The Solar-Hydrogen-Methanol Economy

A first step toward the "ecoKapitalism"

(capitalism combined with sustainable development)

Remark about the form of this document: this document was written as a fictive report produced by an imaginary oil & gas company, "BTSX".

Fictive report written in April/May 2006 (First published on 2006-05-24... I was already #WhistleBlowerCOMBAZ pro-solar, anti-crude-oil)

You can contact me (Philippe) in English, French, Russian, at the following email address:

ecoKapitalism@hotmail.com (this email address #ecoKapitalism has been disbanded)

Nowadays: philippe.combaz.pro@gmail.com or postmaster@BankMetanola.com

I am the unsung true inventor of #MethanolEconomy i.e. #SolarMethanolEconomy (aka #SolarHydrogenMethanol)

I showed a less detailled version (without my “Economy of scale” aka #CoindeCombazEquation, nor the existence of HydrogenSolar-Ltd whom I met on 2006-05-17 in Guildford, UK) to nincompoop #PatrickPOUYANNÉ on 2006-01-13 as he was TOTAL’s (now #TotalEnergies) Director for Strategy-Growth-Innovation-Research-&-Development...

Solar-Hydrogen-Methanol Plan

2006-2010

Prepared by "BTSX-Hydrogen" subsidiary

BTSX is a multinational energy company committed to leveraging innovation and initiative to provide a sustainable* response to humankind's energy requirements.

BTSX est un Groupe énergétique international dont la mission est de satisfaire durablement*, par l'innovation et l'action, les besoins des hommes en énergies.

(*) pour qui? / whose point of view?

Contents

1Introduction

One of the largest Oil & Gas Company in the world, named BTSX*, has announced a vast investment of $5Bln ($5G) in their so called "Solar-Hydrogen-Methanol Plan 2006-2010", involving solar energy, hydrogen, methanol, fuel cell vehicles and renewable power generation.

This move is fully backed-up by shareholders as BTSX stocks jumped +15% after the announcement. BTSX seems to be taking advantage of a particular conjuncture: European, American people are ready to financially participate in projects that will reduce their dependency on a few fossil-hydrocarbon-producing countries and prepare a better world for future generations. High oil prices are presently allowing funding of non-conventional projects aimed at developing alternative energy sources...

The XXI century may become the "century of China" perhaps, but it will definitely be the "century of Solar Energy"!

Indeed, it's hard time to install and begin improving the technologies of the future while the world has still enough fossil fuel to live comfortably (the white part of the egg).

(*) BTSX, whose name means "Beyond TotShexXon", is an imaginary oil & gas company. Note: it may be seen as a word play with the names of 4 oil companies: BP (Beyond Petroleum), TOTAL, SHELL and EXXON, although I had TOTAL (where I worked) in mind while I wrote this song.

2Preliminary remark: BTSX and the hydrocarbons

BTSX has been involved in exploration, production, transportation, refining, transformation, distribution of fossil hydrocarbons for over 80 years.

Hydrogen is the simplest of the hydrocarbon chains! It is logical that BTSX shall create a new subsidiary named "BTSX-Hydrogen" to deal with this very "special" hydrocarbon.

... C_nH_2n+2 … C₅H₁₂ C₄H₁₀ C₃H₈ C₂H₆ C₁H₄ => C₀H₂ = H₂ QED!

3Executive summary

The (would-be) Solar-Hydrogen-Methanol Economy

The main objective is to render energy a renewable and recyclable utility service in a sustainable way.

The objective of the "Solar-Hydrogen-Methanol Plan 2006-2010" is to build a profitable, large case-study (a region "Pau-Biarritz" of 600 000 habitants in the South West of France*¹) that will be using H₂ (hydrogen) and methanol*² as energy vectors instead of electricity. Small local hydrogen networks will be fed by free sources of energy such as sun (mainly), wind, biomass and geothermal sources. Methanol, conveniently being a liquid at atmospheric conditions, will be used as the energy storage means and long-distance carrier. Local hydrogen networks will be coupled to methanol tank farms thanks to new "conversion stations" converting extra hydrogen into methanol (maybe using Biomass to produce methanol/ethanol from hydrogen). The stations will feed back (reforming process) the local hydrogen networks during low hydrogen production periods (nights, winter, rainy days) as well as supply a network of vehicle methanol refilling stations (existing petrol infrastructures will have to be slightly adjusted). This is one of the main advantages of this plan: existing vehicles just need minor adjustment of the carburettor of their conventional piston engine (cf. Brazil with ethanol), no need for millions of new cars equipped with fuel-cells! Initially, methanol make-up may be provided by fossil fuels. Hydrogen will be locally transformed into heat & electricity to cover the needs of households & offices. Methanol-fuelled or hydrogen-fuelled combined-heat-and-power CHP cogeneration plants will cover industrial needs. With this ambitious plan, we are actively preparing the after-fossil-fuel era. On the top of creating thousands of local jobs, this plan will make UK, France, China, India, USA less dependant on a small group of hydrocarbon-producing countries such as Saudi Arabia, Russia, Iran & Iraq. The effect on the environment is nil since all CO₂ produced at one point of the chain (combustion of methanol) is absorbed at another point (see carbon-cycle below). The same applies to the water/oxygen cycle.

*¹ [alternatively a region in China, India or Brazil]

*² [alternatively ethanol]

Comment about the importance or carbon C & carbon-dioxide CO2: Let's not be afraid!

One should not be too dogmatic in rejecting CO₂ and carbon. Mother Nature has been using carbon for millions of years as a way to harvest the only available source of energy: solar light! Plants/people store energy in the form of oxy-hydrocarbons such as glucose and other sugars. This is why we "eat" each other.

The current problem with CO₂ is only due to the fact that burning fossil hydrocarbons releases CO₂ into the atmosphere without re-cycling it. It's only half a cycle! Man is a worse industrialist than Nature! (so far)

(*) Nuclear energy (fission) is not sustainable because, each year, it generates radioactive wastes that last thousands of years (unfair to future generations) whereas the "utility service" (electricity) is consumed instantaneously. Therefore it shall be stopped. Especially, I do not believe in economic computations over thousands of years on a spreadsheet and in subsequent financial provisions covering the lifespan of radioactive wastes!

What would we think if Egyptians left us radioactive wastes produced along "energy" that was used to build the pyramids 4500 years ago?!? Do you think that they would have left us an equivalent in gold to cover the expenses of storing these wastes?!? Don't you think that we had used all gold a long time ago (particularly during wartimes)? See my chapter on the "discount rate" used in electricity tariff computation: the devil is in this very detail! Inexpensive nuclear electricity is a pure illusion. There is another (sustainable) way! Our great-grand children are watching us.

4Why choosing the sun as the main source of energy?

4.1World energy needs

In 2005, the world energy

needs* were as follows:

(*) non-commercial energies are not accounted for

(e.g. wood taken from the garden for the fire-place).

450 Quadrillion Btu/yr or 213 M boepd or 15 000 GW (1.5 10¹³ W)

(i.e. ~ 11 000 M.TEP/yr = 11 G.TEP/yr)

This is 15 000 nuclear blocks or 20 times the oil production of Saudi Arabia.

NB. World oil reserves: 1 300 Billion Barrels (22% in Saudi Arabia) = 17 years if oil only.

Russia produces ~ 20 M boepd (O+G) ~10% of world's needs (a position allowing to play games)

Average output of Kharyaga* oil field (Russia, 75km north of polar circle): 14 300 bopd = 1GW

Nominal output of Kharyaga* oil field* (Russia, 75km north of polar circle): 30 000 bopd = 2GW

TOTAL E&P* produces 3 M boepd that is 211GW i.e. 1.5% of world's needs.

(*) Where I worked.

4.2Free energy from the sun

The sun radiates its free energy to the universe. The solar constant is the amount of solar radiation, measured on the outer surface of the atmosphere. It is roughly 1366 watts per square metre. Earth has a globe cross section 127,400,000 km² (orange disc below).

Thus, Earth benefits from a continuous free power of 1.74×10¹⁷ W.

This is more than 10 000 times our needs!

4.3Free solar energy at the surface of the Earth

But clouds, atmosphere reflection and other screens make that only part of this energy is available at the surface of the Earth around the year.

e.g. energy available is 2 to 8 kWh/m²/day in USA.

France's land surface is 550 000 km². If we consider an average sun energy of 3.6 kWh/m²/day (i.e. 150W/m²) & all French territory covered with 20%-efficient photovoltaic solar panels, France could generate an average yearly power of 16 500 GW (236 Mboepd), a little more than our current needs. We will see further that photovoltaic cell efficiency is growing above 20% too!

France area represents 0.37% of earth land area only and 0.11% of earth total surface.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power

4.4Why choosing solar energy?

• because it is free & renewable.

• because it covers the needs of mankind.

• because the technology of harvesting it exists.

• because Nature and Evolution have chosen it too (photosynthesis in green plants).

• because we have already been using it for years (fossil hydrocarbons are "stored" solar energy).

5General overview: the Solar-Hydrogen-Methanol Economy

6Why choosing hydrogen to "harvest" solar energy?

Because it is the simplest "carrier for chemical potential energy". Nature herself chose hydrogen to "capture" free solar energy in the well known green plant photosynthesis ATP/ADP cycle.

n CO₂ + 2n H₂O + light energy → (CH₂O)_n + n O₂ + n H₂O

We will see later on, why Nature "decided" to store hydrogen in hydrocarbon chains C_nH_2nO_n (such as sugars) instead of just storing hydrogen as a gas (H₂).

Let's also note that this reaction is beneficial in terms of carbon sequestration, because it uses CO₂ present in the atmosphere (NB. average concentration: 0.03 mol %).

