.
El Niños, Hunga Tonga Volcanic Eruption, and the Tropics
El Niños, Hunga Tonga Volcanic Eruption, and the Tropics
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/hunga-tonga-volcanic-eruption
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/natural-forces-cause-p...
.
PART I
Impetus of El Niños
Near the Equator, a 9000m-deep plateau, near Papua New Guinea and Solomon Islands, has major periodic, volcanic activity, that influences the world’s weather. The plateau covers about 150,000 square miles. It is:
1) One of the most geologically active regions on Earth
2) Home to the junction of five active fault systems, the second-largest, ocean-floor lava plateau on Earth,
3) Has hundreds of ocean floor volcanoes, and a large number of ocean-floor hydrothermal vents. See URLs
https://www.plateclimatology.com/why-el-nios-originate-from-geologi...
https://climatechangedispatch.com/geologist-how-geologic-factors-ge...
.
The plateau has several tectonic plates slide over each other. There are hundreds of vents and lava eruptions.
The cause of sliding is mostly gravitational pull of the moon. The forces must be enormous to move around so much water every 24 hours.
Just as the oceans react with tides, the floating land masses react as well, but with much smaller amplitudes, except at weak points, such as the 9000-m deep plateau. The Pacific Rim has many weak points, with vents and eruptions, as does the mid-Atlantic rift.
The normal condition is with trade winds from east to west, so called La Nina, but every 3 to 7 years additional sliding occurs on the plateau. This causes additional venting and eruptions and additional heating of the already warmish water; the impetus of an El Niño, rated weak to very strong, whose development and consequences are well known. This warmish water rises, and with pre-vailing currents, arrives at Peru. That El Niño process takes several months to develop.
The upwelling weakens the trade winds , which changes air pressure and wind speeds, and push warm water toward the west coast of South America.
At higher latitudes, these changes in the Tropics allow the Pacific Jet Stream, a narrow current of air flowing from west to east, to be pushed south and spread further east. The jet stream steers weather systems, thereby determining the weather patterns seen across a wide geographic area.
.
Water Vapor: In the Tropics, insolation and water and air temperatures are high, while the water travels, causing much evaporation and huge cloud formation.
As the WV and warm air rises, other air flows in to fill the “vacuum”. This causes winds, which ripple the surface, which causes greater rates of evaporation, which causes increased winds and waves, which causes even greater rates of evaporation, etc.
.
Hunga Tonga Underwater Eruption: Now comes along a rare event, the very large Hunga Tonga eruption on January 15, 2022. The free cloud looks enormous from a satellite. The opening of the underwater volcano is small, in comparison. Huge evaporation with water in contact with 1000 F lava.
The free cloud contained hot eruption gases and solids, and entrained warm air.
The water totaled of about 146 million metric ton of water (droplets/vapor/ice crystals) into the atmosphere and lower stratosphere within a few days. The ice crystals refract additional sunlight, providing additional warming to the Troposphere, which causes additional evaporation at high rates in the Tropics, as does the WV.
.
Contrails of Jet Airplanes Augmented by Hunga Tonga Eruption: Jet airlines typically cruise at 10 to 13 km. Their exhaust includes WV and soot particles. The WV condenses on the soot to form ice crystals.
The WV (as ice crystals) of the Hunga Tonga eruption are added to the ice crystals of the cruising jet airliners, but now the layer extends into the lower stratosphere, above 20 km!
The layer acts as a warm blanket, because it absorbs outgoing IR radiation, which warms the TS, and increases evaporation.
.
Temp and Energy Increase: WV, abundant in the Tropics, is a strong green house gas (CO2, a trace gas, is a weak green house gas), so the El Niño process (rated strong in this case) likely would gradually heat the lower atmosphere (aka Troposphere, TS, 17 km high at the Equator, 9 km at the Poles), by say 0.5 C (measured from the start of 2023, blue line, Image 2), which means the Troposphere can hold additional WV.
The Hunga Tonga eruption likely would add another 0.5 C (measured from the start of 2023, blue line, Image 2), which means the TS can hold even more additional WV.
The total temperature increase, due to the two natural events, was about 1.0 C, which enabled the atmosphere to hold 7% more WV, or about 0.07 x 3984 = 278.9 ppm more, which is 278.9/0.0458 = 6089 times greater than the rapid 0.0458 ppm increase due to the 146 million metric ton water of the Hunga Tonga eruption.
It required 2009 EJ to evaporate that much WV over a period of at least one year
This shows the magnifying power of the sun creating additional WV after the onset of the two natural events.
See Image 2 and below section "Hunga Tonga Type Eruptions are Weather Influencers"
It may take up to 5 years for the increased WV to dissipate, and while this happens, the TS would have elevated temperatures, gradually decreasing, to more normal levels.
.
A New Equilibrium?: The El Niño and Hunga Tonga events were major natural driving forces that, along with other forces, caused the TS temp to increase by about 1 C, which may well become a new equilibrium, with an associated regime of weather events. The question is what major natural force, such as a temporary reduction of solar output, for how long, will set in motion a process to reduce the TS temp by 1 C to get back to the prior equilibrium?
.
Image 1, shows 45 years of temperatures of the TS, based on satellite measurements by NASA.
It shows the peak of the El Nino of 2019 - 2020 and the low-point of the La Nina of January 2022, but does not yet show the up/down spikes of the subsequent El Nino/La Nina concurrent with the Hunga Tonga eruption.
Those spikes have nothing to do with CO2 emissions, manmade and natural, all of which are gradually increasing, due to increased world wide greening, increased use of fossil fuels, and other causes.
Because La Niña and El Niño cycles often span multiple consecutive years, the last La Niña event impacted the Pacific during the winter of 2020-2021 and then again in the winter of 2022/2023, as shown in this analysis by Meteorologist Paul Dorian, “La Nina Conditions Continue Across the Equatorial Pacific.”
.
.
Image 2 is the latest graph. You can see the temps in 2024 have peaked, and will continue decreasing in 2024, even though CO2 is gradually increasing.
.
Image 3: Strong El Niño effects peaking in late-summer/early-fall of 2023
.
.
PART II
Hunga Tonga Sub-Surface Eruption
In January 15, 2022, the underwater Hunga Tonga volcano, located close to the Solomon Islands, exploded,
The WV caused the TS temperature to increase; January 2024 is 0.8 C higher than January 2023, See blue squares
The 2023 El Nino, rated strong, added WV to the atmosphere over a period of months.
Its peaking effects in December 2024 likely added to the effects of the Hunga Tonga eruption.
Image by PhD Douglas Lightfoot
.
.
Heating and Evaporating 146 megatons of Water = m x Cp x dT = (1.46 x 10^11 kg) x (4182 J/kg.C) x (100 - 26, C) x
1/10^18 = 0.0452 EJ, for heating + (2260000 J/kg.C) x (1.45 x 10^11 kg) x 1/10^18 = 0.3300 EJ, for evaporation, a total of 0.3751 EJ; excludes energy to heat gases to well above 100 C, and increase in potential energy from below surface to high elevation. 1 exajoule = 10^18 J
Because the eruption occurred about 150 m underwater, the red hot lava immediately superheated the shallow seawater above and converted it to steam.
https://climate.nasa.gov/explore/ask-nasa-climate/3143/steamy-relat....
Adding WV to Stratosphere: There is a lag of a few months from the onset of an El Niño near Papua New Guinea and its effect on sea surface temperature, SST
The Hunga Tonga eruption quickly increased the WV ppm above 20 km
Air pressure at sea level is 101.325 kPa, about 10000 kg, at 288.1 K
Air pressure at 20 km, about 2.26 times Mt Everest, is 5.529 kPa, at 216.6 K
Weight of air above 20 km is (5.529/101.325 = 0.0546) x 10000 kg = 546 kg, or (546 x 10^3 g)/(29 g/mol) = 18816 g mol
Before eruption, WV was 1.8 g/m^2/ 29 g/mol = 0.062 g mol, or 0.062/18816 = 3.3 ppm
After eruption, WV was 2.1/29 = 0.072 g mol; a 0.072/0.062 = 17% increase
Image by Bob Weber
.
