Skip to content

Latest on The Myth of More Severe Storms

December 9, 2016

Radical environmentalists continue to claim that CO2 emissions cause climate change and that global warming, aka, climate change, will bring more severe storms.

Every year, the facts prove them wrong.

2016 is the third year in a row that no category 3 or stronger storm has actually hit the United States mainland, however Hurricane Matthew came close to the coast and paralleled Florida while a category 3 & 4.

In addition, not a single hurricane of any category hit the mainland United States in 2015 … Zero.

The following table show the decades of greatest Atlantic hurricane activity affecting the United States.

The decades before 1960 consistently had more large storms hitting the United States than in the past 55 years. There were fewer storms over the past 55 years, while there was greater atmospheric CO2.

Decade

All Category 1-5

Major Category 3,4,5

1900-1909

15

6

1910-1919

20

8

1920-1929

15

5

1930-1939

17

8

1940-1949

23

8

1950-1959

18

9

1960-1969

15

6

1970-1971

12

4

1980-1989

16

6

1990-1999

14

5

21st Century

2000- 2009

19

9

2010 – 2016

3

1*

* Includes Matthew, whose track paralleled the U.S. coast without actually coming ashore while a category 3 or 4.

Hurricanes that hit mainland U.S.

Source for 20th century storms: http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Landsea/deadly/Table5.htm

Source for 21st century storms

http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/index.php

And the years 2010 through 2016 were supposed to be the warmest in history, where atmospheric CO2 levels are higher than at any time in at least the past 4,000 years.

Dr. Chris Landsea, National Hurricane Center, has also noted that many hurricanes went undetected before the advent of satellites. He has also shown the effect of hurricanes of short duration, less than two days, or those lasting less than 4 days, on the trend of hurricanes over the past century. These shorter hurricanes only became known with the advance in satellite technology. His paper is available at http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Landsea/gw_hurricanes/

This is important, since we can now see embryonic hurricanes as they emerge from North Africa — and then track them as they cross the Atlantic, with many swerving to the North and missing the United States by a wide margin. We might never have known about these storms prior to the use of satellites, unless some hapless ship got in their way.

Hurricane Lisa in 2010, that rambled around the Cape Verde Islands off the coast of Africa, is an example of a storm that might not have been seen without satellites.

The area west of Mexico, the Gulf of Tehuantepec, has been known as the birthplace of Pacific hurricanes for at least the past two centuries.

Mostly, these hurricanes travel west, and sometimes threaten the Hawaiian Islands.

Occasionally, they turn eastward, and hit Mexico, with winds and rain sometimes extending into New Mexico and Texas. The path of Eastern Pacific hurricanes can be seen here: http://weather.unisys.com/hurricane/index.php

It was one of these Tehuantepec hurricanes that we went through on our way to Japan while I was a cadet/midshipman.

S.S. Reuben Tipton in edge of Typhoon. Photo by D. Dears

S.S. Reuben Tipton in edge of Typhoon. Photo by D. Dears

The insurance industry is clamoring for action to stop global warming because they have suffered large losses in recent years.

However, it was the increase in coastal populations that caused the higher insurance losses. In his testimony to Congress, Professor Lomborg pointed out that, “The two coastal South Florida counties, Dade and Broward, are home to more people than the number of people who lived in 1930 in all 109 counties stretching from Texas through Virginia, along the Gulf and Atlantic coasts.”

And the story about tornadoes is similar.

Fewer tornadoes than in prior years, while atmospheric CO2 levels are at the highest levels in at least the past 4,000 years. Only 976 so far in 2016, less than half as many as in 2011 and 2008.

tornado-count-2016

For more information about tornadoes, and for years prior to 2000, go to http://www.spc.noaa.gov/wcm/#data

As with hurricanes, satellites have resulted in more small tornadoes being seen than would have been seen otherwise.

The idea that global warming is causing larger and more frequent storms is a phony myth.

It’s another myth being perpetuated by alarmists in their efforts to scare people over CO2 emissions.

And the facts debunk it.

Storms are not getting more severe or more frequent.

* * * * * *

Nothing to Fear is available from Amazon and some independent book sellers.
Link to Amazon: http://amzn.to/1miBhXy

Book Cover, Nothing to Fear

Book Cover, Nothing to Fear

* * * * * *

NOTE:

It’s easy to subscribe to articles by Donn Dears.

Go to the photo on the right side of the article where it says email subscription. Click and enter your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

If you know people who would be interested in these articles please send them a link to the article and suggest they also subscribe.

