ciferecaNinjo

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Luckily you don’t need to burn uranium to avoid 5 steps of energy transformation.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

No you haven't. Read your own source. Hint: biogas

biogas was used in 2009, not in 2020 when the stats were collected. Nor would it matter if it were still used. Hint: it would be an increase on the 80%.

recall: fuel energy → heat energy→ steam → turbine → transmission → heat energy

Also, nuclear fuel is not gas, so this speaks for electric stoves, silly.

That’s fuel. That’s in the 80%.

again: fuel energy → heat energy→ steam → turbine → transmission → heat energy

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (4 children)

Ignoring other renewables

I have accounted for all the renewables mentioned in the linked wikipedia page, which covers sources as insignificant as hydro (<1%). What else is there? Have you thought about updating wikipedia with whatever you think is missing?

Ignoring French nuclear imports

That would only increase the proportion of fuel energy even more, which only works against your botched claim. If you want to count French nuclear, then the portion of solar, wind, and hydro is proportionally even less. Brussels currently has a nuclear power plant inside the region. Why do you think it would it be sensible to transmit over such distance? That would introduce even more substantial inefficiency in the transmission.

Ignoring current state but talking about possible future plans

The status quo only has 1 year left on it. And nuclear power still has the same stages of energy transition loss you’ve failed to debunk. What’s the point? Your claim is nonsense either way.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (6 children)

Get your facts straight, or update Wikipedia to reflect your understanding:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Belgium

wind + solar + hydro → 20%

80% from burning fuels¹. With 3 new gas-burning plants under construction to replace nuclear, that’s not going to improve things.

Belgium is aiming to reduce its use of gas as much as possible.

Nonsense. I guess you missed the whole “Code Red” march against Electrabel last year protesting the plan to build 3 new gas-burning power plants.

there are two nuclear power plants, not one.

And that’s important why? From wikipedia:

“Belgium decided to phase out nuclear power generation completely by 2025.”

Whether there are 1, 2, or 5 nuclear plants is immaterial when it’s all being phased out, and replaced with gas-burning power plants.

Betting on gas, be it a stove or something else, is just stupid.

Betting in a way that neglects plans that have already been announced is stupid for sure.

¹ recall: fuel energy → heat energy→ steam → turbine → transmission → heat energy

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

I’m still waiting for someone to show me an induction oven. This is the same as saying “don’t use an oven at all”. Of course, if you don’t need an oven, then it would not make sense to install an oven at all.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (9 children)

It’s not an assumption. This is how power is produced in Belgium. There is only 1 nuclear power plant and it’s being decommissioned. 3 new fossil fuel burning power plants will be built.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

If I were to open the boiler before and after using it just as I have a wood stove, that brief exposure to trace amounts of toxins once a day would not influence a choice to use it. That theory is quite far fetched.

The finding that gas stove toxins can be significant is also more recent than the popularity drop in gas ovens.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (14 children)

Why do you say that in the past tense? You can see from my figures that in Belgium gas is still cheaper.

This is something that varies from one region to another. In the US, some states have cheaper electric than gas. Electric is less efficient because of big losses in all the conversion steps:

fuel energy → heat energy→ steam → turbine → transmission → heat energy

Gas simply has:

fuel energy → transmission → heat energy

It is important to note that gas transmission is also lossy due to the impossibility of leak-free main lines, but it’s still more efficient in the end. Thus in most of the world gas is also naturally cheaper due to the efficiency difference. It gets inverted in some regions because of pricing manipulations as well as the drive to promote green energy (and rightfully so -- social responsibility should be incentivized). And in some regions they cut down on the transmission losses by putting the power plant inside or close to the big city. But in Belgium gas is still cheaper than electric even despite Russia’s war and efforts to get off Russian fuels.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Poor venting is not inherent in the technology. A diligent installer can run a duct from the oven to the outside just like we do for gas boilers. A diligent building code can even make it mandatory. The lack of gas ovens (and selection thereof) in Belgium is not likely a consequence of concern for toxic gases, because if it were, then gas boilers (which burn far more fuel than an oven would) would be far less popular than they are. So what is your theory on that difference?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (6 children)

Still sounds like you’re talking about stoves. To use a stove, you inherently need to stand next to it and your face is between the flame and the vent. Ovens are well insulated (this is important for energy efficiency), they vent to the outside, and you are not generally standing over the oven throughout the baking.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (8 children)

That depends on how well vented they are. Most people undersize their range hoods for aesthetics and don’t take venting seriously. Of course recent findings show it’s a bad idea to cut corners on that with gas stoves, and ovens to some extent. But it’s mostly stoves that have the issue you describe.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Cloudflare is a walled garden that excludes people.

Many would say it’s fair enough if the private sector excludes people because people have an equal right to not patronize private businesses. But when a government has a human rights obligation to serve the whole public, it’s obviously an injustice for some demographics of people to be blocked from access to a public resource that was financed with public money.

view more: ‹ prev next ›