Not to me. The real number could be even higher, at least for the USA population.
Without electricity, here are just a few things that come to mind:
1) no water to your house. Have fun drinking out of the nearest river. There won't be a hospital you can go to when you get cholera or dysentery or heavy metal poisoning.
2) have fun using a chain saw (you do have one?) to chop down nearby trees so you can cook your food. How many cans of spam do you have right now in your pantry?
3) One tank of gasoline. The one in your car. That's it. Gas stations can't pump out of their tanks. It wouldn't be hard to get the 10,000 or 20,000 gallons out of their storage tanks by portable pumps. It's a day or two worth of gas. Many stations get daily gas deliveries, they don't have much inventory around.
4) No electricity means refineries can't operate. No diesel for trucks to deliver the gasoline that refineries can't produce. How many refineries can operate for long, if at all, without external electricity?
5) A lot of oil and gasoline moves by pipelines. These need significant energy for pumping along the way. No electricity, no pipelines.
6) No food being shipped from farms. No energy for factories to process it, e.g. refine grain and slaughter cattle.
7) How long can diesel-electric trains run with the diesel they have on hand? A few weeks? Of course, subways and overhead-electric trains would be totally non-functional.
8) Have fun in urban areas like NYC. I can't imagine what a place like that would be after a week or two without water or power and without working sewage.
I'll just stop right there. I could probably come up with another 100 things without really trying.
On the bright side, who will be OK:
1) A lot of the third world. People whose daily existence depends on subsistence farming can survive for years. Many of them don't have electricity right now.
2) Some farmers in the USA. They probably have hand-pumped wells (a relic from bygone days) and plenty of food on hand.
3) Some groups like the Mormons. They (at least on paper) prepare for those kinds of things.
4) People like the Amish. They would probably do OK.
5) Survivalists in general. They have stocked up on food, and they have guns. They will be happy to shoot you dead if you come to them to take their food. And if they run out of food they will be happy to go looking for you and shoot you dead and take your food.
Just 150 years ago none of this would have been an issue. We didn't have electricity and we had much lower population density.
But now, if we lose electricity nationwide for an extended period of time, we are way beyond fucked. We're mostly dead.
I can understand your negative perception on such situations but do you honestly believe that wind mills will come to a screeching halt with such outage? No, I’m not implying that they will power the entire nation but I have a hard time believing that those small sunsets of folks will also not have power.
The vast majority of electrical generation equipment, which is to say virtually all of it, is designed to either shut down or isolate from the grid when a disruption of electrical grid frequency is detected. This is to protect both the equipment and the grid, in the case of mechanical generators and even some solid-state generators connection to a significantly off-frequency grid (e.g. due to severe load imbalance due to loss of interconnection) will cause physical damage to the generators and possibly to transmission equipment.
So yes, windmills will come to a halt because they are designed to. Or, more specifically, they will feather their blades and continue to rotate idly while not producing power in order to ensure adequate hub lubrication.
There is a significant concern that, even in a scenario where all power plants are undamaged, it would take a significant period of time for plant operators and distribution system operators to restore service due to the need to more or less restart everything. Something very similar happened during the California power crisis and the great Northeast blackout, in which undamaged power plants were offline for an extended period of time due to the difficulty of restoring grid condition to normal.
Even under normal conditions of a stable grid, when power plants start (e.g. due to expected increase in demand) it takes hours from startup to connection to the grid. Most renewable generation methods (except hydro) and the newest natural-gas turbine plants can start much more quickly (e.g. 15 minutes), but this assumes that they will be connected to a grid which is operating at their design frequency, which would be very difficult to achieve if there has been a significant loss of generation.
And just to worry a bit more, a significant amount of electrical generation, especially in plants capable of load following (quick response to demand), is via natural gas. Natural gas distribution also relies heavily on compressor stations which run on, well, electricity. These stations have backup power capability but recent experience in the Southwest, during the 2011 winter, shows that this is not entirely reliable, and that severe events can disrupt the natural gas supply as well.
In BC ive heard of natural gas compressor stations have a natural gas turbine generator to run its own electric motor compressor. If it is connected to the functioning grid they can choose whether they Buy or sell electricity
Most commercial windmills would come to a screeching halt. That's because they feed into the grid. They're designed to feed into a fully functional, working grid. If the grid is broken then having random power inputs into it won't work. There would be no way to control the grid under that scenario.
Windmills that e.g. farmers and other rural people install on their property would probably be OK. It should be easy to disconnect them from the grid and have them power local equipment. But without some sort of energy storage, it would be dangerous to try to operate on just windmill power. Too variable. Most equipment wouldn't deal with it very well.
But there is one other strong positive I forgot to mention. PV power. That's becoming more and more available. Such a massive change in just the last few years.
PV would let pockets of people do well. Also, having something like a Tesla car or Powerwall, coupled with rooftop PV, would be a game changer for those people. A setup like that could do pretty well if decoupled from the external power grid.
Not to me. The real number could be even higher, at least for the USA population.
Without electricity, here are just a few things that come to mind:
1) no water to your house. Have fun drinking out of the nearest river. There won't be a hospital you can go to when you get cholera or dysentery or heavy metal poisoning.
2) have fun using a chain saw (you do have one?) to chop down nearby trees so you can cook your food. How many cans of spam do you have right now in your pantry?
3) One tank of gasoline. The one in your car. That's it. Gas stations can't pump out of their tanks. It wouldn't be hard to get the 10,000 or 20,000 gallons out of their storage tanks by portable pumps. It's a day or two worth of gas. Many stations get daily gas deliveries, they don't have much inventory around.
4) No electricity means refineries can't operate. No diesel for trucks to deliver the gasoline that refineries can't produce. How many refineries can operate for long, if at all, without external electricity?
5) A lot of oil and gasoline moves by pipelines. These need significant energy for pumping along the way. No electricity, no pipelines.
6) No food being shipped from farms. No energy for factories to process it, e.g. refine grain and slaughter cattle.
7) How long can diesel-electric trains run with the diesel they have on hand? A few weeks? Of course, subways and overhead-electric trains would be totally non-functional.
8) Have fun in urban areas like NYC. I can't imagine what a place like that would be after a week or two without water or power and without working sewage.
I'll just stop right there. I could probably come up with another 100 things without really trying.
On the bright side, who will be OK:
1) A lot of the third world. People whose daily existence depends on subsistence farming can survive for years. Many of them don't have electricity right now.
2) Some farmers in the USA. They probably have hand-pumped wells (a relic from bygone days) and plenty of food on hand.
3) Some groups like the Mormons. They (at least on paper) prepare for those kinds of things.
4) People like the Amish. They would probably do OK.
5) Survivalists in general. They have stocked up on food, and they have guns. They will be happy to shoot you dead if you come to them to take their food. And if they run out of food they will be happy to go looking for you and shoot you dead and take your food.
Just 150 years ago none of this would have been an issue. We didn't have electricity and we had much lower population density.
But now, if we lose electricity nationwide for an extended period of time, we are way beyond fucked. We're mostly dead.