© Power For USA, 2010 – 2016. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author, Donn Dears LLC, is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Power For USA with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Russia: Leader in Nuclear Power

December 6, 2016

Russia is emerging as the worldwide leader in nuclear power.

According to the international Atomic Energy Agency, 60 new nuclear power plants are being built around the world.

Worldwide, there are around 440 nuclear power plants in operation, of which approximately 99 are in the united States.

In spite of the United States having more nuclear power plants in operation than any other country, the United States lags badly in its ability to build new nuclear plants.

Most notable is the lack of heavy forging presses to handle the large forgings required for reactor vessels. In fact, the largest presses in the U.S. can only handle forgings up to 270 tons at one location, and 170 and 175 tons at the remaining two locations.

In comparison, Japan, China and Russia have presses that can handle 600 ton forgings. South Korea and France can handle 500-ton forgings.

The latest reactors require forging presses with 500- and 600-ton capabilities.

But, Russia is evolving as the leading builder of nuclear power plants.

It currently has orders for, or is in the process of constructing, 33 new nuclear power plants around the world, plus 4 within Russia. This doesn’t include floating power plants.

Russia is also developing and building fast breeder reactors.

China is rapidly becoming the second most important user and builder of nuclear power plants, partly in cooperation with Russia. But with a copycat version of the Westinghouse AP1000 (Japan) designated the CAP 1400, China has ambitious plans to build these units in China and to export the CAP 1400 design.

China currently has 35 nuclear power plants in operation, and another 20 under construction. It has plans to have around 150 nuclear reactors in operation by 2050.

Nuclear power in the United States, Europe and Japan is largely at a standstill. Only four nuclear power plants are under construction in the United States, 1 in France and possibly 1 in the UK.

Meanwhile, the United States is shutting down reactors, 5 in the past 4 years, while Germany has promised to shut down all its remaining 8 reactors by 2022. Japan is struggling with whether to restart the reactors it shut down after the Fukushima disaster.

It was only 35 years ago that the United States was a leader in nuclear energy.

The 1979 movie China Syndrome, with misleading and inaccurate information, was the turning point when radical environmentalists began convincing Americans that nuclear energy was dangerous.

china-syndrome-ad

Jane Fonda, and others, had to know that their diatribe was false. They have done a terrible disservice to all Americans. See, Destruction of America’s Nuclear Industry.

Russia and China are the emerging nuclear power leaders, and there is not much the United States can do to alter the immediate future. It’s entirely possible that all of the nuclear power plants in the United States will be shut down by the end of this century.

If small nuclear reactors become plausible, the United State could possibly regain a leadership role.

If not, Russia and China will likely dominate the nuclear power industry for the next several decades.

* * * * * *

Nothing to Fear, Appendix 3, describes the decline in U.S. nuclear power generation and why all nuclear power plants in the U.S. could be shut down by 2100.

Nothing to Fear is available from Amazon and some independent book sellers.

Link to Amazon: http://amzn.to/1miBhXy

Book Cover, Nothing to Fear

Book Cover, Nothing to Fear

* * * * * *

NOTE:

It’s easy to subscribe to articles by Donn Dears.

Go to the photo on the right side of the article where it says email subscription. Click and enter your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

If you know people who would be interested in these articles please send them a link to the article and suggest they also subscribe.

© Power For USA, 2010 – 2016. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author, Donn Dears LLC, is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Power For USA with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

What next for shale?

December 2, 2016

“In August 2015, Saudi Arabia declared war on shale oil development in the United States.”

“In October 2016, Saudi Arabia capitulated.” Quote from, Saudi Arabia Capitulates.

This has now been confirmed by an agreement among OPEC producers to cut production by 1.2 million barrels per day. Whether the cut ever actually materializes is immaterial: U.S. shale oil producers will be off and running in 2017.

The number of U.S. oil shale drilling rigs, at the end of November, had increased by 154 since the low point in May 2016.

The number of DUCs (Drilled but Not Completed) is currently around 3,800, not counting 900 natural gas DUCs.

The stage is set for rapid growth of shale oil production in the United States.

Initially, it could be unexpectedly rapid, and capped only by the surge in oil production forcing the price of oil lower.

We are likely to enter a period where U.S. shale oil production dictates the price of oil.

When the price of oil drops, due to an increase in supply caused by U.S. producers, U.S. producers will back off completions, and increase the number of DUCs. When the price of oil increases, U.S. producers will once again aggressively complete the DUCs and resume drilling.

This cycle could dictate the price of oil on world markets for many years in the future.