.
Hunga Tonga Type Eruptions are Weather Influencers
Hunga Tonga volcanic eruption adding 10 to 15% WV (say 12.5%) to the atmosphere.
https://eos.org/articles/tonga-eruption-may-temporarily-push-earth-...
WV weight fraction temporary increase from 0.2473% to 1.125 x 0.2473 = 0.2782%
Rapid WV increase of 1.46 x 10^11 kg, 8.11 X 10^9 mole
Temporary increase of the WV from 3984.4818 ppm to (initial WV + addition, WV)/Dry air = (7.0556 x 10^14, WV + 8.11 x 10^9, WV addition) / (1.7708 x 10^17, dry air) = 3984.5276 ppm; a 0.0458 ppm increase!
Atmosphere, wet air = 5.1352 x 10^18, dry air + 0.0127 x 10^18, WV, incl. clouds = 5.1480 x 10^18 kg
A small percent increase on a world-wide basis, but a major increase on a local, Pacific-Ocean basis. It upset normal weather patterns of those Pacific-Ocean areas, as verified by satellite measurements
.
PART III
CO2 and WV Molecules
CO2 molecules absorb IR photons at four narrow bands of wavelengths, centered on 2.0, 2.7, 4.3 and 14.9 micron (μm); the first three have minuscule energy. See Image 11A.
CO2 molecules absorb minimal IR photons at wavelengths greater than 15 micrometers
WV molecules have more bands, and those bands are much wider than of CO2 molecules, especially the bands with shorter wavelengths. See Image 11A
WV molecules have up to 6 times wider absorption spectrum than CO2 molecules
IR photons with wavelengths from 0.8 to 70 μm (except the 8 - 13 μm window) are mostly absorbed by WV molecules.
Each WV molecule can absorb IR photons at these wavelengths, plus WV molecules are far more abundant than CO2 molecules.
WV molecules likely are more energetic than CO2 molecules, because of their absorption of short wavelength/high energy photons. See Image 11A
The heat of the warmed WV molecules is distributed, by means of mass transfer of energy, and conduction, convection, cloud formation/evaporation, to all molecules in the atmosphere, which mostly are 78% N2, 21% O2, and 1% Argon
That 99.9% neither absorbs nor radiates IR photons. It gets mostly heated by contact with warmed earth surfaces (conduction) and rising warm air (convection)
CO2 and WV Vertical Concentration Profiles
WV quantities in the atmosphere depend on temperature, and are kept nearly constant, due to continuous precipitation and continuous evaporation, transpiration, etc., meaning WV year-to-year impacts are nearly unchanging
As the TS warms, it can hold 7% more WV/1.0 C increase
WV, on average, is about 1.5% (15000 ppm) at sea level, and 0.4% (4000 ppm) over the entire atmosphere.
The image shows data of two tests:
WV is 11 g WV/kg dry air = 17722 ppm at sea level; 9 g WV/kg dry air = 14500 ppm at 1.6 km.
WV ppm rapidly decreases, due to condensing/freezing on aerosol particles, water droplets, and ice crystals
After enough WV molecules have condensed, the droplets become large enough to be "seen" by lightwaves, the light scatters, which makes a cloud visible.
WV/CO2 molecule ratio is about 17722/421 = 42.1 near the surface; 14500/421 = 34.4 at 1.6 km.
https://d-nb.info/1142268306/34
NOTE: CO2 was 421 ppm at end 2023, but in densely populated, industrial areas, such as eastern China and eastern US, it was about 10% greater, whereas in rural and ocean areas, it was about 10% less.
https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/4990
IR Radiation Near the Surface: IR photons, at all wavelengths, thermalize (transfer their energy) by collisions with molecules, aerosol particles, ice crystals and water droplets near the surface.
IR photons, at appropriate wavelengths, thermalize by absorption by WV and CO2 molecules within 150 m from the surface. The upward radiation flux from the surface, at long wavelengths, is 398.19 W/m^2, per NASA
Downward IR Radiation by "Warmed" TS: The "warmed" TS emits IR radiation in all directions.
Downward radiation sees about the same CO2 ppm, about 421 ppm in 2023, but sees increasing WV ppm, up to 17772 ppm near the surface
Downward radiation at longer wavelengths, is mostly outside of CO2 absorption bands, but within WV absorption bands.
The other photons thermalize by collision with numerous air molecules, aerosol particles, ice crystals and water droplets.
The remaining downward radiation flux impacting the surface, at longer wavelengths, is 340.3 W/m^2, per NASA.
Upward IR Radiation by "Warmed" TS: The atmosphere above the TS is transparent to IR radiation (aka atmospheric window), because:
1) WV is about 3.3 ppm at 20 km; irrelevant regarding absorbing photons
2) CO2 is about 390 ppm at 20 km. However, at low temperatures of about -56.5 C (216.6 K), photon wavelengths are beyond CO2 absorption bands, i.e., any increase of CO2 ppm, such as from burning more fossil fuels, does not reduce upward IR radiation
3) Temps increase from -56..5 C at 20 km to -2.5 C at 50 km, but pressures are very low,
https://www.pdas.com/atmosTable2SI.html
Collision rates are less, due to 1) low temps, 2) low pressure, i.e., molecules moving slower and much further apart. Collision rates are 4 billion/s at sea level; 1 billion/s at 10 km; 7 million/s at 50 km
With sufficient transparency, upward radiation flux becomes the dominant heat transfer/cooling mode.
Total upward radiation flux (TS + clouds + window) is 239.9 W/m^2, per NASA; this value has been increasing since 1985, even though CO2 ppm has been increasing, i.e., the window is not closing.
See URLs and Image 11A and below 5 images
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/air-altitude-pressure-d_462.html
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/standard-atmosphere-d_604.html
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/the-greenhouse-model-a...
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/04/18/when-satellites-refute-the-c...
.
.
The green line shows temperature; Kelvin = (C + 273) at sea level, (-50 + 273) at 10 km
https://www.aos.wisc.edu/~aos121br/radn/radn/sld013.htm
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/standard-atmosphere-d_604.html
.
.
.
Latest Earth Energy Balance by NASA
BB radiation from earth surface using Stefan-Boltzmann, is (5.1 x 10^14 m^2, world area) x (5.67 x 10^-8) / (m^2.K^4), S-B constant x (273.16 + 16.32 = 289.48 K^4) = 2.03 x 10^17 W, or 398.19 W/m^2; emissivity was assumed at 1.0 The image shows energy in and out, but does not show retained energy
.
Solar Energy, TOA |
EJ/y |
|
m^2, world area |
5.1E+14 |
|
W/m^2 = (J/s)/m^2 |
340.4 |
|
Albedo |
0.2935 |
|
Reflected, total |
99.9074 |
|
s/y |
31557600 |
|
J/y |
5.47853E+24 |
|
J/EJ |
1E+18 |
|
EJ, TOA |
340.4 |
5478526 |
Reflected, clouds, atmosphere |
77.0000 |
1239267 |
Reflected, earth surface |
22.9074 |
368680 |
Reflected, total |
99.9074 |
1607947 |
Absorbed, atmosphere |
77.1000 |
1240876 |
Absorbed, earth surface |
163.3926 |
2629702 |
.
.
