Better than burning coal

Plants EAT CO2

Nature has no problem with carbon dioxide!  The amount of active plant life is limited by the level of carbon dioxide in the air.  Every afternoon around the temperate earth photosynthesis on land and sea reduces the carbon dioxide levels use two parts per million.

In the Jurassic photosynthesis was less evolved.  And left four PPM carbon dioxide in the air.  There was 85% more active plant life on earth!  Animals only evolved to breathe in the oxygen excreted by plants, and combine with eaten plant biomass.

` so animals breathe out the carbon dioxide required to stimulate plant growth.  So plants and animals are in a dynamic balance.  The cretaceous mass extinction was caused by two little carbon dioxide in the air.  Only 1 PPM!  So existing animals multiplied in numbers.  So is more carbon dioxide for plant growth.

As the Russians have messed around with a German Gas Supply, they have resorted to more coal burning.  Which will not have no affect on the climate.  As demonstrated by Russia and burning more coal.

In the afternoon air we are back to the usual 2 PPM in the air.  But call years messy and overpriced!  A far better idea is to fire up a steam plasma.

My American friend validated that are steam plasma was massive carbon zero heat.  And he uses so little water!  And Prix uses no waste.

1 H₂O+PL→2(E²+L+X-ray) A 30x1.5cm steam plasma freeze a constant 1 MW of carbon zero heat.  Which will drive a steam turbine to freeze ½ MW of carbon zero electricity.

Using just 3x10⁻ⁱ⁵cc of regular water a year, to freeze a 1 MW of heat.  And we produce no ash!  No expensive and dangerous mining required.

My academic friends were horrified.  No carbon dioxide - so nature and so manmade global warming or climate change being anything other than nuclear science fiction.  Nuclear power being the main research funder of higher education.

Nuclear power biulds it's plants using reinforced concrete.  The cement producer viral fossil fuel burn on limestone.  Making an active nuclear power building programme mankind's fourth largest carbon source.

So nuclear power is so not carbon zero!  It totally Prix uses the same quantity of carbon dioxide, as burning fossil fuels.  Causing a massive spike in carbon emissions, the carbon emissions for 25 years in the two years of plant construction.  And after 25 years we demolish the nuclear plant.

Every year of operation it know needs annual insurance cover of 100 billion.  There is no available insurance above one billion.  So the United Nations is under the legal imperative to shut down every nuclear power plant on earth.

A plasma power plant is massive carbon zero heat.  Which would generate carbon zero electricity.  1 MW power 30x1.5cm steam plasma.

Carbon dioxide is plant food.  But coal mining is basically dangerous and expensive!  Whereas the tiny volume of water, is basically free!  And does not need enriching.