Created
May 28, 2024 19:17
-
-
Save XerxesZorgon/6b056a34ee85fb4322053b8265f3b301 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Earth temperature from the Stefan-Boltzmann Law
Author
Right, I was worried that I'd gotten data that was after conversion instead
of before. I'll check to be sure, but I'm hoping you're right and they're
the before numbers. I also realized recently that the solar, wind and hydro
values aren't strictly the electricity produced, but there's an extra loss
because the systems aren't perfect. For solar, the panels reduce the albedo
locally so they absorb more sunlight than would normally be taken in by the
ground, and wind and hydro slow the natural flow of air and water which
introduce entropy losses. I don't think it's worth correcting because the
energy from these systems is minor compared to the total, but it's
something to consider. Geothermal and nuclear are worse because we're
extracting energy that would otherwise have remained underground for a
very long time, and then it has to be radiated away.
…On Mon, Jul 7, 2025 at 1:32 AM Lars Ekman ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this gist.
------------------------------
do these numbers represent useful energy to society, or total consumption?
Good question, but I don't think it matters all that much. In the case of
fossil fuels (~87%) it should be simple: it should be based on extraction.
For example, a coal power plant may have an efficiency of 35%, but the
statistics should be based on the amount of coal used, not electricity
produced. And I think that's the case. Statistics on extractions should be
fairly easy to get.
For wind, solar, bio and hydro, I think the stats are based on electricity
produced. But they should not be included in your temperature calculations
anyway, since the energy is already received by earth, just transformed to
electricity.
Nuclear is trickier. I *think* (and I am guessing) that the stats are
based on electricity produced. But a nuclear power plant has an efficiency
around 35%, so the thermal effect is around 3 times the electricity output.
But then again, nuclear is a small contributor (yet).
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<https://gist.github.com/XerxesZorgon/6b056a34ee85fb4322053b8265f3b301#gistcomment-5665636>
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC3KQPO5KICEF4YJJXZ32QT3HIA57BFKMF2HI4TJMJ2XIZLTSKBKK5TBNR2WLJDUOJ2WLJDOMFWWLO3UNBZGKYLEL5YGC4TUNFRWS4DBNZ2F6YLDORUXM2LUPGBKK5TBNR2WLJDHNFZXJJDOMFWWLK3UNBZGKYLEL52HS4DFVRZXKYTKMVRXIX3UPFYGLK2HNFZXIQ3PNVWWK3TUUZ2G64DJMNZZDAVEOR4XAZNEM5UXG5FFOZQWY5LFVEYTGMBVGE4DMNBYU52HE2LHM5SXFJTDOJSWC5DF>
.
You are receiving this email because you authored the thread.
Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS
<https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675>
or Android
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub>
.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Good question, but I don't think it matters all that much. In the case of fossil fuels (~87%) it should be simple: it should be based on extraction. For example, a coal power plant may have an efficiency of 35%, but the statistics should be based on the amount of coal used, not electricity produced. And I think that's the case. Statistics on extractions should be fairly easy to get.
For wind, solar, bio and hydro, I think the stats are based on electricity produced. But they should not be included in your temperature calculations anyway, since the energy is already received by earth, just transformed to electricity.
Nuclear is trickier. I think (and I am guessing) that the stats are based on electricity produced. But a nuclear power plant has an efficiency around 35%, so the thermal effect is around 3 times the electricity output. But then again, nuclear is a small contributor (yet).