PART IV
Enthalpy of Atmosphere at Various Elevations
About 5.5 million EJ/y from the sun enters the top of atmosphere, and almost as much leaves,
Some energy is retained in the atmosphere on a continuing basis
Retained energy, RE, is a net effect of the interplay of the sun, atmosphere, earth surface (land and water), and flora and fauna, i.e., all effects are accounted for, including radiation, evaporation, condensation, precipitation
WV in the TS, up to about 1.5 km, is nearly constant at 9 g/kg of dry air
WV decreases from about 2.5 g to less than 0.3 g, from 2 km to 6 km, per balloon measurements
Water at high elevation consists of ice crystals condensed on particles, i.e., minimal WV
Assume, for 2023, WV near the surface is 9 g/kg dry air (14,500 ppm) at TS = 16 C
Table 1 shows the enthalpy of a one-m layer at various elevations
.
https://www.pdas.com/atmosTable2SI.html
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/water-vapor-d_979.html
https://aerospaceweb.org/design/scripts/atmosphere/
https://www.eoas.ubc.ca/books/Practical_Meteorology/prmet102/Ch03-t...
https://www.cambridge.org/us/files/9513/6697/5546/Appendix_E.pdf
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/carbon-dioxide-d_974.html
.
Enthalpy, H; K ref = 0 |
|||||
Elevation, m |
1 |
2000 |
5000 |
10000 |
20000 |
Density, kg/m^3 |
1.2249 |
1.0066 |
0.7364 |
0.4135 |
0.0889 |
Pressure, kPa |
101.325 |
79.501 |
54.480 |
26499 |
5529 |
Temperature, C |
15 |
2 |
-17.47 |
-49.7 |
-56.4 |
Temperature, K |
288.15 |
275.15 |
255.68 |
223.45 |
216.75 |
Cp dry air, kJ/kg.K |
1.0061 |
1.005 |
1.0053 |
1.006 |
1.013 |
Dry air fraction, kg/kg dry air |
0.9904 |
0.9974 |
0.9979 |
0.9989 |
0.9993 |
1) H dry air, Cp dry air * K |
287.113 |
275.799 |
256.494 |
224.549 |
219.418 |
Cp WV, kJ/kg.K |
1.862 |
1.859 |
1.855 |
1.852 |
1.849 |
WV fraction, kg/kg dry air |
0.00900 |
0.00200 |
0.00150 |
0.00050 |
0.00010 |
2) H WV; Cp WV * K |
4.829 |
1.023 |
0.711 |
0.207 |
0.040 |
CO2 fraction, kg/kg dry air |
0.000639 |
0.000628 |
0.000606 |
0.000576 |
0.000584 |
Cp CO2, kJ/(kg CO2.K) |
0.834 |
0.819 |
0.798 |
0.763 |
0.753 |
Cp CO2 at K |
240.317 |
225.348 |
204.033 |
170.492 |
163.213 |
3) H CO2, kJ/kg dry air |
0.154 |
0.142 |
0.124 |
0.098 |
0.095 |
H total, kJ/kg dry air |
292.096 |
276.964 |
257.329 |
224.854 |
219.553 |
H total, kJ/m^3 dry air |
357.8 |
278.8 |
189.5 |
93.0 |
19.5 |
.
NOTE: This short video shows, CO2 plays no detectable RE role in the world’s driest places, with 421 ppm CO2 and minimal WV ppm
https://youtu.be/QCO7x6W61wc
.
Specific enthalpy of Dry Air and Water Vapor; C ref = 0
ha = Cpa x T = 1006 kJ/kg.C x T, where Cpa is specific heat dry air
hg = (2501 kJ/kg, specific enthalpy WV at 0 C) + (Cpwv x T = 1.84 kJ/kg x T), where Cpwv is specific heat WV at constant pressure
.
1a) In 1900, near the surface, at T = 14.8 C and H = 0.008244 kg WV/kg dry air (13,282 ppm)
h = ha + H.hg = 1.006T + H(2501 + 1.84T) = 1.006 (14.8) + 0.008306 {2501 + 1.84 (14.8)} = 35.886 kJ/kg dry air
RE dry air is 14.889 kJ/kg; RE WV is 20.997 kJ/kg
1b) In 2023, near the surface, at T = 16 C and H = 0.009 kg WV/kg dry air (14,500 ppm)
1.006 (16) + 0.009 {2501 + 1.84 (16)} = 38.870 kJ/kg dry air
RE dry air is 16.096 kJ/kg; RE WV is 22.774 kJ/kg
https://www.wikihow.com/Calculate-the-Enthalpy-of-Moist-Air#:~:text....
.
Specific enthalpy CO2, in 1900
h = Cp CO2 x K = 0.833 x (14.8 + 273) = 239.8 kJ/kg CO2, where Cp CO2 is specific heat
Surface enthalpy CO2 = {(296 x 44)/(1000000 x 29) = 0.000449 kg CO2/kg dry air} x 239.8 kJ/kg CO2 @ 287.8 K = 0.108 kJ/kg dry air
Specific enthalpy CO2, in 2023
h = Cp CO2 x K = 0.834 x (16 + 273) = 241.2 kJ/kg CO2, where Cp CO2 is specific heat
Surface enthalpy CO2 = {(421 x 44)/(1000000 x 29) = 0.000639 kg CO2/kg dry air} x 241.2 kJ/kg CO2 @ 289 K = 0.154 kJ/kg dry air
.
Tropics; C ref = 0
In 2023, surface enthalpy, at T = 27 C and H = 0.017 kg WV/kg dry air (27,389 ppm)
h = 1.006 (27) + 0.017 {2501 + 1.84 (27)} = 70.524 kJ/kg dry air
RE dry air is 27.162 kJ/kg; RE WV is 43.362 kJ/kg
.
Solar Energy
Incoming Solar Energy to Earth: Surface area is about 510,000,000 km^2
Energy to Earth is (340.25 W/m^2) x (510,000,000 km^2) x (3600 s/h x 24 h/d) x (1 exajoule/10^18 J) = 14993 EJ/d
Reflected fraction, albedo (whiteness) is about 0.30
Absorbed by atmosphere, oceans and land masses is about 3,850,000 EJ/y, or 10548 EJ/d, per URL
Absorbed by surface is about 3,400,000 EJ/y, or 9315 EJ/d, per URL
.
Incoming Solar Energy to Tropics: Surface area = 0.398 x 510,000,000 = 202,298,000 km^2, of which land about 66 million km^2, water about 137 million km^2
Solar flux at top of atmosphere is 420 W/m^2 at the equator, and 400 W/m^2 at +23.5 and -23.5 latitudes, for an average of 405 W/m^2
Energy to Tropics is (405 W/m^2) x (202,298,000 km^2) x (3600 s/h x 24 h/d) x (1 EJ/10^18 J) = 7103 EJ/d, about 7103/14993 = 47.4% of Earth
.
Energy Transfer: The Earth gains excess solar energy in the tropics and subtropics, and transfers it to areas north and south of the 37 parallels with energy deficits
The emphasis on CO2, causes the energy collection and distribution in the tropics to be ignored,
An energy budget just for the Tropics is needed
As WV and warm atmosphere gases travel toward the Poles, they transport energy and create weather. Variations in the Earth topography of different regions result in different weather outcomes. See video in URL
.
https://nhpbs.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/nves.sci.earth.vapor/mo...
https://issues.org/avery-2/#:~:text=During%20an%20average%20day%2C%...
https://www.e-education.psu.edu/meteo469/book/export/html/202
.
WV/CO2 Ratio Increases From Polar Areas to the Tropics
About 75% of WV in atmosphere is produced in the Tropics. The process is 24/7/365, due to unvarying temperatures. The Polar regions, 8.4% of world area, produce about 1% of WV.
At every location on Earth, CO2 molecules/m^3 varies with dilution by WV and temperature
Where WV and temperature are higher than at the Poles, CO2 molecules/m^3 is always fewer. The CO2 grams at 20 weather stations was calculated. See table for two stations
The enthalpy (heat content) of dry air, WV and CO2 was calculated, and using McMurdo as the base, the differences in temperature and enthalpy was calculated. The enthalpy increase, due to CO2 causes a maximum temperature increase of 0.006 C from the Poles to Equator.
.
