• phneutral@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    5 days ago

    Electric motors and heat pumps are far more energy efficient than their combustion counterparts. Solar and wind electricity can be generated in situ or transported via cable. No need to power ships and trucks for fossil delivery to refineries or fuel stations. Thus we will end up with less primary energy.

    • eleitl@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 days ago

      How does a heat pump helps you firing Portland cement, ceramics, melting glass and metal, fixating air nitrogen? And these are all 24/7 industrial processes.

      • HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        These are still big challenges, but very bright people already work on them. For example, Germany’s Hans-Joachim Schellnhuber, a top climate scientist, is working on climate-friendly buildings. Other research groups have worked on recycling concrete into more climate-friendly cement as a co-product of electrical steel processes.

      • Greyghoster@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 days ago

        As you say, these are industrial processes and need to be addressed by industrial solutions. There are new processes for steel, cement and fertiliser being developed and tested. They will move to mainstream as we electrify everything.

        • eleitl@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Looking at glass, or cement. Do you know a heat pump that runs at up to 1600 C? So it’s just plain ohmic heating. And it’s a 24/7 process, so it needs electrochemical backup. Do you know what that does to your EROEI?

          • Greyghoster@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            It’s not the first cab off the rank. Processes that are energy intensive may need careful consideration and I’m sure smart minds will work it out. We need to move forward and economics of energy production are shifting rapidly which will initiate change. It’s always been the case.

            • eleitl@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              Careful consideration doesn’t work around thermodynamical limits very much, I’m afraid. When we move forward, we do not energy transition but rather add new atop the old: we never stopped burning classical biomass, coal or natural gas. Renewable energy is just a new thin layer on top. Depletion of mineral resources necessary for renewable infrastructure buildout and maintenance indeed does a number on the overall economics and energetics, but unfortunately in the wrong drection.

              • Greyghoster@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                I tend to be more optimistic than that. If you take the view that there won’t be a shift from fossil and chemical processes that are destroying our environment then there is most likely no future for our kids. Either we find a way or billions will die. I’m heartened that we have alternative processes for steel, concrete and fertiliser as well as new battery technology but when evil swans like AI and satellite mega constellations appear, it is a downer.

      • liuther9@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        In cement production particularly: Pumps + co 2 capture = 5x efficiency in the process + negative carbon footprint

        Add renewables and voila, best cement factory in the world