Much will depend, however, on growth in demand. If environmental activists succeed in getting governments to restrict the use of fossil fuels, demand growth could slow.

COP 21 established a program for cutting CO2 emissions that could result in the use of less energy.

The United States can reject this scenario of energy deprivation that harms people around the world, and lead the world to increased use of low-cost energy.

Low-cost energy over the past century has resulted in worldwide benefits, and the United States could provide the leadership for another century of improving economic growth and improved living standards around the world.

Natural gas from shale could also change the world markets for natural gas, and improve the availability of low-cost electricity for millions of people.

Diagram of fracking operation. Diagram source not known.

Diagram of fracking operation. Diagram source not known.

The shale revolution originated in the United States, and will spread to other countries over the next decades.

OPEC’s grip on the oil market has been broken, and the world will benefit from low-cost energy as a result of this revolution, assuming a belligerent Iran or terrorist action doesn’t upset this equation.

OPEC is still relevant, but it seeks oil price stability within a range of prices it can live with.

* * * * * *

Nothing to Fear, Chapter 15, An Alternative Hypothesis, describes why the sun is the far more likely cause of global warming..

Nothing to Fear is available from Amazon and some independent book sellers.

Link to Amazon: http://amzn.to/1miBhXy

Book Cover, Nothing to Fear

Book Cover, Nothing to Fear

* * * * * *

NOTE:

It’s easy to subscribe to articles by Donn Dears.

Go to the photo on the right side of the article where it says email subscription. Click and enter your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

If you know people who would be interested in these articles please send them a link to the article and suggest they also subscribe.

© Power For USA, 2010 – 2016. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author, Donn Dears LLC, is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Power For USA with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

COP 21 Carbon Cutting Absurdity, Part 2 of 3

November 29, 2016

As shown in Part 1, it’s impossible for the world to cut CO2 emissions enough to prevent a climate disaster, but could the United States cut its CO2 emissions 80% by 2050?

US ratified UNFCCC treaty in 1992. UNFCCC held Conference of the Parties (COP) 21 and is leading the efforts to cut CO2 emissions.

US ratified UNFCCC treaty in 1992.
UNFCCC held Conference of the Parties (COP) 21 and is leading the efforts to cut CO2 emissions.

As seen in Part 1, electricity generation and gasoline usage produced 59%, or nearly two-thirds of CO2 emissions in the United States in 2004.

These CO2 emissions must be cut 80% from 1990 levels if there is to be any possibility of cutting total U.S. CO2 emissions 80% by 2050, as required by Obama and the EPA.

The percentage of U.S. electricity generation, and related CO2 emissions in Million Metric Tons (MMT) for each source in 2014, are:

Coal = 33%, CO2 = 1,364 MMT
Natural gas = 33%, CO2 = 530 MMT
Nuclear = 20%
Hydropower = 6%
Other renewables = 7%
Oil 1%, CO2 = 24 MMT

Cutting CO2 emissions 80% from 1990 levels requires that total CO2 emissions from electricity generation in 2050 not exceed 364 MMT.

CCS (carbon capture and sequestration) is not a viable option for continuing the use of fossil fuels. See, The Why and How of Carbon Capture and Sequestration.

Without CCS, all coal-fired power plants and one-third of all existing natural gas power plants must be shut down if CO2 emissions are to be kept below 364 MMT.

Wind and solar as replacements

There are two fundamental scientific reasons why wind and solar can’t replace the coal-fired and natural gas power plants that must be closed.

  • Wind and solar don’t generate electricity when the wind doesn’t blow or the sun doesn’t shine.
  • Solar doesn’t generate electricity during nighttime hours.

Currently, there are 1,068,422 MW of installed capacity of all types.

This amount of capacity must be available at all times to provide electricity during periods of peak load.

But 441,704 MW of this capacity, or 41%, is eliminated when all coal-fired and 1/3 of Natural Gas power plants are shut down, so there won’t be sufficient capacity to respond to peak loads.

Therefore, if wind and solar are used to replace the lost capacity, the remaining installed capacity would be insufficient to meet peak demand when the wind stopped blowing or the sun didn’t shine.

This alone means that wind and solar can’t replace the lost baseload power that’s needed to be available at all times, 24/7, for when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine.

The only theoretical possibility for using wind and solar to replace coal-fired and natural gas power plants that have been closed, would be to install storage essentially equal to the lost capacity.

Unfortunately, there is no type of storage currently available that can store this amount of electricity across all of the United States. See, Storage is Essential for Wind and Solar.

In addition, there are economic reasons why wind and solar can’t be economically used to replace coal-fired and natural gas power plants.

  • The cost of building, at $2,000 per KW, the approximately 434,137 new wind turbines, rated 2 MW, needed to replace the lost coal-fired and natural gas units would be $1.7 trillion. (Using offshore wind would cost twice this amount.)
  • The cost for using PV solar at $3,000 per KW would be around $2.5 trillion while concentrating solar, at around $5,000 per KW, would cost over $4 trillion.
  • The cost of constructing new transmission lines to transport the power from remote areas to where it can be used must be added to the investment in new wind and solar capacity. This investment in new transmission lines could easily exceed $200 billion, based on the Joint Coordinated System Plan (JCSP’08).

Replacing coal-fired and natural gas power plants with nuclear would allow a transition where CO2 emissions could be cut 80%. But, the public has been conditioned to believe nuclear power is dangerous, so there is little likelihood that very many new nuclear power plants will be built. In fact, it’s very probable there will be less nuclear power available in 2050 than there is today.

Even if nuclear were acceptable, it would require building 442 new nuclear plants rated 1,000 MW each by 2050, which would be virtually impossible. Currently, there are about 100 nuclear power plants in the U.S.

Conclusion:

It is impossible to eliminate all coal-fired power plants and 1/3 of natural gas power plants by 2050, without destroying America’s standard of living by forcing Americans to accept huge reductions in the use of electricity, such as for air-conditioning, appliances, communications, WiFi, TV, etc., and without crippling American industry.

Part 3, in the next week or two*, will explore whether gasoline can be cut 80% by 2050.

  • Change.

* * * * * *

Additional information:

Nothing to Fear is available from Amazon and some independent book sellers.

Link to Amazon: http://amzn.to/1miBhXy

Book Cover, Nothing to Fear

Book Cover, Nothing to Fear

* * * * * *

It’s easy to subscribe to articles by Donn Dears.

Go to the photo on the right side of the article where it says email subscription. Click and enter your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

If you know people who would be interested in these articles please send them a link to the article and suggest they also subscribe.

© Power For USA, 2010 – 2016. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author, Donn Dears LLC, is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Power For USA with appropriate and specific direction to the original content

COP 21 Carbon Cutting Absurdity, Part 1 of 3

November 18, 2016

The COP 21 agreement is absurd, and is likely to become a tragedy for mankind if actually implemented.

The COP 21 agreement is based on the premiss that CO2 emissions must be cut 50% worldwide by 2050 or there will be a climate catastrophe. This, in turn, is based on the assumption that atmospheric CO2 must be kept below 450 ppm. Atmospheric CO2 is currently 400 ppm.

Computer models predict that temperatures could rise as much as 8 degrees F if these last 50 ppm are allowed to happen.

The assumption has also been that developed countries, including the United States, must cut their CO2 emissions by 80%, so that undeveloped countries, including China and India, can continue to increase their CO2 emissions, although at a slower rate.

But, are these basic assumptions valid?

Table 1

Country CO 2 emissions (MMT) Per capita emissions (Tons) % of Total World
World 35,270
China 10,300 7.4 29.2%
United States 5,300 16.6 15.0%
EU28 3,400 6.8 9.6%
India 2,500 1.9 7.1%
Russia 1,800 12.6 5.1%
Japan 1,400 10.7 4.0%
70.0%
  • Estimates for 2014

Table 1 from Nothing to Fear

These 6 countries account for 70% of CO2 emissions worldwide.

Realistically, only two sources of CO2 emissions are relevant to any attempt to cut CO2 emissions.

They are:

  • Gasoline
  • Generation of electricity

Industrial causes are too diverse for effective action. They include cement production, natural gas for heat treating and heating, etc.

Table 2

U.S. CO2 Emissions 2004

Source MMT % Total
Electric Generation 2298.6 39%
Gasoline 1162.6 20%
Industrial 1069.3 18%
Transportation (Excluding Gasoline) 771.1 13%
Residential 374.7 6%
Commercial 228.8 4%
United States Total 5905.1 100%
  • Total excludes approximately 70 MMT of CO2 emissions from miscellaneous sources.
  • Source: Emission of Greenhouse Gasses in the United States 2005 by DOE Energy Information Administration.
  • MMT = Million Metric Tons

Table 2 from Nothing to Fear

While Table 2 is for the United States, both Europe and Russia have similar distributions of CO2 emissions, while China and India, the two largest developing countries, have more emissions from the generation of electricity than from gasoline usage.

