Why Stopping Climate Change?
Home Page     Sitemap      About      Foreword     Environmentalism's Nuclear Disaster      The Technology      Footnotes & Links

Site Facilities:     1  Unneeded Old Coal Power Plant      2  New Electricity Generator Building       
Power Plant:       3  Power Plant Choices      3a  Pilot Plant Power Drop      3b  Carbon Capture Power     REACTORS:     3c  NuScale 550°F     3d  ThorCon 1,300°F     3e  Terrestrial  1,300°F     3f  GA 1,560°F

Fuel Feedstock:  4  Hydrogen and Steam Generators      5  Biomass Preparation      6  Plasma Torch Biomass Gasifier     
Refinery:             7  Biosynfuel Refinery      8 Biosynthetic Fuels     
8a Cellulosic E85 BioEthanol     8b Cellulosic M70 BioMethanol     8c Cellulosic BioDiesel     8d Fuel Hydrogen

Why This Website?

Climate Change must be stopped before it can be reversed.  Soon and inexpensively.


About 25,000 Clean Energy Parks are necessary if we are to completely stop Climate Change's growth.
The world has over 50,000 coal burning power plants. 
How many power plants are there?

The output of a Clean Energy Park is 2/3 nuclear electricity - there goes coal - and 1/3 cellulosic liquids - there goes oil. Natural Gas applications will eventually be absorbed by nuclear electricity and cellulosic fuels.

HOW?  Electrify everything possible, replace coal with nuclear, replace oil and natural gas fuels with equivalent cellulosic CO2-neutral biosynfuels.

The less we have to change to stop Climate Change, the quicker, cheaper, and better.  The less our lives will be impacted by changes we do not want and can't afford.

Since fossil fuel's CO2 is altering Planet Earth's weather - effectively forever - we have to de-fossilize our fuels to begin re-stabilizing the environment.

If we continue to use fossil fuels, there are enough fossil fuels remaining in the ground to give the world a terrible case of Global Warming before they are all burned.

Here is one group's estimate of how much longer affordable fossil fuel deposits will last:

Most energy experts agree renewables such as windmills and solar cells cannot fill the entire energy gap the loss of fossil fuels will create.

Today, after 60 years, the world gets only about 14% of it's energy from nuclear so ramping up traditional nuclear to 50%+ by 2050 is not likely.

Worse, what nuclear we do have are your grandfather's big hunkers that don't run hot enough to make carbon-neutral synthetic oil and gas or pull CO2 out of the air.

This all adds up to an chronic energy emergency.

Stopping Climate Change's growth pronto means mass producing the new, small, higher temperature nuclear reactors by the thousands shipyard style and locating them on the world's existing coal power plant site properties as a way to end coal burning and begin the manufacture of carbon-neutral cellulosic oil and natural gas combustion fuels quickly.


The world's remaining mineral energy resources.

Already, there are over 50 baby nuclear reactors incubating right now in the development nest. You're bound to find several that you like. The four I point out on this website are all very different, yet all very desirable for very different reasons.

Lights = Cities = One to a Dozen Coal Power Plants.

Bottom Lines

Pennsylvania State Redevelopment Agency Seeks To Revitalize De-commissioned Power Plants.

An article for The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (4/21, Legere) reported that old coal-fired power plants which have been de-commissioned in the last decade because they “couldn’t compete with cheaper energy sources, lower demand and stricter air pollution rules” may find new uses as the result of a redevelopment project administered by the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development (PDCED)  . The agency’s “playbook – the first in a series planned for closed Pennsylvania coal plants – is written to inspire developers’ interest in reusing the shuttered Mitchell site and the surrounding 800 acres of woods and fields mounded with mining waste rock and a coal ash landfill.” PDCED Senior Energy Advisor Denise Brinley is quoted saying, “We want to engage with the development community in a meaningful way and get these sites back into reuse. We have a lot of work to do. There’s a lot of them.” The Post-Gazette added that “in Pennsylvania, 11 power plants have shut down coal-fired generating units since 2010 and another three have converted to run on natural gas.” TRC Companies Plant Redevelopment Specialist Ed Malley “said there is no federal law to keep closed power plants from sitting cold and dark indefinitely,” and he is quoted saying that “the whole thing turns on economics,” adding, “if there is a valuable piece of property that has a power plant on it, chances are that someone will want it. But if the site doesn’t have a lot of value, it is very difficult.”

* Climate Change Has Run Its Course - Its descent into social-justice identity politics is the last gasp of a cause that has lost its vitality.
A case in point is climate campaigners’ push for clean energy, whereas they write off nuclear power because it doesn’t fit their green utopian vision. A new study of climate-related philanthropy by Matthew Nisbet found that 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.” The major emphasis of green giving was “devoted to mobilizing public opinion and to opposing the fossil fuel industry.”  - For the full article: 
- The author thinks the "Early Climate Change Movement" has run it's course and the cynical pleas of the "Windmill Greenies" are being heard less often.

The fossil fuel industry cannot be "opposed" away.
Fossil fuel's combustion heat will always be too important for mankind to abandon until more BTUs [or Joules] can be obtained for less money from carbon-neutral fossil fuel replacements.
Common sense tells you this is the only force that will ever stop Climate Change. Lower cost carbon-neutral drop-in fossil fuel replacement is this site's goal.

If this website is to have any lasting value at all, it will be necessary to identify specific fuel production technologies and determine order-of-magnitude cost estimates for:
                                                                               Production from Nuclear Reactor Heat:
(1), one megaWatt-Hour of Small Modular Reactor (SMR) nuclear electricity,
(2), one cubic metre of SMR flash desalinated water,
(3), one kilogram of SMR thermochemical hydrogen gas,
                                                                               Production from Carbon-neutral (Cn) Captured CO2 Carbon:
(4), one gallon of Cn corn-equivalent synthetic carbon-neutral ethanol   
      Corn Ethanol Energy Balance:                                                        

(5), one standard cubic foot of Carbon-neutral (Cn) synthetic 'natural' gas, 
(6), one gallon of Cn 87 octane (regular) gasoline,
(7), one gallon of Cn M70 methanol (E85 replacement), and
(8), one gallon of
Cn dimethyl ether [DME] (diesel replacement), 
 - all liquid combustion fuels to be made from Cn cellulosic feedstocks.

In addition, Metropolitan Solid Waste tipping fees, plasma slag recovery fees, and other sundry economic components need to be factored in.
For more background see:

To see where the idea for the above list came from, see Table 1 of:  
While not the inspiration for this website, which is the realization of some of the concepts mentioned in the Science Magazine paper, the author can't think of a better single paper covering the issues that led to the idea of using unneeded coal power plant sites to manufacture the energies suggested in the paper. Please check it out - well written with good graphics.

"Technological fixes are often far simpler, and therefore cheaper, than the doomsayers could have imagined." -  ( From Foreword )