This article calculates, from temperature and humidity measurements at four weather station, the enthalpy (heat content) and specific volume, and the global warming potentials, GWPs, of CH4, N2O and CO2, that are much less than IPCC values.
https://setpublisher.com/index.php/jbas/article/view/2509
.
McMurdo station, - 23 C |
|
|
0.070 |
g WV/kg dry air |
|
418 |
CO2 ppm |
|
0.634 |
g CO2/kg dry air |
(418*44*1000)/(1000000*29) |
0.669 |
specific volume, m^3//kg dry air |
|
0.110 |
molecule WV/molecule dry air |
0.070/0.634 |
0.3 |
molecule WV/molecule CO2 |
0.110*44/18 |
Mogadishu, 31 C |
|
|
18.878 |
g WV/kg dry air |
|
418 |
CO2 ppm |
|
0.871 |
specific volume, m^3//kg dry air |
|
28.9647 |
g/mole dry air |
|
0.0184 |
g CO2/mole dry air |
418/(1000000)*44 |
0.0141 |
g CO2 |
0.0184*(0.669/0.871) |
0.488 |
g CO2/kg dry air |
0.0141*(1000/28.9647) |
38.7 |
g WV/g CO2 |
18.878/0.487 |
94.6 |
molecule WV/molecule CO2 |
38.8*44/18 |
.
WV, worldwide: WV is variable between locations, from 10 ppm in the coldest air, such as the Antarctic to 50,000 ppm (5%), such as in the hot, humid areas of the Tropics.
WV weight is about 1.29 x 1016 kg, or 7.1667 x 10^14 moles
Atmosphere weight, dry, is about 5.148 x 10^18 kg, or 1.7752 x 10^17 moles
WV percent, weight basis, is about 1.29 x 10^16 / 5.148 x 10^18 = 0.002506, or 0.2506%
WV fraction, mole basis, is about 7.1667 x 10^14 / 1.7752 x 10^17 = 0.004037, or 0.4037%, or 4037 ppm
WV molecules are about 4037/421 = 9.59 times more prevalent than CO2 molecules
.
WV, temperate zones, north of +37 and south of -37 parallels
WV, at 16 C and 50% humidity, is 0.0056 lb WV/ lb dry air, or 2.5424 g WV/ 454 g dry air.
After converting to moles, 0.009022 mole WV/mole dry air, or 9022 ppm.
A mole of WV is 18 g, a mole dry air is 29 g
WV molecules are about 9022/421 = 21.43 times more prevalent than CO2 molecules.
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/water-vapor-air-d_854.html
http://www.uigi.com/psychrometry.html
WV, Tropics, at 27 C and 70% humidity, near land surface, is about 24811 ppm; at 27 C and 80% humidity, near ocean surface, about 35,912 ppm
WV molecules are about 24811/421 = 58.93 times more prevalent than CO2 molecules on land, and 68.18 times near ocean surface
Weighted average molecule ratio = 66/208 x 58.66 + 142/208 x 68.18 = 65.50
Weighted average ppm = 66/202.98 x 24811 + 136.98/202.98 x 28839 = 27,529 ppm
.
Polar Regions: Incoming solar varies from 560 W/m2 at -90 latitude, to 0 W/m2 at +66.6 latitude, on December 21; black line. Dashed line is solar declination on March 21. See image
The energy retention/greenhouse effect in polar regions is very small, because water vapor ppm is minimal.
CO2 at 423 ppm, absorbs photons at 13 - 20 μm, at 240 K (-33 C)
WV at minimal PPM, absorbs at 11 - 70 μm, at 240 K (-33 C)
The 15 μm photons are only 7% of the photon population, which is a small population, due to very low levels of IR radiation at temperatures as low as 220 K (-53 C); black curve in Image 11A. Also see Image 11B
.
.
PART V
CO2 and WV IR Radiation Spectra
The absorption spectra of CO2 and WV overlap about 70%. See dark areas of image
WV/CO2 absorption ratio 17722/421 = 42.1, near the surface. See Images 11A and 11B
The WV window is from 8 - 13 μm. The arrow of the image is overstretched.
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/EnergyBalance#:~:text=In....
.
.
Image 11A
.
.
Image 11B
.
This graph is based on WV at the surface of 7750 ppm. See pg. 9 of ADA URL, and pg. 4 of clintel URL
I think, it should be based on 14500 to 17722 ppm, because almost all IR photon extinction occurs less than 150 meter from the surface. The H2O areas would be larger, more representative of the Tropics/Subtropics.
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA175173.pdf
https://clintel.org/doubling-co2-increases-absorption-by-only-a-few...
.
.
PART VI
Molecules Absorbing Photons Excites Molecules
https://nov79.com/gbwm/ntyg.html
Photons are packets of energy with various frequencies; E = h x f = h x c/λ
h = 6.626 x 10^-34, Planck's constant; c, 3 x 10^8 meter, speed of light in vacuum; λ, wavelength
wavenumber = cm/15 μm wavelength = 10000 x 10^-6 /15 x 10^-6 = 666.7
E of 15 μm IR photon = (6.626 x 10^-34) x (3 x 10^8)/(15 x 10^-6) = 1.325 x 10^-20 joule
E of 0.55 μm green photon = (6.626 x 10^-34) x (3 x 10^8)/(0.55 x 10^-6) = 36.136 x 10^-20 J
Photons of the green color have 15/0.55 = 27.27 times more energy than 15 micron photons
Molecules, Photons, Total Extinction
Excerpt from article by Dr. Cyril Huijsmans, a Dutch Research Scientist Retired from Shell
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/the-greenhouse-model-a...
C.7.1, CO2
Radiation, E, emitted by the earth at 15 μm wavelength, and line width of 2 μm, is 0.0042 W/cm2 C.6.3
Photon energy, per Planck is E = hc/λ C.7.1
E = (6.626 x 10^-34) x (3 x 10^8)/(15 x 10^-6) = 1.325 x 10^-20 joule
Photons emitted is 0.0042/(1.325 x 10^-20) = 3.17 x 10^17 per cm^2, per second.
At sea level, at 288 K, air density at 1.223 kg/m^3, CO2 at 400 ppm, CO2 molecules is 1.012 x 10^22 per m^3
.
Dr. Heinz Hug performed absorption measurements of IR at 15 μm in a mixture of 375 ppm CO2, 2.6% (26000 ppm) WV, and air. See URL
Hug calculated a total absorption distance of about 10 meter
Time frame for absorption is 10/(3 x 10^8) = 3.333 x 10^-8 second, or 0.0333 microsecond.
In such a timeframe, emitted photons is 3.17 x 10^17 x 0.0333 x 10 ^-6 = 1.0556 x 10^10
In a column of air, 1 cm^2 and 10 m high, for extinction, CO2 at 400 ppm, CO2 molecules is 1 x 10^19
CO2 molecule to photon ratio, for extinction, is (1 x 10^19)/(1.0556 x 10^10) = 9.47 x 10^8
.
In a column of air, 1 cm^2 and 80 km high, CO2 at 400 ppm, CO2 molecules is 8.28 x 10^21
Fraction of CO2 molecules participating in extinction is (1 x 10^19)/(8.28 x 10^21) = 0.0012, or 0.12%
This is independent of the way the excitation energy is dissipated, be-it by collisions or by radiation.
IR photons, all wavelengths, collide with all molecules and particulates, except photons, with appropriate wavelengths, are absorbed in every collision with WV and CO2 molecules. The photon energy is converted to heat. The warmed WV and CO2 molecules re-emit the photon energy at longer wavelengths.
,
C.7.2, WV
WV is the most dominant greenhouse gas. Above about 10 km, WV ppm is near zero. Average concentration of WV in the TS is about 0.4% volume, or 4000 ppm.
