StoppingClimateChange.com
The solution to Climate
Change has to be as big as what caused it.
The world has over 100,000 coal power plants and oil refineries that can be
rebuilt to stop Climate Change.
Let's
have oil companies do this!
Small Nuclear can be an excellent replacement for all big coal. Cellulosic
Carbon's Potential Is Large Enough To Replace All Oil.
Let's
have oil companies do this!
The objective of this website is to provide an
effective plan to
stop the growth of Climate Change from all fossil fuel sources completely within 5
years. The plan is economically feasible, uses only developed technology, won't
change the world's energy use habits, vehicles, or commercial infrastructure,
provide mankind with genuinely cheap, abundant, sustainable clean energy,
wherever fossil fuel fire is used today, and is rapidly scale-able to a global
size large enough to actually stop the real growth of Climate Change.
Ending Climate Change has two parts: Part1, stopping climate change's
growth. This is the quick and easy part. Part 2, sucking enough CO2 out of the
air to bring the atmosphere back to what it was at the end of WWII. This may
prove to be impossible.
Carbon-captured
Fossil Heat or Nuclear Heat
+ Hydrogen + Biomass System - (Slides) - Dr Charles W. Forsberg .pdf
-
Quick slide show explanation.
Recycling air's CO2 into clean fuels - abstract sketch above - is
shown in sketch below using standard industrial equipment to
assemble
GTL molecules
[
GTL ]
to make CO2-neutral fire fuels.
We can continue to provide mankind whichever
energy they need, whenever they need it, in whatever volumes they need it.
A combination of clean energy producing technologies for stopping Climate
Change's growth.
CO2's carbon has an essential function in most
fire.
Equipping our existing nuclear
reactors with
Lightbridge
much safer higher output fuel rods
[pdf] and building additional
NuScale
modular reactors in the U.S.' Northern tier states to provide enough electricity to power 100 times as many electric cars and
heat cities.
Example: To replace the fossil fuel burning furnace in the
average house's furnace with an electric furnace/air conditioner would call for
20 to 40 amperes (A) at 220 volts (V). Most post-WWII houses have 200 A, 220V
power panels.
Forest thinning
machines that do the job of a controlled
forest burn might harvest enough brush cellulosic carbon to replace
America's need for oil to make gasoline.
Discussion pages. >
Foreword
Oil Industry 2.0
Cheaper Than Coal?
The Technology
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_liquor
Equipment pages. >
1
Original Plant Site
2 New Plant
Description
3 Energy Park and
Industrial Power Plants
4 Hydrogen,
Steam Generators
5 Biomass
Preparation Equipment
6 Plasma
Torch Gasifier
7 GTL Refinery 8
Fuels Description
(Left, Click to enlarge.)
CO2 disposal capacities for Michigan counties. (Right) Integral amine carbon
captured natural gas or oil power plant for Clean Energy Parks.
Many
countries and regions have only tiny or depleted oil
patches (i.e., like Michigan), lack advanced energy
infrastructure, and need something like Hybrid CO2.
1. CO2 emissions can be reduced to near-windmill levels by adding amine carbon
capture to the turbine's exhaust (somewhat like adding a catalytic converter to a car).
2. Substantial reductions in the cost of plant energy since you are making your own Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) CO2 and
burning its unrefined crude oil.
(If you add postcombustion carbon capture, plan on the
amine equipment taking up as much as 4 acres.)
CO2 is used two ways in the above Hybrid CO2 Energy Park.
1, In a carbon-neutral fuel-product loop where plants extract CO2 from the air, the
carbon (the ‘C’ in CO2) is extracted from the plants and used as one of the
essential ingredients (carbon carries the hydrogen in hydrocarbon
combustion fuels) to make synthetic gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, etc. When the
vehicle exhausts the burnt fuel's CO2 back into the air, this creates an energy
cycle that does not add to, or reduce, Climate Change.
2. Using CO2 for ‘Enhanced Oil Recovery’ to power the Hybrid CO2 Energy Park
itself.
In most parts of the world there are trace oil patches that cannot be profitably
pumped because the oil is attached to rocks and won’t flow easily by itself. The
Permian basin oil patch in Texas is an example. For instance, Michigan is the
U.S.' 17th largest oil producing state. Many of its wells are 10 barrels-a-week
'strippers'.
