Why does CBLL.net Look like this?

Like a vast number of other web sites on the Web, CBLL.net uses CSS (Cascading Style Sheet) technology to present the pages. Your browser either could not find or does not support the CSS code.

You can continue to use this page as it is, it will work fine. If you would prefer to have a better experience you can download the latest version of a modern web browser. The major browsers should render the page well. Others should also do fine as long as they support CSS.

The Mozilla Organizataion
Opera Software
Netscape

CBLL INTERNET
Searching for Order in this World of Entropy
Decelerating Delat S
November 12, 2008, 6:44 pm

Hooray for insightfulness...

The International Energy Agency, with its inability to see anything but fossil fuels as the premier source of energy and no alternatives to the infinite growth/consumer capitalist economy, has made a dire prediction:

Only Carbon Sequestration Can Prevent Environmental Nightmare In 25 Years or Less.

Carbon Sequestration, the mythical process by which the dilute flue gases of carbon-burning power plants are separated, concentrated, compressed to extremely high pressure, then stuffed in the ground somewhere, is being touted as the only solution to the problem.

The most realistic carbon sequestration schemes require an entirely new power plant which will convert the coal to synthetic gas before burning it or an air separation plant to produce pure oxygen in which the coal is combusted in order to concentrate the CO2. Simply retrofitting existing power plants, as many people seem to imply will be done, is extremely impractical.

COGENERATION is the first and foremost solution to our problems. I repeat: COGENERATION!!! WHY IN THE WORLD would we build more power plants which will consume even more coal when the ones we have now throw away twice as much energy as they produce for use? That logic makes absolutely no sense (other than the money-making that is to be had for the fossil fuel industry). More power plants are the last thing we need. Some new, more efficient ones to replace the old ones wouldn't be bad, though the proposed carbon sequestration schemes don't exactly come out as winners when it comes to efficiency. Cogeneration still uses fossil fuels, but it uses those fossil fuels 2-3 times more efficiently.

The people promoting all of these fancy power plants and mythical technologies to reduce carbon dioxide emissions need to first get back to common sense. Seriously, more power plants? More power plants when the ones we have now in the United States throw away twice as much energy as is used by the entire continent of Africa? People are struggling to pay their oil and gas heating bills while a single large coal-fired power plant simply blows away enough heat in the cooling towers to heat over a million households! What good is a 20% efficient power plant that will store its CO2 emissions underground (other than burning more coal and boosting the profits of the coal industry and running out the world's finite coal reserves even faster)?

Carbon sequestration technology should be developed and funded by the fossil energy industry itself, as they are the ones profiting from the extraction and combustion of carbon. If it is able to prove that it is safe and feasible to use, then that's great, let's us it! If not, the world will have to eventually move fully to other sources of energy to meet its needs. Research efforts should be focused towards energy sources which do not require carbon to be brought to the surface, burned, and then put back underground. It is an extremely roundabout and inefficient way to get the job (of electricity production) done.

I'm betting that district heating pipes will lower carbon emissions more than carbon sequestration. The age of cheap fossil fuels is over, and that means the building of inefficient infrastructure is over.

Carbon regulations will hit 33% efficient electric utility sector and <25% efficient transport sector hard.

Comments

Posted by   www
on November 16, 2008, 2:04 am
Good post. Cogeneration really is key to solving the climate crisis, both in terms of pollution AND costs. I’m associated with Recycled Energy Development, a company that turns manufacturers’ waste heat into clean electricity and steam. Estimates from the DoE and EPA suggest energy recycling could cut U.S. greenhouse emissions by 20%. That’s as much as if we took every passenger vehicle off the road. Meanwhile, we’d cut costs considerably through efficiency. The way to get more of this done is to change the rules that give utilities a monopoly on power at the expense of efficient options like CHP.

Reply to this comment


 
Name

Email

URL


Remember me?

Comments


Verification code
Verification code