I don’t doubt the math, but does the 103 quadrillion BTUs take into account the energy consumed/utilised by the humans in the same manner as for the whales - I mean does it include the food eaten and the metabolic rate of the human, or just the external sources of energy such as electricity and fuel?
JimR
In your discussion about energy usage of blue whales and humans, you talk about what whales eat and the power usage of humans. Shouldn’t you also consider what humans eat as well?
Or do the DOE stats quoted take that into account?
It’s pretty easy to see that it doesn’t matter if you take our food into account. (Though I’m assuming those numbers would include energy expended to create food.)
A person eating 2000 (kilo)calories a day consumes 730,000 a year. If the 491 million a blue whale eats equates to 65 kilowatts, a human’s consumption is equivalent to a hair under 0.1 kilowatts. And given that the article dealt only in whole kilowatts, it’s promptly rounded away.
Mod note: I’ve merged two threads on the same blue whale topic, just to sort of vaguely try to keep things together.
It seems to me that the relevant question is not how much energy but how many non-renewable resources humans use up vs. whales. On that score we have 'em beat.
Agreed, and that there are on the order of 10,000 blue whales on the planet and 300,000,000 Americans? That there are 30,000 times as many humans dwarfs any moderate math error in the per-individual calculations.
In pre-whaling days, the population was estimated at about 300,000 blue whales. That means we’re using 1,000 times as much energy today as all the whales used at their peak population.
I think what this tells us is that we should switch to krill as an energy source.
Am I the only one who thinks the comparison is strange?
I’m not a biology expert, but my understanding is that large animals have relatively low metabolisms. To me, it would be more impressive to say something like “the average American uses more energy than 7,000 migrating hummingbirds” or something like that.
I can’t think of a less relevant metric.
One of your best, Cecil.
What I would like to point out that worldwide blue whale population is estimated to be anywhere from 5,000 to 12,000 individuals, so granting the largest population estimate and largest energy consumption estimate of 75 kilowatts the total blue whale population would use a maximum of 900,000 kilowatts per annum. But there are about 311,000,000 Americans now, so if each uses 11 kilowatts per year the total is 3,421,000,000 kilowatts per year. This amounts to over 3,800 times as much energy use as the total whale population, and our grazing grounds are much smaller than that of the whales. I concede that per capita American energy use is near the top of industrial societies, exceeded only by Belgium and one or two others, but considering that we comprise only 4.5% of the total world population I’d say the total human energy footprint exceeds that of the whales (and every other creature) by an astonishing margin.
Inasmuch as you are just about the most erudite person I know, I certainly hope that you are familiar with Bill Catton’s monumental 1980 work, Overshoot.
It is my contention that every literate person should be familiar with it, dismal though the implications may be.
Warm regards, acerbas
Are we taking into consideration all forms of energy consumed? Electric,natural gas, fossil fuels, food, solar, wind, hydro, etc? Are we adding up all the power output of all machines we are using? I’m sure if you take into consideration everything we use in our daily lives from calculators to dragsters and earth movers, and everything between and beyond, we could use considerably more energy.
Perhaps the whales need to adapt to the modern American lifestyle, then there will be no question who consumes more energy per capita.
Capacity to love? Number of interstellar wars waged?
I like the “dialogue with Una” format for columns.
::Notices you noticing his Una fan club t-shirt.::
All primary energy consumption was included. One potential source of error, which Cecil and I debated a little about, was whether to take into account the energy included in the trade imbalance. That seemed too fiddly and small, and distracted from the main point. Food consumption of people is also very small relative to the primary energy consumption.
If whales use that much energy just eating, we should be grateful they don’t drive.
So if my car uses 1liter/100km more, how many blue whales do I need to kill to save the planet?
