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 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 consider 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. Sea levels 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 has already endorsed my process 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.

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 way of donations to my campaign at

  https://readyfundgo.com/?post_type=ignition_product&p=52427.

The funds will be used to seek international patent for my invention as an intellectual property. It will enable me to demonstrate further the invention by installing a 25 Mw baseload power plant with zero emissions using only sun and sea. It is a small beginning for a lasting solution for a net zero emission technology. It will also help reduce ocean acidification and help marine life including corals. It will be the new beginning !

Flawed Carbon pricing and the cost of global warming

The climate is changing with increasing global warming caused by man-made Carbon emission. The economic impact of global warming can no longer be ignored by Governments around the world because it is impacting their budget bottom lines. Weather is becoming unpredictable. Even if Meteorological department predicts a disaster 24 hrs in advance, there is nothing Governments can do to prevent human and economic losses within a short span of time but evacuate people to safety leaving behind all their properties. Governments are forced to allocate funds for disaster management every year caused by severe draughts, unprecedented snow falls, and coastal erosion by rising sea levels, flash flooding, inundation and power black outs. We often hear people saying,” we were completely taken by surprise by this event and we have never seen anything like this in the last 50 years” after every naturals disasters explaining the nature and scale of disasters. Nature is forcing Governments to allocate more funds for disaster managements and such allocations have reached unprecedented levels. The cost of natural disasters around the world in 2011 was estimated at $ 400 billion and in 2012 it was estimated at $160 billion. The only way to fund these disasters is to tax Carbon pollution which causes global warming. Countries should take long term decisions that will save their current and future generations to come. They should understand how Carbon is emitted and what the best way to curb such emissions is. It is a global issue and its requires a collective solution. There is no use of pricing Carbon when economic recession can jeopardize the pricing mechanism? Global warming is a moral and social issue and not just an economic issue. Developed countries have been emitting bulk of the Carbon since industrial revolution while developing countries such as India and China were emitting less carbon in spite of their vast population due to their lowest per capita consumption. But that trend has now changed with rapid industrialization and economic growth of India and China and other developing economies. Australia is still a leading emitter of Carbon in the world in spite of their low population because of their high energy consumption, availability of cheap and high quality Coal and increasing mining, industrial and agricultural activities. That is why Australia is one of the first few countries who introduced Carbon tax while rest of the countries is still debating about it. Now it is clear that Carbon emission is directly proportional to industrial, economic and population growth of a country and it can be easily quantified based on the growth rate of each country. It is time countries agree to cut their Carbon emissions to sustainable levels with a realistic Carbon pricing mechanism and sign a world-wide treaty through UN. “THE EUROPEAN UNION carbon emissions trading scheme—the biggest in the world and the heart of Europe’s climate- change program—is in dire straits. The scheme’s carbon price has collapsed. The primary reason: The economic recession has suppressed manufacturing, thereby reducing emissions and creating a huge over- supply of carbon emissions allowances. Carbon trading is a market approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions in which each facility involved is given an emissions cap for the year, and each year that cap is reduced. A firm must record and report its facilities’ emissions and must obtain allowances for its total emissions. An allowance permits a facility to emit 1 metric ton of carbon dioxide or its carbon equivalent; some allowances are given for free by the government, others can be bought at auction or from other firms. If a facility exceeds its cap, the company operating it has options: It can reduce emissions, buy allowances from other companies, or obtain allowance offsets by reducing emissions at another pollution source. The cost of an allowance is referred to as the carbon price and is driven by market conditions such as supply and demand. If the low carbon price continues, the region’s ability to meet long-term reduction targets for greenhouse gas emissions will be severely hampered because the trading scheme will fail to provide money for clean-tech programs and incentive for manufactures to adopt cleaner technologies. The trading scheme is a key component of the EU’s climate-change strategy because about 40% of all greenhouse gases emitted in the region fall under EU’s control. The mandatory scheme applies to 11,000 industrial installations, including power plants and major chemical facilities, across all 27 member states, as well as in Croatia, Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway. The aviation sector has been included in the scheme, but its active participation has been deferred to allow for an international agreement on aviation emissions, which is expected to be concluded in the fall. The goal of the European Commission, the EU’s administrative body and the architect of the emissions trading scheme, is to reduce all greenhouse gas emissions by 20% from 1990 levels by 2020. To contribute toward this goal, the trading scheme has targeted a 21% cut in the emissions of participating sectors by 2020 from a 2005 baseline. In recent weeks, however, the EU carbon price dropped to a new low of $5.20 for each metric ton allowance of CO2, down from a high of $23 in 2011. This is despite an annual reduction of the EU emissions cap of 1.74% through 2020 and the introduction on Jan. 1 of a new phase of the scheme requiring companies to purchase allowances. AT ITS CURRENT carbon price, the EU emission scheme’s role in encouraging chemical firms to ditch fossil fuels and adopt greener technologies “is meaningless,” says André Veneman, director of sustainability at AkzoNobel. Many of the industry’s investments in low-carbon technologies that are marginally financially viable also will likely be delayed, he says. Without a strong carbon price, the underlying push to clean-tech in the EU will come only from the price of oil, Veneman adds. Veneman and other experts say that a carbon price of between $68 and $135 is required if industry as a whole is to be forced to shift onto a new low-carbon footing. Yvo de Boer, special global adviser for climate change and sustainability for KPMG—an audit, tax, and advisory firm—and form EUROPEAN SCHEME IS IN FREE FALL Record-low CARBON PRICE threatens to derail transition away from fossil fuels and ability to meet climate-change targets.” Source: EUROPEAN SCHEME IS IN FREE FALL Record-low CARBON PRICE threatens to derail transition away from fossil fuels and ability to meet climate-change targets ALEX SCOTT, C&EN LONDO The burden of Carbon tax should be borne by both power generators as well as consumers. Even if the Carbon tax is imposed on emitters it will eventually be passed on to consumers. Either way the cost of energy will increase steeply and there is no way to avoid such escalation if we want to maintain our power consumption levels or our current life style. In other words people will have to pay penalty for polluting the air either by generating or consuming power that causes Carbon pollution. All developed countries that have been polluting the atmosphere with Carbon emission should be taxed retrospectively from the time of industrial revolution so that emerging countries need not bear the full cost of global warming. Such a fund should be used for developing renewable and clean energy technologies or to purchase Carbon allowances. Current mechanism of Carbon pricing does not penalize countries who caused the global warming in the first place for hundreds of years but penalizes only countries who currently accelerate the rate of Carbon emission. Such an approach is a gross injustice on the emerging economies and not at all pragmatic. Most of the developed countries are currently facing economic recession resulting in plummeted Carbon price. This will only encourage existing Carbon emitters to emit Carbon cheaply and penalize Renewable energy and clean energy technologies with higher tariffs and drive them to extinction. In spite of Carbon level in the atmosphere exceeding 400 ppm according to the latest report, the world is helpless to reduce the Carbon emission anytime sooner making our planet vulnerable to catastrophic natural disasters. Countries that are reluctant to pay Carbon tax will pay for Natural disasters which may be many times costlier than Carbon tax. Countries like US, European Union, Japan, Australia the largest power consumers and countries like Saudi Arabia, Russia, Venezuela, Iran, Iraq, Libya the largest oil producers should bear the cost of Carbon pollution that caused the globe to warm since industrial revolution. Such a fund should be utilized in developing innovative Renewable energy and clean energy technologies of the future. More than anything else the rich and powerful countries should declare global warming as a moral issue of the twenty-first century and take some bold and hard economic decisions to save the planet earth.

Recycling Carbon emissions to Gasoline production

Nature has a wonderful way of capturing Carbon and recycling it through a process called ‘carbon cycle’ for millions of years. The greenhouse gases in the atmosphere were restricted within certain limits when it was left to Nature. But when human being started burning fossil fuels to generate power or to run cars, the GHG emission surpassed the limit beyond a point where global warming became an issue. The GHG level has increased to 392 ppm level for the first in our long history. Many Governments and companies are exploring various ways and means to reduce greenhouse emissions to avoid global warming. Some Governments are imposing taxes on carbon emission in order to reduce or discourage such emissions. Others are offering incentives to promote alternative energy sources such as wind and solar. Some companies are trying to capture Carbon emission for sequestration. While we try to capture Carbon and store them underground, there are many potential commercial opportunities to recycle them. This means the Carbon emission is captured and converted into a commercial fuel such as Gasoline or Diesel or Methane so that future sources of fossil fuels are not burnt anymore. But this is possible only by using ‘Renewable Hydrogen’. Hydrogen is the key to reduce carbon emission by binding carbon molecules with Hydrogen molecule, similar to what Nature does. When NASA plans to send a man to Mars they have to overcome certain basic issues. Mars has an atmosphere with 95% Carbon dioxide, 3% Nitrogen, 1.6% Argon and traces of oxygen, water and methane.Nasa is planning to use Carbon dioxide to generate Methane gas to be used as a fuel and also generate water by using the following reaction. CO2 + 4H2-----CH4 + 2 H2O, 2H2O-------2H2 + O2 The water is electrolyzed to split water into Hydrogen and Oxygen using solar power. The resulting Hydrogen is reacted with Carbon dioxide from Mars to generate Methane gas and water using a solid catalyst. This methanation reaction is exothermic and self sustaining. How this can be achieved practically in Mars in those conditions are not discussed here. But this is a classical example on how the Carbon emission can be tackled to our advantages, without increasing the emissions into the atmosphere. There are several methods available to convert Carbon emission in to valuable products including gasoline. The reaction of the methane with water vapor will result in Methanol. 2H2 + CO-------- CH3OH On Dehydration, 2CH3OH ----- CH3COCH3 + H2O.Further dehydration with ZSM-5 Catalyst gives Gasoline 80% C5+ Hydrocarbon. Gas to liquid by Fischer-tropic reaction is a known process. Carbon dioxide is also a potential refrigerant to substitute CFC refrigerants that causes Ozone depletion. Carbon recycling is a temporary solution to mitigate Greenhouse gas emission till Hydrogen becomes an affordable fuel of the future. It depends upon individual Governments and their policies to make Hydrogen affordable. Technologies are available and only a political will and leadership can make Hydrogen a reality.

Carbon-free air is a Human right issue

Environment Pollution Authority EPA of US Government regulated the gas emission standards for power plants for oxides of Nitrogen and Sulfur in the past but not for GreenHouseGas (GHG) emissions into the atmosphere. However, when President Obama took over power, EPA passed ‘Clean Air Act’ to regulate the emission standards of all gases including GHG for new stationary power plants. This act projected to prevent over 230,000 early deaths in US alone by 2020 due to Carbon dioxide. According to this act, 1. Starting in January 2011, large industrial facilities that must already obtain Clean Air Act permits for non-GHGs must also include GHG requirements in these permits if these increase are newly constructed and have the potential to emit 75,000 tons per year of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) or more or modify and increase GHG emissions by that amount. 2. Starting in July 2011, in addition to facilities described above, all new facilities emitting GHGs in excess of 100,000 tons of per year CO2e and facilities making changes that would increase GHG emissions by at least 75,000 tpy CO2e, and that also exceed 100/250 tons per year of GHGs on a mass basis, will be required to obtain construction permits that address GHG emissions (regardless of whether they emit enough non-GHG pollutants to require a permit for those emissions.) 3. Operating permits will be needed by all sources that emit at least 100,000 tons of GHG per year on a CO2e basis beginning in July 2011. 4. Sources less than 50,000 tons of GHGs per year on a CO2e basis will not be required to obtain permits for GHGs before 2016. (Sources: clean technica) According to Stanford scientist Mark Jacobson, there is a definite link between the Carbon dioxide and increasing deaths. While the argument continues between believers of global warming and skeptics, it clear that Carbon pollution kills people without any discrimination. Any gaseous emission into the atmosphere will eventually spread across the borders of each country and becomes a global issue. EPA in each country in the world should pass similar legislation to curb GHG emissions, at least to protect their people if not to curtail global warming. What is most surprising is some scientists still want more ‘scientific data’ to accept whether GHG causes global warming or not. One need not be a rocket scientist to conclude that chemical pollution is slowly poisoning the air, water and earth. Hundreds of chemicals that we used in the past were abandoned due to their harmful effects. For example, Asbestos,DDT,Chlorine for disinfecting drinking water, coal tar dyes, Nicotine, Refrigerants like Fluorocarbons etc to name a few. We can choose to ignore the warnings of Nature and carry on the business as usual in the name of science. But we cannot ignore people claiming their legitimate rights to live and breathe a quality air to lead a normal life. It is a human right issue. It is not an issue that can be debated only by scientific community and decided. WHO should classify ‘Quality air’ as a fundamental human right with great urgency. Governments around the world can pass ‘Clean air act’ similar to US. They may not levy carbon tax or offer new incentives to promote green energy, but regulate the indiscriminate emissions of GHG into the atmosphere, which passively kills millions of people around the world. This is nothing but ‘weapons of mass destruction’ in a passive way, but on a grander scale. When ‘passive smoking’ is a crime Carbon emission too is a crime. It is the duty of industries to incorporate carbon pollution prevention measures by scientific innovations.