The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Thursday, May 23, 2013
  • Sections
    • Home
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Solar
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Wind
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Geothermal
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Bio
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Hydro
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Careers
    • Companies
      • Company Directory
      • Press Releases
      • Products
      • Events Calendar
      • White Papers
    • Webcasts
      • Upcoming Webcasts
      • Featured Webcasts
      • Archived Webcasts
      • Events Calendar
    • White Papers
    • Magazines
      • Renewable Energy World
      • Wind Technology
      • Large Scale Solar
      • Hydro Review
      • HRW - Hydro Review Worldwide
      • Renewable Energy World (North America Edition)
      • Photovoltaics World
    • Awards
  • Account
    • Sign In
    • Register
  • Search
Don't Miss The Great Solar Debate: Where Does the Global Solar Industry Stand? Click Here to Register! ×

Converting New York State Entirely to Renewable Energy: What Would It Look Like?

James Montgomery, Associate Editor, RenewableEnergyWorld.com
March 13, 2013  |  380 Comments

While the State of New York hashes out deep disagreement over how to deal with sugary megadrinks that contribute to obesity, maybe they can turn their attention to something a little less complicated — like mapping a full conversion to 100 percent renewable energy in less than 20 years.

Stanford Professor Mark Z. Jacobson previously co-authored studies in 2009 and 2011, outlining what it would take to shift completely to renewable energy at a global and national scale, respectively. In either case, such conversion would be a colossal undertaking in infrastructure, policy, finance, and partnerships.

But could it be more feasible to do it on a smaller scale — say, an individual state? Jacobson has now shrunk those analyses down to what it would take for the State of New York to shift its entire energy needs — transportation, electricity, heating and cooling — to renewable sources. Bottom line: It is all doable, with some important cost comparisons and behavioral shifts. "We think it's feasible to power the grid this way," Jacobson told RenewableEnergyWorld.com. "The assumption that you can't do it, is just an assumption."

The study, scheduled for upcoming publication in the journal Energy Policy, breaks down the specific mix of renewable energy ("wind, water and sunlight," or WWS) required to convert New York's all-purpose energy infrastructure. It uses 11 criteria to evaluate each technology: e.g. resource abundance, footprint and spacing, operating reliability, water consumption, emissions and pollution. Excluding mined natural gas, liquid biofuels, nuclear power, and carbon-capture coal (for reasons detailed in the full study), here's what they come up with as New York's renewables-only mix by 2030:

  • 40 percent: Offshore wind (12,770 5-megawatt turbines)
  • 10 percent: Onshore wind (4,020 5-MW turbines)
  • 10 percent: Concentrated solar (387 100-MW CSP plants)
  • 10 percent: Utility-scale solar PV (828 50-MW plants)
  • 6 percent: Residential rooftop PV (5,000,000 5-kW systems)
  • 12 percent: Commercial/government rooftop PV (500,000 100-kW systems)
  • 5.5 percent: Hydro (7 1.3-GW hydroelectric power plants, most of which already exist)
  • 5 percent: Geothermal (36 100-MW plants)
  • 1 percent: Tidal (2,600 1-MW tidal turbines)
  • 0.5 percent: Wave energy (1,910 0.75-MW wave devices)

The end result, according to the study: power demand would be reduced by 37 percent, fuel costs would be zero, there would be a net increase in jobs, nearly all energy would be produced in-state, costs (and mortality) associated with pollution and emissions would decline significantly, and the 271 GW of installed power needed would be repaid within 17 years.

Such a transition won't happen easily or overnight, of course. Jacobson proposes some ~40 short-term policy options, including expanding the state's renewable portfolio standard (RPS), setting goals for offshore wind, establishing a green bank, implementing feed-in tariffs and net metering, more electric vehicles, etc. Another big part of the picture will be much more aggressive targets for energy efficiency, currently 15 percent less energy use by 2015. He also offers suggestions to smooth out variability of the renewable energy sources, by bundling them with hydro or stored CSP power, using demand-response management, oversizing the mix, and using energy storage. He cites two recent studies showing up to >99.8 percent of electricity could be produced using these "WWS" resources over multiple years.

The study wasn't funded from any group; it was requested and encouraged by people working on different types of energy proposals in New York State, Jacobson noted. He's subsequently put together a similar renewables roadmap for California, and is starting another one for Washington State. The model could be replicated for all 50 states, he says, with customized mixes of energy that take advantage of local resources, and with improvements to transmission systems and interconnections. And, of course, the commitment to make it happen.

Lead image: Map of New York State, via Shutterstock

380 Comments

Register To Comment
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 17, 2013
@Montgomery
Hit commit???
You mean submit instead?
The count read less than 1900 before I sent it and returned a message that my posting was over 2000.
So, if commit and submit are the same then what????
Either way, thanks for looking into it...
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 15, 2013
Re Gary's loss, CtrlA, CtrlC is always prudent on web comments sites, so CtrlV can restore text, but sometimes Back on the browser will work.

This site is particularly bad because if you have a URL it doesn't like, it eliminates the whole text, and if you go over the max count it doss the same and doesn't even get the count right after you reduce it a bit. Logging off (having done a CtrlA CtrlC to an editor and then bring the shortened text back that way works.

Web jockeys aren't noted for testing their hacking.
;]
James Montgomery
James Montgomery
April 15, 2013
garyrich2000 #368-9 -- IT's short answer is sorry but no, if you didn't hit Save or Commit we can't recover it. Sorry.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
April 13, 2013
Dear Bonkin: We have to consider the "merit order effect" with renewables. What does a renewable cost to install per producing watt? How much fossil fuel equivalent does a "renewable" replace in conjunction with a "sustainable" energy efficiency measure, i.e. EE energy efficiency + RE renewable energy system? What do the distributed smart grid, fast ramping base line power back ups cost to install? Can we make them CHP combined heat power systems?
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
April 13, 2013
Dear Bonkin: We agree that energy efficiency is the key to urban sustainability systems. The cost effectiveness must be done case by case.
Consider a mid-size hotel, already equipped with vacuum dual pane insulated windows. reducing heat costs by 30%. Yet, it still has a European heat and power bill of €200.000 p.a.
Cost effective power measures would be ending in teams of electricians and appliance-elevator repair people to replace all the motors in the building- refrigeraor freezer units in the restaurant kichen, the washing machine and dryer motor in the laundry, the mini-bar refridgerators-escalators- and elevators- with added "power management systems" that reduce power consumption by up to 60%.
Then use "Sonic Drilling" systems to drive four to six heat- air conditioning geothermal wells,and run the heat pick up lines through vacuum glass tubing in front of rooftop, concave solar concentrator, with heat exchange- and add C.N.C. energy management systems-which regulate the heat and air conditioning according to actual room use. Thpose measure cuts heat and air conditioning costs by 70%.

So, for an investment of about €400.000, the hotel reduces its combined heat-air-conditioning and power bill by 60%. I.E. cutting costs by €130.000 p.a.- And the "energy efficiency measures" amortize
inside 4 years.

Cost benefit analyses must be conducted for every measure. These are not academic, but are going into place every day across Europe. Cut consumption- increase performance. Residential and commercial builing heat and power and air conditioning consume over 50% of the Northern Hemisphere energy needs, and there is plenty of room for efficiency and renewable energy measures to systematically cut that.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
April 13, 2013
kent-doering - nothing to denigrate - I am sure there are very good examples of renewables, energy efficiency, etc, etc, in Germany and Austria - the reql question is what the investments are against returns, how many people are benefited, etc,. I don't believe renewables will substitute all demand - only a fraction in practical terms - also because of intermittency and small scale of each device will require large generators to back up/stabilize the supply/provide security. Furthermore questions about global population ( even if population is declining in Germany) and overall resource depletion - lifecycle of mankind is close to its end and human beings are content to wait until it hits them directly. So much of this discussion is of academic interest.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
April 13, 2013
kent-doering - nothing to denigrate - I am sure there are very good examples of renewables, energy efficiency, etc, etc, in Germany and Austria - the reql question is what the investments are against returns, how many people are benefited, etc,. I don't believe renewables will substitute all demand - only a fraction in practical terms - also because of intermittency and small scale of each device will require large generators to back up/stabilize the supply/provide security. Furthermore questions about global population ( even if population is declining in Germany) and overall resource depletion - lifecycle of mankind is close to its end and human beings are content to wait until it hits them directly. So much of this discussion is of academic interest.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
April 13, 2013
Dear Bonkin: Of course I will be denigrated as usual by some for "daring" to come back and make some statements. Of course we cannot compare the situation in Munich, Bavarian and Germany with N.Y. nor can we compare the Austrian situation either.
You can find something about the Munich Utility (SWM- Stadtwerke München) plan to be the 1st city over million inhabitants to be entirely off fossil and nuclear fuel for power and long distance distict heat by the end of 2025. The SWM English Language website is

http://wwwswm.d/english.html

All private households will be supplied by renewable, - solar p.v., concentrated solar, wind, hydro geothermal by 2015 and the entire grid will be sustainable by the end of 2025. (Not pipedreams by me but the stated goals and objectives of Munich Utilities.) The city will be the first million inhabitant city in Germany to have its power and long distance heat-hot water grid off nuclear and fossil.
A plebiscite prohibited Austria from erecting nuclear so it has been massivly building out hyrdo, wind, solar and other forms of bio-waste that are virtually unknown in the U.S.. Güssing Austria was the first rural region town to be go entirely off fossil for power in 2001. Guessings successful model is very relevant.

The entire Güssing county is 100% renewable now.
Its website is www.guessing.co.at. and www.eee-info.net/cs/net.austria/napro/app/na-professional.

Güssing has a special form of carbon monoxide forestry and agrarian cellulose waste to gas system developed in Vienna that not only supplies heat and power from foresty and agrarian cellulose wastes - bio-char) the plant also produces Fischer Tropsch diesel. Fuel.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
April 13, 2013
Dear Bonkin: Of course I will be denigrated as usual by some for "daring" to come back and make some statements. Of course we cannot compare the situation in Munich, Bavarian and Germany with N.Y. nor can we compare the Austrian situation either.
You can find something about the Munich Utility (SWM- Stadtwerke München) plan to be the 1st city over million inhabitants to be entirely off fossil and nuclear fuel for power and long distance distict heat by the end of 2025. The SWM English Language website is

http://wwwswm.d/english.html

All private households will be supplied by renewable, - solar p.v., concentrated solar, wind, hydro geothermal by 2015 and the entire grid will be sustainable by the end of 2025. (Not pipedreams by me but the stated goals and objectives of Munich Utilities.) The city will be the first million inhabitant city in Germany to have its power and long distance heat-hot water grid off nuclear and fossil.
A plebiscite prohibited Austria from erecting nuclear so it has been massivly building out hyrdo, wind, solar and other forms of bio-waste that are virtually unknown in the U.S.. Güssing Austria was the first rural region town to be go entirely off fossil for power in 2001. Guessings successful model is very relevant.

The entire Güssing county is 100% renewable now.
Its website is www.guessing.co.at. and www.eee-info.net/cs/net.austria/napro/app/na-professional.

Güssing has a special form of carbon monoxide forestry and agrarian cellulose waste to gas system developed in Vienna that not only supplies heat and power from foresty and agrarian cellulose wastes - bio-char) the plant also produces Fischer Tropsch diesel. Fuel.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
April 13, 2013
Dear Bonkin: Of course I will be denigrated as usual by some for "daring" to come back and make some statements. Of course we cannot compare the situation in Munich, Bavarian and Germany with N.Y. nor can we compare the Austrian situation either.
You can find something about the Munich Utility (SWM- Stadtwerke München) plan to be the 1st city over million inhabitants to be entirely off fossil and nuclear fuel for power and long distance distict heat by the end of 2025. The SWM English Language website is

http://wwwswm.d/english.html

All private households will be supplied by renewable, - solar p.v., concentrated solar, wind, hydro geothermal by 2015 and the entire grid will be sustainable by the end of 2025. (Not pipedreams by me but the stated goals and objectives of Munich Utilities.) The city will be the first million inhabitant city in Germany to have its power and long distance heat-hot water grid off nuclear and fossil.
A plebiscite prohibited Austria from erecting nuclear so it has been massivly building out hyrdo, wind, solar and other forms of bio-waste that are virtually unknown in the U.S.. Güssing Austria was the first rural region town to be go entirely off fossil for power in 2001. Guessings successful model is very relevant.

The entire Güssing county is 100% renewable now.
Its website is www.guessing.co.at. and www.eee-info.net/cs/net.austria/napro/app/na-professional.

Güssing has a special form of carbon monoxide forestry and agrarian cellulose waste to gas system developed in Vienna that not only supplies heat and power from foresty and agrarian cellulose wastes - bio-char) the plant also produces Fischer Tropsch diesel. Fuel.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
April 13, 2013
Larryofgalaxy - "Burning that resource while aware of the fact that without it,or even if in short supply, has millions starving can only be labeled a form of insanity."

It is the development of science and technology over the past two hundred years and exploitation of finite resources that have expanded human populations around the world, extended lifespans, also allowed humans to populate inhospitable regions on earth.

Once born humans aspire to do everything you say is harmful - fly to holiday destinations in their millions, gobble up exotic delicacies, burn rubber on tarmac,farm beasts that gobble up twenty times the agricultural production that plant eaters need, etc, etc - this will continue until the human system is hit irreversibly - already serious tensions on water and energy sources, and the tendency is to simply channel aid to prolong the lives of the starving and sick of the world and not find internal adjustments/solutions for readjustment of the natural causes. Most people think the end will not come during their lifetime and will only stop when hit.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 13, 2013
The posting had references to KWh's consumed in the month of December 2012 with comparisons to offshore wind meeting that demand with half of that suggested in the article above. Additionally, I added electric/hydraulic technology suggestions and references for complete elimination of fossil fuel use in a large portion of transportation applications (which is the biggest consumer of energy in that state)
Furthermore, there were added pointers on integration and shared costs for polyamide aerogels and Pan Fibers (Carbon Fiber) in biomass and steel/cement construction respectively.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 13, 2013
I'm pissed, I just lost a 2000 plus character posting and didn't save it before hitting submit. If Mr. Montgomery is able to retrieve the submission it would be appreciated.
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
April 12, 2013
bonkim2003

My primary reason for the comment is simply to illustrate that disconnecting our energy supplies,no matter the source,from the realities that we have to deal with as a result of profligate and irresponsible use of those energy supplies is neither relevant or productive in the final evaluation.

I'm also trying to direct some focus on the irrefutable fact that all the renewable energy on earth cannot replace fossil fuels in a direct one for one ratio or application. Let's not even get into Second Law of Thermodynamics issues.

Burning a finite resource to propel an overweight and underutilized vehicle and passenger down a highway that paves over productive farm land is not the signs of an intelligent or sustainable society.

Burning that resource while aware of the fact that without it,or even if in short supply, has millions starving can only be labeled a form of insanity.

That is not hyperbole

That is just stating a fact

It's time more folks wake up to reality and not sleep walk into chaos.

Otherwise as your choice of words describes things; it's hopeless.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
April 12, 2013
larryofgalaxy - see some of my comments on the same vein - people propose what they can contribute - and no one like to think the situation is totally hopeless.
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
April 12, 2013
364 comments and barely a mention of the soon to be dead oceans,wars over water resources,oil reaching peak,overpopulation,landfills overflowing with no attempts at reductions in generated wastes,more mindless cultural suicide suburbs and endless McMansions,more highways and vehicles etc etc.

Yes I suppose a few nukes and some minor renewable energy projects and all will be fine.

There is about as much chance of NY ever being %100 renewable energy self sufficient as there is a chance Lindsey Lohan becomes a nun.

Now let's all get busy developing that energy silver bullet economists and other Polyanna's tell us will be shortly forthcoming based on those magic price points
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
April 12, 2013
garyrich2000 The UN is a defunct body and those depending on it save the world will be waiting for ever. I am sure it would be possible to transmit power from space - the question is how much and at what cost. Why not tap the Van Allen belt?

Sustain it with limits on population - by the time mankind rations its membership - it will be a different world. In the mean time the Chinese are buying up all the potential resources particularly in Africa, and S America, and will probably outlast tye others in this struggle - don't forget the origins of the 2nd war was to corner resources - Japan starved out of the SE Asian oil fields and germany from Africa and Asia - the domain of the British Empire. It will be interesting to see the future in a few decades and the UN will be gone by then.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 12, 2013
Well Bonkim, since you are forecasting our future out to couple of centuries, I might as well add space based power transmitted to earth to help sustain 100 percent renewables. God help us if there is some United Nations study which claims it is not feasible.

Speaking of United Nations involvement in the safety of Nuclear, aka supporting DrA premise that wind is not needed, what I've seen so far is conclusions based on acute exposure and a stale mate on long-term/chronic conditions due to lack of clear methods of identifying causation (bio-markers) and ample statistical exclusionary samples. Smells of playing innocent until proven guilty.

So, if New York aims for 100% renewables, they may be able to attain it. And, perhaps sustain it with limits on population at some point.
William Fitch
William Fitch
April 12, 2013
Hi: 361 comments for this?? Well, goal achieved, they apparently got the press they wanted... CSP in NY... now there's a trip... but hey, when you can proceed your name with professor, I guess you can say anything..

.....Bill
PS: Now it can be 362
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
April 12, 2013
Bosch Germany is getting out of solar PV following losses of over 2.4billion Euro and German Government's slashing previous generous renewable subsidies.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 12, 2013
Bonk, others have been discussing thiswith me for a while and you're quite right, things are grim.

Humans were reduced to a few thousand souls hiding in S. African coastal caves about 130,000 years ago, due to an ice age drought. I believe the great Samoan volcanic eruption d d such a job on climate about 68,000 years ago that a decimation occurred then too. Our present path is soon to wreak havoc, especially when we consider that Norway is already experiencing fishing losses due to acidification, even in traditional regions far from their country.

It seems likely that countries like Norway will be most effective in changing how we behave in, and combat, the coming environmental crush.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
April 12, 2013
Dr Alx - have been immersed in this topics both as an engineer (Power Projects) and as a local councillor for decades - no medical doctor gives up hope as that will be accepting defeat and stop the medical business - environment and climate change, renewable industry is a business and those involved find it lucrative whether research, government commissions, industry, or consultancy - how can any one claim that growth and renewable energy solutions will save mankind, etc - not too difficult to build up a resource/population/consumption model - even back of envelope doodling will show integrating growth and population increase within limits of resources leads to a singularity at a not so distant point. Yes discussion/webinars/clever scientists seem to make sense, sound interesting, and politicians promise a better tomorrow - that does not mean sensible people have to believe that.

I would just point to the fundamental principles of a 'life cycle' for everything in nature and that for mankind on earth is spinning ever faster to its end. Not a doom monger but a realist. Populations in the west that have been developing a technological/consumer oriented society over the past two centuries may be declining and getting poorer, consuming less or inventing new ways to save energy or making materials last longer - but the main thrust is the rest of the world where aspirations are running high, energy and materials consumption accelerating and the climate/environment deteriorating fast - the US or EU despite pretending to be clever are powerless to change that. Renewable industry requires huge investment - and in real terms today's bankrupt world economy cannot afford that - even if it did - renewables, energy efficiency, recycling, wind coupled to the hydrogen economy, waste to energy, Stirling engines, energy storage, mining ocean floor, etc, etc, will meet only a fraction of demand - hence the terminal patient.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 11, 2013
Bonk, you should appreciate Helm & Grantham...

www.policyexchange.org.uk/modevents/item/fixing-climate-policy-with-professor-dieter-helm-cbe
www.charlierose.com/view/interview/12812
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
April 11, 2013
garyrich2000 being at the practical/strategic area of such discussion, such research reports are of academic value - hence don't trust them/don't read them.

Taking in the bigger picture and from first principles much of your discussion has no practical value in solving the issue raised - that of weaning New York off fossil fuels.

I don't see any practical solution to the energy conundrum except gas, and nuclear, even clean coal technologies until the sources last - after that or well before when societies around the earth start fighting for what is left - hopefully populations will be decimated to a level when consumption will fall - but doubt if there will be any sustainable level.

Yes renewables will be tapped where commercially feasible but overall limited in terms of meeting present day consumption rates.

As things get scarce people will be prepared to pay higher prices/ration use - that will be a social change - and in turn economic/political/social structures across the globe will be radically different from what it is today.

The discussion amongst people who google or debate the validity of research papers is complete bonkers - produce something useful that will people pay money to buy.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 11, 2013
I'll save comments for later.....
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 11, 2013
Not so fast, there is more to check.
DrA your conclusions smell of Red Herrings by potentially drawing someone away from inconsistencies or other errors.
Bonkim your comments smell of impatience to verify truth. I'm assuming you did read the UNSCEAR report. So my question is, to what degree did you scrutinize it?
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
April 9, 2013
DrAlexC - absolutely - given that we both agree on this point, the present discussion is futile. Also politically, a few research bods are not going to change track and human societies only shift when hit by brute force - parallel with the basic lawas of motion.

Overall i don't believe New York State would be able to detach itself from fossil fuels and nuclear ever unless it cuts itself to size to what it was in the 18th and 19th century and also in terms of population. So fossil fuels, nuclear will continue until these resources are exhausted in turn.

So a century or two if not decades.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 9, 2013
Right, Erich. The EDF recently had a day of nuclear-power education for their board, which I attended, and it was interesting to see the stats. For example, no one at Fukushima died from radiation, but if the plant had never been built and operated, more than 130,000 years of Japanese lives would have been lost to pollution illnesses from combustion power.

Today, China loses >3% of GDP to combustion pollution and ~700,000 Chinese die per year for that reason alone.

Their plans to build over 100 new reactors are good, but even their most aggressive plans to implement solar, wind and nuclear will still have coal dominant in 2035 -- burning twice what they burn today.

Our failure to act properly in the '60s and '70s is a lasting shame...
http://energyfromthorium.com/pdf/CivilianNuclearPower.pdf
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbyr7jZOllI?=5618117

The irony is that the Chinese were shadowing us every step of the way, including Nixon's unwise funding shutdown. Thus, they're now just getting back to the '70s!...

www.ibtimes.com/chinas-push-nuclear-power-alternative-energy-export-potential-1101243
www.energyandcapital.com/articles/china-thorium-investing/2992
erich knight
erich knight
April 9, 2013
I believe Dr.Hansen;

"global nuclear power has prevented an average of 1.84 million air pollution-related deaths and 64 gigatonnes of CO2-equivalent (GtCO2-eq) greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that would have resulted from fossil fuel burning. On the basis of global projection data that take into account the effects of the Fukushima accident, we find that nuclear power could additionally prevent an average of 420?000–7.04 million deaths and 80–240 GtCO2-eq emissions due to fossil fuels by midcentury"


Prevented Mortality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Historical and Projected Nuclear Power
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es3051197?journalCode=esthag
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 9, 2013
Bonk, the world is already "totally different", if only because most organisms have been displaced by humans and the carbon cycle has been overwhelmed by a factor over 20 for decades. Just the deficit in carbon recycling in the oceans will require hundreds of years, should we stop all combustion today. And, we're only decades away from turning off the dominant carbon recycling due to ocean acidification. No one knows how to deal with that 500,000,000,000 ton C debt.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 9, 2013
Gary, glad you're reading all the info. The "Mangano Study" cannot be considered a "study", since they had no effective review and were drawing conclusions via opinion, rather than controlled data & experiments.

Such studies have indeed been done for folks exposed to radiation on daily bases and those are explained in, for example, "Radiation & Reason".

Again, since radioactive materials decay (half lives), radiation in the past was far higher than now. To believe Nature had not evolved defense mechanisms is incorrect. All one need do is look up cellular-repair, and of course note that radiation is used to destroy cancers by targetted doses that exceed the cells' abilities to survive/repair damage.

As to electrical dangers inside power plants, they are no different from type of fuel used to another -- the generation/transmission sections of a plant are standard.

Chemical threats, on the other hand,, do not decay, so the lead & mercury we've ingested from food & air pollution remain with us about forever.

I'm not sure what your last sentence is about.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 8, 2013
(Mangano Study)
Here is a reminder of what is stated in the first paragraph.

Patterns of long-term health risk reduction after levels of environmental hazards decline have been documented, but are still not precisely understood. Nuclear plant shutdowns that eliminate radio- active emissions and reduce toxins in the environment and food chain have been previously linked with significant short-term declines in local infant deaths and child cancer cases.

I agree that other comparisons were not made and so did Mangano indirectly by suggesting further study. This study is basically a red flag for further investigation.


(Electrical)
Thanks for pointing out the number of electrical connections are greater for wind than Nuclear. My bias is based on working with the VPP program, especially in Navy Shipyards. I feel much safer there but would have concerns with commercial work unless OSHA enforces as tightly there as they do in military vessels. Especially when Lock Out Tag Out procedures are religiously followed.

However, I do see more safety enforcement in commercial yards now than 5 years ago. Which leads to my confidence of wind having similar electrical safety records as nuclear.
Besides, didn't you make a case for smaller distributed nuclear as a viable option on a previous occasion?
Also, the summary report to the link you provided had such low electrical fatality numbers that they didn't even bother to give a tally. Why???????
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
April 8, 2013
Statistical probabilities/death rates from radiation, carbon dioxide , methan, ammonia, and other man-made hazards - best to close down our industries, aviation, and motoring - the last heading by the way kills each year more that the total of all radiation deaths sice Marie Curie. This discussion is going down a dead track - The world is as it stands - economics and technology that have evolved over the past two centuries - exploiting world resources at an ever increasing rate, altering nature/climate along a one way track - give or take a century or two - will see a totally different world - all your research will not create new resources or alter the thermodynamic laws - living in the closed confines of a lab or University - guys wake up the real world outside is quite different from what you read in technical papers which someone comes along and shoots down.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 8, 2013
Are you limiting your argument to radiation exposures only?
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 7, 2013
Yes, Gary, UNSCEAR is a standing UN committee. Their prior report years back was criticized for not discussing the observation in meany studies of low-level radiation that have shown no effect, or beneficial effect, below 200mSv exposure. This new report corrects that partially by stating that 100mSv is indistinguishable from no effect.

If you want to read results of real studies, go to Allison, "Radiation and Reason" 2009, or Henriksen & Maillie, "Radiation and Health", 2003 or even a summary: http://tinyurl.com/c8vrc8y
http://imgs.xkcd.com/blag/radiation.png

It's wise to note that, like creationism, which assumes God is dumb, blind radiation fear assumes Ma Nature is too.
;]
Other, recent refs...
www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_UN_approves_radiation_advice_1012121.html
www.timesonline.com/news/local_news/isn-t-this-radiation-naturally-occurring/article_a9af4fb7-26a3-5c8a-afb9-4e29726
f37eb.html
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 6, 2013
www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/67/46 (UNSCEAR correction 2012)

This link you gave didn't match any existing documents so I assumed that (UNSCEAR correction) was typed by you.

I'm currently reading

http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/67/46
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 6, 2013
I'm starting to question if you cautiously read what you post as reference for your argument DrA. But it will take time for me to cautiously check what I'm reading.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 5, 2013
...Continuing with Gary's Mangano BS...

All these references (and more) were discredited by British medical agencies...

40. Busby C, Cato MS. Death rates from leukaemia are higher than expected in areas around nuclear sites in Berkshire and Oxfordshire.

41. Black RJ, Sharp L, Harkness EF, McKinney PA. Le
ukaemia and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: incidence in
children and young adults resident in the Dounreay
area of Carthness, Scotland in 1968-91. J Epid Comm
Health 1994

42. Draper GJ, Stiller CA, Cartwright RA, Craft AW,
Vincent TJ. Cancer in Cumbria and in the vicinity
of the Sellafield nuclear installation, 1963-90.

The pioneer of this fake was Busby, who used Fukushima to start a 'foundation' to sell anti-radiation pills to scared Japanese.

He indeed has been a disgrace to the profession, whether or not Mangano is that, or just foolishly biased (at least he wrote that they hadn't done all the controls they should have).

Reading the interview transcript with Busby is a blast!...

www.monbiot.com/2011/11/22/how-the-greens-were-misled/ (The Guardian, 22 Nov. 2011)

So, Gary, is this the best we can expect from you?
;]

Some historical reality (http colon slashslash)...
tinyurl dot com/3nwjboz
manhaz dot cyf dot gov dot pl/manhaz/szkola/materials/S3/psi_materials/ENSAD98.pdf (Swiss 1998 rpt)
www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/
www.scientificamerican.com/article

While this thread has been serving Gary, nuclear power around the world has saved many years of lives otherwise lost to combustion, windmills, etc. Fukushima alone saved over 130,000 years of Japanese lives.

And, remember Onagawa.
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 5, 2013
...Continuing with Gary's Mangano BS...

All these references (and more) were discredited by British medical agencies...

40. Busby C, Cato MS. Death rates from leukaemia are higher than expected in areas around nuclear sites in Berkshire and Oxfordshire.

41. Black RJ, Sharp L, Harkness EF, McKinney PA. Le
ukaemia and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: incidence in
children and young adults resident in the Dounreay
area of Carthness, Scotland in 1968-91. J Epid Comm
Health 1994

42. Draper GJ, Stiller CA, Cartwright RA, Craft AW,
Vincent TJ. Cancer in Cumbria and in the vicinity
of the Sellafield nuclear installation, 1963-90.

The pioneer of this fake was Busby, who used Fukushima to start a 'foundation' to sell anti-radiation pills to scared Japanese.

He indeed has been a disgrace to the profession, whether or not Mangano is that, or just foolishly biased (at least he wrote that they hadn't done all the controls they should have).

Reading the interview transcript with Busby is a blast!...

www.monbiot.com/2011/11/22/how-the-greens-were-misled/ (The Guardian, 22 Nov. 2011)

So, Gary, is this the best we can expect from you?
;]

Some historical reality (http colon slashslash)...
tinyurl.com/3nwjboz
manhaz.cyf.gov.pl/manhaz/szkola/materials/S3/psi_materials/ENSAD98.pdf (Swiss 1998 rpt)
www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/
www.scientificamerican.com/article

While this thread has been serving Gary, nuclear power around the world has saved many years of lives otherwise lost to combustion, windmills, etc. Fukushima alone saved over 130,000 years of Japanese lives.

And, remember Onagawa.
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 5, 2013
...Continuing with Gary's Mangano BS...

All these references (and more) were discredited by British medical agencies...

40. Busby C, Cato MS. Death rates from leukaemia are higher than expected in areas around nuclear sites in Berkshire and Oxfordshire.

41. Black RJ, Sharp L, Harkness EF, McKinney PA. Le
ukaemia and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: incidence in
children and young adults resident in the Dounreay
area of Carthness, Scotland in 1968-91. J Epid Comm
Health 1994

42. Draper GJ, Stiller CA, Cartwright RA, Craft AW,
Vincent TJ. Cancer in Cumbria and in the vicinity
of the Sellafield nuclear installation, 1963-90.

The pioneer of this fake was Busby, who used Fukushima to start a 'foundation' to sell anti-radiation pills to scared Japanese.

He indeed has been a disgrace to the profession, whether or not Mangano is that, or just foolishly biased (at least he wrote that they hadn't done all the controls they should have).

Reading the interview transcript with Busby is a blast!...

www.monbiot.com/2011/11/22/how-the-greens-were-misled/ (The Guardian, 22 Nov. 2011)

So, Gary, is this the best we can expect from you?
;]

Some historical reality...
http://tinyurl.com/3nwjboz
http://manhaz.cyf.gov.pl/manhaz/szkola/materials/S3/psi_materials/ENSAD98.pdf (Swiss 1998 rpt)
www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/
www.scientificamerican.com/article

While this thread has been serving Gary, nuclear power around the world has saved many years of lives otherwise lost to combustion, windmills, etc. Fukushima alone saved over 130,000 years of Japanese lives.

And, remember Onagawa.
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 5, 2013
Ok, Gary, I was able to look at a few pages on the link you passed, which s draft, not peer reviewed, and not submitted to a peer-reviewed journal, as said above. This is its ostensible publication identifier: "1:xx:xx:xx:xx" -- obviously never published other by the self-publishing tool mentioned earlier.

The authors are not physicists, engineers, or scientists. One is an MD, only published in chemical effects. The lead (Mangano) is an MBA and Philosophy grad. He heads "The Radiation and Public Health Project".

The group: "RPHP was founded in 1988 as a fiscally sponsored project of the United Church of Christ Commission for Racial Justice" and they say they're: "dedicated to understanding the relationships between low-level, nuclear radiation and public health".

All fine, except they seem not to care that original radiation & health standards were formed via a misstatement in a 1945 speech, and only recently corrected by the UN over many years of study...
http://tinyurl.com/4xqwzjc (IEEE Spectrum, October 2011)
www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/67/46 (UNSCEAR correction 2012)

So, not only do they appear limited in capability, limited to self-publishing, and not discussing any other possible, changing causes of cancer in Sacramento County, they don't even properly quote what they say are "significant" differences. They appear uneducated in proper distributional statistical analysis, because they don't explain how they verified the overall distributions of cancer as appropriate to the basic tools for symmetrical, Gaussian data distributions.

They simply say their results, for about 1/2 of their samples, are "significant". They further demonstrate how they'd fail basic peer review by saying: "The 104 aging U.S. reactors at 65 plants affect many Americans" without providing any backup at all.

They even underscore their ineptitude by quoting several references to the discredited Dr. Busby in England -- hilarious!
...
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 5, 2013
The article is fairly neutral and could point to Nuclear being safe enough with adequate design and safety measures than contrary conditions employed at the Rancho Seco site. But then again, how easy or hard is it to get control for adequate results in other locations for similar comparison?
The authors did acknowledge that the control was not what they desired but gave an explanation as to why their data was adequate for consideration. The researcher's conclusion suggested further study.

Cellphones with GPS and a willing public could provide more accurate data on exposure risk with fewer errors. All it would take is a downloadable GPS app with user recognition technology that pays participants a reward for taking part in the study. Such technology could put the debate to rest once and for all with nuclear being shut down, modified, or allowed to grow at a faster rate.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 5, 2013
Gary, I well understand the peer-review process and that the bigger the journal; the more articles published, the more retractions are made. But your source is not more than a self-publishing venue.

If these folks have something valuable, ask them to submit to Nature, AAAS Science, various of the biological journals, etc.

I'll try to load it again, but this if now definitely off topic and wasting time.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 5, 2013
The link loads fine on both my PC and my Mac. Perhaps you didn't copy or highlight it entirely. You can also try to search the entry and match the search results to the address given.

As far as peer review goes. You are claiming that anything that isn't on your selected list smells of a fox guarding the henhouse.

http://ezinearticles.com/?Corrupted-Research---Exposing-the-Peer-Review-Process&id=808798

And how would you respond if the authors did get the peer review through your source?
Would you find some other disqualifying tactic?
Something tells me you would....
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 5, 2013
Gary, if you really are an electrician, you shouldn't be surprised that windmills consume power continually, for many reasons, not just being ready for wind that meets its minimal specs. Why not study industry data sheets, as from Mid-American Energy?

Windmills must continually run sensors for direction, blade loading, blade temperature, wind speed, interface electrical parameters, generator & transmission parameters, etc. This is on the order of several kW, 24/7, for a large windmill.

And, as you might imagine, heating blades in icing conditions is a large power loss. Add to all that the inevitable conversion/transmission loss from necessarily distant wind 'farms' to loads, and we again see why wind is a scam -- the many subsidizing the few.

But, you're a professional, an electrician, and you didn't know all this, while advocating windmills to others, Gary?
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 5, 2013
You'll have to do better, Gary -- your first link doesn't load the paper and what does show is a Word doc by "Joe" which has headers/footers indicating it was yet to be published.

Your next link doesn't confirm any review, because it's PKP...

"Open Journal Systems (OJS) is a journal management and publishing system that has been developed by the Public Knowledge Project through its federally funded efforts to expand and improve access to research.

OJS Features

OJS is installed locally and locally controlled.
Editors configure requirements, sections, review process, etc.
Online submission and management of all content.
Subscription module with delayed open access options.
Comprehensive indexing of content part of global system.
Reading Tools for content, based on field and editors' choice.
Email notification and commenting ability for readers.
Complete context-sensitive online Help support.

So again, if this is the caliber of info you depend on, keep you electrician's job!
;]
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 5, 2013
Here is the orginal article:

http://www.bmijournal.org/index.php/bmi/article/viewFile/115/82

And confirmation that it is peer reviewed:

http://bmijournal.org/index.php/bmi/about/editorialPolicies#focusAndScope
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 5, 2013
Is the continual power consumption an assumption by you or did you quote it?
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 5, 2013
Gary, we finally learn you're an electrician, not an engineer or scientist, so now we know why you'd make such foolish statements as:

"Nuclear has to worry about electrocution hazards as much as wind"

Really? If it takes ~5000 electrically interconnected windmills all driving convertor and grid-interface systems at fatally-high voltages, you really think that the electrocution danger is the same as one power plant of any kind, with one or two fenced transformer and switching yards?

You are a funny guy, Gary.

Still awaiting that link to your cancer 'study' in my state!
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 5, 2013
One thing to note is the continual, 24/7 power consumption by each windmill and the controller for N windmills, regardless of wind speed, etc. Even blades must be kept heated in climates where condensation and icing may occur.

Hard to find a more Rube Goldberg 'solution' that wind power.
;]
Just a tip of the old iceberg...
www.nrel.gov/wind/pdfs/day1_sessioniv_04_shermco_alewine.pdf

Some favorites...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5PPBGsoQMM&feature=endscreen&NR=1
http://tinyurl.com/bl9vlc7
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
April 4, 2013
Gayrich: Responsible wind turbine manufacturers such as G.E., Siemens, Vestas have a learning curve. Today, built in constant computer monitoring can detect developing problems before they cause serious damage, feathering the variable pitch blades so they no longer turn in the wind. (Todays turbines all shut down in high wind conditions. Older turbines do have blade breaks, and some older systems failed to use variable pitch... and spun out of control, setting the generator on fire and crashed and burnt in open fields. Considering the sheer volume, the safety record of wind construction is very high. I am pesonally familiar with the safety measures taken by Vestas and Siemens in constructing their big coastline and offshore turbie systems, and the fatalities are now immaculate... much lower than in normal building or highway construction.
Back in the 60s, Ralph Nader established his reputation by an expose of the dangers of the automobile. "Unsafe at any speed". Now we have crash zones, different glass, airbags, and the rest.. which increases passenger safety during a crash. Germany experieced a high speed rail disaster at Eschede over a decade ago.. which resulted in wheel redesign, and a very strict inspection program...
(the trains go through inspection at least once a month...i.e. every 30.000 km. Safety was improved. Back in the 19th century, steam boilers blew up killing workers. That is why the Germans founded the Technichnische Überwachungsverein, which supervises the safety on everything from cars and trains to power plants, refineries, pipelines, etc.
Goodness, experience has shown that even rooftop solar can be very dangerous in the event of fire. All German fire departments are now informed as to which buildings have rooftop solar, and a special truck sprays a non-conductive foam on the solar p.v. to block sunlight and allow normal firefighting without fear of electrocution from the rooftop solar. A hailstorm is enough to do it.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
April 4, 2013
Dear Gary: Makers of medical imaging equipment are aware of the health dangers involved in radiation. (Advised by the IPPNW there as well.)
Back in the 90s, there was a focus on develping less invasive, less radioactive imaging. (x-rays and CT scans are very intensive.) Work was done on reducing the radiation in both x-rays and CT scans while improving imaging.)
Up in Erlangen, Germany, Siemens physicists and engineers spent a decade in developing "nuclear resonance" imaging. (That is, each element not only has its own particular positron nuclear spin, it has its own particular nuclear resonance- which enabled magnetic nuclear resonance imaging. Siemens meditech in Erlangen developed it, and then licensed it out to G.E. and Philips. (It is not something for claustrophobics. ) Now, their physcists and engineers combined magnetic resonance and advanced c.t.s for low radiation exposure fast imaging.)
Now,EADS researchers up in holland developed high pulse, dual magnetron ion thrusters. Somebody came up with the idea of studying the ionisation processes of ion thrusted ionized steam in an industrial materials CT system. Then somebody else tried studying it accelerated through a combied CT-MR system... with a big surprise for everybody. The ion thruster accellerated steam disassociated to hydrogen and oxygen in the magnetic fields. That lead to other developments. The nuclesr resonance of hydrogen is 144 KHz.
Another set of physicists at the University of Michigan were considering spraying water in front of a standard micro-wave signal system pulsed at a lower frequency of nuclear resonance of hydrogen hoping the the salt water vapour would disassociate and drop the salt in the VHF frequency. When they increased signal intensity, the salt water vapour ignited.
That effect was not lost on the Austrian-German experimental research team studying steam plasma ignition. Now, Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Steam Plasma Ignition system is a reality. Post Helmholtz.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 4, 2013
Regardless the argument that Nuclear is renewable (Comment 71) in comment 23 an argument is made that Nuclear is safer than wind and is energy dense enough to supply projected growth in demand. As a result of this plea for the sake of saving lives the study linking drops in cancer rates with the shut down of the Rancho Seco plant does seem relevant.

The link below provided by DrA does offer some potential insight in how wind's safety can be improved and made even more attractive.

www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf

For instance, the second page of the report states:

Of the 133 fatalities:
• 83 were wind industry and direct support workers (divers, construction, maintenance, engineers, etc), or small turbine owner /operators.
• 50 were public fatalities, including workers not directly dependent on the wind industry (e.g. transport workers). 17 bus passengers were killed in one single incident in Brazil in March 2012.

As you can see, 50 injuries were the result of public fatalities which is virtually eliminated by the lack of public exposure in offshore sites.

