I suppose it could be said of every age in human history that there was “great promise and peril” involved with all we could imagine to do and build. I wonder if today’s dichotomy is more extreme. I have often heard it said that we are currently in a Schrodinger economy that seems both alive (growing) and dead (drowning in debt) at the same times. The Lifeboat Foundation has certainly found plenty of perils to worry about in the near future. In the case of the environment, as I mentioned yesterday, we are either headed for mass starvation, death, and world-wide calamity or an abundant future with clean energy, depending on which lens you are peering through on any particular day.

I mentioned the great progress in battery and electric vehicle technology yesterday, but these will do no good unless we have a clean source of energy to “fill them up”. Wind power is an option, but it is limited, and comes with some drawbacks. Biofuels might be a good bridge fuel (to the future), but are they really that much better than natural gas (another “bridge” fuel) when everything is considered (land use, infrastructure development, etc). About the best biofuel story I have seen recently is this lab result which created liquid fuel from carbon dioxide and electricity supplied by solar panels. Who knows if this could be scaled up for industrial production, but if we could take carbon dioxide out of the air and make fuel out of it, that would be ideal from an AGW perspective – if we continue to use liquid hydrocarbons to power the economy many decades into the future.

Then there is nuclear energy, which has taken a beating since the Fukushima disaster in Japan. Japan has of course shut down nearly all of its reactors, Germany has promised to retire all of theirs, and funding is drying up for the construction of newer safer fission reactors. As far a pollution and AGW is concerned, the phasing out of nuclear power right now will probably lead to the use of more fossil fuels, not more renewable energy sources, because our Schrodinger economy is not good enough to pay for the expensive alternatives. Two new modular reactors are being considered in the U.S. but they are mired in regulatory approval and will not come online perhaps until 2020. There is still hope for nuclear fusion reactors as new computer simulations have shown some promise, but these will be quite expensive to build and are probably years away.

One of the cheaper and cleaner alternative options we have right now is solar power. The price has fallen dramatically in the last 5 years from about $4 per watt down to $1 per watt and there are many signs it will continue to get cheaper. The price drop is due in part to technological innovation but also due to an oversupply on the market. Chinese solar panel manufacturers are running full steam ahead flooding the market - with the help of government support. This has led to a burgeoning trade war between the U.S. and China and the implementation of tarrifs.

Blythe Solar Power Plant Goes Bankrupt

I know the reasoning behind tariffs, and perhaps this will help U.S. manufacturers survive, but the end result is usually bad. Tariffs (economic warfare) often lead to real physical war. They also raise the price on the taxed items. Perhaps we should just buy up all the cheap solar panels while they are on the market instead. Maybe our solar power plant projects in the U.S. would not be going bankrupt (after recieving billions in loans from the government) if we managed our purchases better. Solar would also likely benefit from a more intelligent power grid and the use of information technology to save on installation costs.

Outside of all the current technological “fixes” we could implement to the world from potential future peril (like AGW) there are also more mundane measures that would help. If it is too difficult to stop emitting carbon dioxide, maybe we could focus on methane instead, as less of the gas floating around the atmosphere would lead to a significant reduction in possible future warming of the atmosphere. Then there are more radical futuristic ideas like engineering our bodies to be less energy intensive. Although instead of re-engineering the human body, it would be much easier to stop having so many kids.

I’ll leave you with one last positive data point to consider for today: extreme poverty around the world has decreased dramatically in the last couple of decades. The percentage of people living on the equivalent of less than $1 per day has dropped from 42% in 1981 to just 14% today.  Now why would this be a positive thing for the environment? Becoming wealthier usually means increased usage of resources, doesn’t it? Typically, yes. However, wealthy people usually choose to reduce pollution as we have seen almost all metrics of pollution decline in recent decades in the developed nations of the world. When people have greater food and energy security, they do not focus as much on day-to-day living and instead on the future world where they will live. Most people choose an un-polluted future world. Also, with the price of traditional fossil fuels continuing to rise, it is likely the new prosperity will lead to the use of alternative energy sources.

