Are different forms of energy more efficient?

[Elite Engineer]

We all know that 100% cannot be transferred from one system to another. However, what if different forms of energy can efficiently transfer more energy than others?

 

For example: Can kinetic energy transfer more energy than chemical energy? Can Thermal energy transfer more than mechanical energy? Can electric energy transfer more efficently than magnetic energy etc.

 

-Or is energy nondiscriminatory in all its forms, and transfers the same regardless of what form it is in?

[studiot]

Or is energy nondiscriminatory in all its forms, and transfers the same regardless of what form it is in?

 

 

Well what do you think?

 

Have you taken several known examples of energy transfer and compared their efficiencies?

 

[Elite Engineer]

 

 

Have you taken several known examples of energy transfer and compared their efficiencies?

Well no, I was hoping someone on here would have some theoretical knowledge of this or did some sort of related research.

[studiot]

So given the information I have offered, your thoughts are?

 

Is an electric fire bar more efficient at converting energy to heat than a gasoline engine?

[swansont]

Efficiency depends on what you want to do with the energy, and the system you are using. Energy itself being efficient is a nonsensical statement.

 

As studiot has implied, yes, some conversions are more efficient than others. That's why we use different machines for different applications. A resistive load is very efficient at converting electrical energy to thermal energy, while a system designed to do mechanical work is less efficient. But a resistor is exceedingly inefficient at doing mechanical work.

 

Trivially, though, energy is a conserved quantity. No one system is better at it than another at transferring energy in general. e.g. a system with kinetic energy that comes to rest will transfer 100% of that energy into other forms.

[EdEarl]

Energy inefficiencies are generally measured as heat losses. But if your objective is to heat something and some energy is lost as radiant energy, the calculations are similar but the meaning is different.

 

A laser light, (e.g., indicator lights on electronic equipment) are very efficient, and an automobile engine is very inefficient.

[Enthalpy]

Indicator lights are not made by lasers.

[studiot]

We all know that 100% cannot be transferred from one system to another.

 

I do not know if this is a question about thermodynamics or ?

 

It is perfectly possible to describe a physical system that converts 100% of its energy from one form to another in theory.

 

A perfect pendulum is such a system, converting kinetic energy to potential energy and back again in an indefinite cycle.

 

But the energy is not transferred from one system to another, it remains in the one system.

 

 

 

[EdEarl]

Indicator lights are not made by lasers.

True, but laser pointers are.

[Elite Engineer]

I do not know if this is a question about thermodynamics or ?

 

It is perfectly possible to describe a physical system that converts 100% of its energy from one form to another in theory.

 

A perfect pendulum is such a system, converting kinetic energy to potential energy and back again in an indefinite cycle.

 

But the energy is not transferred from one system to another, it remains in the one system.

 

What I meant by not "not 100% of energy can be transfered" was like combustion in a cylinder. Radiant heat is lost (like was EdEarl said), and some of the energy is transferred to mechanical energy. But studiot, you may have answered my question. If kinetic energy can transfer 100% to potential energy, and transfer 100% of potential back into 100% (at least dealing with a pendulum-like system) kinetic energy, then I guess we could say kinetic-potential and vice versa in pendulum-like systems are the most energy efficient, as they conserve the most... right?