In my chemical engineering education and profession, we were taught and trained to look at the big picture to evaluate the feasibility of an idea.
The first case study was the perpetual machine where we discover that if we do not figure in the losses in a system, we can keep a clock running indefinitely without rewinding (or a battery for electronic timers).
The same can be applied to food -> body heat -> hot water or steam -> electricity -> heat & light -> grow food -> back to food ...
However, anytime energy is transformed or transported, there is a loss factor. Lets say it is 70% efficient for all process: wind -> kinetic -> heat and electric -> storage -> transmission -> transformer -> storage -> transmission -> appliances ... 0.7 * 0.7 * 0.7 * 0.7 * 0.7 * 0.7 * 0.7 = ? (a very small number) ...
Now, if you add in human time and labor and business costs ...
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
The compounding efficiency problem is a signficant one, I agree. Especially true when looking at systems such as in the 'Hydrogen Economy'. Part of the reason I believe so heavily in Nuclear/Solar/Batteries is the efficiency of energy transmission via electrons. Glad to meet a fellow ChemE
Thank you for your comments. Welcome and glad to meet ya too.
That loss factor will always be there since none of the system is 100% efficienct. The perpetual motion machine is the only machine that is said to be 100% efficient. One of the reason it never works in real life.