Is the COP 21 agreement realistic, or a farce?

How will it be possible to cut CO2 emissions 80% from the generation of electricity and the usage of gasoline?

But before examining how the United States can cut its CO2 emissions 80% by 2050, one has to wonder whether such a herculean effort would have any effect on the world’s ability to prevent the climate catastrophe predicted by the UNFCCC and IPCC, which is the basis for the COP 21 agreement?

What are the facts?

  1. China and India already emit more CO2 than does the United States, Europe, Russia and Japan combined.
  2. China and India are developing countries that will be allowed to increase their CO2 emissions.
  3. The UN has said the world must cut total CO2 emissions 50% by 2050, which means, referring to Table 1, cutting CO2 emissions by 17,635 MMT.
  4. Assuming the United States, Europe, Russia and Japan cut their CO2 emissions 80%, it would amount to only 9,520 MMT, nowhere near the 17,635 MMT needed for the world to prevent a climate catastrophe.
  5. The remaining developing countries that produce 30% of the world’s CO2 emissions are mostly struggling to survive, with countries in Africa and many in Asia barely at subsistence levels, and mostly, with the exception of oil producing countries and S. Korea, unable to cut CO2 emissions by any amount.

No amount of speech making by 10,000 attendees in Marrakesh, at the UN COP 22 climate change conference the week of November 6, will change these facts.

From UNFCCC web site

From UNFCCC web site

The only conclusion that can be reached is that it is impossible for the world to cut CO2 emissions enough to prevent a climate catastrophe.

On this basis, COP 21 is worse than a farce, it is a tragedy.

(The next articles will examine whether the United States can cut its CO2 emissions 80% by 2050 as demanded by Obama and the EPA.)

* * * * * *

Nothing to Fear is available from Amazon and some independent book sellers.

Link to Amazon: http://amzn.to/1miBhXy

Book Cover, Nothing to Fear

Book Cover, Nothing to Fear

* * * * * *

NOTE:

It’s easy to subscribe to articles by Donn Dears.

Go to the photo on the right side of the article where it says email subscription. Click and enter your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

If you know people who would be interested in these articles please send them a link to the article and suggest they also subscribe.

© Power For USA, 2010 – 2016. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author, Donn Dears LLC, is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Power For USA with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Coal and the Unreachable Climate Goal

November 15, 2016

While the Obama administration continues to promote its war on coal, and fossil fuels in general, coal usage worldwide continues at a brisk pace.

While silly movies, like Before the Flood, promote COP 21 goals, the world continues to favor the use of coal for generating electricity.

Wind and solar grab the headlines, but coal does the job.

It can be said, with little contradiction, that it is impossible to cut CO2 emissions enough to prevent the forthcoming climate disaster, assuming CO2 is the cause of global warming.

One must wonder why the United States should destroy its economy and the standard of living of Americans, when its impossible to prevent the onrushing climate disaster, if CO2 is the cause of global warming.

Bloomberg promotes the COP 21 agenda, yet it also recognizes that coal usage will continue to grow.

Growth of coal in Asia, (right graph) Courtesy of Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF)

Growth of coal in Asia, (right graph) Courtesy of Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF)

In recent years, China has been building two coal-fired power plants per week, but now forecasts a reduction.

The reduction? Build one, rather than two, coal-fired power plants each week.

Japan is pushing to build more coal-fired power plants to replace the nuclear power that has been sidelined after the Fukushima disaster caused by a tidal wave.

This chart from the EIA shows that CO2 emissions from developing countries will overwhelm the puny reductions in CO2 emissions from Europe, the US and other developed countries.

The growth in coal usage in developing countries is the major contributor to the growth in CO2 emissions.

CO2 projections from EIA

CO2 projections from EIA

Europe, with its massive, costly push to cut CO2 emissions, has achieved very little in the way of reducing CO2 emissions.

Coal will remain a significant share of energy usage by 2040, regardless of all the COP 21 efforts to kill coal.

The Obama administration and the EPA demand that the United States cut its CO2 emissions 80% by 2050, but this is obviously not enough to stop the growth in worldwide CO2 emissions.

To achieve an 80% reduction, Americans would have to cut their per capita CO2 emissions from 16.6 tons per person today, to 2.3 tons by 2050.

Cutting CO2 emissions 80% is virtually impossible to do, but even if it were technically possible, it would destroy America’s standard of living.

