Advanced Biofuels Determined to Win Through

Syntroleum and Tyson Foods have partnered to build a 75 mgy advanced biodiesel plant in Louisiana.

The plant is expected to be cash positive at this commercial scale, and is expected to have a material and sustained advantage in feedstocks costs over soy biodiesel, with chicken fats and waste greases trading in the 25 cents per pound range, compared to the 39 cents per pound range for soybean oil. That’s roughly a $1 per gallon differential in the feedstock costs. Overall, the price differential could rise to as much as $1.50 per gallon compared to conventional biodiesel.

The announcement officially moves advanced biofuels from the “where’s the gallons?” era into the commercial scale-up.

...Tyson’s role: procurement of the feedstocks, using their own resources and their trading network. “Since they routinely acquire huge volumes of palatable, low-cost fats and greases to be mixed into their feeds, they are looking at this project, essentially, as if it is a large feedlot they are supplying,” Stinebaugh added. “They have the logistics, the trading platform, everything we don’t know in the feedstock area. That made it a great partnership, because you have two companies that have complimentary but different strengths and we need each other’s role in order to extract the full value.”

Overall, that’s a heady combination – a drop-in renewable fuel that can be blended with the existing diesel fuels without requiring infrastructure changes. A fuel that does not require a tax credit to be economically viable. Does not require the use of additional land for its production, using instead an existing stream of low-value residues and waste to which it adds a high value. Domestically produced without requiring operations at 5,000 feet below sea level in the Gulf of Mexico. Here now. _BiofuelsDigest

GCC
Novozymes is announcing two significant partnerships to develop advanced biofuels.

BP has paid $100 million for Verenium's cellulosic ethanol operation

Multiple breakthroughs in bio-refining will be one topic discussed at the Northeast Biomass Conference and Expo in Boston, on 4-6 August 2010.

... of particular commercial interest is the production of ethyl levulinate, a versatile fuel product that can be blended with heating oil, diesel or gasoline. “It is manufactured by combination of levulinic acid with ethanol,” he said. “The development of a renewable heating oil blending component that can be economically produced and used in the Northeast should be of great commercial interest.” He projected that the process can allow profitable production of heating oil blendstock from wood or agricultural residues for less than two dollars per gallon at large scale. “Ethyl levulinate can be blended directly or co-blended with biodiesel,” Fitzpatrick said.

...“Thirty-seven percent of the energy used in this country comes from crude oil. Ten percent of that is used to manufacture plastics and rubber. We can take that 10 percent and bring it back into the energy stream. That can have a major impact.”

...Also presenting at the NEBCE in Boston is Bernhard Quirbach, who will discuss hydrothermal carbonization and pyrolysis, two systems to get a high-energy output without a very high-energy input, he said. Quirbach’s presentation will show the options of how to use HTC and pyrolysis for a “new biofuel and bioenergy generation,” he said.

... “The genome sequence of the Q microbe shows the presence of over 105 different glycosyl hydrolases, and microarray analysis indicated that the glycosyl hydrolases were induced when the organism was grown in the presence of complex carbohydrates and down-regulated when grown on simple sugars,” he said. “Enzyme titration data has shown that the Q microbe achieves maximal productivity with one-fourth to one-fifth the amount of exogenous enzyme required by Saccharomyces cerevisae.”

Gray said a genetic system has been developed such that specific genes can be deleted or over-expressed in order to improve performance, adding, “this presentation will describe recent progress in strain and process development to meet commercial metrics.” _BiodieselMag

Thermochemical production of advanced biofuels, high value chemicals, and plastics -- from biomass -- will be marginally commercially viable in a few years. But in the long run, there is the microbial fuels darkhorse, moving up from the back of the field, well timed to hit commercial viability around 2020.

First generation biofuels -- such as cane and corn ethanol -- keep getting more efficient, as the cruel logic of the marketplace sifts out the operations that cannot innovate quickly enough to survive. Second generation biofuels such as cellulosic ethanol and enhanced biodiesels (Neste etc) will take up more of the market over the next 10 years.

Government mandates based upon greenhouse gas concerns are "helping" biofuels in the short run, but hurting them in the long run. Everything the government promotes ends up handicapped in some way by the government intervention.

Babcock & Wilcox Ally with Bechtel to Bring SMR to Market

The promise of Gen III small modular reactors is the promise of safe, affordable, sustainable, and scalable nuclear power. It is precisely what is needed to bring about an energy and clean-industrial renaissance to both the advanced and the developing worlds.

But to break through government bureaucracies and entrenched anti energy and anti-nuclear forces, you need some deep pockets and heavy corporate firepower. The alliance of Babcock & Wilcox with Bechtel Power Corporation creates precisely the type of staying power that is needed to get past the forces of energy starvation and political peak energy.

Babcock & Wilcox Nuclear Energy, Inc., (B&W NE) and Bechtel Power Corporation today announced they have entered into a formal alliance to design, license and deploy the world’s first commercially viable Generation III++ small modular nuclear power plant. Based on B&W mPower™ small modular reactor (SMR) technology, this new alliance, to be known as Generation mPower, brings together two recognized and established energy industry leaders in engineering, manufacturing and construction. Both Bechtel and B&W are making a substantial commitment in forming Generation mPower. B&W NE is a subsidiary of The Babcock & Wilcox Company.

As a more practical clean energy option for power generation, the 125 megawatt B&W mPower SMR development program underway for the past two years has already gained wide recognition for its substantial electric utility involvement, cost competitiveness and innovative design.

“This alliance is about two companies maintaining America’s historic leadership in the nuclear energy industry,” said Chris Mowry, president of B&W NE. “The formation of our Generation mPower alliance demonstrates a new level of commitment by American industry to address the growing challenge of climate change in an economical and practical way with small modular reactor technology. It brings together industry leaders in the areas of nuclear technology, manufacturing and construction. We believe that Generation mPower positions us to collectively deliver greater certainty in nuclear project cost and schedule, which are necessary to enable broader, more timely deployment of nuclear power.”

“The formation of Generation mPower is a turning point in the nuclear power plant industry – it has the potential to be a real game changer,” said Jack Futcher, president of Bechtel’s power business. “This alliance intends to advance the development and deployment of nuclear power in a way that makes nuclear power more accessible to utilities and more affordable to consumers. Bechtel brings the plant engineering, procurement and construction capability to complement B&W’s expertise in nuclear engineering and manufacturing. Together, we have the resources, experience and expertise to deliver on the promise of a new clean energy option.”

The alliance is expected to generate new jobs in engineering, manufacturing and utility operations in the United States and Canada. B&W will focus on designing and testing the nuclear steam supply system (NSSS) and nuclear island, including the design certification application development and submission, and NSSS production. Bechtel, backed by 60 years of experience in the nuclear power industry, will complement these responsibilities with integrated engineering and project management leadership.

Depending on regulatory approval and other factors, the first plant could be deployed as early as 2020. _FinancialPost

The biggest obstacles to a clean and abundant energy future are political. Anti-nuclear forces are willing to utilise harassment, litigation, protest of all kind -- including violent protest, and more to stop the development of clean and abundant nuclear power. The faux environmental left -- the forces of the dieoff.org left and energy starvation -- have their best team ever in the US White House and Congress. If they cannot kill big energy and initiate the great human dieoff now, they know it will be a daunting task to achieve when more rational persons are elected to public office on the rebound.

More on the plenitude of clean, high-grade energy, and the need to develop the political will to develop it.

Great Green Bags of Micro-Algae Invade La Jolla

The joint micro-algae fuel venture involving Craig Venter's Synthetic Genomics and Exxon/Mobil, have just opened a new research greenhouse facility in La Jolla, CA. The facility is described as a "halfway house" between a research lab and a pilot facility.

In the greenhouse facility, researchers from ExxonMobil and SGI will examine different growth systems for algae, such as open ponds and closed photobioreactors. They will evaluate various algae, including both natural and engineered strains, in these different growth systems under a wide range of conditions, including varying temperatures, light levels and nutrient concentrations.

They will also conduct research into other aspects of the algae fuel production process, including harvesting and bio-oil recovery operations.