Have a pleasant Tuesday! Meteorologist Justin Loew.

Posted under AGW, Alternative Energy, Climate Change, Technology

Yet another follow-up to start out today’s blog post – something that mainstream media sources have ceased covering even though the situation seems to get worse by the day. It is the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan. While the country’s economy has returned to a reasonable amount of normalcy, the danger is not gone.

Before getting into the latest news I just want to highlight the fact that there was a massive cover-up (or massive incompetence) on the part of TEPCO from the beginning of the nuclear (meltdown). I have heard that it is a cultural tendency in Japan to not over-exaggerate, to remain reserved in a time of crisis and not cause panic. Perhaps this is why there was so little credible information released about the nuclear meltdown. I had always thought of Japan as a place where honesty and integrity would reign above all else, but this nuclear situation has made me re-consider.

The news is that there have been some scary aftershocks in some areas where other nuke plants oerate AND that a much higher level of LETHAL radiation is still spewing from the Fukushima meltdown area and that the contamination has spread into more soil, cows, and water, than originally reported. I haven’t heard any reports of the current actions being taken by TEPCO but I can’t believe the resolution to this disaster isn’t further along. At least one physicist – Michio Kaku – said from the beginning that they should just start dumping cement on the nuclear site (like Cherynobl) and create a sarcophagus. That was probably the best solution all along.

In related news, as I highlighted last month, Germany’s decision to phase out nuclear power completely is going to cost them. Here is another look at the challenges and cost of going nuke-free.

In Japan, in order to replace the lost energy from the nuke plants, they are exploring the feasibility of recovering methane hydrates from the ocean floor. Environmentalists will complain that this energy source is not “green” or low carbon, but in a world of slowly declining amounts of cheap oil, countries will try to bridge the gap by any means possible, all the while working on better renewable sources.

Even though many government bureaucrats have soured on nuclear power, there are still some companies working on better designs that could help solve our energy problems while also being more safe. Terrapower is one such company working on a travelling wave reactor design it hopes to have producing energy at commercial scale by 2016. It will be quite costly to build but if it is substantially more safe, then it might find a home somewhere on the planet.

____________________

In weather news, the latest ENSO diagnostic discussion is out and the trend is still neutral for the next couple of months. Surface temperatures in the central Pacific ocean over the past month have remained close to normal however, the sub-surface temperatures have been trending a little toward La Nina. The computer model projections are still indecisive with 50% of them indicating more-or-less neutral conditions through the upcoming winter and the other half indicating a weak La Nina could form. Something interesting (that I have highlighted in previous ENSO blog posts) in the computer models is that the COLA CCSM3 model is still almost all by itself forecasting El Nino conditions for the winter. There seems to be a warm bias in this model as it has forecast El Nino to develop for 3 months running.

If La Nina does develop again, even if it is a weak one, we will probably hear a big groan coming from the southern U.S. because this could prolong the massive drought. The latest U.S. drought monitor shows only very very slight improvement in the drought over Texas, due to tropical storm Don, which dropped some rain in the far south of Texas. Three other states are completely covered in at least some category of drought. Those would be Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Louisiana. In Wisconsin, the abnormally dry regions shrunk about 2 percent in the past week. I doubt it will get any worse over the next week but we might not see too much improvement either. We have two chance of rain – once Saturday night into Sunday morning and another Monday night into Tuesday. Neither of these storm systems looks to be huge rainmakers.

Have a nice weekend! Meteorologist Justin Loew.

Posted under Drought, ENSO Update, Technology, Tsunami

Due to the earthquake and tsunami in Japan, devastating tornadoes in the U.S. and various other disasters, 2011 is already the costliest year for weather disasters in recorded history. Through the first 6 months of 2011 natural disasters have resulted in $265 billion in losses. The second place year was 2005 when losses were about $220 billion. Surprisingly (and thankfully) this year is no where near close to being tops in human deaths from natural disasters. Tragically, 19,380 people have died from natural disasters this year. Last year the total was much higher due to the earthquake in Haiti which killed 225,000 people alone. Another deadly disaster last year was the heat wave  that struck Russia, killing about 50,000 people.

