By David G. Eselius
Modern economies support large populations by consuming very large amounts of energy. In the 1990s, the Euro-U.S. leadership promoted the replacement of conventional energy (coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear, hydroelectric) with a new “renewable energy” business sector. The new energy sector is solar (photovoltaic) and windmill electric. Because “renewable” energy does not work, European and American investments in “renewable” energy has undermined the economic foundations of all nations.
After more than a decade of large government and private investments in constructing factories to construct “renewable” energy we find out that “renewable” energy produces at great expense only a small portion of national electrical demand. Worse still, none of the “renewable” investments produces electricity that the national electrical distribution-net can use.
Although the technical problems with “RENEWABLE ENERGY” distribution has always been know, world leaders ignored warning advice in order to promote “green” energy business sector investments, jobs, and non functioning energy products.
Bankrupt Solyndra solar power is not the problem. The complete solar and wind industry is the problem. Although there are hundreds of billions of dollars of global investments and commitments, the "renewable" energy business sector is unable to do what investors though would be done. That is, “RENEWABLE ENERGY” does not distribute generated energy.
Simply stated, through a conventional complex electrical distribution scheme, base-load electrical generation (coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear, and hydroelectric) provides energy for the variable demand load of customers. National electrical distribution systems cannot compensate for both a viable customer demand load-follow (i.e., adjusting generator output according to demand) and at the same time compensate for the unpredictable requirements of variable supplies of solar and wind.
The world’s economies and electrical supply and distribution systems function with base-load electrical supplies accommodating variable load demands. “RENEWABLE ENERGY” unpredictable supply electrical distribution does not work with base load demands. “RENEWABLE ENERGY” does not work.
“RENEWABLE ENERGY” is a political fraud of multinational energy platforms, and hundreds of billions of dollars of investment waste. Additionally, global warming temperature increase and the factual need to produce large amounts of global clean energy has left the Euro-U.S. leadership without a valid energy policy to guide the survival of the human populations into the 21st Century.
No wonder US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said in a speech to the International Monetary Fund's (IMF’s) steering body. "Sovereign and banking stresses in Europe are the most serious risk now confronting the world economy." If you have doubt that you may not live long enough to see a return on your long-term investment, or that you will be able to live long enough to retire, why invest in the future in the first place?
Phase-Out Carbon Energy - Phase-In Nuclear Energy
It is obvious that with a established human population of more than 9 billion people before 2050, long before 2050 the global energy use and resulting global warming greenhouse gas emission will have established the course of human race destruction 2050-2099. The only clean energy source with enough energy capacity to reduce human greenhouse gas emissions is nuclear energy.
Global population growth in combination with industrial development will lead to a doubling of electricity consumption from 2007 level by 2030. Besides this incremental growth, there will be a need to replace a lot of old generating stock in the USA and the EU over the same period. An increasing shortage of fresh water calls for energy-intensive desalination plants, electric vehicles will increase overnight (base-load) demand, and in the longer-term hydrogen, production for transport purposes will need large amounts of electricity and/or high temperature heat.
Popular sentiment focuses on renewables, but nuclear power is the only readily available large-scale alternative to fossil fuels for production of continuous, reliable supply of electricity (i.e., meeting base-load demand).
Increasing fossil fuel prices have greatly improved the economics of nuclear power for electricity now. Several studies show that nuclear energy is the most cost-effective of the available base-load technologies, at least when natural gas prices are high. In addition, as carbon emission, reductions are encouraged through various forms of government incentives and emission-trading schemes, the economic benefits of nuclear power will increase further.
As the nuclear industry is moving away from small national programs towards global cooperative schemes, serial production of nuclear new plants will drive construction costs down, as China has done, and further increase the competitiveness of nuclear energy.
An enabling factor is the increasing ability of nuclear reactors to load-follow (i.e. adjusting their output according to demand), so that they are less restricted to steady base-load role. However, in the short term this is only relevant where nuclear power supplies more than about 60% of the power.
Most reactors today are built in under five years (i.e., first concrete to first power), with four years being state of the art and three years being the aim with modular prefabrication. Several years are required for preliminary approvals before construction.
Global Warming and Energy
There is more energy stored in Polar methane clathrate (or natural gas hydrates) than is stored in all the coal, oil, natural gas, and wood reserves. Methane (CH4) release has taken over from carbon dioxide (CO2) release as a major greenhouse gas of global warming temperature increase. Methane release is why long-term investments are increasingly risky investments. If methane continues to increase its rate of emission, no one will live long enough to collect a return on his or her investment.
Polar permafrost methane clathrate stability-state decrease is primarily a function of temperature-increase and/or pressure-decrease. Within the Arctic Ocean (and all oceans), methane clathrate stability is mostly temperature sensitive. In order to alter clathrate stability-state, it is necessary to reduce global warming ocean and atmosphere temperatures. Reducing global warming temperature is something Euro-U.S. politicians have never done.
Researchers warn that the release of even a fraction of the methane stored in the Arctic shelf could trigger abrupt and rapid global warming. When methane clathrate further destabilizes, the methane emissions would be significantly larger, resulting in increased significant north and south polar positive feedback loop warming and significant increased global warming temperature increase.
The frozen methane clathrate cap trapping billions of tonnes of methane under the cold waters of the Arctic Ocean and Arctic lakes is leaking and venting the powerful greenhouse gas into the atmosphere, 2003-2008.
This report states, “Global feedbacks already arising from arctic climate change suggest that anything but the most ambitious constraints on greenhouse gas concentrations may not be sufficient to avoid dangerous interference with the climate system."
If you want to collect on your investments, businesses have to bend the will of “renewable” energy politicians and have them start building nuclear electrical facilities.