Thomas EDISON and the world following him, made a great mistake when we chose electricity to power most of our pieces of equipment. Electricity cannot be stored or transported easily. Nature did not make such a mistake!

Figure 7.18(2) represents respiration of a cell (not photosynthesis). Following figure represents the electron course in light-dependent reactions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthesis

7How to produce hydrogen?

This is one of the technological breakthroughs brought by BTSX. "BTSX Solar Systems", a new subsidiary, manufactures innovative solar panels which directly produce hydrogen gas (H₂). There is no need to connect the panels to the electric grid. BTSX have patented the method of producing hydrogen directly from sunlight & water. The efficiency has been enhanced with a sun-best-angle tracking system. Let's note that BTSX used their "TRIZ*-Nature" methodology to derive the tracking system from sunflower's natural behaviour.

(*) See further down explanations about what "TRIZ" is.

In their design, BTSX (sort of) uses the electrons generated by the solar cell in situ to generate hydrogen gas H₂ (from water). Then, H₂ carries solar energy to local consumers (short distances) for immediate use, the excess of hydrogen H₂ shall be transformed for future use & transport applications (explained further down).

Current electrical efficiency of PV panels is 20% but expectations are high to reach 40% soon.

=> See important remark at the end of this document about the only company on earth producing solar-hydrogen panels "Hydrogen Solar" of Guildford, London, UK. (www.hydrogensolar.com)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cell

8How to stock/transport hydrogen?

8.1QED again!

H₂ = C₀H₂ => C₁H₄ C₂H₆ C₃H₈ C₄H₁₀ C₅H₁₂ …. C_nH_2n+2 … QED again!

8.2Looking at the achievements of Mother Nature

Nature has "created" the "carbon cycle" because it was very convenient for her. Let's imitate her!

Hydrogen H₂ is a gas very difficult to contain. Why? Look at it! It is very small in size. It is not strange that it shall migrate through all walls (leading to such problems as "embrittlement" of pipes. Nature found a very convenient way of storing it, by "plugging" it onto a carbon backbone (like a "LEGO" construction). In this way, at atmospheric pressure & temperature, hydrogen is rendered liquid (alkanes>4, alcohols such as methanol, ethanol), even mushy-solid (glucose, sugars). Nature has optimized the energy density per volume of hydrogen thanks to carbon (valence = 4). Nature made hydrogen "heavier" thanks to atoms of carbon (and oxygen). Therefore, we (humans) shall rule out solution involving H₂ high compression (increased problem of migration) or liquefying it (cost, complexity). This is as vain as trying to industrially store electricity in electric batteries. For example, the energy density of methanol CH₃OH (amount of hydrogen in a given volume) is orders of magnitude greater than even highly compressed hydrogen!

8.3The Carbon cycle

Most of the carbon within living organisms comes from carbon dioxide (CO₂) in the air. The carbon cycle involves oxidation-reduction, i.e. "redox", chemical reactions. Atmosphere is used to stored oxygen gas O₂ (21 mol %) and CO₂ (0.03 mol %), water is readily available on earth (so far). For millions of years, all CO₂ gas released by the cycle, has been fixed by the same cycle… until Man came.

Photosynthesis (reduction)… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthesis

n CO₂ + n H₂O + light energy → (CH₂O)_n + n O₂ [storing energy]

… and Respiration (oxidation) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_respiration

(CH₂O)_n + n O₂ → n CO₂ + n H₂O + energy [using energy]

8.4Liquid methanol used to store/transport hydrogen

A convenient molecule, which is liquid at atmospheric P, T

Methanol molecule Ethanol molecule

Thanks to the addition of a single oxygen atom, CH₄ methane, which is a gas at atmos P,T, is changed into a liquid: methanol CH₃OH. This molecule is very convenient. At atmos P,T, the energy quantity per volume of methanol is very high in comparison to H₂ or CH₄ (both gases therefore occupying a huge volume at atmospheric pressure).

Methanol, as other liquids, can be pumped, stored in tanks, transported by trucks or by pipeline.

The ideal transport/storage fluid! Methanol can be directly burnt in some fuel cells (likewise Hydrogen H₂ in fuel-cells, see further). Methanol, such as Ethanol, can be directly burnt in conventional piston engines of most of existing vehicles, they just need to slightly modify the carburettor jet angle (cf. Brazil/ethanol).

(*) As stated earlier, ethanol C₂H₅OH could be "selected" for this purpose too (except for DMFC fuel-cells application, see further).

Bacteria

Methanol can be produced by BIOMASS. It is produced naturally in the anaerobic metabolism of many varieties of bacteria*. As a result, there is a small fraction of methanol vapour in the atmosphere. Over the course of several days, atmospheric methanol is oxidized by oxygen by the help of sunlight to carbon dioxide and water.

Note: Methanol burns in air forming carbon dioxide and water:

2CH₃OH + 3 O₂ → 2CO₂ + 4H₂O

(*) Of course, idem for ethanol C₂H₅OH (cf. bacteria for vine, beer, and other spirits).

Hydrogen/Methanol "conversion" reactions (also see chapter 11.3 "Hydrogen-Methanol Conversion stations")

Storage (=conversion) reaction (Globally exothermic)

3H₂ + CO₂ → CH₃OH + H₂O + energy (sort of combustion of H₂ with CO₂)

Hydrogen reforming reaction (Globally endothermic)

CH₃OH + H₂O + energy → 3H₂ + CO₂ [Copper/Zinc/Alumina catalysts at 200-250°C]

9How to transform hydrogen/methanol into electricity/heat?

9.1Fuel cell and micro-CHP for houses/offices

Households/offices can burn hydrogen in FC's (Fuel Cells) to generate electricity (η_e=45-50%). This process also generates heat that can be recovered. It is called a combined heat & power CHP cogeneration scheme with global efficiency η_CHP=80%.

A similar family of fuel cells can burn Methanol directly (no need for reforming) called DMFC's (Direct Methanol Fuel Cells).

On a long term perspective, home appliances will directly be plugged to the hydrogen network, and not to electrical cables.

Example of a Fuel Cell (FC)

Let's note that BTSX-Hydrogen subsidiary has signed contracts with BOC, Air Liquide, EDF, GDF, Dalkia (Veolia), ELYO (Suez/TRACTEBEL), Alstom and French CEA-AREVA to develop a micro-CHP system based on a hydrogen fuel cell.

Methanol burns in DMFC with air forming carbon dioxide and water:

CH₃OH + 3/2 O₂ → CO₂ + 2H₂O + energy

9.2Micro-turbines and micro-CHP for houses/offices

Similarly, hydrogen/methanol can be burned in CHP systems where a micro-turbine is used instead of a FC (identical schemes). The electrical efficient is less (η_e=25-35%). Global CHP efficiency remains unchanged: (η_CHP=80%).

10How to transform hydrogen/methanol into motion?

Transport applications need a fuel with as high as possible energy per volume & weight. As explained before, it is better to store/transport hydrogen in the form of methanol, which is liquid at atmos P,T. Also, Methanol is the only liquid (so far) that can be directly burnt in either a fuel cell or a rotating engine (turbine, piston engine), hence, no need to purchase millions of new cars, we can keep the old ones for the moment!

10.1DMFC's (Direct Methanol Fuel Cells)

DMFC installed in a vehicle can burn methanol directly (no need for reforming) as stated earlier.

Other idea:"Plugging" the car to the house to cover night heat/elec needs with car's methanol tank.

10.2Hybrid systems using either a rotating engine or a DMFC

Vehicles will be equipped with either type of mechanical power systems: FC (fuel cell) or rotating engine (turbine or conventional piston engine), both running on methanol (or ethanol). The same applies to trucks, trains and boats. The ADVANTAGE is that people can keep their old cars! They just need to slightly modify the carburettor jet angle (cf. Brazil/ethanol).

10.3Gas Turbines for airplanes

BTSX-Hydrogen has signed an agreement of cooperation with GE, SNECMA, and Pratt & Whitney to adapt aeronautic gas turbines to burn methanol. NO PROBLEMS for this (I think), gas turbines can already burn many types of fuels. BTSX R&D (Refining & Distribution subsidiary) will supply airports with methanol.

A Pratt and Whitney turbofan engine for the F-15 Eagle is tested at Robins Air Force Base.

11Infrastructures for Hydrogen and Methanol

11.1Safety considerations

Hydrogen gas is highly flammable. Methanol is a toxic product, on the top of being highly flammable. This is not the first time that mankind has to handle hazardous elements for his own benefit (natural gas, gas-oil, petrol/gasoline, Diesel oil, etc.). All risk assessments and necessary measures will be carried out. Let's bear in mind that methanol is a "natural" product, "naturally" produced by the metabolism of some bacteria (idem for ethanol). Methanol is dangerous with the same order (I think) of magnitude as Diesel oil/petrol/gasoline for cars. Ethanol is a lot less dangerous than Methanol (cf. ethanol in alcohols that we drink).

11.2Local LP hydrogen networks (no meters) & Energy savings

Low Pressure Hydrogen

BTSX in association with French Oil & Gas company TOTAL (through their subsidiary TIGF Total Infrastructures Gaz France), Gaz de France, BOC and Air-Liquide have patented a special coating that limits hydrogen embrittlement through metal walls of pipes (prerequisite). They will develop local LOW PRESSURE hydrogen gas networks.

Inertia and Swarming effect

These networks will be designed to optimize inertia and swarming effect (in French: "coefficient de foisonnement") among the users. Small tanks will be installed within the network to increase inertia. A special "swarming effect" software has been developed (using TRIZ).

