4713

Because urban living is intrinsically more energy efficient.

It’s a question, but you haven’t answered it, and the actual data we’ve looked at suggests it isn’t, and it’s irrelevant to the question of whether urban living is more energy efficient. It is. The data show it is.

This is just one bad-faith argument after another. I’m through.

4714

Due to the longer heating seasons, the Northeast and Midwest regions still, consume the most energy per household, at 108 and 112 Million Btu per household in 2009, respectively.

I think the question has been answered definitively.

Maybe you didn’t like the answer.

I don’t doubt it.

But if you think the government should eliminate economic incentives for suburban development in an effort to move people to the city, then logically they should also eliminate economic incentives in northern/Midwestern states, in an effort to move people/jobs to the south.

Personally that kind of thinking seems too extremist, but YMMV.

There you go again.

4715

If you don’t want to be accused of arguing in bad faith, don’t argue in bad faith.

4716

Maybe respond to the facts you don’t like, rather than bailing out and projecting your anxiety on others.

There’s a big graph up there that you don’t want to look at.

4717

Some of these numbers are a bit off, but generally the point is correct.

An average Central air-conditioning unit (compressor and fan) uses about 3500 watts, so 3.5 kWh

BTU’s are an energy unit, and equate to 0.293 watt-hours. 100k btu is on the high end of a normal home furnace, but ok, so that equals 29.3k watt hours.

So, yeah, heating takes a lot more power, generally.

More importantly though, to address the feasibility of running this off solar… At ground level, the total energy density of sunlight is around 1kW\m².

So if you had magical solar panels that somehow converted solar into usable energy with 100% efficiency, you would need about 30m² of solar panels to produce enough power to translate into the heat put out by the average furnace.

But solar panels aren’t that efficient. They are only at around 20% now. So to put out the power equivalent to the average home furnace, you are talking 150m² of solar panels, per home. And that’s only if they are producing that much power in ideal solar collecting conditions.

Technically, the average home has about 140m² of roof, but you can’t use all that space, because of course you need to angle them towards the sun. So you generally only have half of that space, at most.

Even if you assume some kind of efficient battery tech that can store the power during the day, maybe you can assume that since a furnace doesn’t run all the time, it might be a wash with the fact that you are only gonna get sun during the day… But still, the average home isn’t going to be able to produce enough power to heat itself in colder climates, just due to limits in the space available for solar panels. You would need dramatically more efficient solar technology than what we have now.

4718

Do we run the heating for the same duration as we run the AC?

4719

I don’t think anyone in this thread ever argued that it would. This entire line of argumentation is just a diversion tactic. Much like ‘sunlight can’t even melt snow!’

4720

You argued with magnet that it wasn’t proven that living in the South is more energy efficient than living in the North.

But it definitely is. There’s no reasonable argument otherwise. It is in fact definitely proven through data, and even beyond that it’s somewhat obvious intuitively.

I don’t know exactly why you were arguing about that, but magnet was clearly correct on that point.

4721

It isn’t. Home climate control is only one way people use energy. Look at the whole picture, and the data suggests otherwise. NY uses less energy than Texas because of population density. Population density seems to matter more than local climate when determining per capita energy use. It may be more efficient to cool a home in the rural south than in the urban north, but that difference evaporates once you start factoring in transportation costs for everything else.

4722

Population density isn’t related to the latitude on the Earth you live at though.

4723

Well sure if we could cram every American human into whatever climatological zone San Francisco is in, that would be even more energy efficient. And luckily it’s already a city, though–IIRC–not the most dense one.

As things currently stand, the density of cities is superior to the sprawl of rural areas. Other factors apply, beyond the original discussion. If all hyper dense FutureCities of the Grand Republic could be built in whatever part of CA it is that never freezes or goes over 90, all the better!

4724

No one says it was. If everyone in Texas moves to high rise apartments in Houston, probably Texas won’t be the 6th largest user of energy per capita anymore. Victory!

4725

Ultimately, the issues of climate change aren’t going to really be solved via efficiency in usage anyway. Humans are going to keep needing more and more energy, which is going to offset any efficiency gains.

You need to produce carbon neutral power. That’s the only way to really solve the issue.

Now, regarding things like population density, you actually start running into the inverse of the issue we just talked about in terms of solar harvesting.

As you increase population density, you increase efficiency in terms of energy usage for some things, but you also lose some things like surface area for solar harvesting. When people live in apartment buildings rather than houses, you some have as much area capable of collecting solar energy.

4726

Um, no. The solar panels need not be where the people are. All of west Texas can harvest solar power for Houston.

4727

I nominate @ArmandoPenblade as Benevolent Dictator to make it so.

4728

I would say we need to start with more carbon neutral power and then we would want to shift devices, preferably efficient one, to use it. It makes a lot more sense to push electric cars when we know the power they are drawing from is efficient and carbon neutral, for example, same with good rail systems.

California’s rolling blackouts would like to have a word with you.

It costs a lot less energy to cool than to heat, but CA has some serious issues with their electricity, and when we’re done cramming everyone there, we can start to talk about water.

4729

Oh sure, but you are still using all that space then.

4730

Do your own math:

https://www.energystar.gov/buildings/tools-and-resources/degree_days_calculator

Weather Station Name: RALEIGH/RALEIGH-DUR
Time Period: February 01, 2018 - January 31, 2019
Annual HDD: 3238 °F
Annual CDD: 1928 °F

Weather Station Name: SAN FRANCISCO INTL
Time Period: February 01, 2018 - January 31, 2019
Annual HDD: 2592 °F
Annual CDD: 76 °F

Weather Station Name: NEW YORK/LA GUARDIA
Time Period: February 01, 2018 - January 31, 2019
Annual HDD: 4529 °F
Annual CDD: 1568 °F

Weather Station Name: MIAMI
Time Period: February 01, 2018 - January 31, 2019
Annual HDD: 84 °F
Annual CDD: 4573 °F

Weather Station Name: PHOENIX/SKY HARBOR
Time Period: February 01, 2018 - January 31, 2019
Annual HDD: 892 °F
Annual CDD: 4936 °F

Weather Station Name: "SEATTLE"/BOEING FLD KING CO
Time Period: February 01, 2018 - January 31, 2019
Annual HDD: 4241 °F
Annual CDD: 333 °F

Weather Station Name: ATLANTA MUNICICPAL
Time Period: February 01, 2018 - January 31, 2019
Annual HDD: 2477 °F
Annual CDD: 2219 °F

Weather Station Name: CHICAGO/MIDWAY
Time Period: February 01, 2018 - January 31, 2019
Annual HDD: 6184 °F
Annual CDD: 1328 °F

Weather Station Name: NOME ALASKA (LOL REALLY!)
Time Period: February 01, 2018 - January 31, 2019
Annual HDD: 12119 °F
Annual CDD: 0 °F
4731

Achievement Unlocked
https://twitter.com/i/events/1097837295237967877

" A mammal has been declared extinct due to man-made climate change for the first time

The Australian government has confirmed that the species Bramble Cay melomys, a tiny mammal found only on an island near Papua New Guinea, is now formally extinct. The species was thought to have died out in 2016, with environmental experts linking its demise to anthropogenic climate change including changes in sea level."

4732

“More profoundly alone than any human has ever been.”