How can it be justified to burn natural gas to generate electricity?

Question

Consider the actual efficiency of this method of delivering electricity to our homes compared to using natural gas directly.

Answer 1

If I get the meaning of your question correctly its mostly a matter of infrastructure. Piping gas requires that you do it underground, and in rocky areas that is not very easy. In earthquake prone areas gas pipes could rupture, and natuaral gas is flammable. Electrical wires use less material to transport the power to your home, and its easier than having a power plant in your basement.

Answer 2

The simple answer.

Natural gas is an excellent energy source but electricity is easier to distribute than CH4 (methane or natural gas). It is also safer and requires less expensive equipment to receive.

It can also be compressed (CNG) and then if cooled below 270 deg C. it turns into a liquid LNG and takes up much less space than a gas

Not all houses are piped for gas but almost every house in the world is wired for power. Western AZ has very little gas service.

Gas can be made from any organic source and it is a by product of any trash dump or waste facility. It must be burned to generate energy and it doesn't create less C02 if burned in the home as opposed to a power plant!

So what is the Difference here?

No oil company will tell you this but it is almost free and is often a nuisance to the refineries that produce gasoline and diesel fuel. .

The refineries have installed large torches that burn off methane just to safely get rid of it.

];-)

.

Answer 3

Since the use of natural gas is most often used in homes for heat, let's assume that's the question.
Think about how much piping and meters and whatnot it takes to distribute gas. If you have homes widely separated, and since they usually want electricity in any case, then there would be a trade off in how much infrastructure you'd have to create to spread the gas around vs the cost of conversion and electrical losses in distribution then heating.
And don't forget it takes a lot of energy to dig up the ditches and melt the steel for the pipes and meters etc.

Answer 4

What? How can it not be justified? How does it differ from oil or coal which are burned in many electric generation plants in the USA.

Please be more specific as to why you are questioning the burning of natural gas for electricity.

Answer 5

About the only way you might be able to produce electric power cheaper than the power company is with a small wind driven generator. If you include the capital cost for a solar power system, it simply can't compete with the power company and the economy of scale that their system has. You want to save some bucks, cut down on your energy consumption. That is the cheapest and simplest way.

Answer 6

Do you have a better suggestion?

While alternate systems like wind or solar sound good, electricity is needed 24/7, and the wind does not always blow, nor the sun always shine.

Nuclear can be a good choice, but the fanatics have all but killed it in the USA, so we are stuck with burning fossil fuels for now.

Answer 7

Natural gas contains carbon and hydrogen. When you burn it you get CO2 which contributes to global warming, and water which doesn't. Petrol, kerosene and diesel contain a higher proportion of carbon and coal is almost all carbon, so although burning natural gas contributes to global warming, it does so to a lesser extent than these other fuels.

Answer 8

Most power generating plants have the ability to use more than one type of fuel to fire their boilers, and they will use whatever type fuel is the most economical for them at the time. most of them switch between oil or gas, but even some of the coal fired boilers have the ability to operate with other fuels.

Answer 9

It's cleaner burning than oil or coal so it produces less pollution.