NNadir
NNadir's JournalThe CO2 Concentrations at Mauna Loa are 25.91 ppm higher than 10 years ago.
As I've indicated repeatedly in my DU writings, somewhat obsessively I keep a spreadsheet of the weekly data at the Mauna Loa Carbon Dioxide Observatory, which I use to do calculations to record the dying of our atmosphere, a triumph of fear, dogma and ignorance that did not have to be, but nonetheless is, a fact.
Facts matter.
When writing these depressing repeating posts about new records being set, reminiscent, over the years, to the ticking of a clock at a deathwatch, I often repeat some of the language from a previous post on this awful series, as I have been doing here with some modifications. It saves time.
A recent example of posts here relating to this disturbing habit of mine is this one: New Weekly CO2 Concentration Record (Provisional) Set at the Mauna Loa Observatory, 424.63 ppm.
This week's is unsettling, but then again, most weeks give unsettling data; the concentrations continue to rise at a rate that is accelerating, all the reactionary bullshit about the so called "renewable energy," batteries and hydrogen notwithstanding.
The planet is burning.
This week's readings:
Weekly value from 1 year ago: 418.81 ppm
Weekly value from 10 years ago: 396.39 ppm
Last updated: December 17, 2023
Weekly average CO2 at Mauna Loa
As noted in previous posts, the fact that this week's reading is lower than the record from last spring is a function of sinusoidal seasonal variations:
Monthly Average Mauna Loa CO2
This week's reading 422.20 ppm compared to last year's 418.81 ppm is "only" 3.39 ppm higher, which in the 20th century would have seemed outrageous but is now, regrettably, not all that dramatic.
As of this reading, there are 2,497 weekly readings that can be accessed at the Mauna Loa website; 3.39 ppm is "only" the 104th highest, in the 95th percentile.
Of the top 50 weekly readings, 40 occurred in this century, with 6 others taking place in 1998, when fires set in Southeast Asia to clear rain forest for palm oil plantations to supply "renewable biodiesel" to Germany went out of control because of drought, making 1998 the worst year for accumulation of CO2, at least until 2016.
This should have said something about the reactionary impulse to return to the 19th century and make energy supplies dependent o the weather, precisely at the time we have drastically destabilized the weather by not doing anything meaningful about climate change, but it didn't do so.
What is notable about this week's reading is that it is 25.81 higher than the reading of the same week 10 years ago.
Of the top 50 comparator's of weekly readings compared week-to-week with those of the same week 10 years ago, this is the 7th highest.
All of the top 50 such comparators have occurred since 2019, six of them in that year, the rest since and including 2020.
A 52 week running average of all comparators of concentrations of the dangerous fossil fuel waste CO2 in the planetary atmosphere in the past year is currently 24.35 ppm/10 years = 2.44 ppm/year. In the week 49 of the year 2000, the week beginning December 3, 2000, that running average was 15.19 ppm/10 years - 1.52 ppm/year.
We spent over 3 trillion dollars in the period between 2004 and 2019 rendering wilderness and farmland into industrial parks for wind and solar energy. Many here and elsewhere may think that this was "doing something." All this proves that people can lie to each other and lie to themselves, but that numbers don't lie. The effort to address climate change with wind and solar energy is obviously a grotesque failure, in particular because the reactionary impulse to employ so called "renewable energy" was originally never about climate change, but was rather about attacking the last best hope of humanity, nuclear energy. The obviously delusional belief that solar and wind energy have something to do with addressing climate change was and is an afterthought.
Source:
I manually entered the figures in the bar graph in figure 8 to see how much money we've thrown at this destructive affectation since 2004 (up to 2019): It works out to 3.2633 trillion dollars, more than President Biden has wisely recommended for the improvement of all infrastructure in the entire United States.
Have a nice day.
Assessing the Supply Chain Risks of Electric Vehicles and Their Sustainability.
The paper to which I'll refer in this post is this one: Assessing Short-Term Supply Disruption Impacts within Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment─A Case Study of Electric Vehicles Marcus Berr, Roland Hischier, and Patrick Wäger Environmental Science & Technology 2023 57 (48), 19678-19689
This paper is available to the public to read for free, a gift to society (for those interested in sustainability) from the American Chemical Society.
