News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Engineering of Landfills by darksaints on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @02:32PM (#41437705)
70k homes is about 84MW.

You’re gonna have a tough time finding any evidence that running a landfill requires 84MW of electricity.

Re:The Engineering of Landfills by mikojan on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @02:50PM (#41437858)
A single truck requires more energy to operate in a year.
Re:The Engineering of Landfills by creddit on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @02:58PM (#41437962)
A single truck requires more energy to operate in a year than 70k homes do!? I find this extremely difficult to believe.

As far as I can tell, the EIA [1] suggests the average home uses 10,791 kWh a year. A gallon of gasoline contains ~33.7 kWh of energy per the EPA/Wikipedia [2].

This would mean that a single truck would be burning 70,000 * 10,791 / 33.7 = 22,414,540 gallons of gasoline a year or 61,409 gallons a day. Seems like wild bullshit to me.

[1] https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=97&t=3 [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_gallon_equivalent#:~:....

Re:The Engineering of Landfills by weaksauce on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @03:29PM (#41438299)
you should note that a gas engine does not convert all that 33kWh of energy into mechanical energy. a gasoline engine has about a 25% conversion into mechanical energy. https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/atv.shtml . diesel might be a bit better than a car but it's city driving by nature.

just heat alone is the largest waste product in a car or truck

Re:The Engineering of Landfills by creddit on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @03:34PM (#41438339)
That's not relevant to the comparison in any way.
Re:The Engineering of Landfills by weaksauce on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @04:39PM (#41438964)
fair enough. misread your comment
Re:The Engineering of Landfills by selimthegrim on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @04:13PM (#41438734)
Only Soviets kept using gas engined trucks and buses past the 50s
Re:The Engineering of Landfills by mrguyorama on Wednesday September 04, 2024 @10:07AM (#41446020)
And, for some insane reason, the average American commuter.
Re:The Engineering of Landfills by 8note on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @04:28PM (#41438886)
A tank of gas is still a tank of gas, regardless of what it gets used for.

Energy in = energy out + waste + energy stored

The truck is barely storing anything on average, so what you've described is energy out and waste, but the calculations to compare the truck to the landfill was done on Energy in - the amount of gas that it needs to be filled with.

For the same total job, you could raise or lower how quickly the truck goes through a tank of gas, but that variance has already been averaged out

Re:The Engineering of Landfills by throwaway2037 on Wednesday September 04, 2024 @07:36AM (#41444451)
This has got to be one of the greatest retorts I have ever read on HN. Hat tip to you.
Re:The Engineering of Landfills by CRConrad on Monday September 09, 2024 @04:51AM (#41486629)
Most trucks -- at least of the kind used for transporting trash to a landfill -- don't burn any gasoline at all. They run on diesel fuel.

(But yeah, the original claim still seems orders-of-magnitude off; clearly BS.)

Re:The Engineering of Landfills by throwup238 on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @02:56PM (#41437947)
According to [1] an electric garbage truck traveling 15,000 miles a year uses about 38,960 kWh. An 84 MW power plant produces 84,000 kWh every hour, or enough to power more than two trucks for an entire year. Even if we assume that the diesel equivalent uses a hundred times as much it's still a tiny fraction of what the plant in TFA produces.

[1] https://www.oregon.gov/deq/ghgp/Documents/ElectricGarbageTru...

Re:The Engineering of Landfills by rtkwe on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @03:09PM (#41438088)
Couple issues with that comparison: 15k seemed low given I drive ~10k a year and I don't work a job that uses my car, so I checked refuse trucks drive on average more like 25k miles per year and there are many servicing a single dump. Also most garbage trucks are still diesel so you've got to 5-10x that power usage number and there's all the vehicles used to compact and move the trash once it reaches the landfill which are also (currently) pretty exclusively diesel powered (think bulldozers and soil compactors with some excavators thrown in).

https://afdc.energy.gov/data/10309

Re:The Engineering of Landfills by bluGill on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @04:36PM (#41438939)
The point is this is free energy - all of the energy sent to the trucks is going to be done either way.
Re:The Engineering of Landfills by marcosdumay on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @04:38PM (#41438951)
So, you use more of that "enough energy to power them for an ear" that your power plant is outputting every hour.

There are plenty of hours in an year. You won't get any meaningful problem by complaining about the OP's approximations.

Re:The Engineering of Landfills by ericd on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @03:30PM (#41438305)
A 500 hp semi truck engine running at peak power is like 350 kw, so 84 megawatts (84,000 kw) is more than 200 of those engines at full throttle at all times.
Re:The Engineering of Landfills by gruez on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @02:53PM (#41437902)
Are you confusing MW (power) with MWh (energy)? There's no way that a truck uses more energy, unless it's running 24/7 or something.
Re:The Engineering of Landfills by 486sx33 on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @04:15PM (#41438753)
84 Megawatts = 112645.86 Horsepower
Re:The Engineering of Landfills by 542354234235 on Wednesday September 04, 2024 @10:22AM (#41446187)
Fast and Furious 12: Too Trash Too Furious
Re:The Engineering of Landfills by tomrod on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @05:05PM (#41439195)
I think their point was the delivery of that garbage over time is subject to entropy, and from first principles probably took more energy consumption than a sustained 84MW over the time period the landfill is a viable source for energy.

I know nothing about landfill engineering here, to be frank, simply being a grease for good online gearing.