Quoting, Bloomberg New Energy Finance founder Michael Liebreich:

“The [Japanese] utilities are seeing how difficult it is to restart the nuclear power stations after Fukushima, so they’ve decided to build coal.”
And,

“If Asia keeps building coal-fired power stations, then there is no way of sticking within a carbon budget consistent with 2 degrees,”

Efforts by the EPA to cut the use of coal and natural gas are harming Americans, with no possible benefit.

Atmospheric CO2 will continue to rise well past the magical 400 ppm, where there will be, according to DiCaprio, Gore and Obama, a climate catastrophe.

Attempting to cut CO2 emissions is a dangerous delusion, and the next few articles will explain why.

* * * * * *

Nothing to Fear, Chapter 14, explains why it’s impossible to cut CO2 emissions 80%.

Nothing to Fear is available from Amazon and some independent book sellers.

Link to Amazon: http://amzn.to/1miBhXy

Book Cover, Nothing to Fear

Book Cover, Nothing to Fear

* * * * * *

NOTE:

It’s easy to subscribe to articles by Donn Dears.

Go to the photo on the right side of the article where it says email subscription. Click and enter your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

If you know people who would be interested in these articles please send them a link to the article and suggest they also subscribe.

© Power For USA, 2010 – 2016. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author, Donn Dears LLC, is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Power For USA with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

CO2 Wizardry or Hype?

November 11, 2016

The headlines read:

“Scientists accidentally discover a method to turn carbon dioxide Into ethanol.”

And,

“CO2 may help renewables industry.”

While stories in the media read:

“The [CO2 to Ethanol] process could be used to store excess electricity generated [by] wind and solar. … It could help balance a grid supplied by intermittent renewable sources.”

And, more dramatically:

“This low-cost electrochemical reaction may come to the rescue of the earth’s climate.”

Photo from ORNL, catalyst of copper nanoparticles embedded in carbon nanospikes.

Photo from ORNL, catalyst of copper nanoparticles embedded in carbon nanospikes.

While most people would applaud being able to dispose of unwanted CO2, this wizardry, from DOE’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory, may just be hype.

First, there is the scientific fact that the process requires more energy to produce ethanol from CO2, than is in the ethanol that’s produced. The energy input is greater than the energy output. (This is the same basic problem with fusion.)

We have not yet discovered perpetual motion. Electricity is required to produce ethanol from CO2, and the process only has a yield of 63%.

Unless the source of electricity doesn’t use fossil fuels or the electricity would otherwise be wasted, the process would ultimately add CO2 to the atmosphere. (I.e., generating electricity for the process produces more CO2 than would be absorbed by the ethanol.)

For example, if wind turbines generate electricity that cannot be used on the grid, this electricity could be used to produce ethanol and remove CO2 from the atmosphere.

But this is a very limited case, since selling the electricity to the grid has a greater economic value than using the electricity to produce ethanol. Excess electricity from wind energy usually only happens at night when the grid is lightly loaded and represents a small fraction of the electricity produced by wind turbines.

Rephrasing the issue:

Why build wind turbines and solar farms to generate electricity to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, when they could, theoretically, be used to displace the electricity generated by fossil fuel power plants and prevent the CO2 emissions in the first place?

Amazingly, if the foregoing isn’t sufficient to demonstrate that the media headlines are hype, the scientific paper describing the process contained the following conclusion:

“The process probably precludes economic viability for this catalyst.” And,

“The entire reaction mechanism has not yet been elucidated.”

This discovery does nothing to change the fact that wind and solar are unreliable, or intermittent. Neither wind nor solar generate the electricity required for the reaction when the wind doesn’t blow or the sun doesn’t shine: I.e., no electricity, no ethanol.

Summary

The media created the impression that a process was accidentally discovered that could remove CO2 from the atmosphere and “come to the rescue of the earth’s climate” while also mitigating the intermittent problems associated with wind and solar.

Both propositions are false.

It’s merely media hype.

 

* * * * * *

Nothing to Fear, Chapter 6, Wind Energy, explains why wind energy is expensive and unreliable.

Nothing to Fear is available from Amazon and some independent book sellers.

Link to Amazon: http://amzn.to/1miBhXy

Book Cover, Nothing to Fear

Book Cover, Nothing to Fear

* * * * * *

NOTE:

It’s easy to subscribe to articles by Donn Dears.

Go to the photo on the right side of the article where it says email subscription. Click and enter your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

If you know people who would be interested in these articles please send them a link to the article and suggest they also subscribe.

© Power For USA, 2010 – 2016. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author, Donn Dears LLC, is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Power For USA with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.