Blade failure incidents may also be mitigated by incorporating a tether into the matrix of the composite at several points.

Nuclear has to worry about electrocution hazards as much as wind does so that is a draw there. (I'm a marine electrician)

Fire was listed as #2 hazard and again offshore installation mitigates the damage from this hazard. A halon or sprinkler system may prove practical here if not implemented already.

Structural failure for nuclear seems to be a greater hazard than wind. (God forbid inferior materials slip into valve manufacture or the construction of the containment vessels.)

Ice throw is also listed as a hazard from this report and may be reduced by introducing plasma systems to turbine blade surfaces.

http://www.plasmatreat.com/industrial-applications/new-

Significance of credentials? Time will tell...
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
April 4, 2013
Dear Gary; Corex electro-smelting radically reduces the energy needed in electro-smelting pig iron or scrap metal as used by Voest Austria or Thyssen Krupp on their almost fully automated, state of the art rolling lines- (with upgraded drive systems) which keep German and Austrian steel price competitive to Chinese and Indian Mittal Group steel. (That also cuts the carbon footprint of wind turbine towers and solar panel steel backings and püushes the price down on both.) Silicon, the standard staple in silicon solar cells, was and is the most energy intensive part of solar p.v.. In the "old 2 phase refining process- incinerating natural gas at very high temperatures snelted the stone and tree ash raw material to 90% pure silicon. Then, 2nd phase electrode processing refined it to the 99.9 % purities needed for computer chips and silicon solar p.v..
German heat recapture engineering already cut energy consumption on that by over 30%, making German silicon production so energy efficient and cheaper that the Chinese accused Wacker Chemie of government subsidized price dumping. (LOL) Further developments will make silicon production almost "overunity" radically slashing its carbon footprint.
The heat recapture - tech is also being applied to glass, (being improved) for glass coverings, and the ultra efficient "glass voltaics" invented by a retired MBB Aerospace Dr. Sc. Physicist who was the companies C.T.O.. (I co-hold a patent with him.) All that industrial heat recapture tech slashes fossil fuel carbon footprint impact on both solar and wind, sometimes by up to 90%, which also cuts costs and keeps Germany competitive with China.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
April 4, 2013
Hey Gary: Don´t worry about it. The mix of onshore wind, coastline wind, offshore wind waste incineration, bio-waste gas, closed dual pipe geothermal, solar thermal, hybrid-geo-solar geothermal combined heat power systems, will continue to be built out. And serious Nobel Prize Winning Organisations such as the IPPNW will continue to do careful and cautious statistical analyses of rates of cancer, leukemia etc close to nuclear power plants. (Their work was what prompted the Swiss government to follow the German example, and legislate an exit from nuclear power. They will have no problems in finding substitutes for it.
As for Alec touting his credentials, a friend and colleague of mine is doing a consultation job for the Saudi Government in Riad - about the build out of renewable energy there. - And Dr. J.E.T. can put the following credendials behind his name:
FRSA, MBA (London School of Economics) COAP/CCP,LCD, and DPMA behind his name. (He is advising them on things Dr. Alec hates like big wind and waste incineration power generation.) The big renewable money is not betting on nuclear (And we wouldn´t want it there in the region anyhow, would we?)
Another friend and colleage, a British-Hungarian Viscount-Baron, (RAF veteran, etc) M.B.A. London School of Economics, was the strategic investment counsellor to the Royal House of Saudi Arabia and is now doing strategic renewable energy consulting to the Association of S.W. African states, and tied up a deal between them and G.E. and Lockheed for four traunches of wind turbines- each traunch 24.700. Makes 98.800 turbines bringing power and light to a lot of people who previously relied on kerosene for lighting. Angola is becoming a major exporter of uranium and rare earths in addition to oil- but it is not "betting nuclear" - in its renewable energy electrification- programs. The "big money" is not betting on nuclear, but other forms of renewables.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 4, 2013
So Gary, go back and read my request for a link to the paper you claimed is relevant to Rancho Seco and cancer (but not to this site topic).

And do answer as well, why you have appropriate background to make any comments on radio-biology, nuclear power, statistical analysis, etc. We'd love to hear, Gary.
;]
And, if it's not clear, I don't care about convincing you of anything. I just care that other folks get accurate information, as opposed to biased misinformation.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 4, 2013
Since you consider yourself similar in competency, then elaborate please.
Either you have the willingness or ability to enlighten those who may not know or are just familiar with the concepts provided here.

BTW, I don't work in the wind industry and have nothing to benefit from wind except from being a direct customer. ;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 4, 2013
Gary, looks like many of the comments you've been spitting out have been eliminated as spam! Do you think that helps your uninformed, uncritical thinking and argumentation here?
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 4, 2013
Gary says: "Do you consider yourself having similar competency?"

Maybe having 5 degrees, including in Statistics, could help someone like me understand what's a good study vs a flawed study -- whaddya think, Gary?

How are you qualified?
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 4, 2013
@ Uhhh Gary, is that what you rely on -- un-peer-reviewed piece by an advocacy that made no attempt to control for great changes in Calif. pollution over those 2 decades?

1.Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people of similar competence to the producers of the work (peers.)

Do you consider yourself having similar competency?
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 4, 2013
I've no idea what you're talking about, Gary. Do you?

Why not summarize and provide a link, if you think it important?
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 4, 2013
DrA
You don't even bother to give a rebuttal to Joseph J. Mangano and Janette D. Sherman comments on contol of the data and why they believe their study is an adequate substitution.

Did you even bother to read it?
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
April 3, 2013
Dear Garyrich 2000. "But then again, it may conceal human nature at its worst." I`myself believe we`ve been reading some brilliant fireworks illustrating what Herbert Marcuse, Adorno-et-al, and Christopher Lash described as an "authoritarian-narcissistic-personality disorder". (See Marcuse: "One Dimensional Man", Adorno et al- "The Authoritarian Personality and Christopher Lash- "The Culture of Narcissism". I cited the studies of the Nobel Prize Winning ICCNW demonstrating increased rates different forms of cancer, especially childhood leukemia- within a ten km radius of the Memmingen NP reactor and cited how measured radioactive emissions spike during refueling and inspection. IPPNW studies played a role in the Swiss parliament to also exit nuclear power in shorter time. Don´t waste your time arguing with Dr. A.C..
The fact remains Switzerland is now also exiting nuclear. And comparable to New York State study here: the German states of Schleswig Holstein, Lower Saxony, Mecklenbur-Vorpommern, and the city states of Bremen, Hamburg, and Berlin have all unvelied plans to have their power generation 100% off both fossil fuels and nuclear power by 2030. Doable and financable with the so called "merit order" efect. I had a pleasant Easter in the analomy weather in Germany despite the snow on the solar cells, because the Desertec Solar and Wind is feeding into the grid, along with Andasol concentrated Solar from Spain, and all the wind installed inland, onshore, and offshore. (Another 6 MWh offshore wind turbine is installed every day in the Atlantic, the North Sea, and the Baltic Sea. Dr, A. hates the Europea transition from nuclear to solar wind, etc wind, but there is really nothing he can do about it.) Remember the 8th corrolary to Murphey´s law: "Never Argue with a Fool, you might not notice the difference.)"
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 3, 2013
Yes, I hope to see a follow up on this site and sampled the same way as Joseph J. Mangano and Janette D. Sherman have done. This may reveal a more serious problem or suggest a move to more tighter standards or scrutiny.

But then again, it may conceal human nature at it's worst........
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 3, 2013
On NY state, or any other, suggest you read the April IEEE Spectrum article discussing how local solar is approaching grid parity around the US. www.spectrum.ieee.org search for "Residential Solar Power Heads Toward Grid Parity"
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 3, 2013
Gary, you apparently don't understand California and our regions, each with their specific climates and pollution sources, types and effects. It stops me from generalizing from poor data, but apparently not you.

Tell you what, since San Onofre has been shut down for over a year now, due to a bad Mitsubishi steam generator, why not start tracking cancers inland from it?

But, one thing we do know in Calif -- our windmills kill people and our key flying species. The Brits know that too, remember?... www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf

So, did you read the 2012 UN update I sent on radiation effects around the world, Gary?

Have you read the exposure doc I sent you, so you can see whether to cut your banana consumption?

Did you read the British Health Ministry's study of the falsified Welsh leukemia data? Find it here...
www.monbiot.com/2011/11/22/how-the-greens-were-misled/

Maybe you read the study of Fukushimma effects?
www.nature.com/news/fukushima-s-doses-tallied-1.10686

Maybe you read the Swiss study you've long had in front of you?
http colon slashslash tinyurl dot com/42wvr9l

How about doing some studying before wasting your & everyone else's time, Gary?
;]

Some refs on all power costs in terms of life...
W. Krewitt et al. Risk Analysis, Vol. 18, No. 4
Energy Environ. Sci., 2012, DOI: 10.1039/C2EE22658H
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 3, 2013
Gary, you apparently don't understand California and our regions, each with their specific climates and pollution sources, types and effects. It stops me from generalizing from poor data, but apparently not you.

Tell you what, since San Onofre has been shut down for over a year now, due to a bad Mitsubishi steam generator, why not start tracking cancers inland from it?

But, one thing we do know in Calif -- our windmills kill people and our key flying species. The Brits know that too, remember?... www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf

So, did you read the 2012 UN update I sent on radiation effects around the world, Gary?

Have you read the exposure doc I sent you, so you can see whether to cut your banana consumption?

Did you read the British Health Ministry's study of the falsified Welsh leukemia data? Find it here...
www.monbiot.com/2011/11/22/how-the-greens-were-misled/

Maybe you read the study of Fukushimma effects?
http://www.nature.com/news/fukushima-s-doses-tallied-1.10686

Maybe you read the Swiss study you've long had in front of you?
http://tinyurl.com/42wvr9l

How about doing some studying before wasting your & everyone else's time, Gary?
;]
Soem refs on all power costs in terms of life...
W. Krewitt et al. Risk Analysis, Vol. 18, No. 4
Energy Environ. Sci., 2012, DOI: 10.1039/C2EE22658H
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 3, 2013
Back to the main question of this article....

Converting New York State Entirely to Renewable Energy: What Would It Look Like?

It would probably look similar to the study done by Joseph J. Mangano and Janette D. Sherman.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 3, 2013
@ Uhhh Gary, is that what you rely on -- un-peer-reviewed piece by an advocacy that made no attempt to control for great changes in Calif. pollution over those 2 decades?

Ok DrA, How about limiting your control of pollution to a 25mile radius around the Rancho Seco site and compare it to the same changes in pollution emmissions elsewhere?

Certainly, the greater California has similar changes in pollution levels and correlated cancer rates and can be checked for cancer types as well.

It would be a fool's errand to assume this study to be disregarded.

Also consider two things here,

Comparisons were made by Joseph J. Mangano and Janette D. Sherman:

"We examine official California Cancer
Registry data on cancer incidence for Sacramento County vs. the entire state, using the last two
years of reactor operation (1988-1989) as a baseline; the Registry began in 1988."


http://www.bmijournal.org/index.php/bmi/article/viewFile/115/82

Now contrast that with this last sentance...

"Statewide, 91 percent of California's live in counties with failing pollution grades."

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2010/04/26/daily43.html
erich knight
erich knight
April 3, 2013
Jim Hansen's last paper while at NASA finds big health & CO2 benefits from nuclear power in place of coal:

Using nuclear power in place of fossil-fuel energy sources, such as coal, has prevented some 1.8 million air pollution-related deaths globally and could save millions of more lives in coming decades, concludes a study. The researchers also find that nuclear energy prevents emissions of huge quantities of greenhouse gases. These estimates help make the case that policymakers should continue to rely on and expand nuclear power in place of fossil fuels to mitigate climate change,

http://revkin.tumblr.com/post/46976300057/cenmag-jim-hansens-last-paper-while-at-nasa#_=_
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 3, 2013
Gary, annual revenue from a >90% capacity factor nuke at 5MW and 0.05/kWHr = $1,970,000.

Annual revenue from a full, 1GWe nuke = $394,000,000 from power, @$.05/kWHr plus $ millions from medical/industrial isotope production, - <$5 million for fuel.

And, oh yeah, the nuke power is cheaper and more reliable!

And no charge for finding the other 50-60% of makeup power for lousy wind CF. Remember, your windmills have to buy nuke/combustion/solar power to fill in. Oops.
;]
Want to keep trying?
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
April 3, 2013
Uhhh Gary, is that what you rely on -- un-peer-reviewed piece by an advocacy that made no attempt to control for great changes in Calif. pollution over those 2 decades?

Some facts:
"The plant operated from April 1975 to June 1989 but had a lifetime capacity average of only 39%"

That means the plant was in shutdown for most of the 14 years it did any generation.

In contrast, known effects of pesticides, field burning, and vehicle emissions in the Central Valley in the '70s was high, being continually reduced by our Anew air-pollution laws from then 'til now. That region remains more polluted than all Calif. except LA.

Drawing any conclusion re cancer & the miserably nonfunctional Rancho Seco is a fool's errand.

It's about as dumb as believing the correlation of pirates & climate change, or the intriguing correlation between the introduction of dental floss and incidence of gum disease -- they actually correlate for a good reason -- non-causative, but good reason.

If you want to make an informed statement about nuclear, just compare the allowed emissions from nukes vs what's allowed from coal & other combustion plants, even from geothermal. Remember where Radon comes from? Not nukes.
;]
Here are some facts, if you care...
http://imgs.xkcd.com/blag/radiation.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_equivalent_dose
www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-human-cost-of-energy
www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_UN_approves_radiation_advice_1012121.html (UNSCEAR 2012)
www.timesonline.com/news/local_news/isn-t-this-radiation-naturally-occurring/article_a9af4fb7-26a3-5c8a-afb9-4e29726f37eb.html (fracking radiation, see also NORM)

Remember, windmills use coal, limestone, iron ore, etc. at the rate of ~2000 tons per avg. MW installed, All of that releases natural radiation from rock far greater than any nuke is allowed to emit. And we're not even counting the radioactive materials from mining/processing rare earths for wind systems.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 3, 2013
Annual revenue per 5MW Turbine @$0.067/KWh is:

$1,173,840 @40% Capacity Factor
$1,467,300 @50% Capacity Factor
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
April 3, 2013
One reason why I think nukes will not replace wind for reducing CO2 levels.

http://health.yahoo.net/articles/healthcare/study-nuclear-plant-shutdown-results-4319-fewer-cancer-cases

I've done some early preliminary calculations from various websites for wind costs but so far I calculate a potential 5 to 10 year pay back period w/o subsidies for floating offshore wind in Washington State at $0.67 per KWh. But this is done with ideal conditons of a scaled up supply chain offering materials at very low rates, quayside construction, minimum 5MW size, swappable/self righting towers.

Utility Wind averaged $1.3M to $2.2M per MW in 2012 (windustry.org)
O&M/BOP costs avg $31K/MW in 2011 in USA (North American Wind Power)
330MW Cross Sound Cable $213M/25 mile = $8.52M/Mile (Wikipedia)
Cost per Mile 5MW turbine $129,090/Mi (330MW/5MW=66 Turbines)

Matching onshore costs of Utility wind based on estimates from:

Dr. Habib J. Dagher, Director of both the Composite Center and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)-funded DeepC Wind Consortium at the University of Maine

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/how-much-will-offshore-wind-really-cost/

If our Government helps to drive down the cost of concrete, carbon fiber, steel, and copper, these costs may come down signifcantly.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 30, 2013
Tomorrow is Easter. And many of us will be celebrating what some consider to be an insane and irrational idea - to cite Adorno-
The Infinite Becoming Finite, the Divine becoming Human.

I bid you all a Happy Easter. Christi Ernesti. Pax Christi.
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
March 30, 2013
A total of 304 comments

More than I think I have ever seen on this list.

It constitutes quite a bit of available idle non productive time for many. I'm certain many post directly from a cubical while being paid to do something else. I see it way too often when walking around my clients engineering design complex.

With only a few exceptions the original focus of a rational debate as to whether or not this studies conclusions hold water when viewed beyond simple hypothetical data points generated in an intellectual vacuum,quickly became lost and we are left with simple ego massaging and data dumps.

Once again we see why our government can't seem to get anything of value completed.

I suppose it just deserve more repetition............

"No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it"
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 30, 2013
If you were awre of steam disassociation, Dr. C.. why didn´t you try experimentally igniting it.
One very simple, replicable, and reliable experiment in steam ignition is as follows.
Simply take any conventional a.c. - d.c. transformer unit, and hook it up to a high voltage inverter- taken from race tuning- i.e. "plasma ignition" systems which increase the spark to the spark plugs - improving the burn and goosing the horsepower. Standard on all race car tuning shops. Anybody can replicate the experiment- run a plasma current - through a spark plug on a table- pulsed through a capacitor - and then simply put a steam line onto it. The steam ignites. Now, if you run steam through a magnetic ionisation system as described, it disassociates, and mixed with hho gas efficiently generated on a protusion fuel cell- at a ratio of 500 liters per hour per 1 kWh input power- it suffices to power an internal combustion engine. That is reality. The perceived problem is not aqueous fuel systems as such, but a lack of sufficient distilled, mineral free water. However, in small micro-CHP units- that can be supplied by rooftop runoff rainwater systems. All aqeuous micro-CHP is not a pipedream.
Researchers at the University of Calgary took a variation of the hho protusion fuel cell, and instead of running water through it to obtain hho- inflammable gas- they ran co² through the unit. Lo and behold, the co² broke down to carbon and 0². Low energy input co² breakdown is now a reality. That means big urban waste incineration plants can be retrofitted with carbon capture- breakdown systems. From what I have been given to undrestand, the U.S.Navy and DARPA are exploring the technology- to use on nuclear powered aircraft carriers- extracting co² from its high concentrations in sea water- breaking it down, and mixing it with hho - to make artifical kerosene. (We never know what developments will come next.)
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 30, 2013
DrAlexC and Herr Doering are behaving like two children on details which don't amount to a can of beans. Suitcase CHP units are pretty expensive both capital and O&M, use fossil fuels, and regardless of the claimed efficiencies, and avoided emissions, we will run out of the basic inputs of all these clever technologies. Technological fixes will be taken up when people can afford them, and when they see clear benefits. The renewable technologies are at present dependent on government subsidies, and with the economic belt tightening around the world, and as we are still not on the last drop, mankind will continue its mad rush towards extinction - may be a century or two if not decades.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 30, 2013
Goodness, you displayed your ignorance about the q
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 30, 2013
Goodness, you displayed your ignorance about the q
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 30, 2013
Look Nimtz spells his first name Günter Nimtz in German. Some transate that in English to Guenther with an H. But the correct German is Günter. Too bad you never took the time to read his book or understand his work. In your own post above, you stated you googled Tunnel Effect, but could not find it. Then when I refer you to his work, you falsely claim he was not claiming faster than the speed of light sound transmission of microwaves through a compression zone. I am not dropping names, just stating state of the art - non-Helmholtz, entanglement physics. Adorno et al penned an interesting critical rationalist study about "The Authoritarian Personality". Herbert Marcuse penned "One Dimensional Man" while in Calipornia. And Christopher Lash followed up with an interesting study on "The Culture of Narcissism". What I have been seen watching with you is a most magnificent fireworks display of "One Dimensional Authortarian Narcissism." That from a "cirtical rationalist" point of view of course.

Now HHO systems do work. Output on submerged, and dry cell hho "fuel cell" systems ranges anywhere from 260 liters per input kilowatt hour on the Korean B.E.S.T. Brown´s Gas, Chinese Norelcoo B.E.S.T. Brown´s gas and Taiwanese Epoch Energy Corp - all the way to state of the art high- tri-pulsed frequency dry titanium cell hho units- producing up to 450 - liters per input kilowatt. African.Hydrogen under Dr. John Morris has a system that also puts out close to 500 liters per input kilowatt hour.
There is a group down near Linz austria applying the Nimtz tunnel affect as I described for "steam disassociation". Just because you were ignorant about it doesn´t mean it does not work. The burden of proof is on them now, but don´t take any bets on that group not producing resuolts. After all Austrian scientist Helmut Zeilinger is doing post-Helmholtz-quantum entaglement Photon teleportation which is not contested here in Europe. (of course, you also contest wind power.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 30, 2013
Kent, on your imagined German nuke-leukemia effect, stop wasting time and power, and pass me the link to your 'best' IPPNR study.

And though you may think you're clairvoyant, but saying: "You are neither a physician nor a nuclear physicist, so your expertise in the field is no better than mine" -- simply shows you ignorant again.

Keep it up, Kent!
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 30, 2013
Kent claims I don't read, but he clearly doesn't read, when he says: "Steam disassociation is an experimental reality ".

I said it's nothing new. It's been an operational reality for all of the Steam Age, all of the Industrial Age, and so on, Kent. Have you no idea why what you say is both not new and foolishly misstated?

Amazing how you seem to need to embarrass yourself in public. (well in a blog).
;]
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 30, 2013
I think you are the one who is hilarious. Never even took the time to red the book by Nimtz et al, yet falsely claimed to have understood it.
Steam disassociation is an experimental reality and will be appearing soon enough. Developed near Linz Austria on the Danube which now has a huge windpark with turbines from Austrian Repower pumping out 7.5 megawatts apiece. That will get your anti-turbine Don Quixotic temper flaring. Grab a your lance, mount a donky bass ackarwds, and go off tilting at windmills again.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 30, 2013
It's hilarious how you keep trying to look smart but write such absurdities, Kent!

" steam has been induced to disassociate - by utillizing the quantum tunnel effect- i.e. passing the steam line through two magnetrons- and focusing and concentrating the sound waves- onto the line in an electro-magnetized, cereamic lined compression zone"

You can't even take time to spell the names you drop, and you can't even bother to study why what you write, as above, is meaningless.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 30, 2013
Micro-CHP units are cost effective. The units here for multi-family dwellings displace about 5000 liters of heating oil per annum. 100.000 such "aqueous fuel" units in multi-family dwelling units displace appr. 50.000.000 liters of heating oil per annum- cutting co-2 emmissions by appr. 80.000.000kg per hundred thousand units.
it will establish itself as an excellent, cost effective, fast ramp up and down back up baseline power for all the wind- and rooftop solar going in- adapting renewable output to demand and stabllizing the grid with "CNC controlled "SWARM- virtual power plants". Of course, the aqueous CHP systems not only displace 80.000.000 kg per hundred thousand units by displacing heating oil, they will also displace the emission equivalent of 9 X 200 mWh of lignite coal burning power plants. The units can be made in smaller sizes for singole family dwellings down to 3 kWh power 7 kWh heat performance or up to big 1 megawatt units using M.T.U. ICE Otto engines designed for mid sized CHP opeations in hospitals and schools.
Experiments are also being conducted into the "aqueous system" application in gas turbines for CC Erskine-Rankine cycle systems. If those are also successful, the means hybrid aqeuous powered Erskine cycle turbines can be backed up against the Rankine cycles of some coal hooked up to long distance heat grids, and some nuclear, doubling output while cutting either co² emissions and radiation, which is the whole point of the "Energiewende". Now, these aqueous developments have something to do with post-Helmlholtz "entanglement" physics as they definitely contradict the 190th century Helmholtz illustration of the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics- "You can´t run an engine off its own steam."
We feel very comfortable with developments as they are proceeding.
The nice thing is, th Linz area of Austria is located near a very large wind turbine project that has big Repower Turbines ech genreating 7.5 megawatts of power along the Danube.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 29, 2013
You were quick to deride the tunnel effect when i first mentioned it, claiming you couldn´t find it on Google, and when I mentioned Nimtz again, you claim you understand it when you haven´t even read the book.
The fact remains that in experiments near Linz, steam has been induced to disassociate - by utillizing the quantum tunnel effect- i.e. passing the steam line through two magnetrons- and focusing and concentrating the sound waves- onto the line in an electro-magnetized, cereamic lined compression zone. The result is a hot gas which happens to ignite, in direct violation of the Helmholtz dictum "you cannot run an engine off its own steam."
A VW Golf engine in a micro-CHP lichtblick unit- consumes 6 cubic meters of nat gas an hour to provide 35 KW of heat energy and 19 kWh of power (SMART GRID coordinated, the can form a "SWARM" virtual power plant the equivalent of two nukes as back up baseline power for the massive build out of wind and rooftop solar- to stablize the grid.
Now, some energy can be "wasted" by applying advanced hho system genreation- for 1 cubic meter an hour of HHO brown´s gas which drops power output but cuts much more than 1 cubic meter an hour of nat gas input (the burn is more efficient.) Feel free to scream "scam" or whatever, but the 2nd part is steaming water on the hot exhaust manifold line, pushing the steam through a dual magnetron "ion thruster"- and through a "tunnel effect" sonic signal compression zone which is also a ceramic insulated electro-magnetized pipe with current from the hho unit-cathode end. The tapped feed back power is transformed tri-pulsed VHF, UHF, and MW dc current flows through the hho unit boosting output, then the dual magnetron "microwave ion thruster" system and then through the pipe magnetization system on the same line. Both gasses are mixed- and go through a "flashback inhibitor"- and run the engine- drving the generator and providing the heat for the building.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 29, 2013
More 'science' from Kent: "leukemia in children living within a ten kilometer radius of Memmingen Power plant"

Since I don't know what German nukes are allowed to emit, let me just quote the studies that are easily found about the above...

"This result was not to be expected under current radiation-epidemiological knowledge and confounders could not be
identified, the observed association of leukemia incidence with residential proximity to nuclear plants remains unexplained...The KiKK study points out the need for a critical re-examination of uncertainties, flaws, and inappropriate
generalizations in fundamental assumptions and models on which current radiation safety standards and regulations are based."

So, since cancer is very hard to induce by radiation, because cancer cells transit through several stages, avoiding the body's immune and ant-cancer defenses in specific ways, it's hard to say the few leukemia cases observed were due to any specific source -- even such as coal/ash emissions from upwind plants, or from diesel emissions from nearby highways, etc.

We do know the alleged leukemia cases in England, near nukes, were faked by a doctor selling pills -- that was provided you as a link earlier, Kent -- did you read it?

Now, in the US, nuke plants can emit a little Tritium, which has a 12-year half life and emits low-energy electrons. It's such a mild radioactive source that it's used on watch dials, etc., for glow-in-the dark needs. You may have an alarm clock or Rolex like that, eh Kent? The radiated electrons can't even penetrate the plastic watch dial.

So, now, Kent, we know you don't understand statistics, radiobiology, or epidemiology.

Next field to flunk?
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 29, 2013
Kent, undaunted by science, continues to drop names and display ignorance, with: "Prof. Nimitz claims faster than light transmission of signals through the compression zone."

Nimitz knows what it means to exceed the speed of light in a medium, Kent. You apparently don't.

And, like a magpie, you seem to think collecting shiny objects that sound scientific props up your chances for mating or acceptance -- ahh the thought!

You've discovered that hot water, not even steam, dissociates to an extent dependent on temperature and ionization -- ooooh, Kent!

"which is also an electro magnetized steel pipe. And the steam comes out "disassociated"

Every steam system, whether combustion or nuclear fired, needs continual chemical control of the steam, often by injecting pure hydrogen, so as to maintain pH away from oxidizing, thus protecting metal plumbing.

Keep piling up those "shiny thought objects", Kent! Hope your employer isn't reading here though.
;]
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 29, 2013
As for the controversial Tunnel effect. Prof. Nimtz claims faster than light transmission of signals through the compression zone.

There is an interesting book: "Zero Space Time: How quantum tunneling broke the light speed barrier"
by Guenter Nimtz and Astrid Heubel , with an intro duction by Ulrich Walter von Wiley. It is available over Amazon.

Be that as it may. Researchers in Austria have been succesful in running a steam line (interior ceramic coated) through a dual magnetron ion thruster- and then ran the ceramic coate steam line through a "sonic compression zone" - which is also an electro magnetized steel pipe. And the steam comes out "disassociated" on the other end. i.e. it does not recondense into water when cooled, and lo and behold, it ignites in both internal combustion engines and in gas turbines in preliminary experiments. A group in Austria is using the device to power a 7 liter Ford V8 race tuned t0 900 BHP using bi-turbo technology and "racing plasma ignition" systems- i.e. high voltage spark pplugs. and a few other things.. to have the engine running off hho generrated from pöowe derived from thermo coupling plates.. and steam obtained from steaming water in a special unit on the exhaust manifold. The hho is fed in through the bi-turbo air intake, and the "ionized steam" goes into the fuel injection sytem. It runs just fine in a carbon fibre mid-engined G.T. with 0-60 acceleration in 2.5 seconds and a top end of over 250 mph. They are also experimentally igniting it in a small gas turbine.

I think I do know what a Rankine cycle is about- steam turbine or steam piston drive is it not. At least that is what I learnt. The organic rankine cycle is about using liquids like alcohol or ammonia with a lower evaporation temperature than water to drive a turbine which is applied in some geothermic plants. (Very problematic because of their explosive and toxic nature. It is called the Kalina cycle as well.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 29, 2013
Doc Alex C. You do prefer to ignore the IPPNW statistics. which have established higher rates of leukemia in children living within a ten kilometer radius of Memmingen Power plant in South Germany.
The study was replicated in Switzerland with the same results.
The IPPNW studies established that. It is a matter of measuring the radioactive emissions of a bnuclear power plant during regular operation, and measuring how they spke during inspection and refueling. Then, do comparative statistics on the distribution of leukemia in any national pöpulation. Check the records as to cause of death in childhood mortality. The records are public. And, pediatricians have done studies on that. Rates of luekemia are higher than average within a ten kilometer radius of a nuclear power plant.
We do have the statistical data about the rates of cancer, and other health hazards associated with uranium mining. Disease rates are higher within a ten km radius of uranium mining slage heaps loaded with uranium tailings. The Soviets operated the world´s biggest uranium mine in Wismuth, Saxony from 1946 throough 1990. The Federal German Ministry of health has the data about that. Readers here are perfectly free to check out the IPPNW websites.
You are neither a physician nor a nuclear physicist, so your expertise in the field is no better than mine. At least I take the time to check out all websites. And the IPPNW is a Nobel Prize Winning organisation. Do you have a Nobel Prize, Dr. Alex C..t?
(Oh excuse me, I am sorry about the dyslexia, and, I take the misspelling back. C....´s are useful. You´re not in your derisvie and denigrating mode.) You say you are active in a church. There is nothing very scientific about the idea of the Infinite becoming Finite, the Divine becoming Human, but that is what the church asks us to believe. It is the central paradox of Christianity I would assume to which you have not given much thought, either. Today is Good Friday. Happy Easter.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 29, 2013
Really, if it can be statistically established that the rates of pediatric leukemia are higher within a ten kilometer radius of nuclear power plants, relatives of deceased and still living pediatric leukemia patients could launch some fat class action suits against the PPG which could dwarf the Erin Brokovitch awards of 100 million bucks.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 29, 2013
DrAlexC - words of wisdom from a puffed up nobody.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 29, 2013
Ahh Kent, again with the fibs or just plain ignorance. No one, including the United Nations, has demonstrated any increase in leukemia or other diseases in regions outside of the highest fallout from Chernobyl in the Ukraine. In fact, the highest fallout level in Scandinavian mountains corresponded to ~20 people standing next to each other, irradiating each other from their natural Potassium40, Uranium and other radioactive elements incorporated into all our bodies. Whom are you irradiating 'irresponsibly', Kent?

If you actually had read the references supplied earlier, you'd know the facts, but you don't care, right, Kent?

You'd also have known that Chernobyl's RBMK reactors were always illegal outside the Soviet Union. And you'd know that several remain today, safely operating, despite remaining illegal here. You knew that the Russians didn't evacuate or treat residents soon enough to avoid some serious diseases, unlike the Japanese in 2011, right Kent? Of course you did.

So we know you're not an honest broker of any scientific information of any kind. But you knew that before we figured it out, eh Kent?

For others (avert your eyes, Kent), here are some facts, including the latest WHO and UNSCEAR reports...

www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/67/46
www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_UN_approves_radiation_advice_1012121.html
http://imgs.xkcd.com/blag/radiation.png
www.monbiot.com/2011/11/22/how-the-greens-were-misled/
www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/apr/05/anti-nuclear-lobby-misled-world
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 29, 2013
I am not in the business of selling wind. I vastly prefer it to nuclear because children living within a ten mile radius of a nuclear power plant have a much higher statistically proven risk of developing leukemia. My anti-nuclear stance comes from watching in horror as pediatric disorders spiked in Germny after the massive Tchernobly fallout in 86. My son developed a form of epillepsy (pediatric epilepsy rates skyrocketed after the incident. So did miscariages and birth defects. And several friends of mine lost children to leukemia- definitely linked to radiation. I again refer you to the IPPNR studies which a show an over 60% higher statistical risk of children living within ten miles of a nuclear reactor develpoping leukemia. And yes, even the safest of nukes has a higher emission of radiation than coal fired plant, and the emission rates spike during refueling.

Pediatricians keep records. And it was the higher rate of leukemia occuring in children living within ten miles of Swiss reactors which also prompted the democratically elected Government of Swiitzerland to decide on a nuclear exit last year.

And the higher rates of birth defects, miscarriages, canceres, and especially pediatric lukemia in the native American tribes of the Navajo in New Mexico, the Lakota in South Dakota, and the Spokane tribes in Washington State are not congenital either. The radioactive slag heaps from maassive uranium mining on tribal lands obviously plays a role in the statistically higher rates of health disorders in those tribes.
Put it another way. It would not be hard for the IPPNW to statistically evaluate the occurance of cancer and pediatric leukemia within 10 kilometer radii around California nuclear power plants. Just do a comparative statistical analysis with rates all across the state. Now, it the rates are anything compared to the rates measured by the IPPNW in Germany and Switzerland, you could legally establish in court that generating power is related.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 29, 2013
As usual, Kent talks without knowledge -- Googling: "Tunnel Effect reaches 6.5 times the speed of light" yields nothing but various effects that confirm no observation of signal propagation faster than c.

The problem for Kent, that wastes our time, is that he doesn't care that an arts major turned salesman with a keyboard can be a continual embarrassment to himself.

Can someone get Kent a bunk buddy?
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 29, 2013
Kent is chirping again: "Oh Dr. Alec. Your denigration of wind ignores the fact that it is being built out all over the world because it is cheaper and cleaner than conventional oil, coal, and gas fired Rankine cycle power generation."

Kent can't make up his mind to be "denigrating" himself, by not spelling another's name right. But, Kent thinks we should listen when he drops words in the wrong places, like "Rankine?.

Keep it up Kent. No one could discredit a salesman better than you do yourself.
;]
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 29, 2013
The German obsession with speed is a reason why many are exploring different aqueous fuel systems. There´s the proven "Aquasol" system from A.G.I.P. and Total S.A. which boosts the water content in diesel from 10% to 30%, and all Italian busses and trucks with high consumption rates run off it. There is the Gunnermann "Clean Fuels Technologies" now a part of Caterpillar-Lubrizol which does does emulsions of up to 30% - in every dy use, 80% on test rigs and the engines still run. There is the Cottel "sonic emulsion" system which require some engine adaptation for heating the 50% - 50% water fuel emulsions. Then there all the "hho systems" currently out on the market which do reduce consumption when properly installed by professionals. (when amateurs do it, they could get an unwanted explosion udner the hopod from their "hydrogen on demand" systems.) The point is, dual magnetron "ion thrusters" aimed through a compression zone- ceramic lined electromagnetized -stainless steel pipe "disassociate" steam so that it ignites in both ICE engines and turbines. People have patents on it, and I expect the system will be out on the market soon just lkke "hho" browns gas systems are out on the market.
Bqck to the proven tunnel effect discovered by Prof. Dr. Guenther Nimtz t the 2nd Physical Research Insitute at the University of Duesseldorf which does accellerate microwaves to 6.5 times the speed of light, but with signal intensity corresponingly dropping over the short distances But you, Dr. Alec C-. think you know better than everybody even when you xdon´t have a clue because it is outside of your field, like wind power energy. (Goodness, the automotive aqueous fuel systems are being optimized in Linz Austria,,, not far from a big wind park with 7.2 mW wind turbines from Repower -reliably pumping out 360 mW... the equivalent of 1.5 coal burning power plants.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 28, 2013
Oh Dr. Alec. Your denigration of wind ignores the fact that it is being built out all over the world because it is cheaper and cleaner than conventional oil, coal, and gas fired Rankine cycle power generation. As for the tunnel effect- people are already applying it in a number of different applications, not the least of which is data processing and data transmission. Business clients here in Munich can subscribe to ultra high speed internet through optical fibre cable pulsed at 100 gHz. (My optical fibre connection is 19 gHz,,, which is norm here in´Munich. Unthinkable only 5 years ago.
be it as it may, dual magnetrons are applied as "ion thrusters" in satellite accelleration systems. And you can also accelerate a steam flow in a ceramic pipe through charged dual magnetrons- and the pulsed sonic signals can be pulsed through a ceramic lined compression zone, inside an alectro-magnetized pipe... and the steam treated that way comes out disassociated on the other end. i.e.: it cannot be cooled back to water. It stays a gas, and that hho gas ignites very handilly thank you. Now, it was very easy to build a unit pumping water through a line across hot exhaust manifolds- running it through the device described, mixing in some hho generated by power generated by thermo-coupling plates on the engine bloc, and getting that mix to ignite in both Otto engines and Diesel using variations of the designs. It literally violates the Helmholtz 1st and 2nd but who0 cares? The devices can be made any size- fit to both Otto and Diesel ICEs and gas turbines. (both aleady on test rigs.- like a 7 liter Ford tuned to 900 BHP - and on a small M.T.U. gas turbine unit.
That is the only way we can cut consumption on the autobahn. You have as much a chance of getting sane speed limits on German autobahns as you have have in getting sane gun control in the U.S.. Many cars safely do 250 kmh, and some do over 300, and they do put their feet to the floorboards when coditons allow it.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 28, 2013
The "tunnel effect" experiments by Prof. Dr. Guenther Nimtz at the 2nd physical Institute at the University of Duesseldorf are well documented. You and other readers are perfectly free to Google "Tunnel Effect" reaches 6.5 times the speed of light". It is part of the "post Helmholtz" - This is an experimental confirmation of the quantum entanglement" physics worked out by Erwin Schroedinger when he was the Prof. of Physics at the University of Dublin after WW II. Prof. Zeilinger at Vienna is doing photon teleportation which also confirms the "quantum entanglement".

Accellerating sonic signals 6.5 times faster than the speed of light where the signal arrives before it is even sent has been replicated in a number of different physics research labs all over the world.

Just because you are ignorant about "quantum entanglement" and pulsing sonic waves 6.5 times faster than speed of ligh through "compression zones". Prof Nimtz has a number of "faster than the speed of light" experiments with both optical and sonic systems. Prof. Stephan Chu and another collegue in Berkeley also tested and corroborated the "Tunnel Effect" with lasers. (I`ve known about it since the mid-nineties.
There is an interesting Wikepedia write up on "The Tunnel Effect" as well.
In your rush to denigrate and deride, you failed to check out the sources I mentioned. It was developed by Prof. Nimtz at the 2nd Physical Institute at the University of Duesseldorf. It was originally challenged, but since replicated in a number of carefully set up experiments elsewhere. The experiments pushed microwave signals to a velocity 6.5 times fastere than the speed of light in the "tunnel effect compression zone." Sure, I can get dislexic when I type fast. But unlike you, I can do it in three different languages. And I do tend to read German scientific research magazines to stay abreast because that is a part of philosophical science in which I received my formal training. Google Tunnel Effect.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 28, 2013
"Wind offers a higer effectiveness to stop the CO2 bleeding faster than other technologies per dollar invested (including solar) and that advantage allows a lower efficiency to be acceptable for a couple of reasons. One, the speed at which MWh are added annually is within a matter of months. "

This shows a typical, incomplete analysis of wind generator costs, emissions, efficiencies and extra demands placed on grids.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 28, 2013
Sorry to upset you with facts based on your words, Bonk. That's all I have to go on, so when you say: "how do you know what I do Alex" I simply say your own words have shown you don't understand wind power, for example.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 28, 2013
"Dr A. has demonstrated his ignorance about the Tunnel Effect developed at the 2nd physical institute by Prof. Guenther Nimtz where he gets microwve signals pulsingmicrowave signals faster than the speed of light through a compression zone"

If only you knew what you were talking about, Kent? Or are you really a dyslexic Siri clone?
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 28, 2013
Ahh, KEnt, others critique your off-the=wall stuff and now you reach for the stars with: "Alex You just displayed your ignorance of post-Helmholtz physics."

I wonder how a arts-degreed salesman thinks anyone with even 1 degree in science of engineering should be impressed by you lonely blathering.
;]
Keep it up, Kent!
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
March 28, 2013
kent-doering

Don't know where you are getting your 'rose colored glasses' but there is little REAL published evidence of proven reserves in this region

Most if not all is still speculation

Such unwarranted euphoria and wishful thinking has been seen many times in the past with 'potential' oil discoveries

Even if your confidence was warranted have you taken a recent look at current proven reserves across the board and seen the accelerated declines.

It was only a few years ago we heard the cheery notes singing praises of the great North Sea finds. They are now well past peak and dropping fast.

Even the great Ghawar former giant oil field is now seeing massive 'water cuts' due to the pumping of sea water to increase pressures caused by its depletion.

2nd level producer Russia is not any better and Mexico past peak some time ago.

Running ever faster just to keep from sliding backwards by drilling in East Africa is no substitute for a reality check in our use of and total dependence on a finite resource. A resource that all renewable energy development is now dependent on in spite of 'greeny fairy tales' that lull all us into a state of denial.

