TED Conversations

Richard Krooman

TEDCRED 50+

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

create agricultural land and partially solve the global warming process by creating energy

Hello everyone let me introduce you to a very easy to grasp idea which I can't quite formulate.

In the past decade there has been a tremendous increse in 'caring for our planet' and 'reducing co2' etc.
One of the things we have done in order to become more green is creating the energy efficient lightbulb! Which is supposed to work way more efficient than the old. We have actually increased the efficiency of many devices.

But the first law of thermodynamics basically tells us that you can only alter energy rather than use it.

For our efficient lightbulb this means that it is more efficient at producing light than the old one. The old one created lots of heat while this new one does not.

So what do we do when it gets dark outside? We turn on the light!
And after a bit temperature drops heavy due to lack of sunshine in the evening so we turn on the central heating. Which then heats every room in our house. A bit later at night we want to go to bed so we turn the lights off... the heater down and wait till morning comes.

When you think about this it poses a very complex problem. Because when you install energy save lights in general your gas bill (central heating) will go up.
My pc is very inefficient compared to new ones however my room is always at a nice temperature in the evening because of it.

However here is where the idea becomes interresting. The same goes for "creating" green energy!
If you build a solar panel on your house this would in general cool either your house or the air around it (as you're transfering radiation into electricity which would otherwise dissapate into heat).

This also means that if you live in a cold area you're nuts if you use solar panels (unless you'd like it to get colder).
But also that we might be able to recreate agricultural land by building solar panels across deserts. Their main purpose would be to create energy and ow ye as a by product they will regain lost farm land and reduce global temperature.

0
Share:
progress indicator
  • Sep 22 2012: This dilemma is a false one: unless you live on Antarctica it won't be cold all year, so there are times in the year when waste heat of inefficient devices would really be wasted, it gets even worse when the summers are so warm where you live that you use cooling devices, these devices would have to work harder if you used inefficient light bulbs. Also, it's possible the inefficient devices were creating more heated than you needed to heat your home to begin with, things like inefficient lights on your car don't help heat your home and you can increase isolation of your home to trap the heat from your more efficient devices to keep your home heated, still end up with a lower energy bill and a cleaner environment AND keep your devices serving whatever purpose they were designed for serve (to reduce energy use without efficient devices you would have to power some of your inefficient devices down).

    "If you build a solar panel on your house this would in general cool either your house or the air around it (as you're transfering radiation into electricity which would otherwise dissapate into heat)."

    At least 50% of the heat your roof captures would be radiated into the air above your house anyway and converting heat into electricity doesn't mean you've lost that heat: the energy is converted into heat again by whatever device the electricity is powering. Instead of losing heat you could actually gain some because your vacuum cleaner (unlike the tiles on your roof) doesn't have half its surface facing outside and away from your home.
    • Sep 22 2012: Well John you are both right and wrong at the same time.
      And I'll take the blame for the parts on which you're right as I am unable to perfectly say that which I want to (as I am still strugling with the wording of the idea).

      What your post imo is saying is that 'my idea is crap because the examples given are only true in 25% of all cases'. While I'm saying that people should pay a lot more attention to the concept of how energy is used and if we're not just redirecting energy (and depending on how it's redirected we suddenly call it green) into different types while you eventually end up with the same result.

      The basics of the concept is that "inefficient devices are only inefficient if their by-products require energy to get rid off". Aka if you want more heat whenever you need light -> the old lightbulb is 100% effective as you'll fully use both the light as well as the heat.

      Then the next step is that if you put solar panels on your house that will only "get energy" if you do not utilize the electricity generated for heating your home.

      Next step: if you require your house to be coolled down you'd be very wise to install solar panels.

      logical next step -> if we build solar panels near the border of agricultural land and deserts it should be quite obvious that the desert will cool down and therefor become better agricultural land.

      For instance say that we want to cool down our planet. I'm saying that we can create a huge energy efficient lazer beam in the middle of the sahara which is then powered by tons of solar panels build around it. Aim the beam into space and tada you'll get rid of the energy.

      This way of thinking has somewhere gone extinct... or never existed before while it should be blatantly obvious to everyone.

      Could you tell me if this post influenced your opinion or am I still missing something?

      Regards,

      Richard
      • Sep 23 2012: "Aka if you want more heat whenever you need light -> the old lightbulb is 100% effective as you'll fully use both the light as well as the heat."

        If you want 100% of the heat the light bulb emits then yes, but those situations will be the exception, not the rule, on Earth.

        "For instance say that we want to cool down our planet. I'm saying that we can create a huge energy efficient lazer beam in the middle of the sahara which is then powered by tons of solar panels build around it. Aim the beam into space and tada you'll get rid of the energy."

        Yes, this would cool the area, do you understand why it is different if you have solar panels on your roof and you use the electricity they generate to power your vacuum cleaner?

        "So imo we need to incorporate the first law of thermodynamics and it's direct concequences into our thinking of energy efficiency."

        I don't think it would change anything: more energy efficient is just better: even if in 99% of all cases you want 100% of the waste heat, you can just crank up the heating to compensate, keeping energy use the same for all those cases, while you would still reduce energy use for the other 1%.

        "But if you want to cool your house during the day and heat it up in the evening / night you would want solar panels but you shouldn't care about the light bulbs."

        No, solar panels don't cool your house: the heat they trap is released when you turn on devices in your house that are powered by your solar panels. Also, consider that a solar panel traps less than 10% of the heat from your roof, which itself provides only a fraction of your house's heating, especially if the building has multiple stories (solar panels are only 20% efficient, your roof radiates half the heat it receives away from yout house, your roof is not a perfect black body and the solar panels don't cover your entire roof).
        • Sep 23 2012: you're too focussed on showing that the examples are only partially correct rather than seeing the concept behind them.

          In all cases where the by-product of a device is used it is not inefficient. Note that you agree with this "If you want 100% of the heat the light bulb emits then yes".

          So imo we need to incorporate the first law of thermodynamics and it's direct concequences into our thinking of energy efficiency.

          For instance having solar panels on an airconditioned mall would make perfect sense, it should also have energy efficient light bulbs.
          But if you want to cool your house during the day and heat it up in the evening / night you would want solar panels but you shouldn't care about the light bulbs.

          If you build solar panels around the borders of the sahara obviously the land around it will cool down again and it should become more usefull for argriculture.

          We need to start thinking like this rather than "oeee it's energy efficient I need that!" and than using more electricity for another device in order to correct the lack of by-products from your (now) more efficient device.
  • Sep 21 2012: interesting thoughts, I can honestly say I never thought about how that law of thermodynamics played into the 'green energy' concept and overall life
  • Sep 21 2012: I put quotes around "creating" because you can never create energy you can merely transfer it from one state to the next.