There is no "commercially viable CCS technology" which has been successfully demonstrated at scale, especially at the removal levels required by EPA.
CCS imposes a significant efficiency penalty on either natural gas or coal generation, increasing electricity costs. https://thundersaidenergy.com/?s=CCS
The closer a generator is to the end of its useful life, the less likely its owners would be to consider installation of CCS.
Environmentalists are generally opposed to CCS and would likely sue to prevent or delay installation.
EPA is fond of "sue and settle", which would make CCS installations even less likely.
And then, there's the issue of transporting and storing the captured CO2.
Yes, very much, but not unexpected. SCOTUS is generally wont to step-in when a case is still in District Court. That said, I agree with the authors that the decision was likely more due to the election than to procedure.
I will never understand how a 6" steel tube spewing beautiful and clean LNG in perpetuity is harmful to the environment. It is only harmful to 'environmentalist' communist grifters regulating toxic, inefficient solar panel stealing your money.
Kinetic heat transfer processes of contiguous atmospheric molecules render surface BB impossible.
RGHE is bogus & CAGW is a scam!
FACTS & EVIDENCE:
FACT 1: Remove the Earth’s atmosphere or even just the GHGs and the Earth becomes much like the Moon, no water vapor or clouds, no ice or snow, no oceans, no vegetation, no 30% albedo becoming a barren rock ball, hot^3 (400 K) on the lit side, cold^3 (100 K) on the dark. At Earth’s distance from the Sun space is hot (394 K) not cold (5 K).
That’s NOT what the RGHE theory says.
EVIDENCE:
RGHE theory says “288 K w – 255 K (-18 C) w/o = a 33 C colder ice ball Earth” 255 K assumes w/o keeps 30% albedo, an assumption akin to criminal fraud. Nobody agrees 288 is GMST + it was 15 C in 1896. 288 K is a surface measurement. 255 K is an equilibrium calculation at ToA. Apples and potatoes.
Nikolov “Airless Celestial Bodies”
Kramm “Moon as test bed for Earth”
UCLA Diviner lunar mission data
JWST solar shield
ISS HVAC design for lit side of 250 F. (ISS web site)
Astronaut backpack life support w/ AC and cool water tubing underwear. (Space Discovery Center)
FACT 2: The GHGs require “extra” energy upwelling from a surface radiating as a Black Body.
EVIDENCE:
According to TFK_bams09 atmospheric power flux balance, numerous clones and SURFRAD the GHGs must absorb an “extra” 396 BB/333 “back”/63 2nd net W/m^2 LWIR energy upwelling from the surface allegedly radiating as a Black Body. These graphics contain egregious arithmetic and thermodynamic errors.
FACT 3: Because of the significant non-radiative, i.e. kinetic, heat transfer processes of the contiguous participating atmospheric molecules the surface cannot upwell “extra” energy as a near Black Body.
EVIDENCE:
As demonstrated by experiment, the gold standard of classical science.
I read your op-ed. I hope there will soon be a change in administration that will reign in the regulatory agencies to a more reasonable level and streamline the permitting process - especially for mining and for nuclear power plants.
There is no "commercially viable CCS technology" which has been successfully demonstrated at scale, especially at the removal levels required by EPA.
CCS imposes a significant efficiency penalty on either natural gas or coal generation, increasing electricity costs. https://thundersaidenergy.com/?s=CCS
The closer a generator is to the end of its useful life, the less likely its owners would be to consider installation of CCS.
Environmentalists are generally opposed to CCS and would likely sue to prevent or delay installation.
EPA is fond of "sue and settle", which would make CCS installations even less likely.
And then, there's the issue of transporting and storing the captured CO2.
This is fantastic context! Thanks for teaching me something new!
Sigh, that was probably our last hurrah. 😢
I hope not! but perhaps.
Unfortunate outcome
Yes, very much, but not unexpected. SCOTUS is generally wont to step-in when a case is still in District Court. That said, I agree with the authors that the decision was likely more due to the election than to procedure.
I will never understand how a 6" steel tube spewing beautiful and clean LNG in perpetuity is harmful to the environment. It is only harmful to 'environmentalist' communist grifters regulating toxic, inefficient solar panel stealing your money.
Haha! I care that natural landscapes and agricultural areas aren't covered entirely with solar panels. I'd take that trade.
ABSTRACT:
Earth is cooler with atmosphere/water vapor/30% albedo not warmer.
Ubiquitous RGHE heat balance graphics don't + violate GAAP & LoT.
Kinetic heat transfer processes of contiguous atmospheric molecules render surface BB impossible.
RGHE is bogus & CAGW is a scam!
FACTS & EVIDENCE:
FACT 1: Remove the Earth’s atmosphere or even just the GHGs and the Earth becomes much like the Moon, no water vapor or clouds, no ice or snow, no oceans, no vegetation, no 30% albedo becoming a barren rock ball, hot^3 (400 K) on the lit side, cold^3 (100 K) on the dark. At Earth’s distance from the Sun space is hot (394 K) not cold (5 K).
That’s NOT what the RGHE theory says.
EVIDENCE:
RGHE theory says “288 K w – 255 K (-18 C) w/o = a 33 C colder ice ball Earth” 255 K assumes w/o keeps 30% albedo, an assumption akin to criminal fraud. Nobody agrees 288 is GMST + it was 15 C in 1896. 288 K is a surface measurement. 255 K is an equilibrium calculation at ToA. Apples and potatoes.
Nikolov “Airless Celestial Bodies”
Kramm “Moon as test bed for Earth”
UCLA Diviner lunar mission data
JWST solar shield
ISS HVAC design for lit side of 250 F. (ISS web site)
Astronaut backpack life support w/ AC and cool water tubing underwear. (Space Discovery Center)
FACT 2: The GHGs require “extra” energy upwelling from a surface radiating as a Black Body.
EVIDENCE:
According to TFK_bams09 atmospheric power flux balance, numerous clones and SURFRAD the GHGs must absorb an “extra” 396 BB/333 “back”/63 2nd net W/m^2 LWIR energy upwelling from the surface allegedly radiating as a Black Body. These graphics contain egregious arithmetic and thermodynamic errors.
FACT 3: Because of the significant non-radiative, i.e. kinetic, heat transfer processes of the contiguous participating atmospheric molecules the surface cannot upwell “extra” energy as a near Black Body.
EVIDENCE:
As demonstrated by experiment, the gold standard of classical science.
For the experimental write up see:
https://principia-scientific.org/debunking-the-greenhouse-gas-theory-with-a-boiling-water-pot/
CONCLUSION:
No RGHE, no GHG warming, no CAGW or mankind/CO2 driven climate change.
BSME CU ‘78
Thanks for info on supreme court.
I read your op-ed. I hope there will soon be a change in administration that will reign in the regulatory agencies to a more reasonable level and streamline the permitting process - especially for mining and for nuclear power plants.
Full agreement, Al! We shall see what November brings.
I read your op-ed on NEPA reform, and have some comments. To where do I send them? Your substack email address?
Please, if you can!