It so happens that liquefied CO2 acts as a solvent when mixed with crude oil.
Oil companies pay good money to buy tank cars full of liquefied CO2 and inject
it, along with water, into the ground in a circle around underground patches of
oil. This loosens the oil from its surrounding rocks and the water pushes the
now loose oil toward oil wells located in the circle's center. These oil wells pump the oil and CO2
mixture to the surface and into tanks. The CO2, being a gas under pressure,
bubbles to the top of the oil where it is recaptured, then recompressed to re-liquefy
it, and then is injected into the ground again. Not all of the oil is recovered
and, after several trips up and down, the CO2, unable to free up all the oil
every time, is
lost (sequestered) underground forever.
Typically, one barrel of CO2 will get you about 5 barrels of crude oil before
the CO2 is completely absorbed by the ground forever.
________________________________________________________________
Using Fossil Fuels to Make Clean Fuels
A reluctant bottom line: Personally, I prefer
nuclear. The world may keep nuclear in reserve until it has more completely
exhausted oil and gas. However, we need thousands of Clean Energy Parks immediately if we are
to head off the worst of Climate Change and can do so by using carbon captured
fossil fuels to power the manufacture of carbon-neutral fuels for general public
use on existing vehicles and building heating systems.
We have a head start with the unneeded
coal power plant sites themselves since worldwide there will be over 50,000 of them for the taking.
In addition, in the Michigan site examples cited above, perhaps a dozen unneeded Michigan coal power plant
sites are located directly above some of the best and safest CO2 disposal
geologic strata in the world.
All that is needed to sequester the CO2 is to drill a CO2 disposal well
straight down on plant property. Nothing could be quicker or cheaper.
Going nuclear with the new smaller, safer reactor technologies will
probably entail delays lasting into the mid-2030s. Even then,
production will come in dribbles and drabs for at least another 10 years.
Gas turbines have been in mass production since about 1940 as jet
airplane engines. Every day, about one million ordinary people trust them with
their lives. Either of the above two gas turbine configurations -
conventional carbon-captured gas - or hybrid CO2 - should be able to do the job.
Either of them will prove to have dirt-cheap initial cost compared to early
Small Modular Nuclear Reactor (SMRs) facilities. Standard turbine/generator
modules should be available for immediate delivery along with a standard outdoor
concrete pad installation that can be completed in several months from at least 10 different
world-class manufacturers who have already made tens of thousands of gas
turbines for the world's electricity and aircraft industries.
Why do I prefer nuclear? Natural gas CO2 emissions
from a non-carbon-captured gas turbine power plant are the same as the
CO2 emissions from the cleanest coal burning power plant at 85% carbon-capture
(considered excellent for coal). As I recall, CO2 emissions from coal power
plants are about 13%, oil 7%, natural gas 3%.
Link to fossil fuel CO2.
To capture 90% of a natural gas turbine's CO2 to make it CO2-competitive with
nuclear calls for much better amine (or other) chemistry along with much larger
absorption columns. The cost of doing this brings you face-to-face with the CO2
reality of carbon-captured natural gas vs. small modular nuclear reactors.
In this emissions region, oxyfuel carbon-capture offers substantial advantages
over amine carbon carbon-capture despite it's greater costs.
The carbon-capture systems for the gas/oil turbines can be added later if
carbon capture is not part of the turbine manufacturer's product line, perhaps
by one of the more than 20 different global chemical process engineering & construction companies. Some
of these E&C companies have been
designing and building industrial-scale carbon capture process facilities since
the mid-1930s.
Both gas turbines and nuclear facilities wear out. Some faster than others. Turbines, as short as 10 years; nuclear, as long as 50+ years. Both usually can be updated or refurbished on an as-needed basis.
________________________________________________________________
Observations
1. Greenies are barking up the wrong tree - the
Tax Tree. Energy is a common commodity. Clean energy fuels
must be genuinely cheaper than fossil energy fuels before they will be
embraced by the world.
2. Climate Change's
growth must be STOPPED
before Climate Change can be REVERSED
. (We are currently dumping over 100 million tons of ADDITIONAL CO2 into the air
EVERY DAY.)