There is a myth that electric cars, and electric things in general, are all "green." It's a myth because electricity, like most of the world's energy supply, is largely provided by dangerous fossil fuels, despite all the marketing and pretense that claims that so called "renewable energy" is a significant provider of energy.
It isn't. So called "renewable energy" is a reactionary land intensive and material intensive expensive and disastrous failure.
The article here is about material intensity of a popular, but I think disingenuous, putatively "green" device, the electric car.
Now, I have been driving a hybrid car which was recently completely demolished - it was less than a year old - in an accident when a young woman ran a stop sign. I waited six months to get the car in the first place, and I am now in my second month of waiting for its replacement to come off back order - I expect to receive the car before the end of the year.
Since the supply chain for a hybrid car is similar to that of an electric car, I have direct experience of what I speak.
Note too, that as a critic of the car CULTure in general, and as a critic of the moral costs of batteries, I can easily and irrefutably be characterized as a hypocrite, to which I can only offer a week defense, that a hybrid car is slight less obnoxious than an electric car, since a hybrid car recovers otherwise waste exergy, specifically that of braking, going down hill - the car will not exceed the speed to which it is set on cruise control - and, to the extent it runs when stopped, idling. Thus the thermodynamics of the system, involving fewer energy transformations subject to the 2nd law of thermodynamics, is less odious from my perspective.
An electric car, by contrast, consumes exergy charging off a grid, as electricity on the grid is a thermodynamically degraded form of energy already, and by storage and discharge, involves far more losses to entropy.
Again, the paper is open sourced, but a few excerpts and telling graphics are in order:
Mechanisms leading to resilience in supply chains have been identified by Sprecher et al. (12,13) using a case study from the 2010 rare earth crisis. These mechanisms include, for example, increases in supply diversity, improvements in material properties, and substitution. In another study, Sprecher and colleagues (14) identify stockpiling as a suitable response option to supply disruptions caused by unexpected events for metals produced as coproducts.
To identify measures suitable for mitigating supply risks, potentially disrupted flows along supply chains first need to be anticipated. Here, criticality assessment is useful, as it allows for assessing the relative importance of supply disruptions for materials/products. Several critical studies have already been performed with regard to the electromobility sector. For example, Helbig et al. (15) have used the criticality assessment approach developed by Tuma et al. (16) to assess the supply disruption impacts for raw materials used for different traction batteries...
While the reference to the "Democratic Republic" of Congo refers only to political instability - it's a bit of sugar coating - the real issue is moral, human slavery.
Every time I sit in my swell hybrid car (when it comes) and push the ignition button, I am participating in human slavery, and to the extent I ignore that I am worse than morally obtuse.
A few graphics:
The caption:
The caption:
The caption:
I don't expect we'll stop kidding ourselves; experience teaches we will do everything in our power to avoid doing so, but there will be hell to pay, there is hell to pay.
Have an enjoyable weekend.
On the 70th Anniversary: The Legacy of Eisenhower's Atoms for Peace Speech.
Viewpoint: The legacy of Eisenhower's Atoms for Peace speechSubtitle:
Her full speech can be read at the link.
Some excerpts:
Seventy years ago, in 1953, President Dwight D Eisenhower delivered his historic Atoms for Peace speech.
On that day, he set out a vision to harness the power of the atom for the betterment of humanity, setting the stage for international cooperation in the pursuit of peace and prosperity - a vision that has grown into a lasting legacy.
As we know, "it only takes one seed to grow a forest", and now, as we reflect on the past 70 years, we see that Eisenhower's vision has indeed germinated into a forest of possibilities for the peaceful uses of nuclear applications...
...Looking forward, we must paint an ambitious outlook for the nuclear sector, one that honours Eisenhower's vision and prepares us for the challenges and opportunities of the 21st century. The legacy of Atoms for Peace must inspire us to increase the contribution of nuclear for a better and brighter world. We must dream big and work tirelessly to transform those dreams into reality.
So, what are the key actions for us today that will lead us into this brighter future?
