Kyot home: statistics 2007

[nonoLeRobot]

It's spring, so to celebrate the new year (almost in time ;-)), you can see the statistics of Kyot-home 2007

http://www.kyot-home.com/articles-227.html

Here, see you

[Christophe]

Fuel wood is outdated in our case

Keep in mind a column / kWh Primary Energy classification by applying a Coef of 2.8 to electricity that would allow electric heating to be not so favored ... Because frankly KH makes Vivrelec good life ...

[nonoLeRobot]

Ah yes, even more wood? Is it 100% solar? well it's cool.

otherwise why 2.8 ?? Then, that's how we know it's because of the nut that has lots of other bp, but we're not going to start trying to make up the facts.

What we can do is comments or an article to show all the nuclear power points.

[Christophe]

Ah yes, even more wood? Is it 100% solar? well it's cool

Ah no it is rather 100% wood there!

otherwise why 2.8 ?? Then, that's how we know it's because of the nut that has lots of other bp, but we're not going to start trying to make up the facts.

It is the correction coefficient to go from kWh meter to KWH Primary Energy retained by the DPE: https://www.econologie.com/diagnostic-de ... -3559.html

APPENDIX 3.2
CONVERSION OF FINAL ENERGIES INTO PRIMARY ENERGY
The factors for converting final energy (expressed in PCI) into primary energy are as follows:
+ 2,58 for electricity;
+1 for other energies.

Mea coulpa is 2,58 not 2,8: =) but it would also be necessary to apply a coefficient for gas and fuel oil: their "gray energy" (if I dare say it) is not zero ... Between 1.1 and 1.2 for fuel oil for example ... obviously we are far from 2,58 ...

[etikeco]

"+1 for other energies."

I have difficulties to understand. Does that mean that for all other energies kWH meter = KWH Primary Energy?

[Christophe]

Well it is "simple", electricity is a more "noble" energy than oil or gas and it should NEVER be used as heating, except in exceptional cases ....

Indeed, to make an electric kWh, it is currently necessary to roughly spend 3 heat, the same for a nuclear power plant: 2/3 of nuclear energy goes into cooling towers.

The average used by professionals is 2,58.

At a global level, we cannot therefore compare 1kWh electric with a thermal kWh. It is a scientific error.

Here is the trick (escrology?) On which are based the sellers and installer of heat pumps which are interesting economically only by replacing a 100% electric heating .... On the other hand in France you have to burn nuclear fuel ...

At best overall a heat pump which has a COP of 3 barely compensates for the efficiency of the power plant.

In Germany where almost 50% of the electricity still comes from coal (see https://www.econologie.com/europe-emissi ... -3722.html ), an oil boiler will be cleaner on CO2 than a heat pump.

Not all truths are good to hear in the environmental world ...

[etikeco]

ok, thank you for the details, I actually noticed this inconsistency compared to heat pumps some time ago (by browsing econologie.com and futura-sciences.com to be honored) ... but a little reminder does not bad (it's tedious to clearly understand all the data when we talk about the environment)

Do you know if in these coefficients take into account all the direct / indirect criteria (manufacturing of infrastructures, routing, recycling at end of life and all everything)?

[Christophe]

Do you know if in these coefficients take into account all the direct / indirect criteria (manufacturing of infrastructures, routing, recycling at end of life and all everything)?

I think not ... for the good and simple reason that a power plant (except nuclear) must have roughly the same "econological" cost as a refinery or a gas treatment station ...

Ditto for mines and gas / oil extraction ...

A nuclear power plant is "profitable" energetically in a few weeks ...