Things don’t always translate well from the lab bench to the scale that we need to literally supply billions of gallons of fuel is this is to have any impact at on shifting CO₂ levels. Things that work well in the lab don’t always work well outside the lab—in fact, most of the time they don’t.

—J. Craig Venter, Ph.D., founder and CEO for SGI

ExxonMobil and SGI researchers say they have made substantial progress since the program was announced last July, including:

• Isolating and/or engineering a large number of candidate algal strains and developing growth conditions under which these strains could be made more productive. SGI scientists are seeking to optimize numerous characteristics, including the types of hydrocarbons produced, and in some cases excreted by the algae into the growth media.
  A key part of the genetic engineering, Dr. Venter noted, is determining the length of the hydrocarbon chains produced by the algae, and optimizing those for refining.
• Identifying and testing some of the preferred design characteristics of the different production systems, including closed, open or photobioreactors; and
• Initiating life cycle and sustainability studies to assess the impact of each step in the process on greenhouse gas emissions, land use and water use.

The next major milestone in the program, expected in mid-2011, is the opening of an outdoor test facility.

If research and development milestones are successfully met, ExxonMobil expects to spend more than $600 million on the algae biofuels program over the next decade, $300 million of which will be allocated to SGI.

_GCC

No one should expect any big algae fuel payoffs for Exxon/Mobil within the next ten years. But given the incredible capacity for growth of micro-algae, and the progressive improvements in energy balances for newer algae-to-fuel processes, it would be unwise to bet against microbial fuels (including algae) for the 2020s.

An Intent to Create Political Peak Oil?

When a government is run by ideologues more concerned with satisfying an extreme special interest constituency than in seeing that the country functions well and prospers, a number of problems can crop up. The current US government's bumper crop of fools appears intent on creating "political peak oil" -- energy starvation brought about by counter-productive government policies.

Not wanting to allow a crisis to go to waste, the Obama Pelosi regime is determined to create an all-out catastrophe.

Three weeks ago, William K. Reilly, the newly named co-chairman of the presidential commission appointed to investigate the BP oil spill, said he thought the six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico was necessary – and maybe even too short.

He said in an interview with The Times that the commission was unlikely to recommend that the ban be lifted before the panel completes its work in January. He said that government and industry must first adopt profound changes in how they operate before he would be willing to advocate lifting the moratorium. “Those things would have to happen faster than past history would suggest is possible,” he said.

But on Tuesday, after two days of touring the gulf region and a day and a half of hearing testimony from a variety of aggrieved local officials, business interests and oil executives, Mr. Reilly changed his tune. The moratorium is spreading economic pain across the region, he said, and for many is worse than the effects of the spill itself.

He said he was prepared to press President Obama and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to move as quickly as possible to adopt new safety and environmental protections and lift the moratorium well before it is scheduled to end in late November. “It’s not clear to me why it should take so long,” Mr. Reilly told reporters during a break in testimony on Tuesday.

“The commission has not researched this issue, and we will give full attention to countervailing arguments,” he said. “But I come from this whole experience with a much clearer sense of the degree of economic dislocation and the hardship caused by the moratorium than I had three or four days ago.”

The other co-chairman of the commission, Bob Graham, a former Democratic senator and governor from Florida, said that he, too, believed that the moratorium was a burden on the economic life of the Gulf Coast. He said the federal government has had nearly three months to inspect the rigs in the gulf and wondered why it was taking so long to determine whether they can safely restart operations. _NYT

But it bothered me the most when Interior Secretary Salazar reported that a panel of experts selected by the National Academy of Engineering had “peer reviewed” the report, agreeing on the six-month moratorium on exploratory drilling in the Gulf. It turns out that the seven experts never saw the final recommendation and in fact, opposed it. Salazar actually modified their report after they signed it to include two paragraphs calling for the moratorium! Salazar finally had to admit to the fraud, but this looks like one more instance where the Obama crew is neither honest nor competent.

By the way, Carol Browner, EPA, even said, “no one's been deceived or misrepresented.” What? I say impeach the whole bunch of clowns. _Source

Accelergy's Coal / Biomass to Liquids Fuels Approach

Accelergy
We have to take advantage of all of our energy resources -- including coal -- if we are going to make it through the next 40 to 50 years. Accelergy is planning a pilot project to produce liquid fuels from a combination of coal and biomass. The process will be similar to modern petroleum refining in complexity and intensity.

How does it work? Like biomass and coal co-firing for power, the introduction of biomass is the leverage used to ratchet down the emissions associated with coal-based fuels. In Accelergy’s world, the biomass of choice is camellia, and the company announced development back in March of a partnership to develop camelina resources. The more camelina in the mix, the lower the emissions. Pure camellia, there would be concerns on cost and availability in the near-term. But, aiming squarely at the 20 percent target, the company believes it can beat petroleum-based aviation fuels on cost.

... It’s commercially viable at north of 4000 barrels per day, around 60 Mgy, according to Vail. The company’s fuels are expected to be certified by 2011 – that’s work taking place at the Wright Patterson AFB in Ohio at the moment. One thing the Air Force is looking for is higher fuel densities that are highly beneficial for supersonic jets.

18 month targets for the company’s development?

“Produce sufficient quantities of fuels to complete testing, then in fact complete testing, and announce commercial scale facility either US or China.”

With a 2-3 year build-out (the former a likely timeline for China, the latter more feasible for the US), we can look for the potential of a first commercial-scale facility by 2014, if all goes well in testing and financing. But its an interesting option indeed. Coal reserves are massive. Beating petroleum on emissions by 20 percent, with a lower cost and a higher fuel density useful for advanced aircraft. _BiofuelsDigest

More on the CBTL Process from Accelergy:

CBTL technology shares many process steps with crude oil refining. Both start with a basic raw material (crude oil/coal/biomass), with the first step transforming raw materials into feedstock for further processing. Oil refining utilizes an aggressive high pressure and catalytic processes called hydrocracking or coking to achieve the first step, whereas CBTL utilizes a gasification process. The second stage involves converting the feedstock into fuels. While oil refining employs a fluid catalytic cracking process for that purpose, CBTL utilizes an indirect or direct liquefaction process. Both require thermal and catalytic reactions to achieved desired results.

The Accelergy process appears to be quite scalable. The company is willing to build in the US, but of course if the faux environmentalists in Washington DC restrict energy production too much, they will force an abandonment of the US for foreign shores -- just like Obama Pelosi is driving oil drilling rigs out of the Gulf of Mexico to fairer shores.

Ancient Bacteria Works to Position Itself in Bioenergy Race

“In this study,” Kim notes, “we found that phosphorus is really important.” Indeed, the cyanobacteria were unable to make efficient use of carbon dioxide in their growth cycle until the BG-11 medium was supplemented with phosphorus. Augmenting the medium with additional phosphorus allowed higher biomass productivity in the bioreactor. Once the phosphorus limitation was overcome, light irradiance and CO2 became the limiting factors for growth. _NewEnergyandFuel

Cyanobacteria are over 3.5 billion years old, and provide the world's oldest fossils. Often referred to as "blue-green algae", they are not actually algae. And cyanobacteria are not ready to let algae take all the glory, in the brave new world of cornucopian biomass and bioenergy.

Cyanobacteria are among the oldest living forms in nature, responsible for generating the atmospheric oxygen we breathe today. Now Hyun Woo Kim and Raveender Vannela, researchers at the Biodesign Institute at Arizona State University are perfecting the means to culture these microbes—a potentially rich source of biofuels and biomaterials—in significantly greater abundance. The work provides a vital foundation for optimizing a device known as a photobioreactor (PBR), in which these energy-packed photosynthetic organisms proliferate.

...new research indicates that the optimization of cyanobacterial growth requires a delicate interplay of CO2, phosphorus and sufficient light irradiation, within the PBR vessel containing the microbial crop. The group’s foundational study provides quantitative tools for evaluating factors limiting production of cyanobacteria within PBRs—a critical step along the path to large scale biofuel production. Results appeared recently in the journal Biotechnology and Bioengineering.

Photosynthetic cyanobacteria are able to produce roughly 100 times the amount of clean fuel per acre compared with other biofuel crops, and because their survival needs are simple—sunlight, water, CO2 and a few nutrients—they do not require arable land to be taken out of food production. Rather, cyanobacteria can be grown in rooftop PBRs or wherever sufficient quantities of sunlight and CO2 can be provided.

...Cyanobacteria reproduce prolifically, achieving a high biomass yield and they are tolerant of a wide range of temperatures, salinities and pH conditions. In addition to biofuels, which are extracted from fat-containing lipids in the cyanobacteria, the microbes can also produce many chemically based materials useful for industrial applications, like biopolymers or isoprenes. Photosynthetic microbes are also valuable for the growing field of neutraceuticals, permitting the manufacture of anti-cancer agents from fatty acids or antioxidants like beta carotene.

...Vannela and Kim stress that while they supplied CO2 and nutrients including phosphorus to the PBR’s cyanobacteria in their experimental design, ultimately, the nutrient source could come from waste streams or be recycled from the harvested biomass, while the excess CO2 produced by power plants could fulfill the microbe’s respiratory requirements. Thus, a closed loop could be formed, generating useful energy from water contaminants and the CO2 currently contributing to greenhouse warming. _ArizonaState_via_NewEnergyandFuel

A wide variety of microbes would be amenable to "tweaking" to achieve optimal production of fuels, high value chemicals, plastics, animal feed, nutraceuticals, cosmetics, and other useful co-products. Just the biomass alone -- up to 100 times the biomass of other bioenergy crops -- opens several doors to valuable products.

Humans have worked with microbes for perhaps ten thousand years, in producing beer, butter, cheese, wine -- and more recently extremely valuable pharmaceuticals. Microbes are used for oil spill remediation and increasingly for topsoil remediation and revitalisation.

But as long as governments waste billions -- even committing trillions -- to phantoms of carbon hysteria and destructive "green" energy approaches such as wind and solar, many of the more worthy approaches to an abundant and clean energy future will go unfunded. Such stupidity at the highest levels, when the lowest and most ancient levels of life are waiting to help.

Is the Cornucopian Promise of Algae Soon to be Realised?

Algae can be far more productive -- in terms of yield per acre -- than other energy crops. But up until now, too much energy has been required to process algae into fuel. If Unitel's new fuel-from-algae process is as energy-efficient as the company claims, we may be entering an entirely new era of biofuels sooner than expected.

Here are comparative bioenergy crop yields from MSU Bioenergy:

Table 1. Compartive productivity of selected biofuel crops.

Crop

Productivity (Ton/ha.year)

Energy (GJ/ha.year)

---

Wheat (seed + straw)	11	170
Miscanthus	16	270
Switchgrass	10	180
Microalgae (optimized)	60	1200
Microalgae (Theoretical)	120	2400

And here is what Unitel is saying about its new process for producing fuels and co-products from algae:

In the Unitel process, the feedstock—a slurry or “soup” of water and cultivated algae (1% to 20% by weight) is continuously treated in a special hydrolysis reactor to yield:

a fatty acid product;
a “sweet” water stream containing glycerol and other solubles; and
de-oiled algal biomass.
A small fraction of the fatty acid product is fed back into the reactor as catalyst. The nutrient rich “sweet water” is recycled into the algae propagation tanks, where the carbon in the glycerol serves to promote the growth of phytoplankton. The de-oiled biomass (consisting primarily of proteins and carbohydrates) is dried as a food ingredient for animal consumption.

The algal fatty acid product is catalytically decarboxylated and converted into paraffinic hydrocarbons (alkanes), followed by mild hydrocracking and hydroisomerization to make biojet fuel comprised of C10-C15 branched paraffins.

Some of the features included in our technology can be traced back to the nineties when we designed and built several first-of-its-kind slurry-based coal liquefaction and supercritical CO2 extraction demo units. The slurry pump loop and the depressurization module are two examples. The high-efficiency heat interchange system was developed in 1994 when I was Chairman of Xytel-Bechtel in Houston.

—Serge Randhava

Unitel has built up a diversified portfolio technology programs. In addition to the new algal process, its current agenda includes:

HarvestGas – oxyblown/pressurized fluidized bed gasifier for making synthesis gas from biomass
Bio-ammonia – fertilizer from biomass
Dimethylether (DME) – two options: methanol dehydration and direct synthesis
Cellulosic bio-alcohols – thermochemical conversion of renewable resources into liquid fuels
Cornex for the dry corn ethanol industry
Synthesis gas and hydrogen from infrastructure fuels
Neogen – beneficial harvesting of low grade waste heat
Catalyst test system (The Octave/CTS) – screening and evaluating catalysts for the future _GCC

Unitel Technologies, Inc. announced that the company has filed a patent application for a new technology for making biofuels from microalgae. The process involves minimal dewatering, and completely bypasses the energy intensive drying and oil extraction steps.

Currently, most of the proposed methods in the biofuels-from-algae space require the extraction of immobilized oil from algal biomass. However, regardless of the oil extraction technique used, and some are more efficient than others, getting to the oil is usually very expensive in terms of capital and energy costs. In some instances, the amount of energy consumed to extract the oil can actually exceed the energy value of the end product. _FP

Unitel is not dependent upon its algal processes to make a profit. Here are the future bio-energy technologies which Unitel is touting on its website: Synthesis gas from renewable biomass using pressurized, oxygen-blown fluidized bed gasification, Anhydrous ammonia from agricultural wastes, Dimethylether (DME) from biomass and brown coal, Cellulosic bio-butanol, bio-ethanol and bio-methanol, Fischer-Tropsch products from biomass, Synthesis gas and hydrogen from natural gas, LPG and gasoline, Rescue options for the struggling corn ethanol industry.

Unitel's lack of dependency on algae for profits is crucial to its chances for developing its agal fuels processes to the point where they are profitable on their own. It gives Unitel credibility and staying power.

Because of the serious economic and technological challenges involved, most observors of bioenergy do not expect algal and microbial fuels to breakthrough to full competitiveness with petro-fuels before 2020. But if companies such as Uniteltech can push the envelope by a few years, it could change the dynamics of the energy transformation appreciably.

More on Brian Wang's Winning Energy Bet w/ Michael Dittmar

Brian Wang discusses his winning bet with Dittmar for world uranium production in 2009. Dittmar not only lost to Brian, but he lost big in terms of percentage prediction error.

The Oil Drum picked up on Brian's winning bet, and attempted to downplay the meaning of Brian's win. Although The Oil Drum provides some useful articles by experts such as "Heading Out", and helpful links to energy articles in The Drumbeat, the website also often displays a quasi-religious faith in "peak oil" and "peak energy."

Brian provides a counter-point to Gail the Actuary's somewhat slanted piece, on his own blog and in comments at The Oil Drum.

The facts are quite important, since whether or not the world embarks upon "a nuclear renaissance" will have a lot to do with whether the developed world can readily ride out the transition from fossil fuel dependency to more sustainable and clean long-term energies. Energy is the life-blood of a modern civilisation. Access to energy is vital to all societies -- but particularly to advanced societies which are headed up a steep technological curve.

In another posting, Brian looks at the peak oil bet between doomer Matt Simmons and John Tierney at the NYT. Doomers clearly have "doom on the brain", and cannot see the world except through "doom-tinted" lenses.

Blog Carnival of Nuclear Energy #9 at Rod Adams' Place

Rod Adams is hosting the 9th Blog Carnival of Nuclear Energy, with a good selection of articles from the best nuclear bloggers.

First, Rod discusses the wager between optimistic futurist Brian Wang and energy pessimist Michael Dittmar. Dittmar not only believes in Peak Oil Doom, but apparently also believes in Peak Uranium Doom! Brian is taking Dittmar to the cleaners:

Brian Wang at NextBigFuture had a bet going with Michael Dittmar based on several posts and commentary at The Oil Drum. Michael believes that the world is running out of uranium and predicted that world uranium production for 2009 would be just 44,000 tons or less. Brian predicted 49,722 tons with the bet being set at the mid-point of 47,383 (over under). The actual number was 50,572 tons. Brian won the bet. You can read all about it and find some of the background links at World Uranium Production for 2009 Was 50572 tons. (I found it fascinating and ended up spending an hour or so reading the back story.)

Dittmar has also predicted that world uranium production will not go over 45,000 tons/year through 2018. He is and will be more and more wrong. Dittmar published his wrong predictions in arxiv and had it published on theoildrum.com and Technology Review Arxiv blog and the Economist magazine and several newspapers. _AtomicInsights

Nice going, Brian!

More from Rod Adams' 9th Nuclear Carnival:

Dan posed a thought provoking question at Cool Hand Nuke titled Are Investors Wary of New Nuclear Builds

On Idaho Samizdat, Dan Yurman talked about the current trends in new nuclear power plant supplies with his post titled Is Asia rising to dominate the global nuclear industry?_NuclearCarnival9

More at the link above. And for those who have not kept up on all the nuclear energy carnivals, Rod has kindly provided links to all of the previous carnivals #1-8 in the series, just below carnival #9.

Something important is happening in the nuclear energy field. With the coming of safer, smaller, more modular nuclear reactors, nuclear energy is making itself suitable to most types of power demands -- large or small. Factory-built reactors that require very little supervision to operate safely, are likely to overturn the prevailing beliefs about nuclear power.

As good sources of uranium and thorium are developed, and better ways are devised for recycling used fuel and disposing of contaminants, any remaining fears about the long-term sustainability of nuclear energy should be quelled.

And just when everyone finally gets comfortable with the idea of small modular fission reactors, someone is going to come along and make small modular nuclear fusion viable.

Brian Wang's Carnival of Nuclear Fusion

The technology takeoff point for nuclear fusion should hit by 2015 and there is even a chance for signicant proof before the end of 2011. Also, once a few prove viable then the other approachess could also be more fundable and be adapted to be made viable. One of the biggest argument against all of them is Bremsstrahlung radiation, which is too much energy leaking away via microwaves. Once a few show how to overcome the problem then all of them can get tweaked if they would not already work
_BrianWang

BrianWang
Brian Wang provides perhaps the best coverage of nuclear fusion developments on the web.

In his latest fusion posting, Brian looks at several competing small fusion projects, complete with images and links.

Besides front-runners Focus Fusion, EMC2, and General Fusion, Brian looks at Tri-alpha Energy, Helion Energy, Japan Muon fusion, "impact fusion", Cold Fusion, and nuclear fusion for space propulsion. Excerpt:

Recent work suggests that impact fusion is more viable than previously believed.

It looks promising but I guess it is at least 5 years away from a full scale test and more likely ten+ years. Unless one of the current linear colliders could be adapted.

The researchers are from China, so this could be attempted by China. I also see this work being helped with the improvement and lowering of costs for superconducting magnets. Higher Tesla field strengths. Iron superconductors might reach 200 tesla. There is a project to build 32 tesla superconducting magnet with YCBO variant wire. 2015 should see the Superpower Inc ramping up of 2G wire production payoff with far lower costs. Far more powerful and affordable superconducting magnets makes most of the nuclear fusion designs smaller and better to implement.

There is the possibility of a breakthrough with Low energy nuclear reactions (what was called cold fusion). I like the nickel 64 - stripping reactions theory.

The potential of a viable implementation of nickel-64 stripping reactions.

All of the nuclear fusion approaches have the potential to enable hybrid fusion-fission to close the fission fuel cycle (virtually no nuclear waste) even if they fall short of pure commercial fusion.

You may want to bookmark the link to Brian's nuclear fusion category, so you can keep up on the latest.

What Most Believers in Peak Oil Fail to Consider.

A lot of otherwise normal, well-functioning persons are firm believers in the idea that global oil production has irrevocably peaked -- or is soon to peak irrevocably. Whether such a peak will result in total global collapse, or simply lead to widespread economic hardship, is a point of contention within the peak oil community itself.

But the essential reasoning upon which most peak oil believers appear to base their quasi-ossified expectations is inherently invalid. The past production rates of national oil companies cannot reliably be used to predict future production potential for wells that are controlled by national sovereign oil companies -- and yet that is exactly what is being done by peak oil prognosticators and associated grifters.

True, oil production is likely to decline, causing oil prices to rise. But the reasons for the decline are critical to understand, if one wants to comprehend what is happening.

From an interview with Rick Rule:

The most important theme that people need to understand with regard to conventional oil is that most conventional oil that is produced in the world and sold for export is not produced by companies like Shell or Exxon or Total, in other words it’s not produced by major oil companies. It’s produced by national oil companies, where the shareholders aren’t public shareholders but rather sovereign governments, and that’s important to understand. It’s important for investors because most of the national oil companies have been, for some period of time, diverting substantial amounts of the cashflow from their domestic oil industries into other domestic spending programs that aren’t oil related, thereby starving their domestic oil industry of sustaining capital. I think this has gone on for so long that several of these national oil companies have production decline curves that are irreversible for the next decade. The consequence of that is that several countries, particularly Mexico, Venezuela, Peru, Indonesia and perhaps Iran, will cease to be oil exporters within 5 years, even if they start spending now, which they aren’t able to do. The impact of that is that as much as 20% of world export crude will come off of export markets and that could lead to a truly precipitous increase in price. The only hope that oil import countries have is that sustaining capital investments have increased in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait. These three countries, with the help of a resurgent Iraq (if it does resurge), are the importing countries’ only hope for moderated oil prices in the next 5 years. It’s my belief that production declines as a consequence of a lack of reinvestment will be greater than the production adds and I suspect we will see sharply higher world oil prices in the next 5 years. _GoldSeek

Many peak oil disciples will claim that it makes no difference whether oil production declines due to lack of investment, or due to lack of oil. Clearly, however, they are being disingenuous when making that assertion.

More from Rick Rule on Peak Oil:

Peak oil is more an economic and political phenomenon than it is a geological phenomenon. I think we’re past $40 peak oil but I don’t think we’re past $200 peak oil. There are technologies, as an example, miscible CO2 flooding to recover oil from allegedly depleted oil fields. There are new basins, albeit remote, frontier basins. There are new technologies that allow dry gas or LNG to be substituted for liquid oil. It’s an economic function because these technologies and substitutions require higher energy prices. At $200 oil, we’ve got lots of oil. _GoldSeek

Again, many peak oil proponents will claim that it makes no difference why oil prices climb higher. The very fact of higher oil prices will vindicate their beliefs, according to the true believers and disciples. But again, clearly, they are wrong. If prices are high, but oil is plentiful, either the world will move on to cheaper forms of energy and fuel, or technology will be spurred by higher prices to achieve more efficient economies of production in the more difficult oil (and oil equivalent) fields.

If a nuclear renaissance does come about, demand for fossil fuels will decline precipitously across most of the world -- except for specific applications as engine fuels. But at the rate that biomass and microbial fuels are progressing, it is likely that demand for oil and oil equivalent for fuel will begin to decline quickly after the year 2030.

Peak oil is a religion. And like most religions, the majority of followers do not have a clear understanding of exactly what it is they are supposed to believe. They only know that they believe it, and they are right, dad-blame-it! Meanwhile, the world keeps turning.

Top Quality Fuels from Biomass -- Taking it to the Harvest

Scientists are learning to grow greater yields of biomass on soils once thought unfit for crops. And now, biomass can become fuel of the highest quality, using a new Purdue process. Further, the biomass can be processed on-site using portable processing, eliminating the need to ship the biomass to a central processing plant.

Chemical engineers at Purdue University have developed a new method to process agricultural waste and other biomass into biofuels, and they are proposing the creation of mobile processing plants that would rove the Midwest to produce the fuels.

"...you can process all kinds of available biomass -- wood chips, switch grass, corn stover, rice husks, wheat straw …," said Rakesh Agrawal, the Winthrop E. Stone Distinguished Professor of Chemical Engineering.

The approach sidesteps a fundamental economic hurdle in biofuels: Transporting biomass is expensive because of its bulk volume, whereas liquid fuel from biomass is far more economical to transport, he said.

"Material like corn stover and wood chips has low energy density," Agrawal said. "It makes more sense to process biomass into liquid fuel with a mobile platform and then take this fuel to a central refinery for further processing before using it in internal combustion engines."

The new method, called fast-hydropyrolysis-hydrodeoxygenation, works by adding hydrogen into the biomass-processing reactor. The hydrogen for the mobile plants would be derived from natural gas or the biomass itself. However, Agrawal envisions the future use of solar power to produce the hydrogen by splitting water, making the new technology entirely renewable.

...Findings are detailed in a research paper appearing online in June in the journal Environmental Science & Technology. The paper was written by former chemical engineering doctoral student Navneet R. Singh, Agrawal, chemical engineering professor Fabio H. Ribeiro and W. Nicholas Delgass, the Maxine Spencer Nichols Professor of Chemical Engineering.
The article can be accessed online at http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es100316z _Physorg

There is essentially no limit to the growth of biomass, except for chemical feedstocks such as CO2 -- which is quite scarce in the atmosphere, only 0.04%. As we learn to grow biomass on ever more marginal soils, and in saltwater seas, previous "limits" to biomass will become laughable.

Now, with small, portable processing units and biorefineries which can go to the crop wherever it may be, more and more of the "disadvantages of biomass" are falling by the wayside.

Biofuels, bio-chemicals, bio-plastics, bio-feeds, etc. will never achieve the magnitude or density of power achievable with nuclear energy. But that is comparing apples to oranges. Nuclear energy cannot give us hydrocarbon based chemicals, fuels, feeds, plastics, etc etc which we can get from biomass. We need both.

Obama Pelosi is determined to bankrupt coal companies, prohibit most domestic oil and gas drilling, and make it impossible to utilise Canadian oil sands. Neither is Obama Pelosi making it easier to build new nuclear plants that are desperately needed. The regime's policy appears to be one of deliberate energy starvation. The underlying motive is uncertain, but appears to be complex and multi-focused.

In such an energy-antagonistic environment, domestic energy production is forced to to smaller-scale, and distributed on a local and regional basis. Of course, when domestic energy is spurned and oppressed by government, most energy will be imported.

Ontario Hit by Monster Heat Wave: Wind Provides 0.1% Relief!

Canadian Energy Issues blog reports on the amazing stalwart response of Ontario wind farms to the deadly challenge of a monster heat wave. In the face of the heat wave, Ontario wind is operating at a capacity factor of 1% -- contributing 0.1% of the province's power load!

Anybody who thinks wind and other intermittent renewable energy sources are the answer to Ontario’s power supply problems needs to monitor the electricity system operator’s website. Here we are, in a major heat wave, and the provincial wind fleet is operating at a ONE PERCENT CAPACITY FACTOR. That’s right: wind, the mainstream greens’ preferred power source, is contributing one tenth of one percent of the province’s electricity.
So where is the other 99.9 percent of Ontario’s power coming from? The top four souces, from highest to lowest, are: nuclear (9,321 megawatts), natural gas (5,382 MW), coal (5,035 MW), and hydro (3,796 MW). It is those four that are powering the province’s air conditioners right now.
Good thing we have the nuclear plants.

...No policy maker should listen to anything the mainstream greens say.
Next time somebody tells you wind and solar are the answer to Ontario’s power problems, remember this date/time. _Canadianenergyissues

Texas experienced a similar situation last winter, as did the UK. In fact, anyone stupid enough to rely upon an intermittent power source for crucial, life-saving power, is going to experience the sinking feeling of being stood up by wind (or solar, wave, etc).

For more information on the problems with wind energy:

Wind Energy Facts

Ted Rockwell Energy Facts

Without Hot Air Energy Facts

SCORE: Stove for Cooking, Refrigeration, and Electricity

BrianWangInformation about an interesting approach to small scale heat and electricity co-generation comes from a NextBigFuture posting. This thermo-acoustic device can burn any carbonaceous fuel -- even dried cow dung -- to produce the heat, which is converted to electricity via a linear generator.

BrianWang

* Target of 100-150 Watts electrical thermo-acoustic generator (stove, fridge, electricity) for £20 in 1 million quantities with half the wood and no smoke
* weight: 10-20kg
* 1.6 kWth for cooking and 0.75 kWth for simmering.
- Fuel: consumption 1 kg/hour, wood, dung and other bio-mass.
* fuel is placed inside the stove and burned. The fire heats compressed air that has been pumped into specially shaped pipes located inside the stove's chimney and behind the stove. The heated air begins to vibrate and produce sound waves. Inside the pipes, the noise is 100 times louder than a jet taking off. But because the pipes are stiff and do no vibrate, the sound waves have nowhere to go. So outside the pipe, people hear only a faint hum.

* The sound waves vibrate a diaphragm located at the end of the pipe. The diaphragm is attached to a coil of metal wires that sit inside a magnet. As the wire coil vibrates — about 50 times per second — it generates an electrical current, which is captured by wires and converted to the proper voltage.
* The stove has electrical sockets, where the homeowner can plug in, for example, a mobile phone for charging. Or she can sell the electricity as a phone-charging service.
* For refrigeration, the heated, compressed air is sent through a different part of the pipe, where sound waves cause the air to expand. As it expands, it cools to a temperature that can produce ice. It takes about two hours of stove use to produce enough ice that will keep the fridge cold for 24 hours. But homeowners have the option of producing more ice to sell for income. _NextBigFuture

Research innovation:
- Research into the combination of the thermo-acoustic engine, linear alternator and cool
box in a single device, powered by a biomass stove.
- Design of a rugged and inexpensive linear alternator that could be easily mass-produced.
- Overall system design from the view point of low cost, application of indigenous materials,
use of local manufacturing skills and simplicity of assembly, which are major research issues
compared to the current high-cost and thermo-acoustic systems.
Standing wave thermo-acoustic engine:
- Fractional wave length design.
- Combustor: wood burning, high efficiency, low emissions and used for cooking.
- Hot heat exchanger (1): 500 C gas temperature.
- Stack: heats and cools gas packets.
- Ambient Heat Exchanger (2): water cooled, also used for cooking. _SCORE.UK_PDF

This is one of many attempts to provide efficient cooking, heating, refrigeration, and small-scale power to the third world. Besides the need for clean water, inexpensive shelter, and abundant, nutritious food, the third world most needs practical sources of cooking fuel, refrigeration, and small power. Inexpensive, practical level medical and dental care would also score high on the list.

The challenge for the advanced world is to not allow itself to turn into the impoverished third world before it is able to solve the most pressing problems of the third world.

Charles Barton Takes the Offensive in Nuclear Reactor Safety

Charles Barton has been looking at nuclear reactor safety recently. He has decided that it may be time for nuclear safety promoters to go on the offensive.

A third philosophy of nuclear safety might be called precautionary or offensive safety. This approach is only possible in fluid core reactors. In particular it was investigated at Oak Ridge National Laboratory for the Molten Salt Breeder Reactor. [Offensive] safety involves the removal of highly radioactive fission products from the nuclear core. These include the gasses xenon(Xe), and krypton (Kr),. and the volatile fission products, iodine(I), tellurium(Te), cesium(Cs), and rubidium(Rb). In particular it is considered highly desirable from the standpoint of reactor control to continuously bubble xenon out of the liquid salt core fluids, with krypton following the xenon out. They can then be captured and stored. Removing the volatile fission products enhances nuclear safety, nut solves some materials problems with MSR. Tellurium is a particular problem because it contributes to some materials problems in the MSR core. The removal of the noble metals,

The removal of the noble gases, volatile fission products, and Nobel metals can be justified by safety benefits as a step designed to increase nuclear safety while lowering overall nuclear costs. In addition the continuous removal of fission products will offer significant benefits to reactor designers.

Thus Molten Salt Reactors have unique [offensive] safety features, that involve the removal of radioactive isotopes. Combining the [offensive] safety removal of radioactive gasses, and volatile fission products with an underground location location would mean in practice that further defenses against radioisotope release in the event of a nuclear accident would be unnecessary because gravity would serve as a sufficient barrier to the movement of against the movement of non-volatile radioisotopes away from the reactor hot cell. In addition, MSRs including the Liquid Fluoride Thorium reactor (LFTR) can be designed to operate with a negative coefficient of thermal reactivity, which protects the reactor from a loss of control over criticality as internal temperature rises.

MSRs can be designed to completely shut down before rising temperatures become a serious problem. In addition freeze core drain plugs offer a fall back passive safety feature that prevents reactor overheating. As core salt temperature rises past a certain point a plug of frozen salt is melted by simple heat transfer from the fluid core salt to the frozen plug salt. Once the plug melts the core salt drains into a tank or series of tanks shaped to prevent criticality. A passive air cooling system can insure that heat from the radioactive decay of the remaining fission products in the core salts will not become a problem.

The ARC-100, a proposed 100 MWe Integral Fast Reactor would share with other IFRs a negative temperature coefficient of reactivity. A large tank of liquid sodium located in close proximity to the reactor core would then serve as a thermal reservoir to prevent overheating due to the radioactive decay of the fission products embedded with in the fuel. A passive air cooling system will prevent the core and sodium tank from overheating. The ARC-100 breeding ratio is unlikely high enough to pose a void wort problem, and even if it did, Argonne National Laboratory research indicates that the IFR negative temperature coefficient of reaction feature of IFRs would shut down the fission process in the ARC-100 core before the core is damaged.

Thus both the LFTR and other factory produced MSTs as well as the ARC-100 would offer outstanding levels of safety. In particular MSR safety could offer a major route to lowering reactor price, because massive safety structures would be unnecessary. _CharlesBarton

There is much more at the link above.

The idea is to design the safety into the reactor, so that multiple complex extrinsic safety systems will not be needed. With present reactors, large numbers of trained personnel are necessary to constantly watch over safety and operational indicators -- constantly on the ready to intervene in case of problems.

But reactors which are built to keep themselves within safe limits of operation do not require expensive armies of overseers, eyes glued to screens and dials.

Perhaps eventually even the US NRC will catch on.

Can Iron Nano-Particles Save Shale Gas from Green Hysteria?

The shale gas bonanza has completely overturned mainstream peak oil / peak energy expectations. But recent sensationalist portrayals of shale gas environmental effects have revived hope among the true believers of the peak oil apocalypse. Knowing that no form of energy production is totally risk-free, and accepting that anti-fossil fuels crusaders have exaggerated harmful effects by a factor of at least 100, what can problem-solvers do in the real world to reduce risks to approximately zero?

Lehigh U. PDF
It looks as if nano-particles of Iron and Palladium may provide an answer. Researchers at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania have been studying groundwater remediation using iron nanoparticles for several years (PDF). This important research has led to at least 50 successful toxic waste site cleanups, and continues to advance the science of nano-remediation.

Researchers at Lehigh University have been utilising scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM) and X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS) in order to extend and improve the applications of the powerful nanoparticles. They have captured, for the first time, the evolution in the nanostructure of the bimetallic particles as they remove contaminants in water. As they react with pollutants such as trichloroethene (TCE), a toxic industrial solvent, the nanoparticles display huge structural changes. The particle core hollows out, the iron diffuses outward and the palladium, a catalyst that makes up 1% of particle mass, migrates from the outer surface to the interior surface of the iron.
Writing earlier this month in Environmental Science and Technology (ES&T), the Lehigh researchers reported that the ability of the nanoparticles to remove toxins decreases as the particles ‘age' and undergo structural change with exposure to water. Their results, they wrote, suggest that the age and storage environment of the nanoparticles play a critical role in influencing their effectiveness as remediation agents. The nanoparticles, which were invented by co-author Zhang, average 50 nanometres in diameter (1 nm equals a billionth of a metre). Islands of palladium on the outer surface of the iron measure 2-5nm in diameter. The particles have removed pesticides, vinyl chloride, TCE and other contaminants in 10 states and in Europe and Asia. Treated sites include landfills, an electronics manufacturing plant, chemical plants and military facilities.
When injected into groundwater, the nanoparticles flow with the water and react with and detoxify contaminants. Their small size and greater proportional surface area give them more reactivity with toxins than larger quantities of the same catalyst. According to Harch Gill (president of Lehigh Nanotech LLC, a Bethlehem company which owns the commercial rights to the particles), this superior reactivity enables the particles to remediate a toxic site in less than a year; treating such a site with traditional pump-and-treat methods would take 10-20 years. According to the Association of University Technology Managers, which named Lehigh Nanotech one of the top 25 technology-collaboration stories in 2008, 'it takes only six ounces of the tiny nanomaterials, versus a ton of larger compounds, to make sweeping changes in cleaning up contaminated environments.' As a result, the nanoparticles are now one of the world's most widely used nanomaterials. _EnvironmentalExpert

For purposes of environmental remediation, few metals have been more thoroughly investigated than iron. In moist settings, including the ground, iron naturally corrodes to iron oxide—rust—by giving up electrons to water molecules. Environmental engineers have long sought to commandeer this trait by designing iron particles that donate electrons to toxic chemicals instead. As iron transforms into rust, many bad chemicals transform into benign products as well. For instance, the extra electrons strip all the chloride groups off TCE, converting the toxic compound into ethane.

Several years ago, Zhang developed a chemical technique for making nanoscale particles of iron. Since then, his team has tested, with approval from EPA, iron nanoparticles at several sites polluted with TCE and its toxic relatives perchloroethylene and dichloroethylene.

One of the first field tests took place in 2002 at an industrial site in Research Triangle Park, N.C. To enhance the particles' reactivity, the researchers coated the iron nanoparticles with a layer of palladium, a favorite metal for catalyzing the breakdown of chemicals. Then, Zhang's team mixed a total of 11.2 kg of the nanoparticles—enough to fill a coffee can—into about 6,000 liters of water and slowly injected the resulting slurry into contaminated groundwater running under the site. Within 6 weeks, the concentration of the target chemicals dropped by 99.9 percent in groundwater within 12 meters of the injection site.

Engineers with the consulting firm PARS Environmental in Robbinsville, N.J., have also seen promising outcomes from injecting iron nanoparticles at more than a dozen sites around the United States. "We haven't seen results [from other remediation strategies] as effective as those we've experienced with nanoiron," says Harch Gill, an engineer with the company.

In addition to being simple, the technology is relatively inexpensive, says Gill. He contrasts the price of injecting a slurry of nanoparticles with alternative strategies. The company recently calculated that the cost of using the pump-and-treat approach to clean up a small, polluted site owned by a New Jersey manufacturing firm would be about $4 million. An alternative, to intercept a plume of polluted groundwater with a permeable iron barrier, would cost about $2 million. The firm chose to experiment with iron nanoparticles, the cheapest option at $450,000.

Targeting the source
Although iron nanoparticles have already proved successful at cleaning up toxic chemicals that spread through groundwater, they don't go after the source, the polluted, saturated soil under the original dumping sites, says Chris Clausen, a chemist at the University of Central Florida in Orlando. Even after a plume is cleaned up, material from the source can continue leaching out of the soil, forming a new plume.

"Take a dry cleaning operation that dumped chlorinated solvents into the environment," he says. "If you had nothing more than 25 kg of solvents in that soil and your groundwater flow was relatively slow, you could have a contaminated plume that could last for hundreds of years."

Iron nanoparticles don't work very well for treating sources of chemicals because the particles are hydrophilic, or water attracting, says Clausen's colleague Cherie Geiger, also of the University of Central Florida. In contrast, the organic contaminants in a typical underground source are highly hydrophobic, or water repelling. Instead of penetrating the saturated soil, the iron particles float on top of the contaminated zone.

Clausen and Geiger have adapted iron nanoparticles to circumvent this problem. The researchers encapsulated clusters of particles in hydrophobic membranes of vegetable oil. "In order to get the particles to move to where the contamination is, we wanted to create something that would travel through the [contaminated] soil just like chlorinated solvents do," says Clausen.

To demonstrate the technology in the field, Clausen and Geiger teamed with researchers at NASA, EPA, and Geosyntec, an engineering firm based in Guelph, Ontario. Their maiden site was Launch Complex 34.

As reported in the March 1 Environmental Science & Technology, the group injected a half-ton of nanoparticles into a small area under one of the complex's engineering buildings. Within 90 days, soil tests showed that 85 percent of the contaminants—mainly TCE and dichloroethylene—had disappeared from the test site. Within that area, some sections of soil showed 100 percent removal while others showed very little, a disparity that Geiger blames on uneven distribution of the particles.

Environmental engineer Greg Lowry and chemist Krzysztof Matyjaszewski of Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh are using another material to cover iron nanoparticles. The polymer coatings they're developing not only facilitate the nanoparticles' transport through contaminated soil but also enable the particles to selectively seek out chlorinated compounds. "If we can't get [the particles] to where they need to be, then they're no good to us," says Lowry.

The coatings consist of three polymer layers. The outside shell is hydrophilic, so that the particle can move easily through the groundwater. The next layer is hydrophobic, to have an affinity for chemicals such as TCE. The third and innermost layer anchors the entire polymer complex to the iron nanoparticle. _phschool

Interestingly, similar iron nanoparticles are also used to locate and kill malignant tumours in the human body. The nano-particles can be coated with sugars, peptides, or lipids for more effective penetration into tumours and tumour cells.

Iron is also combined with Palladium and Platinum in a new, nano-particle approach to fuel cells. This approach reduces the platinum requirement in the fuel cell appreciably, thus helping to reduce overall costs.

You are wondering how all of this can help with reducing groundwater pollution risks associated with shale gas drilling and fracking?

First, the level of risk needs to be established scientifically, without all the green mulch-for-brains hysteria which dominates the discussion in media, government, conspiracy theory, and political activist circles. Clearly the risk is much less than is being portrayed by sensationalist media.

Once the risk is quantified and clearly delineated, decisions can be made as to the timing and location of injection of nano-remediating particles for both prophylactic and rehabilitative purposes. The groundwater and soil can be remediated well in advance of any human contact.

In fact, nano-particles can be encapsulated in time-release polymers, and packed around the drill casings and groundwater barriers, as a just-in-case preventative measure.

Similarly, bio-remediative preventative measures can be utilised alongside the nano-particles, as an extra precaution.

But again, the first step is to move away from the typical hysteria, in order to scientifically quantify and qualify the actual risks involved.

Carnival of Nuclear Energy #8 at NextBigFuture

Brian Wang presents the 8th Carnival of Nuclear Energy. Excerpt:

1. Idaho Samizdat - Finland approves plan for two more reactors 

2. Acknowledging that Vermont Yankee is old, Meredith Angwin points out that replacing it with untried methods of power production (the Energy Amplifier) is not a good idea....
...
6. Nextbigfuture has the Focus Fusionexplanation of how dense plasma focus fusion could be scaled in experiments this year to prove breakeven.

More on nuclear energy from the Seattle Times:

The operating performance of existing reactors is truly outstanding. They operate longer between fuel reloading, resulting in less used fuel being generated. They are also 50 percent more efficient. In 1980, reactors operated at less than 60 percent efficiency while today it is over 90 percent. The power output of reactors has also been safely increased by more than 5 percent, the equivalent of 5 ½ new reactors, with another 3 ½ reactors worth of additions expected.

Reactor operating lifetimes are also being extended. Initially, reactors were licensed for 40 years of operation. As of the end of 2009, the NRC extended the operating license of 59 reactors by 20 years — another 50 percent improvement. In time, most of the existing plants will have their licenses extended to 60 years, with 80 years of operating life being considered.

The multiple reactor designs that were a contributing factor to the problems at WPPSS have been replaced by fewer standard designs. The NRC has established a Design Certification, Early Site Permit and Combined Construction and Operating licensing process that provides more-predictable licensing procedures with full public input and due process.

New reactor designs under review are referred to as Gen (for generation) III, reflecting that designs and features have evolved to incorporate lessons learned with improved technology and construction processes. In general, Gen III reactors have passive safety features, less-active systems, improved instrumentation and reduced construction times...

...Lifetime cost for nuclear power is very competitive because of low fuel costs, high operating efficiency and long operating life. Unlike other energy sources, the cost for waste disposal and plant decommissioning are included in the operating cost and paid for as you go....

...Nuclear energy has progressed from its overly optimistic early years, through a turbulent adolescence, and is now a mature technology. It is a clean, secure and sustainable base-load source of electricity and an essential ingredient in meeting the world's increasing energy demand. Frankly, there is no solution without it. _SeattleTimes

Brian Wang reports that thousands of people have died this year in accidents related to fossil fuels energy. None, of course, have died in nuclear energy related accidents.

Brian Wang

Nuclear reactors are safe, and getting safer. It is government incompetence and corruption that is downright dangerous.

The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission is Sub-Par

Don't hold your breath waiting for a nuclear renaissance to spring up in the USA anytime soon. It almost seems as if the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission intends to make sure that nothing so hopeful will occur, if they can do anything to stop it.

Here is Obama's NRC commissioner in his own words, explaining why safe and affordable small modular reactors are likely to take a far back seat in any considerations for new reactor licensing.

Here is Rod Adams explaining a small part of NRC policy as regards to nuclear entrepreneurs:

Unfortunately, new license applicants have a good reason for being reluctant to get too specific too early with the NRC - as soon as discussions move past general questions, the NRC requires the project to be docketed. That starts the billing clock and puts the applicant on the hook for paying the government $259 for every regulator hour - with no ability to control the number of hours expended. _RodAdams

US Senator George Voinovich is a rare promoter of small, modular nukes -- along with Senator Lamar Alexander:

Well friends, I think we need to have a more aggressive approach to these SMRs than we’ve got today. As I said, the DOE budget calls for about $40 million/year for SMRs. My bill funds an SMR program at $100 million/year for 10 years so that we can accelerate the development of several types of SMR designs. I am very much a fiscal hawk, but in this case I think that what is at stake merits funding this program at a higher level.

Honestly, I’m hell-bent to accelerate this SMR development effort. As I’ve said, nuclear is vital to the interests of the United States! If you look around the world, in the countries that are actively moving forward with new nuclear power plants, the projects are backed and funded by their governments. Strategically, these new reactors represent a real opportunity for us to re-establish U.S. global leadership in nuclear power. We can’t let these other countries take over the world market. We need to seize the day, and we need the funding in this title to help us do that! _Voinovich

Of course Voinovich takes the big-government approach to promoting small modular reactors -- he is a big government kingpin, after all. But in reality the best thing the government could do in regard to safe and affordable SMRs is to quickly see that they are safe, certify them, and then Get Out of the Way!

The NRC has gotten fat from doing nothing. Sitting in huge, expensive, lavish new headquarters, NRC commissioners are enjoying the rich, secure life of tax - supported top bureaucrats, while actually not having any appreciable responsibility to the taxpayer who supports their lavish lifestyle.

The US government is destroying the US economy, destroying the futures of US citizens and taxpayers. The NRC is but one small part of this ongoing destructiveness of government, but it is a significant part all the same.

NRC commissioners should get off their lazy butts and make the way clear for safe, affordable new nuclear power reactors. And quickly. Else, get out of the way and allow civilian certifying agencies to spring up to do the job the way it should be done.

Nuclear news from Russia:

Russian nuclear engineering group Rosatom launched the world's first floating nuclear power plant Wednesday, according to The Voice of Russia. Photos show the Akademik Lomonosov, a 21,500-ton barge equipped with twin 35-megawatt light-water reactors, slipping into the water at St. Petersburg's Baltic Shipyard.
The Akademik Lomonosov represents a particularly flexible example of the small modular reactor (SMR) nuclear power plants that are under development worldwide. _IEEESpectrum

Sure, Greenpeace and the rest of the faux environmental Luddites will try to stop safe, clean, cheap nuclear. In fact, the faux environmental lobbies probably have more influence at the US NRC under Obama Pelosi than does the entire nuclear industry, or the utility industry. Speaking frankly, the faux environmentalists have more influence on the Obama Pelosi regime than the best interests of the American people and the US itself. What did you expect?

Is There Anything Genetically Modified Micro-Organisms Can't Do?

San Francisco startup company Siluria is concocting thousands of genetically modified microbes daily, then studying their prolific outputs. The aim is to generate catalysts that can convert simple molecules such as methane into chemical feedstocks for industry -- leading to the creation of an entire new $trillion dollar biological chemical sector of industry. More from New York Times

One of Siluria's wildest ideas so far is to teach a virus to coat itself with "a tangle of metal coated nanowire" to act as a catalyst, for the conversion of methane to ethylene -- a useful feedstock in the chemical industry.

Bringing viruses into the picture previously dominated by bacteria, algae, and fungi, may have been a master stroke. The simplicity of the viral genome makes viruses a promising foundation for innovative approaches to bio-nanoengineering.

Microbes tend not to sleep if they can help it, and will continue working and multiplying as long as conditions are right. It is up to humans to find the limits of microbial ingenuity. And then to go beyond them.

Wind and Solar Exorbitantly Expensive, and Can't Meet Demand

"Without...fossil fuels, we would be returned to the incredible environmental destruction and nasty living conditions and incredibly hard labor of the 19th century," he says. "We would be living in dire poverty." _World

Promoters of big wind and big solar energy have not done the math, nor have they looked at the true economic costs of attempting to convert from a fossil fuel infrastructure to a wind and solar energy infrastructure. Severe cost increases plus energy cut-backs would be devastating to any economy -- but much more so to an economy stuck in a global depression.

Math and physics offer stark realities about wind and solar energy. The most obvious problem: The sources are intermittent.

As Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah, ranking member of the Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, told Environment and Energy Daily: "The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't always shine."

To make the energy sources consistently reliable on a wide scale would require massive amounts of reliable storage—technology that doesn't exist on a cost-effective basis. Forcing utility companies to generate more of their power using wind and solar would likely raise energy costs for U.S. consumers.

Another problem: Wind and solar require massive amounts of land to produce and transport energy. The Nature Conservancy, a U.S. environmental group, published a report last year estimating that wind power requires about 30 times as much land as nuclear energy, and four times as much land required for natural gas.

... if wind and solar remain unrealistic for large-scale, cost-effective energy, natural gas has already proven itself on both counts: Natural gas provided nearly a quarter of the nation's energy for electricity in 2009, second only to coal.

Advances in technology over the last five years have created a mini-revolution in extracting natural gas using new methods, opening up new gas supplies all over the country. Hayward of AEI says fields are so vast, it's conceivable that the United States could become an exporter of natural gas over the next few decades. The new technology could also hold promise for developing countries still creating their power systems, if they embrace natural gas as a major source of energy that is far cleaner than coal.

Peter Huber, author of The Bottomless Well (Basic Books, 2005), sees another major use for natural gas: transportation. The United States consumes massive amounts of oil for vehicles each year, but Huber thinks natural gas could compete. He notes that some 10 million vehicles worldwide already run on natural gas. Vehicles would require more natural gas to travel the same distance, but Huber says modifications to vehicles over the coming years could accommodate the change. And since natural gas is cheaper than oil, the option could still be cost effective.

...Despite the devastating BP oil spill, oil advocates point out that major spills are rare, and that relying more heavily on imports could lead to tanker spills—already much more common than well leaks.

With any major energy transition still years away, Hayward says oil is here to stay for at least decades. "The 'problem with oil' is that it's such a terrific fuel, it's hard to match its performance and cost with anything else." Bryce agrees, and bristles when politicians complain about an abundance of fossil fuels.

"Without those fossil fuels, we would be returned to the incredible environmental destruction and nasty living conditions and incredibly hard labor of the 19th century," he says. "We would be living in dire poverty." _World

Nuclear Energy Facts PDF

Wind Energy Facts SlideShare

Renewable Energy Facts

If you digest the material in the above links, you will know 100 times more about the energy problem than the average university educated person, and over 1000 times more about energy than President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, Senator Boxer, or Secretary Salazar.

Which should tell you something about the dunces who are running the US government.

Opening the Entire Planet's Surface to Biomass Land and Sea

Science and technology are turning conventional concepts of "cropland" upside down and inside out. Starting with Ceres:

In California, Ceres announced that it has developed a plant trait that could bring new life to millions of acres of abandoned or marginal cropland damaged by salts. Results in several crops, including switchgrass, have shown levels of salt tolerance not seen before.

Ceres reported that its researchers tested the effects of very high salt concentrations and also seawater from the Pacific Ocean, which contains mixtures of salts in high-concentration, on improved energy grass varieties growing in its California greenhouses. According to Ceres, there are more than one billion acres of abandoned cropland globally that could benefit from this trait and others in Ceres’ pipeline, including 15 million acres of salt-affected soils in the U.S. The company now plans to evaluate energy crops with its proprietary salt-tolerant trait at field scale.

Chief Scientific Officer Richard Flavell said “When we begin stacking together salt tolerance, drought tolerance and traits that allow plants to require less nitrogen fertilizer, we can deliver significant productivity and yield increases with fewer inputs than used in the first Green Revolution, as well as valuable increases on marginal or abandoned cropland that does not currently sustain economic yields.” _BiofuelsDigest

Positioning algal and biomass companies for growth

Marine bacterium becoming a biomass superstar

We know that algae can grow in the open ocean, in the desert on salt and wastewater, and virtually anywhere else the temperature is above freezing. Various strains of algae have adapted to virtually any climate and environment on Earth. There is no shortage of area for growing algae -- the premier fast-growing biomass.

Using Ozone to Break Down Lignocellulose to Sugars

Finding a quick and thorough method of breaking down lignocellulose in biomass to sugars, for fermentation to butanol and ethanol, is one popular goal of modern biofuels researchers.

...now researchers from NC State have developed a new way to free the carbohydrates from the lignin. By exposing the plant matter to gaseous ozone, with very little moisture, they are able to produce a carbohydrate-rich solid with no solid or liquid waste.

“This is more efficient because it degrades the lignin very effectively and there is little or no loss of the plant’s carbohydrates,” Sharma-Shivappa says. “The solid can then go directly to the enzymes to produce the sugars necessary for biofuel production.”

Sharma notes that the process itself is more expensive than using a bath of harsh chemicals to free the carbohydrates, but is ultimately more cost-effective because it makes more efficient use of the plant matter.

The researchers have recently received a grant from the Center for Bioenergy Research and Development to fine-tune the process for use with switchgrass and miscanthus grass. “Our eventual goal is to use this technique for any type of feedstock, to produce any biofuel or biochemical that can use these sugars,” Sharma-Shivappa says.

The research, “Effect of ozonolysis on bioconversion of miscanthus to bioethanol,” was co-authored by Sharma-Shivappa, NC State Ph.D. student Anushadevi Panneerselvam, Dr. Praveen Kolar, an assistant professor of biological and agricultural engineering at NC State, Dr. Thomas Ranney, a professor of horticultural science at NC State, and Dr. Steve Peretti, an associate professor of chemical and biomolecular engineering at NC State. The research is partially funded by the Biofuels Center of North Carolina and was presented June 23 at the 2010 Annual International Meeting of the American Society for Agricultural and Biological Engineers in Pittsburgh, PA.

NC State’s Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering is a joint department of the university’s College of Engineering and College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. _NCSUNews

Abstract:

“Effect of ozonolysis on bioconversion of miscanthus to bioethanol”

Authors: Anushadevi Panneerselvam, Ratna Sharma-Shivappa, Praveen Kolar, Thomas Ranney, North Carolina State University

Presented: June 23, 2010, 2010 Annual International Meeting of the American Society for Agricultural and Biological Engineers in Pittsburgh, Penn.

Abstract: Miscanthus is an energy cane capable of producing high quality lignocellulosic biomass for bioethanol production. However, the conversion of this biomass into fuel ethanol has not been investigated in depth and depends to a great extent on the pretreatment technique. Ozonolysis is a novel pretreatment method that can enhance biomass digestibility with minimal generation of chemical waste streams and degradation of the carbohydrate components. It employs ozone, a powerful oxidant, which forms highly reactive free hydroxyl ions upon decomposition thus degrading lignin in the absence of inhibitory degradation products such as furfural and HMF. This study investigates the effect of ozonolysis as a pretreatment method under room temperature and pressure. Ozone concentrations up to 60 ppm at flow rates up to 0.5 l/min are being used to pretreat several varieties of miscanthus for varying times to enhance enzymatic hydrolysis. The efficiency of pretreatment will be determined by measuring the reducing sugars generated after hydrolysis. It is expected that the results of this study will help in the development of a pretreatment process that provides higher specificity towards lignin removal compared than other delignifying agents/pretreatments. _NCSU

See Brian Westenhaus' coverage of this story