StoppingClimateChange.com
A project-oriented web site
Advanced
Nuclear
Nuclear Skyscrubber
Nuclear Seascrubber
Nuclear Energy Parks
coal2nuclear
It is possible the world's oil companies could simply phase in biosynfuels to
replace fossil oil, the future's major source of Climate Change.
Oil companies phase different fuels in and out constantly. Think no-lead
gasoline, E-85 ethanol, biodiesel, etc.
Various
Synthetic Liquid Fuels.
Switching to biosynfuels, plus nuclear electricity, would sidestep the
time and cost needed to stop Climate Change by any other means.
The prerequisite for this scenario would be of thousands of unconditionally safe, very hot, very cheap, and very small
nuclear reactors.
"Shell Prepares for 'Lower Forever' Oil Prices" - The Wall Street Journal -
(Below) The reason we should have oil in our cross-hairs is that oil is almost as CO2-dirty as coal but oil is the most useful fossil fuel on the planet. And, as you can see from the chart to right, oil is already producing more total CO2 than coal. When you include Canada's oil sands and Venezuela's oil sludges, there may be more oil than coal so oil, not coal, is the fossil fuel that will cause the most total Climate Change.
The task before us is daunting. The above right chart says you must end 100% oil, + 100%
coal, + 100% natural gas burning to end only 57% of Climate Change.
To break even we will have to capture and sequester about 160 million tons of CO2,
methane, and NOx every
day.
(Below) This book, written by a Nobel Prize winning chemist, tells how we can replace oil and natural gas with cheaper equivalent fuels that will not add to Climate Changing CO2.
There are nearly 400 oil refineries about this large in the
world. They are already on top of biosynfuel technology.
Fighting Climate Change without nuclear energy is like
boxing with one hand tied
behind your back.
Environmentalists are being just as anti-science as Trump by excluding nuclear energy as part of a green energy revolution.
CO2's
Diminishing Global Warming Effect
It looks like CO2 is nearly tuckered out. We might be taking future CO2
too seriously.
(From
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/03/08/the-logarithmic-effect-of-carbon-dioxide/
)
Notice how as CO2 goes up, the heating curve increase slope approaches zero (horizontal).
What this shows is that the major damage has been already done. We missed our last chance when the environmentalists advocated large coal power plants instead of nuclear power plants in the 1980s.
The extra CO2 in the air and sea has to be scrubbed out, returned to the ground, and we start over using nuclear + carbon neutral combustion.
There simply is no other way to get back to pre-industrial environment temperatures.
On the other hand, since the big harm has already been done, we can just keep on using fossil fuels and adapt to Climate Change.
Why all the fuss about the
world's warming perhaps 2°C? Like Planet Earth, your body is an environment
for living cells that depend upon it for sustenance.
Here’s an analogy that Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, who helped compile some of the
climate research data for the World Bank, likes to use.
"Take the human body. If your temperature rises 2°C, you have a significant
fever. If it rises 4°C or 6°C your organs begin to fail and you can die.