First, safety and security will remain paramount. Our commitment to non-proliferation and safeguards is unwavering and was a pillar of the Atoms for Peace vision. We must continuously invest in research and development to enhance the safeguarding of nuclear materials.
Second, we must prioritise sustainability. We know well the contribution of nuclear to mitigating climate change. Our actions must reflect a profound commitment to reducing impacts on the environment, by extending the life of existing nuclear power plants we can maximise 24/7 clean energy contributions. The continued presence and integration of nuclear energy into a broader energy mix, alongside renewables, can help us achieve a more resilient, low-carbon future...
In a dark country, a ray of light.
I cannot tell anyone in a brief series of remarks, what an important development this is, surprisingly, in the dismantling of nuclear arsenals for war, and the addressing of the most important crisis before us, climate change.
MOX fuel with minor actinides produced for BN-800 reactor
Subtitle:
Minor actinides are transuranic elements other than plutonium which are formed in irradiated nuclear fuel. They are highly radioactive and have long half-lives.
Rosatom said that the proposed Russian solution to what are the most hazardous components of nuclear waste is via fast neutron reactors which can be fuelled not only by enriched natural uranium, but also by secondary products of the nuclear fuel cycle, such as depleted uranium and plutonium. "In addition, the research shows that minor actinides from spent nuclear fuel under the flux of fast neutrons will fission into fragments representing a fairly wide range of radioactive and stable isotopes, but in general their potential hazard will be much lower than that of the original minor actinides," the company said.
Alexander Ugryumov, senior vice president for research and development at Rosatom's fuel division, TVEL, said: "Rosatom is step-by-step taking the unique advantages that powerful fast neutron reactors provide to our industry. The introduction of MOX fuel enables the expansion of the resource base for nuclear power multifold involving depleted uranium and plutonium, and also to reprocess irradiated fuel instead of storing it. Afterburning of minor actinides is the next step in closing nuclear fuel cycle, which should not only reduce the amount of nuclear waste for final isolation, but also significantly reduce its radioactivity. In the long term, it could avoid the complicated and expensive deep burial of waste..."
Some years back, on another website, I discussed, in general terms, why this type of fuel is essential to minimize the risks of nuclear war, which, by the way, have never been zero, since uranium exists.
On Plutonium, Nuclear War, and Nuclear Peace
Of course Russia is a pariah state, but in a dark place - any dark place - there are always people who work for good. This is a critical development, (pun unintentional but recognized) and one I have hoped for for a long time.
The Execution of Two Abortion Providers in Fascist France (1943).
Since late in life I am forced to wonder how I would behave under fascist rule, having never had to call on real courage, I am reading (in excerpts) an interesting history book, France, the Dark Years 1940-1944, by Julian Jackson.
It's an interesting read, in particular with respect to the behavior of French intellectuals under Vichy and Nazi occupation, but this passage struck me as our modern fascists try to put their bloody hands on women's bodies. I am reading the hardcover edition published by Oxford University Press, copyright 2001. From page 332:
...In the circumstances of the Occupation - the presence of strangers in local communities (whether Germans or refugees), the absence of husbands, and the burden represented by unwanted babies in a period of shortages - it is hardly surprising that the number of abortions increased. The real figures can only be guessed, but the evidence of post-abortion cases arriving in hospitals suggests a sharp rise in 1941-2, possibly between 400,000 and one million per annum. They were usually married women of modest means, often with a small family. Mostly the abortions were carried out by family friends not professional abortionists.
It can happen here; it is happening here.
Defining an Idiot: Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker's Speech to Northwestern Graduates
It's a great speech overall, albeit based on a popular television show that I have never watched - although members of my family did - "The Office," but if you cannot sit through all of it, I'd like to suggest going to 8:44 to hear about defining an idiot.
You know, I certainly disagreed vehemently with the Governor with respect to his position on new nuclear power in Illinois, but apparently he changed his mind and came back from the dark side to sign legislation allowing new nuclear plants in the State.
I have deep respect for anyone who can change his or her mind.
Beyond that, as an old man, and as a father, I definitely came to admire and come away with a more favorable opinion of the Governor from this speech.
