Better than burning fossil fuels

Oil going down

2018 and my American contact verified my ideas that are steam plasma was a useful carbon zero energy source.  Nature gave me the hint!

Every 3 minutes around the world there is a lightening strike set up by heavy rain or snow storms doing molecular nuclear fusion, the nuclear fusion all compounds of hydrogen - in this case water!

1 H₂O+P+TU→He²⁺+O⁺+3e⁻+E²+X-ray where TU= precipitation turbulence > 1W

University geography departments have noted the emission of X rays and heat from the rain or snow storms.  There being no chemical source of helium or X rays, physics should really have paid attention!

I started screaming at my engineering contacts from 2008 to do the practical experiments.  And fortunately they have their noses two deeply embedded in the cash cow or of research money from nuclear fusion, to research the climate!

All the planets in inner solar system have been a warming since 1978.  Including mass with 98% carbon dioxide in the air.  As there is no photosynthesis!  The temperate earth has used two parts per million carbon dioxide in the afternoon air.

Above the polar ice In winter there is four PPM carbon dioxide, and the lowest natural temperatures on earth.  Down to -80° C above the Antarctic ice sheet.  Carbon dioxide obviously not a warming gas!

It's global controlled by photosynthesis.  And one photosynthesis around the temperate earth is just two PPM carbon dioxide in the afternoon air.  A static trace gas affects nothing!

The fourth biggest carbon source on earth is nuclear power, or busy constructing uranium nuclear power plants.  They use a fossil fuel burn on limestone to free use the cement.  For all their reinforced concrete!

Releasing in two years the Covent carbon emissions from operating commercially fired power plant, burning oil or gas over 25 years.  To reduce carbon dioxide do not build a new nuclear power plants!  That is so stupid!

My friend fired up a 30x1.5cc steam plasma.  Non pressurised!  Using the high voltage electronics from old fluorescent light, to fire up the plasma.  The term and self sustains while we top up the steam level with just 10⁻ⁱ⁸cc of regular water a year!  We will struggle to measure it.

And we get out a constant 1 MW of heat!  As we do our molecular nuclear fusion.

2 H₂O+PL→2(E²+L+X-ray) A non pressurise plasma probably doesn't even produce X rays.

We get a blinding white light and massive carbon zero energy.  Are 1 MW of carbon zero heat.  Without a whiff of fossil fuel burning.

I call it a steam burn, but the plasma converts the regular water molecules into just high heat light and X rays.  Probably a blinding white light!

My American friend the NASA had to turn their heat into electricity.  I advised him to buy a 65 kW thermoelectric generator: which is 13% efficient!  And he is just a 15x1.5 CM steam plasma cylinder.

The a 30 cm plasma is maybe a little energetic to engineer!  By every house needs just 8 kW of electricity on Christmas day.  And the generator turns out DC current into mains linked phase and voltage AC.

So send us a check or every year 480,000 UK pounds.  As we utilised two little water ever to measure!  From a plant costing just 125 pounds to a hire.  Owning us an income of 15,000 UK pounds a month.

So month one we by the thermoelectric generator.  We may choose to via 1/2 MW steam turbine, which has a 50% efficiency!  So a 30 cm steam plasma will give us 1 MW of heat.  So we generate the carbon zero electricity for 150 houses.

Personally I would tend to go for the thermoelectic option.  To avoid melting down and five cables utilised for the national grid.

Who fire eight houses of one phase of the AC current.  So a good match to were 65 kW of generative power.

Crucially we utilised no fossil fuel burn, and no hyper toxic radioactive materials.  For which he had news special massively expensive licence!

And are required totally horrendous insurance cover!  Every uranium nuclear power plant knees annual insurance of 100 billion after Fukushima in 2010.  40 billion after Chernobyl in 1986.

We lack a nuclear core!  And he they utilised or produce any radioactive materials.  And we can assume it so little regular water, we will release struggle to measure it!

And get the annual check for 180,000 UK pounds.  Nice!  My local MP Rebecca long Bailey for labour, suggests she's interested in carbon zero science.

I keep E mailing her, but she never replies!  It turns out she's interested in carbon taxes, not remotely interested in our understanding of power generation.  She is a politician after all!

I would thank professor Z for is import into nuclear fusion.  But since uranium nuclear power bought him a chair in chemical and process engineering, the the Dr. Z has lost interest in clean safe and free nuclear fusion.

Like the rest of the science academics!  The world the all prices crashing quite nicely.  Hopefully falling below $50.00 a barrel in six months.

Burning oil or gas only releases 45 kW/m of burner.  Burning massively expensive fuel, and liberating carbon dioxide which stimulated plant growth.