A toxic, fat ladened, scorched chunk of burned cow flesh loaded with hormones wrapped in a GMO and pesticide laden mutant wheat 'bun' from McDonald's exists only due to cheap crude oil. Now multiply this times millions of other useless and destructive items dependent on cheap crude. Now imagine there is no cheap crude. It all crumbles like a house of cards in spite of wind and solar development attempting to keep all this foul brew on life support.

They don't destroy the environment digging for tar sands at extremely poor EROI due to any 'glut' of a fully fungible commodity for nothing.



Saying East Africa is larger than Persian Gulf no longer says all that much.


Let's all 'whistle past the graveyard' to reduce our apprehension shall we.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 28, 2013
outsiders creaming off some of the riches - and regardless of huge deposits - these are finite and integrate consumption over time - will not last forever - and the fossil fuels are simply solar energy stored over the earth's history being used up in a matter of one or two centuries - a one shot one way fix - river of no return.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 28, 2013
Dear Bonkim 2003. Today the region is choking in oil and nat gas. I don´t see any peak oil crisis. The East African Horn field dwarfs the Persian Gulf. South Sudan, Uganda, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Djibouti, Somalia, Kenya, all the way down through Tanzania and Mocambiique, the last great oil field in the world tappable by conventional drilling, on-shore and offshore. Namibia used to impöort L.N.G., now it exports it. Fortunately, their energy and housing ministers are investing in "clean housing" and renewable.
24/7 concentrated solar is the most interesting development. Instead of using it to drive steam turbines, they are building smaller units - heating oil, or using ground heat- concentrated solar to heat refrigeration gaases to heat oil to 200 ° c- and drive Stirling motors 24/7. Simple kick ass solution for storing solar energy-. And after driving heating the oil, the compressed still hot gas lines are fed back into the ground.... The Canadian SHEC corporation is developing something similar for the region, but with a different storage method. Dr. John Morris of African.Hydrogen developed some interesting hho solutions.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 28, 2013
yes Kent - impressive - I did an energy plan for Botswana many years back and of course things evolve and desert regions are suitable for solar projects - let us see how all that improves the life of the Africans at large. The region however is rich in all sorts of minerals, coal, etc. 1930/40s Fischer Tropps process also in S Africa to convert coal to oil.

Wait till the oil crunch hits trasport - road, rail, and aviation - hope you are working on solar PV aeroplanes before we burn all oil.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 28, 2013
Dear Bonkim: Zadook, Mocambique and the Rupblic of South Africa are all doing 24/7 concentrated solar power as well. The system uses concentrated solar like we find from Phoenix or Schott solar, but instead of expensive steam turbine p.g... the units heat a refridgeration gas that is concentrated to release heat in insulated (oil containers - heating them up to about 200 c² or so- with the heat driving Alpha and Beta Stirling motor systems powering generators. SHEC solar in Canada developed a different concentrated solar Stirling system which is also in experimental application in the R.S.A.
Hemp is being planted on a plantation basis for hemp oil and hemp fibre for construction in both the Zadook states and Mocambiue along with Castor (remember the castor oil we used to have to swallow as kids) for bio- fuel additives to diesel (wouldn´t we love to get stuck in traffic jam with hemp oil powered cars?) And the cow manure-polymer material also makes for a great lightweight car body by the way. (Henry Ford actually manufactured hemp fibre cars in 1941) The stuff grows to over 15 feet in the region, and three crops a year are possible down there.)
Dr John Norris of Capetown South Africa also devdeloped an hho system which produces hho out of brown water- with no mineral And you can actually run ICE Otto engines driving generators with it. (Another "overunity" system some people don´t like.) Plans there are to pull engines out of European car wrecks, hook em up to generators, and get them out to villages with primitie plumbing and septic tank systems as well.
A prof at the University of Stellenbusch developed a new type of solar where something the size of a tablet computer puts out the equivalent of 10 squre meters of conventional silicon solar p.v..
A major multi-national power equipment supplier payed a 20 million down payment on future royalites to him. The deal was cut in the fall. Ultra efficient. Really, Africa is also innovative.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 28, 2013
Dear Bonkim: I work for a group that does energy consulting for the Association of SW African States - Leshotho, Botswana, Zimbabwe, the Congo, Zambia, Angola, and Namibia. With an abbrevition of ZADOOK. And those countries are indeed applying waste incineration - p.g., human excrement and cow, pig, and poultry manure methane racapture on in village electrification. Wind is going up. They inked a massive deal with G.E. and Lockheed for mostly locally produced wind turbines- with towers and housings produced "in country" - four four traunches of wind turbine systems- until 2030. (the scope is massive- 24.700 turbines in each of the 4 traunches- 98.800 turbines going up in those countries. The Congo, Angola, Zimbabwe, planting massive balsa wood plantations - to supply the balsa wood essential to turbine blade manufacture. (there is the natural limit to wind turbine build out- balsa wood supply.) Mozambique is doing massive planting of hemp-- for hemp oil (in lamps for people still not electrified) and as a building material, and as a base for cow manure-vortical wind turbines. I.E. a German chemist came up with a formula for mixing cow manure with an oil based polymer that hardens into a very strong carbon fibre- and spray on to hemp-- you get an excellent, cheap and durable material for small scale wind turbines.
Those cheap as heck locally produced polymere blades will be hooked up to micro turbines- i.e. re-poled electric motors yanked from older inefficient appliances and production lines- (cheaper than melting them down for scrap-- and those motors are cheap, available,and provide intermittant wind.. when its needed, namely in the evenings when the wind picks up.
Zadook, the association of SW African sates has all sorts of interesting programs for utiling renwewable energy sources. For example, the Congo will use hemp based fibreglass to build tri-marans, with turbines dropped between the hulls, driving generators adapted from wind turbines.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 28, 2013
Yes Kent - I know about Gussing, etc, - you need to carry out a modeling study of the combinations you mention - the main issue is not tecnology but how all these diverse systems are managed/who controls it and who oversees the back up. Having practical experience of power projects - difficult to manage heat and power cogeneration because of the mismatch of heat and power and relative high value of electricity compared with heat. Germany is at an advantage as it has considerable biomass (as Austria) and planning less problematic - the Germans/Austrians look at authority more favourably than in the English speaking world. Also Germany is at the centre of gas and electricity grid and able to have favourable terms - so many options. Not all government subsidy leads to cost effective installations though. Wind capacity over 30,000MW is impressive. Biogas (AD) you will find production variable - the problem with all farming/biomass use is the lack of fuel security and many projects fail after start because of that. There is less reluctance amongst German householders to industrial installations compared with many other parts of the world - i must go back to my previous point - Germany may be able to reduce fossil dependency considerably and reduce emissions significantly - but will still be dependent on fossils for a long time (natural gas is fossil energy). Translating that to the rest of the world/bulging populations/increasing consumption and depleting resources - the model does not look sustainable whatever you do.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 28, 2013
Dear Bonkin: The solution in Germany for back up baseline systems for the renewables are manifold. The first is converting coal fired power plants to combined cycle - gas and steam systems (hooked up to district heating). The second approach is to tear out heating oil units and replacing them with Russin natural gas fired micro-CHP units in single and multi family housing units- (with solar on the rooftops) Smart grid coordinated, they form "SWARM" virtual power plants. The key is computer coordination and the ability to do "fast" ramp up, ramp down to compensate for the variable swings in rooftop solar and wind.
The third baseline back up system- is agrarin bio gas. When the build out of all German farms is complete..that will put another 32 GW of power on the grid as back up baseline. (See "Wildpoldsried" or Gussing, Austria as examplles of rural power generation using that. (They put out 3 times as much power as they consume. Not bad.)

But it is the baseline that is needed to compensate for the power swings. C.N.C. coordinated baseline power systems replacing heating oil units go a long way in doing the trick. The VW Llichtblick system is displacing 100.000 heating oil units and putting 1.9 gigawatts of power on the grid as back up baseline for solar and wind. (and slashing heating oil in the process.) The "trick" now is to get them to run "all aqeous" with Brown´s gas nd MRSPI systems, easy enough to do despite the denial here. I wonder why people tiptoe around aqueous fuel systems when the Chinese and Koreans are pursuing it at a breakneck pace.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 28, 2013
Really Alex You just displayed your ignorance of post-Helmholtz physics. I stated before that Prof Guenther Nimtz of the 2nd physical institute at the University of Duesseldorf pushed microwaves 6.5 times faster than the speed of light in the early 90´. It is known as the "Tunnel Effect". Google it. You demonstrate a profound ignorance of post-Helmholtz "entanglement physics" clearly demonstrated by the work of Nimtz or the "photon teleportation" work done by Zeillinger in Vienna. It was only a matter of time before researchers would attempt applying "the tunnel effect" to "steam disassociation"- experimentally pulsing microwaves 6.5 times faster than the speed of light through steam in a magnetized "tunnel effect" compression zone.
A group near Linz, Austria now has a 7 liter Fpord engine up on a test rig literally running off steam generated on its hot exhaust manifolds. You shall be seeing that development soon enough on the race tracks. Also excellent applications in SMART grid coordinated SWARM back up base line power- using VW - Lichtblick micro-CHP systems in conjunction with the massive build ot of wind and rooftop solar in the G.A.S. area (Germany, Austria, Switzerland) which have exited or are exiting nuclear power with ambitions to totally exit fossil fuels as well.

That you would ignore the IPPNW studies linking nuclear power to leukemia is insane. Goodness, if the IPNNW were to conduct studies like that in California, and could prove it, the P.P.G would have another "Erin Brockovitch" case on its hands. The health costs of nuclear are too high to pay. All the IPPNW has to do is replicate the studies it conducted in Europe linking leukemia with nuclear power (that which prompted the Swiss Parliament to decice to exit) and you could have some nasty law suits going on in California.
The P.P.G. does not like those prospects one bit, so it is shifting to real renewables. And you still don´t have the problem of nuclear wastes solved.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 28, 2013
Dr A. has demonstrated his ignorance about the Tunnel Effect developed at the 2nd physical institute by Prof. Guenther Nimtz where he gets microwve signals pulsingmicrowave signals faster than the speed of light through a compression zone. Low energy input steam disassociation utilizes that "post - Helmholtz" physics tunnel effect. Signals sent through a compression zone "arrive" before they are sent. Parodoxical, but true. And Zeilinger has been doing fascinating work on photon teleportation. It was only a question of time before researchers started looking at practical energetic applications of the tunnel effect, not just the electrical engineers goosing data processing speeds to above 100 gHz.
That has been replicated 100s of times. So the experiements were in pulsing micrwave signals through an electro-magnetized compressin zone conducting hot steam. (already loaded with electro-weak photon infrared energy.)
The Swiss IPPNW presented excellent data - oorrelating higher incidents of luekemia in children in a ten mile radius of power plants in Switzerland, so its parliament decided to join the countries exiting nuclear power and shifting to wind, solar and geothermal, urban waste incineration. But of coure, Alex would dismiss that as being "misguided by greens" in his pro-nuke stance deriding everything else like wind. The studies liking nuclear power to higher incidents of leukemia are incontrovertable- near the power plants and near the waste dump tailings from mining. (Germany has to deal with the massive problems left behind from the Soviet uranium mining at Wismuth between 1946 and 1990. The area has to rebuild buildings and roads because the tailings were carelessly used in road construction and as filler in concrete. Fortunately, wind and rooftop solar can go a long way in displacing the nuclear power in Europe. Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, are leading the way in exiting fossil and nuclear.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 28, 2013
garyrich2000 - even if wind is proven/least cost unlikely to meet all demand - and will have to be supported by large base load fossil/nuclear for grid stability - in the U.K many wind turbines have to be feathered and owners paid compensation because of surplus generation at certain times and also need to maintain standby large plants. The main problem integrating renewables is that of system stability when renewables exceed a certain proportion of generation capacity and I suppose Germany has considerable experience in this.Energy storage still high cost.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 28, 2013
garyrich2000 - absolutely - wind is proven/conventional technology, and lease cost, allowing farming activities to continue although government subsidies tempt developers to install them at low potential sites. Although intermittent/variable, wind does blow day and night Solar PV still high cost - in many parts of the world planning on- shore wind is problematic as people just don't want them close to where they live.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 28, 2013
Thankw for your comments Gayrich. Some people here have been denigrating wind. I hve been derided as a "wind energy" salesman for advocating its use. The fact is, Denmark, Norway, Northern German states,Spain are all building out. It is cheaper to install than conventional power genration and has a very high availability.

For example, as part of the 400 Billion Euro "Desertec" initiative to harness the Solar energy of the Sahara, Siemens inked a deal with Morocco to erect 7.500 turbines on the coast of Morocco to utilize the constantly blowing trade winds to supply Morocco, France, and Germany wit additional power. Output per turbine, 6 mW. That is 45000 gigawatts- the equivalent of 45 nukes or 225 lignite burning power plants.
Then add all the concentrated solar coming in from the Deserted DII initiative.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 28, 2013
DrAlexC - how do you know what I do Alex - you are too ready to jump to conclusions not typical of true scientists or thinkers - conversely how does anyone know what you do or what type of environmentally destructive life you live or what you have done in practical terms for your fellow man - talking about blogging or bleathering - you have the upper edge. I am quite at ease with what I have done or doing in the present context and care two hoots about what others like you think. You would achieve more by sticking to the discussion topic which is now entered the solar black hole rather than posting personal comments.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
March 28, 2013
Wind offers a higer effectiveness to stop the CO2 bleeding faster than other technologies per dollar invested (including solar) and that advantage allows a lower efficiency to be acceptable for a couple of reasons. One, the speed at which MWh are added annually is within a matter of months.

Second, City, County, State, and Federal governments have a much easier time implementing incentives and subsidies for demand response from carbon neutralizing loads to sop up all available wind generation.

Third, onshore wind efficiency gaps are negated by how cheaply the electricity is progressing toward the lowest cost per KWh. Though latent in maturity, wind is quickly progressing from a recent high learning curve.

Offshore wind has the advantage of receiving hand-me down learning from onshore and rapid scaling up of the supply chain. Offshore wind cabling demand can also be negated from growth in existing and new offshore market demand for power (mining, drilling, transportation, farming, lodging????) Additionally, new markets means new net jobs.

Furthermore, wind offers more co-generated harvesting options per meter sq when looked at from more than just Watts per meter square. This is already proven in co-location with farming which allows more revenue to be earned than if wind was not included since the footprint at the base has such small coverage.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 28, 2013
Kent obligingly says: "Dr. Alec: You do love to be derisive, derogitory and denigrating." -- when he's already demonstrated he knows how to spell my name. Irony, Kent? "derogitory ", Kent?
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 28, 2013
And Bonk: "practical reality" is exactly what the carbon cycle means. You may not understand, care, or bother to learn, but others will being doing practical things while you sit & blog. At least you don't blow as much Internet juice as Kent.
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 28, 2013
Kent is generating GHGs babbling on again: "get the microwave signals pulsing faster than the speed of light "

Still wasting your time and ours, eh Kent?
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 27, 2013
It applies tunnel effect- sonic systems-- actually the TDI systems that microwaave the air intake- get the microwave signals pulsing faster than the speed of light with the tunnel effect in the air intake compression zones- and a Doppler Effect amplifies the signals on the upstroke- causing a massive -quantum resonánce sonoluminescence on the upstroke..which makes today´s diesels so efficient. (From VDO in Freilassing, Bavaria.) The Audi TDI was then retrofitted with thermo coupling plates -on the engine- and the power from that - put through "titanium dry cell" hho systems -pushing hho through a "bubbler" and "flashback inhibitor"- and into the air intake for a 30% reduction of diesel. (That required reducing the the common rail diesel fuel injjection.) The 2nd part of the retrofit consists in running water into a steaming unit over the exhaust manifold, heat evaporating diesel mixed with the steam- running steam hot diesel vapour mix line through an electro-magnetized piping unit. It adds a nuclear resonance of hydrogen 144 kHz pulse to the microwave air intake pulse (actually travelling faster than the speed of light into the cylinders- (utillizing the Tunnel effect") for a sonolumiscence of the mix of remaining pre-vapourized diesel, ionized steam, and hho.. It all ignites very nicely and the actual diesel fuel consumption is well under 1 liter per hundred kilometers. (Doc Alec derided the concept, but we´ve got it up and running.) We have a similar system for Otto engines which also utliizes the tunnel effect." HHO Brown´s gas - and a steaming unit over the hot exhaust manifold- with "faster than the speed of light" sound signal utilizing the Nimtz "tunnel effect"- a dual magnetron system radically ionizing the steam as it passes through the electro-magnetic ionisation unit. That goes into the fuel injection. VHF and UlTRA piezo pulsing on the bi-turbo
air intake along with the hho. We rounded it off with racing plasma ignition systems. 900 BHP!
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 27, 2013
Dr. Alec: You do love to be derisive, derogitory and denigrating. Ever hear of Theodore Adorno and his study on "The Authoritarian Personality", Herbert Marcuse, who taught at Berkeley, and his Theory of the "One Dimensional Man", or maybe Christopher Lash "The Culture of Narcissism".
As for driving around the block in a Hummber, I prefer taking energy efficient, brake energy recycling, low entry streetcars. Once upon a time, the city of Los Angeles had the world´s largest network of energy efficient, light rail, streetcar lines. When I vist friends in Hamburg, I prefer to take a brake energy recycling subway to Munich´s central station, (powered by waste incineration and hydro) and then an energy efficient, brake energy recycling, high speed rail ICE clicking at 300 kmh, 180 mph, (very energy saving) which has already been in service since 1992- California won´t have its Los Angeles to S.F. HSR up and running for another decade. We´re a good 40 years ahead of you on that EE energy efficiency measure.)
(The judicious application of heavy rail, light rail, subway- has always been a part of the "Green" environmental protection" program because even diesel-electric is 80% more energy efficient in moving freight and people than trucks or busses. But somehow Americans have totally forgotten about it as a measure for reducing emissions. Nobody has once mentioned it here, but rail is a critical element in transitioning off a fossil fuel economy.
Now let us get back to the "faster than the speed of light" -sonic system utilizing "the tunnel effect" for steam ignition.
I really don´t drive much.. less than 4000 miles a year (unthinkable in Califoronia.. I share a car with a company with which I`m involved a popular in California Audi A 6 3 liter TDI aluminum body station wagon. (2010 model.) Very fuel efficient. We made it more efficient with "aqueous fuel systems".
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 27, 2013
No problem understanding - but AlexC - as said theory gets you no where except daydreaming - practical reality - most research scientists live on government grants, inflated egos, are zero getting carried away in the minute details in their specialist areas without taking in the bigger picture. And much of the scientific principles being discussed superficially not translatable into practice on a global scale.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 27, 2013
Bonk says: "Get the US to cut down on its fossil fuels"

Forgotten what our new, cheap gas has done to coal, Bonk?

However, the issue is having folks like you take time to understand the overall carbon problem.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 27, 2013
Kent, you continue to demonstrate a desperate need to be respected by showing you don't respect your own need to study rather than drop terms & names.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 27, 2013
Dr. Alex: the tunnel effect - magnetic resonance steam ionisation system- "post Helmholtz entanglement" device continued: So we have steam spinning through the electro-magnetic ceramic lined pipe field-and UHF- VHF-MW sonic pulses - pushing on both the electrons in the steam, and the electron-wave function of low frequency electro-weak-infra-red light carrying the heat. (Steam is loaded with electro-weak energy, remember.) Both the mgnetic field and the "tunnel effect" faster than the speed of light sonic pulses contribute to a hot plasma state water disassociation. The produce is simply passed through a "bubbler" (enriching it with more steam) and a "flashback inhibitor - and force injected into a gas turbine along with water.. and ignited via another electro-spark ignited hydrogen line...
Now, do try to imagine five big Siemens or G.E. 200 mWh gas turbines.... fired by the "faster than the speed of light", tunnel effect Magnetic Resonance Plasma Steam ignition device backed up against the existing Rankine cycles steam turbines on Germany´s nuclear power plants (converting them) and doing the same thing with all the coal fired power plants hooked up to long distance heat hot water district heating grids. It cost effectively retains the power and transmission lines of the to be converted nukes..And is less expensive than demolition and replacing with a conventional plant elsewhere. Feek free tto scoff,Dr, Alex, but that is where "post Helmholtz", "entanglement plasma hydrodynamics" are leading.
The ignition system gets especially interesting in conjunction with internal combustion engines- in micro-combined heat power building units- putting out 35 kWh of ´heat and 16 kWh net power in fast ramp up, ramp down SMART GRID- SWARM mode, smart gride coodinated- replacing heating oil units in buildings.The VW Lichtblick ICE micro-CHP system running off nat gas can be converted to run MRSPI with rooftop runoff rainwater, emitting only steam.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 26, 2013
AlexC - difference between your hope and practical application worldwide. Plenty of coal still left, and unless human beings are hit they will not change. Get the US to cut down on its fossil fuels - Decisions are made based on balance of probabilities and available options/costs/penalties - as yet people are not falling like flies - so people are flying across the earth, motoring, holidaying, etc, etc, as if there is no tomorrow. As said unless you want the present economic/political systems to change track - I believe the old economic/political order that developed 200 years back had its day and unless a new world order comes into being, and population/consumption cut down drastically - no hope. Let is talk real - rather than what could have been if governments were run by theoretical scientists or what others should do or else.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 26, 2013
Kent, why do you continue to expose yourself as a name dropper? Do you really think people here with degrees in physics and engineering haven't long known about: 'There is something called "quantum entanglement"'?

Why do you waste so much of your and others' time, plus power generated to run the servers and networks that have to pump your stuff around?

Do you not realize that writing, sending & receiving 1 message like yours is equivalent to driving a Hummer around the block?

Are you lonely?
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 26, 2013
Bonk, I'm in Calif. so am aware in particular of our fairly good efficiency efforts since the 1980s, and of the present efforts to move to local solar, such as the "million solar roofs" initiative, plus all manner of local jurisdictions installing solar PV/hot-water. Here's a church: http://tinyurl.com/3znad4b

As for your remark: "Not sure why you think combustion is polluting" -- there indeed is such a thing as "clean coal" -- everything that's left in the ground.
;]
And, the point folks really need to get is that we blew through the natural ability to recycle carbon from air & sea into limestone and crustal rock -- we blew through it decades ago.

Our total carbon debt is >500 billion tons from our combustion. We add >6 billion tons per year. The entire world's erosion and life forms can at most recycle 0.3 billion tons.

Combustion for power is now a Fool's Errand. You can do the math, as many scientists have done, and figure out roughly how many centuries lie ahead of us, even if we halted all combustion today.

If anyone can't figure it out, just Google something like the "carbon cycle" and "Berkeley Planetary Sciences publications".

www3.geosc.psu.edu/~jfk4/PersonalPage/Pdf/annurev_03.pdf
www.atmo.arizona.edu/courses/fall07/atmo551a/pdf/CarbonCycle.pdf
www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.earth.031208.100206?journalCode=earth
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 26, 2013
Dr. Alex: As it is, the legislatures of quite a number of German states, and the city councils of many cities have passed measures with the goal of reaching 100% renewable in power by 2030. They are the city states of Bremen and Berlin, then, Brandenburg, Bavaria, Baden-Wuerrtenburg, Schleswig-Holstein,
There is something called "quantum entanglement"- which Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen stumbled upon, and tried to experimentally disprove in the EPR experiments which backfired. Then, Schroedinger worked out the math behind it, and Casimir confirmed it with his experimental replications of the EPR experiment using closely spaced, non charged metallic plates in vacuum. (The Dutch have always lead in magnetic experiments ever since Mueschenbrock in the 17th-18th centuries, by the wa.) Nowadays, the Dutch EADS research center builds dual magnetron ion thrusters- that even lift off in a
- 10 kNw vacuum chamber, demonstrating a remarkable anti-gravity effect (for EADS satellite ion thrusters). Now, Günther Nimtz at the 2nd Physical Department at the University of Düsseldorf discovered "the tunnel effect" two decades ago..He pulsed microwave signals through a compression zone, and achieved transmission signals 6.5 times higher than the speed of light. (Google "Tunnel Effect". Down in Vienna, Anton Zeilinger further corroborated "entnaglement" with "photon teleportation" which you can also "Google." "Post-Helmholtz" physics.
Now, other experimenters tried running a steam line through a dual magnetron ion thruster- pulsed with VHV, UHF, and microwave frequencies- funneling them onto the pipe in an insulated section- ceramic lined-stainless steel pipe- wrapped in copper coils turning it into a big electro-magnetic-pipe with the current also pulsed at the identical UHF, VHF, and MW frequencies as on the magnetrons. The steam runs through on north south magnetic field basis. So it is being subjected to both the magnetic field and faster than light sound wave pulsing.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 26, 2013
DrAlexC - no doubt the USis well endowed with energy sources other than fossil - but in a market economy, there is a pecking order and old coal fired stations have written down their capital costs and the main hydro potential have been developed, nuclear - long/expensive construction period and venture capital don't see easy profit - NY is bound by what capital it can muster given the situation that exists - and given the dire economic state, unlikely that the US (NY included) will not tap into the cheaper sources before getting deep down in installing solar PV in any grand scale regardless of the theoretical potential - peak summer and also allowing for storage.

I have been visiting California and other US states where solar has more potential and despite all the concepts being discussed - PV and energy storage, emission reduction, solar thermal, etc, etc, oil/coal/gas/nuclear still the mainstay. With fracking ga snow being exploited - US is more or less self sufficient for a few decades and unlikely business/politicians will opt for high cost/under development technologies in a hurry.

Not sure why you think combustion is polluting - modern coal fired rankine, and combined cycle gas are pretty clean - and carbon dioxide emission - yes - on that count you are proposing to shut down the vast majority of chemical, industrial manufacture, refineries, sugar mills, food processing plants, etc, etc. If you think all these conversion/manufacturing processes can be done using renewables you are living in cloud cuckoo land - whilst good that researchers are working on all these issues, ultimately decisions will be made by those with the resources, and in touch with what the public want. Peak oil has defined the problem - which is acknowledged - see my previous note and we are running out of resources, increasing population and consumption, also increasing the atmospheric GHG audit - and mankind's tenure - a few centuries if not decades. the situation is as is.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 26, 2013
Hello Kent, I have been attending the renewables conferences hosted by Brandenberg in Potsdam - whilst the progress of renewbles in Germany is impressive, and as you say many resaerch projects in various aspects of energy maximisation, substitution, etc, and nuclear has been take out of the energy mix - I do not believe if renewables will be able to supply all the demand - possibly a fraction simply because solar/wind/tidal, etc are intermittent, biomass limited and conversion to transport fuel problematic. Germany is on the cross roads of the EU grid supplied by fossil and nuclear sources, also gas pipelines.

Even if Germany increases its renewables content, able to provide cost-effective storage, the equation is still not solved.

Germany although significant, is a small part of the world demand still hooked on coal, oil, and nuclear. as said previously, unless population numbers fall drastically, and consumption toned down to pre 1800s non-industrial agrarian economy, no hope despite all the magic technical fixes you and Dr Alex have been talking about.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 26, 2013
Kent, saying "The discussion here is about putting New York state entirely on renewables." is indeed correct. It's not about Germany, and it's not about a densely-populated city state in Germany.

What it is about is how to reduce emissions of GHGs from power sources, hopefully to 0. It's also about what "renewables" actually means.

Wind and thermal-combustion sources are the least efficient.

So, to use facts and honest engineering, what you think applies in Germany, may not apply elsewhere, particularly in a region not under such odd political control that the region would contemplate shutting down their most reliable, safest and lowest-emitting sources in order to increase their combustion sources and inefficient, subsidized sources like wind.

So, for NY, we have more options than Germany. We have local solar, we have hydro, we have geothermal and we have nuclear -- all renewable; all with superior power density to wind and solar 'farms'.

In other words, all those choices are superior environmentally to any sort of combustion and any sort of wind-generator deployments. And all are appropriate to New York.

A while back, even NY City was LIDAR surveyed and found able to meet 1/2 its highest peak summertime loads simply via rooftop solar. Even DC can do similar...

www.nytimes.com/2011/06/16/science/earth/16solar.html?_r=1&emc=eta1
www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2011/08/rooftop-solar-could-power-20-of-d-c-and-save-ratepayers-money?cmpid=WNL-Friday-September2-2011
www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2011/09/new-york-citys-solar-windfall-illuminates-americas-clean-energy-future?cmpid=WNL-Wednesday-September21-2011

We understand you're in the heat biz. Fine. That's not relevant to a large, rural state. It's relevant to a compact metropolis, which is why it's already done in places like Berlin & NYC.

By the way, if you don't understand why geothermal and nuclear are both nuclear and renewable, holler.
;]
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 26, 2013
Dr. Alex: You could try some of the English Language sites (google them) for the states of Brandenburg-Berlin. The discussion here is about putting New York state entirely on renewables. The parliaments of the city-state of Berlin and the surrounding state of Brandenburg - passed some very interesting legislation pertaining to just that. And they are already ahead of schedule.
Berlin-Btandenburg used to have impossible to breathe air in the old Communist days. The coal fired plant emissions were cleaned up with flue gas scrubbing. Diesel emissons were reduced by 50% by technological advances slashing fuel consumption by 50%. (more radical advances to come.) Appliances, factory motors, etc are all being upgraded to A+++. (including streetcars, subway systems, and the fantastic German rail system - which moves people and goods at energy savings of 85% under road use. (nothing moves people and goods so efficiently as a steel wheel on a steel rail.)
Brandenburg - Berlin have radically slashed brown coal generated power consumption by radical build outs of both rooftop solar, field solar where applicable (say on old Soviet Army bases.) and wind.
Brandenburg and Berlin currently have over 5.400 mWh of working wind installed, and the build out is continuing, with projections being revised upwards. The projections were for a 10.200 MWh capacity by 2030, but that was assuming large wind turbines of 3 megawatts apiece. Slightly increased tower heights and blade lengths, and radically improved turbine designs mean upgrading the estimates because today´s large scale turbines are between 6 mWh, and up to 7.2 mWh (From Austrian Re-power wind) The current 5.400 MWh is the euqivalent of 5 nukes or 18 big coal power plants. There is a massive build out of rooftop solar still going on, despite its high northerly lattitude withlower insolation values in the winter, but higher in the summer.
Patrick O'Leary
Patrick O'Leary
March 26, 2013
Erich, For "Integrated Building Systems" check Futura Solar. I'd be interested to read what you think.

Also, entropy effects linear systems. Prigogine won the Nobel for demonstrating that Non-linear can and does counter it. I'll give you a couple of written references for you time and effort.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 25, 2013
Kent, since you can't seem to spell my name right, why should I bother repeating references already given you?

You can easily compare coal & nuclear plants for radioactive emissions and you can easily get the emissions of other, more dangerous elements, like mercury, that combustion plants put and that nukes don't.

I'm aware of IPPNW, because I'm a supporter of NAPF. The goal is weapons reduction, not nuclear power ignorance.

Your situation in Germasny is for you to determine.

And, if you want to see why coal plants emit more radiation than US nukes, or why your potassium content is worse than living near a nuke, have a banana & study up...

http://imgs.xkcd.com/blag/radiation.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_equivalent_dose
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 25, 2013
Alec, I gave you the link to the IPPNW which had physicists and physicians measuring the emmissions of a fairly new nuclear plant built by a client of ´mine in Memmingen. (A model they are building in Finland, and in Russia to replace the old Tchernobyl type reactors. (Back in 2007, Cheney and co formed a British-American offshore - consortium which tried to do an L.B.O. on the company after its stock had plunged due to a five billion u.s.d. fine for non-compliance. later reduced to 500 million-the "me and me" of Halliburton and co wanted a piece of that action. The contracts were signed in Moscow on the day Obama was inaugurated. LOL.) That is what I was referring to in my post... and those are definite measurements of radioactivity around the Memmingen plant and how it spikes to massive emissions during re-fueling. (I´d like to see some comparative measurement figures for the radiation of coal fired plants compared to nuclear. And maybe some emmision comparisons between urban garbage powered CHP which does not send any heat out of the cooling towers.) The IPPNW is a very serious and reputable organisation with many physicians and physicists on board. They have loads of stats and measurements - relating the frequency of things like habitual miscarrige, foetal deformities, cancer rates, and exposure to nuclear fuel mining, power plants, tailing dumps (like mountains of radiactive tailing dumps in France and Germany at Wismuth, pronounced Vistmuth- with horrendous rates of lung cancer, breast and ovarian cancer, way above the statistical national norms.
Figures for Sellefield and La Hague go through the roof compared to national averages. Source IPPNW. Do try and get some physicans agreeing with you here. (One of my neighbours is a clinical radiologist quite aware of the dangers of exposure.) Show me statistics where people living around lignite burning plants have higher rates of cancer like they do around nuclear plants, and I just might start to believe you.
erich knight
erich knight
March 25, 2013
Since Kent brought up the Max Planck Institute, here is a universal closing post for this long discussion;

You were here…
Or at least you were, 13.8 billion years ago.
At first glimpse of this map, I thought how it could be seen as a scaled-down globe projection view of continental plate tectonics.
A sort of Universal Googlex-Galactic Drift.

The Universal debate, as I understand it, has been whether entropy wins; we drift apart into a cold cruel limbo, so diffuse matter doesn't interact, stars burn out, lights out.
Well,... Entropy took a hit with this new Matter Map, less dark energy than thought, more dark matter and Atomic matter to fight back entropy with gravity.
Stay tuned over the next few hundred billion years for the results of this game.

The new scorecard; 5 % Matter, 25% Dark Matter VS. 70% Dark Energy,
Complete results from Planck, which still is scanning the skies, will be released in 2014.

Detailed Map Reveals New Information about the Age, Contents and Origins of the Universe
http://scitechdaily.com/detailed-map-reveals-new-information-about-the-age-contents-and-origins-of-the-universe/


I'm betting Gravity...an unbroken circle.. with the Hindu & Buddhist,

Cheers,
Erich
erich knight
erich knight
March 25, 2013
This has got to be the longest discussion I've ever seen.

I give great thanks to Dr. Alec C, he makes you do your homework, He reminds me of another very sharp commentator on science forums; Uncle Al, The same acerbic wit, humor And obvious command of the subject.

Kent;
Given your interest in integrated building systems, two developments in Germany you may be interested in. First, from Hans Peter Schmidt, an article entitled "55 uses Biochar"
http://www.ithaka-journal.net/55-anwendungen-von-pflanzenkohle?lang=en
He has formed the company in Germany formulating Biochar/plasters, which control indoor humidity and he reports block cell phone transmissions.

Also of interest is this University program in Germany creating green roof systems.
PlantPower,..

I'm betting that with all the interesting electro-microbiology research we have been seeing recently, the several efforts utilizing Biochar for Biofuel-cell production, that incorporating a Biochar substrate for this electrifying green roof design would maybe amp up their Green Roof systems. Now producing 0.4 W/m2, they aim for, 3.2 W/m2 sufficient for a household.

I hope the researchers of this innovative green roof system could collaborate with the North Sea Region Biochar An EU INTERREG IVb project, www.biochar-nsr.eu, by contacting
Rob van Haren,
http://www.biochar-international.org/regional/northsea

'Green electricity roof' could provide power, water storage and insulation
http://environmentalresearchweb.org/cws/article/news/52643

PlantPower Living plants in Microbial fuel cells for clean, renewable, sustainable, efficient, in-situ bioenergy production
http://www.plantpower.eu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=17:wageningen
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 25, 2013
Kent continues displaying his ignorance for all to see: "you probably don't know French" -- actually, I sort of do, Kent ol' boy, but you never need to ask about things because you know everything anyway, right, Kent?

Then there's this fluff: "your stupid comment, that the French never met an atom they didn't like,"

Can't even read & quote correctly, eh Kent? Look back and see I said the French keep all Uranium atoms that cross their boundaries.

As to your myths about radiation from nuke plants, note that similar fibs were made, and discredited in England, by a doctor who stared a business selling anti-radiation pills and was Johnny on the spot when Fukushima occurred, selling his pap to unknowing Japanese...
www.monbiot.com/2011/11/22/how-the-greens-were-misled/

And, if you really cared about radiation exposures in Germany, you'd work to see that they don't allow coal emissions to contain the same radioactive materials we allow via our industry's NORM Exemptions. Thos ash piles are also radioactive, as well as harboring many tons of arsenic, nickel, lead, and all sorts of materials that are not only dangerous, but permanent, unlike radioactive materials, which are radioactive because they're disppearing into stable elements.

But you must know so much about radio-biology, form your philosophy classes, that you're surely worried about getting close to other people, at least to save them from your own ~4400 Becquerels of radiation emitted by just the potassium your kidneys maintain in your body. And surely you don't offer bananas or nuts to close friends, since they concentrate potassium even more than your kidneys.
;]
Keep it up, Kent!
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 25, 2013
Now, Dr. A. if pursuit of the alterenative Bullular model is correct, we shall be able to capture and convert the Beta associated with gravity..i.e. the positron wave function of g-force-Betas.
60 % efficient solar voltaic on every roof, and Beta voltaic- BV- in every cellar working 24/7, obviating the need for both nuclear (which I detest- and wind- which you detest.)
it could change aerospace too. An insulated "positron charged" lightweight sheet of graphene in the wings and mainframe would do the Beta Voltaics- and the current could be conducted to a dual magnetron ion thruster- pushing out Beta thrusting against the two media which carry gravity according to the theory. (Saves a lot of fuel wouldn´t it. 60% efficient Solar on all rooftops, and that in the cellars. Both mass produced by the Germans and the Chinese at dirt cheap prices.) If the Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Research at Potsdam, and the Spinoza Institute at the University of Utrecht took that Bullular model seriously as set down by everybody from Ramon Lull through Dom Boscovitch and K.C.F. Krausse , it is worth taking a look at.) The theory holds if Beta particles are cryogenic. And we "perhaps" could establish that by generating and running a positron current into a newDym Yag laser and measuring its thermodynamic properties on a target. (one does have to memorize established coupling amplitudes a a certa9in level of thinking.) 4 very prestigeous institutes asked the question: "Does a Bullular Upgrade yield quantum gravity?" (going way beyond my original thesis) They rjecteds the model due to its inherent EPR effect but now are looking at it again, and considering that problematic to the model effect could be the mechanism turning the positron and electron functions of atomic level matter to "w" particle (related to mass as postulted by nobel Prize Winning Stephan Weinbertg) and Beta particles. (which must be cryogenic if the model is to hold.)
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 25, 2013
Hey Kent, didn't any profs in your arts curricula warn about the dangers of dropping names to fake smarts?
;]
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 25, 2013
Physicists at the Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Research in Potsdam (familiar with Leibnitz), the Physical Institute at the Ramon Lull University in Barcelona (familiar with the work of St. Ramon Lull), the Spinoza Institute at the University of Utrecht (familiar with the model description by Spinoza) and at the University of Toronto formed an internet team to see if upgrading the "non-source-free" Bullular model of the atom to modern Q.E.D., "Q.C.G" would "yield the relationship between atomic level positrons and electrons and gravity." - (See Max Planck Research Magazine) Anyhow, like myself, they hit upon the model´s inherent e/-e "EPR effect". And after months of deliberation, they came up with the conclusion "atoms cannot exist this way as the EPR effect" would simply burn them up." The EPR effect generates "electro-weak photons, and positron-electron neutrino- Beta particles. (See Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen´s work on that.) I was stunned when I heard about their work, and got back to them with the simple suggestion: "Could we try saving the model by assigning cryogenic properties to the co-product Beta particles to account for homeostasis within its framework? So they are looking at it again.
And how do we test to see if Beta couplings are cryogenic. "Do the impossible" and generate and conduct a positron current into a neoDym Yag laser and measure its temperature effects on a metallic target. More work is needed. Beta are cryogenic. Now, if the theory is correct, then the EPR effect products, a reverse coupling photon (i.e. one that travels between electron hatches as an uncoupled "w" particle, (associated with mass by Prof. Dr. Stephan Weinberg) and Beta particle positron-neutrino couplings are that which carry mass.
are that which carry gravity. And if that is correct, we can do Beta-voltaics that work much like solar voltaic, capturing its positron wave function like solar p.v. captures the electron wave function, and convert to power.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 25, 2013
Dr A. (IPPNW cont´d) " ´This provides a plaubile explantion of the Kikk study publish3ed in 2007-2008 that under fives living near NPPs are considerably more at risk of cancer, particularly leukemia, than children living further away " Theile added: "up to now, supervisory authorities have kept these spikes a secret by only providing annually averaged figures despite our reuests for disagtgregated data. We need half hourly data of the releases of each radioactive nucleide for all German NPPs for scientific evaluisation. This is necessary for the protection of unborn children lving near German reactors.
From IPPNW Press Release- Spikes of Radioacive Emissions during insprection and refueuling.
For net links... readers can go to WWW.nuclear-risks.orgen.en.homepage.html.
or to http://www.ippnw-europe.org/ and click to the
section on Nuclear Energy and Security."

As for your stupid comment, that the French never met an atom they didn´t like, the French section of the Nobel Prize winning IPPNW has been keeping close statistical track of cancer rates and other health problems near French radioactive mines (the tailing waste dump areas), the reactors, the re-processing plants, etc. You probably don´t understand French, so I won´t give their site. it is not the French "greens" who are calling for a shutdon, but the IPPNW and the French "Gauche" party (communist) where its leader Melanchon is calling for a conversion of the nukes to geothermal. The current socialist government is pushing wind and rooftop solar. Switzerland also voted to shut down its nukes due to IPPNW gathered data about the incidents of miscarriages, foetal deformations, and childhood luekemia near its reactors. (the incidents of such medical disorders are statistically measured to be up to five times more within a 5 km radius of a nuclear power plant. Sorry, but the IPPNW stats have been carefully collected by physicians and physicists.
Let us take Sellefield and La Hague.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 25, 2013
Dr. A. Do you want sites in reference to how nuclear plants emit a lot more radiation. Have you ever heard of the IPPNW, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War? The organisation won a nobel peace prize in 1985. They not only concerned themselves about the close to impossible job of providing medical service in the event of a nuclear holocaust, they also focused on the measuring and rating the health problems associated with mining and processing nuclear fuel, using it, reprocessing it, and then intermediate and final storage. They work closely together with nuclear physicists.