Energy saving behaviours

Moreover, people will be given proper training about energy consumption behaviours, such as the use of a warm pullover during wintertime. Each person, each family will be explained that energy is not free and trained on how to reduce the use of energy in every day's life.

No gas-meters, but fixed fees.

An originality in this project: there will be NO GAS-METERS on these local hydrogen networks. Firstly: because solar energy is free. Secondly: because it will be un-economical to install thousands of gas-meters and manage their subsequent readings/invoices, not to mention the particularly low molecular weight of H₂. Moreover, bear in mind that at any time of day/night, hydrogen may be running in either way of the pipe (to or from the building). A fixed fee will be billed to cover network's investment, operation & maintenance (CAPEX & OPEX).

Balancing points - Economic incentive schemes

At some points, hydrogen networks will be connected to methanol storage infrastructures through "Conversion stations" (newly developed by BTSX-Hydrogen, see below). These stations will include hydrogen gas meters (and methanol meters). Economic incentive schemes will favour local communities or office buildings whose ratio H₂-production/solar-panel-surface is the highest. This is to counter-balance the absence of H₂-meters that will inevitably induce poor behaviours from the users (cf. careless behaviours of people in former USSR countries where energies are inexpensive).

11.3Hydrogen-Methanol Conversion stations

"Conversion stations" have been developed by BTSX-Hydrogen. Their aim is to balance the periods of extra H₂-need (night, winter, rainy days) with periods of extra H₂-generation (sunny day, summer) whenever H₂ network's inertia and swarming effect cannot cope with these variations.

As stated earlier, hydrogen will be stored in the form of methanol. The redox reactions are:

Storage/conversion reaction* (Globally exothermic)

3H₂ + CO₂ → CH₃OH + H₂O + energy

Hydrogen reforming reaction (Globally endothermic)

CH₃OH + H₂O + energy → 3H₂ + CO₂ [Copper/Zinc/Alumina catalysts at 200-250°C]

(*) read about biomass/industrial process in Appendix 3 : Methanol generation from Hydrogen.

Heat pump

BTSX will improve the overall efficient of the "Conversion stations" with systematic installation of heat pumps (succession of exothermic, endothermic reactions).

CO₂ global fixing/sequestrating (cf. Kyoto Protocol)

Let's also note that "Conversion Stations" are "sequestrating" atmospheric CO₂ during the storage/conversion reaction. Reversely, they generate CO₂ during H₂ reforming. But the idea is that the stations globally convert more H₂ into methanol than they reform. Indeed, as we saw, methanol shall be used by transport applications (vehicles, trains, boats, planes). Therefore, these plants are globally eligible in terms of CO₂ quotas.

Hydrogen Generation

Hydrogen networks will be fed by individual solar cell panels installed on the roofs of houses and buildings, and by solar H₂ farms (also being developed by BTSX-Hydrogen).

Complementary idea => Offshore floating hydrogen generation farms not far away from coasts.

11.4Methanol storage/transport infrastructures

As stated before, methanol is a liquid at atmospheric P, T (Pressure, Temperature). Therefore, it can be pumped, stored in tanks, transported by trucks, trains, ships, pipelines, etc. It is a fuel also, it can be used as a fuel by the object that transports it (truck, ship, etc.), quite convenient!

11.5Methanol car refilling stations

BTSX R&D (Refining & Distribution subsidiary) is engaged in the adaptation of hundreds of methanol refilling stations for vehicles, and will also supply airports, and sea ports (slight modifications to existing petrol/gasoline infrastructures).

11.6Large H₂ or methanol-fuelled CHP Power Plant for industrial needs

Hydrogen (H₂) or alternatively Methanol can be used to fulfil electric power and heat needs of large industries. BTSX G&E (Gas & Electricity subsidiary) is involved in the construction of dozens of such combined heat-and-power CHP cogeneration plants.

12Key-figures for the case-study

12.1Case-study 1: South-West of France (600 000 people area)

France has roughly 1/100^th of the world population. But French people use 2.5 times more energy that the world's average.

BTSX will launch their case-study in TOTAL's historical region in the South-West of France.

The technical data key figures are as follows:

FRANCE

Pyrénées-Atlantiques

12.2Economics - solar panel economies of scale

We saw that we need to install more than 3.4 GW of solar panels for our project. But the current world-wide installed manufacturing capacity is 0.9 GW per year. Current price of installed solar panel ready to use is $10/W (which, we will suppose, incorporates all expenses including pipes, wiring, adjustment of methanol infrastructures, modifications of engine carburettors, etc. This is a strong assumption, I reckon). Now called #SwansonsLaw instead of #CoindeCombazEquation!

Let's try to assess the benefit of an increased manufacturing capacity (economies of scale).

Experience seems to show that solar panel production/installation costs tend to decrease when the manufacturing capacity installed world-wide increases. Of course, it is exactly the same with all other new technologies! Remember how much the first mobile phones did cost in comparison to their price now? How about personal computers, laptops, flat-screen TVs?!?

It is generally accepted that the costs (and generally global prices including installation, balance-of-plant) drop by 20% each time the capacity doubles. (In fact, this must be a measure of human genius, organisation and efforts, so to say).

As we saw, at the moment (i.e. in 2006), price of a solar-panel installed is P₀ = $10/W (ready to use), for a current world installed manufacturing capacity of Q₀ = 0.9GW per year.

This means that the equation to be solved is P(2×Q) = P(Q) × 80% and P₀ = P(Q₀)

See the solving of the equation in Appendix 2 : Solar panel manufacturing economies of scale.

The solution to this (look-alike) differential equation is the following one:

Price = P(Q) = P₀.(Q/Q₀)^γ

with γ = ln(k)/ln(a) = -0.322 [k = 0.8 = 80% and a = 2] and P₀ = $10/W & Q₀ = 0.9GW per year.

e.g., if we multiply the installed capacity by 10, price is 50% of initial one (divided by 2).

e.g., if we multiply the installed capacity by 100, price is 25% of initial one (divided by 4).

e.g., if we multiply the installed capacity by 1000, price is 11% of initial one (divided by 10).

Be careful, this is not a curve of price versus time, but price versus manufacturing capacity!

12.3Economics - Application to case-study 1

We have to imagine that all world capacity is increased to meet the case-study 1's needs (and only the case-study, unfortunately). This means that (at this point) we exclude business synergies with other regions of the world that may decide to go 100% solar too!

Price = P₀.(Q/Q₀)^γ with γ = ln(k)/ln(a) = -0.322 and with P₀ = $10/W and Q₀ = 0.9GW per year

General economics regarding Solar Panels:

For the French South-West region "Pyrénées-Atlantiques (64)" the result is the following:

We can compute the payback period: 13 years (not so good!)

CONCLUSION [with an oil price at $100 per barrel]

The payback period is not so good (13 years) and the investment per capita quite high ($37k).

12.4

The advantage of more regions going 100% solarOf course, the larger the installed manufacturing capacity is, the greater is the reduction of costs!

12.5Case-study 2: If California (40M people) goes 100% solar

USA (general data)

Location

California

CONCLUSION (for California)

The payback period is much better (3 years) and the investment per capita quite reasonable ($15k).

NOTE that #ElonMUSK (CEO of #TESLA) created #SolarCity on 4th-July-2006, just 6 weeks after my genius & free internet website publication on 2006-05-24… what a coincidence, isn’t it?

12.6Case-study 3: If France (60M people) goes 100% solar

The payback period is very good (3 years) and the investment per capita quite reasonable ($9k).

12.7Case-study 4: If USA (300M people) goes 100% solar

The payback period is smashing (1.4 years) and the investment per capita quite reasonable ($8k). Then USA can sell solar panels to the rest of the world…

Of course, this computation is an EXTREME case where all solar panels will be installed in ONE year. In reality, this could take 3, 5, 10 years.

Comparison with the cost of war:

The cost of Iraq War could reach many hundreds billions by the end of year 2006. The investment of $2,364 Bln in our case-study 4 could be only a dozen times bigger than the cost of Iraq war, and USA would get rid of oil dependency (and accompanying wars)!

12.8Case-study 1 revisited

Let's suppose that the case-study 1 benefits from a general "rush for solar energy" in the order of case-study 2 "California (40M people) goes 100% solar" (let's be optimistic). The revised economics are the following ones:

Revised investment

The payback period is very good (2.6 years) and the investment per capita quite reasonable ($8k).

=> Investment for installed power (solar) = $1.3.Bln per GW (that is $4.7Bln for 3.45 GW).

=> Then, the energy source is free (Sun), and we do not need to go to war…

12.9Oil & gas + government investments, profits considerations

Let's bear in mind the cost of huge projects like Sakhalin 2 (Shell) $20 billions; or the future project Shtockman (Gazprom): estimation $10-20 billions, and this is only upstream! Then the costs of transport and re-gasification terminals, and subsequent gas structures need to be included. All of this to tap "old" solar energy, harvested by Nature millions of years ago. What a poor strategy!

Let's also bear in mind that, in 2004, TOTAL's annual investments amounted to around $10 billions, and net income to around $10 billions too.

Between 1979 and 2004, world oil/gas exploration & production investments have oscillated between $80Bln/yr and $170Bln/yr, at an approx average of $120Bln/yr. What a waste of money!

All this money spent to tap "old" fossil solar energy, harvested by Nature millions of years ago, the consequence of which is the release of tons of non-recycled CO₂ in the atmosphere, the cost of which has to be determined yet. What a poor strategy and so unfair to future generations!

=> What sense does it make to invest in such schemes?!? This is NONSENSE, pure MADNESS.