The speech:
Abundances of Some Heavy Elements Result From Fission of Transuranium R-process Actinides.
The paper I'll discuss in this post is this one: Roederer, Ian U., Vassh, Nicole, Holmbeck, Erika M., Mumpower, Matthew R., Surman, Rebecca, Cowan, John J., Beers, Timothy C., Ezzeddine, Rana, Frebel, Anna, Hansen, Terese T., Placco, Vinicius M., Sakari, Charli M., Element abundance patterns in stars indicate fission of nuclei heavier than uranium 2023 Science 382, 6675, 1177-1180.
The heaviest element to survive on Earth is uranium, element 92, but it is understood that the early Earth probably had some plutonium as well, the long lived 244Pu isotope (t1/2 = 81,100,000 years) as well as its decay product, 240Pu with which it must have been in secular equilibrium. (Detection of a few atoms of naturally occurring Pu has been claimed in very old lanthanide ores in California.) A significant fraction of the thorium on Earth, 232Th probably originated as 244Pu.
Speaking of California, the spectrum of the element named for the State, Californium, element 98, has been detected in stars.
Cf. Gopka, V.F., Yushchenko, A.V., Yushchenko, V.A. et al. Identification of absorption lines of short half-life actinides in the spectrum of Przybylski’s star (HD 101065). Kinemat. Phys. Celest. Bodies 24, 89–98
Anyway, the "r-process" is process that takes place during extreme conditions in stellar evolution, think supernovae, neutron star collapses, etc.
The most stable nuclide in the universe is an isotope of iron, 56Fe; lighter elements can release energy by fusing up to iron, heavy elements can release energy (in theory but seldom in practice) by decaying to it. Nuclides heavier than iron, which includes the bulk of the periodic table, although hardly the mass of the universe, which is essentially slightly impure hydrogen and helium, are formed in two ways, both of which are endothermic, i.e. by consuming energy. The first is the s-process, (slow process) in which elements absorb a neutron or proton and then undergo beta or positron decay. This process can take place in stars for billions of years. The second is the r-process, in which very short metastable neutron rich elements continue to absorb neutrons. These processes can result in superheavy elements, and indeed the well known transuranium actinides now available for use on Earth, neptunium, plutonium, americium, and curium, the first three now available on ton scales if isolated from used nuclear fuels.
Anyway, all of the transuranium actinides have significant fission cross sections across all ranges of neutron energies, and it stands to reason that they would be subject to nuclear fission, either by neutrons or by spontaneous fission.
For most elements subject to fission, the distribution of fission products is asymmetric. There's a "light" fraction, centered roughly around the mass number of 90, the stable nuclide at 90 being 90Zr and a heavy fraction, centered around 137, for which the stable nuclide is 137Ba. (These are the figures for the fission of 235U; other nuclides may vary, particularly on the heavy fraction.) The heavier fraction has significant amounts of the lanthanide elements. The lighter fraction has significant amounts of the noble metals, ruthenium, rhodium, and palladium, as well as cadmium and silver. The paper cited at the outset suggests that these elements, the lanthanides and noble metals and just beyond, vary in their stellar abundance because they are the products of fission events in stars.
From the paper:
The detailed compositions of some ancient stars in the Milky Way have been determined from their spectra, which contain hundreds of absorption features of more than 40 r-process elements (9). The abundance patterns of lanthanide elements in these stars are nearly identical, indicating a possible universality of r-process events and producing the same abundance ratios. The composition of each star is dominated by the ejecta of individual r-process events (10, 11), such as neutron star mergers or rare types of supernova, which enriched the gas from which the stars formed (12)...
...We investigated the r-process using a sample of 42 stars in the Milky Way. We selected stars that were previously observed to have heavy elements known to be formed by the r-process, with no evidence of contamination from other processes [such as the slow neutron capture process (s-process)]...
... The heavy-element abundance patterns in the selected stars are shown in Fig. 1 (individual elements are shown in figs. S3 and S4). We found that stars with higher [Eu/Fe] ratios have abundances of some elements (including Ru, Rh, Pd, Ag, Gd, Tb, Dy, and Yb) that are slightly enhanced relative to those in stars with lower [Eu/Fe] ratios. This excess is not an expected consequence of r-process universality...
