Skip navigation

Category Archives: Carbon emission reduction

C

WATER AND ENERGY ARE TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN
I always believed one can create energy from water and water from energy. Ancient Hindus believed water comes from fire and fire comes from water, two fundamental building blocks out of five elements that are necessary for Creation.
Water (H2O) is made up of two atoms of Hydrogen and one atom of Oxygen. The structure itself is an absolute beauty because it contains both reductant and oxidant tied up inseparably in such a way it requires enormous energy to separate them. Individually Hydrogen forms an explosive mixture with air on combustion. People familiar with Oxy Hydrogen will know such a stoichiometric mixture of Hydrogen and Oxygen in gaseous form by water electrolysis generate a flame that can cut an iron piece but leaves water on condensation. Current methods of Electrolysis using PEM (proton exchange membrane) can not only split water into Hydrogen and Oxygen but also separates them simultaneously into two different gases. Fuel cell just reverses the above reaction by combining Hydrogen and Oxygen generating electrical power and heat as a by-product. The basic fundamental facts about water and energy remain the same for millennia.
We are now facing a new challenge of global warming and climate change that is supposed to be caused by the unabated emission of CO2 into the atmosphere by the combustion of fossil fuels. The world is now gearing up to achieve net-zero emission by 2050. In my opinion, it is not such a big challenge but the world has neglected emissions for too long. The science of electricity generation using electromagnetism is far from perfect in the sense it failed to take into account the emissions by combustion of fossil fuels. The simple solution is to reduce the oxides of Carbon back into Carbon so that there will be zero-emission. Unfortunately, we never used pure Oxygen for combustion but air because it is readily available and cheap to use. But it generates not only CO2 but also NOx, NO2, H2S, SO2, etc all contributing to air pollution which is now affecting the world by way of global warming and climate change. The CO2 level in the atmosphere has now reached 415 ppm which is only part of the anthropogenic CO2 emission since the industrial revolution. About a third of it has been absorbed by the ocean thus acidifying the seawater. The pH level of the sea is slowly but steadily decreasing making it more acidic. Thanks to the enormous buffering capacity of the sea and such a change are hardly noticeable. But it will soon change the chemistry of the water. It is a complex situation with the changing chemistry of seawater due to absorption of CO2, heat, increasing salinity. Sealevel rise due to melting of glaciers, constant discharge of highly concentrated effluent discharges from seawater desalination plants and power plant cooling towers, etc. Climate modeling in the future will be challenging.
I previously posted an article on “Zero-emission baseload power using only sun and sea”.It has attracted many viewers worldwide especially in my blog/: https://www.clean-energy-water-tech.com.
I have already filed a provisional patent application with IP Australia and I am in the process of filing an international patent application so that I can secure an IP with a value. The technology is based on a couple of well-proven concepts and it will not be difficult to implement them commercially. A couple of multinational companies have already endorsed my process and they are even willing to take part as EPC (engineering, procurement, and construction) contractors.
I am planning to seek donations and contributions from my worldwide audience by way of crowdfunding to secure an IP worldwide so that I can practically contribute my knowledge and experience to address one of the greatest challenges of global warming and climate change by installing a demo plant.
Please watch this blog and my next article will elaborate on my patented technology
CARBON RECYCLING TECHNOLOGY (CRT) also known as RAMANA POWER CYCLE (RPC) FOR A ZERO EMISSION BASELOAD POWER USING ONLY SUN AND SEA.
I invite everyone to contribute by donating to this great cause. Please visit by clicking the following link. It is a small step into lasting solution to our emission problem. It will also help reduce acid acidification slowly but steadily so that we can save our marine species including corals.  By securing a IP (intellectual property) by way of an international patent will enable me to demonstrate the technology by setting up a demonstration plant of 25MW capacity using only SUN AND SEA! Click the following link to participate in the campaign !

