Natural Gas Debate
Discussions center on the efficiency, cost, and environmental impact of natural gas compared to electricity, nuclear, and coal for heating, cooking, and power generation, often debating CO2 emissions and energy transitions.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
Probably less efficient than converting the natural gas to electricity too?
Even in areas where natural gas is much cheaper than electricity?
as a totally lambda citizen : natural gaz is a co2 emitter, so it's a no. The fact it's cheap is not enough anymore.
how is it a nightmare? if you aren't getting that energy from natural gas, you'd mostly get it from a CO2 producing power plant, with efficiency losses going from heat (steam) -> electric -> heat (cooktop)
That's natural gas, not coal.
Using natural gas means climate change still progresses. Not to mention you'll be paying all of the overhead cost of maintaining natural gas plants, but only use them for a fraction of the time. So net cost per watt hour will be very high.
That's a false choice, as natural gas is already being wasted and burnt as a byproduct, if that natural gas were used as an energy source, then we could better control the burning process and reduce emissions. Building nuclear plants would actually just increase the amount of natural gas that ends up being burned as a byproduct all the while not helping us in the grand scheme of things
Natural gas cannot be replaced by nuclear energy (or any other source of electricity) for many applications, at least not in the short term. For example here in Germany, many homes use gas boilers (heaters) for heating space and water. You would need to rebuild a lot of infrastructure to use electricity (which Germany plans to do, but obviously this will take years if not decades).
*if it wasn't for cheap natural gas
Natural gas seems like a better fit for this.....