3. BECCS will prove to be a VERY BAD idea. BIOMASS should never be
burned to produce industrial heat. Biomass' neutral carbon is too valuable. It is
feedstock for producing advanced combustion fuels.
4. Fewer than 1/4 of the world's coal power plants would need
to be rebuilt to stop Climate Change's growth from
ALL
fuel sources. The remaining 3/4 of the coal plants could then be repurposed or shut down.
5. The world's oil industry has the ability to stop
the growth of Fossil Fuel Climate Change by using "Clean Energy Parks"
to replace all fossil oil and gas fuels with
Carbon-neutral Oil and Gas fuels.
________________________________________________________________
Template Industries
Shell Pearl: The world's largest Gas-to-Liquids (GTL) refinery.
https://www.shell.com.qa/en_qa/projects-and-sites/pearl-gtl.html
Showing what the oil industry could do to abate Climate Change
using syngas-to-liquids GTL technologies. Check out Shell's introductory video "What
is Pearl GTL?"
This website is about
clean Gas-to-Liquids (GTL)
fuels.
What is GTL? You can go back
and also check out Shell's other video "Shell's GTL Technology".
Shell Pearl clearly and simply illustrates the realization
that the world's oil industry has the capacity - personnel, know-how, equipment,
and economic ability - to rescue the world from much of the growth of Climate Change if
the world would make it worth their while.
Global mass production of simple, standardized, trouble-free Energy Parks should
bring substantial reductions in cost-per-park along with improved performance
and reliability. Think what mass produced cars, airplanes, and ships have made
possible.
(Plasma torches break matter down into it's
basic atoms for re-assembly into new molecules. Although rare on earth,
plasma (think lightning and Star Trek weapons) is the fourth state of matter. Plasma is the most common form of matter in space.)
Notice the plasma gasifier has a 1,000 tons-of-garbage-per-day appetite so it
needs to be located near 1 large or at the intersection between several medium
size cities or in a forest near a number of sawmills and paper mills.
http://plascotechnologies.com/
is using city garbage (MSW) to make electricity now!
Check out their videos.
Don't let garbage go to waste! -
Let's not fritter away valuable CO2-neutral syngas by burning it to make electricity. Make
green gasoline instead!
________________________________________________________________
The material presented on this web site was
gathered from the internet or a few personal photos over the the last 10 years
by a long-retired utility and industrial control systems engineer living mostly on Social Security.
His motivation for building this web site/blog rather than a model railroad is
his concern that most of the people making decisions about Climate Change are
from academia or politics and quite a few of their Climate Change mitigation
solutions - i.e., wind, solar, massive batteries, etc. - display only a superficial awareness of the
consequences of thrusting massive amounts of chaotically intermittent electricity from these
sources into the electricity grids of modern industrialized countries.
Old coal power plant sites, diversified to be Clean
Energy Parks,
would be platforms for industries offering clean energy solutions such as
fuel synthesis
that need the stable, predictable, no-carbon 24/7/365 electricity and heat available
from nuclear reactors.
________________________________________________________________
Placing This Idea In It's Contexts
The entire world is covered with similar
coal power plant sites about to be shut down either due to emissions or worn
out. We couldn't be more fortunate.
(Left) U.S. Coal Power Plant Shutdown Schedule: Red-2000 to 2014, Yellow-2014 to 2050. (Right) Global Carbon Capture (CCS) Storage Locations.
Here is a small rural coal power plant site
scheduled for shutdown that is working very hard to upgrade itself to provide local industry with
a cleaner energy industrial park: https://michiganhub.com/
Note: U.S. Supercritical and Ultra Supercritical
Thermal (Coal) plants and their sites should be reserved for future carbon
capture development and considered out of bounds for Clean Energy Parks.
There are about 50,000 more or less identical coal power plant sites worldwide
that could make clean energy manufacturing locations.
No magic to tripling a coal power plant site's power output. Just install a
three or more times as powerful carbon-captured gas turbine or modular molten salt reactor
(SMR) adjacent to the abandoned old coal equipment.
Lights = Cities = Coal Power Plants (click)
Major Oil Refineries (click)
Gasification Facilities (click)
Oil Refinery
________________________________________________________________
"Nothing in life is more liberating than to fight for a cause larger than yourself, something that encompasses you but is not defined by your existence alone" - John McCain.
