Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
Hope everyone has a wonderful and warm Thanksgiving!
Super Cedar firestarters 30% discount
Use code Hearth2024
Click here
I think the nova special said just one lake Easie Lake (not sure of spelling, but sounds like Easy Lake) emits about 2 Million tons of methane EVERY DAY. That sounded significant to me. I don’t know how much natural gas is required to justify drilling a well, but I’d think if it’s bubbling out of the ground and been measured at the surface
I think we can all assume that we are being charged for any natural gas we are emitting in our homes, at least on our side of the pressure relief diaphragms. So we can meter in some way our maximum natural gas emission, and perhaps get details for each appliance from the manufacturer.
I guess I repeatedly look at “free energy” which I guess all of it is, just the effort of harnessing it is the cost.
The other “cost” is the effects of methane in the atmosphere, and wondering what affect scientists believe that will have on our world.
Should I double or triple my energy and systems costs to avoid spillung a little more CO2 from natural gas burning into the atmosphere? When I know even that electricity I will be buying is CURRENTLY made primarily with fossil fuels? My gut says no. Investing in geothermal wells on my new property sounds perhaps worthwhile, at least maybe for the cooling of the condenser of the AC units, but I do wonder how much more efficient that will be than just using swimming pool water.
Thanks for this article. It leads me to believe there is some hope, but does it consider the melting permafrost methane issues?
I guess I repeatedly look at “free energy” which I guess all of it is, just the effort of harnessing it is the cost.
The other “cost” is the effects of methane in the atmosphere, and wondering what affect scientists believe that will have on our world.
Should I double or triple my energy and systems costs to avoid spillung a little more CO2 from natural gas burning into the atmosphere? When I know even that electricity I will be buying is CURRENTLY made primarily with fossil fuels? My gut says no. Investing in geothermal wells on my new property sounds perhaps worthwhile, at least maybe for the cooling of the condenser of the AC units, but I do wonder how much more efficient that will be than just using swimming pool water.
Thanks for this article. It leads me to believe there is some hope, but does it consider the melting permafrost methane issues?
While methane is a potent greenhouse gas, its lifetime in the atmosphere is a couple decades, versus the 500-1000 years for CO2. The CO2 we are emitting will be there and affecting the climate for many centuries, unless our descendants decide to scrub it out. The methane we release will heat the climate while we are alive, and not be a curse on the next 20 generations.
Most of the stuff I have seen about permafrost methane release has been sensationalistic and not IMO trustworthy. Whether the release process speeds up (or slows down) is hard to predict, and the methane released will not have time to accumulate (bc it breaks down).
As for electrification, the details are in the numbers. In my case, I bought a 2200 sq ft, 1960 house that burned 1100 gallons of fuel oil per season for heat (HW was on top of that). I retrofitted the house insulation to get that down to more reasonable 600 gallons of oil. I then put in a 4-ton (low-tech, single speed) ASHP and tore out the boiler. This drove my bill up about 10,000 kWh per year.
So, does the 10,000 kWh of electricity (made with fossil fuels) release less carbon than the 600 gallons of oil?
According to the EIA, in 2020, the US average number for CO2 per kWh is 0.85 lbsCO2/kWh.
Conversely, I know that burning 80 gallons of oil releases a ton of CO2.
So the 10,000 kWh = 8,500 lbs CO2 = 4.25 tons CO2/ year.
the 600 gals HHO = 7.5 tons CO2/year.
So electrification for me got a 44% reduction. About what you got from burning wood versus gas!
In practice, my HP is 14 years old, and not the most efficient. And my local power is likely greener bc we have a lot of nukes and gas in the mix compared to the US average. So I am probably doing better than a 50% reduction in CO2. And a newer HP (like an inverter model or a mini-split) would be even better again. When the current one dies.
Compared to the 1100 gallons I used when I moved in (= 13.8 tons/year), I bagged a close to 70% reduction in CO2 emissions.
You can crunch the numbers for your situation, but the fact is that insulation and electrification can really reduce CO2 emissions.
Interesting read. something to consider about sending wood to the landfill though, the local WM landfill caps the face when full and pulls the gas off to burn. Pretty sure they use it to heat their shop.
I guess I repeatedly look at “free energy” which I guess all of it is, just the effort of harnessing it is the cost.
The other “cost” is the effects of methane in the atmosphere, and wondering what affect scientists believe that will have on our world.
Should I double or triple my energy and systems costs to avoid spillung a little more CO2 from natural gas burning into the atmosphere? When I know even that electricity I will be buying is CURRENTLY made primarily with fossil fuels? My gut says no. Investing in geothermal wells on my new property sounds perhaps worthwhile, at least maybe for the cooling of the condenser of the AC units, but I do wonder how much more efficient that will be than just using swimming pool water.
Thanks for this article. It leads me to believe there is some hope, but does it consider the melting permafrost methane issues?
My parents pool can hit 92 during a hot week. I do think pool would improve cold weather efficiency. Wouldn’t want pool water in my hvac exchanger though. Might be ok but haven’t thought about it. It’s 27,000 gallons and 52 degrees at the surface right now. We have shallow ground water but it could be high in iron. But the pool is filled with well water.
I think OP was thinking of dumping heat from his AC into his pool. Being south of me (and the Mason-Dixon line), an ASHP would work just fine for the OP.
I think you are correct. My issue is that I have a package unit (condenser, evaporator and blower in a single unit). Its 16 SEER was new in 2009. To my knowledge there is not a more efficient package unit available today. And at 30 degree I’m already down to 58% of rated capacity. Lots of pools and package units down here. Probably more heated pools than geothermal units.