With average WV density of 0.6 kg/m^3, in a column of air, 1 cm^2 and 10 km high, WV molecules is (volume x density/mol wgt.) x number of Avogadro x concentration, or 600 g/29 x (6 x 10^23) x (4000 x 10^-6) = 4.96 x 10^22 molecules
.
In 150 m there is full extinction of BB radiation. It sets a time frame of 0.5 microsecond
A column of air, 1 cm^2 and 150 m high, at 288 K, at 10^5 Pa, at ρ = 1.223 kg/m3, contains 0.0183 kg air.
Air molecules is (18.3g/29) x (6 x 10^23) = 3.79 x 10^23 C.1 and C.2
At 4000 ppm, within 150 m, WV molecules is (4000 x 10^-6) x (3.79 x 10^23) = 1.516 x 10^21
WV molecules participating in full extinction is (1.516 x 10^21)/(4.96 x 10^22) = 0.305 x 10^-1 = 0.0305, or 3%.
.
Average wavelength in BB radiation is about 15.4 micrometer
Energy of average photon is Ef = hc/λ = (6.626 x 10^-34) x (3 x 10^8)/(15.4 x 10^-6) = 1.291 x 10^-20 Joule
Total BB radiation is 0.0459 W/cm^2 C.6.6
Photon flux is 0.0459/(1.291 x 10^-20) = 3.56 x 10^18 per cm^2, per second
Photon extinction, within 150 m, timeframe 0.5 microsecond, is (0.5 x 10^-6) x (3.56 x 10^18) = 1.78 x 10^12 photons
Ratio of WV molecules and photons, for extinction is (1.516 x 10^21)/(1.78 x 10^12) =
8.51 x 10^8 molecule/photon.
Those percentages fully absorb the earth's BB radiation, at their specific absorption wavelengths, at 300 K. See Image 11A and URL
The rest of the WV molecules first gained their energy by evaporation, then by collisions.
The rest of the CO2 molecules, and almost all other atmosphere molecules gained their energy by collisions.
Molecules near the surface have a mean free path of 64 - 68 nanometer. Even though their average speed, near the surface, is about 470 m/s, they travel very short distances before colliding.
Near the surface, with the sun shining on land and water, dew and fog become WV, which is rising and forming clouds.
Of 100 photons:
22 photons escape to space through the atmospheric window (no collision, no absorption),
5.5 photons (7% of 100 - 22), with 15 micrometer wavelength, either thermalize by collision with all other molecules, or are absorbed by WV and CO2 molecules.
72.5 photons thermalize by collision with all other molecules
.
Near the surface, WV absorbs 17722/(17722 + 423) = 98% of the 15 micrometer photons, and CO2 2%
If CO2 were 846 ppm (not possible, due to not enough fossil fuels), WV would absorb 17722/(17722 + 846) = 95%, and CO2 5%. See image and URLs
Near the surface, WV absorbing IR photons totally swamps whatever CO2 does.
See dark areas regarding IR absorption in Image 11A
.
PART VII
Urban Heat Archipelagos
UHAs, as on the US East Coast, from Portland, Maine, to Norfolk, Virginia, significantly contribute to local warming. That area used to be forested.
Many large solar systems in the US Southwest add up to a heat archipelago, plus the very hot PV panels have very low efficiencies at high temperatures
Adaptation, such as increasing the width and height of dikes and capacities of culvert and storm sewer systems; planting billions of trees each year; rebuilding rain forests, etc., is required.
Because, huge quantities of solar energy are collected in the Tropics to warm the planet each day, preservation of the world's rain forest belt is vital for the future well-being of the earth.
That should have priority over expensive, uneconomical, wind/solar/battery/EV/heat pump, etc., measures, implemented mostly in temperate zones.
That should have priority over expensive, uneconomical, wind/solar/battery/EV/heat pump, etc., measures, implemented mostly in temperate zones.
.
.
Flora and Fauna Need More CO2, at least 1000 ppm
Plants require at least 1000 to 1200 ppm of CO2, as proven in greenhouses
Many plants have become extinct, along with the fauna they supported, due to a lack of CO2. As a result, many areas of the world became arid and deserts. Current CO2 needs to at least double or triple. Earth temperature increased about 1.2 C since 1900, due to many causes, such as fossil CO2, and permafrost methane which converts to CO2.
.
Many plants have become extinct, along with the fauna they supported, due to a lack of CO2. As a result, many areas of the world became arid and deserts. Current CO2 needs to at least double or triple. Earth temperature increased about 1.2 C since 1900, due to many causes, such as fossil CO2, and permafrost methane which converts to CO2.
.
CO2 ppm increased from 1979 to 2023 was 421 - 336 = 85, greening increase about 15%, per NASA.
CO2 ppm increased from 1900 to 2023 was 421 - 296 = 125, greening increase about 22%
Increased greening: 1) Produces oxygen by photosynthesis; 2) Increases world fauna; 3) Increases crop yields per acre; 4) Reduces world desert areasThe ozone layer absorbs 200 to 315 nm UV wavelengths, which would genetically damage exposed lifeforms.
.
Energy-related CO2 was 37.55 Gt, or 4.8 ppm in 2023, about 75% of total human CO2.
One CO2 ppm in atmosphere = 7.821 Gt. Total human CO2 was 4.8/0.75 = 6.4 ppm in 2023. See URLs
To atmosphere was CO2 was 421.08 ppm, end 2023 - 418.53, end 2022 = 2.55 ppm; natural increase is assumed zero; to oceans 2.50 ppm (assumed); to flora and other sinks 1.35 ppm
Mauna Loa curve shows a variation of about 9 ppm during a year, due to seasonal variations.
Inside buildings, CO2 is about 1000 ppm, greenhouses about 1200 ppm, submarines up to 5000 ppm
.
Respiration: glucose + O2 → CO2 + H20 (+ energy)
Photosynthesis: 6 CO2 + 12 H2O (+ sunlight+ chlorophyll) → 1 glucose + 6 O2 + 6 H20
Plants respire 24/7. Plants photosynthesize with brighter light
In low light, respiration and photosynthesis are in balance
In bright light, photosynthesis is much greater than respiration
Oceans Absorb CO2
Sea water has 3.5% salt, NaCl, by weight.
CO2 molecules continuously move from the air into sea water, per Henry’s Law
CO2 and NaCl form many compounds that contain C, O, H, Cl, Ca
They sustain flora (plankton, kelp, coral) and fauna in the oceans.
At the surface, seawater pH 8.1, and CO2 421 ppm, the % presence of [CO2], [HCO3−], and [CO3 2−] ions is 0.5, 89, and 10.5; “Free” CO2 is only 0.5%; CO2 out-migration is minimal, given the conditions.
The oceans are a major sink of CO2 (human + natural)
.
PART VIII
IPCC Sanctioned Greenhouse Effect
WV molecules, 39 to 62%
Clouds, 15 to 36%
WV and clouds, 67 to 85%
CO2 molecules, 14 to 25%
All other GHGs, 5 to 9%
https://www.windows2universe.org/earth/climate/greenhouse_effect_ga...
http://assets.press.princeton.edu/chapters/s9636.pdf
.
PART IX
World Offshore Wind Capacity Placed on Operation in 2021
During 2021, worldwide offshore wind capacity placed in operation was 17,398 MW, of which China 13,790 MW, and the rest of the world 3,608 MW, of which UK 1,855 MW; Vietnam 643 MW; Denmark 604 MW; Netherlands 402 MW; Taiwan 109 MW
Of the 17,398 MW, just 57.1 MW was floating, about 1/3%
At end of 2021, 50,623 MW was in operation, of which just 123.4 MW was floating, about 1/4%
https://www.energy.gov/eere/wind/articles/offshore-wind-market-repo...
Floating Offshore Wind Systems in the Impoverished State of Maine
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/floating-offshore-wind...