Zero emission base load power using only sun and sea

C

WATER AND ENERGY ARE TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN
I always believed one can create energy from water and water from energy. Ancient Hindus believed water comes from fire and fire comes from water, two fundamental building blocks out of five elements that are necessary for Creation.
Water (H2O) is made up of two atoms of Hydrogen and one atom of Oxygen. The structure itself is an absolute beauty because it contains both reductant and oxidant tied up inseparably in such a way it requires enormous energy to separate them. Individually Hydrogen forms an explosive mixture with air on combustion. People familiar with Oxy Hydrogen will know such a stoichiometric mixture of Hydrogen and Oxygen in gaseous form by water electrolysis generate a flame that can cut an iron piece but leaves water on condensation. Current methods of Electrolysis using PEM (proton exchange membrane) can not only split water into Hydrogen and Oxygen but also separates them simultaneously into two different gases. Fuel cell just reverses the above reaction by combining Hydrogen and Oxygen generating electrical power and heat as a by-product. The basic fundamental facts about water and energy remain the same for millennia.
We are now facing a new challenge of global warming and climate change that is supposed to be caused by the unabated emission of CO2 into the atmosphere by the combustion of fossil fuels. The world is now gearing up to achieve net-zero emission by 2050. In my opinion, it is not such a big challenge but the world has neglected emissions for too long. The science of electricity generation using electromagnetism is far from perfect in the sense it failed to take into account the emissions by combustion of fossil fuels. The simple solution is to reduce the oxides of Carbon back into Carbon so that there will be zero-emission. Unfortunately, we never used pure Oxygen for combustion but air because it is readily available and cheap to use. But it generates not only CO2 but also NOx, NO2, H2S, SO2, etc all contributing to air pollution which is now affecting the world by way of global warming and climate change. The CO2 level in the atmosphere has now reached 415 ppm which is only part of the anthropogenic CO2 emission since the industrial revolution. About a third of it has been absorbed by the ocean thus acidifying the seawater. The pH level of the sea is slowly but steadily decreasing making it more acidic. Thanks to the enormous buffering capacity of the sea and such a change are hardly noticeable. But it will soon change the chemistry of the water. It is a complex situation with the changing chemistry of seawater due to absorption of CO2, heat, increasing salinity. Sealevel rise due to melting of glaciers, constant discharge of highly concentrated effluent discharges from seawater desalination plants and power plant cooling towers, etc. Climate modeling in the future will be challenging.
I previously posted an article on “Zero-emission baseload power using only sun and sea”.It has attracted many viewers worldwide especially in my blog/: https://www.clean-energy-water-tech.com.
I have already filed a provisional patent application with IP Australia and I am in the process of filing an international patent application so that I can secure an IP with a value. The technology is based on a couple of well-proven concepts and it will not be difficult to implement them commercially. A couple of multinational companies have already endorsed my process and they are even willing to take part as EPC (engineering, procurement, and construction) contractors.
I am planning to seek donations and contributions from my worldwide audience by way of crowdfunding to secure an IP worldwide so that I can practically contribute my knowledge and experience to address one of the greatest challenges of global warming and climate change by installing a demo plant.
Please watch this blog and my next article will elaborate on my patented technology
CARBON RECYCLING TECHNOLOGY (CRT) also known as RAMANA POWER CYCLE (RPC) FOR A ZERO EMISSION BASELOAD POWER USING ONLY SUN AND SEA.
I invite everyone to contribute by donating to this great cause. Please visit by clicking the following link. It is a small step into lasting solution to our emission problem. It will also help reduce acid acidification slowly but steadily so that we can save our marine species including corals.  By securing a IP (intellectual property) by way of an international patent will enable me to demonstrate the technology by setting up a demonstration plant of 25MW capacity using only SUN AND SEA!

Zero emission base load power using only sun and sea

CCS (carbon capture and sequestration) and CCUS (Carbon capture, utilization, and storage) technologies are essentially “after thought” to fix the CO2 emission by 2050. It also indirectly encourages continuity of fossil fuel usage for a foreseeable future to help those industries who have invested billions of dollars in creating their infrastructures including “fracking”. Fracking generates hundreds of cubic meters of toxic effluent whose salinity is more than ten times that of the salinity of seawater. It is an environmental nightmare. Are these technologies practicable? Will they pay $100 or more for a ton of CO2 to capture and then transport hundreds of km distance to find a suitable site; and even if they pay what will be the cost implications? Certainly, their cost of production will sharply increase, which will be necessarily passed on to the consumers whether it is a power industry or oil and gas industry. Why some of the CCS projects are dormant in many parts of the world? They claim injecting CO2 into existing oil field will increase oil production. Only US companies and US governments support such schemes by way of carbon credit at the rate of $ 35/Mt to please local companies and local population. There is hardly any evidence to substantiate their “Carbon negative” claims. How many such oil fields exist in Australia, for example? The same question should be raised for all the countries around the world especially those oil importing countries like India. IEA should lead the world in energy matters by publishing necessary data to back up claims that CCS and CCUS will lead to zero emission by 2050 instead of simply following American companies claims. In the absence of such data and hard evidence and the cost and economic analysis these projections will lead us nowhere. Without imposing Carbon tax as a financial incentive (not as a penalty) will these industries embark upon such a venture? The Carbon tax cannot be less than $250/Mt (because Carbon capture from air, for example, cost more than $150 to 200/Mt depending upon the maturity of technology). Now they want to utilize capture Carbon to produce synthetic fuel with green Hydrogen. Green hydrogen is awfully expensive, renewable energy is costly and storing them is prohibitively costly and converting them to Hydrogen by electrolysis is even more expensive. Despite all these expensive measures can zero emission be achieved by 2050? The cost of green fuel will be at least 10 times more than fossil fuels currently used. Will consumers afford to pay for such high fuel cost? Many questions remain unanswered. The word “Carbon capture” implies continuity of fossil fuel. It is like tobacco industry. At least in cigarette packs there is a warning ” smoking is injuries to health” but there is no such warnings in CCS or CCUS because the “captured CO2 will be released back into atmosphere slowly at the point of usage in the near future , for example, Urea made out of captured CO2 will slowly release CO2 back into atmosphere by soil enzymes. Conversion to “concrete” or “Nano Carbon” are claimed to be potential products but only future can tell. We are talking about “billions of tons of CO2”. Only carbon recycling and circular economy will be the answer and not CCS or CCUS.