"Technological fixes are often far simpler, and therefore cheaper, than the doomsayers could have imagined." - ( From Foreword )
To stop Climate Change: 1, Electrify everything possible, 2, burn only cheap, clean non-fossil combustion fuels to provide all other energy needs.
Power = Power . . . . . . . . . Electricity explains the modern world.
________________________________________________________________
This website is based upon the understanding that
fossil fuels will always be preferred as long as clean energy fuels are more
expensive. Nuclear appears to be the best path to making cheap
clean fuels.
Already, there are over 50 different baby nuclear reactors incubating in
technology's development nest. You're bound to find several you like. I point out
four on this website that are all very different,
yet all very desirable for different applications such as producing electricity,
extreme heat, hydrogen, desalinated water, and, of course, carbon-neutral combustion fuels.
The world also has over 200 thousand stationary diesel engines in the 2,000
and under horsepower class cranking out electricity and pumping water in rural
locations. A swarm of tiny nuclear
micro-reactors are being developed to replace these
really dirty oil-burners.
Would it be worth living with
nuclear's problems if that's what it took to end Climate Change's problems?
Nuclear is the most powerful clean energy tool
available.
Of the $556.7
million green-leaning foundations spent from 2011-15, “not
a single grant supported work on promoting or reducing the cost of nuclear
energy.”
https://www.wsj.com/articles/climate-change-has-run-its-course-1528152876
If environmentalism's base - such as Sierra Club -
really cared about stopping Climate Change, they would have been 100% behind
nuclear by 1990. In light of the bad things Climate Change is bringing to the
world, their opposition to nuclear is simply criminal.
Nuclear's real danger is what happens when Climate Change causes crop failure,
then famine, then mass migrations. Then nuclear weapons will be used to
gain and keep control of the world's still-fertile regions regardless of other
consequences.
________________________________________________________________
International Panel on Climate Change: Sixth (2018) Assessment Report: https://www.ipcc.ch/
________________________________________________________________
(From Carbon Dioxide
Information Analysis Center Q&A): Q. In terms of mass, how much carbon does 1 part per
million by volume of atmospheric CO2
represent?
A. Using 5.137 x 1018
kg as the mass of the atmosphere (Trenberth, 1981 JGR 86:5238-46), 1 ppmv of CO2
=
2.13 Gt of carbon. [G = Giga, or billion.]
- - - So, 400 ppmv CO2 =
852 Gt of carbon, or 852 billion tons of carbon, or, times 44/12 for CO2
to include the weight of the 2 oxygens at 16 each and one carbon at 12 each
= 3,124 billion (3.124 trillion) tons of CO2.
This is why this website is about HALTING the GROWTH of additional CO2,
rather than pulling enough existing old CO2
out of the air to make things right again.
 |
Carbon
Dioxide Information Analysis Center Frequently Asked Global Change Questions |
http://cdiac.ess-dive.lbl.gov/pns/faq.html
Q. Are organizations elsewhere in the world studying technologies that could help us address the problem of global climate change?
A. Yes, quite a few. For example:
Research Institute of Innovative Technology for the Earth (RITE) (http://www.rite.or.jp/English/E-home-frame.html) in Japan was founded in 1990 as a "research hub ... for the development of innovative environmental technologies and the broadening of the range of CO2 sinks."
GREENTIE, the Greenhouse Gas Technology Information Exchange, https://www.iea.org/tcp/fossilfuels/ghg/ (http://www.greentie.org/) an initiative of the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), was established in 1993 "to improve the awareness of, and facilitate the access to, suppliers and experts of `clean technologies', particularly technologies that help mitigate the emissions of greenhouse gases."
CADDETT (http://www.caddet-re.org/), the IEA/OECD Centre for the Analysis and Dissemination of Demonstrated Energy Technologies, "provides an international information network to help managers, engineers, architects, and researchers find out about the energy-saving techniques that have worked in other countries."
ScientecMatrix (http://www.scientecmatrix.com) is "a community of over 1000 scientists and technologists working on subjects as diverse as clean energy production from waste." [RMC]
________________________________________________________________