Modern economies support large populations by consuming very large amounts of energy. In the 1990s, the Euro-U.S. leadership promoted the replacement of conventional energy (coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear, hydroelectric) with a new “renewable energy” business sector. The new energy sector is solar (photovoltaic) and windmill electric. Because “renewable” energy does not work, European and American investments in “renewable” energy has undermined the economic foundations of all nations.
After more than a decade of large government and private investments in constructing factories to construct “renewable” energy we find out that “renewable” energy produces at great expense only a small portion of national electrical demand. Worse still, none of the “renewable” investments produces electricity that the national electrical distribution-net can use.
Although the technical problems with “RENEWABLE ENERGY” distribution has always been know, world leaders ignored warning advice in order to promote “green” energy business sector investments, jobs, and non functioning energy products.
Bankrupt Solyndra solar power is not the problem. The complete solar and wind industry is the problem. Although there are hundreds of billions of dollars of global investments and commitments, the "renewable" energy business sector is unable to do what investors though would be done. That is, “RENEWABLE ENERGY” does not distribute generated energy.
Simply stated, through a conventional complex electrical distribution scheme, base-load electrical generation (coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear, and hydroelectric) provides energy for the variable demand load of customers. National electrical distribution systems cannot compensate for both a viable customer demand load-follow (i.e., adjusting generator output according to demand) and at the same time compensate for the unpredictable requirements of variable supplies of solar and wind.
The world’s economies and electrical supply and distribution systems function with base-load electrical supplies accommodating variable load demands. “RENEWABLE ENERGY” unpredictable supply electrical distribution does not work with base load demands. “RENEWABLE ENERGY” does not work.
“RENEWABLE ENERGY” is a political fraud of multinational energy platforms, and hundreds of billions of dollars of investment waste. Additionally, global warming temperature increase and the factual need to produce large amounts of global clean energy has left the Euro-U.S. leadership without a valid energy policy to guide the survival of the human populations into the 21st Century.
No wonder US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said in a speech to the International Monetary Fund's (IMF’s) steering body. "Sovereign and banking stresses in Europe are the most serious risk now confronting the world economy." If you have doubt that you may not live long enough to see a return on your long-term investment, or that you will be able to live long enough to retire, why invest in the future in the first place?
Phase-Out Carbon Energy - Phase-In Nuclear Energy
It is obvious that with a established human population of more than 9 billion people before 2050, long before 2050 the global energy use and resulting global warming greenhouse gas emission will have established the course of human race destruction 2050-2099. The only clean energy source with enough energy capacity to reduce human greenhouse gas emissions is nuclear energy.
Global population growth in combination with industrial development will lead to a doubling of electricity consumption from 2007 level by 2030. Besides this incremental growth, there will be a need to replace a lot of old generating stock in the USA and the EU over the same period. An increasing shortage of fresh water calls for energy-intensive desalination plants, electric vehicles will increase overnight (base-load) demand, and in the longer-term hydrogen, production for transport purposes will need large amounts of electricity and/or high temperature heat.
Popular sentiment focuses on renewables, but nuclear power is the only readily available large-scale alternative to fossil fuels for production of continuous, reliable supply of electricity (i.e., meeting base-load demand).
Increasing fossil fuel prices have greatly improved the economics of nuclear power for electricity now. Several studies show that nuclear energy is the most cost-effective of the available base-load technologies, at least when natural gas prices are high. In addition, as carbon emission, reductions are encouraged through various forms of government incentives and emission-trading schemes, the economic benefits of nuclear power will increase further.
As the nuclear industry is moving away from small national programs towards global cooperative schemes, serial production of nuclear new plants will drive construction costs down, as China has done, and further increase the competitiveness of nuclear energy.
An enabling factor is the increasing ability of nuclear reactors to load-follow (i.e. adjusting their output according to demand), so that they are less restricted to steady base-load role. However, in the short term this is only relevant where nuclear power supplies more than about 60% of the power.
Most reactors today are built in under five years (i.e., first concrete to first power), with four years being state of the art and three years being the aim with modular prefabrication. Several years are required for preliminary approvals before construction.
Global Warming and Energy
There is more energy stored in Polar methane clathrate (or natural gas hydrates) than is stored in all the coal, oil, natural gas, and wood reserves. Methane (CH4) release has taken over from carbon dioxide (CO2) release as a major greenhouse gas of global warming temperature increase. Methane release is why long-term investments are increasingly risky investments. If methane continues to increase its rate of emission, no one will live long enough to collect a return on his or her investment.
Polar permafrost methane clathrate stability-state decrease is primarily a function of temperature-increase and/or pressure-decrease. Within the Arctic Ocean (and all oceans), methane clathrate stability is mostly temperature sensitive. In order to alter clathrate stability-state, it is necessary to reduce global warming ocean and atmosphere temperatures. Reducing global warming temperature is something Euro-U.S. politicians have never done.
Researchers warn that the release of even a fraction of the methane stored in the Arctic shelf could trigger abrupt and rapid global warming. When methane clathrate further destabilizes, the methane emissions would be significantly larger, resulting in increased significant north and south polar positive feedback loop warming and significant increased global warming temperature increase.
The frozen methane clathrate cap trapping billions of tonnes of methane under the cold waters of the Arctic Ocean and Arctic lakes is leaking and venting the powerful greenhouse gas into the atmosphere, 2003-2008.
This report states, “Global feedbacks already arising from arctic climate change suggest that anything but the most ambitious constraints on greenhouse gas concentrations may not be sufficient to avoid dangerous interference with the climate system."
If you want to collect on your investments, businesses have to bend the will of “renewable” energy politicians and have them start building nuclear electrical facilities.
