Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

A homebuilder installs electric baseboard heat and claims, "It is the cheapest and cleanest way to go." Apply your understanding of the second law of thermodynamics (Concept 2-3b, p. 34) and net energy (Figure 13-A) to evaluate this claim.

Short Answer

Expert verified
Electric baseboard heat is not the cheapest due to energy conversion inefficiencies and operational costs, particularly if electricity is from fossil fuels.

Step by step solution

01

Understanding the Claim

The homebuilder claims that electric baseboard heat is the cheapest and cleanest form of heating. To evaluate this, we need to understand the cost and environmental impact associated with electric heating compared to other forms of heating, such as gas or oil heating.
02

Considering the Second Law of Thermodynamics

The second law of thermodynamics states that energy conversion is not 100% efficient. When electricity is generated from a fuel source such as coal or natural gas, energy is lost in the conversion process. This means that electric heating is not as energy-efficient as directly using fossil fuels for heating.
03

Evaluating Net Energy

Net energy refers to the actual energy available for use after subtracting the energy required to produce, process, and deliver the energy. Electric heating may have lower net energy because a significant amount of energy is lost during electricity generation and transmission, making it less efficient compared to using primary energy sources like natural gas directly for heating.
04

Considering Environmental Impact

While electric heating is considered clean at the point of use, the overall cleanliness depends on the source of the electricity. If the electricity comes from fossil fuels, then it may not be environmentally clean, due to emissions produced during electricity generation.
05

Cost Evaluation

For cost, electric heat can be cheaper to install, as it does not require installation of ducts or a combustion system. However, operational costs may be higher if the price of electricity is greater than that of natural gas or oil, considering the inefficiency and energy losses involved.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Second Law of Thermodynamics
The second law of thermodynamics is a fundamental concept in physics that tells us energy transformations are not perfectly efficient. This law implies that whenever energy is converted from one form to another, some of it is inevitably lost as waste heat. For electric heating, this means that when electricity is generated from fossil fuels like coal or natural gas, a significant fraction of the initial energy is lost in conversion processes before it even powers your electric heater.

This loss results in electric heating potentially being less efficient compared to systems that convert energy into heat directly at the point of use, such as gas heating. Understanding this concept helps us critically evaluate claims of efficiency and cost-effectiveness, such as those made about electric baseboard heating.
Net Energy
Net energy is a crucial metric when considering energy sources for heating, as it accounts for the total usable energy that results after all energy losses in the production and delivery processes.

Suppose you want to assess whether electric heat is as energy-efficient as claimed. In that case, it's essential to consider the energy spent on generating, processing, transmitting, and delivering electricity to our homes. Due to significant conversion and transmission losses, the net energy for electric heating can be lower than utilizing energy sources like natural gas or oil directly in heating systems, which often have fewer stages of conversion.

Therefore, understanding net energy enables us to see the whole picture of energy efficiency beyond the points directly inside our homes.
Environmental Impact
Evaluating the environmental impact of electric heating involves considering the entire energy lifecycle.

At first glance, electric heating might seem clean since it doesn't produce emissions at the point of use. However, if the electricity used is sourced predominantly from fossil fuels, the broader environmental picture becomes less clear. The generation of electricity from coal or natural gas releases pollutants and greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

Therefore, despite being clean in the immediate sense, the actual environmental impact heavily depends on how the electricity powering those heaters was generated. Opting for electricity generated from renewable sources, such as wind or solar, substantially improves the environmental impact.
Electric Heating
Electric heating involves using electrical energy to generate heat, commonly implemented through baseboard heaters, space heaters, or radiant floor heating.

These systems are generally straightforward to install since they do not require extensive infrastructure like ducts or chimneys. They also provide heat instantly and can be highly controllable, making them convenient for homeowners.
  • Pros: Simple installation, lower upfront costs, easy control.
  • Cons: Higher operating costs if electricity is expensive, potential lower energy efficiency due to conversion losses.
Despite being considered clean, their environmental friendliness often depends on how the electricity is produced, as discussed earlier.
Fossil Fuels
Fossil fuels like coal, oil, and natural gas have long been traditional sources of energy due to their high energy content. However, using them can lead to significant environmental challenges, which is why evaluating alternatives like electric heating is vital.

When fossil fuels are burned to generate electricity, it tells us about the upstream impacts of choices like electric heating. If electric heaters are powered by electricity from fossil fuels, they indirectly contribute to emissions and environmental degradation.

By contrast, a direct use of fossil fuels, like a gas furnace, can be more energy-efficient since fewer conversion processes are involved. Transitioning towards a mix that reduces reliance on fossil fuels for energy generation, such as adopting renewables, is crucial for reducing our environmental footprint while maintaining energy efficiency.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Congratulations! You are in charge of the world. List the five most important features of your energy policy.

Should buyers of energy-efficient motor vehicles receive large rebates funded by fees levied on gas guzzlers? Explain.

Some people in China point out that the United States and European nations fueled their economic growth during the industrial revolution by burning coal, with little effort to control the resulting air pollution, and then sought cleaner energy sources later when they became more affluent. China says it is being asked to clean up before it becomes affluent enough to do this, without greatly slowing its economic growth. How would you deal with this dilemma? Since China's outdoor air pollution has implications for the entire world, what role, if any, should the developed nations play in helping it to reduce its dependence on coal and to rely on more environmentally sustainable energy sources?

Imagine that you live at the Rocky Mountain Institute headquarters building, powered mostly by the sun (Core Case Study). Do you think that you would have to give up any of the conveniences you now enjoy? If so, what are they? Describe any adjustments you might have to make in your way of living.

Explain why you agree or disagree with the following proposals made by various energy analysts as ways to solve U.S. energy problems: (a) find and develop more domestic supplies of crude oil; (b) place a heavy federal tax on gasoline and imported oil to help reduce the waste of crude oil resources and to encourage use of other alternatives; (c) increase dependence on coal; (d) phase out coal by 2050; (e) increase dependence on nuclear power; (f) phase out all nuclear power plants by 2025.

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Environmental Science Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free