Conclusion about oil & gas world:

If you want to understand where the money goes and who benefits from this heresy (similar to heroin addiction by the way, with bigger & bigger doses), just meditate on the following data.

i) Russia defaulted on the exterior debt in August 1998, triggering an international financial crisis (in Asia notably). But within 8 years, Russia's international reserves are projected to grow to $300 billion by the end of 2006. External debt will be virtually nil (Paris Club).

ii) Have a look at construction wonders (skyscrapers, beaches, parks, plants) in Russia, Kuwait, UAE (United Arab Emirates), etc. Where did the money come from in only 40 years?!? From your pocket, you blind dope! A lot of money goes to oil & gas producing countries. Western oil & gas companies are just their assistants, bringing technologies & experience (highly paid).

iii) Governments of oil consuming countries (USA, France, UK, Japan, Germany, etc.) are to blame for this fiasco too. They let the oil-drug business spread out because they gain huge financial resources in the form of taxes on petroleum products. See the following example:

Oil $60/bbl (=159 litres) 1.li ~ 38MJ(energy) = $0.38 => 1GJ(energy) = $10

Petrol/gasoline (France) 1.li ~ 32MJ(energy) = €1.30 ~ $1.60 => 1GJ(energy) = $50

iv) We should not complain about paying petroleum-product-taxes if these taxes were being invested in financing the alternative energies. But governments around the world are lazy. They simply have been using this oil-related easy money to fund their national budgets instead. They are blind enough to ignore that they are preparing a polluted environment (CO₂, radioactive wastes) for future generations!

12.10Lessons from case-studies : world oil/energy prices

Our figures show that in order for solar photovoltaic energy to be competitive, men around the world have to join hands (and brains) and massively invest in this technology (case study 1 revisited vs. case study 1 initial), as we did for mobile phones 10 years ago. Current price consideration does not mean anything by the way. Remember that the first mobile phones were anaesthetic, expensive and inefficient, whereas now mobile phones are smart, inexpensive and powerful. Solar panels will follow the same path, should we all contribute to this.

These are graphics showing price of photovoltaic panels falling with time.

The only real issue is the following one:

We have to recover from a solar panel a lot more energy than we need to manufacture, install, recycle it (life-cycle cost analysis), which is the case (factor 4 over 25 years). All other economic considerations are pure illusions. Indeed, energy prices are arbitrary!

(cf. my theory) => Two arbitrary economic parameters govern all others worldwide:

1) The US Federal Funds Rate (dictated by the Fed: Federal Reserve of USA) because the USD currency is used in almost all international transactions. This is a measurement of "time".

2) The price of barrel of oil, i.e. the price of "energy" (result of strategy from OPEC + Russia + others in situation of oligopoly). All other energy prices are derived from oil price. Price of nuclear electricity is manipulated to be just a little bit less than price of "oil energy". Note that crude oil is the only good not included in the World Trade Organization (WTO) regime, although it accounts for roughly 12% of international trade exchange, how strange!

Data:

Cross-border exports(=imports) in 2002: $6,600.Bln.

From 80.M.bopd world production/consumption, I assume(?) an international trade of 45Mbopd.

Therefore @ $50/bbl => Int'l Oil-Trade = 45x365x50 = $821.Bln.

13TRIZ-Nature methodology for innovation management

13.1What is TRIZ?

See also further down in Error: Reference source not found.

WHAT IS TRIZ? => Managing Creativity for Project Success

"TIPS" is the acronym for "Theory of Inventive Problem Solving," and "TRIZ" (ТРИЗ) is the acronym for the same phrase in Russian "Teoriya Resheniya Izobretatelskikh Zadatch" (Теория Решения Изобретательских Задач). TRIZ was developed by Genrich Altshuller and his colleagues in the former USSR starting in 1946, and is now being developed and practiced throughout the world.

TRIZ research began with the hypothesis that there are universal principles of invention that are the basis for creative innovations that advance technology, and that if these principles could be identified and codified, they could be taught to people to make the process of invention more predictable. The research has proceeded in several stages over the last 50 years. Over 2 million patents have been examined, classified by level of inventiveness, and analyzed to look for principles of innovation. The three primary findings of this research are as follows:

• Problems and solutions were repeated across industries and sciences

• Patterns of technical evolution were repeated across industries and sciences

• Innovations used scientific effects outside the field where they were developed

• In the application of TRIZ these 3 findings are applied to create/improve products, services, & systems.

TRIZ works! Large and small companies are using TRIZ on many levels to solve real, practical everyday problems and to develop strategies for the future of technology. TRIZ is in use at Ford, Motorola, Procter & Gamble, Eli Lilly, Jet Propulsion Laboratories, 3M, Siemens, Phillips, LG, and hundreds more.

13.2Superiority of TRIZ-Nature over TRIZ

As stated, TRIZ databases are rich of over 2 million patents that have been examined, and analyzed to look for principles of innovation. This covers human activities, therefore, a feed-back from a period of over 5000 years in general (even though patents examined are from the last 50 years).

In TRIZ-Nature databases, the innovations of Mother Nature responding to environment imbalances have been accounted for as well. Therefore the feed-back period has been increased to roughly 3.5 billion years!

[Bear in mind that this is a fictive report. TRIZ-Nature, a variant of TRIZ, has yet to be formalized, note by the author] My idea was stolen, predated, and is now being called #BioTRIZ !

14Conclusion - The solar-hydrogen-methanol economy is the birth of ecoKapitalism

The solar-hydrogen-methanol economy, in fact, overcomes the "peak-oil" problem by establishing a control over two natural cycles on Earth, used to "harvest" free solar energy in a sustainable way. The cycles mimic what Nature has been doing for millions of years (photosynthesis) with the carbon/hydrocarbons/carbohydrates-cycle (involving CO₂) and the water/oxygen-cycle. Note that, because we are dealing with "cycles", all carbon released (CO₂ in the atmosphere) at one point is absorbed at another point of the cycle. The same applies to water & oxygen elements. Hydrogen, the simplest "carrier for chemical energy", is involved in both cycles.

Hydrogen gas H₂ is used to cover local/fixed energy needs (houses, offices). Methanol CH₃OH, conveniently being a liquid at atmospheric conditions, is used as a fuel (high energy density storage capacity) for transport needs (air, road, sea). Existing vehicle-fuel distribution infrastructures need to be slightly adapted (e.g. petrol/gasoline stations), as well as all existing engine vehicles (with slight carburettor adjustment to run on methanol, cf. Brazil/Ethanol). These minor adjustments minimise the overall investment.

The 600 000 people-region case study shows the financial benefit of solar energy harvesting, although it shall be considered in the context of a 66-times-larger move of 40M people going 100% solar world-wide (for example California as a whole. Let's have a dream!). This means a political decision, because the investment order of is too large for private corporations (John M. KEYNES agrees with me versus simplistic Adam SMITH's laissez-faire). If the system keeps its promises, the infrastructures will keep deploying and more regions will become "H₂-connected".

With this move, the (imaginary) oil & gas company BTSX (Beyond TotShexXon) did not shoot themselves in the foot, but showed they could prepare the future of the company together with the future of mankind (energy needs). After having been marketing "old" fossilized solar energy ("stored" underground millions years ago) in the form of fossil hydrocarbons (oil, gas, coal), BTSX decided to market & sell "present" solar energy in the form of hydrogen and methanol. It is expected that BTSX's shares would keep rising during the next few months, when more and more investors understand this long-term strategy.

BTSX's solar-hydrogen-methanol plan is universal and can easily be deployed everywhere, for example in developing countries such as China, India and Brazil. We will all gain from these developing countries joining the solar-energy path. All men share the same atmosphere and seas. Moreover, it is safer to help developing countries to go 100% solar rather than to let them build nuclear power plants for instance (with radioactive wastes in corrupted hands, because corruption goes along poverty unfortunately).

With this plan, the development of mankind can keep its (crazy) pace without bringing about the risk of destabilizing Earth systems (for the moment). No radioactive wastes lasting thousands of years are generated, our great-grand-children will thank us for that.

As for the CO₂ released in the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels during the last 100 years by our grand-fathers without recycling it, the ones that benefited from the energy produced (namely USA, France, Germany, UK, Russia, China, etc.) will have to PAY to "sequestrate" & remove it from the atmosphere (pro rata fines). Of course, other countries that did not pollute in the past could ask liquidated damages to us, it would be understandable…

We would like to conclude with thanking all BTSX's personnel for their contribution to this huge plan. It is a pleasure to see how BTSX was able to mobilize thousands of brains and arms in their organisations around this ambitious plan. All people, blue collars, white collars, geologists, biologists, engineers, welders, accountants brought their ideas, initiatives, innovations, which were then channelled and perfected using TRIZ methodology.

"I don't think with my brains only. I think with millions of brains from people around the world".

Generalisation about recyclable goods & services: the ecoKapitalism

There will be a big difference in some ordinary actions between today's Economy and the future solar-hydrogen-methanol Economy. When people will switch on lamps at work using solar-generated electricity, heat their homes with solar-produced hydrogen, or re-fill their cars with solar-produced methanol, they will be using recyclable goods and services that will not harm their environment and will not endanger their children's future. Unfortunately, nowadays these products are still in competition with electricity generated from nuclear power plants (risks, radioactive wastes lasting thousands of years, inexpensive costs relying on untrustworthy economic computations), natural gas and petrol/gasoline (both releasing CO₂ in the atmosphere without recycling it nor accounting for the future costs of cleaning it). We will see in Appendices how a proper - political - tax system based on ecoKapitalism's sustainable development principles can remedy this unfair distortion of competition.

