Zum Seitenende Übersicht Artikel Home & Impressum
First the link to this week's complete list as HTML and as PDF.
The risk table in Papale & Marzocchi' is sufficiently bad to fail a first year student. It's headlined
“One-year probabilities” and without any differentiation list risks per planet Earth like asteroids, per individual plant as nuclear meltdown, and per single individual person as in traffic accidents. The latter is wrongly and misleadingly labeled as per the State of New York, but that is obviously just to be read as a descriptor of the kind of single person it applies to. The last entry obviously states a risk per passenger*flight making even the per-year headline an obvious nonsense. These totally incommeasurable values do not belong in a single table and are mostly meaningless in the context of the article.
For quite some time now I have been predicting that the willful squandering of precious natural gas in large electrical power units would inevitably lead to a renaissance of coal gasification. This was and is totally obvious and in China it is now happening at a large and quickly growing scale. Undoubtedly Wang et al.'s is an admirable achievement but as they're nearing the thermodynamic limit any further improvements, if any, will be negligible. So where is the carbon reduction from gas power plants now compared to highly efficient modern coal burning ones, when the same gas is then generated from coal – and only the highest quality coal at that – at a loss of at least one third? With the need to move on to lower grade coal that stark reality will become ever more evident. Green fanaticism – not to be confused with meaningful conservation policy for the environment and limited resources – is and always has been purely religious in nature and a satanic religion at that.
Zum Anfang Übersicht Artikel Home & Impressum