AukeHoekstra Profile picture
Sep 19, 2020 5 tweets 2 min read Read on X
I read it more frequently recently:
bike riding emits more CO2 than an electric car.

And it's true, kind of.
But not really.

If you include the fact that humans have to live an preferably move anyway it becomes untrue. (Short thread.)
First of all, @Mike_Page is right that electric motors are actually more efficient at turning calories into motion than humans. So if we would replace heavy electric trucks with an army of cyclists, this would indeed not be good for the climate and require too much food.
Second of all, I think it's probably true when you compare an electric bike to a car but the 30g/km for a vegan like me is clearly less than for an electric car (~50g/km for manufacturing plus ~40g/km for driving in the EU) and you have to add my CO2 emissions as car driver.
Finally I'm pretty sure the avoided healthcare costs and other societal costs that result from switching from car to bike outweigh the CO2 emissions from biking, both in terms of costs and CO2.
The only thing you could say is that biking is healthy and if that means you live longer, your total CO2 emissions rise. But if you say a person should not bike for that reason I consider you to be 'off the reservation' as they say.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with AukeHoekstra

AukeHoekstra Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AukeHoekstra

Jun 10
Just made a visualization for myself about the unprecedented growth in solar that I thought I might share.

From 1880 to 1950 all electricity came from fossil+hydro. Then nuclear briefly grew with market share increasing with up to 1% per year in 1985.

Now solar takes over. Image
I've described in more detail in a substack post:

There's more info on each picture there.aukehoekstra.substack.com/p/the-coming-s…
I made this picture because I think you forget what is happening when you look at total final energy. Renewables seem so tiny! Image
Read 8 tweets
Jun 9
I see this a lot:

Conservatives who *just know* that nuclear is better than solar and thus blame their favorite scapegoat *the government* for solar doing better.

But in reality it's the opposite: the market likes solar so much that not even the government can save nuclear.
I guess Andre's attention for me is due to my being irritated at his fact free diatribes of pseudo-scientific nonsense:


So now he sees reacting to me as a way to get attention?
And I'm reacting again, so maybe I'm being duped?
Anyhow...
Let's start with some quantifiable facts. (Things this conservative armchair energy philosopher is allergic to.)
First thing we notice is that solar and wind are clearly surpassing nuclear (though the new leadership of the department of energy denies it).
Image
Read 19 tweets
May 18
Many people think solar and wind won't be able to keep the grid stable because they lack "inertia".

I think solar, wind and batteries will do a BETTER job and I think you can explain it thus:
- the old grid is a record player
- the new grid a digital player
🧵 Image
If you play vinyl records, the rotating mass of the turntable is used to keep the speed steady. This leads some vinyl enthusiasts to seek more mass because that will keep things more steady.

This turntable by Excel audio attaches a separate mass. (Overkill but makes my point.) Image
In the same way the inertia in the rotors of current power plants helps the grid to keep a steady 50 Hz (in e.g. Europe) or 60 Hz (in e.g. the US) frequency.

These machines turn a heavy copper coil wound around a heavy iron core and this helps keep the grid frequency steady. Image
Read 21 tweets
Aug 13, 2024
Great to see more and more attention for flexible grid pricing.

We must say goodbye to the "copper plate" that offers free power everywhere and every time. It's hideously expensive and outdated.

What we need is smart flexibility.
🧵
The underlying reason is that the costs of different components of the energy system changed:

Some remained high (e.g. pylons, fossil & nuclear)

Some plummeted (e.g. solar, wind, batteries, EVs & inverters)

Some became possible at all (e.g. measuring & steering in real time)
So now we should make good use of these new, clean, abundant and affordable options, even if it means doing things a bit differently than before.

So what should we do different regarding grid congestion pricing?
Read 20 tweets
Jul 28, 2024
Some are angry about the "anti-Christian depiction of the last supper" at the Olympic Opening ceremony. (@elonmusk and @realDonaldTrump among others)

A Dutch art historian explains it's not the last supper but a Dutch painting of the Olympic gods.
And I explain what I loved.
🧵
Image
Image
Original Dutch thread here. I just translated it.


@WSchoonenberg shows that the "tableau vivant" (living painting) is depicting "The Feast of the Gods" by Jan van Bijlert, from 1635.
Image
The heathen Gods have gathered on mount Olympus for a feast. Sun god Apollo is recognizable by his halo, Bacchus (Dionysus) by the grapes, Neptune (Poseidon) by his trident, Diana (Artemis) by the moon, Venus (Aphrodite) by Cupid.


Image
Image
Image
Image
Read 24 tweets
Jul 9, 2024
With new batteries solar and wind are not only faster and cleaner, but also cheaper.

I'm estimating:
$0.08/kWh for PV+batteries
$0.07/kWh for wind+batteries

@skorusARK gives a good overview of current wisdom, but strongly declining battery prices change EVERYTHING
Image
I've recently written about how I was surprised I missed the enormous consequences of price reductions in batteries.

LFP cells are now $50/kWh and last 10 000 cycles.
That's $0.005 per kWh.

Say we double that to pack the cells and you are at $0.01/kWh.aukehoekstra.substack.com/p/batteries-ho…
If you add batteries to solar PV, not all energy has to flow through batteries. But let's keep it at $0.01 and add that to the price of solar. That makes PV (and wind) SUPER cheap!

Batteries must be discounted more quickly you say?
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(