Capitalism, as it is, has been able to achieve a great evolution for mankind when men had to "conquer" the world and its resources. But now we have reached a point where mankind can harm the planet. Capitalism can be kept but must simply be amended to take environment protection into account. It's the birth of the "ecoKapitalism", an event long awaited by all "anti-globalization" lobbies. Private companies, which are the innovative force driving human progress (and not governments, by the way, as Communism & centralised-planned Economies showed us), will have to adapt the new rules/laws voted by governments & parliaments around the world (political decisions). Thus companies will compete each others to offer us the best recyclable goods & services in a "sustainable development" way. QED.

See Appendix 5 : Sociological, economic & ecological considerations.

15Appendices

15.1Appendix 1 : Errors and inconstancies

I know that my document contains errors and inconstancies. I have tried to list some of them:

1) - It may be inconsistent to change sunlight energy into electricity (solar cells) which in turn (so to say "in situ") performs the electrolyse of water to produce H₂ and O₂, if H₂ is then to be changed a few meters away into electricity again (fuel cell with η_e=45-50%). The chemical energy going with O₂ is lost(?). See item (3).

But I kept this system anyway, because the idea is to benefit from a hydrogen gas network shared among many users, namely, from inertia which increases the swarming effect (in French: coefficient de foisonnement), possibly enough to cover day/night energy needs variations [which electric accumulators will never give us easily!].

The system shall be modified as follows: (i) using electricity in situ for the instantaneous power needed by household/office, and (ii) using only the rest of the electricity to generate H₂, to be sent to the local H₂ network, with the aim of turning it into methanol for storage & transport applications. However, bear in mind that some home appliances could easily run on hydrogen instead of electricity.

Of course, the best would be to generate H₂ gas directly without going through electricity!

2) - These panels which I thought still remained to be invented already exist!

Only one company on earth has been able to achieve solar panels directly generating hydrogen gas, with the invention of Dr. Michael Graetzel the fabulous "Tandem Cell". This company is "Hydrogen Solar Ltd" of the UK: This is the first major achievement!

http://www.hydrogensolar.com/

3) - I did not use a corrective coefficient to reflect the loss of energy when performing water electrolyse (going with O₂?) with electricity at the solar panel in the case study. Anyway, if this energy is lost indeed, it is only temporally, it will be recouped at a later stage at the combustion with O₂. Moreover, I do not know yet how to compare the solar energy received by the panel with the chemical energy produced with H₂ (and O₂, used at future combustion, cf. the cycle).

4) - I did not accounted for the losses in the networks (electrical, H₂, methanol, conversion) in the case study. But it shall already have been taken account in the initial figure of global energy consumption, i.e. in the average (Frenchman) energy needs 4.2 tep/yr/capita (including losses).

The benefit of decentralised energy production: Energy does not have to be transported thousands of kilometres (miles). I read awful electric losses such as 20% on high-voltage lines. How about oil/gas travelling 8000km from production field to consumers?!?

5) - I do not know the energy losses at "Conversion stations" (two-way conversions).

Moreover, I have not found yet the chemical process to achieve the "conversion/storage" reaction:

3H₂ + CO₂ → CH₃OH + H₂O + energy - Globally exothermic. Which P, T, catalyser?

Particularly, how to make H₂ hydrogen gas react only with carbon dioxide from the air (average concentration: 0.03 mol %) and not combust with air's O₂ instead (concentration: 21 mol %)?!?

I assumed that TRIZ-Nature will help us to achieve this second breakthrough (prerequisite), especially I figured out that a close look at the BACTERIA that can achieve this will give us a fair hint… maybe some sort of membrane only permeable to CO₂… How do green plants extract CO₂, and only CO₂, from the air?!? See also Appendix 3 : Methanol generation from Hydrogen.

6) - DMFC's (Direct Methanol Fuel Cells) do exist, but they are too small for the moment. They can only power a mobile phone, not a car, even less a truck, a train or a ship! But inventive people should go around this… anyway. Good old piston engines and combustion turbines (gas turbines) can already run on methanol/ethanol.

7) - NO_x emissions

I did not accounted for the NO_x emissions generated when burning hydrogen/methanol with oxygen in the air. This is an interesting progress possibility brought by fuel-cells. Lower reaction temperature generates less NO_x emissions. This is why in the end, fuel-cells shall supersede traditional engines (piston engines, combustion turbines).

8) - Pictures used in my website

Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. I reckon that I took most of the pictures included in this website from the internet, without asking permission to the owners. It is bad, I know, but I do not get any financial benefit from this. I am currently unemployed and therefore do not work for any of the companies mentioned in this document. If you are the owner of any of the pictures and you do not agree with me using it in this website, please send me an email: ecoKapitalism@hotmail.com. I will remove the picture.

15.2Appendix 2 : Solar panel manufacturing economies of scale

Let's try to identify the price evolution in function of the installed capacity, that is Price: P = P(Q), P being the price and Q being the worldwide installed manufacturing capacity.

It is generally accepted that the costs (and generally global prices including installation, balance-of-plant) drop by 20% each time the manufacturing capacity doubles. This is called economic efficiency (I guess) and technological progress (better organisation, information management, cross-fertilizing between different technical fields) due to economies of scale. This is why I do not have to go outside to kill a wild boar and prepare my lunch of it, whereas my ancestor, only 6000 years ago, had to do it!

At the moment (i.e. in 2006), price of a solar-panel installed (ready to use) is P₀ = $10/W, for a present world installed manufacturing capacity of Q₀ = 0.9GW per year.

This means that the equation to be solved is P(2×Q) = P(Q) × 80% and P₀ = P(Q₀)

In mathematics terms, that is: f(ax) = k.f(x) and f(x₀) = C₀

This looks like a differential equation, but it is not one…

Let's have a look at how it behaves concretely in a simple example. f(1) = C₀ and f(2x) = k.f(x)

We see the function is defined only for x = 1, 2, 4, 8, 2ⁿ, not for all real numbers, even not for all integers, there are many "holes". How about for x = 1.5?!? In fact there is an infinite number of solutions!

Nevertheless let's look at the first terms of the series.

Then, we do something that will mortify pure mathematicians (as I was myself a long time ago). Let's solve the equation by replacing "2" by "a" and "2ⁿ" by "x" on both side of the equation.

That is x = aⁿ which gives ln(x) = n.ln(a)

The initial equation f(aⁿ) = C₀.kⁿ becomes f(x) = C₀.k^ln(x)/ln(a)

I know it's unfair mathematics but the equation is solved, you can check f(ax) = k.f(x) indeed!

It can be written different ways: f(x) = C₀.k^ln(x)/ln(a) = C₀.x^ln(k)/ln(a) or f(x) = C₀.x^γ with γ = ln(k)/ln(a)

If it is f(x₀) = C₀ instead of f(1) = C₀, you can easily check that

the solution nevertheless is f(x) = C₀.(x/x₀)^γ with γ = ln(k)/ln(a)

Therefore the price evolution of solar panel in function of world installed capacity:

Price = P(Q) = P₀.(Q/Q₀)^γ

with γ = ln(k)/ln(a) = -0.322 as k = 0.8 = 80% and a = 2 with P₀ = $10/W at Q₀ = 0.9GW per year.

e.g., if we multiply the installed capacity by 10, price is 50% of initial one (divided by 2).

e.g., if we multiply the installed capacity by 100, price is 25% of initial one (divided by 4).

e.g., if we multiply the installed capacity by 1000, price is 11% of initial one (divided by 10).

Be careful, this is not a curve of price versus time, but price versus manufacturing capacity!

Application to world current energy needs (if we go 100% solar)

Let's say we wish to install the full current world needs (15 000 GW) within 15 years, therefore the world installed solar-panel manufacturing capacity should be 1 000 GW per year. The price for the panel would go down to $1/W (10 times less than it is at the moment).

Therefore, an annual investment of $1 000Bln/year (1G = 1Bln), whose total is $15 000Bln.

At the moment, world energy needs are 213 M boepd, which cost us: $3 900Bln/yr with $50/bbl.

If the price of oil jumps to $100/bbl, costs will reach $7 800Bln/yr… which means a payback period of only 2 years. What are we waiting for?!?

15.3Appendix 3 : Methanol generation from Hydrogen

[Still to be finalized] Searches on the internet gave me this information so far:

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methanol

Methanol is produced synthetically by the direct combination of hydrogen and carbon monoxide gases, heated under pressure in the presence of a catalyst. An alternative industrial process creates a very pure methanol by combining natural gas and steam and then forcing the mixture through a series of heated catalytic chambers.

15.4Appendix 4 : TRIZ innovation management methodology

15.4.1What is TRIZ?

Relevant web-sites:

http://www.triz-journal.com

http://www.triz-journal.com/whatistriz_orig.htm

WHAT IS TRIZ? => Managing Creativity for Project Success

15.4.2Example of TRIZ application in the industry

The following text is adapted from the web page http://www.triz-journal.com/whatistriz/index.htm

"Managing Creativity for Project Success" by Ellen Domb, The PQR Group, Upland, CA USA.

Much of the practice of TRIZ consists of learning these repeating patterns of problems-solutions and patterns of technical evolution, and methods of using scientific effects, and applying the general TRIZ patterns to the specific situation that confronts the developer. Exhibit 1 describes this process graphically.

Exhibit 1. The TRIZ problem solving method. The arrows represent transformation from one formulation of the problem or solution to another. The pink arrows represent analysis of the problems and analytic use of the TRIZ data bases. The purple arrow represents thinking by analogy to develop the specific solution.