IPPNW is the name of the Nobel Prize Winning Organisation which also has a section monitoring nuclear energy in cooperation with nuclear and quantum physcists, some of whom are also Nobel Prize Winners- such as Hans Peter Dürr.

You´re claim of nuclear not emitting radiation is sheer nonsense. The I.P.P.N.W measurements on the Grundremmingen Plant are 3 Bq/m³ pe hour. Now dig this, during refueling and inspection, when the reactors are open.. the figures spiked to 700 KBq/m³ per hour with a peak of 1.470 KBq/m3. In the followin days, (Sept 22 - through 299 - 12) the measured concentraionn of released raioactive Noble gasses were still much higher. (average=100 kBq/m³ during renewed power operion.
IPPNW is concerned about the the probable health impacts of such large emissions spekes. `esepcially at risk are unborn children. When reactors ar eopen and rleasing gasses, pregnant women can incorporate much higher concentrations of radio nucleides than at other times, much via via respiration` said Reinhard Thiel, member of the IPPN board. `Radioactive isotopes inhaled by th mother can reach the unboard child via the blood and placenta with the result that the embroyo/(foetus are contaminted ("labelle" by radioactive isotpes. The contamination has effected, and could effec blood forming cells in the bone marrow resulting in luekemia."
DEHRAN DUCKWORTH
DEHRAN DUCKWORTH
March 25, 2013
Wow, over and out.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 25, 2013
Oh goodness Kent, I missed this gem of nuclear info you don't know...

" escaping deuterium and tritium. Both gasses are Alpha radioactive."

If you weren't so afraid of facts, you'd have first at least Goggled things like Deuterium & Tritium to learn: a) Deuterium doesn't decay, alpha or otherwise; and b) Tritium decays via beta (electron) emission, as do all neutron-rich isotopes.

But, hey Kent, facts ain't in your scheme of life, right? You just love to puff up and try to fool those uninitiated in your fakery. Does that get you dates or something?
;]
This is fun!
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 25, 2013
Kent, you're certainly persistent in displaying your BS! Good for all here to Google your stuff, like: "Bullular model of the atom" -- which leads to comments on blogs from ---- wait for it --- you!

And to fluff like this...

"A SOURCE ANALYSIS OF EMANUEL SWEDENBORG'S
PHILOSOPHICAL AND THEOLOGICAL IDEAS"

So, thanks Kent, for truly confirming your lack of science, engineering and coherent logical discourse (a component of Philosophy).
;]

By the way, if you want to apply your alleged philosophical training usefully, move to explaining things like how electrons and quarks know to have their electric charges be exact fractional multiples of one another, given that quarks & electrons have no apparent physical relation. Hint: look up "preon".

That might actually get you to use more brain and less embarrassing keyboarding.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 24, 2013
As for my qualifications. No, I am not a nuclear. I have an M.A. in mass media social psychology... and an MA in scientific philosophy pertaining to adapting and upgrading the non-source-free, Bullular model of the atom to modern Q.E.D. (the one used by Ramon Lull, Baruch Spinoza, Leibnitz, Swedenborg, Don Boscovitch, Euler, etc prior to the development of the "source-free" Rutherford - Bohr standard model. Title of thesis in English translation: "Does a Bullular Upgrade to Quantum Dynamics yield Quantum Gravity." Conclusion- No! Due to the model´s inherent e/-e quantum EPR effect. (electron positron mutual particl pair annhilation) Then, maybe, if you postulate the EPR effect co-product Beta particles (a positron- electron neutrino coupling) are cryogenic. The lab test on that consisted of running a positron current into a neoDym yag laser and measuring temperatures behind a metallic plate target.) The experiments were successful. Prelminary tests with the Beta laser reveal that when aimed into the base of an open flame, the fire implodes into its product gasses. (That may eventually have its applications in in firefighting. After all, effective firefighting is also an Alpha and Omega in combatting global warming. Fire releases more co2 into the atmosphere every year than all the combustion processes combined. As things stand, you´ll have no shortage of bio-char charcoal in the U.S. for fuel in the near future. Maybe, this cryogenic Beta laser will help in that, but we still have work to do on generating and conducting sufficient amounts of "positron" currents to drive the Beta beam lasers on a large scale application. (And because the Beta is a positron-electron neutrino coupling, I could not help but test it on a small amount of radioactive material, to see if the electron neutrinos would uncouple and couple with a d quark on the free neutron d.u.d. string to transmute the quark to an up quark- and obtain a paradoxical reaction. It is not suited for that. )
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 24, 2013
East Germany is also loaded with mountains of radioactive slag heaps mountains of the stuff. From 1946 through 1984, the Soviet Union obtained all of its uranium it used in its nuclear weapons, submarine and naval nuclear drives, and all its nuclear power plants from two sites in East Germany the occuping troops conveniently found left over from the Nazi nuclear bomb program. (The Nazi´s ignited two small 15 kiloton devices- with an opposed hollow charge field design, on a mountain top in Saxony- and the Island of Rugen-- replete with test victims- Jews, Czechs, Poles, and captured Russian soldiers. It is not just a problem of adequately hiding radioactive wastes (and accidents occur often enough in them, the latest being in the Asse "abkling" deposit in a salt mine in Northrhein Westphalia- where water got in the supposedly dry deposit, rusted a barrel full of wastes, and it spilled out on the floor, mixed with the water on it, and spontaneoously enriched to plutonium and even heavier elements- a fukushima effect- the more the Japanese tried to cool the meltdown, the more "ultra heavy radioactive water they got, paradoxical effect not expected.) The Soviet uranium mine slag heaps around Vismuth, Saxony, and another site are huge. Now the sick joke of it was, the East German communists thóught nothing of using uranium mine slag to mix in with concrete in building soviet style reinforced concrete houses, and as a compacted gravel base under all the asphalt based roads, and mixed it in with the asphalt as well to stretch it. (radioactive houses and roads.) The rates of birth defects, fetal miscarriages, uterine and testicle, breast, throat, liver, stomach, lung and brain cancers are three times higher than in other areas of Germany. And what you are not reading about are the statistically higher rates of cancer around the French uranium mine slag heaps. (I don´t have the figures for England available in front of me right now.) Nuclear! Safe and sustainable. Nonsense?
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 24, 2013
That is why the second experiment was set up as it was. The question remained, is the product gas of "phototropic decay" as practiced at Sellefield and La Haque escaping deuterium and tritium. Both gasses are Alpha radioactive. The purpose of the exercise was to determine that. Researchers were expecting to find alpha radioactive deuterium or tritium. They found none. So what was the gas escaping from "phototropic decay". Neither deuterium nor tritium react with oxygen and do not ignite. (deuterium gas and helium have identical properities in that both are alpha radioactive, and neither chemically react with oxygen.) So the next test on "phototropic decay" of deuterium-tritium oxide gas was the dumb ass question- as to if it reacts with oxygen. Lo and behold it does. You are perfectly free to replicate the second test on "phototropic decay" of mixed deuterium tritium oxide- and you´ll get the same results.
Then an explanation was sought for the "phototropic decay" of free neutrons in heavy water, and Q.C.G. (Quantum Chromo Dynamics) wss applied to that. Now in European circles, the process is no longer referred to as "decay" but "transmutation".
The results of those experiments lead some nuclear researchers both in Europe to conceive of a new reactor type to dispose of nuclear wastes- namely electro-tropic transmutation, with very mixed results, a total lowering of emissions, the formation of a lot of magnesium and copper hydrides (somehow, a lot of the remaining thorium etc, broke down to copper and magnesium chemically bound with hydrogen. Google "decay reactor" or "transmutation reactor" to see about that. But, there is still a high content of plutonium and even heavier elements on the actonide heavy element tables.
And all of that causes cancer.

What you don´´t read about very often are the high incidents of cancer around the French uranium mines. They have mountains of lightly radioactive slag heaps around them. And the cancer rates are higher.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 24, 2013
Kent, you waste so many folks' time and again demonstrate your ignorance and apparent intent to remain so. Juat look up the boiling point of D2O and put a cork in it...

"Boiling point 101.4 °C, 375 K, 215 °F"
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 24, 2013
Those questions were asked and some serious testing devices were installed. One device routinely does weight to volume test samples pof the water discharging into the ocean. If the weight to volume is not that of normal h²o then the "heavy water" is diverted to further decay pools" or back to the original decay pools according to weight to volume density. Deuterium oxide is not radioactive, so that is why those weight to volume samples were instigated.

The second test described here arose from the question as to if the deuterium gas does not "decay" in those decay pools, but rather simply rises like co² rises out of mineral water. The critical DG of EU health, the equivalent of the U.S. F.D.A. had some serious concerns about that. The operators were claiming phototropic decay, and the EU health wanted to know if that was really occuring, or if deuterium gas was indetectably bubbling out, legitimately concerned about deuterium - gas causing things like lung cancer if inhaled.
The same British DB was responsible for the EU wide labelling of all tobacco products with big warnign about health hazards that one cannot overlook.
So the second experiment, about "phototropic decay" was devised to determine if "phototropic decay" was occuringh as expected and claimed, or if the operators were pulling the wool over peoples eyes about it. The whole purpose of the exercise was to see if deuterium or tritium escapes into the atmosphere at Sellefied and La Hague. Those were very legitimae questions on the part of the EU health authorities.

The preliminary tests at two identical, early sixties type heavy water experimental reactors- the EU experimental reactor in Karlsruhe Germany, and the Max Planck Society experimental reactor. Lo and behold a gas was indeed escapes from "phototropic decay". The question remained as to what kind of gas. If it was deuterium or tritium oxide then the "decay pools" were to be shut down or the gas somehow captured and stored.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 24, 2013
Not sure what all the fuss is about - heavy water is the moderator in certain reactor designs - whereas gas cooled reactors usually graphite. Some use light water.

The discussion on the moderator and related properties quite out of the scope discussion on renewables and not sure what you guys are arguing about. Also comments about degree qualifications, etc, totally meaningless in the context of general discussion.

Even if someone has a degree - means nothing.

I think the subject matter has been flogged to destruction.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 24, 2013
The standard definition I have been given for heavy water reactors is that heavy water has a much higher boiling point, and is thus used as the heat modulator.

I know the results of the first described experiment can be accounted for by some as neutron penetration.

Deuterium oxide does not "transmute" inside a reactor. The non-radioctive deuterium oxide heat modulator in heavy water reactors regularly enriches to a mix of non-radioactive deuterium oxide, and "heavier" i.e. denser -radioactive tritium oxide, i.e. with two or more "free neutrons".
That mixed "deuterium-tritium" oxide is then bled from reactors on a regular basis, and "disposed of" by "phototropic decay".
"phototropic decay" has been routinely applied at Sellefield and La Hague for disposing of non-radioactive deuterium oxide laced with radioactive tritium oxide. But skeptical question from European Union health authorities about the quality of water those "decay pools" are dumping into the Irish Sea and the English chennel lead to a number of different testing processes to assure that "phototropic decay" was really occuring the way the nuclear physicists were claiming they were doing. (I am aquainted with the son of the British Director General of European Health agency who ordered the testing decades ago. They were concerned about the genetic changes occuring in seagulls that routinely bathed in the b basins, with offspring sometimes growing to the size of bald eagle. that had to be hunted and killed to keep them from cross breeding with the other high sea gull population.

Now, does "phototropic decay" really occur at those "decay pools" are those "decay pool" setups just a sham exercise to dumpTh the whole thing just a sham exercise to dump
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 24, 2013
By the way, Kent, it's time for us to start reporting things like your: 'Horseshit, deuterium oxide is used because it does not boil.' as the spam it is.

Again, why waste everyone's time here showing lack of knowledge and character, Kent?
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 24, 2013
Kent, you really have an odd idea of why people should listen to you, when you clearly don't study real science & engineering and have as yet not explained what education & experince you really have, besides selling district heating gear.

This is good, Kent: '"phototropic transmutation" of free neutrons in deuterium oxide' -- in one sentence, you again show us all you've no understanding of nuclear physics or engineering!

Why do you make it so easy to discredit you, Kent?

"Free neutrons" are unstable and decay within minutes to Hydrogen nuclei. No wonder a sealed bottle of water at a reactor will later allow a hydrogen flame to be ignited when its opened. You apparently have no idea how neutrons penetrate materials, and that deuterium oxide has little to do with what you mention, except that it allows more neutrons to pass into the bottle from outside without being captured by normal (light) water hydrogen atoms, thus making more D2O..

Keep it coming, Kent! You definitely are on a roll to become dummkopf blogger of the year!
;]


reactor
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 24, 2013
Hi Guys - reading some of the waffle on the site and bad language - probably best to get a few of you in the Tokamak dungeon and leave you there until you solve all the world's energy and resource problems and come up with a neat solution to save mankind.

Should not be too difficult and we can get the Bank of Cyprus to ask for a few hundred more millions from Angela Merkel to meet your expenses.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 24, 2013
Dear Dr. A. And as for the "phototropic transmutation" of free neutrons in deuterium oxide in those "decay pools" at Hague and Sellefield, that has been experimentally establisched by another barometric experiment. It simply consisted of heating a thick walled glass jar, with a measurement point for 500 ml of normal h²o marked. Then, 500 grams of very hot, denser deuterium oxide were poured in, and the top with a gas valve and barometer were screwed on. it was allowed to cool, and it formed a vacuum registering on the barometer. That "heavy water" was exposed to sunlight in front of a mirror for a period of 10 weeks before after the summer solstace. After the period was up, the experiment was checked. The water level had risen from dense heavy water level to the normal water control level, and the vacumm had not only decreased, a positive reading showed on the barometer. A hose was attached to the gss valve, a small bunsen burner flame inserted under its end. The gas coming out of the hose ignited, establishing a phototrically induced free neutron core quark d.u.d. string transmutation to a "u.d.u." core quark single proton transmutation (hydrogen nucleus)
Very simple experiments.. The Q.C.D. explanation behind that is a positively charged electron neutrino-interacting with a d quark, transforming it to a u quark, with a short high burst of energy as it re-aligns on the other end of the string as hydrogen. (electro-tropic transmutation also occurs in radiology, which is why the x-ray machines and cat scans have to be regularly serviced.) Some researchers are now experimenting with positron charged Beta laser beams for application in reactor decontamination prior to demolition.
(Once again, thanks for comment 160 where you demonstrated you yourself are neither a nuclear physicist nor a quantum astro-physicist - with a very shallow grasp of the material. Artificial deuterium reveals all the properties of helium.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 24, 2013
KEnt: "installing Stirling motors driving generators running off district heat... only makes the entire system more energy efficient."

Indeed, when did I say otherwise? If you have heat at sufficient temp and nothing to do with it, heat a bldg, or drive the most efficient generator you can find.

However, you still ultimately dissipate heat to the environment, so the overall system design is what needs optimization.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 24, 2013
Gary, the "bio domes", as in AZ failed because they didn't grasp the realities of the world. Cure, CO2 increases some plant growth, but it increases the temperature and acidity of the biosphere involved, whether a dome or all earth.

This is the problem that is very real, very fast approaching a point at which reversal will not be possible with exceedingly great pain to many species, not just us.

I know most folks like to focus in=on "us", but we don't lkive without many, many other organisms and realities being within narrow ranges.

It wasn't Stanford data that was referred to in my links -- that just provided entry into the UC Berkeley Planetary Sciences group's research, which has been going on for a long time, as has more research around the world -- the carbon cycle is the problem, because we've ignorantly abused its reality.

As you,, I think, pointed out, bureaucracies sadly morph from dedication to self-enhancement. Too many calling themselves 'green' are no better than coal executives.
;]
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 24, 2013
Dear Doc: Therefore the statement you made about "free neutrons" existing in hydrogen atoms since the "big bang" is off the wall horse-nookie which bears no relationship to mainstream quantum chromo-dynamics, quantum astro-physics, nor quantum hydro-dynamics. Neutrons are the product of stellar activity... namely gamma rays as stated above.
An
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 24, 2013
Dear Dr, (compulsive obsessive denigrator) Alec C: Let´s get back to your comment 160. I missed that. Horseshit. You state deuterium oxide is used in Canadia ((and some) British reactors (as a heat modulator) "to avoid wasting neutrons via h capture. Horseshit, deuterium oxide is used because it does not boil.
How is it made. Simply by Wcascadig"" water over any highly radioactive material. (and using light water in "cool down" basins only produces a lot of non-radioactive DO, deuterium oxides by the way. All to often, that is just dumped into the ocean.
You really proved your own ignorance "with the universe would have no neutrons had H not protected them after the big bang." Where did you study quantum astro-physics. Never heard that one before. Most quantum astrophysicists assume neutrons are the product of solar fusion, and even give a logical quantum-chromo-dynamic explanation as to how intra-stellar gamma rays transmute the core u.d.u core quark strings of hydrogen to d.u.d core quark strings of neutrons - via a muono-u quark coupling, which transmute the u to a d and it re-aligns o the other end of the string. The corroborative experiment for that assumptio consisted of pressure pumping hydrogen into a thick walled glass jar- with a simple gas valve and a barometer pressure gauge on top- at 5 bar. The escape valve was extra sealed. And the jar was placed very close to a radioactive source for four weeks. After that, the barometer readings had radically dropped. The most important aspect- was testing the product deuterium gas on opening the gas valve. It did not ignite.
You see, the deuterium gas we make by cascading hydrogen through radioactive material, does not react with oxygen. The deuterium gas obtained by cascading - or exposing hydrogen to transmutation is not one hydrogen atom enclosing a neutron, but rather a "free neutron" between the single proton nuclei of two hydrogen atoms.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 24, 2013
Dr. A. I was not talking about burning additional fuel on Stirling but considering it as a "heat recapture" - adjuvent power source on the already efficient district heating system. Now, having discussed big interaces... what about 3.000 more building units on the long distance heat power grid, putting out a modest - 100 kWh utilizing 40% efficient Alpha Stirlings... on the heat grid to building interfaces. How much power can we squeeze out 24/7 - with that? Why that is another 300 mWh being pulled off the long distance heat hot water grid by the judicious applicatoin of Alpha Stirling systems utilizing the waste heat. So just by installng Alpha Stirling motors on many of the already hooked up buildings on the geothermic and power plant fed district heating system, Munich Utilities will generate the equivalent of two lignite coal power plants or 1/2 a nuke. (It is called "energy efficiency heat recapture. Alpha Stirlings utillize waste heat with a 40% efficiency. Germans are also bak onto developing "infra-red" thermo coupling related to solar p.v. as well.) They are now experimenting with something called "Tubular turbo-thermo coupling" which onverts the waste heat coming off a Rankine cycle steam line directly into power with a 30% efficiency. Turbo thermo coupling will play a role in automotive engineering as well.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 24, 2013
Dr. Alec: Putting Stirlings on an already installed, long distance heat hot water grid does not release any additional co² into the atmosphere, but improves power generating efficiencies. Squeezing out additional power from an already efficient district heat grid saving 5 million barrels of heating oil per annum... by installing Stirling motors driving generators running off district heat... only makes the entire system more energy efficient. So, increasing efficiency by increments cuts consumption and co² emissions. The heat is there, and the Munich city owned utilities will utilize it. (I really am not selling you Munich power here, am I. And I am not in the Stirling motor business either.) How much extra power can Munich utilities squeeze out of its long distance heat power grid... by installing Stirling heat motors running off the waste heat in a counter-entropic measure? B.M.W. factories get a lot of power and heat from Munich Utilities.. and have an interest in keeping industrial power prices low. And B.M.W. can gear its engine production lines to do big Alpha stirling motor systems as well....
How many megawatts of power can B.M.W. squeeze out of the district heating grid- by installing Stirling heat motors on the district heat grid to factory and grid to main office building interfaces? It is a question I put to both Susanne Quant von Klatten, B.M.W. heiress, and Klaus Draegger,`its C.T.O. whom I`ve known ever since he started out a Jr engineer in the company. Munich´s Lord Mayor,Christian Ude, also likes the idea of putting up Alpha Stirlings on all the district heat to building interfaces. We can easilly squeeze out up to 500 kWh on the big factory and hospital and university building, interfaces with no loss of heating capacity. Say, we do 500 units like that. That is how much power utilizing waste heat in the district heating grid? 250 mWh, thank you!
erich knight
erich knight
March 24, 2013
Plant Genes more likely, as I follow a few companies doing genetic hybridization, (not GMOs), with species of miscanthus grass getting record biomass yields of 25 tons per acre, hybrid poplar perennial Coppice Agroforestry, etc.
I am really impressed with what plants can do when given the proper chemical signaling. Here is an example of such pyrolytic chemical signaling,biochar in conjunction with applications of salicylic acid (aspirin) to a open pollinated, tropical cornfield;
Nikolaus Foidl Explains his field work as epigenetic effect,the corn reaching deep into its genetic library to take advantage of field conditions. His field work with aspirin is Amazing in Maize, 250% yield gains, 15 cobs per plant;
http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org/content/trials-maize-reactivating-dormant-genes-using-high-doses-salicylic-acid-and-charcoal

FAO on Conservation Agricultural:
"In general, soil carbon sequestration during the first decade of adoption of best conservation agricultural practices is 1.8 tons CO2 per hectare per year. On 5 billion hectares of agricultural land, this could represent one-third of the current annual global emission of CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels (i.e., 27 Pg CO2 per year)." http://www.fao.org/ag/ca/doc/CA_SSC_Overview.pdf

Adding just 1 Ton of Biochar per hectare, (800 lbs / acre), would cover 100% Current Annual Fossil CO2 Emissions.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 24, 2013
garyrich2000 m for Mega - are you not getting a little petty? and insect genes saving mankind and plant growth accelerated to solve the earth's problems - which world are you living in? We will have to get Captain Nemo to take us all to a new Universe before Dooms Day.
erich knight
erich knight
March 24, 2013
thank you for posting the Geological Perspective on Carbon and Climate.

His geologic perspectives, timelines, and Anthropogenic & Bio perturbations of the climate I think is much easier for most people to understand when framed in this deep Paleo context. I want to send him an e-mail about the potential for accelerating igneousrock dust weathering in agricultural context. William Ruddiman's work on historic atmospheric perturbations
Like this paper;
Kaplan J. et al 2010,Holocene carbon emissions as a result of anthropogenic land cover change,
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1911196/

I really loved his slides about the relationship between CO2 and polar glaciation, his quip about 1500 ppm CO2 allowing swimming in the Arctic Oceans.
His point about cement production being 25 times the natural world's own metamorphic CO2 production, the citation to Machta (1972), data from MaunaLoa,His work tracing carbon sources and sinks utilizing radioactive signature's from atmospheric testing, leading to a later paper he wrote about how atmospheric nuclear testing was good for understanding carbon cycles.

This year carbon itself has been lifting up her/his skirts through isotopic carbon signatures both 13C and 14C for looking at fossil versus recent carbon, Johannes Lehman's work using quantitative 13C(NMR)spectroscopy on the fraction of pyrolytic carbons in the soil and the Advanced Light Source imaging of Fungal Potassium, as the catalyst of every carbon based raindrop (80 to 90%)

With this lecture I learned the unintended consequences, the unintended trail of radioactive signatures in understanding the loads and sources of carbon and why the natural world does it this way. How we have to mimic these natural cycles.
During questions,an obviously bright young man asked about Biochar, icing on my cake.
dennis baker
dennis baker
March 24, 2013
still ignoring solutions it is extremely pathetic!

Guess we will wait till Geo-engineering screws up before we replace the primary source of emissions

http://dingo.care2.com/pictures/causes/uploads/2012/01/GHG-emitters-2010.jpg

In my opinion



We need to replace the fossil fuel power plants, the primary source of GHG. Now!

At a scale required to accomplish this task :

Ethanol starves people : not a viable option.

Fracking releases methane : not a viable option.

Cellulose Bio Fuel Uses Food Land : not a viable option

Solar uses food land : Not a viable option

Wind is Intermittent : Not a viable option



All Human and Agricultural Organic Waste can be converted to hydrogen, through exposure intense radiation!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/DennisearlBaker/2012-a-breakthrough-for-r_b_1263543_135881292.html

The Radioactive Materials exist now, and the Organic waste is renewable daily.

Ending the practice of dumping sewage into our water sources.

Air, Water, Food and Energy issues, receive significant positive impacts .

Reducing illness / health care costs as well !



Dennis Baker
Penticton BC V2A1P9
cell phone 250-462-3796
Phone / Fax 778-476-2633
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
March 24, 2013
That makes two of you.
You with your letters and Kent with his decimal and comma problem as well as using small m for Mega.
Anything else?
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
March 24, 2013
No prob.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
March 24, 2013
Hopefully, the information from Stanford is wrong and our ecosystem is more adaptable than we know. Vegetation may prove to have some genes stored away to trigger rapid growth and capture the excessive carbon under the right conditions. I do know that the Bio Domes that were created a couple of decades ago did experience some rapid vegetation growth when the CO2 levels climbed rapidly. The key to this trigger may be some insect with the right enzyme or other chemical trigger to make rapid carbon accumulation to occur. We still are discovering many species in our rainforests we didn't know about and need to research this some more. It would be sad to find out that the insect we so badly needed was driven to such low levels to not be effective. I'm just speculating but do consider the possibility.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 23, 2013
Gary, I don't always type perfectly. Ok with you?
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 23, 2013
Kent again shows lack of understanding of thermal power systems and math: "Alpha Stirling systems after the organic Rankine cycle are very efficient. There are no expensive real estate, environmental impact hearing,"

Stirling engines are heat engines and subject to the same theoretical maximum efficiency as the Carnot Cycle -- which means Stirling engines dissipate waste heat into the environment -- typically the best designs waste ~40% of input heat energy (or 0.40 of each fuel Euro, etc.)..

You don't care, though, Kent, right? You're just a sales guy.
;]
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
March 23, 2013
What does the capital A in my name mean DrA?
Or is it a typo?
Do tell.......
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 23, 2013
I think GAry mentioned the Stanford link to the Berkeley papers on the Carbon Cycle. The problem is simple. Our Combustion Age has left about 500 billion tons of carbon (not CO2) in air & seas, disrupting more than just climate.

The natural recycling of carbon to curstal depth is done mostly by sea organisms forming skeletal/shell structures from carbonate in seawater. They die, sink and their sequestered carbonates add to limestone un sea floors. The limestone is eventually subducted at tectonic plate overlaps, into the crust, where it may eventually be decomposed by heat and released as volcanic CO2 back to air. The other, smaller carbon recycling is rock weathering and some erosive sedimentation processes.

In all, about 250 million tons of C are naturally recycled these ways -- ~2000 times less than what we've emitted from our combustion sources. We now emit over 6 billion tons of C per year -- about 20 times what can be recycled per year.

Compared to climate change and sea rise, the reality of our trashing the carbon cycle by so absurd an amount is close to wreaking far more immediate & serious havoc. Oceanic pH is now lower than at any epoch in ~300 million years. It's half way to the 8.0 value that will shut down most of the natural carbon cycle. This event threatens a few billion lives in a few decades at most. 'Renewables' do little to help.

Here's a ref or two...
http://eps.berkeley.edu/research/areas.php
www.nature.com/nature/journal/v425/n6956/abs/425365a.html
www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/md/dok/regpubl/stmeld/2008-2009/stmeld-nr-37-2008-2009-/6.html?id=560227 (Norway)
wwwp.dailyclimate.org/tdc-newsroom/2013/01/ocean-acidification-report
www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18938002
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 23, 2013
I like ETC Steve's presentation of a link to "List of learned societies" and asking me to fix his definition of "renewable" through them first.

So Steve, remember, I asked you to call to discuss -- afraid?

And, Steve, we're also expectant to hear all your university & professional experience in energy, engineering, etc. Remember, you couldn't even guess who was an ME or not? CEO calibre?
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 23, 2013
Looks like some folks here have been busy burning network & server power!

"Oil is one variety of energy, solar another." -- this is a symptom of our primary problem -- ignorance of reality.

Ignorance isn't bad, scientists & engineers love ignorance as a motive for exploring nature.

But when folks are talking without understanding reality, and so influencing others, this propagation of ignorance is dangerous & unethical. Oil is not energy. Sunlight indeed is, as is nuclear fission/fusion.

Saturn's moon Titan is worth a thought -- its atmosphere is 50% more dense than ours and contains mostly ethane & methane. Its surface gets rains of methane & ethane at downpour rates for years at a time. There are huge methane/ethane lakes. The upper atmosphere has enough solar UV to create polymers that fall to the surface as orange organic 'snow'.

So Titan has lots of "energy"?

Without oxygen, combustible fuels are useless as energy sources. This reality evidences one of the largest subsidies we've always given the fossil-fuel industry -- a subsidy given no other.

The amount of natural oxygen production the industry would have to provide, if their product was indeed "energy", amounts to the equivalent of about ~174,000 lbs of vegetation per gallon of refined oil. Or, in order to balance both the carbon exhaust and oxygen intake, even a Prius would need to be matched by ~10 acres of healthy, pristine broadleaf forest. And that ignores the car's production & life-cycle emissions/requirements.

Hydrocarbons are not energy.
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
March 23, 2013
"Larry- of Galaxy- Bonkim and myself are aging baby boomers. But some of us learned the value of thrift from our depression era generation parents."

Amazing what a little historical perspective can do to enlighten one.

You guys feel that the current generation is far wealthier than your parents depression era generation.

As to the quantity of material wealth no debate.

Have we sacrificed much in exchange?

In my opinion and the opinions of many willing to see through the mirage we have literally 'thrown be baby out with the bath water' in many ways and now an ever increasing number of us still seek the baby.

Of course if we go back 70-80 years before the depression and the discovery of our 'oil slaves' you would find the majority of those Americans were living a life that looked more like in a medieval feudal era than the relative wealth of the depression era.

All of our vaunted high tech modern day miracles may seem a permanent fixture of ever growing wealth but in reality we will more than likely end up selecting only a few of the more adaptable technologies (adapting to a severe shortage of oil)and rediscovering that baby we previously threw out.

Who knows we may have to resort to something akin to the Library of Alexandria where knowledge is preserved far from the ravages of a long dead internet.


It is the height of arrogance and ignorance to think that we will not and cannot easily fall back to the reality of generations long forgotten when that single resource has been all but used up so far as supply and demand is concerned.

It's actually suicidal and far more the height of ignorance to think that waiting till all signs lead to severe oil scarcity and all that that implies.

I suggest that those living the delusion of 'that was then and this is now' read a little about the residents of a place called Easter Island.

I'm quite certain they also never saw what hit them before it was too late.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
March 23, 2013
BTW the carbon cycling info came from a different comment section from here:

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2013/02/how-obama-should-tackle-climate-change-and-energy-independence-in-his-second-term?cmpid=GeoNL-Thursday-February14-2013

Comment#6

Those of us who've given any administration, including Obama-I, detailed actions & reasons learned early the truth of all bureaucracies -- their founders & founding purpose are worthy, then realities of politics, staff dispersion & so on lead to the common bureaucratic end state: self preservation.

As those studying bank regulation saw clearly: new staff enter ready to put folks like Paulson & Blankfein properly in jail, then learn the balance of doing just enough to keep a job & advance, while avoiding doing too much & aggravating both their targets & their own bosses, who also cherish their positions & future opportunities (often with the regulated).

Unfortunately for us all, reality & Ma Nature don't care how dumb or cupidic we are. We still think we can 'solve' global warming, sea rise and acidification problems, despite the fact that we ignored our Nobel & other wise folks decades ago, who knew what to do then.

So now, we have subsidized bandaids put forth to make some feel comfort in the ignorance that, for example, the Natural Carbon Cycle has been trashed by a factor >20 for decades & we (and descendents) are now guaranteed thousands of years of very unpleasant environmental realities.

For carbon-cycle sadness, follow the links to DePaolo Group reports... http://energyseminar.stanford.edu/node/461

To note what our Nobels and others wisely advised 60 years ago:
http://tinyurl.com/6xgpkfa

And to sample the absurdity we've created for our kids...

http://membercentral.aaas.org/blogs/qualia/global-hyperwarming-conversation-ed-landing

Consider what JFK's goal of eliminating combustion power by 2000
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 23, 2013
Larry- of Galaxy- Bonkim and myself are aging baby boomers. But some of us learned the value of thrift from our depression era generation parents. I grew up in a family of six with hand me down clothes that never fit. So I mowed lawns for spending money, and bought used clothes at Church Bazaars that did. (cut consumption.) The only really new clothes I ever wore were the ones I had to buy from Uncle Sam when I was drafted in sent to Nam and Germany. After that, I went back to prowling Church bazaars in wealthy neighbourhoods for renewing my wardrobe. (Cerruti, Boss, and Brionni designer suits- designer jeans, cashmere and silk sweaters- the whole nine yards... as i let my compatiots buy the new stuff and I get quality 2nd hand.
The kids are grown and on their own- and I use public transporation wherever i can. (when I slashed driving to less than 3000 kM per annum, I thought to myself... why even bother to own car. So I joined a car sharing program. It´s cheaper.) (I co-own a number of experimental vehicles- which are very expensive,but those are research vehicles belonging to our company.) (I never had anything against used cars- like efficient Mercedes or Audi T.D.I diesels. 2nd hand can be excellent quality (and you save on the depreciation) used cars, used clothes. Why even the gorgeous women in my life were all 2nd hand. So what? Goodness, I don´t even own an I-Pod, get along just fine without it. I discovered I didn´t own things, things owned me. There is a virtue in the Franciscan or Benedictine lifestyles to a degree. Wanting to cut my carbon footprint, I did a low carbon footprint upgrade of my household appliances to A +++ efficiencies , not by replacing the entire applince, but simply by going to an appliance repair shop and purchasing the appropriate A ++++ rated energy efficiency motors. Added additional insulation on the built in refridgerator freezer unit - three inch insulation under the kitchen cabinet,etc.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
March 23, 2013
From DrAlex's Stanford link on carbon cycling, it suggests we are on the edge of having massive amounts of CO2 released from the permafrost under the ice caps in our polar regions. (I can't remember if it was 1,000 gigatons of CO2 but that number sticks in my head. Current attempts to capture CO2 in Texas and Britain amount to 6 Giga-tons annually and couldn't even come close to handling this sudden potential release.

What comes to mind as a solution is to expand on ETCgreen's solution not for energy or consumption but to put back into the ground solid and liquid carbons while increasing our renewables and consuming less. The idea being to prevent the melting of permafrost and release of methane hydrates.

Increase carbon fiber production via green methods and use it to build the renewables with as much carbon content as possible. Additionally, graphene based solar cells if feasible. As far as concrete goes, work would need to be done to increase carbon content or substitute it altogether.
Patrick O'Leary
Patrick O'Leary
March 23, 2013
I revived sawtooth roofing with additional solar benefits (US patent 6,912,816).

On the off chance that anybody would care to do something, as opposed to raging away till their end. See the web site.
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
March 23, 2013
I suppose "high indignation is in the eye of the beholder"

I would think my 'purpose' would be obvious to most.

I don't see one persons' attempt to keep another from self destruction as an indication of that persons' being 'indignant'.
Patrick O'Leary
Patrick O'Leary
March 23, 2013
Larry, is high indignation your only purpose here?
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
March 23, 2013
@PartickOleary

I would suggest that you and others do some basic number crunching on the quads (10 to the 15th) of btu's that are consumed just in our 50 states in one year. At least %99 of those energy units come directly or indirectly via crude oil consumption. You cannot even operate a nuke plant without abundant and cheap crude oil even if they were capable of self generation,which they are not.Fukushima anyone?? Don't believe me then do some basic research.

Also remember that a very large percentage of crude oil energy goes to simply growing food not to mention another big chunk that goes just to transport it the average 1500 miles before being consumed.Have any idea of the quantity of crude oil needed just to deal with the food once it's eaten and then 'disposed of'?

Your "oil crisis come and go" indicates that you have done almost no research of current world reserves or how totally dependent even your entire solar scenario is on cheap crude supplies.

The biggest threat we face is not just the peak oil issue,it is folks with a similar mind set who naively feel that once we hit peak oil all we will need to do is turn to renewables

By the time peak oil is visible in our rear view mirror we will have already passed the point where 'less need for suffering" will seem like so much myopic wishful thinking.

Most of the blogs we have gotten on this list from well educated people who should know better than believing in a swift technological fix without fundamental changes, just proves how critical the situation will be once we have to deal with it.

It is a mathematical and physical impossibility for India and China to become another America even with mythical vast reserves of crude or even all the renewable energy on earth. Yet they are hell bent to do just that.

This activity alone is sufficient to relegate your "oil crisis come and go" refrain to a high level of absurdity and self delusion.
Patrick O'Leary
Patrick O'Leary
March 23, 2013
Larry, there is less need for 'suffering' than you suggest. Oil is one variety of energy, solar another. Oil crises come and go. People did fairly well beforehand and will likely do so again.

This time EE married to RE is far more available and far more usable.
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
March 23, 2013
I would suggest etcgreen and others who are coming around to the reality of the post oil century we are now in, beginning to explore something started in the UK called the Transitions Movement.

Essentially the Transitions Movement participants are perhaps analogous to say the 780 survivors of the Titanic preferring to feel a bit of discomfort and fear as they climbed into the lifeboats and thus survived ,while those who refuse to join this movement are more analogous to the multitudes who perished that cold night in 1912 who found it less chaotic and more pleasant,at least temporarily, to remain warm and dry on the upper decks and then hope for something miraculous that plugs the gaping holes in the hull just in time to keep the ship from sinking.

I for one am willing to consume less and in some limited ways feel less comfortable at times due to those self imposed constraints than willingly participate in activities that only increase the likelihood that any pleasures and comforts I have now will be just a fond memory that does nothing to keep food on my table or a roof over my head.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 23, 2013
Waste should be included in renewables as apart from plastics the main materials are either non-combustible metals, and minerals, or biodegradable vegetable, and animal matter which essentially are renewable.

One thing missing from this discussion is audit if world resources - which are depleting fast. Fossil fuels, and all other energy sources are derived from the sun - fossil fuels simply stored versions over millions of years.

If you look at consumption - mankind has exhausted the millions of years of stored energy in a matter of decades - even if you tap a large part of energy from the daily exposure from the sun, and improve energy conversion, and utilisation efficiencies, that will be only a small part of today's consumption.

Even if population is reduced drastically (ref Kent's note), consumption will still be pretty high - note world population was around 3.5 billion in the 1930s/40s and consumption in the developed world was already high..
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 23, 2013
Yes this chap is projecting decline based on declining resources and consequent economic activity and consumption - which I also believe - but that decline will be through major shocks and political/economic readjustment. Watch the space.
Steve Frazer
Steve Frazer
March 23, 2013
bonkim2003 - Your world population projections may be radically off...

Please research Dr. Colin Campbell (Ph.D., Oxford Geologist - Energy Adviser to the IMF and dozens of nations - his long and celebrated career virtually defined petroleum exploration). One interviewer mentioned the challenge of food production per the rising cost of petroleum to feed the current 7 billion world population as it grows to 9 billion. Dr. Campbell's response was to state that his projection was a total world population of 3.5 billion by the end of this century. The interviewer was dumb founded. How does a current 3.5 billion population mass cease to exist in 80 some-odd years? Resources wars, famine, natural disasters, ...

Dr. Campbell writes: Despite the uncertainties of detail, it is now evident that the world faces the dawn of the Second Half of the Age of Oil, when this critical commodity, which plays such a fundamental part in the modern economy, heads into decline due to natural depletion. A debate rages over the precise date of peak, but this rather misses the point, when what matters — and matters greatly — is the vision of the long remorseless decline that comes into sight on the other side of it. The transition to decline threatens to be a time of great international tension. Petroleum Man will be virtually extinct this Century, and Homo sapiens faces a major challenge in adapting to his loss.

World population is directly tied to energy and you now live in a world sliding down the backside of Peak Petroleum. For a better perspective...

http://etcgreen.com/general/american-greatness-letter-to-rachel-maddow
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 23, 2013
Kent - depopulation - the world is getting more urbanised and some of the countries you mention - Czechoslovakia, Sweden, populations very small - US/Canada very low population density - all the depression era farm failures moved West to work on New Deal projects - but see how their cities have expanded.

The result of massive increase in production/global warming already pronounced and major changes to climate patterns - many parts of the world already short of water and good agricultural land, irrigated land increased salinity, etc.

Mankind only reacts to shock - the question is when it will come.
Steve Frazer
Steve Frazer
March 23, 2013
DrAlexC - Re: def of renewable energy. Interesting that you would take exception with this definition. We adopted the definition as it is the standard def for the vast majority of the following...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_learned_societies

Please submit any changes or issues you might have to each of these world recognized Scientific Societies and please let us know when they comply with your suggestions, then we will update our def.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 23, 2013
I am aware of demographics in the EU, having been travelling around for decades - US population as that of the rest of the Americas on the increase, as that of Asia, Africa, and Australasia.