Despite the meager floating offshore MW in the world, pro-wind politicians, bureaucrats, etc., aided and abetted by the lapdog Main Media and "academia/think tanks", in the impoverished State of Maine, continue to fantasize about building 3,000 MW of 850-ft-tall floating offshore wind turbines by 2040!!
Maine government bureaucrats, etc., in a world of their own climate-fighting fantasies, want to have about 3,000 MW of floating wind turbines by 2040; a most expensive, totally unrealistic goal, that would further impoverish the already-poor State of Maine for many decades.
Those bureaucrats, etc., would help fatten the lucrative, 20-y, tax-shelters of mostly out-of-state, multi-millionaire, wind-subsidy chasers, who likely have minimal regard for: 1) Impacts on the environment and the fishing and tourist industries of Maine, and 2) Already-overstressed, over-taxed, over-regulated Maine ratepayers and taxpayers, who are trying to make ends meet in a near-zero, real-growth economy.
Those fishery-destroying, 850-ft-tall floaters, with 24/7/365 strobe lights, visible 30 miles from any shore, would cost at least $7,500/ installed kW, or at least $22.5 billion, if built in 2023 (more after 2023)
Almost the entire supply of the Maine projects would be designed and made in Europe, then transported across the Atlantic Ocean, in European specialized ships, then unloaded at a new, $500-million Maine storage/pre-assembly/staging/barge-loading area, then barged to European specialized erection ships for erection of the floating turbines. The financing will be mostly by European pension funds.
About 500 Maine people would have jobs during the erection phase
The other erection jobs would be by specialized European people, mostly on cranes and ships
About 200 Maine people would have long-term O&M jobs, using European spare parts, during the 20-y electricity production phase.
https://www.maine.gov/governor/mills/news/governor-mills-signs-bill...
The Maine people have much greater burdens to look forward to for the next 20 years, courtesy of the Governor Mills incompetent, woke bureaucracy that has infested the state government
The Maine people need to finally wake up, and put an end to the climate scare-mongering, which aims to subjugate and further impoverish them, by voting the entire Democrat woke cabal out and replace it with rational Republicans in 2024
The present course leads to financial disaster for the impoverished State of Maine and its people.
The purposely-kept-ignorant Maine people do not deserve such maltreatment
Electricity Cost: Assume a $750 million, 100 MW project consists of foundations, wind turbines, cabling to shore, and installation at $7,500/kW.
Production 100 MW x 8766 h/y x 0.40, CF = 350,640,000 kWh/y
Amortize bank loan for $525 million, 70% of project, at 6.5%/y for 20 years, 13.396 c/kWh.
Owner return on $225 million, 30% of project, at 10%/y for 20 years, 7.431 c/kWh
Offshore O&M, about 30 miles out to sea, 8 c/kWh.
Supply chain, special ships, and ocean transport, 3 c/kWh
All other items, 4 c/kWh
Total cost 13.396 + 7.431 + 8 + 3 + 4 = 35.827 c/kWh
Less 50% subsidies (ITC, 5-y depreciation, interest deduction on borrowed funds) 17.913 c/kWh
Owner sells to utility at 17.913 c/kWh
NOTE: The above prices compare with the average New England wholesale price of about 5 c/kWh, during the 2009 - 2022 period, 13 years, courtesy of:
Gas-fueled CCGT plants, with low-cost, low-CO2, very-low particulate/kWh
Nuclear plants, with low-cost, near-zero CO2, zero particulate/kWh
Hydro plants, with low-cost, near-zero-CO2, zero particulate/kWh
Cabling to Shore Plus $Billions for Grid Expansion on Shore: A high voltage cable would be hanging from each unit, until it reaches bottom, say about 200 to 500 feet.
The cables would need some type of flexible support system
There would be about 5 cables, each connected to sixty, 10 MW wind turbines, making landfall on the Maine shore, for connection to 5 substations (each having a 600 MW capacity, requiring several acres of equipment), then to connect to the New England HV grid, which will need $billions for expansion/reinforcement to transmit electricity to load centers, mostly in southern New England.
Floating Offshore a Major Burden on Maine People: Over-taxed, over-regulated, impoverished Maine people would buckle under such a heavy burden, while trying to make ends meet in the near-zero, real-growth Maine economy. Maine folks need lower energy bills, not higher energy bills.
APPENDIX 2
Floating Offshore Wind in Norway
Equinor, a Norwegian company, put in operation, 11 Hywind, floating offshore wind turbines, each 8 MW, for a total of 88 MW, in the North Sea. The wind turbines are supplied by Siemens, a German company
Production will be about 88 x 8766 x 0.5, claimed lifetime capacity factor = 385,704 MWh/y, which is about 35% of the electricity used by 2 nearby Norwegian oil rigs, which cost at least $1.0 billion each.
On an annual basis, the existing diesel and gas-turbine generators on the rigs, designed to provide 100% of the rigs electricity requirements, 24/7/365, will provide only 65%, i.e., the wind turbines have 100% back up.
The generators will counteract the up/down output of the wind turbines, on a less-than-minute-by-minute basis, 24/7/365
The generators will provide almost all the electricity during low-wind periods, and 100% during high-wind periods, when rotors are feathered and locked.
The capital cost of the entire project was about 8 billion Norwegian Kroner, or about $730 million, as of August 2023, when all 11 units were placed in operation, or $730 million/88 MW = $8,300/kW. See URL
That cost was much higher than the estimated 5 billion NOK in 2019, i.e., 60% higher
The project is located about 70 miles from Norway, which means minimal transport costs of the entire supply to the erection sites
The project produces electricity at about 42 c/kWh, no subsidies, at about 21 c/kWh, with 50% subsidies
In Norway, all work associated with oil rigs is very expensive.
Three shifts of workers are on the rigs for 6 weeks, work 60 h/week, and get 6 weeks off with pay, and are paid well over $150,000/y, plus benefits.
If Norwegian units were used in Maine, the production costs would be even higher in Maine, because of the additional cost of transport of almost the entire supply, including specialized ships and cranes, across the Atlantic Ocean, plus
A high voltage cable would be hanging from each unit, until it reaches bottom, say about 200 to 500 feet.
The cables would need some type of flexible support system
The cables would be combined into several cables to run horizontally to shore, for at least 25 to 30 miles, to several onshore substations, to the New England high voltage grid.
.
https://www.offshore-mag.com/regional-reports/north-sea-europe/arti...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating_wind_turbine
.
.
APPENDIX 3
Offshore Wind in US and UK
Most folks, seeing only part of the picture, write about wind energy issues that only partially cover the offshore wind situation, which caused major declines of the stock prices of Siemens, Oersted, etc., starting at the end of 2020; the smart money got out
All this well before the Ukraine events, which started in February 2022. See costs/kWh in below article
US/UK Governments Offshore Wind Goals
1) 30,000 MW of offshore by 2030, by the cabal of climate extremists in the US government
2) 36,000 MW of offshore by 2030, and 40,000 MW by 2040, by the disfunctional UK government
Those US/UK goals are physically unachievable, even with abundant, low-cost financing, and low inflation, and low-cost energy, materials, labor, and a robust, smooth-running supply chain, to place in service about 9500 MW of offshore during each of the next 7 years, from start 2024 to end 2030, which has never been done before in such a short time. See URL
US/UK 66,000 MW OF OFFSHORE WIND BY 2030; AN EXPENSIVE FANTASY
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/biden-30-000-mw-of-off...
US Offshore Wind Electricity Production and Cost
Electricity production about 30,000 MW x 8766 h/y x 0.40, lifetime capacity factor = 105,192,000 MWh, or 105.2 TWh. The production would be about 100 x 105.2/4000 = 2.63% of the annual electricity loaded onto US grids.
Electricity Cost, c/kWh: Assume a $550 million, 100 MW project consists of foundations, wind turbines, cabling to shore, and installation, at $5,500/kW.
Production 100 MW x 8766 h/y x 0.40, CF = 350,640,000 kWh/y
Amortize bank loan for $385 million, 70% of project, at 6.5%/y for 20 y, 9.824 c/kWh.
Owner return on $165 million, 30% of project, at 10%/y for 20 y, 5.449 c/kWh
Offshore O&M, about 30 miles out to sea, 8 c/kWh.
Supply chain, special ships, ocean transport, 3 c/kWh
All other items, 4 c/kWh
Total cost 9.824 + 5.449 + 8 + 3 + 4 = 30.273 c/kWh
Less 50% subsidies (ITC, 5-y depreciation, interest deduction on borrowed funds) 15.137 c/kWh
Owner sells to utility at 15.137 c/kWh; developers in NY state, etc., want much more. See Above.
Not included: At a future 30% wind/solar penetration on the grid:
Cost of onshore grid expansion/reinforcement, about 2 c/kWh
Cost of a fleet of plants for counteracting/balancing, 24/7/365, about 2.0 c/kWh
In the UK, in 2020, it was 1.9 c/kWh at 28% wind/solar loaded onto the grid
Cost of curtailments, about 2.0 c/kWh
Cost of decommissioning, i.e., disassembly at sea, reprocessing and storing at hazardous waste sites
.
APPENDIX 4
Levelized Cost of Energy Deceptions, by US-EIA, et al.
Most people have no idea wind and solar systems need grid expansion/reinforcement and expensive support systems to even exist on the grid.
With increased annual W/S electricity percent on the grid, increased grid investments are needed, plus greater counteracting plant capacity, MW, especially when it is windy and sunny around noon-time.
Increased counteracting of the variable W/S output, places an increased burden on the grid’s other generators, causing them to operate in an inefficient manner (more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh), which adds more cost/kWh to the offshore wind electricity cost of about 16 c/kWh, after 50% subsidies
The various cost/kWh adders start with annual W/S electricity at about 8% on the grid.
The adders become exponentially greater, with increased annual W/S electricity percent on the grid
The US-EIA, Lazard, Bloomberg, etc., and their phony LCOE "analyses", are deliberately understating the cost of wind, solar and battery systems
Their LCOE “analyses” of W/S/B systems purposely exclude major LCOE items.
Their deceptions reinforced the popular delusion, W/S are competitive with fossil fuels, which is far from reality.
The excluded LCOE items are shifted to taxpayers, ratepayers, and added to government debts.
W/S would not exist without at least 50% subsidies
W/S output could not be physically fed into the grid, without items 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. See list.
1) Subsidies equivalent to about 50% of project lifetime owning and operations cost,
2) Grid extension/reinforcement to connect remote W/S systems to load centers
3) A fleet of quick-reacting power plants to counteract the variable W/S output, on a less-than-minute-by-minute basis, 24/7/365
4) A fleet of power plants to provide electricity during low-W/S periods, and 100% during high-W/S periods, when rotors are feathered and locked,
5) Output curtailments to prevent overloading the grid, i.e., paying owners for not producing what they could have produced
6) Hazardous waste disposal of wind turbines, solar panels and batteries. See image.
.
.
APPENDIX 5
BATTERY SYSTEM CAPITAL COSTS, OPERATING COSTS, ENERGY LOSSES, AND AGING
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/battery-system-capital...
EXCERPT:
Annual Cost of Megapack Battery Systems; 2023 pricing
Assume a system rated 45.3 MW/181.9 MWh, and an all-in turnkey cost of $104.5 million, per Example 2
Amortize bank loan for 50% of $104.5 million at 6.5%/y for 15 years, $5.484 million/y
Pay Owner return of 50% of $104.5 million at 10%/y for 15 years, $6.765 million/y (10% due to high inflation)
Lifetime (Bank + Owner) payments 15 x (5.484 + 6.765) = $183.7 million
Assume battery daily usage for 15 years at 10%, and loss factor = 1/(0.9 *0.9)
Battery lifetime output = 15 y x 365 d/y x 181.9 MWh x 0.1, usage x 1000 kWh/MWh = 99,590,250 kWh to HV grid; 122,950,926 kWh from HV grid; 233,606,676 kWh loss
(Bank + Owner) payments, $183.7 million / 99,590,250 kWh = 184.5 c/kWh
Less 50% subsidies (ITC, depreciation in 5 years, deduction of interest on borrowed funds) is 92.3c/kWh
At 10% throughput, (Bank + Owner) cost, 92.3 c/kWh
At 40% throughput, (Bank + Owner) cost, 23.1 c/kWh
Excluded costs/kWh: 1) O&M; 2) system aging, 1.5%/y, 3) 20% HV grid-to-HV grid loss, 4) grid extension/reinforcement to connect battery systems, 5) downtime of parts of the system, 6) decommissioning in year 15, i.e., disassembly, reprocessing and storing at hazardous waste sites. Excluded costs would add at least 15 c/kWh
COMMENTS ON CALCULATION
Almost all existing battery systems operate at less than 10%, per EIA annual reports i.e., new systems would operate at about 92.4 + 15 = 107.4 c/kWh. They are used to stabilize the grid, i.e., frequency control and counteracting up/down W/S outputs. If 40% throughput, 23.1 + 15 = 38.1 c/kWh
A 4-h battery system costs 38.1 c/kWh of throughput, if operated at a duty factor of 40%. That is on top of the cost/kWh of the electricity taken from the HV grid to feed the batteries
Up to 40% could occur by absorbing midday solar peaks and discharging during late-afternoon/early-evening, which occur every day in California and other sunny states. The more solar systems, the greater the peaks.
See above URL for Megapacks required for a one-day wind lull in New England
40% throughput is close to Tesla’s recommendation of 60% maximum throughput, i.e., not charging above 80% full and not discharging below 20% full, to achieve a 15-y life, with normal aging.
Tesla’s recommendation was not heeded by the Owners of the Hornsdale Power Reserve in Australia. They excessively charged/discharged the system. After a few years, they added Megapacks to offset rapid aging of the original system, and added more Megapacks to increase the rating of the expanded system.
Regarding any project, the bank and Owner have to be paid, no matter what. I amortized the bank loan and Owner’s investment
Divide total payments over 15 years by the throughput during 15 years, you get c/kWh, as shown.
There is about a 20% round-trip loss, from HV grid to 1) step-down transformer, 2) front-end power electronics, 3) into battery, 4) out of battery, 5) back-end power electronics, 6) step-up transformer, to HV grid, i.e., you draw about 50 units from the HV grid to deliver about 40 units to the HV grid, because of A-to-Z system losses. That gets worse with aging.
A lot of people do not like these c/kWh numbers, because they have been repeatedly told by self-serving folks, battery Nirvana is just around the corner.
APPENDIX 6
SolarEdge Technologies shares plunged about two weeks ago, after it warned about decreasing European demand.
Solar Panels Are Much More Carbon-Intensive Than Experts are Willing to Admit
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/solar-panels-are-more-...
APPENDIX 7
World's Largest Offshore Wind System Developer Abandons Two Major US Projects as Wind/Solar Bust Continues
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/world-s-largest-offsho...
US/UK 66,000 MW OF OFFSHORE WIND BY 2030; AN EXPENSIVE FANTASY
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/biden-30-000-mw-of-off...
Regulatory Rebuff Blow to Offshore Wind Projects; Had Asked for Additional $25.35 billion
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/regulatory-rebuff-blow...
Offshore Wind is an Economic and Environmental Catastrophe
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/offshore-wind-is-an-ec...
Four NY offshore projects ask for almost 50% price rise
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/four-ny-offshore-proje...
U.S. Offshore Wind Plans Are Utterly Collapsing
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/u-s-offshore-wind-plan...
APPENDIX 8
Nuclear Plants by Russia
According to the IAEA, during the first half of 2023, a total of 407 nuclear reactors are in operation at power plants across the world, with a total capacity at about 370,000 MW
Nuclear was 2546 TWh, or 9.2%, of world electricity production in 2022
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/batteries-in-new-england
Rosatom, a Russian Company, is building more nuclear reactors than any other country in the world, according to data from the Power Reactor Information System of the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA.