For example, a powerful demonstration of this method comes from the pharmaceutical industry (Anderson, 1997). Following the flow of Exhibit 1, the specific problem is as follows:

Tailored bacteria are used to cultivate human hormones, producing a superior product to those refined from animal sources. To produce the product, very large quantities of tailored bacteria cells are cultured, then the cells must be broken open, and the cell wall material removed, so that the useful hormones can be processed. A mechanical method for breaking the cells had been in use at a moderate scale for some time, but the yield was 80%, and was variable. A current crisis was a reduction in yield to 65%, and a long-term problem was anticipated in trying to scale production up to high rates, with yield much better than 80%.

The TRIZ general problem at the highest level is to find a way to produce the product with no waste, at 100% yield, with no added complexity. A general TRIZ solution formula is “The problem should solve itself.” Another general TRIZ solution is that the pattern of technical evolution is that mechanical devices are replaced by fields. This may seem very general, but it led the pharmaceutical researchers to analyze all the resources available in the problem (the cells, the cell walls, the fluid they are in, the motion of the fluid, the processing facility, etc.) and to conclude that 3 specific solutions had very high potential for their problem:

• The cell walls should be broken by sound waves (from the pattern of evolution of replacing mechanical means by fields)

• The cell walls should be broken by shearing, as they pass through the processing facility (using the resources of the existing system in a different way.)

• An enzyme in the fluid should “eat” the cell walls and release the contents at the desired time

All three methods have been tested successfully, and the least expensive, highest yield method was in production in a very short time.

15.4.3TRIZ-Nature & a quick look at Earth environment evolution

Superiority of TRIZ-Nature over TRIZ (nowadays “TRIZ-Nature” exists by the name: #BioTRIZ)

As stated, TRIZ databases are rich of over 2 million patents that have been examined, and analyzed to look for principles of innovation. This covers human activities, therefore, a feed-back from a period of over 5000 years in general (even though patents examined are from the last 50 years).

In TRIZ-Nature databases, the innovations of Mother Nature responding to environment imbalances have been accounted for as well.

Therefore the feed-back period has been increased to roughly 3.5 billion years! [Bear in mind that this is a fictive report. TRIZ-Nature, a variant of TRIZ, has yet to be formalized, note by the author]

Earth is believed to have formed around 4.55 billion years ago out of the solar nebula, along with the Sun and other planets (age of the universe is roughly 13.7Bln years). The Sun has another 5Bln years to live before it dies. Initially molten, the outer layer of the planet cooled, resulting in the solid crust. Outgassing and volcanic activity produced the primordial atmosphere; condensing water vapour, augmented by ice delivered by comets, produced the oceans. The highly energetic chemistry is believed to have produced a self-replicating molecule around 4 billion years ago, and half a billion years later, the last common ancestor (LCA) of all life lived (i.e. 3.5 billion years ago).

Last universal ancestor (LUA), the hypothetical latest living organism from which all currently living organisms descend. As such, it is the most recent common ancestor of the set of all currently living organisms. Also LCA (last common ancestor) or LUCA (last universal common ancestor). It is estimated to have lived some 3.5 billion years ago.

The development of photosynthesis allowed the sun's energy to be harvested directly; the resultant oxygen accumulated in the atmosphere and gave rise to the ozone layer. The incorporation of smaller cells within larger ones resulted in the development of complex cells called eukaryotes. Cells within colonies became increasingly specialized, resulting in true multicellular organisms. With the ozone layer absorbing harmful ultraviolet radiation, life colonized the surface of Earth.

Let's thus deduce the equation: Energy = Life (and vice-versa)

Over hundreds of millions of years, continents formed and broke up as the surface of Earth continually reshaped itself. The continents have migrated across the surface of the Earth, occasionally combining to form a supercontinent. Roughly 750 million years ago, the earliest known supercontinent Rodinia, began to break apart. The continents later recombined to form Pannotia, 600-540 million years ago, then finally Pangaea, which broke apart 180 million years ago.

Since the 1960s it has been hypothesized that a severe glacial action between 750 and 580 million years ago, during the Neoproterozoic, covered much of the planet in a sheet of ice. This hypothesis has been termed the "Snowball Earth", and it is of particular interest as it precedes the Cambrian explosion when multi-cellular lifeforms began to proliferate. [Conclusion: around 540.M years ago => apparition of first multicellular organisms that are more complex than sponges or medusoids].

Since the Cambrian explosion, about 535 million years ago, there were 5 distinct mass extinctions. The last one occurred 65 million years ago, when a meteorite collision probably triggered the extinction of the (non-avian) dinosaurs and other large reptiles, but spared small animals such as mammals, which then resembled shrews [in French "Musaraigne"]. Over the last 65 million years, mammalian life diversified, and several million years ago, a small African ape gained the ability to stand upright. As brain size increased, these hominids developed the use of tools and language. The development of agriculture, and then civilization allowed humans to affect the Earth in a short time-span like no other life form had before, affecting both the nature and quantity of other life forms as well as global climate, i.e. affecting their environment.

15.5Appendix 5 : Sociological, economic & ecological considerations

15.5.1Initial sociological remark "Life" = "Energy" (and vice-versa)

Transformation of energy is life. See previous chapter about the quick look at earth environment evolution (4 bln year): "The highly energetic chemistry is believed to have produced a self-replicating molecule around 4 billion years ago, and half a billion years later, the last common ancestor (LCA) of all life lived".

Energy is a right for all living beings on Earth, we have to strive to build a world society which provides enough energy to all human beings.

15.5.2Happy Birthday Chernobyl! Already 20 years ago!

15.5.3Some pictures of HIROSHIMA

Pictures of HIROSHIMA

15.5.4Open questions:

1) Why are all investments of the world converging now to China who is the country on earth that cares the least for their environment? (cf. latest pollution catastrophes)

30 years on from now, who will pay for the retirement and health care of that old Chinese lady who confectioned my sleepers and manufactured the toys for my children?

2) Why shall we develop new huge gas deposits in Russia and Iran? How are we going to sequestrate atmospheric CO₂ generated by burning fossil fuels?

3) Why are western leaders speaking about re-launching nuclear power generation investments in UK, France, USA? How will my great-grand children consider me when they have to cope with radioactive wastes lasting thousands of years that were generated 100 years earlier for electricity, a utility service, instantaneously consumed?

15.5.5My answers:

ANSWER to (1): I am ready to pay more for my sleepers but change them less often, and want to offer fewer toys to my children (they have too many of them anyway). All these old sleepers & cheap broken plastic toys end up dumped in landfills each year! People have to be ready to pay a just price to promote "sustainable development". This is the end of "cheap" oil and "cheap" goods!

ANSWER to (2) & (3): All projects which are not producing "recyclable" goods & services are to be screened out or heavily penalized in favour of "sustainable" projects. There are no reasons to allocate resources (money, brains) to doomed projects. Moreover, I am ready to pay more for my electricity if I am guaranteed it is "sustainable".

15.5.6Common root to problems: future costs not accounted for

The common root to problems (1), (2) and (3) is that future costs of a present good/service are not enough taken into account when computing its present price. They are the costs of the future retirement of millions of Chinese workers and future de-pollution of Chinese rivers in (1), the cost of future sequestrating CO₂ and long-time effects on environment in (2), and the radioactive-waste-storage costs within thousands of years borne by our future great grand-children in (3). This is pure capitalism without "sustainable development" considerations. We will not "kill" a Chinese worker once he is 65 years old (if he is lucky enough to reach that age). How his retirement is going to be paid?!? Is he going to work for us until his very last breath?

We are being selfish and unfair when consuming cheap goods & services (i) to our OWN grand-children who will have to pay one day to clean our wastes and (ii) to people living in countries having less social protection than ours [therefore they work as our slaves, without health protection nor future].

=> How shall we change that?

15.5.7Companies will not spontaneously promote "sustainable development".

a) The essence of capitalism

Companies are getting larger and larger (some already have the size of a country now). They compete each other in the capitalist world world-wide. The rule is clear and unique: "each company has to yield the maximum of the capital invested". Let's note that now capitalism encompasses almost all countries in the world.

Through investments, a company prepares its growth, its future profits. "Business plans" help the company's senior management to classify investment opportunities and decide. Company's money is invested in the most profitable project (i.e. having the best "business plan"), then in the second-most profitable project, and so on until the company's investment budget is totally spent. The last projects, less profitable, are left pending without allocation of resources.

b) "The Devil is in the Detail": the "discount rate"

A "discount rate" (taux d'actualisation in French) is used in the computation of investment project's future profitability showed in the "business plan" (the basis of the investment decision). A "discount rate" is used to compare future moneys (revenues/expenses) with today's money (e.g. the money that you invest today). And here is "the Devil in this very Detail".

The problem is that the "discount rate" zooms out future (great) expenses, especially if they occur "late" in the "life" of the project, and especially if the "discount rate" is great (sometimes used to "penalized" risky projects, for example in China, Eastern Europe). This is how we end up with a CRAZY cost computation for nuclear electricity [because expenses will occur in thousands of years time], or with underestimating the old Chinese women pension schemes [in 30 years time]. Consequently resources are wrongly allocated because sustainability is not accounted for.

c) A wrong "good-idea": ethical considerations

Firstly companies do not have "ethical considerations", this is not part of their clear and unique rule. And secondly, the ethical considerations are really subjective, sorry to say that.

Look at the working conditions in France:

- 100 years ago: 10 hours per day / 6 days a week / no holidays / life expectancy of 50 years,

- Now: 7 hours per day / 5 days a week / 5 wks holidays per year / life expectancy of 76 yrs.

(cf. French Magazine "Capital" dated August 2003).

Why shall a company consider that what was good in France only 100 years ago, is not "ethical" now?!? Moreover, if the country's local legislation allows it, the company will apply it. They may preserve their international image by giving high-standard employment conditions to their local employees, but they will maximize sub-contracted work, and hide behind their contracts with local companies in case of problems. I see this all the time.