We are living on the savings and reinvestment from the prosperous decades after WW2 can't say life for today's youngsters will be as good as yours and mine have been. The fault lines in the world economics are already showing - and we will have to reinvent economics from Adam Smith's old world model developed at a time when populations were small, new continents, and resources being opened up and resources appeared to be inexhaustible. Life cycle theory is part of nature.
Steve Frazer
Steve Frazer
March 23, 2013
garyrich2000 - Re: stats for production yields of various feedstock.

We are working with the United Nations Agricultural Org, USDA, DoE, dozens of private sector firms and we have our own R&D group and test orchards. We feel pretty good about our sources and stats.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 23, 2013
World population increasing - now 7 billion + 9 billion in another 2 decades - more worryingly consumption pro rata increasing due to rise in prosperity levels. Not too optimistic mankind's days are numbered regardless of the wonders of technology and international business.Live in hope. Munich or Germany cannot exist in isolation of world events/changes taking place.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 23, 2013
You´ve travelled through Sweden. And I assume you´ve noticed the same kind of demographic shift. Really, few people are complaining about all the big coastline wind turbines going up in North Germany such as in Mecklenburg Vorpommern because there are fewer people to complain about it. Cape Wind made the headlines because it was offshore of Hyannisport. Check out the Baltic sea Island of Rugen or the Swedish island of Samso and look at the age demographics.

Regions along the "iron curtain" depopulated during the cold war, and they are not repopulating now. A lot of that land is being reclimed by nature. (Not bad) I had the opportunity to pick up a Baronial Estate in the Czech Republic - replete with serf villages etc a few years back for "next to nothing" just across the border from Germany in the Bavarian-Bohemian forest region. But the region is depopulated and the road infrastructure is miseralbe, and we couldn´t even find the labour to do forestry there. Beautiful region. Even replete with mineral wells. No way we could turn it into another health spa or sr nursing home.. not there. (something like the area North of Manchester or Northwest Ireland, or some of the Greek islands. empty.
I knew a "green" couple who only had one child who retired to grow bio-vegetables to a farm west of Munich. Solar cells on the rooftops. Wind turbines in the field. The neighboring farmer leases the land from their gay son, and the lovingly renovated farmhouse with the solar on the roof and a even a small millrace with a paddle wheel- stands empty. (Demographis.) I could take you to regions west of New York, west and northwest the dammed up resort Lake Wallenpaupak where the rural region farms all went bust during the great depression and depopulated- an area of about 4000 square miles where you won´t meet a soul. (While the other kids were sailing on the lake, I hiked around the region, sleeping in abandoned farmhouses and barns on my wanderings.) Depopulated.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 23, 2013
Bonkin: The European populations are declining. China had a mandated one child per family program, but if you follow European population demographics, a lot of people never get married, and never have any children at all, and the German families have a statistical average of 1.2 children per family or something like that. The population here is aging quickly, and declining. The only thing keeping up the population here is immigration from other EEC countries, and from Africa and Asia. (Turks make up an increasingly large portion of the population.) Condoms and the pill are depopulating Germany of its Germans. (I`m an American of German descent who stayed here after military service in Nam and here.) My parents had six kids. My siblings multiplied- but no more than four. I sired only two. (And so populatin explosion slows down, and is now reversing.) Look at the demographics. And look at the change in markets. The "recession" was also partially due to the "baby boomers" all retireing or going into semi-retirement. No demand for new housing, no demand for new cars, increased demand for medical services. Goodness gracious, the same thing is true of the U.S.. the "white middle class" two kid family is "going the way" of... Condoms and the pill changed things.
East Germany depopulated quickly after the wall fell, as people moved to higher paying jobs in the west. I can take you to a lot of half ghost towns and villages even here in Bavaria where you will find a lot of multi-family houses occupied by only one family. Empty farm houses as farms consolodated, etc. Germany extensively automated, but there are points where the demographic can´t be denied. I know a lot of places where i can hardly meet somebody under 50. The local butcher and baker shops are shuttered. I know a large land owner... who imports all his forestry labour from Poland, and even they don´t stay on, but find jobs in industry. That may change with "telecommuting" and internet, but I doubt it.
Patrick O'Leary
Patrick O'Leary
March 23, 2013
Actually, district heating is used in Manhattan, NYC. Con Edison has been doing it for years. Of course, we usually only hear about it when the pipes give out from age and vibrations, and explode.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 23, 2013
You mention German exports. Germany exports over a trillion a year in goods and services. And believe me, the sales go well because it is selling "energy efficiency systems". For example, new Siemens baggage retrieval systems at air ports virtually eliminae lost luggage at plane transfers, and a fifty percent more energy efficient. New Siemens automated production lines not only cut labour costs, (creating its own social problems because Robots don´t pay social security or taxes) they have power management systems and upgraded to a+++ motors which are 55% more energy efficient than lines installed at the end of the 90s. A lot of the mandates for energy efficiency turn into export items. To wit... Germany mandated massive insulation on buildings. A company called Thermodul then developed a system for "lost mould" insulation systems on steel reinforced cast concrete buildings. It not only cuts heat and air conditioning costs by 90% (good for the environment) but cuts construction time in half. Does it sell well around the world. You had better believe it. This years Hannover industrial trade fair is all about "energy efficiency". It is all about "cutting consumption - increasing performance." Energy Efficiency ane Renewable Energy" sustainability has now outpaced the automotive sector and is the biggest sector in the German economy, and is expected to grow to 20% by 2020. And, energy efficient transport in vehicles and trainsets are good sales items around the world. It´s not the exports which support the sustainabity, its the "sustainability" which drives the exports. Putting up factories that are 70% more efficient- make people want to cut costs by upgrading. "Energy efficiency" is the first 9 yards in "sustainability" systems to counteract global warming. Really, as stated above, Stirling motors are making big comeback in Germany. And I have no doubt they will become a another nice little export item as a "counter-entropy" system just like infra-red thermo coupling
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 23, 2013
You mention German exports. Germany exports over a trillion a year in goods and services. And believe me, the sales go well because it is selling "energy efficiency systems". For example, new Siemens baggage retrieval systems at air ports virtually eliminae lost luggage at plane transfers, and a fifty percent more energy efficient. New Siemens automated production lines not only cut labour costs, (creating its own social problems because Robots don´t pay social security or taxes) they have power management systems and upgraded to a+++ motors which are 55% more energy efficient than lines installed at the end of the 90s. A lot of the mandates for energy efficiency turn into export items. To wit... Germany mandated massive insulation on buildings. A company called Thermodul then developed a system for "lost mould" insulation systems on steel reinforced cast concrete buildings. It not only cuts heat and air conditioning costs by 90% (good for the environment) but cuts construction time in half. Does it sell well around the world. You had better believe it. This years Hannover industrial trade fair is all about "energy efficiency". It is all about "cutting consumption - increasing performance." Energy Efficiency ane Renewable Energy" sustainability has now outpaced the automotive sector and is the biggest sector in the German economy, and is expected to grow to 20% by 2020. And, energy efficient transport in vehicles and trainsets are good sales items around the world. It´s not the exports which support the sustainabity, its the "sustainability" which drives the exports. Putting up factories that are 70% more efficient- make people want to cut costs by upgrading. "Energy efficiency" is the first 9 yards in "sustainability" systems to counteract global warming. Really, as stated above, Stirling motors are making big comeback in Germany. And I have no doubt they will become a another nice little export item as a "counter-entropy" system just like infra-red thermo coupling
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 23, 2013
Now, the use of utility profits to pay for urban transit build out over the last fifty years in Munich- has given the city 6 cross town subways, with a 7th now getting started, and two lines still being built out, a complete rebuild of its light rail system (all powered by wastes) ultra efficient, new common rail TDI engines busses... plus helped to subsidize the through town German rail commuter tunnel intersecting with the subway and light rail lines... (a second tunnel is building out right now.) And, state owned German rail, brake energy recycling commuter lines extend out in fifteen different directions. The city transit and German commuter rail have a consolodated ticket system. Now, for the price surprise. I am Sr citizen. And I get a Sr. citizen subscription price for unlimited use of the urban transit system- on a pay 10 - and ride two month free. That is, I have unlimited use of the entire, excellent Munich public transit system- for only €410 per annum. Like unlimited, subsidized by the savings achieved by burning garbage for power, and district long distance heat hot water displacing heating oil. (you know the EEC prices for that. and displacing 5 milion barrels of heating oil by district heating saves a lot of moohlah for the utilities - and makes money when they sell heat otherwise lost to entropy. I am talking about 6 subway lines, often with state of the art brake energy recycling walk through trainsets, 12 low entry, ultra efficient, state of the art light rail, 360 ultra-eficient single frame and double frame, low entry busses that have fold out ramps like the steetcars which enable entry by paraplegics in wheelchairs and mums pushing baby carriages. Ridership for the entire commuter system extending out 15 directions frowm town is over 4.5 million people a day...cutting a lot of fuel expenses for driving. (We have a much lower car traffic volume thank you. We can breathe better here thanks to that. It is not like N.Y.C., London or L.A. .
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 23, 2013
Great Kent - all good - now integrate that across Germany and see if there is potential there for all that to avoid not only nuclear but also coal, gas, and to include transport and space heating, industrial power, etc, etc, you will find potential for renewables/smart energy conversion, efficiency, etc, still a small part of the total. Now try to integrate it across the globe - multitude of political/social/economic systems. the only way you will achieve that would be to drastically cut global population, energy use, consumption patterns, aviation and road/rail transport, remote manufacture and shipping - a totally different world to what is around today - and a world dictatorship that allocates resources on a global basis to the reduced population.

Will become a necessity soon.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 23, 2013
Dear Bonkin: Those long distance heat hot water systems were indeed forward financed by state capital, through state owned, parallel public banks. In Munich´s case, the long distance heat hot water system was forward financed by its city owned parallel public banks. But they amortized! Calculate the price of natural gas heating, or oil heat. (at best a mix) Then calculate the annual savings on fossil fuel purchases if converted to district heating. Then it becomes self amortizng. There are no subsidies involved in district heating build outs. I know of a few, citizen intiative power plants like a waste wood burning power plant in Baden-Wuerttenburg´s Black Forest- district using waste chips from lumber operations. The village council voted to borrow money from the state owned bank at low interest rates to use back hoes - dropping in a local long distance heat hot water line from the new wood burning power plant. People even hand dug the trenches from the line hook ups to their houses in the villages. Not a nickel of subsidy went to it.
The Munich utilities are not subsidized. They are profit center. And long distance heat hot water... is a profit center, long amortized, and still kicking out massive profits. They sell heat to customers at a rate pro-rated at 3/4s of what the averaged gas heat- heating oil bill would be. I don´t get my heat and hot water for free anymore than I get the power for free. I pay 3/4s of what it would cost me were I to heat with nat/gas. (Like about €1.200 per annum for a two room flat in addition to the power which runs me €600 p.a. for a single person household.)
Now, Bonkin, utilities subsidize urban transit in Germany. I´ll explain how. Cities always took profits from their city owned utility operations to subsidize their urban transit systems. Then a British Director General of the EEC ruled they can´t do that. So German cities got around the ruling by consolodating utilities with urban transit systems. LOL.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 23, 2013
With the expensive, extensively building out and connecting grid..increasingly powered by geothermal power plants, adding Stirling power generating units merely utilizes the available heat in a cost efficient, counter entropic measure. (new coal fired plants are expensive.)
Teams of physicists and engineers from the Munich Technical University, the Ludwig Maximiliens University, Munich City college, and the German Fraunhofer Institute are all studying and experimenting with the feasibility of adding Alpha Stirling systems on the heat to building interfaces- on the building out combined heat hot water grids. As i said, Munich gets its heat from a waste incineration plant, a sewage sludge-compost methane recapture fuel cell plant, a gas and steam combined cycle plant, a gas fired plant, and massive dual concentric pipe, dry hot rock geothermal systems utilizing the massive south German "Molasse field".
Alpha Stirling systems after the organic Rankine cycle are very efficient. There are no expensive real estate, environmental impact hearing, or other environmental impact costs associated with installing Stirling motor p.g. on a district grid heating system.
Installing district heating CHP amortizes itself by displacing heating oil and natural gas heating in less than 6 years. (Remember building tenants do pay for the heat and hot water they use. Munich utilities send in the meter man to read the electric meter, heat meter, hot water meter, gas meter once a year.) They do electronic readings- takes about 5 minutes of building supervisor and meter readers time.)
But what we are looking at in installing Stirlings on the heat hot water line, is an added cost of less than 750 Euros per installed generating kWh... for power, which is less than wind, solar, or conventional coal or gas fired plants.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 23, 2013
Yes Kent - High speed GTs and under table sized CHPs has been available for some years - have seen one - check out the price, maintenance and life of these gadgets. In a larger building becomes a little more economic, a number of gas/electricity Cos are involved in marketing small scale CHPs, also hospitals, resorts, etc, but each situation will require careful techno/economic study as investment inputs and outputs need to be assured over life of plant. It would be silly for governments/EU to pass laws or targets which the people will find difficult to implement. Engineers and scientists' dreams need investment that is the crunch in all these dreams. Investments in renewables only feasible with government support - and with the economic downturn belt tightening all round.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 23, 2013
Dear bonkin: next on heat energy. CHP is mandated in new buildings. And one company, Australian - British Whisperegen markets a CHP unit that uses Stirling motors....
That in turn got physicists and engineers at Munich Utilities to thinking. If our customers are converting... how can we still utilize the heat as a profit center? if Whispgen can market Stirling micro-CHP units, why can´t we squeeze more power out of the district heating system by installing proven, industrial grade - Stirling motor systems on the district heating to building interfaces?

Alpha Stirling motor systems can be configured to release heat on a rooftop heat release system during the summer (cooling tower system that has hitherto not existed on the Munich power system). And, voila- the already efficient building where I reside will be getting a 500 mWh - 24/7 CHP extension Stirling in the cellar. That makes everything "combined cycle". Now, doing 1000 buildings on the grid like that will squeeze out another 500 mWh. All of a sudden that "expensive" long distance heat- hot water grid becomes very interesting. You not only have the buildings themselves, there are at least 200 power and heat distribution centers around town which can be efficiently converted. Swedes run submarines with Stirlings, and Philips designed and developed advanced Stirlings from the 30s through the 60s, so we are familiar with excellent, efficient heat difference designs based on the Alpha cycle heat difference engines.
(I note that a German high school girl won the 92 "youth researches" prize by combining concentrated solar heat-with Stirling motors. the first ever application of that. She still holds the patents on them and could sue the bejeezus out of all the companies since using it for global patent violations, by the way.)
So engineers, physicists from a number of institutions are experimenting and studying the feasibility of adding stirling p.g. to the district heating grids.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 23, 2013
Building regulations, and energy efficient measures help - good - what to do with energy - don't use - and save the earth. But this just shows that government policy often does not look at the costs or consequences. May be the EU has to be scrapped as that is the source of these policies - and with the economic down turn in most of Europe, policies developed during affluent times will bring ruin.

What to do - cut down on consumption, production, and also population around the world, go back to an earlier era of less technology, more human values. Technology on its own will not save mankind - if anything it has promoted faster exploitation of the earth's resources - which will soon run out.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 23, 2013
Dear Bonkin and Bob: The building energy efficiency laws make buildings ever more heat efficient. On a big building, Siemens energy management systems automatically raising or lowering heat and air conditioning reduces heat-air conditioning consumption by as much as 50%. Then there are the extensive insulation programs mandated on new buildings and retrofitted to old ones. Re-windowing with one inch wide vacuum insulation windows saves about 30% in heat. (and Munich has extensively re-windowed over the last 15 years.. often with glass voltaic "wiring" systems turning windows into solar panels.) Three to twelve inch face and ten inch roof insulation further slashes heat consumption. New buildings are mandated to have ground heat, solar heat, and heat pumps with back up in building micro-CHP where not hooked up to district heating.)
Munich utilities accounted for this and rooftop solar by laying optical fibre cable to better monitor consumption and solar power production. (Renewables get complicated) They also carry HDTV and HD radio signals and digital TV - internet- 19 gHz "standard connection" and ultra high speed 100 gHz for business customers.)
Munich is building new geothermal power plants to displace its one remaining coal burning power plant. Dual concentric pipe dry hot rock geothermal- which avoids the problems normally associated with unwanted minerals coming up. And it saves on the problem of mineral deposits, the bane of power engineering.) Hot water down, steam back up.) District heating saves on the need for cooling towers.
But, be that as it may, we have discovered a new efficiency measure. Those heat grid to building heat interface cellars are quite large for a housing section of say five buildings in a complex like the one where I reside. (It was upgraded with all sorts of insulation, slashing heat consumption.) So with all the insulation measures, solar heat, ground heat pumps etc mandated as well, what do we do with the heat energy?
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 23, 2013
Yes Kent, I have seen some of these integrated energy systems in Germany/Austria/Sweden. The main driver is government policy/subsidies which becomes difficult where the economy is mainly market driven and home/lifestyles not managed by government as it is in many parts of Europe - different mindsets of people.

Germany also has a large land mass, forested areas, and lower population density than asay the U.K which is very crowded and not much biomass or geothermal, etc, dependent on imported oil, gas, etc. Regards landfill gas - this is tapped - and modern contained landfills can be as efficient as anaerobic digesters with very low leakage - the main problem is collection of segregated food wastes in sufficient quantities to justify investment. People in the U.K also don't like industrial installations - EFW plants, etc - serious disjoint in affluent societies which want all the comforts without paying the real price - I bet the more profitable parts of German industry/exports is paying for the renewable subsidies.Ultimately it all depends on economics and economic priorities - with the Eurozone in dire straits they will have to think hard on state subsidies.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 23, 2013
Dear Bonkin and Bob Freeston: Let us stay with power plant Oberföhring. The city built it simply because it ran out of space for garbage dumps and the garbage dumps were emitting greenhouse gas methane. (so the put methane traps all over the existing garbage dumps, and greened them after Oberföhring was built in the mid-eighties) It generates 400 mWh -in two Rankine cycle systems with a coal fired 400 ranking cycle system. (They can´t convert it to GaS because a lack of gas pipeline capacities to handle one more GaS plant.) /The GaS district heating plant in Ma´nching near Ingolstadt sucked up a lot gas supplies.) You can only build out GaS -CHP as you have gas pipeline capacities.)
But that does not mean the end of the build out. The New Perlach satellite city is already supplied with geothermal heat, and the utilities are putting up another 200 mWh geothermal power plant out in Munich East - to provide heat and power to the new Munich trade fair center (with Europe´s largest rooftop solar installation by the way- city utility owned.)
Modern build out of insulated long distance heat hot water is not cheap... 100.000 bucks per 100 meters including the lines into the buildings. But yet, it is still rapidly self amortizing- when you consider the 80 cents a liter price for heating oil. So, given the average apartment building height of between 5 to seven stories- and an average use of 5000 liters per season, i.e. up t ten buildings per 100 meters- you get a minimum heating oil displacement per hundred meters of 50.000 liters of heating oil per heating season. Of course, the building owner has to cooperate with the utiltiie a well, it costs money to tear out the heating oil unit and install the heat exchangers.
However, German renewable energy laws and programs have stimulated a number of programs which radically slash building heat consumption. i.e. re-windowing with dual pane insulated windows (often with glass voltaic wiring in them, by the way.)
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 23, 2013
Dear Bob Freeston: I don´t have the exact statistics in front of me as to how much heat comes from which source in the long distance heat hot water system.
Munich shut down a lot of small coal fired plants supplying the heat hot water system when it built its massive - urban waste power generation system north of the city. One plant runs of methane gas recaptured from "methane digesters". (they are now "upgrading those systems for a faster "digestion".) using sewage sludge and compost materials) (After digestion, they are incinerated in the 400 mWh garbage incineration plant. Everything I flush down the toilet and throw into the trash is returned to me in the form of power and long distance heat, hot water.)
Apart from geothermal, the Munich long distance heat hot water grid is supplied by its remaining combustion thermodynamic plants-

Power Plant South was a 250 mWh coal fired plant, hooked up to the south part of the heat grid... In 1999, the city revamped the plant.. upgrading generators to A +++ and installing new more efficient transformers. With the sudden surge in Russian nat gas supplies, the city laid a huge gas pipeline to power plant South- and put in a big 250 mWh GE Gas Turbine - driving 250 mWh in power for a 500 mWh combined cycle operation- which is fast ramping- i.e. it can be ramped up and down very rapidly to accomodate for renewable variable fluctuations. That is, the GaS combined cycle operation boost efficiencies over a Rankine cycle alone- and gets the heat power covnersion efficiencies to over 60%. And when you add the long distance heat, efficiencies go to over 95%. The Max Vorstadt power plant just north of the central city is gas fired/hydrogen fired - (using excess power from early mporning hyrdo and trash incineration that genreates hydogen.) Power plant Öberföhring supplies the entire Northern - northeastern part of the city with power, heat and hot water.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 23, 2013
Kent has set out the historic background well - on a practical plane, each situation needs a techno-economic investigation, US/UK individual homes, and privatised utilities - difficult to integrate large scale heating, and power generation as district heating loads are seasonal, daily fluctuations greater than for electricity, also electricity is a higher value product. Where electricity is a byproduct (e.g waste to energy plants), district heating mains require huge investment, also managing control, etc, gets problematic. Also as Kent says, WW2 provided a clean slate for new infrastructure, higher density housing, etc, where district mains could be laid at low cost. Theoretically any suitable heat source can be used and heat exchangers, pipework, controls, etc, etc, all conventional/proven - the main question is economics and willingness to invest.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 23, 2013
Dear Bob Freeston: As with East Coast cities like Boston, N.Y.C., Philadelphia, Baltimore and Washington, Munich build out district heating heating since the inception of thermodynamic hydro-electric power generation. Urban utilities are city owned. And, when they need forward financing based on a 1 to 10 leveraging basis- they obtain low interest loans from the municipality owned parallel public banks. (Bismarck copied the U.S. parallel public banking system set up by Lincoln´s economic advistor, Henry Charles Carey, during the U.S. civil war to finance the Union War Effort - privatized in 1913 in the U.S. under Wilson. Germany never privatized their three level parallel public banking system- which makes the country very stable.)

After the period of collective insanity under Hitler and the near total levelling of the town during WW II by allied bombers, the city was faced with the task of rebuilding all its power plants along with cleaning up the rubble (women did the work) and rebuilding its power supply. That included re-building the district heating damaged by bomb craters all over town. In re-building, the engineers developed very efficient ways of dropping the heating lines in loads of special insulation... under inverted U formed concrete blocks.)

As it is, Munich´´s CHP long distance heat hot water grid is continental Western Europe´s longest and most intensively connected combined heat-hot water grid. Much is provided by deep geothermal heat wells in the South German " molasse, hot rock field utilizing the dual concentric pipe- dry hot rock system which does not carry up unwanted minerals with it. (Munich´s water is "mineral water" quality from the Alpine foothills.) The entire downtown area inside the "Altstadt ring" is hooked up, and the other districts have a high connection.
Munich swapped its participation in nuclear for hydroelectric in 1992. It is upgrading. So more heat wells go down to compensate when a coal fired plant is shut down.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 23, 2013
Dear Bob Freeston: Coupled co-generative District heating systems are quite common all over Europe, as, like in New York City - they have been in place since the very beginning of electric heat and lighting (prior to the invention of the lightbulb- limelight was used.)
District heating pre-dates - p.g., and was often used by industrialists with steam fired plants driving piston steam engines- for heating their factory complexes and worker homes... simply because they needed to re-cycle the steam as distilled water to cut back on scale formation, the bane of every engineer working with steam power. When the first d.c. power plants were set up using factory steam power systems in Berlin, (for powering the first electric streetcar lines,- they were hooked into the already existing factory district heating systems. (dates from the mid-19th century.)
Munich´´s tradition of combined heat-power dates back to "mad King Ludwig II"- who was the first of European Royalty to have his palaces lit by "limelight" from steam engine powered and re-condensing steam in heating. (Early central heating systems used district heat steam.)
The "oldest" still existing,(not used) Combined Heat Power system was built by mad Ludwig in Linderhof palace in 1872-up in the alps where the coal fired steam unit..heated the main building and the outbuildings- with the power going to "limelight" in his private "Wagnerian" opera hall - (Wagner himself would premiere his opera´s for the "mad King" in general rehearsals- at the different palaces. Lindnerhof is a is bizarre electro-mechanical realisation of Wagner´s "Schwanensee" opera... repleat with mechanically pulled swans propelled throughthe "blue Grotto"...(the indigo used there was commercially produced, and established the Bayer A.G. as a national and then international chemical corp.)

Now I will get on to modern district heating, using Munich as an example because I am most familiar with it.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 22, 2013
By the way, Steve, your ETC definition of 'renewables'...

" Any energy resource that is naturally regenerated over a short time scale and derived directly from the sun (such as thermal, photochemical, and photoelectric), indirectly from the sun (such as wind, hydropower, and photosynthetic energy stored in biomass), or from other natural movements and mechanisms of the environment (such as geothermal and tidal energy). Renewable energy does not include energy resources derived from fossil fuels, waste products from fossil sources, or waste products from inorganic sources."


...is only partially right and needs significant correction, especially in its last sentence. Feel free to have someone call me, if you like.
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 22, 2013
Steve, Mr. CEO of ETC, says, with surety: "Your communication style is that of a ME"

Guess what, Steven, I ain't no ME, though all engineers in real universities do have to take classes in other disciplines than their majors.

So you claim something godlike for ETC. Fine.

If I've made some comment about what you've said here that you think your many engineers, even PhDs, would disagree with me on, have any of them call me (650 400 3071). They might be intrigued by my education & experience too, and less prone to jump to conclusions about others as you seem to.

By the way, does your prancing around with all your ETC fluffery actually intimidate anyone to agree with you when you're wrong?
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 22, 2013
So Kent, you've reduced yourself to exposing your ignorance, not just of science, but of the damage you bring yourself by calling childish names -- does that ever work for you?

"I can assure you right now judging from his "Besserwissende" comments, that Dr. C. definitely does not work in any form of renewable power, He has derided urban waste incineration CHPG - which saves on a lot of fossil ignition. He has denigrated mill race hydro, had nothing very sane to write about wind, and is not very knowledgable about efficiency improvements in rooftop and mounted dual axis focused solar p.v.."

Kent -- still awaiting your explanation of what your science & engineering education and degrees are. Still awaiting you grasping that honest engineers/scientists are not "for" everything that you are for, because, like doctors, we in science have an obligation to truth and fact, rather than to swag and self-promotion. You seem to be trying the latter path, which degrades your words.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 22, 2013
Kent, in a marvel of misinformation, says: "the heavy water disposal in "decay pools" at La Hague, France and Sellefield England is not "decay", but a phototropic induced "free neutron" to "hydrogen" transmuation taking place at a core quark string level."

Heavy water is deuterium oxide -- as stable as H2O. D is more stable within reactors than is H, which is why heavy water is used, in Canada, to avoid wasting neutrons via H capture. In fact, the universe would have no neutrons, had H not protected them after the big bang by forming stable D.

Your words are truly beyond understanding. It would be great to learn what you think your purpose is here.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 22, 2013
Kent, what can be said? You pump out lots of terms that sound cool. You drop lots of names you think help you.

But, all you do is reveal you're no scientist or engineer, and that you're disinterested in studying what you should know before wasting everyone's time, including yours, here.
bob freeston
bob freeston
March 22, 2013
Questions for Kent D.--I'm very interested in German and European district heating systems. They are very rare here in the US. How are they financed? What population density is required? What per cent of off takers is required to go forward? What is the scale of the power plants producing the heat? What is the state of deep geothermal as a source for the power and heat? What is the level of permitting--municipal, state, national? Is it mainly multi unit or are residential areas used? Are they private or municipal systems? Thanks Bob
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
March 22, 2013
@ETCgreen,
The idea of microalgae production and harvesting some of the other crops seem worth pursuing.
However, the projections and calculations stated have already been outdated or proven wrong in some cases. (Although conditons may change as they sometimes do.)
Amazingly, your data is not that old (2009-2011)
I recommend updating your data so that you don't scare away investors.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 22, 2013
Steve: As an American ex-pat outsourcer active in the field of sustainability"in Munich Germany, for over 37 years, I can assure you right now judging from his "Besserwissende" comments, that Dr. C. definitely does not work in any form of renewable power, He has derided urban waste incineration CHPG - which saves on a lot of fossil ignition. He has denigrated mill race hydro, had nothing very sane to write about wind, and is not very knowledgable about efficiency improvements in rooftop and mounted dual axis focused solar p.v.. Another reader pointed out German common rail TDI - in a hybrid formation with stop start tech is 80% more efficient than an Otto engine and he denigrated and drided the idea. (B.M.W., Daimler, and Audi taxis in Munich all use it. He had no idea of the lightweight carbon fibre VW XL1 which gets 240 m.p.g. as is. He does not have a clue about automotive and stationary applications of hho systems, never even heard of them, much less Pantone GEET, Cottel water fuel emulsion systems, or Clean Fuels Technologies Water Fuel Emulsion systems, or the A.G.I.P. - Total Aquasol system which boosts the water content of diesel to an unstable emulsion of 30% water that is used and distributed by the day to run garbage trucks and city busses in Italy and France. Suggest re-powering mill head dams and he denigrates. Knows nothing abou the massive European programs to build out agrarian manure methane recapture systems which provide 120% of baseline power for agrarian regions- with local wind, solar.p.g and hydro being the icing on the cake. (See Wildpoldsried Germany, and Gussing, Austria as working example.) In his hysterical pro-nuke stance, he has obviously definitely not heard of the nobel prize winner studded "International Physicians and Physicists Against Nuclear" (I am personally aquainted with Prof. Emeritus Hans Peter Dürr, director of the Werner Heisenberg Institute for Quantum Astro Phyics who started the IPPN.
Steve Frazer
Steve Frazer
March 22, 2013
DrAlexC - Your communication style is that of a ME. We have 4 ME/PE's on staff and work with over 100 on a weekly basis (we have an Aerospace Division).

You seem to be muddled in stringent engineering labels and minutia.

The Emerging Technology Corporation (ETC) - Green Division includes Professional Engineers, seasoned Project Managers, Scientists and Researchers in various related disciplines and experienced Field Staff - a total of over 200 committed individuals. ETC Green and the Emerging Technology Corporation have also established relationships with U.S. National Laboratories, the United Nations, USDA, EPA, DoE, NRC, DoI, BLM, DoD, USGS and several universities. We are active in the development and authoring of new Renewable Energy legislation working with current and past state governors, state and federal legislators, county governments and municipalities.

Our major business models are based on the work of a team of 3 Nobel Laureates and over 200 Ph.D.'s in the various universities, government agencies and private sector firms. We have the support of a list of institutional funds.

Yes, we offer products and services. We currently manage 374,000 acres with a target of 2 million acres by 2020 ($20B annually). While so many people blog about their opinions, there are those of us who are solving the most complex problems of our time - everyday and for the past 10 years.

Visit our websites. If the information does not make sense to you, then I will suggest you simply lack the perspective and experience to embrace the high-level concepts. You are not alone, we learned early in our existence that ME's simply cannot be involved in our strategic planning or financial development as their training motivates them to focus their attention on stringent engineering labels and minutia - very important to our over-all success, but paralyzing to our high-level decisions.

Regards,

Steve Frazer, Founder/CEO

http://etcgreen.com
Patrick O'Leary
Patrick O'Leary
March 22, 2013
There are lots of common perspectives, and a lot of them are wrong.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 22, 2013
The "Milano" is a muscle car that Germans love. The limited street version will weigh in at 1200 kq- but still have excellent performance characteristics, not quite as fast as the Bugatti. Back to Mr. Piech. He was personally behind the developmen of the Bugatti, his baby, as well as the 240 m.p.g. or one liter per hundred kilometer VW XL1 carbon fibre hybrid. (also made from the same carbon fibre that goes into the Red Bull F1 and "the Milano" all aqueous our specility shop is making. ) And believ me, Piech is a compulsive visionary.. having made the VW Porsche group the second largest automtive group in the world behind Toyota. He´s green as proven by his VW Passat Plant in Chattanooga getting much of its power from solar. (And the VW group production lines have all been upgraded- with Siemens power management and ultra efficient drive motors- 55% more energy efficient than the lines of the 90s.)
Piech not only pushed the development of the 240 m.p.g. VW XL 1 plug in hybrid, he also pushed the VW Lichtblick micro-CHP unit to displace heating oil units- as SMART GRID coordinated back up baseline power to stabilize the power supply with all the wind and solar going in. (100.000 such units are the equivalent of 2 nukes.) They´ll be running "all aqueous" sooner than you think, Dr. Smart Alec C.
ANONYMOUS
March 22, 2013
Dr. Alec C. The point of the exercise is simple. Germans have no speed limits on many sections of its autobahn on certain times of day (Say from Munich to Nurenburg or Munich to Salzburg..) And getting sane speed limits there has about as much a chance as getting sane gun control in the U.S.A. (Ii´ve been out in B.M.W.s, Audi R-8 ten cylinders, Turbo-Porsches and Lamborhinis at speeds of up to 340 kmh. Hell to be in the passenger seat, but fun to drive.)
The other inspration for this is an experimental dual magnedtron ion thruster device at an ESA/EADS lab near Amsterdam- in a vacuum chamber. Running a charge through it, it actually lifts off, and has a very interesting "plasma tit" glow in the vacuum under the dual magnetron device.) So what the device does is ion thrust steam through a magnetic field device - utilizing the tunnel effect to accelerate the tri-pulse wave v.h.f., u.h.f. microwave frequencies faster than the speed of light through the steam in the magnetic fields.
The nice thing about living in Munich is that I can bicycle to B.M.W. hg, take a Siemens HSR Velaro ICE train to Ingolstadt - HQ of Audi, grab an ICE to Stuttgart to Daimler HQ, and an S Bahn from its main station out to Zuffenhausen, Porsche HQ, I fly to Wolfsburg, VW HQ., and down to Milan where the Fiat Group has its HQ, the developmental group behind the RED BULL F1 carbon fibre car-the ones delivering our Milano car body, are in Salzburg. where the Porsche family has its ancestral home. (during the 2008 crash- Porsche hid its miserable sales simply by keeping up normal production, and beautiful alpine valleys were the hiding places of the vehicles they later moved in 2009.) Ferdi Piech, maternal grandson of Ferry Porsche- and chairman of the VW-Porsche board- loves both fast cars- (the Bugatti W 16) and fuel efficiency (the 240 m.p.g. VW XL1) And w´re rubbing the lightweight carbon fibre "Milano" under his nose that runs all aqueous with performance to match the Bugatti.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 22, 2013
Now, in the vehicle system- the "radically ionized steam" - coming out the south magnetic end of the "tunnel effect" micro-tokomak (ceramic lined) can be very inflammable. That is injected into the cyclinders. The Brown´s gas goes in via the air intakes on the bi-turbo air injection system. We add- V.D.O. piezo VHF ultra-sonic-and micro-wave signals to the air intake- which carry into the cylinder- and amplify with the upstroke doppler effect, causing sonolumiscence of the "brown´s gas- radically magnetic ionized steam" mix- and hit it with a high voltage, racing spark plug- "plasma ignition", and lo and behold- we have a 900 kilogram, lighweight carbon fibre- mid-engined vehicle, with a specially tuned Ford V8 with special cam and drive shafts from Kügelfischer.. putting out- 900 B.H.P. - 0 - 60 in 2.5 seconds, top end 250 m.p.h. and nothing else but tap water goes into the carbon fibre tank. (Nano-tube filters adapted from Siemens desalinisation sytems demineralize the water, and it a magnetic field device keeps any remaining minerals getting through from forming scale in the steaming unit on the hot manifolds. (Adapted straight from Tokamak technology at the Garching Max Planck Research facility for controlled fusion.
The device is simple- steam generated on the hot exhaust emissions is passed through a dual magnetron, tri pulsed ion thruster device- as it goes into the interior ceramic insulated "electro-magnetic-pipe" where the Nimtz "tunnel effect" accelerates the sonic waves faster than the speed of light through the steam in the magnetic line which disassociates the hydrogen and oxygen in the steam. As with the 100 million degree temps in tokamaks, it all has something to do with quantum hydrodynamics which are obviously above you, Dr. Alec C..
The lightweight, mid-engine GT is already in testing. We have another one running in a carbon fibre replica of a Shelby Cobra- also kicking out 900 BHP. And we have still another system on a 190 BPH Abarth 500.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 22, 2013
Dr.Alec C. I get dislexic when I type fast at 2 inthe morning. Sorry bout the misspelling of Tokamak. I happen to have met Dr. Bradshaw who heads the Max Planck Tomakak experiment in Garching a number of times, and was up in Sheffield England a number of times at the J.E.T. - Joint European Torus reactor. Both systems achieve atto second bursts of 100 million degree c temperatures. The Garching device is nuclear powered. The late 50s experimental reactor there pumps power into the world´s largest horizontal, stainless steel flywheel- which has specially cooled bearings.. built by Siemens... weighs 5000 tons, and gets the thing revving up to 5000 r.p.m. (A five thousand ton flywheel revving at those speeds has quite a lot of kinetic energy... then- they simply re-pole the motors and the high voltage powers the Tokamak. I`ve seen it at work a number of times and have been inside both the Garching and the JET.
Atto second burst temps get up over 100.000.000 c. (I`ve been inside both the JET Torus and the Garching Tokamaks a number of times when they wre not working.
(And browns gas - water torches can sublimate- vapourize tungsten at 10.000 c) Paradoxical, but works.
Now, brake energy recycling- (Porsche wheels) is a flywheel system, and Porsche hybrtids use flywheels instead of lithium.) Now imagine steaming water on the hot-exhaust lines- and using a related to Tokomak system pulsing ultra sonic and micro-wave signals in a "tunnel effect" acceleration to speeds faster than the speed of light (Discovered by Prof. Dr. Guenther Nimtz at the 2nd Physical Institute at the University of Duesseldorf.)Those signals go through a ceramic lined - electo-magnetized pipe with steam passing through it. (on a North South basis- a mini tokomak as it were.) We are also feeding a high voltage- very high frequency- microwave pulsed dry cell hho generator- capable of pumping out 500 cubic liters an hour per input kWh. (We get even more power from lightweight thermo coupling.)
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 22, 2013
Dr Alec: I know a little about nuclear. I developed an experiment to demonstrate that the heavy water disposal in "decay pools" at La Hague, France and Sellefield England is not "decay", but a phototropic induced "free neutron" to "hydrogen" transmuation taking place at a core quark string level. I did it under the direction of Dr. De Boer at the Max Planck Institute at Garching. Won´t get into details, but it demonstrated that sunlight turns free neutrons in radioactive tritium oxide to hydrogen.
I also know about the adventures of how the Brits spied out the secrets of the Soviet compact bomb back in the mid 80s as their response to the "neutron dirty bomb." Today´s generation of compact bombs does not use "heavy water" but rather something more difficult to dispose of, namely radioactive acetone. If you know chemistry you know what people make out of acetone. Now directly mix a bit of red-mercury into one specific product of radioactive acetone. At my suggestion people sprinkled a lot of lithium carbonates, magnesium and aluminimum oxides in as well. (The U.S. could not test the stuff due to test ban treaty- so it was tested in France.)
But that is not the point of the exercise. Prof. Dorit De Boer, is the Director Emeritus of the Max Planck Institute for Nuclear Research in Garching, North of Munich. Prof. Dr. Hans Peter Dürr is the Director Emeritus of the prestigeous Werner Heisenberg Institute for Quantum-Astro Physics in the Schwabing District of Munich. Hans Peter and Dorit won alternative Nobel Prizes- and Nobel Prizes for their work in the I.P.P.N. International Physicians and Physicists against Nuclear. (we´re talking about health hazards) I think their statistics and facts presented by the Alternative Nobel and Nobel Prize Winning I.P.P.N are a bit more factual than what Dr.Alex C. has been posting here. For example, the water the japanese used to cool the meltdown turned into radioactive water, i.e. more laced with neutrons than even Tritium Oxide.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 22, 2013
EtcG, your naive statement: " the 80% efficiency level of an advanced diesel vehicle (start/stop) "

is as trustworthy as your fear of using a real name.

You're also clearly no degreed engineer or scientist, or you'd know exactly why no combustion engine can exceed ideal Carnot efficiency, and in reality wastes >60% of the fuel-air energy and $ put into it.

But, you do seem to be selling something!
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 22, 2013
Keep it coming, Kent! You can't even spell Tokamak, and apparently have no idea gasoline engines are already ignited by plasmas, for for more than 100 years.
;]
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 21, 2013
Dr. Alec I am going to love your comments when the mid engined carbon fibre "Milano" hits the tracks later this year, running off "Brown´s gas hho, and MRSPI. The body is made of the same carbon fibre that goes into the Austrian Red Bull world championship Formula One racing cars piloted by Sebastian Vettel and Jenson Button. The exhaust systems are by Abarth as are the bi-turbo air compression systems. the VHF-Microwave Piezo signals on the air intake are from V.D.O. in Frelassing, Bavaria just across the border from Austria where the prototypes are being built. The special cam and crankshafts are from Kugelfischer in Nuremburg (V.D.O and Kugelfischer are part of the Schaeffler group). The high voltage, standard racing inverter for high voltage and the "plasma ignition" spark plugs are standard race equipment from Bosch Automotive as are the front wheel brake energy recycling units and the flywheel power storage unit. (which goes into the hybrid Porsche Carrera instead of a battery.) The engine block and pistons are from a standard Ford 7 liter V8. The ceramic turbo thermo coupling plates on the engine were specially made by supplier to Siemens. The steaming line unit was built by a supplier of fuel injection lines to B.M.W. at Utting on Lake Ammersee. The dual magnetron steam ionizing system was custom built at a site North of Munich on the Max Planck Research complex. (related to the never worked but high temp controlled fusion experiments with a Tomokak which inspired the design.)
(it gets atto second bursts of 100 million degree temperatures out of hydrogen. The in-vehicle deminerealisation systems are adapted from Siemens desalinisation systems. The racing version weighs 900 kilograms and with a V8 Ford engine output of 900 B.H.P. - 1 B.H.P. to to one kilogram power to weight ratio. 0-60 in 2.5 seconds. Top end - 250 m.p.h.. The only thing that goes in the tank is ordinary tap water. The street version is 400 kg heavier with slightly lower performance.
Steve Frazer
Steve Frazer
March 21, 2013
DrAlexC - "...burning stuff in engines is always wasteful"

This too common perspective is part of the problem we have as a society in moving our renewable and sustainable energy plans forward. This is another good example of considering only a "slice" of the entire picture.

Yes, the 80% efficiency level of an advanced diesel vehicle (start/stop) is wasteful, however, expanding on the unit of measure for efficiency and considering complete life cycle minerals to recycling, "fuel" and emissions, an EV is about 20% as efficient as an advanced diesel vehicle burning 100% biodiesel from 2nd generation feedstock.

Do the research then do the math. The large scale production of biodiesel sourced from 2nd generation feedstock is the only scalable, economically viable, environmentally friendly and truly sustainable replacement for petroleum we have today. U.S. citizens have wasted over $2T by purchasing hundreds of billions of lower energy density gallons of gasoline and burning that fuel in lower efficiency gasoline engines over just the past 10 years. There is a direct 1-to-1 relationship today between the strength of a nation's economy and the percentage of that nation's light fleet that runs on diesel fuel with biodiesel mandates.

Burning the right stuff in the right engines is the only option we have and people who are in denial simply have a limited perspective.

Join the Migration -= http://etcgreen.com U.S. Migration
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 21, 2013
Kent, you do know burning stuff in engines is always wasteful, right?
;]
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 21, 2013
By the way, Alec, hho is the standard abbreviation for Brown´s gas generators, wet cell and dry cell as are currently being applied by Korean BEST brown´s gas, Epoch Energy Technology Corp in Taiwan, or George Wiseman´s "Eagle Technologies" among others. Some people have goosed output to +> 400 liters of inflammable hho gas per hour per input kWh. (up from the 260 liters per hour per kWh used by Korean B.E.S.T., Chinese Norinco, and Taiwanese Epoch Energy. People are using it all over the world. MRSPI stands for magnetic resonance steam plasma ignition. Getting a mix of hho "Brown´s Gas", and magnetic resonance ionized steam to ignite- in internal combustion engines (in different configurations for both diesel and otto engines) on fuel cells, and in gas turbines is now a reality. Ho ho.
Now I am bsolutely confident that you, Alec, don´t have the vision to imagine 4 Siemens 250 mWh steam turbines powered by hho-mrspi backed up against the Rankine cycle of converted nuclear power plant to run it that way. (while utilizing the hho to do on-site radioactive waste transmutation.) You are free to denigrate.
Oh, I notice you are a church goer. Check out True Christian Religion nr. 47 by Swedish Scientist turned mystic Emanuel Swedenborg. It has some very interesting things to say about people who constantly denigrate others and hold them in contempt in comparison with themselves. Do keep up your "Besserwisser" denigrating mode of wind, waste incineration, and everything else you disagree with. I just think of that passage by Swedenborg when you do, and don´t take it too seriously, Dr. Alec.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 21, 2013
Gotta love it, Kent: "we ´re getting it to literally run of nothing more than ordinary tap water. "Aqueous fuels technologies"."

Water is already "burned". Adding a little to internal combustion engines is an old trick to get some benefit of a mini steam explosion in a cylinder, but it's only an incremental benefit and never "literally run of nothing more than ordinary tap water". This does prove you have no idea of thermodynamics or physics.

You "literally" prove you're no engineer or scientist, Kent. But you do love to mislead folks like any true salesman, eh?

Got some youth cremes to peddle too? Bonks might buy.
;]
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 21, 2013
DrAlexC or Mr Know all - an empty pot rings loud - much of the discussion here - book knowledge with little practical experience.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 21, 2013
Rest most assured, hho technology is further advanced than you think. Anybody can build a less efficient hho generator putting out about between 260 to 280 liters per hour- and sometimes over 300 per input kilowatt. (Standard with Korean B.E.S.T. brown´s gas or Taiwan Epoch Energy Tech - 280 liters of highly inflammable hho per input kWh... (pulled from brake energy recycling into a flywheel.) and some units now put out 500 liters per input kWh. Combine that with something like the Paul Pantone GEET system... and add a standard high voltage "plasma ignition system" from any race tuning shop which gooses the spark in a spark plug... and see what you get.
The engine runs very nicely, thank you. We have built something similar- a 7 liter bi-turbo charged v8 putting out 900 BHP - mounted in a lightweight carbon fibre mid endgine GT chassis- and the whole vehicle only weighs 900 kg.. for a phenomenal 1 BHP per kilo power ratio. It goes from 0 to 60 in 2.5 seconds and top ends at 250 m.p.h.
It will be hitting the endurance race courses in Europe this summer. And all that goes into the tank - is water. Tell me its impossible. Our group dropped a bundle and certain automtive groups in Europe are very interested. Do keep denigrating things like Wind and Germany´s exit from nuclear power. (Latest stats out of Vismuth in Sachsen, near the old Soviet Uranium mines- still reveal cancer rates four times higher than elsewhere.) You want uranium, we have mountains of it you are welcome to have. Give it to you for nothing, plus all the wastes you want to recycle in your power plants. I`m sure you could get the capital together to do that. I only scraped up the capital to do hho research and mrspi. But a certain group is interested in the tech as a base for in building micro-combined heat power systems. I co-hold a patent for boosting standard 15% efficient to 35% efficiency, and then others drop a Siprius Fresnel lens on top of that to go over 50% efficiency for rooftop solar.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 21, 2013
That is all right. I am aware of the broad synergy of technologies that are also cutting consumption in the transportation sector. Some big, some small. Take the VW XL 1 lightweight bodied plug in hybrid as an example. Over 240 m.p.g. per gallon of diesel. With a hybrid- brown´s gas system- combined with "Magnetic Resonance Plasma Steam Ignition" - we ´re getting it to literally run of nothing more than ordinary tap water. "Aqueous fuels technologies". We can cut consumption on trucks, busses, ships. You are free to google "Nicola Tessla - Pierce Arrow. Another team in Germany poured through the scanty descriptions of that, and experiment with a number of different magnet and coil devices until they got it right. (it only took Edison 25.000 experiments to get it right with what is now the standard car battery.)
As for the building efficiency upgrades, you have to realize that building heat and power, residential, commercial, office, and manufacturing consume the bulk of energy, and that yes, the efficiency measures I mentioned slash consumption.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 21, 2013
Looks like VG's "spinach-head" comment

"you spinach-head not sure your education/experience"

was moderated into spinach-dom! Too bad, I wanted to see what fluff VG had written to waste more time and server & network power here.
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 21, 2013
You're topping yourself, Kent! "Magnetic Resonance Steam Plasma Ignition. HHO + MRSPI does the impossible and enables 100% aqueous operation in I.C.E"

Amazing how a lack of understanding of physics and engineering can be so easily displayed via acronyms & abbreviations the writer doesn't understand.
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 21, 2013
Kent says: "You can only reprocess spent rods so much. After that, the percentage of plutonium and even heavier elements gets too high."

So, Kent, you display a lack of understanding of nuclear technology. Why not study what the French do -- believe it or not, the Germans don't always know more than others.
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 21, 2013
Larry, in #127, indeed we have to be educated and aware, because there are people in & out of research who are just promoters, whether for $ or personal advancement.

At a church discussion on energy a while ago, I mentioned Jacobson's paper (and Sci. American article) and their defects, and someone from the audience later came up to me and simply said "Aw, he's just a wind promoter."

This is why it's so important to have an educated populace and to have open scientific publication that corrects for biases. Fortunately, the newer studies, as summarized by Harvard folks, show the wind promoters for what they are...

www.seas.harvard.edu/news-events/press-releases/rethinking-wind-power
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/1/015021/
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 21, 2013
LArry, you are not wrong about no "magic bullet". We had the chance decades ago, but failed because of politics & ignorance.

However, this is our present analogy -- an old retired general asked his gardener to plant a favorite flowering tree. The gardener came with sapling & shovel, but said: "Sir, you will likely pass away before this tree blooms". The general replied: "Then we must not delay, plant it at once."

And, by the way, this 'God particle' claptrap -- puhleez everyone get the quote right -- the physicist quoted said "this god-damned particle", because he knew it was hard to find. The interviewer screwed us all up by taking out the essential "damned".
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
March 21, 2013
All of the efforts you describe are no different than one climbing to higher decks on the Titanic. Without fundamental changes (you are suggesting tiny steps where each positive step is cancelled out by the giant negative steps generated as a result of addiction to crude oil) then there is still no plan B. Plan B is a final recognition that our entire current crude oil tower of Babble is in no way sustainable and the resultant destruction of our bio sphere will not be stopped by screwing in light bulbs and heating and cooling buildings better suited to demolishion, that were built on a pre post oil model and have no real function in the new paradigm. A paradigm that's getting ever closer no matter how high the deck you climb. The only hope is to use the limited lifeboats of altered consciousness and hope for the best. Gloom and Doom?
Not when looking at the reality of true and valid evidence and data points that tell the tale.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 21, 2013
Goodness, while there are no single solutions, there are a broad synergy of energy efficiency and renewable energy measures that can slash energy consumption when applied on a broad basis.
Being an ex-pat Nam vet living in Munich for the past 40 years, a leader in "urban sustainability" and familiar with U.S. cities, I am well aware of just how energy inefficient and wasteful the U.S. building - heat-power, and transportation systems really are, and know at least two hundred different technologies which can be applied in systematic, targeted applications which get the country cutting fossil consumption by at least 5% per annum over the next 20 years.
Take the Empire State building. The owners adapted European style 1 inch wide vacuum insulated windows. And that cut its heat consumption by 30% right there. What else could they do.
Siemens - building energy management systems-- which further cut heat and air conditioning costs by another 40% simply by centrally programming and controlling heat and air conditioning in each room according to usage... turning the the air conditioning or heat down at night when the rooms are not in use. Then there is the measure of power management systems and replacing all the motors in the building- air conditioning motors, elevator escalator motors, restaurant and office refrigerator motors, etc. with A +++ rated motors with the addition of "power management systems"- cuts power consumption by 50%, thank you.
Then, extra surprise, down in the cellar, where the interface is between the Con-Ed long distance heat hot water grid and the building heat system is- simply install a battery of special Alpha Stirling motors (also providing heat on their cooling lies) generating at least 2 megawatts of power. (It slashes power consumption, long distance heat consumption and uses the long distance heat to pump power back onto the grid.) Counter-entropic engineering goes a long way. Now consider doing all buildings in N.Y.C. like that?
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
March 21, 2013
I'm continually amazed and not a little disappointed that many who should know better by, virtue of training in engineering or a good grounding in history, can feel that a MAGIC BULLET can be discovered yet alone implemented in a time line that avoids total collapse of the the system it's designed to serve. Once the system collapses that MAGIC BULLET will be in a fruitless search for a gun to fire it from.

Again remember

It has been only 154 years since the first oil well. The world prior to 1859 went on for thousands of years in a sustainable manner where the lifestyle was as alien to the world created after 1859 as the bar scene in Star Wars or the underground world of Matrix was to the reality of present day Abu Dabai or London.

We have built our current reality on the back of only one non renewable finite resource that cannot be duplicated no matter all the wishful thinking.
This resource is being exhausted at an ever accelerating and logarithmic scale.

Oil is like the 'God particle' we are now hearing about that appears to hold matter together and gives it mass. Remove the God particle and everything that makes up matter is now reduced to separate and free molecules.

Expecting to invent some single or even multiple solutions to replace our 'Crude Oil God Particle' is not unlike the Medieval Alchemists who attempted to turn lead into gold.
I'm quite certain these wishful thinkers were as convinced of success as the current crop of technologists and Pollyanna's who will say "but that was then and not now"

Being a Casandra I prefer to question all of this and instead seek another path. I suppose in the final analysis proof one way or another will emerge no matter what we do

I just hope for all of us that I'm wrong

History indicates that is probably not the case
Patrick O'Leary
Patrick O'Leary
March 21, 2013
Steve Franz, where did you get the 'All from Solar?" I never wrote that, nor do I suggest it. That straw dog is yours alone.

As far as the Hybrids & 'Solarized' buildings, which is what I actually wrote, reduced use in the latter frees up capacity for the former. As far as the numbers are concerned, they are still "Duck Soup" till anybody acts.

Why did you add in EV's and leave out the 'solarized' buildings?
dennis baker
dennis baker
March 21, 2013
One Magic bullet..................

In my opinion



We need to replace the fossil fuel power plants, the primary source of GHG. Now!

At a scale required to accomplish this task :

Ethanol starves people : not a viable option.

Fracking releases methane : not a viable option.

Cellulose Bio Fuel Uses Food Land : not a viable option

Solar uses food land : Not a viable option

Wind is Intermittent : Not a viable option



All Human and Agricultural Organic Waste can be converted to hydrogen, through exposure intense radiation!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/DennisearlBaker/2012-a-breakthrough-for-r_b_1263543_135881292.html

The Radioactive Materials exist now, and the Organic waste is renewable daily.

Ending the practice of dumping sewage into our water sources.

Air, Water, Food and Energy issues, receive significant positive impacts .

Reducing illness / health care costs as well !



Dennis Baker
Penticton BC V2A1P9
cell phone 250-462-3796
Phone / Fax 778-476-2633
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 21, 2013
Larry of Galaxy - you speak my mind - there is a tendency for people to assume, their little liece of the jigsaw is the magic bullett to solve all the world's problems - every cause has an effect and in this complex interconnected world nothing stands still. The basics are resources, population, consumption - in all engineering systems inputs, outputs and the box within which the system operates. Regardless of this or that technologies being developed or being developed (if capital and methods of translating theory into practice exists) mankind is running out of resources - water, energy and minerals at an alarming rate and following second law of thermodynamics and entropy, the manufacture, and consumption processes are irreversible regardless of the efficiencies in the conversion and part of the materials being recyclable/reusable. There are too many people on earth, and unless mankind winds the clock back to low numbers, and low intensity of use of water,energy and mineral resources, no hope of survival - and given the natural law of inertia change of direction will require massive shock to the existing economic, and political systems developed two hundred years back. Renewable technologies will not save the world.
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
March 20, 2013
Jacobson told RenewableEnergyWorld.com.

"The assumption that you can't do it, is just an assumption."

Does this not go both ways?

How about "The assumption that you can do it,is just an assumption"

But you know what believing in this typical academic exercise in fantasy will get you if you just assume it is correct and doable?

Not only does it make an ASS of U and ME it leads us all down a path of delusion where the end of that journey is not what we would have wanted or expected. It forces us to ignore a Plan B.
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
March 20, 2013
How many on this blog have taken the time to take a calculator and run some simple calculations on just how much raw investment is required to only install %6 of residential PV and %12 of commercial PV. It appears the total cost is over 112 billion dollars if @ $1.50/watt. That is over 17 years. Even with economy of scale it is unlikely you will get much better cost than $1.50 watt installed since commodity and labor costs can only go down so far no matter the quantities.

Just remember this is for only an %18 share of the total renewable contribution.
You still need to find the capitol to finance another %82 at I'm certain a higher cost per watt in the aggregate than $1.50/watt

This multi trillion dollar investment would have to come from somewhere other than the 4 or 5 mega banks now with balance sheets reflecting more bankrupt zombies than institutions flush with real cash.

With the top 1% of our citizens holding over 40% of our national wealth,and with these folks having a vested interest in seeing that renewable energy sources always remain an orphan step child in the energy mix due to the majority of their wealth being generated by preservation and even advancement of profits from the fossil fuel industry,this entire study reveals two not so readily obvious truths.

The first is that the massive quantity of new capitol needed here is only for one state. There are 49 more that need equal or better investment if renewable energy is ever to be a real player in this game.

The second should be more obvious. Multi trillions of dollars for needed change is most likely not in the cards. No substitute for the cheap crude that currently keeps the world from falling into chaos,war, starvation and death is going to magically materialize and save us all. A linear supply of crude oil cannot keep afloat exponentially expanding demand. It is not mathematically possible.
Obviously neither is this study.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 20, 2013
Dr. Alec C. You can only reprocess spent rods so much. After that, the percentage of plutonium and even heavier elements gets too high.
GE and Siemens both developed spent rod re-processing which was picked up by French Alstom. Siemens had a huge plant for that up in Hanau, Germany. They shut it down in the 80s and got out of the business because of health risks and other factors. Fast breeder technology never got anywhere either. And there is the slight problem of what do you do with the water you use in cooling spent rods in the "cool off pools". Heavy water, the heat modulator in a lot of older G.E. and Siemens type fleets in Europe - is not at all measureably radioactive. But the water coming off those "spent rod" cool off basins - is, i.e. it is "heavier- denser than heavy water" -tritium oxide. And they just dump the stuff into the rivers and oceans. You get a lot of gamma ray induced - hydrogen in water to free neutrons. Ask any really knowledgable nuclear physicist about the quantum chromo dynamics behind gamma induced - d.u.d. core quark string hydrogen to u.d.u. core quark string free neutrons (the stuff that causes radioactivity.) or Beta particle induced u.d.u. core quark string- free neutron to d.u.d. core quark string hydrogen. (reversable transmutation processes.) Fron an advanced QCG point of view, the energy released in thermonuclear "fission" and fusion devices are really "transmutation" reactions where all the free neutrons in the mass simultaneously transmute to u.d.u. core quark strings- which then strip the hydrogen atoms in water down to their core quark strings- which kicks off a massive "quantum EPR effect" releasing super hot tachyons, muons, and photons.
My patented experiment demonstrating phototropic free neutron transmutationin deuterium oxide consists of pouring hot deuterium oxide in a preheated jar- with a small barmoter attached to an excape valve on the lid. (The jar has a marking for normal water volume)
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 20, 2013
Wave generators already exist, and tidal buoys/ships whatever will generate some electricity if moored at one location provided appropriate energy transfer mechanisms are built in. Wave/tidal, etc, all are caused by similar solar/lunar pulls - which also have influence on the weather systems, which influence tidal surges and indirectly wind power.

The question whether such devices will replace all fosiil/nuclear, etc, debatable. Even for wave generators, the energy recoverable intensity is low and you will need huge areas of the tidal basi or wave fields to provide significant outputs.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 20, 2013
Galen Maloney and Richard Gammel: Both of you are dealing with material that go outside the realms of normal physics. Goodnes Galen, if you can demonstrate that tidal model and show it does generate power, go knocking at the doors of either G.E. or Siemens.

Richard: I hate to say it, but even "environmentalists" get hysterical when you write about "hho" systems. Asians are not so prejudiced. Korean B.E.S.T. Brown Gas and Taiwanese EPOCH Energy Technology, Corp- both 250 million U.S.D. companies, have a broad range of hho applications out on market right now. A German group has a system which boosts hho production from their "standard" 260 liters per hour per input kWh to over 500. The same group developed "MRSPI" for use in ICEs, Magnetic Resonance Steam Plasma Ignition. HHO + MRSPI does the impossible and enables 100% aqueous operation in I.C.E diesel and otto engines, gas turbines, and on fuel cells, over external combustion Stirling motor systems and on to standard rankine cycle steam boilers.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 20, 2013
DrAlexC - you spinach-head not sure your education/experience - and I am not going to boast - no point arguing with spinach-heads. Much of real energy/environmental sience, and practical applications beyond your grasp from some of your infantile comments.
DEHRAN DUCKWORTH
DEHRAN DUCKWORTH
March 20, 2013
@larryofgalaxy-

Point well taken, and I appreciate the analogy its one I often use. However, the metric (15000 slaves crammed in the two F350 fuel tanks) is based on the current consumption of your F350 as a static baseline, I know I dont have to tell you that is what has to change. Current energy consumption rates are unsustainable for all energy options. The fact is we are throwing thousands of slaves at tasks that in most situations only really require hundreds to achieve the desired outcome. 2012 F350 @15MPG vs 1912 Model T Ford @25MPG. In 100 years we certainly could have done better, like maybe 100 times better....
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 20, 2013
Bonk, "In simple terms", you fail to grasp realities, like thermodynamics.

Saying: "energy from waste allows some heat to be converted to more useful forms" indicates you aren't really an experienced, degreed engineer, because all engineers with university degrees have had to take physics & chemistry, where thermodynamics is clearly explained and tested.

And you seem happy to be ignorant of the reality if the natural Carbon Cycle, for which you've had excellent refs to study.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 20, 2013
And, Kent, way back -- "you still don´t have intermediate or long term storage problems solved." -- there is no long-term 'waste' issue for present reactors, because >95% of the spent fuel content is re-usable.

If what you say were true, the French, who do just partial recycling, and for more than just their reactors, would be swamped with nuclear waste. Clearly, Kent, you're no engineer who understands nuclear power.

As to health risks, windmills are champs at killing/injuring, much as are cell towers -- thought of how cell phones kill?
;]
www.caithnesswindfarms dot co dot uk/accidents dot pdf (deaths & injuries)

Remember, Kent, I asked you for the German figures? When, Kent?

For your search of truth, here are the safety realities you might study...
httpcolonslashslash tinyurl dot com/42wvr9l
httpcolonslashslash nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html
www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/
www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-human-cost-of-energy
www.wano.info//article.cfm?id=the-human-cost-of-energy
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 20, 2013
And, Kent, way back -- "you still don´t have intermediate or long term storage problems solved." -- there is no long-term 'waste' issue for present reactors, because >95% of the spent fuel content is re-usable. If what you say were true, the French, who do just partial recycling, and for more than just their reactors, would be swamped with nuclear waste. Clearly, Kent, you're no engineer who understands nuclear power.

As to health risks, windmills are champs at killing/injuring, much as are cell towers -- thought of how cell phones kill?
;]
www.caithnesswindfarms dot co dot uk/accidents.pdf (deaths & injuries)

Remember, Kent, I asked you for the German figures? When, Kent?

For your search of truth, here are the safety realities you might study...
httpcolonslashslash tinyurl.com/42wvr9l
httpcolonslashslash nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html
www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/
www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-human-cost-of-energy
www.wano.info//article.cfm?id=the-human-cost-of-energy
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 20, 2013
And, Kent, way back -- "you still don´t have intermediate or long term storage problems solved." -- there is no long-term 'waste' issue for present reactors, because >95% of the spent fuel content is re-usable. If what you say were true, the French, who do just partial recycling, and for more than just their reactors, would be swamped with nuclear waste. Clearly, Kent, you're no engineer who understands nuclear power.

As to health risks, windmills are champs at killing/injuring, much as are cell towers -- thought of how cell phones kill?
;]
www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf (deaths & injuries)

Remember, Kent, I asked you for the German figures? When, Kent?

For your search of truth, here are the safety realities you might study...
httpcolonslashslash tinyurl.com/42wvr9l
httpcolonslashslash nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html
www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/
www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-human-cost-of-energy
www.wano.info//article.cfm?id=the-human-cost-of-energy
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 20, 2013
And, Kent, way back -- "you still don´t have intermediate or long term storage problems solved." -- there is no long-term 'waste' issue for present reactors, because >95% of the spent fuel content is re-usable. If what you say were true, the French, who do just partial recycling, and for more than just their reactors, would be swamped with nuclear waste. Clearly, Kent, you're no engineer who understands nuclear power.

As to health risks, windmills are champs at killing/injuring, much as are cell towers -- thought of how cell phones kill?
;]
http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf (deaths & injuries)

Remember, Kent, I asked you for the German figures? When, Kent?

For your search of truth, here are the safety realities you might study...
http://manhaz.cyf.gov.pl/manhaz/szkola/materials/S3/psi_materials/ENSAD98.pdf

http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html
www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/
www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-human-cost-of-energy
www.wano.info//article.cfm?id=the-human-cost-of-energy
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 20, 2013
Kent, appreciate your challenges, but, for example: "heat difference Stirling motors - driving generators."

Wastes energy, no matter the source of heat. The Carnot Cycle is the ideal heat engine and Stirling engines approach, but do not reach that limit.

Thus your solar-to-Stirlking-to generator system is far more wasteful than just plain, everyday, $1/W, 20% efficient solar PV.

Carnot wasn't German, but he was still right.
;]
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
March 20, 2013
@dehran-duckworth


"There are a lot of really intelligent people out there that still buy the old Oil Co lie, "our product is the only product".

I'm not sure about the lying (those addicted to crude oil prefer being lied too after all) but I'm quite sure you needed to add this to your quote "our product is the only product that can accomplish so much with so little effort on such a low level of financial and natural resource capitalization and at such rapid rates of delivery in spite of their product having a finite shelf life".

When I taught classes on energy and renewable energy in particular I always referred to crude oil as obedient slaves that almost worked for free.

A single gallon of crude oil can do the work 500 slaves could do in one hour.

Ten gallons gives you 5000 slaves
An F350 4x4 with full tank starts out with 15000 slaves crammed in a single tank

You only need to supply crude oil slaves with minimal housing,scraps of food and they never talk back or refuse to work nor do you find them sleeping due to the time of day.

Now think of what you need to have the equivalent work completed over an equal period of time from 5000 slaves but derived from say solar energy .

First you will need to house them meaning at least 100 times the equivalent space.

You need to feed them all with highly nutritious financial capital meals, where the original source of that capital meal was a loan from crude oil slave masters not willing to readily give up their positions of master.

You will also have to be patient and a convincing personality to ever get others to accept this new and foreign looking slave or slaves who will never work as hard or be so servile as a crude oil slave. Solar slaves will always feel like an illegal alien and rejected by these 'others' who may actually have to put a little more effort into getting by on allot less while the solar slaves take a vacation and rest once in a while.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 20, 2013
Dehran, good comment, except please note, oil/coal/gas aren't from dinosaurs, but much earlier.

If you want to be more annoyed about the combustion industry, consider just two key omissions from their responsibilities...

a) NORM Exemptions -- they can emit Arsenic, Radon, Mercury... freely because they are normal constituents of rock associated with all fossil fuels. www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf30.html

b) They don't supply energy. They supply ;ess than 1/2 the nuclear mass needed to use their product in combustion -- they assume we supply the Oxygen. Even NASA has to buy its oxidizers.

Both should anger any environmentalist to action.
Tamer Zaim
Tamer Zaim
March 20, 2013
It looks like we are still far from agreeing and more creative thinking and changing the way we think is needed.

Tamer Zaim
http://greengrowthenergy.eu/services/
DEHRAN DUCKWORTH
DEHRAN DUCKWORTH
March 20, 2013
@Bonkim2003-
Only efficiency measures can save the planet, and all else will follow. Unfortunately we dont have centuries. We burn through resources at a ridiculous rate for the sole purpose of lining the pockets of those who control these resources. E.g. the technology to get 150 MPG plus in a passenger car has existed for over 50 years, but instead auto makers pat themselves on the back for producing cars that get 25 mpg, the same mileage the first Ford Model T got!!
DEHRAN DUCKWORTH
DEHRAN DUCKWORTH
March 20, 2013
@Larryofgalaxy, thank you for comment 97. If the fossil fuel dominant paradigm and the unnecessary consumption levels of the dino goo were put under as much scrutiny as ANY conceivable alternative is subjected to, BIG OIL would never survive the wrath of the math! Then we may start to see an even playing field (combined with either the removal of oil industry subsidies, or the addition of matching subsidies to renewable energy production and delivery).


There are a lot of really intelligent people out there that still buy the old Oil Co lie, "our product is the only product". They did a damn good job, and as a result we literally eat, breath, wear, burn, worship, and kill for their product....an island of ignorance in a universe full of possibilities!
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 20, 2013
Larry of Galaxy -see my note -wre arunning out of resources at a fast rate on the back of growing expectations, growing populations, and growing expectations - give the planet a few decades/centuries - for the old economic and political systems to collapse. The rest oblivion. Renewables will not save the earth - the constant call - give us funds and will solve all problems - will echo until then.
Steve Frazer
Steve Frazer
March 20, 2013
Patrick-OLeary - Hybrids? EV's? All being recharged via solar?

Have you done the math for this migration? We did... this was in response to another blogger, but the math and inter-dependencies are the same..

http://etcgreen.com/general/blogging-on-renewableenergyworld-com
Richard  Gammell
Richard Gammell
March 20, 2013
Galen Maloney,

Very Cool!! Good Luck!!
Galen Maloney
Galen Maloney
March 20, 2013
Many of the issues brought up here would be addressed by a new baseload source of renewable electricity that is scalable, cost effective and capable of providing consistent and reliable electricity. Oh my goodness, i just so happen to know of such a thing, and its currently seeking funds to build the first prototype.
www.indiegogo.com/cahill

Since you are on this site, reading and commenting on this article, you obviously care about the planet. Please consider giving some of your attention to this page and either contribute and spread the word, or both. Every dollar goes a long way. Cheers
G Maloney
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
March 20, 2013
@etcgree

I suppose you could say I'm an engineer since that was my formal training and I now do it for a living

I have made my living over the past 20 years being hired on contract to essentially pick up others after they have fallen and can't get up. Figuratively of course.

If I've been told once I've been told one thousand times

"Some people see the glass as half full"
"Some see it as half empty"
"You see the glass and say who the hell made it like that"?

What I do to help change the current reality?

I have first changed my own reality

I'm now active in the international Transitions Movement

I have been able to ween myself off of crude oil by at least %75 in the past 30 years

Now to get that other %20

The last %5 is just wishful thinking
Richard  Gammell
Richard Gammell
March 20, 2013
How 'bout Massive conservation (Carpooling) electrification of the automobile and change all Heavy Equipment, Farm Equipment and Big Rigs to Hydrogen produced from solar and wind energy.

Hydrogen Big Rig.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7X8lLQkGYKY

New Holland Fuel Cell Tractor.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_jJ9T3WtdI

This should put some people back to work!!
Patrick O'Leary
Patrick O'Leary
March 20, 2013
Hybridizing the vehicle fleet and solarizing the building stock is exactly the answer to the problems we face right now. Whether we see the problem as global warming or regional air pollution, vehicles and buildings are a problem and changing them is the way forward.

Reducing emissions has defined what we call progress. Those reductions have reduced costs as well as clean up the air. We concentrate emissions where we live and breathe. Reducing emissions makes sense, especially as the number of vehicles and buildings continue to increase.
Steve Frazer
Steve Frazer
March 20, 2013
larryofgalaxy - How refreshing, a highly informed blogger.

So what do you do for a living that you have come to understand these complex, multi-level, inter-dependencies to the point of establishing a firm grasp on our current reality?

Any thoughts beyond repetition to convey these concepts to the masses?

http://etcgreen.com Article (bottom right of the home page): EV's and Hybrids are not our Future
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
March 20, 2013
YEP!

I went back and read most of what is posted here

I'm now even more convinced that Einstein was in fact a genius when he said


"No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it."
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
March 20, 2013
Wow!
This article has generated quite the response

I myself am very skeptical of the rosy picture

He listed transportation?

And where does this magic battery come from?

* Just as an aside has anyone recently looked at the current rate of extraction of copper metal relative to extraction and processing of the available ore? Or how about the quantity of crude oil per oz of copper smelted needed just to mine the ore? Lithium ore anyone?

Yeah! I thought so.

When you begin to wake up to the reality that nearly %100 of every single thing we have,had,will have and could have in the future is linked with a Gordian knot to cheap supplies of crude oil his entire study begins to have holes as leaky as the Titanic.Did I mention the 'magic battery?

To expect to replace the current paradigm of our total dependence on one miracle of geologic and situational physics, having unique energy density qualities unlike any other substance on earth, is naive at best.

We currently exist in our current reality and at our current level of energy use by consuming millions and millions of years of ancient sunlight. We consume our PRINCIPLE capitol account at massive rates of extraction.

Expecting to transfer to a capitol account that is an INTEREST based account with only some minor tweaks of efficiency and building of wind and solar is the height of self delusion.

This type of thinking is what is now driving the Peak Oil debate.
Some are looking for a Plan B for the inevitable that does not include much of what we call 'normal lifestyle'. Yes! Normal based on cheap crude oil.

Too much delusion and moving to higher decks of the Titanic by thinking that we just need a little make up and face powder when what we need is massive plastic surgery to make a pretty starlit from our present homely hag.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 20, 2013
Munich has one of the world´s most advanced and efficient public transportation systems. Decades ago, it consolodated the urban transport system with the utility system, using profit savings from waste incineration, long distance heat power, and combined cycle p.g. to build out its excellent public transportation system inside of 40 years.
A the moment, it has 6 subway lines cris-crossing the city (with a unique energy efficient tunnel engineering, the tracks drop and rise between stations- for gravity aided acceleration and braking.) The U 4 and 5 are still building out to the west, and a new U 7 is projected. The newer Siemen walk through subway fleets are all ultra efficient brake energy recycling. (A program is going on to replace the older escalators with A +++) (they stop automatically when no one is on them.) Elevators let mothers with baby carriages and paraplegics in wheel chairs use the system.) Low entry, brake energy recycling light rail streetcar lines (12 of them) and ultra efficient low entry TDI single and double frame busses)(also with fold out ramps to accomodate paraplegics in wheelchairs. Mums can easily get the baby carriages aboard.) that is complemented by an intersecting suburban train going out in fifteen directions, with a second commuter tunnel going in.)(4 million riders a day off the road and on public transport saves a bundle of emissions and money!-
(I only pay 400 Euros a year for unlkimited Sr. Card use of the entire system by the way.) Then, we have extensive bicycle paths.
So the subway line, two bus lines, and a two consolodated tram lines on Hohenzoloern platz also have lots of bicycle rack parking. Just like the Munich Central Station. When I grab a B.M.W., Mercedes or Audi ultra effienct TDI engined taxi, I notice they all shut down when the lights are red, and automatically start when the lights turn green and the cabby steps on the gas. (cool engineering. TDI and that save a lot of fuel.)
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 20, 2013
Escuse me, I type "blind" so there are typos. I mean "Siprius"" fresnel lenses. While others talk, Germans act on energy efficiency and boosting efficiency. It gets even nicer. Everyone in the bulding are upgrading their older, inefficient appliances to A +++, ultra energy efficient LED lighting or other energy saving lamps (cutting consumption over 2002 levels by over 40%.) Now Munich utiltiies are running underground optical fibre cables to all buildings as well. Those carry digital internet, telephone, HDTV, cable radio -(200 channels I never watch) at standard rates of either 19 gHz or 100 gHz for business customers (Ultra fast transmission, thank you.) There is another purpose in those cables- Distributed Smart Grid coordination of all the rooftop solar and in-building "micro-CHP" going in.
Now, with all the heat efficiency measures that went into the block, Munich Utilities are installing something else in the heat exchange cellar with the long distance district heat system... heat difference Stirling motors - driving generators. (I had a hand in developing that.) That will add 100 kWh to the ultra efficient rooftop solar... going up on the block- 24/7. That gets juicy becasusethe long distance heat hot water is fed by a "sewage sludge-compost" methane gas recapture power plant, geothermal plants, high temperature waste incineration plant, combined cycle GaS. (Everything I flush down the toilet and throw into the trash is returned to me in the form of heat, power, and urban transportation.) Goodness, I not only live in a LEED gold building, i ride LEED gold public transport.
Howzat work?
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 20, 2013
Dr. Qlec: Your pro´ünuke logic is so off base. The IPPN has a lot of facts and figures on the health risks involved. And you still don´t have intermediate or long term storage problems solved.

So there are "alternatives" which you do love hysterically denigrate.
I reside on an apartment building on a quiet, tree lined deliberately dead-ended cobblestone street. The 50´s concrete and brick building was re-windowed-back in 1998 with 1 inch wide vacuum dual pane insulation systems. (The same dual pane vacuum re-windowing done on the Empire State Building which cut its heat and air conditioning energy needs by a full 30%, thank you.) In 2004, it received a 4 inch facade and ten inch rooftop- insulation. (not black tar roofing like in ne york buildings, but after the insulation- an aluminum backed tarpaper. covered with white gravel so as not to absorb unwanted solar heat)

(efficiency is the low hanging fruit.) Those combined insulation measures alone slashed heat/air conditioning needs by over 50%. Now, to make things even nicer, the building is hooked up to Munich´s re-built- well insulated, district long distance heat-hot water-grid which is powered by geothermal and waste incineration. (only 35% of the garbage incinerated is fossil based plastic- the rest is paper which makes it a bio-fuel system in that sense.) It gets a lot of power from wind, local solar,(Munich has Europes two largest rooftop solar installations.) The building block will be getting focused dual axis rooftop solar next year, lightweight backing- dual axis mounted, keeping it constantly focused into the sun at optimal angles. (The building roof is strong enough to handle that and the stress of wind blowing against the panels.)
Lightweight backing, standard silicon at 15%, two sheets of glass voltaic (I co-old the patent on hybrid silicon-glass voltaic with the Munich inventor of glass voltqics) then a Sirprius. fresnel lens which gets efficiencies to over 60%, up from 15%.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 20, 2013
Dr Alex - Our lifecycle is carbon - without carbon changing continuously, we are nothing - as one engineer to another - all carbonaceous materials react in time (natural processes), or fast as in combustion - and the chemical balances are no different whichever route you choose.

In simple terms energy from waste allows some heat to be converted to more useful forms - electricity and for space heating, displacing fossil fuels that would have been used otherwise - hence a net reduction - and you have to get rid of waste one way or the other.

On the same count - are you planning to eliminate all the industrial processes, manufacturing, transport, home and office heating, motoring, aviation, almost everything mankind does and that gives rise to emissions - and increasing as opulations and consumption rates increase around the world - and are you expecting renewables to make up the deficit - and we will run out of fossil fuels in the next few decades/centuries - you must be living in cloud cuckoo land.
The only way to reduce emissions - cut down consumption, and population.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 19, 2013
Bonk, way back -- "burning waste - power generation is not the primary purpose" -- burning waste is a fool's errand, whether for power or not.

How one can imagine it aiding our extreme need for emissions reduction is beyond me. But what does an engineer like me know, eh Bonks?
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 19, 2013
Bonk advocates "run of mill turbines (bulb) it all depends upon the hydraulic potential, and cost of installing the huge numbers needed"

Without apparent awareness of the damage done to rivers & streams by their use in earlier centuries, and without apparently understanding why we're net removing dams rather than building them to continue damaging our fisheries.

Of, course, they're (low-head mills) also miserably inefficient as well.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 19, 2013
So Kent says: "South Germany was traumatized by the Tschernobyl fallout in 86" as a sort of argument against nuclear?

So Kent, you apparently have no clue that the Chernobyl disaster was man-made in two ways: a) the RBMK reactor type is illegal everywhere but in the former Soviet Union, and b) the management of the power station took the reactor into known unsafe operating regions for purposes of odd experimentation or demand following -- we only have their log notes left.

So Kent, don't drive a vehicle of any sort, because some vehicles have been made with no brakes, thus all vehicles are dangerous.

And, listening to you is indeed dangerous.
;]
PS, several RBMKs remain in operation, safely, because their operators know what to do, and not do.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 19, 2013
Gary, what can I say, you throw terms around as if you knew what they meant.
;]
As a Sunpower stockholder, they indeed are working on improvements in power density, which are already achieved in the military/space realms at greater expense. Local solar PV will be one of the greatest clean-power sources our descendents will enjoy.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 19, 2013
Erich, while biochar is indeed useful, it is no real solution to the carbon-emissions problem.

I gave you the reference to the Stanford GCEP symposium on "negative carbon" technologies last Spring and I gave you the reference to the UC Planetary Sciences Group papers on the vast debt we have to the Carbon Cycle -- did you bother to read either?
erich knight
erich knight
March 19, 2013
If you enter "biochar field trials" into the search engine Google Scholar if will bring up thousands of peer-reviewed studies, For the last two years growing exponentially, like biologic systems.

Pyrolytic carbons comprise 40 to 50% of all Soil organic carbon. Biochar helps foster increasingly recalcitrant forms of humic substances. Glomalins,recalcitrant for 100 years,and yes increased metabolism and soil respiration. That soil emitted CO2 is where the plants recycle it into more exudates for more soil microbiology. A soil microbiom predominated by aerobic and nitrogen fixing bacteria over the anaerobic and methane producing bacteria.

Abundant and Stable Char Residues in Soils: Implications for Soil Fertility and Carbon Sequestration
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es301107c

The cost of sequestering C with biochar is less than $50/t C, if not $25/t C depending on how you slice income stream pie.

McCarl BA,(2009), Economics of biochar production, utilization, and greenhouse gas offsets. Chpt.19 in J Lehmann and S Joseph; Biochar for Environmental Management:
http://www.biochar-international.org/images/Biochar_Table_of_Contents_pages_3-7.pdf

The carbon cost of sequestration utilizing Biochar;
The Australians have worked several scenarios, different ways the carve up the income streams, and come up with a range from $5 - $50/tC for their offsetting values.
Using Biochar Systems to Sequester Carbon;
http://www.agmrc.org/renewable_energy/biomass_energy_production/using-biochar-systems-to-sequester-carbon
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 19, 2013
Erich, carbon is indeed wonderful in its many forms, but

"Carbon to the Soil, the only ubiquitous and economic place to put it."

Misses the reality that it becomes CO2 eventually, by the action of soil organisms -- biochar isn't forever.