This year, the most deadly event was the Japan earthquake and deaths from that disaster might continue to rise due to lingering after effects. Not only have some strong aftershocks hit the island nation (one just a few days ago), unfortunately, the complete meltdown at the Fukushima nuclear plant spread a lot more radiation around that what was originally assumed and reported. Recently, radioactive particles have been found in the ash of waste incinerators. Contaminated meat has also been found from cows raised near Fukushima. So far, the radiation health risks have been contained, at least according to Japanese government officials, some of whom have not been very forthcoming throughout this ordeal. It makes me wonder how much radiation actually reached the United States. It is probably not much and I haven’t seen any reports about health risks, so hopefully we will be alright. What makes the tragedy even more tragic is the news that the Fukushima plant was built on a site that once had a 120 foot hill. TEPCO razed the hill so that the nuclear plant would be closer to sea level and bedrock. They calculated the odds of a tsunami as being so low that the plant would be ok. Sadly, it wasn’t. Mother Nature surprised us again.

Maybe we will not be so surprised in the future, by earthquakes anyway. geologists and seismologists have long been working on methods of predicting major earthquakes (including a new and better understanding of how plate tectonics work) and now they might get a new tool in their arsenal, courtesy of the weather. Preliminary analysis of the weather over northeastern Japan shortly before the big earthquake shows an increase in infrared emssions and an increase in total electron content in the ionosphere over the epicenter in the days leading up to the quake (another article here with graphics).

Because it is only one quake and one set of data, it is hard to draw any firm conclusions about the weather before an earthquake. I would say the electron content of the ionosphere holds more promise. The infrared emissions of the atmosphere change all the time for all kinds of different reasons, so it would be hard to know what increases in heat (infrared emissions) were presaging an earthquake and which ones were not. Still, given all the anecdotal reports of weird weather prior to earthquakes, it is an interesting field of study and something to keep an eye on in the future.

Have a fine Wednesday! Meteorologist Justin Loew.

Posted under Earthquake, Geology, Natural Disasters, Severe Weather

Remember the Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan that got hit by the earthquake and tsunami. It turns out that the damage was much more significant than authorities let on in the beginning. Apparently there was a complete meltdown of three reactors and a partial meltdown of the fourth on the day of the tragedy. Much more radiation was released than was told the public and it was (and still is) a much greater health hazard than everyone was led to believe.

When it was thought that there was no meltdown (by most of the world except insiders at TEPCO), many opined that nuclear power was still a viable option for future power needs – a cleaner greener option with less carbon dioxide emissions. Since then, things have really soured. Not only is Japan thinking about scaling back nuclear power, Germany is beginning a plan to phase it out as well. The problem with phasing out such a significant source of energy is that it will make electricity much more expensive. At this point, Germany plans to make up for the lack of electricity from nuclear power with off shore winds farms which are more expensive and produce intermittent power. Also, wind turbines do not come without side effects. While they are currently the “greenest” alternative energy option, they do have adverse effects on the weather, flying animals, and perhaps fish. Some scientists suspect that the constant droning sound of the wind turbines might stress some aquatic life.

Back in Japan, ground zero of the meltdown, they are already feeling the effects of living without nuclear power and much of the rest of the world is mulling transitioning to other forms of “green energy”. Various countries are looking toward alternatives not only because of safety issues but because a recent study has shown that nuclear power is not as scalable as many people previously thought. The study indicates that we could probably triple our current nuclear power before the rising cost became unsustainable. If we wanted to power the world with nuclear (fission) we would need to increase our nuclear capacity by about 45 times. So it looks less and less likely that nuclear fission will be the energy of the future. It might even be rapidly phased out if the price of other energy options continues to decline (like solar). I am still holding out some hope for nuclear fusion. In the next couple of years, while wind and solar power gain traction, natural gas could become the cleaner, cheaper, and slightly “greener” fuel of choice to keep society afloat.

Have a nice Wednesday! Meteorologist Justin Loew.

Posted under Alternative Energy, Earthquake, Tsunami