15.5.8From Capitalism to ecoKapitalism, a small amendment and … heavy taxes

Our capitalist system is not so bad I would say*. We just need to amend it (with political decision) by demanding that companies only sell goods and services (including utilities) that are 100% recyclable. All other products have to be removed from the markets, or heavily penalized** so that they do not unfairly compete against "sustainable" products. The ecoKapitalism is Capitalism amended by "sustainable development" (the ability to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs).

(*) The world population grew from 230M people in year 1 to 600M people in 1700 (only 3 times bigger within 1700 year), then jumped to 6.5Bln in 2003 (10 times within 300 years). Therefore human kind has been thriving under capitalism. (cf. French Magazine "Capital" dated August 2003).

(**) Sorry for the bad news, this means a new tax, the "eco-TAX". Indeed, if we want a sustainable world, some products have to be heavily penalized in favour of recyclable/sustainable products. Their price has to include the total "life-cycle costs". The money from the eco-TAX shall be invested in companies developing innovative sustainable technologies. We can imagine interchangeable products still in competition with different "sustainable" indexes (0% to 100%) and therefore adjusted eco-TAX. Customers will have to choose which one they want to buy.

15.5.9Conclusion: the ecoKapitalism implemented

When companies, or governments, determine allocation of new resources, they will only compare sustainable projects, and invest in the best ones (i.e. the most profitable, still). "Non-sustainable" projects, goods and services shall simply be zapped out!

15.5.10Applications: new prices of a few products with the ecoKapitalism

- Nuclear electricity price computation => not-sustainable* => eliminated => stopped at once!

(*) Not-sustainable because this year it generates radioactive wastes lasting thousands of years, next year also, and so on. Everybody understands that this is not sustainable (quantity of wastes growing and growing without limit!!!).

- Price of Petrol/gasoline (from crude oil) to fuel a car: price shall be the sum of all production costs (exploration & production, transport, refining & distribution, i.e. UPSTREAM, MISDTREAM, DOWNSTREAM, as it is now) + cost of recycling it (the sellers has to build physical plants that will sequestrate CO₂ released in the atmosphere and include the costs of these CO₂ recycling plants) + profit.

- Price of Solar panel: sum of costs of manufacturing it + cost of recycling it + profit.

- Price of Natural gas from Russia/Algeria/Iran to heat a house: upstream, midstream, downstream costs + CO₂-recycling costs + profit.

- Price of Solar hydrogen to heat a house (boiler): solar panel price + balance of equipment (including their recycling costs of everything) + profit.

- Price of Methanol/Ethanol* (from BIOMASS) to fuel a car: process costs + profit.

- Price of Methanol* (from solar hydrogen): price of solar hydrogen + process costs + profit.

(*) In BOTH these cases, the combustion of methanol in the car's engine releases CO₂ in the atmosphere in a same way as petrol/gasoline (from crude oil) does, but NO eco-TAX NOR CO₂-recycling COSTS shall apply to methanol. Because this very CO₂ has been fixed by the production process of methanol at an earlier stage!!!! No additional CO₂ is released in the atmosphere. It's a CYCLE!!!

- Price of wood to heat the house (fireplace): cost of growing wood + profit.

Again NO eco-TAX NOR CO₂-recycling COSTS shall apply. Indeed, when wood burns in a fireplace, CO₂ is released in the atmosphere. But when a tree grows, it takes all the carbon that it needs from the CO₂ in the atmosphere. It's a natural cycle!

- Price of Plastic toy from China: price of crude oil + production costs* + recycling costs (physical plants) + profit.

(*) We could imagine a "social-TAX" on top of these costs going to a special fund. This fund shall be used to cover future retirement & health expenses of retired Chinese workers.

- Price of a Plastic bag (from oil): price of oil + process costs + recycling costs + profit.

And so on.

If, say, an oil & gas company is able to sequestrate 60% only of the CO₂ released by its petrol/gasoline, the product shall mention "60%-recyclable only" and be taxed so that it costs the same as an equivalent product which is 100%-recyclable. Soon recycling industry will thrive, and soon petrol/gasoline will be replaced by methanol/ethanol!

15.6Appendix 6 : Recommended web-sites

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

http://www.metanature.org (Jim FOURNIER)

http://www.eprida.com

http://www.triz-journal.com

http://www.manicore.com (Jean-Marc JANCOVICI, French Ingénieur Conseil)

- French Magazine "Capital" dated August 2003 (the most interesting one). Dossier spécial: "De l'antiquité à nos jours, la fabuleuse histoire de l'économie".

- Article written by Georges LIPIETZ (1922-2003), Ingénieur Civil des Mines, in magazine "Revue des ingénieurs des Mines" dated May 2001 (Dossier spécial "Energie et environnement"), intitulé "Quelques considérations sur l'énergie en général et Cadarache en particulier".

15.7Appendix 7 : about the author + CV

I wrote this web-site to share my ideas with all and as a sort of therapy too.

Indeed, for many years, I have been happy in my day-to-day life. I think I am a good engineer, economist and manager, my colleagues & friends appreciate me, I am successful with my work. I try to be a good husband/father/son too.

But I have been spending countless sleepless nights, particularly for the last 4 years after having joined the oil & gas industry. I see how the world is running into a brick wall at high speed. I realized how the energy business is related to wars, terrorism & worst pollutions (radioactive wastes, oil spills) around the world, the inability of our short-sighted mediocre political leaders to understand the issues and to find alternative ways, such as the ecoKapitalism, to prepare the future of our children & grand-children.

Furthermore, for the last 4 years, I have met many Russians living poor lives although their country is getting very rich (I know it is the same in other countries like China, India, Africa). I am shocked at westerners and their luxury style of life. Why can't we develop and share technologies like solar-hydrogen-methanol chain that may improve life in Western Europe/USA but also in Africa, India, China without endangering the environment?!?

Note also that I am looking for a job… here is my CV:

Born in 1968,

French, Married, 2 children, email:

ecoKapitalism@hotmail.com

Team & Project Manager/Consultant

13 years of experience - Energy / Environment:

Power, Cogeneration, District Heating, HVAC, Oil & Gas

wishes to manage Sustainable Development Projects

EXPERIENCE

2006 - Consulting Company CEP Cifal Elan Petroleum, Moscow.

Assessment of oil/gas assets. Re-organisation of former soviet-type companies to western standards.

 Consultant, coordination of western experts in Russia/Kazakhstan

Responsibilities: organisation, recruitment, planning, cost analysis, negotiations with clients.

2002-2006 - TOTAL Exploration & Production Russia, Moscow.

Operator of Kharyaga oil field, 30 000 bpd (2GW), located 75 km north of artic circle.

 Project Manager as a consultant

Responsible for new organisation of Logistics/Supply-Chain, and Maintenance depts (SAP).

 Manager of O&M Support (Operations & Maintenance)

Managed production/maintenance O&M team, based in Moscow, supporting the oil field.

Implemented O&M service contract between TOTAL & co-contractors Dietsmann/KBR-Halliburton.

O&M service contract: oil production, equipment maintenance, inspection, waste management.

 Deputy Director of Dietsmann-Russia (in parallel with job above)

Creation of a Russian subsidiary ($6M/yr turnover, 60 pers.). HRs, legal, financial issues, etc.

Responsible for recruitment, training, organisation of O&M teams at start-up of oil field.

2000-2001 - CRISTOPIA Energy Systems. Nice, France.

Small-sized innovative company, manufacturing eutectic nodules for chilled water storage

 USA Development Manager

Responsibilities: Sales, projects with third-party investors, studied setup of $2M/yr US subsidiary.

Domain: Peak-shaving of power/HVAC for office buildings, airports, food industry, hospitals, etc.

Environment-friendly projects: efficiency, CO₂ emissions, reduced installed capacity.

1998-2000 - EDF-GDF France's public power/gas Utility, Paris.

 Engineer-Economist, Gaz de France (GDF) - Division of Gas Transport Infrastructures.

Resp. Studied economic, technical, political risks, tariff computations.

Dom. Gas supply through pipelines or LNG, particularly from Russia.

 Project Engineer/Manager, EDF - Power Plant Engineering Division "CNET". 10-500MW

Resp. Management of teams/projects: cogeneration-CHP, combined-cycle gas turbines-CCGT.

Dom. EPC: engineering, procurement, construction, commissioning. France/Africa.

1996-1998 - ALSTOM "Ruston" Gas Turbines, (now Siemens) Manufacturing Plant. Lincoln, UK.

 Mechanical Applications Engineer - support to Sales/Projects dept's. Worldwide.

Resp. Conception, installation, maintenance of gas turbine plants. 4-43MW, $2-15M per turbine.

Applications: cogeneration-CHP power/heat (utilities), pumps/compressors (oil & gas).

1993-1996 - ELYO, subsidiary to power/heat/gas utility Tractebel (Suez-Lyonnaise Eaux). Paris.

Operation & maintenance, concessions, BOT (build-operate-transfer) of infrastructures (network/plants).

 Business Developer : France & Eastern Europe

Resp. Commercial/strategic reviews, business-plan, investment, tariffs, risks, emissions of CO₂ NO_x.

Dom. Power generation (turbines, Diesel engines), CHP, district heating, environment, waste incineration.

Qualifications

1993 - Diploma in Business Administration "DESS CAAE" (sort of French MBA).

IAE, Institute for Administration of Enterprises. Montpellier, France.

1992 - "Ingénieur Civil des Mines" equivalent to M.Sc. in Industrial/Mining Engineering.

Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Mines, St-Etienne, France. Renowned institute, created 1816.

- Mechanical, manufacturing & industrial process engineering, materials, physics, chemistry, mathematics, operations research.

- Including year 1990/91 as an undergraduate student & research assistant

University of Minnesota, USA, Civil & Mineral Engineering Dept.

Languages: English, French: fluent,

Russian: read, written, spoken.

Geographical spread: UK, USA, France, Africa,

Russia, Kazakhstan, Hungary.

Interests include:

Cultures (particularly former USSR), linguistic, ITs, politics, economy,

walking in the nature, sustainable development, renewable energies.

References in UK, France & Russia available upon requests.

15.8Appendix 8 : CV de l'auteur en français

Notez que je suis à la rechercher d'un emploi... voici mon CV:

Né en 1968, Français

Marié, 2 enfants, e-mail:

ecoKapitalism@hotmail.com

Consultant/Manager d'équipes et de projets

13 ans d'expérience - Energie / Environnement:

Electricité, Chaleur, Froid/Climatisation, Pétrole & Gaz

souhaite s'investir dans le Développement Durable

EXPERIENCE

2006 - Société de Consulting CEP Cifal Elan Petroleum, Moscou.

Evaluation d'actifs pétroliers/gaziers. Réorganisation de sociétés ex-soviétiques sur modèle occidental.

 Consultant, coordination d'équipes d'experts occidentaux en Russie/Kazakhstan

Responsabilités: organisation, recrutement, plannings, budgets, négociations avec clients.

2002-2006 - TOTAL Exploration & Production Russie, Moscou.

Opérateur du champ pétrolier Kharyaga: 30 000.barils/jour (2GW), 75 km au nord du cercle polaire.

 Chef de Projets en tant que consultant

Responsable de la nouvelle organisation des départements Maintenance et Achats/Logistique (SAP).

 Manager de l'équipe Support O&M (Opérations & Maintenance)

Responsable du support opérationnel O&M, basé Moscou, du champ pétrolier en conditions extrêmes.

Implémentation du contrat de service entre TOTAL et co-contractants Dietsmann/KBR-Halliburton.

Contrat O&M: production de pétrole, exploitation, maintenance, inspection, gestion des déchets.

 Adjoint du Directeur de Dietsmann-Russie (en parallèle au poste ci-dessus)

Création de la filiale russe (CA: $2M/an, 60 pers.), aspects financiers, juridiques, RH, etc.

Recrutement, formation, organisation des équipes pendant le démarrage du champ pétrolier.

2000-2001 - CRISTOPIA Energy Systems. Nice, France.

PME innovante qui conçoit & produit des nodules eutectiques de stockage d'énergie (froid).

 Manager du Développement Commercial USA

Responsabilités: Ventes, montage de projets avec tiers investisseur, étude de création filiale $2M/an.

Domaine: Ecrêtage des pointes de puissance (électricité, froid, clim.): bureaux, hôpitaux, aéroports...

Projets favorables à l'environnement: rendement, réduction puissance installée & émissions CO₂.

1998-2000 - EDF-GDF. Electricité & Gaz, Paris.

 Ingénieur-Economiste, Gaz de France (GDF) - Direction des Infrastructures de Transport.

Resp. Etudes de risques technico-politico-économiques, calcul tarifaire.

Dom. Approvisionnement en gaz par pipelines/GNL, particulièrement de Russie.

 Ingénieur/Chef de Projets, EDF - Division "CNET" Ingénierie de Centrales Electriques.

Resp. Management d'équipes de projets: turbines à gaz, cogénération, cycles-combinés 10-500MW.

Dom. Conception, achats, construction, démarrage de centrales en France et Afrique (Côte d'Ivoire).

1996-1998 - ALSTOM "Ruston" Gas Turbines, (maintenant Siemens) à Lincoln, Angleterre.

 Ingénieur Technico-Commercial - Ventes & Projets - Monde.

Resp. Conception, construction, maintenance de centrales à turbines à gaz. 4-43MW ($2-15M) par unité.

Applications: cogénération chaleur-électricité, pompe/compresseur (pétrole/gaz).

1993-1996 - ELYO, filiale de Tractebel (Suez-Lyonnaise Eaux). Paris.

Production d'électricité, cogénération, réseaux de chauffage urbain, environnement, incinération d'ordures.

 Ingénieur de Projets (Business Development) : France & Europe de l'Est

Resp. Analyse commerciale/stratégique, business-plan, investissements, tarifs, risques, émissions CO₂ NO_x.

Dom. Contrats d'exploitation/maintenance, concession, affermage d'infrastructures (centrales et réseaux).

FORMATION

1993 - Diplôme DESS de Gestion "CAAE" (équivalent à un MBA américain)

IAE, Institut d'Administration des Entreprises, Montpellier, France [1 an].

1992 - Diplôme "Ingénieur Civil des Mines"

Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Mines, St Etienne, France [3 ans].

Option: Gestion de Production/Génie Industriel.

dont l'année 1990/91 effectuée à l'University of Minnesota, USA [1 an].

Dept. Civil & Mineral Engineering.

Langues: Français, Anglais: courants,

Russe: lu, écrit, parlé.

Expérience géographique: France, Afrique, Royaume-Uni, USA,

Russie, Kazakhstan, Hongrie.

Centres d'intérêts:

Cultures (particulièrement ex-URSS), linguistique, informatique, politique, économie,

promenades dans la nature, développement durable, énergies renouvelables,

solutions équitables pour les générations futures.

Références sur simple demande (France, Royaume-Uni, Russie)

15.9Appendix 9 : Résumé en français: Hydrogène Solaire - Méthanol et écoKapitalisme

a) Introduction

J'ai décidé de construire ce site internet pour partager mes idées accumulées pendant 13 ans de carrière dans le domaine de l'énergie comme ingénieur, économiste, manager. Voici donc un résumé du site en français pour vous, irréductibles gaulois allergiques à l'anglais.

b) Comprendre comment la Nature gère l'énergie (sans l'homme).

L'idée initiale était de construire un modèle technico-économique qui permette, à l'instar de la Nature, d'exploiter la seule source d'énergie disponible sur terre en quantité abondante et surtout suffisante pour cet ogre d'Homme: l'énergie solaire. Surtout lorsque j'ai réalisé que l'énergie fossile que nous utilisons sous la forme d'hydrocarbures (charbon, pétrole, gaz) est en fait de l'énergie potentielle chimique venant d'une énergie solaire passée (il y a plusieurs millions d'années) enfouie sous terre. De plus, le soleil nous "arrose" chaque année d'une quantité d'énergie gratuite 10'000 fois supérieure à nos besoins!

J'ai pour cela essayé de comprendre comment la Nature s'y était pris, dans sa sagesse bâtie sur 3.5 milliards d'années d'évolution de la vie, d'essais infructueux, de sélection naturelle et de modestie (contrairement à l'Homme, cet apprenti sorcier).

En fait, le principe est simple. Un photon, cette minuscule particule d'énergie, contenue dans la lumière solaire vient "gracieusement" frapper l'électron d'un atome d'hydrogène H d'une molécule d'eau H₂O (en abondance sur terre, deux tiers de la surface de la Terre). Cet électron se trouve "excité" et peut conserver cette énergie fortuite sous certaines conditions. Ensuite la Nature a bâti, au fil des millénaires, 2 cycles pour conserver cette "énergie potentielle chimique" et la retrouver "plus tard" lorsqu'elle en aurait besoin.

Grosso modo, la Nature "fabrique" 2 morceaux (molécules) grâce à l'énergie solaire du photon, qui en se rassemblant plus tard, rendront cette énergie lors d'une réaction chimique d'oxydoréduction. On peut donc considérer que l'énergie (initialement solaire) est "stockée" entre les 2 morceaux. Dans notre vie, ce sont les plantes (chlorophylle) qui réalisent cette merveille. Les animaux, et autres insectes, se contentent de "manger" les parties intéressantes des plantes, en particulier les sucres et huiles, profitant là du travail accompli et de l'énergie solaire donc.

c) Réponse: Energie Solaire + Photosynthèses + Respiration [des cycles naturels]

Photosynthèses (réduction)… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthesis

n CO₂ + n H₂O + lumière → (CH₂O)_n + n O₂ [stockage d'énergie]

… et Respiration (oxydation) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_respiration

(CH₂O)_n + n O₂ → n CO₂ + n H₂O + énergie [utilisation d'énergie]

L'astuce de la Nature a été d'utiliser un réservoir naturel géant et présent partout, qui est l'atmosphère, pour "stocker" 2 molécules intervenant dans les réactions d'oxydoréduction: l'oxygène gazeux O₂ et le dioxyde de carbone CO₂. C'est pour cela, qu'après avoir mangé une plante, l'homme peut travailler, dormir, se déplacer (car il a "stocké" de l'énergie = nourriture). Il brûle les sucres & graisses en respirant l'oxygène de l'atmosphère et en rejetant du CO₂ (qui sera utilisé lors de la photosynthèse par d'autres plantes).

Dans sa sagesse, la Nature n'a pas stocké l'hydrogène sous sa forme gazeuse (peu pratique) mais a "choisi" de le "fixer" sur des chaînes d'atomes de carbone à la manière de constructions de LEGO (carbone naturellement sélectionné sans doute pour sa valence chimique maximale: 4). Il ne faut pas chercher plus loin la participation du carbone à la chaîne de la vie! Ceci explique le glucose, fructose, saccharose et autres sucres et huiles, qui se présentent sous forme liquide ou pâteuse à conditions (pression, température) atmosphériques. Le nombre d'atomes d'hydrogène prisonniers dans des molécules de sucres, est bien plus important qu'un réservoir d'hydrogène gazeux à très haute pression (et bien moins dangereux!).

d) Cycles naturels - pas de déchets