Figure 1:
The caption:
Shown are logarithmic abundances (open circles) measured for 30 r-process elements in the 42 stars of our sample, plotted as a function of atomic number. The symbol sizes are proportional to [Eu/Fe], and error bars indicate 1? uncertainties. The green line is the empirical baseline pattern we defined as the mean abundance ratios for the subset of 13 stars with [Eu/Fe] ? +0.3. Light shading and dark green shading indicate ± 1 and ± 2 times the standard error in the baseline, respectively. The orange lines indicate models of fission fragments added to the baseline pattern; the dotted line has equal contributions from the baseline and the fission model, the dashed line has two parts fission fragments plus one part baseline pattern, and the solid line has four parts fission plus one part baseline. (A) Elements 34 < Z < 52, normalized to Zr (solid circle). Elements are labeled at bottom. (B) Residuals between the data and the baseline pattern in (A). (C and D) Same as (A) and (B), respectively, but for elements 56 < Z < 78, normalized to Ba (solid circle). Numerical values are provided in data S1.
This issue has some relevance on Earth, by the way. Some of the fission products in used nuclear fuel are very valuable elements which may be utilized with short cooling periods to eliminate their radioactivity or to make residual radioactivity be of acceptably low risk in use. In particular, the very valuable and technologically important element rhodium is probably more abundant in used nuclear fuels than it is in all of the ores on Earth.
The case for rhodium is probably the exception rather than the rule for valuable elements. While used nuclear fuel contains for instance, several commercially important lanthanides, in particular, lanthanum, cerium, praseodymium, & neodymium that are essentially nonradioactive after short cooling periods, the high energy to mass ratio of the actinides which makes nuclear power environmentally superior to all other energy sources, means that only small fractions of annual demand for these elements can be isolated from used nuclear fuels.
Have a nice afternoon and evening.
Sheffield Forgemasters set to regain key nuclear accreditation
Sheffield Forgemasters set to regain key nuclear accreditationSubtitle:
Excerpts:
The ASME committee on nuclear certification is now expected to approve the audit's findings and grant the certificate, making the company the only UK producer of such heavy forgings and castings to physically weld-fabricate what are safety-critical components for nuclear power plants. The company, based in the city of Sheffield, originally gained ASME accreditation as a Nuclear Material Organisation in 1992, but that had lapsed, with the lack of nuclear new-build in the following years, instead the focus being on developing technologies for SMRs...
... The UK's energy strategy, unveiled in April, set the target for eight new reactors plus small modular reactors to produce 24 GWe capacity by 2050, meeting about 25% of the UK's projected electricity demand. The UK currently generates about 15% of its electricity from about 6.5 GW of nuclear capacity. The first new nuclear capacity in the UK for about 30 years is being built by EDF at Hinkley Point C - two EPRs producing 3.2 GW of electricity - with a final investment decision also expected on a similar sized project at Sizewell C within the next few months.
There is currently a selection process taking place for SMR technology to be adopted in the UK with six companies - Holtec, Rolls-Royce, Nuward, NuScale, GE Hitachi and Westinghouse - shortlisted ahead of an announcement scheduled for Spring 2024 on which the government will support. The aim is for a final investment decision in 2029, with operational SMRs delivered by the mid-2030s...
The goals set, by the way, for the UK, are way too low to have serious meaning for climate change. They should be more like 100 GWe, and not "by 2050" but ASAP.
With 6 More Reactor Approvals, Poland Now Plans 24 Small Nuclear Reactors.
Poland has, in general, the worst carbon intensity for electrical generation in Europe, generally followed in 2nd or 3rd place for large economies, by Germany.
One can discern this at any point in time by calling up The Electricity Map. As of this writing, 12/11/23, 1:17 AM Warsaw time, the carbon intensity for electricity in Poland is 861 g CO2/kWh, Germany 524 g CO2/kWh, France 36 g CO2/kWh.
In "percent talk," utilized by defenders of the indefensible so called "renewable energy" failure to address climate change, the carbon intensity of Poland is 2390% higher than France, whereas putatively "green" Germany is "only" 1455% higher than France.
Unlike Germany, however Poland has plans to do something about its carbon emissions:
Six SMR power plants approved in Poland
Subtitle:
Excerpts of the article:
OSGE submitted applications in late-April to the Ministry of Climate and Environment for decisions-in-principle on the construction of plants at six locations, omitting Warsaw from the list.
The ministry has now issued decisions-in-principle for the construction of a total of 24 BWRX-300 reactors at the six locations.
The decision-in-principle is the first decision in the process of administrative permits for investments in nuclear power facilities in Poland that an investor may apply for. Obtaining it entitles OSGE to apply for a number of further administrative arrangements, such as a siting decision or construction licence.
"The decisions we received are an important step towards deep decarbonisation of the Polish economy," Rafał Kasprów, President of the Management Board of OSGE, announced during the Net Zero Nuclear forum at the COP28 climate change conference in Dubai. "It is symbolic that we received the decisions today - with carbon dioxide emissions in Poland reaching 928g CO2/kWh, the highest in Europe and one of the highest in the world.
"The decisions enable us to launch a programme to build a fleet of BWRX-300 reactors in Poland to provide zero-emission, stable energy sources for the energy, industry and heating sectors..."
I note that the Poles have mentioned specifically their climate shortcomings in this article. The word for that position is "courage."
This would contrast with a nation calling itself "green," and then raising its carbon intensity with appeals to fear and ignorance.
Verstehen?
I have to say that my mind was blown by a book this weekend.
Today my wife and I were killing time in a University Library while waiting for a musical performance and I wandered around the shelves looking for something that might be a fun read (since I don't have privileges in that library). I came across this book: Entropy . I pulled it off the shelf, and in a few hours went through the magnificent Introduction (the first chapter) by cowritten by the editors, and the inspiring mind bending 2nd Chapter, Fundamental Concepts by one of the authors logo Mueller.
I only had three hours with the book, and then the time for the musical event came upon us, and I had to put it down.
After returning home, I downloaded the full text. I could spend the rest of my life with this book, dusting off withered concepts in mathematics about which I have not thought in a long time, but as a practical matter, unless I retire, which I do not want to do, I won't have time
The book was a compilation of papers from a conference held in 2000 because of the realization among workers in entropy that the mathematical language used in specific disciplines were at least partially incomprehensible to workers in other disciplines.
From the Preface:
Chemists, chemical engineers, and many other kinds of engineers, and certainly physicists and other kinds of scientists all have a working knowledge of the subject of entropy, a fundamental concept in thermodynamics.
One can even get lazy when putting the concept to use, and become detached from the powerful sublimity of the concept and the remarkable intellectual history underlying it.
Fun things I learned in the three hours of reading. Boltzmann never wrote down the equation now inscribed on his tombstone S = k ln(W). Instead, he derived the Boltzmann distribution function as a differential equation that was the sum of two partial derivatives, one in space and the other in time of that function, and thus derived conservation laws in momentum, energy and mass from which the "tombstone Boltzmann equation" falls out with recognition that if one substitutes the number of atoms in a phase space with a consideration of numbers of atoms having unique momenta at particular points in space.
The author makes the point that Gibbs, Maxwell and Boltzmann should have all followed their concepts to a realization and appreciation of quantization of matter, quantum mechanics, by recognizing that space itself is quantized.
From Chapter 2 (Ingo Mueller):
Actually, 'hammered' is the right word. The main proponents went into a prolonged and acrimonious debate. Polemic was rife and good sense in abeyance. After 50 years, when the dust settled and the fog lifted, one had to realize that quantum mechanics could have started 30 years earlier, if only the founders of thermodynamics-not exempting Boltzmann, Maxwell and Gibbs-had put the facts into the right perspective...
Cool. I wish I wasn't running out of time in my life. Now, as an old man, I truly regret the time I wasted.
Have a nice day tomorrow.
Profile Information
Gender: MaleCurrent location: New Jersey
Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 33,582