The data show, a total of 58 large-scale nuclear power reactors are currently under construction worldwide, of which 23 are being built by Russia.
.
In Egypt, 4 reactors, each 1,200 MW = 4,800 MW for $30 billion, or about $6,250/kW,
The cost of the nuclear power plant is $28.75 billion.
As per a bilateral agreement, signed in 2015, approximately 85% of it is financed by Russia, and to be paid for by Egypt under a 22-year loan with an interest rate of 3%.
That cost is at least 40% less than US/UK/EU
.
In Turkey, 4 reactors, each 1,200 MW = 4,800 MW for $20 billion, or about $4,200/kW, entirely financed by Russia. The plant will be owned and operated by Rosatom
.
In India, 6 VVER-1000 reactors, each 1,000 MW = 6,000 MW at the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant.
Capital cost about $15 billion. Units 1, 2, 3 and 4 are in operation, units 5 and 6 are being constructed
In Bangladesh: 2 VVER-1200 reactors = 2400 MW at the Rooppur Power Station
Capital cost $12.65 billion is 90% funded by a loan from the Russian government. The two units generating 2400 MW are planned to be operational in 2024 and 2025. Rosatom will operate the units for the first year before handing over to Bangladeshi operators. Russia will supply the nuclear fuel and take back and reprocess spent nuclear fuel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rooppur_Nuclear_Power_Plant
.
Rosatom, created in 2007 by combining several Russian companies, usually provides full service during the entire project life, such as training, new fuel bundles, refueling, waste processing and waste storage in Russia, etc., because the various countries likely do not have the required systems and infrastructures
Remember, these nuclear plants reliably produce steady electricity, at reasonable cost/kWh, and have near-zero CO2 emissions
They have about 0.90 capacity factors, and last 60 to 80 years
Nuclear does not need counteracting plants. They can be designed as load-following, as some are in France
.
Wind: Offshore wind systems produce variable, unreliable power, at very high cost/kWh, and are far from CO2-free, on a mine-to-hazardous landfill basis.
They have lifetime capacity factors, on average, of about 0.40; about 0.45 in very windy places
They last about 20 to 25 years in a salt water environment
They require: 1) a fleet of quick-reacting power plants to counteract the up/down wind outputs, on a less-than-minute-by-minute basis, 24/7/365, 2) major expansion/reinforcement of electric grids to connect the wind systems to load centers, 3) a lot of land and sea area, 4) curtailment payments, i.e., pay owners for what they could have produced
Major Competitors: Rosatom’s direct competitors, according to PRIS data, are three Chinese companies: CNNC, CSPI and CGN.
They are building 22 reactors, but it should be noted, they are being built primarily inside China, and the Chinese partners are building five of them together with Rosatom.
American and European companies are lagging behind Rosatom, by a wide margin,” Alexander Uvarov, a director at the Atom-info Center and editor-in-chief at the atominfo.ru website, told TASS.
Tripling Nuclear A Total Fantasy: During COP28, Kerry called for the world to triple nuclear, from 370,200 MW to 1,110,600 MW, by 2050.
https://phys.org/news/2023-12-triple-nuclear-power-cop28.html
Based on past experience in the US and EU, it takes at least 10 years to commission nuclear plants
Plants with about 39 reactors must be started each year, for 16 years (2024 to 2040), to fill the pipeline, to commission the final ones by 2050, in addition to those already in the pipeline.
New nuclear: Kerry’s nuclear tripling by 2050, would add 11% of world electricity generation in 2050. See table
Nuclear was 9.2% of 2022 generation. That would become about 5% of 2050 generation, if some older plants are shut down, and plants already in the pipeline are placed in operation,
Total nuclear would be 11+ 5 = 16%; minimal impact on CO2 emissions and ppm in 2050.
Infrastructures and Manpower: The building of the new nuclear plants would require a major increase in infrastructures and educating and training of personnel, in addition to the cost of the power plants.
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/electricity-sources-by-fuel-in-202....
.
Existing Nuclear, MW, 2022 |
370200 |
|
Proposed tripling |
3 |
|
Tripled Nuxlear, MW, 2050 |
1110600 |
|
New Nuclear, MW |
740400 |
|
MW/reactor |
1200 |
|
Reactors |
617 |
|
New Reactors, rounded |
620 |
|
Reactors/site |
2 |
|
Sites |
310 |
|
New nuclear production, MWh, 2050 |
5841311760 |
|
Conversion factor |
1000000 |
% |
New nuclear production, TWh, 2050 |
5841 |
11 |
World total production, TWh, 2050 |
53000 |
.
APPENDIX 9
LIFE WITHOUT OIL?
Life without oil means many products that are made with oil, such as the hundreds listed below, would need to be provided by wind and solar and hydro, which can be done theoretically, but only at enormous cost.
Folks, including Biden's handlers, wanting to get rid of fossil fuels, such as crude oil, better start doing some rethinking.
The above also applies to natural gas, which is much preferred by many industries, such as glass making, and the chemical and drug industries.
If you do not have abundant, low-cost energy, you cannot have modern industrial economies.
Without Crude Oil, there can be no Electricity.
Every experienced engineer knows, almost all parts of wind/solar/battery systems, for electricity generation and storage, from mining materials to manufacturing parts, to installation and commissioning, in addition to the infrastructures that produce materials, parts, specialized ships, etc., are made from the oil derivatives manufactured from raw crude oil.
.
Views: 1724
Comment
Maine as Third World Country:
CMP Transmission Rate Skyrockets 19.6% Due to Wind Power
Click here to read how the Maine ratepayer has been sold down the river by the Angus King cabal.
Maine Center For Public Interest Reporting – Three Part Series: A CRITICAL LOOK AT MAINE’S WIND ACT
******** IF LINKS BELOW DON'T WORK, GOOGLE THEM*********
(excerpts) From Part 1 – On Maine’s Wind Law “Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine if the law’s goals were met." . – Maine Center for Public Interest Reporting, August 2010 https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/From Part 2 – On Wind and Oil Yet using wind energy doesn’t lower dependence on imported foreign oil. That’s because the majority of imported oil in Maine is used for heating and transportation. And switching our dependence from foreign oil to Maine-produced electricity isn’t likely to happen very soon, says Bartlett. “Right now, people can’t switch to electric cars and heating – if they did, we’d be in trouble.” So was one of the fundamental premises of the task force false, or at least misleading?" https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-swept-task-force-set-the-rules/From Part 3 – On Wind-Required New Transmission Lines Finally, the building of enormous, high-voltage transmission lines that the regional electricity system operator says are required to move substantial amounts of wind power to markets south of Maine was never even discussed by the task force – an omission that Mills said will come to haunt the state.“If you try to put 2,500 or 3,000 megawatts in northern or eastern Maine – oh, my god, try to build the transmission!” said Mills. “It’s not just the towers, it’s the lines – that’s when I begin to think that the goal is a little farfetched.” https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/flaws-in-bill-like-skating-with-dull-skates/
Not yet a member?
Sign up today and lend your voice and presence to the steadily rising tide that will soon sweep the scourge of useless and wretched turbines from our beloved Maine countryside. For many of us, our little pieces of paradise have been hard won. Did the carpetbaggers think they could simply steal them from us?
We have the facts on our side. We have the truth on our side. All we need now is YOU.
“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
-- Mahatma Gandhi
"It's not whether you get knocked down: it's whether you get up."
Vince Lombardi
Task Force membership is free. Please sign up today!
Hannah Pingree on the Maine expedited wind law
Hannah Pingree - Director of Maine's Office of Innovation and the Future
"Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine."
https://pinetreewatch.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/
© 2024 Created by Webmaster.
Powered by
You need to be a member of Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine to add comments!
Join Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine