🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <39455AF5.E59D5251@tds.net>, Don Libby  <no.spam@tds.net> wrote:
>"D.A.Kopf" wrote:
>> 
>> Don Libby wrote:
>> >
>> > Yes indeed.  A huge proportion (near 70%) of electricity generated is
>> > lost through transmission and distribution.  I suspect that fuel
>> > requirements for electric power would be greatly reduced with improved
>> > transmission and distribution techniques and organization.
>> 
>> Weren't you citing 3% T&D losses a while back? What changed your mind?
>> 
>
>No, I don't think that was me, I've known about huge T&D losses for
>several years now.  Not sure precisely how losses break down among
>conversion, transmission and distribution, but "In the end, for every
>three units of energy that are converted to create electricity, only
>about one unit actually reaches the end user." 
>http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/eh1998/eh1998.html
>
Actually while the above statement is close to true, that only one unit in
three used to ccreate electricity gets to the customer, the single largest
loss is the conversion from heat to mechanical energy used to drive the
generator.  Once you get to the electrical side, the end to end efficiency
is almost 90% (or up to 85% if you are converting it back to mechanical).


One of the reasons that there is so little research into superconductors
is that it would only result in a 4% savings in fuel, while a cool
combined cycle (gas turbine + steam turbine) could reduce fuel use by
33%. (these numbers assume a 40% efficient steam turbine, and in 1996
General Electric announced that a 60% efficient combined cycle plant was
in the works).