#CCS #CCUS # Carbon emission and Carbon capture # Net Zero emission.

There is likely to be a dramatic change in energy landscape with introduction of super critical CO2 power cycle. It not only increases the power efficiency, reduces the foot print considerably, utilizes part of CO2 emission internally in the form of super critical fluid and open a new path to eliminate Carbon emission completely (zero Carbon emission). It also reduces the water consumption in power generation unlike current conventional Rankine cycle power plants. We will soon be able to continue to generate base load power using fossil fuels with zero carbon emission. Unlike Carbon capture and sequestration already tried unsuccessfully in many parts of the world, Carbon capture and recycle will open a new chapter in the history of power generation. By capturing carbon in a solid form with potential industrial applications such a possibility is now within our reach. It means utilization of existing fossil fuel based power generation infrastructure without any Carbon emission and continue to generate continuous power to meet the increasing demand at a reasonable cost. The current focus on renewable energy will continue but until a practical and viable energy and mature storage technology is developed the renewable energy will have uncertainties. Whatever may be the case the overall cost of energy is likely to go up.

Introduction of Oxy combustion in natural gas turbine has eliminated the oxides of Nitrogen from flue gas thus facilitating separation of CO2 from water and recycling water vapour into combustion process. The condensate from gas turbine is a by-product. Despite the usage of CO2 in the form of super critical fluid there is still an excess CO2 to be disposed of.

A conceptual design to capture CO2 and convert them into SNG while generating additional power using the superheated steam obtained as a by-product of methanation has created a new opportunity to achieve zero carbon emission.

It is an exciting development and our company is now in an advanced stage of developing and commercializing such a technology.

Our new reformation process of natural gas using the captured CO2 and steam allows to precipitate Carbon in a solid form. The chemistry of the process can be explained by the following final methanation process using a proprietary catalyst involving few steps.oxy-fuel-directly-heated-sco2-power-cycle-flow-diagram-1sco2-power-cycle

3CH4 +CO2 +H2O ——–> 2CH4 + 3 H2O + 2 C which will take a final form as follows:

CH4 + CO2 ——> 2H2O + 2C

The superheated steam generated in the process can be exported to generate additional power while the condensate water can be exported and recycled. By using an excess of natural gas the captured CO2 is converted into SNG (synthetic natural gas) which can be recycled into the gas turbine thus achieving a zero-carbon emission while continuing to generate base load power. Such a technology can easily be integrated with other sources of energy such as solar, biomass, waste heat and nuclear.

 

 

Rise in fossil fuel usageTornadoetsunamisuper bugssealevel riseFish deathFloodingEnvironmental refugeesDraughtbushn firesPresident Obama seized his ‘moment of truth’ when he announced his decision to cut carbon emission by 30% by 2030 in USA. His decision may not be popular in USA and in many parts of the world but it is the right decision. He was able to address to some extent ‘ the inconvenient  truth’ that has nagged him during his second term in office. He  introduced his decision through EPA (Environmental protection authority) effectively bypassing congress. In fact the purpose of creating EPA was to address the environmental issues but it failed in many ways and rest of the world followed such failures time and again. This has resulted in an accumulated carbon both in the atmosphere and in the sea in an unprecedented scale causing disease and environmental degradation world-wide.

Air pollution is costing the world’s most advanced economies plus India and China $3.5 trillion per year in lives lost and ill-health, with a significant amount of the burden stemming from vehicle tailpipes, according to a report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

In the 34 OECD member states, the monetary impact of death and illness due to outdoor air pollution was $1.7 trillion in 2010. Research suggests that motorized on-road transport accounts for about 50 percent of that cost. In China, the total cost of outdoor air pollution was an estimated $1.4 trillion in 2010. In India, the OECD calculated the toll at $500 billion.

The costs were calculated based on survey data of how much people are willing to pay in order to avoid premature death due to ailments caused by air pollution. The method assigns a cost to the risks of emissions that decision makers can use in weighing public policy decisions.