And, given that we're more than 500 billion tons behind in its natural sequestering back into earth's crust, putting carbon into soils solves little.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
March 19, 2013
As kent describes affordable small wind via cheap and available materials, so forth may wind also prove the same with much higher outputs. The amortization of wind is very short with grid lines being much longer, but alas with much longer lifespans. The possible end result being jobs created by a free renewable resource providing extended lifetimes of finite resources.

Hybrid wind/thermal generation is worth looking into with improvements in matching supply to load. Furthermore, tooling costs may come down further by engineering multipurpose applications.

Offshore wind may also help preserve our marine biodiversity by supporting an oxygen rich, acid neutral, and radiation regulated sanctuary to ensure we have a clean source of food. Not to exclude the capability to lower the costs of oil drilling.

If we send coal overseas, perhaps we need to expand our geothermal, concentrated solar and other renewable heat/waste heat sources for efficient removal of the dirty portions via direct heat. This type of application may be demand response friendly and handle excess capacity as well. China wants cleaner air so we may be able to work out a deal to co-finance and share the job creating capacity derived from the added thermal sources.

High spread spectrum efficient and flexible solar shingles from alta devices at grid parity? There was a lecture done by the founders of attaining up to 10 junctions in order to capture 60 percent efficiency based on the 28% single junction GaAs technology now affordable to portable electronic devices and other niche applications.
I believe Sunpower is working on a low cost silicon hetero junction solution to stay competitive but the technology may not be available in a flexible format resistant to damage.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 19, 2013
Cpontinued on Kenya- Savonnious wind-on that lake provides power for lighting- and the night crocodile hunters have battery powered lamps instead of kerosene for better locating the crocs, and assessing their size by the distance between the eye reflections. The improvement saves lives because they spear less big bull crocs. Dr. Alec C denigrates the "all of everything" approach, but wind, bio-waste systems - are helping to bring power to the 1 billion people on this planet who still rely on kerosene and wood for heating and cooking.
I`ve been personally involved in a number of n.g.o. projects in Africa, Nepal, and Bhutan... using bio-waste incineration, wind, etc. for light, power, and providing basic sanitation needs of clean water (water filtration systems.) Shit, when the earthquake devastated Haiti, German corporations rushed in emergency generators, small wind, and solar, for water purification and driving the x-ray machines needed for the diagnoses. And hemp grows beautifully in the climate. Perfect for hemp oil bio fuel driving diesel engined cars and generators. An pressed out hemp... makes a beautiful cheap building material. (I was involved in getting Zadook states to build up castor and hemp plantations for bio-fuel and building materials. Hemp fibre boards- connected by wood distancing pegs are perfect for "hempcrete", hemp fibre mixed with concrete- dirt cheap housing for places like Tansania. Better than shantytowns.
Dr, John Norris of Capetown R.S.A., developed an hho system which uses skimmed from sewage sludge "brown water" as the base feed material, and it is overunity... generating 2.5 times much power as you put into it. So that, and car engines pulled from total wrecks and out of service vehicles, driving generators will also be bringing "overunity" power to Africa. (See "African.Hydrogen" on google.) The membranes for that "overunity" poop power hho system are being massed produced in Rumania.
ANONYMOUS
March 19, 2013
Does anyone else have a serious issue with some of the assumptions made in this research? Especially regarding the GHG emissions associated with natural gas vs. coal? I understand methane flaring is a problem, but the researcher claims that the PM and carbon emissions even EXCLUDING flaring are worse than coal. That is against everything I've ever learned.

There are also topics like heating that aren't addressed well, in my humble opinion.
ANONYMOUS
March 19, 2013
Dear Bonkin: Funny you should mention Sr Lanka. I was down there on an outsourcing media job for Siemens a while back. South Sr Lanka was very poorly electrified due to topoggraphy so wind was the solution there. (displacing kerosene lamps.) The prawn fishermen in the brackish waters were and are "night fishers", that is, they attract the small shrimp prawn into nets suspended under rafts - and used kerosene lamps on the rafts. Kerosene is not cheap to those poor fishermen. So, the program uses large wind, and small Savonnious wind turbines made from plastic 55 gallon kerosene drums driving "salvaged from melt" down old 1 to 2 kw motors repoled to work as - genreators. (ultimate cheap wind) And charging stations were set up for charging the batteries on Osram energy saving bulbs.
Fresh water sardine fishermen on Lake Victoria also did night fishing with relatively expensive kerosene. Again, good shoreside wind condition wind turbines brought power to the region, displacing kerosene.
I was down in Botswana for another client, and got a small plant set up for Savonnious turbines... using scrap motors paid for by German relief N.G.O.s. Ssnitary conditions often suck. So we set up a "model" village using cement and tile storage outhouses... They are pumped out regularly.. and put into a methane recapture unit along with cattle manure collected from the yards via wheelbarrow, .. cutting groundwater pollution. and then ran some of the wind and methane recatprue power into water filtration and "electro-shock" units which kill bacteria.

There is a lake in Western Kenya- Ehtiopia fed by the blue Nile- marshy- piss poor area. Again, the region lit by kerosene. Solution, hemp oil, mixed with local light crude- driving generators- Savonnious turbines. The pressed hemp- makes an excellent cheap building material. The poor people of the region - go night hunting, poling through the marshes, in dug out canoes, spearing mid-sized crocodiles for meat.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 19, 2013
Dear Bonkin: I agree. Except for the nuclear part. Let the Americans and the French and everybody else use it. South Germany was traumatized by the Tschernobyl fallout in 86 which caused a massive, statistically relevant spike in miscarriages, birth defects, cancer, in the follow up period. (It wasn´t "Green" propaganda, it was 6 weeks straight of Tschernobyl fallout in 86. that radicalized the electorate against nuclear here. And after Fukushima, the conservative CDU-FDP coalition in Baden-Wuerttemburg was swept out of office by Green-SPD coalition- causing the CDU-CSU to crap in their pants and rescind their decision to extend the working life of nukes to 2050.
A lot of German hydro is late 19th century, early 20th century run of mill. German quality being what it is, their inefficient generators are still up and running. (Munich Utilities swapped its nuclear participation with Bayern A.G. (today E.ON) for un of mill in 92.) Upgrading non-silting run-of-mill by replacing with A +++ rated genrators using high Tessla neodym magnets- and new HVDC transformers for low loss transmission nearly doubles their capacities. One of my favourite Italian Osteria "Il Mulino" in the west part of Munich is located in an old 17th century grain mill on the Wurm river. The Italian owners built an outdoor oak bridge Terrace over the flow- with a view of the replica water wheel- driving a small 200 kWh generator.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 19, 2013
Kent Doering - yes these are called run of mill turbines (bulb) it all depends upon the hydraulic potential, and cost of installing the huge numbers needed and related control, maintenance, and hooking up to the grid. These are also installed at the tail races of larger hydro-units. Many as you say in underdeveloped locations in mountain streams, etc. Many were tried out in remote locations in the late 19th century - tea and rubber plantations, etc - the real question there is that water flow is seasonal - note Sri Lanka which has huge hydro capacity is hit by water scarcity and has to install fossil stations to make up. But yes - as with any renewable - we need to develop all potential sources - but don't take hydro or wind or many other renewable sources as assured capacity - all intermittent, some seasonal, and over capacity at certain periods..
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 19, 2013
DrAlexC - burning waste - power generation is not the primary purpose; power is a useful byproduct that helps with the economics of disposal, also displaces equivalent fossil fuels which in turn decreases the carbon footprint of the total process.

You are pointing out to the real issue - inividually we can criticise every form of renewable energy sources and find falt - but given the precarious resource/demand/population equation and the fast progress to oblivion, all need to be considered within the energy mix - and solutions are all site-specific - I suppose human tendency is to try within ones capacity/understanding at a given time - and dismissing this or that initiative out of hand is contrary to progress. We need all - nuclear, coal, oil, gas, bio, tidal, etc, etc.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 19, 2013
Dear Bonkers: There is very little silting on most German, Austrian and Swiss Alpine -- hydro for a number of different reasons. And due to the "wild river"- "mill race" design of much hydro here which creates no large lakes- there is no silting at all, with very little land loss. Where it does occur, they use the backwaters as gravel pits. So repowering hydro is definitely a good option Munich utilities are using.
Then in hydro- there is non-dam hydro-electric. Namely anchorerd on stream of different sizes. A catamaran, with special slanted screen grids between the hulls- to divert larger maritime life- and with water turbines suspended below winter ice formation levels- driving generators on deck adapted from wind turbine tech. Now imagine these on the Inn River from Innsbruck to Mühldorf where it enters the Danube, and imagine that on the Danube from Neu-Ulm to Passau where it enters Austria. 4 "small" units per kilometer- with an output of 4 mWh per unit. Et Voila: another 9600 mWh in hydro for the Austrian state of North Tyrol (which already gets most of its power from high Alpöine hydro.) and the German state of Bavaria. (the equivalent of five nukes.) Now how much could New York get by repowering dam hydro to A +++, and adding on stream hydro down the St. Lawrence from Niagara Falls on its side, and down the Hudson from the Adirondacks to N.Y.C., Anchored on stream is going up on in Africa as well- the Congo basin, the Niger, the Nile, and the Zambesi, without sqcrificing land to hydro... bringing power to people who use kerosene for lighting. Zadook, the Association of SW AFrican states, also inked a deal with G.E. and Lockheed to put up wind turbines, many things locally produced- in four traunches over the next 18 years - 98.800 turbines- each putting out 3 kw apiece.
on the average bringing close to 300.000 mWh to the region which desperately needs it. Anchored on stream hydro and wind will be two pillars in the future African power mix.
erich knight
erich knight
March 18, 2013
If I May be so bold,… As I speak for Biologic Carbon… I speak for the very center of life itself. We have been burning it for over one million years, exploiting it out of the soil for 10,000 years, combusting fossil carbon for 150 years.

Now, we can grow nano-structured fossil carbons into unprecedented materials and even human tissues. Graphene; a two-dimensional, one-atom-thick membrane in a three-dimensional world, able to sieve water from the seas, Buckminsterfullerene & Nanotubes; for superconductivity, Solar & Thermo-electrics.
The Stone Age did not end for a lack of stones, as well, the Combustion Age will not end for lack of fossil fuels. Nanotechnology and Terra Preta Technology has thrust The Diamond Age upon us, with it, the rectification of the Carbon Cycle, this train is leaving the station, either get on board or be left in the combusted soot and CO2 pollution of history!

Since we have filled the air, filling the seas to full, soil is the only beneficial place left. Carbon to the Soil, the only ubiquitous and economic place to put it.
.
Thank you for your efforts.
erich knight
erich knight
March 18, 2013
A Carbon-Based Religion
Carbon, as the center of life, has high value to recapitalize our soils. Yielding nutrient dense foods and Biofuels, paying premiums of pollution abatement and toxic remediation and the growing dividends created by the increasing biomass of a thriving soil community. Carl Sagan's human connection to stardust leaves out a critical stage. We are stardust, but only stardust transformed by life. Every time I look at an SEMs of Char, it strikes me, the perfect preservation of the base structures of life, a fractal vision, how life creates the greatest surface area with the least amount of material. The preservation of this structure, for return to the lowest order of life, seems almost a religious act.
A perfect cradle to cradle recycling, biotic carbon should never be combusted and destroyed, be revered, as life is revered, be returned to the cradle of terrestrial life the Soil.

This view of biologic carbon has led me to compose several paraphrases; "That Terra Preta prayer",;Our carbon who art in heaven, "The soil carbon Commandments"; Thou shall not have any other molecule before me, and the "Soil Carbon Dream"; I have a dream that one day we live in a nation where progress will not be judged by the production yields of our fields, but by the color of their soils and by the Carbon content of their character. Google them to read the rest.

The photosynthetic "capture" collectors are up and running all around us, the "storage" sink is in operation just under our feet, conversion reactors are the only infrastructure we need to build out. Carbon, as the center of life, has high value to recapitalize our soils. Yielding nutrient dense foods and Biofuels, paying premiums of pollution abatement and toxic remediation and the growing dividends created by the increasing biomass of a thriving soil community.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 18, 2013
Kent, you're clearly in the biz for Euros, eh?

What about the ~50 Mega tonnes of CO2 added by Germany per year in the naive nuclear phase out? Paying the C-tax, Kent?

And, while burning garbage may sometimes be necessary, you should know, if you're an engineer; how inefficient and polluting a power source it is -- thus expensive to remediate.

"There are no fuel purchase costs, and no expensive "radioactive waste hiding costs involved. A lot of the measures amortize inside of 4 years, some in 10 years."

Very clear you don't understand nuclear and that you're selling stuff, Kent. It can't be a surprise to you that the French never let a Uranium atom, that crossed into their country, to leave. The Germans know too that old nuclear fuel is not "waste", but >95% re-usable, as the French have done and as advanced reactor designs increasingly will do.

Solar, by the way, is no issue, as long as it's on-structure. EVs are great. Oncoming, efficient storage will indeed be great. Burning anything for power will never be great -- just a mistake by those who don't understand thermodynamics. And wind farms are indeed a Fool's Errand, especially given the new reality of their massive inefficiency, climate weaknesses and threats to life...

www.seas.harvard.edu/news-events/press-releases/rethinking-wind-power
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/1/015021/
Check the graph in the video. <2W/sqm, Kent?

And what are the casualties for German wind, Kent?
www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf

And, the Chinese already see the climate threat to windmills...
http://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/wind/a-less-mighty-wind

Aw, but you're a sales guy, right Kent?
;]
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 18, 2013
kent-G/doering - check your own terminology first - the subject matter of the report is 100% conversion to renewables. Although various technological fixes are being discussed, and some of these feasible - what is missing is whether the model takes into account the earth's consumption and resources audits.

In a matter of just over 100 years, mankind has managed to exhaust a fair portion of the sun's stored energy on earth and the audit of the remaining resources - land, water, energy, and minerals do not appear to hold much longer than a century or two if not decades.

Regardless of technological innovations and economic and technical optimisation, etc, which are standard methodolgies in this field - no one appears to have defined the bigger picture - and in this context whether New York or Munich, or even some EU countries , Germany included are able to approach zero fossil or nuclear (highly unlikely) - that does not prove anything.

What we need is a mix of all technologies, and improve the application economics of the better proven renewables - in the context hydro potential is more or less exploited, and many older hydro projects around the world are suffering serious silting, and other degradation - even these projects - tidal included have design life of say a hundred years. So if Germany sees its hydro potential doubling good luck but I doubt the figures - if that was feasible within acceptable environmental/population shift and investment capacity that would be good, if cost of energy, water, land, mineral resources go up in real terms as they get depleted, the political/economic system as we see today will collapse, and unable to sustain the population intensity we see today.

Scientists and engineers (I am one) tend to work within a narrow field, assuming thei endeavours will save the world, and that the rest of the earth's systems will stay as they are - which unfortunately they don't.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 18, 2013
Dr A. I outsource for Siemens and am well familiar with the 2 trillion Euro figure- for exiting both nuclear by the end of 2022, and exiting all fossil by the end of 2025 which is the Munich goal. Now those are the up front manufacturing and installation costs. Sustainability measures and renewable enjoy low interest loans from state owned banks over a 20 year amortization period. The manufacturing and installation costs of sustainability measures like garbage incineration power and long distance heat plants are all up front costs. There are no fuel purchase costs, and no expensive "radioactive waste hiding costs involved. A lot of the measures amortize inside of 4 years, some in 10 years. The price of installed solar is dropping- so its amortization drops. Installed wind is dropping. We are aware of the projected costs, but we are also aware that technological advances will drop the costs. Sure, it will cost. But maybe a lot less than curently calculated as "energy efficiency" and "renewable" go through performance changes like in the p.c. computer industry. (I have 100 gHz high speed internet for example.) it is called a cost-benefit analysis. All sustainable measures cost money. But the benefit is simply reduced fossil fuel costs and reduced environmental impact costs. And when you apply the synergies, the savings can grow exponentially as proven by Munich, Headquarter city of the Siemens A.G.. The best sales argument I can think of and have copyrighted for EE and RE is simply "Why Burn Money?" (c)(rtm) K.O. Doering Munich 2010.
Goodness, the theme of this years Hannover Trade fair is industrial xsustainability. And I am quite sure capitalist-industrialist from around the world will be flocking to it to see how they can slash energy consumption while increasing performance. (That is also a Siemens speciality.) I expect record sales there again this year.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 18, 2013
Hey Bonkers: I noticed your delliberate misspelling of my name to associate me with Nazi Hermann Goering. As it is, I am an American born Nam Vet. Get your numbers right. As for German utilities disinvesting from overseas nuclear, so what. They reinvest the cash back into renewables and energy efficiency. "Sustainability" is the form of a broad synergy of energy efficiency measures and a broad synergy of renewable measures. The sector just outpaced the German automtoive industry as the biggest sector of the German economy, and will be 20% of its economy by 2020.
It wasn´t "Green" propaganda that turned a majority of Germans against nuclear. It was the 1986 Tschernobyl disaster which dumped all sorts of radioactive wastes across Southern Germany for six weeks on end- rsulting in masssive spikes in miscarriages- birth defects, cancer, and a lot of other radiation related disorders. I used to love gathering mushrooms in the forests and buying venison from profession German hunters. The radioacivity measurements in forest mushrooms and venison have hardly dropped since them.
I was closer than you think to the German nuclear exit. The CDU/CSU and the FDP coalition extended the working life of nuclear to 2050, especilly pushed by Minister President Walter Mappus in Baden-Wuerttenburg and Horst Seehofer in Bavaria. Then, two months after they passed that, Fukushima. The electorate in Baden Wuerttemburg voted Mappus out, and a Green-Red coalition in,a total upset victory.
Seehofer crapped in his pants, and in a weekend sesseion in the Benedictine Monastery of Andechs (I am friends with the Abbot), they reversed their decision and told Merkel to shut the nukes down. It was the Tchernobyl-Fukushima effect. Now the country is faced with cost effectively exiting nuclear while simultanesouly cutting fossil fuel emissions. The Munich goal is off fossil by the end of 2025.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 18, 2013
Kent says: "You do love to denigrate and deride everything everybody is doing." and that I "don't like wind".

So Kent, when yoiu go to a doctor for a problem, do you accept his/her training and experience and expertise as worth listening too? Do you accept a 2nd or 3rd opinion that might be similar?

It's not a matter of "not liking wind". It's a matter of being concerned with the best environmentally-sound, long-term solutions to our now horrendous energy & pollution issues.

You don't seem to care to study and understand why things like wind/wave yadda yadda power are poor choices. So, your words aren't those of an honest broker of information.

Yes, Germany has long dominated local solar installs, because of amazingly expensive subsidies. Fine. That has nothing to do with wind, because despite their poor weather, even German rooftop solar is less environmentally damaging than their wind.

And their foolish political move away from nuclear even hurts goods renewables, by costing $billions unnecessarily, while increasing emissions that affect the rest of the world.

Ahhh, but you don't care about that, right Kent?

For others with open minds...
www.pointcarbon.com/aboutus/pressroom/pressreleases/1.1552105
http://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/energy/nuclear/siemens-says-germany-nuclear-phase-out-to-cost-trillions/?utm_source=techalert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=011912
www.world-nuclear-news.org/NP_Eye_watering_cost_of_renewable_revolution_2301121.html?utm_so
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 18, 2013
More of the wind fiction (combatting the naive anti-spam s/w here)...
www.nrel.gov/wind/pdfs/day1_sessioniv_04_shermco_alewine.pdf
http://renknownet2.iwes.fraunhofer.de/pages/wind_energy/data/2006-02-09Reliability.pdf
www.windaction.org/news/c48/
http://portsmouth.patch.com/blog_posts/wind-turbine-economics-and-failures
http://news.stv.tv/scotland/west-central/286170-wind-turbine-bursts-into-flames-as-hurricane-force-winds-hit-scotland/
www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqEccgR0q-o
www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=-YJuFvjtM0s&feature=endscreen
www.homebrewpower.co.uk/html-renewable-energy-failures/vestas-wind-turbine-fail.html
www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/windpower/9837026/Wind-turbine-collapses-in-high-wind.html
www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=ppLh5pGX3qQ&NR=1
www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=oke5PzwpBiE&NR=1
www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5PPBGsoQMM&feature=endscreen&NR=1
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 18, 2013
Just calling attention to the usual wind fluff...

"109.237 megawatts of wind capacity were installed in Europe by the end of 2012" and ~30% of that German.

So let's see, at <40% CF tha's really maybe 40GW for all europe, necessarily backed up by 60GW of something that operates at 24/7 and ~90% CF.

Yep, coal, gas, hydro or nuclear.

Then, given the death/injury toll from the first two of those, plus windmills, looks like we're back to the real renewables: hydro, local solar, geo & nuclear. Geothermal, by the way, is nuclear power. Keep that wind fiction coming!
;]
http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 18, 2013
Just calling attention to the usual wind fluff...

"109.237 megawatts of wind capacity were installed in Europe by the end of 2012" and ~30% of that German.

So let's see, at <40% CF tha's really maybe 40GW for all europe, necessarily backed up by 60GW of something that operates at 24/7 and ~90% CF.

Yep, coal, gas, hydro or nuclear.

Then, given the death/injury toll from the first two of those, plus windmills, looks like we're back to the real renewables: hydro, local solar, geo & nuclear. Geothermal, by the way, is nuclear power. Keep that wind fiction coming!
;]
http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf
http://www.nrel.gov/wind/pdfs/day1_sessioniv_04_shermco_alewine.pdf
http://renknownet2.iwes.fraunhofer.de/pages/wind_energy/data/2006-02-09Reliability.pdf
www.windaction.org/news/c48/
http://portsmouth.patch.com/blog_posts/wind-turbine-economics-and-failures
http://news.stv.tv/scotland/west-central/286170-wind-turbine-bursts-into-flames-as-hurricane-force-winds-hit-scotland/
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 18, 2013
Just calling attention to the usual wind fluff...

"109.237 megawatts of wind capacity were installed in Europe by the end of 2012" and ~30% of that German.

So let's see, at <40% CF tha's really maybe 40GW for all europe, necessarily backed up by 60GW of something that operates at 24/7 and ~90% CF.

Yep, coal, gas, hydro or nuclear.

Then, given the death/injury toll from the first two of those, plus windmills, looks like we're back to the real renewables: hydro, local solar, geo & nuclear. Geothermal, by the way, is nuclear power. Keep that wind fiction coming!
;]
http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf
http://www.nrel.gov/wind/pdfs/day1_sessioniv_04_shermco_alewine.pdf
http://renknownet2.iwes.fraunhofer.de/pages/wind_energy/data/2006-02-09Reliability.pdf
www.windaction.org/news/c48/
http://portsmouth.patch.com/blog_posts/wind-turbine-economics-and-failures
http://news.stv.tv/scotland/west-central/286170-wind-turbine-bursts-into-flames-as-hurricane-force-winds-hit-scotland/
www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqEccgR0q-o www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=-YJuFvjtM0s&feature=endscreen
www.homebrewpower.co.uk/html-renewable-energy-failures/vestas-wind-turbine-fail.html
www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/windpower/9837026/Wind-turbine-collapses-in-high-wind.html
www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=ppLh5pGX3qQ&NR=1
www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=oke5PzwpBiE&NR=1
www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5PPBGsoQMM&feature=endscreen&NR=1
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 18, 2013
Dear Bonkers: Repowering hydro-i.e. nearly doubling capacity by new genreators and transformers, will boost current output of about 43 GW to 86 gWh, boosting that part of hydro- to 13 % of the total energy mix. There is another development- anchored on stream hydro- namely large catamarans, anchored in rivers- with water turbines suspended between their hulls below winter ice formation levels- driving two generators on deck derivded from wind tech. The Inn River and the Danube alone built out that way will give Austrian Tyrol and Bavaria an additional 16.800 megawatts they can use and export to other areas of Europe. Thank you. So with hydro-upgrades and emerging anchored on stream hydro, we can expect hydro to provide over 60 gWh in the future.i.e. 20% of Germany´s baseline power needs, thank you. And what about the solar build out- it gets even cuter.
The pace of solar installation is picking up. Last year, another 6.5 gWh of rootop solar p.v. was installed. Now over 35.000 mWh. New breakthroughs are slashing the price of panels while boosting efficiencies from 15% to 35%. That means during 2013 and 2014, another 7 gWh of rooftop solar installed. With new efficiencies- that will go to 20 gWh installed every year. By the end of 2025- Germany will have over 270 mWh installed in rooftop solar.. meaning on a nice summer sunny day, over 90% of its power needs will be covered by solar.. and the wind and hydro can be used for generating hydrogen.......
But there are even more "renewables available" in the coming mix.
Sealed dry hot rock geothermal. This is not like "the Geyers" area north of San Francisco. germany is sitting on two deep hot rock fields- the North German field and the South German "Molasse" field which extends into France. New sealed, dual pipe dry hot rock geothermal does not use ground water, so it cannot have the detrimental effects described above. Demineralized water (or stored rainwater) goes down and comes back up as steam.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 18, 2013
Kent Goering - you sound an arrogant smart-ass - shoot before reading and responding out of context. Nobody is contesting Germany is the highest in Europe for renewables installation - yse 31000MW+ the question posed was how the intermittent generation from renewables is to be balanced - whilst bombasting with details of how clever you are - not yet given simple strategic solutions - high on technology means nothing. At present Germany is linked to other systems which operate stable large power stations - also germany has coal and investment in gas declining. Germany's no nuclear policy has also hit German utilities overseas who are disinvesting from nuclear projects as they see their revenues under threat.

Needless to say you would know Germany's internal situation better than most - but this forum is looking on the international scene - not just in one country/economy.
erich knight
erich knight
March 18, 2013
kent-doering;

Hydro – Thermal Carbonization:
HyrdoCarb GmbH,(on the grid in Germany)
http://www.revatec.de/index.htm
AVA-CO2; (on the grid in Karlsruhe.)
http://www.ava-co2.com/web/pages/en/technology.php

In Germany Austria and Switzerland there are some 80 farms 10,000s of cattle and hundreds of thousands of chickens which are fed Biochar supplements. The integrated nutrient management systems involve composting with additional Biochar to lock up nutrients against leaching, leaving the phosphorus and nitrogen available to plants.

You can read about the systems here;
55 Uses of Biochar
by Hans-Peter Schmidt
http://www.ithaka-journal.net/55-anwendungen-von-pflanzenkohle?lang=en
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 18, 2013
Dear Bonkers 2003: Yu got your facts wrong on German wind. According to the European Wind Energy Association- 109.237 megawatts of wind capacity were installed in Europe by the end of 2012. Germany lead the pack with 31.332 wind capacity installed.
Manufacturing and installation prices for onshore wind are now below that of coal,and nat gas combined cycle power plants. Germany has not subsidized wind since 1999. It gets the usual capital investment deductions, and a guaranteed feed in tariff rate of 8 Euro cents per produced kilowatt. There are no fossil fuel delivery infrastructure costs, no ash disposal costs, and no fuel purchase costs as compared to more expensive to install coal and nat gas plants.
80% of the costs of renewable over a 20 year amortization period are up front costs in manufacturing and installation, and 20% in maintenance. There are no fuel purchase costs. So now that wind is cheaper to build and install than coal or nat gas power plants, it really needs no subsidies except tax deductions for capital plant investment and a minimum feed in tariff. Germany is currently installing aobut 2.5 gWh in wind per annum. I know the EWEA projections for increasing installations, already going on or projected and planned. Between now and 2025,Germany will have installed another fat 50 gWh of wind power installed. Efficiencies are going up while prices are going down. That means that onshore and offshore wind will cover 30% of Germany´s total electric power needs by that date. Shall we take a look at hydro-electric?
At the moment, hydro-electric only accounts for just over 6.5 % of total German power needs. However, all the generators are at least 30 years old, some close to a century old, meaning low mechanical energy to power efficiencies. Repowering all existing German hydroelectric installations with highly efficient A +++ generators and new transformers- means more than doubling its output right there. (A process currently going on.
Patrick O'Leary
Patrick O'Leary
March 18, 2013
Steve, I checked your web site and saw no references or pictures. Were they unmodified or were they Cambar types?
Steve Frazer
Steve Frazer
March 18, 2013
Patrick-OLeary - we have installed sawtooth roofing for various projects over the past 5 years and as recently as last month.

There seems to be a few sub-agendas supporting fringe options for bio feedstocks. Oil yield from various crops are well researched and published (keep in mind the economic models before jumping to conclusions about this list).

http://etcgreen.com/micro-algae
Patrick O'Leary
Patrick O'Leary
March 18, 2013
EtcGreen, Who in this comment volley is making the purchase decision?

Have you checked out the revival of sawtooth roofing for low profile commercial buildings yet?
Steve Frazer
Steve Frazer
March 18, 2013
Sigh... This article's comment volley is reflective of why the U.S. and much of the rest of the world is flailing on renewable energy implementation.

Fundamentally there are no totally false statements in these comments, however, the arguments about physics and specifically the Laws of Thermodynamics are misleading.

The main problem here, in the media and in the minds of the general public is what I call the "Slice Effect". People are not embracing the complete challenge and are discarding the variables and advantages beyond their model's scope. They develop valid arguments for their slice and then attempt to beat the rest of the world over the head into submission.

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know it's what we know for sure that just ain't so." (Twain) Then again, in the context of scientific methodology and compartmentalized problem solving, these arguments are in fact - fact.

Especially on this website, we should learn to recognize when two or more individuals are engaging in a discussion with a radical imbalance with respect to the problem and solution. Think micro vs. macro and financial vs. scientific vs. blue-sky dreams.

There is a place for all of them and the readers of REW no doubt possess the right knowledge, experience, expertise, imagination, ..., to bring them all together. It is what moves the human race forward.

Regards
Joe Zorzin
Joe Zorzin
March 18, 2013
maybe we should just end all subsidies to all forms of energy production, especially the huge cost to our military to protect our oil investments in the Middle East, and the navy's protection of the oil lanes- and of course make the nuclear facilities pay up front for the cost of dismantling their structures and safely burying their waste-- and, force the coal companies to fully restore the mountains they damage---

then put a huge tax on carbon- then let the market place find the answers- assign the revenues from the carbon tax to pay off the national debt...

not likely to happen of course, but it would fun to watch it happen
Richard  Gammell
Richard Gammell
March 18, 2013
Kent and Bonkim,

Application is key:
A 1000 watt solar/wind generator produces only about 3 kWh per day so at $0.14/kWh about $0.42 per day.
BUT:
by using a solar/wind generator to replace a gas guzzling job-site generator, required to run tools at off-grid locations, 4.2 gallons of GASOLINE can be saved per day, at $4.00 per gallon this equates to about $4,000.00 to $5,000.00 per year. Payback time is 3 to 5 years with NO SUBSIDY.
Check it out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beaZVAKlnDQ
&
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSamGenpgnM

I am trying to get these systems to market but so far no luck with funding.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 18, 2013
kent-doering - who said kWhr - 18000mW installed capacity - what it produces annually will vary - the main point was renewables overall not cost effective except with government subsidy and they will need to be supported by stable large generators - coal, gas, or nuclear. Storage, etc, hugely expensive at present.

To repeat - much of the discusion here without looking at the consequential effects of this or that technology, audit of world resources, and the practicality of sustaining our present lifestyles given the consumer-lifestyles, and exploding world populations - discussion on this or that technologies or elements misses out on the bigger picture - also whether world economic and political systems will remain as they are at present - which forms the basis of the various arguments. We can only look ahead a few years and governments in democracies until the next election - mankind possibly lasting few more decades/one or two centuries at most.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 18, 2013
Dear Joe Zorzin: The Max Planck "pressure cooker recarbonisation" turns an average cubic meter of cellulose bio-wastes into coal inside a day. Then, using advanced Fischer Tropsch processing, a cubic meter of re-carbonized bio-wastes translate into a massive 250 liters of finished fuels - or 62.5 imperial gallons. Were the process to be applied to all available celluose bio-wastes-i.e. over 62 million cubic meters. it would translate into 3.750 imperial gallons... but there are other ways of displacing fossil.
The two most efficient bio-fuels I know of are rape seed and hemp oil. (marijuana) That is why Germany grows both. Did you know that the Ford motor company was building lightweight, carbon fibre cars using hemp fibres in 1941. It is making a comeback. Hemp fibre, cow manure, and anothe polymer turn into a very strong carbon fibre for automotive bodies, and even wind turbine blades after the oil has been squeezed out. (We used to make clothes, rope, and sails from hemp.) Paranoia about people smoking it stopped its widespread usage. But it is an excellent bio-fuel and building material.
The Canadians are already doing it. You have a lot of fallow fields in New York state which could be used to grow rape seed for rape seed oil, and hemp for hemp oil and fibre for use in industry and construction.
However, the focus of our particular Munich work group is now on advanced hho systems- in combination with magnetic resonance steam ignition in internal combustion engines, and gas turbines. (For ultra efficient, combined Erskine cycle, rankine cycle, combined heat power systems, or hybrid ICE- Stirling cycle systems.) Applying that will slash 50 billion liters of heating oil- while putting lots of power onto the German grids as SMART GRID COORDINATED; swarm- back up baseline for all the solar and wind going up to match the output to power demands.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 18, 2013
Dear Joe Zorzin: The total bio-waste figure for cellulose waste - in Germany is about 65 million cubic meters of cellulose wastes a year. The Max Planck Institute developed a "recarbonisation" system which turns all bio-wastes into coal in 24 hours. And applying a Fischer Tropsch petroleum system to that- we can obtain 250 liters of diesel, gasoline and kerosene fuel for every cubic meter of cellulose going into the systems.
Yes, there are woody bio-mass power generating systems - up in mixed agrarian - forestry region villages- which not only provide power, but also local, district heating. (Ref. Oshe Gray Davidson- "Clean Break" e-book.) German farms are building out cattle, pig, and poultry manure methane recapture heat and power systems as well. (Google Wildpoldsried, Germany, and Gussing, Austria as examples of where villages use bio-wastes, wind and solar to produce 4 times as much power as they consume.) I know of a Benedictine monastery with both dairy and forestry operations- and runs a boarding school and weekend adult education center which has both "woody bio-waste" and "manure methane recapture" to provide all the heat and power it needs for its massive complex. It will soon be adding 35% efficient rooftop solar - for exporting more power onto the grid. It is lso building out a heat recapture Stirling unit to turn excess heat from its two systems into power. Every farm an energy farm!
Really, the average output for manure methane recapture on a German farm is 160 kWh per hour, 24/7. At a feed in tariff price of 8 Euro cents per kilowatt- that is an annual extra income-of 112.128 Euros for the average farmer who installed "poop power" in addition to solar and participating in agrarian wind cooperatives. The installations amortize inside of four years.
Of course, the German Max Planck Institute at Potsdam developed a method for turning all cellulose bio-wastes into gasoline,diesel and kerosene. It is called "pressure cooker recarbonisation".
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 18, 2013
Dear Bonkers: Germany is exiting nuclear, going on wind, solar, dual pipe, closed circuit geothermal- (with no tapping of underground reserves... the twin pipe system pumps heat distilled water back down and it comes up as geothermal steam.) Combined Heat Power is mandated on all new buildings in addition to massive insulation. Wind and solar are building out very nicely, just as with dual pipe, deep geothermal using horizontal drilling and drill pad circular drilling adapted from the bakken field exploration oil and gas exploration. There really is no need to re-open the currently shut down nuclear power plants, nor to get off schedule in exiting nuclear in toto by the end of 2022. Really, manure-methane-recapture systems driving fuel cells - will put a fat 32.000 mWh of back up baseline power onto the German grid by the end of 2022. Sewage sludge and compost methane recapture systems provide power. Waste incineration sytems provide heat and power. Re-windowing with 1 inch wide dual pane vacuum insulation windows, adding 3 to 10 inch facade and 10 inch roof insulation saves a lot of heating needs (especially combined with passive heat architecture, and geothermal- concentrated- solar heat pumps.
And, there is a combined heat power program- where we replace heating oil units with gas fired Combined Heat Power systems... which we can now operate "all aqueous with hho and MRSPI magnetic resonance steam igntion systems (with rooftop runoff rainwater.) 100.000 multi-family or small commercial dwellings running that way provide a SMART-GRID coordinated virtual power plant pumping out 1600 megawatts. (being optimized and will be built out, thank you.)
Ultra efficient 35% efficiency solar on the roof, geo-solar heat pumps, and hybrid-hho-Magnetic Resonance Steam Plasma Ignition combined heat power - replacing all ten million heating oil units in Germany make nuclear and much coal totally redudant.
Joe Zorzin
Joe Zorzin
March 18, 2013
Kent Doering, do you happen to have a figure on woody biomass in Germany- for both electricity and thermal? Is that sector growing?
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 18, 2013
Dear Bonk: I am well aware of all the different German "energy efficiency" and "renewable energy" measures as I happen to reside in Munich, and work in the "sustainability".

I suggest you revise your figures for European wind upwards. Check out EWEA fkigures. European Wind passed the 100 GW installed capacity mark last year. Coastal and offshore wind is especially being built out due to the high wind availability. Germany happens to lead in per capita installation of rooftop solar. Wind and solar together account for up to 32% of German energy needs.

German wind capacity- actual production- is not 18.000 mWh but rather over 31.200 mWh, and massive amounts of new onshore and offshore capacities are added every single day. (German offshore puts up a big 6 mWh turbine a day..adding another 2190 megawatts of power every year- just offshore wind.

Germany is currently adding about 6.500 megawatts of rooftop solar every year. That figure will go to close to 20.000 soon as a new invention I co-hold the patent on, boosts the output of rooftop silicon solar from 15% to 35% efficiencies.

Urban waste incineration- coupled with long distance heat hot water district heating not only saves on fossil fuel co2 emissions, it eliminates high Greenhouse warming methane emissions from garbage dumps. Sewage sludge methane recapture works quite well, and we also incinerate the sludge itself in the urban waste incineration plants. There is a build out of agrarian- cattle, pig, and poultry manure methane recapture CHP on fuel cells. Both bio-waste systems will generate 20% of German power needs by 2020. (See Wildpoldsried, Germany and Gussing Austria as examples of "energy villages" that generaqte 4 times as much power as they consume.
Your talk of the "temporary glicth caused by the misguided greens" in reference to nuclea demonstrates a total unawareness of the german sustainability industry focusing on both "energy efficiency" and a broad syneregy of renewables.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 18, 2013
Kent Doering - don't wish to get into the uncomplimentary exchange - but Germany has always been in the forefront of renewable technologies - It has over 18,000MW wind, considerable forest, and biomass resources, a continental climate which provides good solar PV and thermal potential particularly in the summer, anaerobic digetsers for food wastes, etc.

The real point not answered is how does Germany manage to balance the intermittent generation with load variation - it is connected to the European grid and with neighbours France (nuclear), and Poland (Coal) sitting pretty. The German utilities are not investing in new plant as the older coal fired plant are still operational, and since the capital has been paid for, can compete with gas CCGT despite their lower thermal efficiencies. Furthermore with the huge increase in gas fired CCGT across the world, and that there is a glut in gas supplies, its price has fallen although utilities in the UK and even Germany (these are pan EU utilities) are making huge profits.

Ultimately Europe will have to build nuclear stations regardless of the temporary glitch caused by the misguided greens.

coal is getting competitive in Europe,
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 18, 2013
Dr A: You do love to denigrate and deride everything everybody is doing.
We have some simple problems to solve as to back-up baseline power in Germany. Solar on every roof is closer to reality in Germany than the U.S. despite our lower insolation. You don´t like wind, but it is steadily building out. Bio-waste-power from incineration (instead of fossil fuels- i.e. fairly carbon neutral, and eliminates greenhouse gas methane from garbage dumps- and manure recapture) will provide 20% of German back up baseline power for intermittent solar and wind.
As for aqueous fuel systems. All aqueous systems using hho already exist which violate the 1st and 2nd laws (I wasn´t talking about Newton) They are partially based on very efficient hho generation-out of rooftop rainwater i.e. 1 kWh input => > 400 liters of highly inflammable hho (Browns Gas) plus MRSPI - magnetic resonance steam ignition. (We add infrared energy to water by steaming it) It can be further ionized- and a mix of 10% hho and 90% radically ionized steam most handilly ignites in internal combustion engines with a very "high octane". We utilize "waste energy" in an ICE to generate steam on the hot exhaust mainifold- and radically ionize it. There are ways of getting that mix of hho browns gas and radically ionized steam to ignite in both Otto and Diesel engines.
It is not only relevant to transportation, but in Distributed Smart Grid coordinated combined heat power systems displacing heating oil units here like the VW Lichtblick system - liteally replacing the natural gas energy source with "aquous fuel systems". The VW Lichtblick system running nat gas generates 19 kWh in power and 35 kWh in heat- sufficient for a multi-family dwelling or small office building. With hho and "steam ignition", the engine literally runs off rooftop runoff rainwater.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 17, 2013
"Adding just 1 Ton of Biochar per hectare, (800 lbs/acre), would cover 100% Current Annual Fossil CO2 Emissions" -- biochar has its purposes, but a full analysis shows it is not a permanent carbon sink, nor is it produced and distributed without emissions and soil degradation through source harvesting (over 800lb/acre).

The relevant presentations from last Spring at Stanford GCEP should be studied carefully. There is no magic biochar bullet.

And, since we're >500 gigatons behind the carbon cycle, with ocean acidification now rampant, talking about any bio-this-or-that for power & sequestration is more than silly.

Even if we amazingly don't ruin the natural sequestration of carbon by sea life within a decade or two, we're still 1 or 2 thousand years behind the natural sequestration of ~250 megatons/year -- a reality our own politics and combustion industry lobbying has given us and our descendents.

I know folks today think highly of themselves, but earlier generations knew most of this and indeed had solutions, as did our scientists and Pres. Kennedy in 1962: http://tinyurl.com/6xgpkfa

Imagine the discussions we could be having about other issues, if we'd indeed eliminated combustion power by 2000.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 17, 2013
Kent, you make my day! "laws formulated in the 19th century were meant to be violated in the 21st" -- really? Tell you what, get a mallet and hit your head until you prove Newton's laws no longer hold.
;]
But, this is great: "Helmholtz also postulated that man can never make a heavier than air machine that can fly" -- not being right has nothing to do with scientific discoveries being different from year to year.

So, Kent, the Law you have demonstrated is Kent's 1st Law: "Listen not to what I say."
;]
Joe Zorzin
Joe Zorzin
March 17, 2013
Speaking of Dr. Hansen, a few years ago he was in full support of a new 100 MW biomass power plant in Florida- because biomass is not a fossil fuel.
erich knight
erich knight
March 17, 2013
Dr. Hansen is putting out a new Case paper in a few weeks.

Biochar can even accelerate Dr. Hansen's plan for 100 GtC of afforestation, through utilizing this substantial new addition to today's land-based NPP of about 60 GtC/yr and Biochar allows the soil food web to build much more recalcitrant organic carbon, (living biomass & Glomalins) in addition to the carbon in the biochar.
'The Case for Young People and Nature: A Path to a Healthy, Natural, Prosperous Future'.
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2011/20110505_CaseForYoungPeople.pdf

FAO on Conservation Agricultural:
'In general, soil carbon sequestration during the first decade of adoption of best conservation agricultural practices is 1.8 tons CO2 per hectare per year. On 5 billion hectares of agricultural land, this could represent one-third of the current annual global emission of CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels (i.e., 27 Pg CO2 per year).' http://www.fao.org/ag/ca/doc/CA_SSC_Overview.pdf

Adding just 1 Ton of Biochar per hectare, (800 lbs/acre), would cover 100% Current Annual Fossil CO2 Emissions.

'Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Potential of Agricultural Land Management in the United States: A Synthesis of the Literature'
An extensive scientific literature review providing a side-by-side comparison of the biophysical greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation potential of more than 40 agricultural land management activities in the United States.
http://nicholasinstitute.duke.edu/ecosystem/land/TAGGDLitRev

Dr. Mario Molina,(Nobel prize for Ozone)
PNAS Report on Reducing abrupt climate change;
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/10/09/0902568106.full.pdf+html

NATURE STUDY;
Sustainable Biochar to Mitigate Global Climate Change
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v1/n5/full/ncomms1053.html
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 17, 2013
You knnow Dr. AlecC. I have studies up on the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics. No problem. However, laws formulated in the 19th century were meant to be violated in the 21st. Helmholtz also postulated that man can never make a heavier than air machine that can fly- which was the 3rd law conveniently forgotten about when the Wright Brothers launched at Kitty Hawk.
Really.
You might think I am peddling ignorance. Your right. I can only tell you we are using hho generators, dry cell protrusion types, that now achieve a good 340 liters of inflammable hho gas per input kWh.
Now, you could go to your local race tuner shops, ask them to hook up a "plasma ignition system" to a spark plug on a fireproof surface.. and then spray either fine water mist or steam onto the high voltage spark. Both ignite very handilly. You can get salt water to ignite if you spray it in front of a combined ultra-sonic- microwave signal pulsed at 144 kHz- 1.4 gHz. No problem.
You are perfectly free to call me ignorant. Our group cares less as we power a race tuned 7 liter Ford V8 putting out 900 BHP - running off both hho and MRSPI (magnetic resonance steam plasma ignition.)
The devil was in the details, but the 1st an 2nd laws can be violated.
You love to denigrate the German efforts at waste incineration, bio-waste recapture, wind, and its solar roof program. (jealous) We also have excellent brake energy recycling subways, streetcars, and common rail diesel busses (ultra efficient) which take a lot of traffic off the road. Munich is already doing compost and sewage methane recapture in addition to waste incineration with long distance heat and power which cuts heating oil consumption by over 5 million barrels a year. Aqueous micro-CHP systems complement the building out solar (with efficiencies soon to be boosted from 15% to 35%.) and onshore and offshore wind, and closed, dual pipe geothermal taking advantage of the North German and South German dry hot rock fields.
Joe Zorzin
Joe Zorzin
March 17, 2013
Erich said, "Dr. Hansen's afforestation plan goes hand in hand with Biochar soil technologies, forestry & Nutrient management." Anyone have a link to Hansen's plan? Not only will afforestation be important but greatly improved every day forestry, most of which is clearcutting and high grading. I suggest light, intelligent, thinning will give us the wood we need while protecting enough of the forest that it will continue to sequester carbon.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 17, 2013
Kent, when you study up on engineering & thermodynamics, write back.

You're selling two things, one of which is simple ignorance.
;]
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 17, 2013
Erich,, you might well view the Stanford GCEP presentations I linked above, especially the one from Brazil,

This comment is irrelevant to our emissions problem, which you also seem not to grasp...

"Agave on marginal lands in Mexico & US southwest, estimate that such marginal lands have the potential of another 1.5 Gt of biomass production. Then the potential of new genetically hybridized, perennial(& coppicing) biomass energy crops, triple cropping in the tropics, etc. can double and triple the current biomass crop yields of about 10 tons per acre."

Burning anything for power is foolish because it's inherently, thermodynamically wasteful

And, growing crops for burning for power is even more foolish.

Ma Nature didn't invent photosynthesis for us to drive combustion engines/turbines with -- surprise?
;]
So, photosynthesis is about 7% efficient in converting sunlight into combustible compounds (carbohydrates...). Conversion of those compounds to fuels (fermentation, digestion...) is also inefficient. And burning those fuels fo0r power degrades the energy release by about 1/2 or 2/3.

So, the net result is 2% of Earth's land covered by human structure. With present PV, there's more roof space than needed to meet all peak daytime power needs, worldwide. Add in efficient storage, EVs, nuclear, etc. and there' no need to burn anything, unless its an accidental GHG from something we must do, like digestion/composting.

The Calif. Energy Comm. has long recognized the value of local solar and that's why we have the "million solar roofs" initiative, with municipalities, colleges, individuals & businesses all deploying local solar PV/hot-water quickly.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 17, 2013
Goodness, I don´t think Dr. Alec C. understood what i was talking about with hho systems combined with magnetic resonance steam ignition systems.
These both "violate" the first and second laws of thermodynamics because they use "system" waste energy to generate energy. Brown´s gas is generated by taking a portion of the generated energy- and using special, tri-pulsed high voltage currents to generate large amounts of hho... inflammable gas at a kwh to cubic liter gas output ratio of appr. 1 kWh => 350 cubic liters (.35 m³) That is combined with water steamed over the exhaust manifolds and radically ionized by magnetic resonance systems. A "hybrid" aqueous fuel system running 15% browns gas hho, and 85% magnetic resonance, steam plasma ignition systems is 100% all aqueous with no co² emissions. Aqeuous micro CHP - with zero emissions will displace the shutting down nuke plants
I am most delighted to say we are already running a big 7 liter autombile engine putting out 900 B.H.P. on this "dual aqueous" system. Garbage incineration- And as for "pig poop" power, Austrian monks pioneered agrarian methane recapture back in the 60s, and Germqany is building out 32 gigawatts of manure methane recapture systems. The nukes will be converted to sealed, dual concentric pipe horizontal drill deep geothermal with no seismic disturbances, with additional heating derived from big Stirlings on the Rankine cycle steam exhausts driving generators in turn generating massive amounts of hho- which, when combined with MRSI- magnetic resonance steam igniton- heats the 200 ° c geothermal steam to the expanded 300° steam needed in the converted nuke steam turbines.
I am amazed how many Americans get on an anti-German rant because it is exiting nuclear-to build out solar, wind, geothermal, bio-fuels and waste incineration systems.
I will add that Munich will be off fossil fuels for heat and power by the end of 2025. Show me any American city getting anywhere near that.
erich knight
erich knight
March 17, 2013
Colleagues working with Agave on marginal lands in Mexico & US southwest, estimate that such marginal lands have the potential of another 1.5 Gt of biomass production. Then the potential of new genetically hybridized, perennial(& coppicing) biomass energy crops, triple cropping in the tropics, etc. can double and triple the current biomass crop yields of about 10 tons per acre.

One example of total potential is the cutting edge Pyro/Catalytic process, now supported by Google, GE, BP & Conoco.
If CoolPlanet Biofuels processed the entire projected US biomass harvest in 2030, of 1.6 Billion Tons, the yields would be;
120 Billion Gallons of tank ready fuel ,(The US uses 150 Billion gallons/year), and 0.3 Billion Tons of Biochar
It would require just 12,000 distributed refineries.(each producing 10 Mgal/yr)

The US CO2 reduction fraction of 26.3 PPM = 207Gt CO2,
207 GtCo2 = 56 GtC,
The avoided carbon from 120 Billion gallons of Bio-Gasoline = 0.324 GtC/yr
0.324 GtC + 0.3 Gt Char = 0.624 GtC/yr
A significant drawdown & avoidance without even accounting for the out year increases of NPP, fertilizer use efficiency, and avoided CH4 emissions & nitrogen conservation.

The carbon cost of sequestration utilizing Biochar is a small fraction of the usually cited $500/tC for carbon capture and sequestration.
The Australians have worked several scenarios, different ways the carve up the income streams, and come up with a range from $5 - $50/tC for their offsetting values.
Using Biochar Systems to Sequester Carbon;
http://www.agmrc.org/renewable_energy/biomass_energy_production/using-biochar-systems-to-sequester-carbon

If you enter "biochar field trials" into the search engine Google Scholar if will bring up thousands of citations, growing exponentially the last three years.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 17, 2013
Re biochar, etc., the presentations here may be useful.. One speaker was the Dane in charge of renewables efforts (like pig poop)...

http://gcep.stanford.edu/events/workshops_negemissions2012.html
erich knight
erich knight
March 16, 2013
Dr. Hansen's afforestation plan goes hand in hand with Biochar soil technologies, forestry & Nutrient management.

A Carbon Farming Initiative, like the Aussies have, and Canada is contemplating, feeds in to a carbon labeling for all products, as WalMart is developing. A carbon label puts externalized cost right there for the public to understand, parsing out all that has gotten the product to their hands. The Accounting of soil carbon as the base measurement of sustainability and aligning incentives to get a farmer paid for his good works, is where carbon markets should all grow from. The farmer will always have the lowest cost system for sequestration of carbon and it is about time that the carbon markets recognize that as it's very foundations.
A foundation far more secure than any other market. All political persuasions agree, Building soil carbon is good.
Re-Building the World's Soil: The Role of Soil Carbon Methodology for U.S. and Global Carbon Offset Projects,
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/12/prweb10185341.htm

2011 Son of Billion Ton
a research team led by Oak Ridge National Laboratory projected that the US would have between 1.1 and 1.6 billion tons of available, sustainable biomass for industrial bioprocessing by 2030. The finding was a highlight of the '2011 U.S. Billion-Ton Update: Biomass Supply for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry'. The report is an update of a landmark 2005 study undertaken by the DOE and ORNL in 2005
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/pdfs/billion_ton_update.pdf
erich knight
erich knight
March 16, 2013
Agree with Dr. Alex C, Combustion of anything is at best a bridge.
Some Bridges are better than others;

Pyrolytic conversion of sustainably procured biomass to maximize formation of biochar (which is added to soil or otherwise stored) while yielding some bioenergy offers another potential route that is particularly beneficial in regions with poor soils where biochar amendments can enhance primary productivity. Several estimates of technical potentials have been made (Lehmann et al., 2006; Laird et al., 2009; Lenton and Vaughan, 2009; Molina et al., 2009; Sohi et al., 2009; Woolf et al., 2010). Perhaps the most thorough of these is Woolf et al. (2010), who very conservatively estimate, a maximum sustainable technical potential (MSTP) of about 130 GtC over the course of a century, of which roughly half would be C removed from the atmosphere in the form of biochar. Reforestation scenarios decrease today's net deforestation rate linearly to zero in 2030, followed by sinusoidal 100 GtC biospheric carbon storage over 2031-2080. Alternative timings do not alter conclusions about the potential to achieve a given CO2 level such as 350 ppm.

Woolf et al., 2010; http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v1/n5/full/ncomms1053.html

Jim Hansen is looking for peer-reviewed results to support a reforestation scenario that draws down atmospheric carbon by at least 100 GtC. This draw-down must be distinguished from a GHG offset, for which Woolf et al numbers are considerably higher. This Biochar consideration provides a draw-down of 33 GtC with the Woolf "most likely" scenario, and 66 GtC with their "maximum sustainable potential", which help his case substantially and can allow Dr. Hansen to expand his up cumming Case Paper to 133-166 GtC.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 16, 2013
On: "Germany is getting appr. 400 MW of power per 1.5 million of the population with garbage incineration plants"

400MW/1,500,000 people is poor efficiency for the emissions. A typical US home is a 1kW, 24/7 load, with ~4 people served. That's 400,000 homes or ~1.6 million served, with no emissions, if the power is hydro, nuclear, etc.

Germany is not a good example right now -- they're building several GW coal plants and even a 2.2GW lignite-burning plant -- worst of the worst. Their naive decisions on nuclear means they're emitting ~50Gigatons of CO2 more now than prior and have blown through any international agreements. Some other nations have already chastised the German foolishness.

Adding trash-burning, rather than effective recycling/composting is simply disgraceful.

But, hey, it's politically expedient given the pompous ignorance of German 'Greens' today.
;]
These may be useful...
www.policyexchange.org.uk/modevents/item/fixing-climate-policy-with-professor-dieter-helm-cbe
www.charlierose.com/view/interview/12812

Our descendents are looking back at us from the future. They'll have every right to spit on our graves, if they can find them.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 16, 2013
As for things like: "Brown´s gas systems combined with MRSPI systems will be making their debut in Europe for driving internal combustion engines."

Burning anything from any source to use in any engine that could otherwise be electrified -- say an EV or industrial motor -- is the wrong environmental choice. All combustion-to-power conversion systems are thermodynamically limited to efficiencies below about 50%. Vehicles now waste ~2/3 of every fuel gallon (and $) put into their tanks. EVs, however, are ~90% efficient and, with regenerative braking, return to a charging base with ~15% less energy demand that

The Carbon Cycle is capable of sequestering ~250,000,000 tons of C per year into seafloor and deep crust. We now emit >6,000,000,000,000 tons of C, primarily from fossil fuels.

Yes, we're emitting >24 times what natural processes can handle. Our total deficit is now ~500 gigatons of unnatural C, in air & oceans. The consequences cannot be corrected for hundreds of years, no matter what we do. One can look up papers at the DePaolo Planetary Sciences Group at UCB, etc...

http://energyseminar.stanford.edu/node/461
http://melts.uchicago.edu/~archer/reprints/archer.2008.tail_implications.pdf
www.nature.com/nature/journal/v425/n6956/abs/425365a.html

Schemes to use heat from any combustion are non-environmental, unless that combustion avoids emission of GHGs worse than CO2, such as methane combustion from dump/compost gas. Intentionally creating Methane, etc., for combustion, is as bad as burning fossil fuels. This is why places like Palo Alto. Calif. are not only moving to sewage digestion, rather than incineration, but to gas capture for modest electrical generation as well. Jurisdictions with local utility authority can easily incorporate this power into their local solar plans, etc.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 16, 2013
JoeZ, good, thoughtful question about geo changing.

It does, and our Geysers PG&E plant has also influenced local earthquakes. Iceland is in a large, long-term volcanic vent field, most other places aren't.

Thus geothermal suffers all the power waste of solar/wind 'farms', due to distance from loads, plus the unique issues of large water dependence and control of effects on groundwater as well as air emissions.

Geo, for instance, doesn't have the NORM Exemption that combustion plants have, so a geo plant can't emit Radon, etc. as radioactive gasses and can't emit sulfurous gasses either.

As the old truth goes, "You can find a coal (or geothermal) plant with a geiger counter, but not a nuclear plant".

The difference for geo is they have to prevent their radioactive emissions from leaving the grounds. Coal plants even dump more stuff, like Arsenic, Selenium, Uranium, Mercury, etc., into both air & ash piles. NORM lets them off the hook, thanks to the combustion lobby. Check the huge TVA ash flood into the Clinch River a while back.
:]
quintin bullis
quintin bullis
March 16, 2013
nice idea for the state of new york,, problem though people in new york are still out of date with renewable energy,, i've been doing lectures in our area (broome& chenango counties,) and people just don't want it and think fracking for natural gas is the way to go, not renewable energy,, i've been trying to sell systems in our area and haven't sold anything in the past 3yrs, there is no money here in upstate ny. people think the money is going to pour in from fracking,,, boy are they wrong,,, renewable energy would be so much better for this area. but again no money here, and people just don't care and just go about their business and not interested in solar esp in our area.. Q.suck for me trying to sell solar..
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
March 16, 2013
There is some truth to what Joel says in comment 20. A move toward community/consumer ownership seems like a viable option to sustaining wealth and cash flow. This type of movement also has influences toward encouraging local labor, materials, and resource development. Meanwhile, black market activity is discouraged due to the people protecting their revenue stream.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 16, 2013
Brown´s gas systems combined with MRSPI systems will be making their debut in Europe for driving internal combustion engines.
These enable "filtered rooftop runoff rainwater" CHP systems.
Germany is getting apßpr. 400 MW of power per 1.5 million of the population with garbage incineration plants- which also feed the heat-hot water grids. (22 GW of power on the full build out) and farms are being equipped with manure methane recapture combined heat power systems. (On the full build out of that- they will generate a full 32 gWh. (so the bio waste systems alone- will put out 52 gWh of power- sufficient to power 15.6500 four family households.
Replacing heating oil units with nat-gas or "awqeuous fired" CHP systems at the rate of about 200.000 building units a year - puts a lot of essential back up baseline power up behind all the solar and wind that is being installed.
Energy efficiency measures include massive building insulation programs, motor upgrades to A +++, generator upgrades to a+++, and combined heat power systems in addition to the massive build out wind and solar. Re-powering hydro- by replacing all the older generators with A+++ boosts output by over 45%.
it is the sum of all the energy efficiency and renewable energy measures which count.
Richard  Gammell
Richard Gammell
March 16, 2013
As Nike says: "JUST DO IT"
but the problem is the general population has to be in favor.

Remember what President Obama said in his 2009 Inaugural Address:
“We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars….and run our factories”
Didn't happen yet!! Why not? I think that, with the TV ad blitz from the oil and gas companies, most people don't realize that we have an energy problem..

The one thing to overcome with solar and wind is massive energy storage. Part of the storage problem can be solved by putting the solar and wind energy directly into the batteries of the electric vehicles ("Direct Solar Charge").
http://greenblocksamerica.wordpress.com/2011/01/29/just-a-thought-lets-bring-back-made-in-the-usa/
Patrick O'Leary
Patrick O'Leary
March 16, 2013
EtcGreen & Mike Gilbert, Good comments, but there are solutions in hand for all these issues. Whether or not people generally avail themselves is another issue. As to Reare Earth and Heavy Metals, this suggests a certain 'gadget' tendency. Ordinary materials and a little imagination are far more likely to succeed.

EtcGreen, please visit http://www.FuturaSolar.com and see the Sawtooth, modified with additional solar benefits, for low profile buildings. You already know the SouthWest is prime solar territory.
Michael Cellini
Michael Cellini
March 16, 2013
Many try to make things more complicated than necessary. I cannot speak to commercial or industrial but from a residential perspective we can achieve zero energy relatively easily. My own home and those of my clients are proof of such. A combination of a Solar Hybrid Heating and Cooling system that will produce 100% of a homes heating and cooling needs, including hot water, powered by solar pv is doable today. Homes without enough Sun exposure does not prohibit the technology if standard ground source heat pumps are used, which need not the Sun. Remote net metering can take care of the power for the heat pump. The solar thermal aspect would also have to be excluded in shaded homes but most homes have at least enough Sun for this technology since it is much more forgiving than PV.

Of course, with just a minimal amount of energy efficiency and then the economics make even more sense.
Joe Zorzin
Joe Zorzin
March 16, 2013
DrAlexC, regarding geothermal in CA, if all subsidies to all forms of energy production were ended (including the vast military costs to protect our oil interests) - which of course skews the economics, how would geothermal compare? Do geothermal sites decline over time?
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 16, 2013
Problem with geo is both emissions and expense of well drilling, maintenance, water pumping, thermal efficiency, well life, etc.

Our geothermal in Calif. is not very effective, despite volcanic regions.
bob freeston
bob freeston
March 15, 2013
I don't see mention of deep geothermal for base load above. At 5,000 feet large buildings (eg schools, hospitals etc) can be heated directly. The Brits may be leaders here. At 15,000 ft you get low grade steam generated electricity (Rankine cycle) and district heat for thousands of buildings--3 to 20 MW systems. The Germans are working on this. The numbers are already near or at commercial on a long term basis. District heating is very important and common in Europe but rare here in the US.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 15, 2013
Exactly right, Michael. The Calif plan for 2050 highlights efficiency even more than since our laws passed after the original '70s oil crisis.
Michael Gilbert
Michael Gilbert
March 15, 2013
While this is a good starting prescription for electricity, the opportunity to improve sustainability and environmental quality must include energy efficiency, as well as a credible plan to address thermal needs (heating) and liquid fuels used for transportation.

The article seems to assume static demand (with nominal growth) and stagnant infrastructure, leaving out two critical dynamic variables than can be affected by policy and behavior.
ANONYMOUS
March 15, 2013
I think we all need to step back and get real. Whatever is done has to be cost justified and commercially viable. Solar, Wind, Hydro, are all capable of generating power but can they compete in the marketplace? The largest IF is their ability to store power efficiently and practically as they are all unpredictable and in many aspects inversely proportional to demand. If there is a major breakthrough with batteries or other such energy storage devices then maybe they have a future. The Germans have done a lot but with a huge amount of government subsidies. Let's concentrate on natural gas (remember it is also renewable) and oil and wait for the others to become a commercially viable product (id.est. without govenment subsidies). Let's not shoot ourselves in the foot before its time.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
March 15, 2013
Basing an article on Jacobson's writings, which have been critiqued repeatedly by scientists and engineers, is foolish. His numbers have never added up for wind and the latest Harvard study shows even worse -- note the summary figure below, where even Jacobson's prior, optimistic numbers are below 10 Watts per square meter for wind, net...
www.seas.harvard.edu/news-events/press-releases/rethinking-wind-power
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/1/015021/

It's important to distinguish between folks who publish to advance us and those who publish for their own promotional purposes. Jacobson has received critiques for more than just wind-power misinformation (I know him).
;]
The future for the US and most other countries is 3-fold: local solar PV/Hot-water, efficient storage & EVs, and advanced nuclear.

The Chinese know all this, as do even out middle-east oil suppliers, like the Saudis. The Calif. "million solar roofs" initiative is directly about local solar -- no wasteful 'farms'. Even municipalities and public colleges are rapidly deploying local solar. Why not? -- for $1 per Watt and 200 Watts per square meter, the 1st decreasing & the 2nd increasing, there's no need for wind 'farms' wasting land, species and transmission power. Oops, forgot wasting subsidies & loves too...
www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf
--
Dr. A. Cannara
650-400-3071
ANONYMOUS
March 15, 2013
I think a baseload renewable like nautical torque would be perfect for New York city. It would make a completely sustainable energy portfolio much more realistic. Its possible too. Nautical Torque just launched an indie gogo campaign to raise awareness and funds for the initial prototype. If you like emerging technologies, please check it out, and spread the word if you like it.

www.indiegogo.com/cahill
Steve Frazer
Steve Frazer
March 15, 2013
Happy to see individuals with credentials are offering such high-level concepts, however, the 'Devil is in the Details".

I worked for the DoE and DoD for years and served as a Research Engineer for 2 major universities. Over the past 5 years I have managed a renewable energy firm in the southwest. The U.S. migration from fossil fuels to 100% renewables will require 100 years - plain and simple. It is a matter of public support, legislation, funding and a far bigger challenge than any of these, almost inconceivable volumes of minerals.

People in general and even scientists and engineers are not considering the volume of minerals - heavy metals and rare earths - required to accomplish these lofty renewable energy goals. Over the past few years, dozens of wind and solar manufacturers in the U.S. have failed and a significant cause is the price and availability of heavy metals and rare earth minerals. This includes Solyndra (my firm was a Dealer).

So 3 years ago, we opened a Mining Division which raised eyebrows among the long list of government agencies as I and most of my Staff are card carrying members of the Sierra Club. We set out to build environmentally friendly mines and mills. What an adventure - a few $M later we hold all the permits and are in operation and have developed extremely environmentally friendly processes. Even some of the big mining players are looking at us.

We are in the trenches (literally) installing renewables everyday and are intimately aware of what is required for the migration. The state of New York will be primarily powered by fossil fuels for at least the next 30 years.

For a better perspective of this issue, I wrote an article, "EV's and Hybrids are not our Future". http://etcgreen.com (link is bottom right column on the homepage)
Joel Davidson
Joel Davidson
March 15, 2013
"...a net increase in jobs" is not going to happen. Automation, robosourcing, or whatever you call it will continue to reduce the number of workers needed to get work done. A few examples are New York and the rest of the U.S. increased food production or world automobile production or white collar productivity with fewer office workers. Look at your own workplace. Will there be an increase in jobs? Are you willing to share your salary with new workers to increase jobs? Decreased population (fewer workers) is an important part of the sustainability equation.
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 15, 2013
Whatever you do, renewables will only fulfil a fraction of demand for energy in all its forms that we use.The sun is the primary source including, solar heat, PV, tidal, biomass, ad other intermediaries. Fossil fuls - solar collected/stored million of years.The main solar sources direct or indirect - wind, PV, thermal, tide, and ocean currents - all intermittent.

will need large central stations - coal, oil, gas, or other fossil sources, or nuclear for system stability, and peak loads -

Given the intensity of consumption, and population density on earth, no chance renewables will meet more than a fraction of consumption although that can be maximised via the various methods suggested.

No one appears to be talking of nuclear - the source other than coal, oil, and gas.Energy from waste not primary function of

Whatever we do - cutting down on consumption, and waste a priority.
dennis baker
dennis baker
March 15, 2013
In my opinion



We need to replace the fossil fuel power plants, the primary source of GHG. Now!

At a scale required to accomplish this task :

Ethanol starves people : not a viable option.

Fracking releases methane : not a viable option.

Cellulose Bio Fuel Uses Food Land : not a viable option

Solar uses food land : Not a viable option

Wind is Intermittent : Not a viable option



All Human and Agricultural Organic Waste can be converted to hydrogen, through exposure intense radiation!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/DennisearlBaker/2012-a-breakthrough-for-r_b_1263543_135881292.html

The Radioactive Materials exist now, and the Organic waste is renewable daily.

Ending the practice of dumping sewage into our water sources.

Air, Water, Food and Energy issues, receive significant positive impacts .

Reducing illness / health care costs as well !



Dennis Baker
Penticton BC V2A1P9
cell phone 250-462-3796
Phone / Fax 778-476-2633
DEHRAN DUCKWORTH
DEHRAN DUCKWORTH
March 15, 2013
Thank you for this great article. It is absolutely possible to create a new paradigm with a lot of focus on efficiency first followed by implementation of ALL the other options that exist, all of which if aggressively pursued do nothing but good through creating local jobs and industry while doing ourselves, the environment, and our children a great service. One very important category that was left out of the article however was biomass. A great study was conducted by a NYS Assemblyman Marc Alessi several years back which concluded (and suggested setting the goal) that if all "fallow" (unused) farmland in NYS were to be used for oilseed crops to produce biodiesel, not only would the upstate rural/ ag economy flourish (picture clean biodiesel plants surrounded by fields of oilseed crops saving the upstate NYS economy), but The State of New York would be able to replace up to 20% of all current NYS diesel (including heating oil) consumption with a locally produced diesel. In conclusion to his findings, Mr Alessi stated "Biodiesel is vastly superior to petroleum is so many ways; so superior, that we would be doing our environment and our children a gross disservice if we do not fully utilize the potential that lies within this energy source," said Alessi. "Using more biodiesel means we are lessening our dependence on oil from unstable parts of the world. By working to reduce fossil fuel emissions, it also means we are doing something beyond providing lip service to the global warming crisis. Further, we can create jobs as we would be producing the fuel right here at home." This "dream" could be implemented within five years with the right focus and determination.
Patrick O'Leary
Patrick O'Leary
March 15, 2013
Herr Doering, Thank you for your comment. Indeed, Cambar could not patent their only slightly modified version. Also, growing up in NYC such roofing was referred to as "German" roofing, since it was usually associated with thrifty German-American businessmen.

Visit the web site and you will see how Futura has modified it significantly enough to qualify for US patent 6,912,816. Patent Cooperation Treaty approval is pending. The application has been accepted for consideration and is being handled by the German Patent Office. Again, it is significantly different from the daylighting only versions with which you are familiar.
ANONYMOUS
March 15, 2013
A target of 15 percent less energy use through energy efficiency is not an aggressive target. 50% percent should be the target. Where is the solar thermal? It provides a much better ROI than PV and wind. Hot water can be stored from summer collection for heating in the winter. Ice can be made in the winter and stored for summer cooling. More passive solar heating and daylighting is needed. Let's think outside of the PV and wind box.

Bill
V G SHENOI
V G SHENOI
March 15, 2013
Incredible New York - but then that would the makings of the Wizard of Oz.
A Malik
A Malik
March 15, 2013
I surely missed something, but if you start with the assumption "power demand would be reduced by 37 percent" then we have a chance ;-)
Also: do they show a total cost and 'payback' period, even with the rosiest assumptions re: savings in fuel costs, health care costs, but factoring in retraining for the 'displaced' workforce.
erich knight
erich knight
March 15, 2013
I am with joe-zorzin, except for the combustion part.

Jim Hansen's plan for 100 Gt C of new forests has a proven historical track record. Including Genghis Khan as one of the most "green" GHG reducing administrations in history. His Politically – Incorrect afforestation plan murdering farmers was recently reported to have reduced 700,000,000 tons of carbon from the atmosphere. Christopher Columbus did quite a bit better with a post Columbian exchange carbon drawdown of 5 Gt C.

The main point is to increase Net Primary Reduction (NPP). With the proper management of that increase NPP billions of tons of sustainable biomass can be gathered. Then thermally converted for energy and carbon soil sequestration, to increase NPP even more in a virtuous cycle.

To appreciate the wider applications of Biochar, the use as a feed additive and nutrient management tool, Please review my presentation and slides of this opening talk for the USBI Biochar conference in Sonoma California. This is the third US Biochar conference, after ISU 2010 and Colorado 2009;

"Carbon Conservation for Home, Health, Energy & Climate"

http://2012.biochar.us.com/299/2012-us-biochar-conference-presentations

Modern Thermal conversion of biomass burns only the hydrocarbons in that biomass, conserving the carbon for the soil. At the large farm or village scale modern pyrolysis reactors can relieve energy poverty, food insecurity and decreased dependency on chemical fertilizers.

Please take a look at this video by the CEO of CoolPlanet Biofuels, guided by Google's Ethos and funding, along with GE, BP and Conoco, they are now building the reactors that convert 1 ton of biomass to 75 gallons of bio – gasoline and 1/3 ton Biochar for soil carbon sequestration. They claim a field to tank cost of $1.50 per gallon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkYVlZ9v_0o

If it is Good Enough for Google… It's Good enough for me
Shreeram Shrivastava
Shreeram Shrivastava
March 14, 2013
The article sets a new vision and high bar which is achievable if we first believe that it can be done.One additional source of renewable energy can be derived from organic waste at the Farms and food processing plants by using Anaerobic Digestion technologies. Biogas fueled cogeneration systems and BioCNG conversion are two very practical means to make electricity and fuels for the trucks.There are other waste to energy sources that will help fill the gap and enable this goal to be achieved in future. Financing and tax incentives can accelerate the time frame.
Ram Shrivastava
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 14, 2013
Suggest it. Germany still uses sawtooth lighting. As a matter of fact, Munich´s main train station uses it. It is on a North - South basis. Now, with boosted solar p.v. to 35%- it will get a lot of power on the alanted (dark west side) of the solar p.v.. Aluminum reflector plates inside the sawtooth system will also increase the daytime light fall. The panes will be dual glazed with 1 inch wide vacuum insulation, and ligtweight insulation- 6 inches wide, will be put on the slants to retain heat.

Sawtoot buildings are still being built in Europe which also sometimes offer solar heat and solar power. I fail to see how you can patent rooftop solar heat systems, and rooftop solar p.v. system in conjunction with an archtectural style that has been public domain for at least a century. I doubt it would be recognized by the European patent office.
Patrick O'Leary
Patrick O'Leary
March 14, 2013
Nice study, as far as it goes. Without a doubt there are areas that academics cannot include, largely because they can't figure them out.

For example, DIA Beacon, now an art gallery in the Hudson Valley, started life as a Nabisco cookie tin factory, circa 1920. It is a sawtooth roofed, low profile commercial structure. Interior pictures, mainly of the art, show the value of this little regarded solar power technique. Over 90 years later it is still going strong, albeit with single pane daylighting. This style of construction went out of fashion at about the same time that local and regional grids were being built out. By rights, it should have come back into fashion some time ago, when the national grid completed its build-out.

No only hasn't that happened, Cambar, the only other company offering sawtooth roofing, was bought out by Duke energy. Pfister Energy did recently install SWH on DIA Beacon, which is part of what Cambar offered.

This combination of EE/RE is still being offered by Futura Solar, in partnership with DCM-A&E, (US patent 6,912,816). This is multiple solar benefit roofing for low profile commercial structures, taking advantage of the fact that even flat, inert, built up deck roofing is collecting solar energy usually as heat. That energy, as light, heat & electricitly, can routinely be delivered to the business beneath the roof. That will save energy and energy dollars, but how does an academic include that in a report?
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 14, 2013
I would agree with Joe. Land is a premium good in Europe, so why waste it with solar. Concentrated solar is okay in arid areas. Otherwise solar p.v. and concentrated Stirling belongs up on rooftops along with solar heat. N.Y. has a much higher insolation rate than GermanyWhy use bio chips whhen you have so much combind geo-thermic - solar thermic available to provide 100% of building heat.?
Joe Zorzin
Joe Zorzin
March 14, 2013
James, thanks for the reference- I took a look at it, though that's a bit of a simplication. If you build a solar farm, that land is essentially now an industrial site- but forest land, where some wood is extracted for energy, is still forest- it's not lost, its ecosystem services are still functioning. A huge solar farm was recently built next to my neighborhood. The entire "farm" is now just a sand pit covered with metal and glass, where once lived many rare and endanged species, next to a river and a state fish and wildlife property- with many vernal pools on one side- and it's built on an acquifer for the town's water supply. I've seen other solar farms where the land is covered with cement or hard packed gravel- all ecosystem services are now lost. As for emissions of biomass facilities, certainly burning wood for energy results in emissions, but it can be argued that the forests will quickly recapture the carbon. Yes, I know about the Manomet Report, which in Mass., where I live, killed off biomass development- but that report, though not bad, is not definitive- it's just a good model and many people don't agree with its conclusions- even some of the authors of that report claim that the results were skewed by the way the state asked questions of the Manomet team. Despite Manomet, biomass facilities are being built in many places, especially in the US southeast. It could have a role to play in NY state. Despite the carbon emissions- harvesting wood from forests, if done right, will enhance the forests and that benefit needs to be considered. States in the Northeast, with lots of forests, are wasting a good energy resource by not doing more with woody biomass. Bill McKibben, of 350.org fame, was in favor of a thermal biomass plant at Middlebury College in VT, where I think he teaches. Certainly, thermal biomass is far more efficient than biomass for electricity, so that may be what we'll see more of in the northeast.
James Montgomery
James Montgomery
March 14, 2013
Joe Zorzin: Jacobson does support solid biofuel but only as a temporary measure, used sparingly to avoid overharvesting and impact on agricultural land. He lists two main reasons in the paper (p 12 in the link above): it requires more land than solar to produce the same electricity & heat, and the overall plan relies on eliminating combustion processes to reduce energy demand as well as emissions and pollution problems (including transportation of the feedstock).
Joe Zorzin
Joe Zorzin
March 14, 2013
I don't see any mention of renewable woody biomass.
Kent Doering
Kent Doering
March 14, 2013
Nice study. From the perspective of Germany, looks a little "pie in the sky" while ignoring advances in technology. The study also ignores heat and hot water needs. There are a lot of technologies Germany applies which the study ignores.

Re-powering programs are what could help. I mean upgrading on the demand side, the "negawatt technology" is what promises the most... i.e. replacing appliance, elevator-escaltor, industrial drive motors with A +++ and adding power management systems could slash consumption by a good 40%.
Hydro-re-powering, as is currently being done in Germany, could also boost hydro-electric output by up to 40%. (Hydo-generators are usually old an inefficient, and upgrading to A +++) I`d revise the possible figure on hydro- to 10%.
The study does not include bio-waste systems such as Garbage incineration CHP, sewge sludge and compost methane recapture, (bio-gas) and agrarian cattle, pig, and poultry manure methane recapture(along with septic tank sludge) bio-wastes can and should comprise 25% of future projections. (Bio-waste systems are the "hidden renewable" in Germany- and will account for 60 gigawatts of power, 20% of German 2030 power and heat needs.)
Upgrading to bio-waste systems. i.e. converting coal to garbage waste incineration and agrarian bio-waste systems can and should account for > 20%.
I would also more than double the figure for residential and office rooftop solar p.v. simply because of new, patent applied for advances in solar p.v. which boosts efficiencies from 15% to 35% while heat recapture nd other tech keeps dropping the price of solar p.v..
Wildpoldsried in Germany demsonstrates how a states agrarian regions can produce over 3 times the power they consume- with farmer wind cooperatives, low level Savonious vorticcal wind turbines, bio-waste methane re-capture systems. I`d add things up differently.
Paul Roden
Paul Roden
March 14, 2013
I have read Jacobson's three earlier articles in Scientific American (2009) and in Energy Policy (2011). We can do this. If we can put a man, er human on the moon and return safely back to the Earth, we can do this. I have started a petition on the Whitehouse.gov Website, "We, the people." at: http://wh.gov/vmC3 to force the Obama Administration to make this type of study for the rest of the United States by the US Department of Energy. This petition will be in effect until 3/22/2013 and needs to reach 100,000. It is our Constitutional right to do this. President Obama said we must act to reverse global warming and will do something if the US Congress will not. So please sign this petition and pass it on. We need to "generate the political will" that Jacobson and Delucchi say we are lacking in the United States. This is my humble attempt to generate that "political will". Why is it that in Germany the Chancellor, and the German Parliament the Bundestag, from Green to Conservative, left to right, are united behind a similar plan, and the US government does not have this unity? The German Parliament Building in Berlin is powered with renewable energy and by contrast the US Capital Building in Washington, DC is powered by coal.
M Preston
M Preston
March 13, 2013
For only a 6% share of the energy mix the residential rooftop PV is a staggering number of systems to be installed. Basically nearly every single home in New York state would have to install rooftop panels. Doesn't seem feasible to me.
Kurt Grossman
Kurt Grossman
March 13, 2013
What did the report say about all the "losers"? Doesn't it make sense to plan for the job displacement and confrontation with traditional energy supply? As a new technology company that has had to fight "tooth & nail": validation after validation; in order to finally get acceptance from the engineering and physics community, we have found that the GREATEST BARRIER to progress is understanding and planning for the competition that you stand to replace.
Does "ConEdison" like this idea?

Add Your Comments

To add your comments you must sign-in or create a free account.

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
James Montgomery

James Montgomery

Jim is Associate Editor for RenewableEnergyWorld.com, covering the solar and wind beats. He previously was news editor for Solid State Technology and Photovoltaics World, and has covered semiconductor manufacturing and related industries,...
  • About
  • Articles
  • Contact
  • FOLLOW
  • CONTACT
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Editors' Picks

  • America's Real Problem with Solar Energy
  • US, Australian Companies Taking Giant Steps for Global EGS Geothermal
  • EU Debate Over Climate Change Policy Could Dampen Renewable Energy Growth
  • Wind Power — Even without the Wind
  • Massachusetts Resets Its Solar Energy Bar, Four Years Early

Most Commented

  • 1
    Moniz Unanimously Confirmed As New DOE Chief

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • EnergyOcean International
  • National Hydropower Association
  • Natural Power
  • HydroWorld.com
  • Delta Rigging & Tools
News
  • Renewable Energy
  • Solar Energy
  • Wind Energy
  • Bioenergy
  • Geothermal Energy
  • Hyrdo Power
  • Blogs
  • Video
  • Finance
Resources
  • Companies
  • Products
  • Careers
  • Events
  • Webcasts
  • White Papers
  • Magazines
  • Press Releases
  • e-Newsletters
Company
  • About Us
  • Our Team
  • Contact Us
  • Advertising & Services
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Site Map
Network Partners - Magazines
  • Hydro Review Magazine
  • Hydro Review Worldwide Magazine
  • Renewable Energy World Magazine
Network Partners - Events
  • Power-Gen International
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India
  • HydroVision International
  • HydroVision Brazil
  • HydroVision India
  • HydroVision Russia
© Copyright 1999-2013 RenewableEnergyWorld.com - All rights reserved.
RenewableEnergyWorld.com - World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for news & Information