September 29, 2006

Strategic technology plan for climate change

The current US dept of Energy plan for climate change at this site The actual 243 page pdf is here

The strategic goals as follows:
1. Reduce emissions from energy end use and infrastructure;
2. Reduce emissions from energy supply;
3. Capture and sequester carbon dioxide;
4. Reduce emissions of non-carbon dioxide greenhouse gases;
5. Improve capabilities to measure and monitor GHG emissions; and
6. Bolster basic science contributions to technology development.

The list of actual funded programs for 2006 and 2007 is in the appendix.

They like the advanced burner reactor to control nuclear waste, carbon sequestering, emission control at source and emission reduction for end use.

I also like better solar and wind, carbon sequestering, thorium reactors, 200+mpg hybrid diesel/fuel cell/ultraconductor cars, space based power using magnetically inflated cable, man made volcano effects, space solar shields, more energy efficiency in the power grid, lighting and home heating.

Nanoscale technology is considered to make production cleaner. (age 221)

Existing and future nuclear power plants can be made more efficient which would provide a quick 160GW boost in non-carbon producing power

Thorium reactors also could be part of the solution


Jonathan Pugh said...

Sounds like we have some plans to reduce emissions. That's great. What worries me is all of the developing nations who won't have the infrastructure or the economic incentive to push to environmentally friendly emission standards. You can stay healthy by not smoking, but if your surrounded by smokers all day, you can die from cancer nonetheless.

James Aach said...

In any energy plan, conservation should be the first piroirty, as the cleanest and safest energy is that which you don't use. I guess that goes into the "reduce emissions" statements.

As a long-time engineer in the electric power industry, one thing I've noticed is that neither pundits nor the public have much good information on how electricity is generated in bulk. It's hard to do. My own area of expertise is nuclear power, which is much different than what either its opponents or fans portray. Atomic power is a weird mix of technolgy, politics and sociology. To provide a rare (and entertaining) inside look at nuclear energy, I've written a novel on the topic. It is available to readers free at - and they seem to like it, judging from their comments at the homepage. It's also been endorsed by Stewart Brand, the noted futurist, internet pioneer and founder of The Whole Earth Catalog.

bw said...

I think the big developing nations. China, India, Brazil will have the economic incentive to adopt the best new tech to develop cleanly. They do not want to live in polluted cities either. China has polluted cities now by taking shortcuts. They have rolled out aggressive plans to clean it up. I think they will have made some dent on the messiest bits by the 2008 Olympics.
India is working on hybrid cars.

as is Cherry automobile and others in China

bw said...

An article from worldchanging about China's plans and progress to go green

Here is another article from them of the progress towards renewable energy in India and China

China has big plans for nuclear power. 40GW by 2020