In addition to the health cost the environmental degradation due to carbon pollution includes global warming resulting in mass extinction of species, causing  mega bush fires that are wiping out forests including rain forests, creating new bugs that are resistant to antibiotics, increasing sea level  that erodes coastal cities and submerge remote islands in pacific displacing millions of people as refugees, acidified oceans with massive extinction of species including fish stock. Such degradation is nothing but suicidal.

When a food or drug is introduced in the market it is subject to scrutiny by FDA (Food and drugs authority), but when it comes to environmental clearance to set up a coal-fired power plant or to set up a seawater desalination plant it is relatively easier to get such clearance from EPA. When  power plants emitted gaseous emissions initially EPA was able to limit the emissions of oxides of nitrogen, sulfur, phosphorous, soot and particulate matter , other organics including mercury and arsenic except carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide has been accepted as part of the air we breathe in; otherwise no power plant could have been approved because bulk of the emissions are only carbon dioxide. Had EPA acted timely in sixties or even in seventies to curb CO2 emissions an alternative  energy  would have emerged by this time.

Industries and economics were high in the political agenda and the environment was overlooked.  Many drugs were introduced during this period to cure diseases that were actually caused by environmental pollution such as carbon dioxide. Both power industries and drug industries grew side by side without realizing that environment is degraded slowly which causes chronic diseases.

Australia is the largest consumers of power in terms of per capita consumption in the world and yet the new Government in Australia is pushing a bill in the parliament to repel Carbon tax introduced by previous Government. They are also planning to raise revenue up to $ 26 billion for medical research over a time. On one hand politicians want to freely allow unabated carbon emissions into the atmosphere and on the other hand they want to introduce new drugs that can cure diseases  actually caused by  such pollution. It is an anomalous situation created by politics of climate change. Unfortunately carbon pollution has turned into an energy related issue and attracted political attention world-wide. The high cost of cleaning carbon pollution has turned many politicians into skeptics of science on carbon pollution and climate change.

“More than 170 nations have agreed on the need to limit fossil fuel emissions to avoid dangerous human-made climate change, as formalized in the 1992 Framework Convention on Climate Change .However, the stark reality is that global emissions have accelerated (Fig. 1) and new efforts are underway to massively expand fossil fuel extraction by drilling to increasing ocean depths and into the Arctic, squeezing oil from tar sands and tar shale, hydro-fracking to expand extraction of natural gas, developing exploitation of methane hydrates, and mining of coal via mountaintop removal and mechanized long wall mining. The growth rate of fossil fuel emissions increased from 1.5%/year during 1980–2000 to 3%/year in 2000–2012, mainly because of increased coal use.” (Ref : 1)

The coal usage continues to grow especially in Asia due to expanding population and industrial growth and demand for low-cost energy.  USA is expected to achieve energy independence by 2015 which means more fossil fuels are in the pipeline. India and China are planning more coal-fired power plants in the coming decade. Australia is planning for massive expansion of coal and LNG and Coal seam methane gas for exports. Fracturing and hydrocracking of shale deposits are adding to the fuel.

Countries are more concerned with economic growth than the consequences of climate change. Despite recent warning from NASA that the depleting arctic glaciers have reached a ‘point of no return’ and the predicted sea level rise up to 10 feet is irreversible, there is a little reaction from countries across the globe.

There is a clear evidence that shows Green House Gas  emission will continue to increase in the future in spite of growing renewable energy projects because renewable solar panels, wind turbines and batteries will need more power from fossil fuels.  It is critically important to reduce carbon emission with great urgency by substituting fossil energy with renewable energy. For example, concentrated solar power (CSP) can be used instead of large-scale PV solar to reduce carbon footprint.

Solar energy is the origin of all other energy sources on the planet earth and solar energy will be the solution for a clean energy of the future. But how fast solar energy can be deployed commercially in a short span of time is a big issue. The increasing growth of fossil fuel production dwarfs the growth of renewable energy exposing the planet to catastrophic climate change. The GHG emission can be contained only by an aggressive reduction of CO2 emission into the atmosphere as well as by drastic reduction of fossil fuel production. This is possible only by using renewable Hydrogen. The cost of renewable hydrogen is high  but this is the price one has to pay to clean up the carbon pollution before the climate is  changed irreversibly. The obvious method to reduce carbon emissions is to tax carbon in such a way that it will no longer be economically viable to emit carbon to generate power or to transport. Paying carbon tax will be cheaper than paying for diseases and environmental degradation and natural disasters. Clean environment is the key for the survival of our planet and life on earth and one cannot put a price on such a life.

Ref 1:  Citation: Hansen J, Kharecha P, Sato M, Masson-Delmotte V, Ackerman F,et al (2013) Assessing ‘‘Dangerous Climate Change’’: Required Reduction of Carbon Emissions to Protect Young People, Future Generations and Nature. PLoS ONE 8(12): e81648. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0081648

 

 

 

%d bloggers like this: