Here and there one can pick up the first light consequenses of climate change. In Holland the summers become drier. A climate denier tried to be funny: “We are lucky, less rain when we are sailing.”
The Pacific side of Panama is warming up. The hottest 8 years of the past 100 years have all been the last 8 years. No matter El Nino or El Nina.
In Bocas del Toro,Panama, the archipelago where ‘Ya’ is now, the last three months it rained about half the normal volume. This is the second year that this happened.
There is no water supply network here. Every house has its own cistern or tank and catches the rain. The marina nearby has an extensive rain catching system and tanks. This is for potable water and It also has a groundwater network, for washing water. An abundant amount. Even Americans (the biggest consumers of the world) have enough of it.
But you see the first signs of the climate change.
Drinkwater tanks of one of the marinas here in Bocas del Toro, Panama.
This year the marina manager saw a first empty tank. It never happened. But even worse, the washing water became a bit salty. How come?
It is easy. There is hardly any rain, so the islands soil doesnot get fresh water influx. On the other hand, the sea level is rising. OK, it is only a bit, but it rises. It is enough to let the sea water flow further into the soil of the coast. Till the first water reaches the well of the marina – bingo!
This first sign of climate change is what we sailors here experience. We don’t care. We have tanks on board. We have water makers. Worst case is, we buy water bottles. Although the price has risen of these bottles, we will get away with it. But households with smaller tanks have a problem. You know who have the small tanks? The poor people. They buy the most bottles, and when they are the most expensive.
More than 50% of the climate change is caused by 10% richest people. That is us. You, me.
What about a moral appeal to you this Sunday, and you start to spend your money to live fossil free now?
Do you know that Becquerel is the unit for radio activity? It is from Edmond Becquerel and he was the very first man who created electricity from sunlight. It was 1839 that he discovered this photo voltaic effect.
But it took some decades before someone took the challenge and made a solar panel. In 1883 it was Charles Fritz, an American who took Selenium and covered it with gold. It worked. It was expensive, but it worked. He could capture about 1% of the solar energy to get electricity from it.
One of the first solar panels, end 19th century, somewhere on a New York roof.
A few years later already, Edward Weston started to focus light with lenses, then on a solar cell. This cell became hot, then electrons start moving, which is electricity.
Meanwhile, the German Heinrich Hertz (the unit for Ffrequency is named after him) discovered that you get more power whit Ultra Violet light, better than visible light. This is called the photo electric effect and still today the solar cell uses this to create electricity. Right away, in 1888, the Russian scientisch Alexander Stoletov built a solar cell and proved it.
One of the many inventions is this apparatus to collect and focus sunlight and put it together in a heat battery, and from that heat one could make electricity OK, it is a bit off-topic, but it is a beautiful picture, though?
A new wave
In the 1950s a big breakthrough came. Three men from Bell Laboratories, Daryl Chapin, Calvin Fuller, and Gerald Pearson, invented the Silicon solar panel. So no gold nor Selenium, but just ordinairy Silicon which is everywhere to find. OK, they were expensive to buitd, but the efficiency was 6 percent in stead of the lousy 1 or 2 percent.
It helped NASA al lot to get electricity on their space rockets.
Later, in In 1970 the first building was provided with a solar cell roof, it is the Solar One building of the Delaware University.
More people became enthousiast. President Carte put 32 panels on the White House as a statement: ““the power of the sun to enrich our lives as we move away from our crippling dependence on foreign oil.” His administration set up fiinancial incentives promoting renewables.
President Carter with ‘his’ solar panels on the White House roof, as a first example and a start for a trickle down
But the wave waned away. Reagan came to power, said that the government was the problem, not the solution, and teared the solar panels down, with the excuse of roof repairs, but never put them back on. Carters incentive system was ended and the first fledging American solar industry died shorty after it.
Percent. by percent
From that time the solar industry was mostly settled in Europe. Solar was expensive, but many governments were willing to subsidise. At the end of the 1980’s you could find a solar panel here and there on a boat. A subsidized one. And what did they deliver? Already over 10% and every three or four years it could grow a percent.
Still, it was not profitable. A pity was that all subsidies were not continuous, so the industry, so there could not grow an industry with continuity. And, on the other hand the oil industry was powerful, and well subsidized.
The wave till now
In the early 2000 years things changed. When solar panels could deliver over 15 percent, a tipping point was reached. The USA and many European states started to give grants (or tax incentives) for installing and using solar power. A bottom-up approach. This was competitive with the fossil driven power.
With that subsidy many people dared to cover their roof completely. The amount left over, could be sold to the power distribution company, and based on a long term contract. The first percent of people took the chance.
Then in some five to ten years these changes came:
China’s solar industry grew and could deliver panels for less than any Western industry could.
Al Gore’s movie ‘An inconvenient Truth’ became known worldwide.
The subsidy regulations still continued.
The efficiency of the general solar panel passes the 20 percent.
So, many many people became interested, that it was sheer luck if you could get the grant. People tried it, tier after tier. And when they did not succeed, they installed without subsidy.
It also helps that the banks offer zip interest rates since 2010. The credo: Don’t put your money on the bank, but put it on your roof, with solar.
Now we are in 2023. The reality now is, that solar power beats fossil fuel power, despite the fossil fuel companies are still well granted with subsidies and tax cuts. There is coming more and more pressure to cut these billions down to zero.
Meanwhile, Putin makes a mess in the fossil fuel market and the fossil rates are expected to go up.
Yes, it is possible. The Silent 60 is the first production motor yacht that could sail fossil free.
Normally people dare tto try to sail the ocean (nearly) fossil free with sailing yachts. But now, this is a motor yacht. It is a breakthrough.
The yachts are rather big. The smallest is a 60 feet (20 meter) yacht, and I don’t dare to call the price. But what the heck, you have to start somewhere!
As you can see, it is fully covered with panels, doing together about 16 kW peak. The warf promises that the yacht would do a continuous 5 knots. This is theory, but with following wind and waves, it would be realistic. OK, it is not fast for this size again, what the heck. It is enough to cross an ocean, to have a pleasant move on the waves, and you cross oceans for pleasure, not for speed. So you have more time to enjoy.
But, people who buy it have to have a big wallet. These people mostly go for luxury. So they want airconditioning. A big galley, an oven, all big energy consumers. So they will build in a big diesel generator. A step backwards.
But what the heck. the Silent Yacht warf made a huge step forward. And, you can buy an extra kite sail for it, to save energy (or to speed up).
The yachts are rather big. The smallest is a 60 feet (20 meter) yacht, and I don’t dare to call the price. But what the heck, you have to start somewhere!
As you can see, it is fully covered with solar panels, doing together about 16 kW peak. The wharf promises that the yacht would do a continuous 5 knots. This is theory, but with following wind and waves, it would be realistic. OK, it is not fast for this size again, what the heck. It is enough to cross an ocean, to have a pleasant move on the waves, and you cross oceans for pleasure, not for speed. So you have more time to enjoy.
But, people who buy it have to have a big wallet. These people mostly go for luxury. So they want airconditioning. A big galley, an oven, all big energy consumers. So they will build in a big diesel generator. A step backwards.
But what the heck. the Silent Yacht wharf made a huge step forward. And, you can buy an extra kite sail for it, to save energy (or to speed up).
Nowadays it is easy to cross an ocean fossil free. This trimaran does it, with an average of 30 knots, foiling her way over the ocean.
Now it is doing close to 25 knots (46 km/hr) with moderate winds. She gets into the foil, so the last wave tops hit the bottom of the boat.
Foiling is also possible on two ‘legs’. This balancing across the ocean needs good trim and subtle steering.
This looks faster, but is slower, because here the hulls touch the water, creating the spray. The crew doesnot like it, also because it makes everything wet.
The trimaran lying still. Time for a visit.
The trimaran consists 3 floaters and 2 beams. That is the construction. All this is covered with solar panels. In between these rigid parts are nets, nets and nets. And there are lines everywhere. Here on the starboard side of the main hull, you see some 20 lines find their way to the mast. The Ya has three lines there.
The direction of this picture is abeam. On the right you see the aft beam. With solar of course.
The chair at the end is for the crew, the red stick is the helm. It steers the foil rudder blade.
Why all that solar? The trimaran doesnot have hydrogeneration, because that takes speed. So dumb head me asked: “But that takes hardly any, perhaps 0,05 knots of the 35 average you make! That was really dumb, because they lost the last transatlantic race from London to New York on 11 seconds with number 1. So it counts. (And I rubbed it in, I am afraid).
Anyway, these speeds are that high, you’d better not put a generator behind it, because the water would blow it off anyway.
The solar energy is used for making the hydraulic systems work, for winches et cetera. However, everything also works by hand, with grinders.
They sail the trimaran with 6 crew: 3 men on, 3 men off.
This is the cabin. One man can sleep here, and two in that dark hole behind this man (a fellow skipper, not a crew member). In that hole, there are also the sails and the spare parts.
Behind the photographer there is the galley. Sorry, no picture made of it, but it is nothing more than a single induction cooker, a pressure cooker, a plate and a spoon.
The crew: “It is not cosey, but it saves energy and weight.”
So sorry, but this sort of fossil free sailing is not my cup of tea.
But interesting is, if you want to win a sailing race nowadays, then you’d better do it fossil free.
It is possible. It is competitive, and it is fast.
Within a year a building is build and ready with 50 care units and daytime activities, aimed at residents who receive care and guidance from the Salvation Army
This building sets a standard in affordable, biobased construction for healthcare.
The project is characterized by a high level of innovation and sustainability ambition. For example, the fully solid wood supporting structure (CLT) can be completely dismantled and a high percentage of biobased and circular materials are used, including wooden facade parts made of Dutch hardwood.
The building stores approximately 570,000 kg of CO2 in the wood products used. That is comparable to the emissions are comparable to the electricity consumption of more than 600 Dutch households per year.
The building will be very energy efficient and the majority of the remaining energy demand will be generated on site. Green facades and a green site design also contribute to providing shelter for plants and animals.
Dennis Hauer of the Urban Climate Architects: “This project is the new normal for us. If we built all buildings in the Netherlands in this way, there would be no nitrogen problem for construction. We see that it is possible. We also do not want to build differently and challenge everyone to do the same.”
Since last year, Europe has decided that nuclear energy is sustainable.
Is that actually true?
The original definition for sustainable development was formulated by the Brundtlandt Commission, in the report Our Common Future:
Sustainable development is the development that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.
So roughly: meet your own needs, but don’t damage the world for your future generations.
What I learned from my mother is that you should clean up your own mess and not leave it for your little brother. I assume that will also apply to grown ups: each generation cleans up its own mess.
The nuclear power plants work with uranium as raw material. The annoying thing is that – just like with any production of something – there is leftover waste. That waste cannot be processed. The pity is that the radioactivity of uranium has only fallen to an acceptable level in 20,000 years.
In terms of generations, we are talking about 667 generations.
In terms of sustainable development, I think that’s not sustainable development. It feels like a Pleistocene king has decreed that his people can do things that could harm us.
But we dispose of the waste safely.
The nuclear waste is poured into thick concrete and then it goes into salt mines – what can happen to it, nothing right?
Gas has been pumped out of the ground in Groningen, in the north of the Netherlands. Nothing could happen with that either. But thousands of houses are about to collapse and that’s only two generations later.
I can see a landslide coming that will force open the concrete blocks in the salt mines, sometime in the next 20,000 years.
But accidents won’t happen, though?
Um, well, uh,
• 1957, Kystim (USSR), an explosion and fall out over a region. The damage was kept secret.
• 1957 Windscale (UK), radio active cloud across UK and Europe
• 1979, Three Mile Island, Harrisburg, partial melt down.
• 1984, Chernobyl, USSR, partial meltdown, radioactive cloud over USSR and Europe
• 2011, Fukushima, partial melt down, radioactive cloud over Japan. Since two years the radioactive cooling water has been pumped into the sea, because it is too much to contain.
So in two generations there are 5 major accidents that should not have happened. How are things not to be happening in the next 667 generations? A calculation says that there will be another 333.3 accidents.
Alternative
The pity is, you can also do it with Thorium. Thorium waste can for the most part be reprocessed. The remainder of that has a half-life of 80 to 300 years. Then you are still talking about 2 to 10 generations, but that can still be explained to your grandchildren. I imagine something like this: “Grandpa and Grandma wanted so badly to go on holiday with you that we didn’t insulate our house. Many grandpas and grandmas wanted that, so then a nuclear power plant was needed to keep our houses at 20 degrees. Well, it was not too bad with us, because we heat up to 19 degrees, or even 18 sometimes. “
On the one hand, we find this accountability ridiculous, but on the other hand, we take it for granted if our leaders pass without batting an eyelid, even without a vote in parliament (it was a hammer piece), the law that would require 667 generations to get hazardous waste and -give or take a few- 333 nuclear accidents.
Between lobbies and leaders
It is possible with Thorium, but it is now Uranium. Why is it Uranium in the first place? Somewhere in the 1960s, Western countries opted for uranium, because this material could also be used in nuclear bombs, while Thorium could not. President Nixon halted the R&D project for Thorium in 1971.
Since then there has been a Uranium lobby and our leaders have been unable to free themselves from it. I could find one thing. A few years ago, the Dutch parliament decided to spend half a million on Delft University of Technology for research into Thorium. Nothing has happened with that yet. Or was that the TU lobby?
Every subsequent nuclear power plant becomes a uranium waste producer again.
How do you tell those leaders that there is no need to saddle 667 generations with our problems?
Per watthour, LFP batteries are 4 times lighter, 3-4 times less voluminous than lead acid. Because there is more effective energy content, you can buy smaller ones. That makes them competitive to lead-acid batteries. And because they live longer if you treat them nice, they can even be cheaper.
How to make them live long? Some do’s and don’ts.
The only maintenance is to balance them so now and then. Use a charger that is fit for this. The Battery Management System (BMS) inside starts charging till every little battery inside is at the same level, is balanced. Let that happen, don’t interrupt it.
You can discharge LFP till 10% of its capacity, but be nice and stop at 20%..
Don’t keep your LFP permanently at 100%.Configure your controller(s) of the solar panels and/or windgenerator that they stop charging at 90% or lower. If you leave your ship for a long time (in the winter), then discharge it to 70%. LFP doesnot discharge that much, so at the end of the winter
Take care for your alternator attached to the dieselengine. LFP ‘sucks’ the energy out of it, so the alternator is working on full power continuously, it gets hot and overworked. Same with the propshaft alternator. Ask the installer to put a limiter in between. There are more solutions, like connecting him to a lead acid battery, in case you combine this.
If the BMS makes the contactor switch off the energy to and from the battery, make sure that also your alternator(s) stop at the same time. This prevents the alternator to ‘blow up’ (diodes blow up mostly).
A computer uses about 10% of its energy input. The causes: – by converting it to the right electricity, it dissipates heat – most of it: because it is on when you don’t use it. So there is much to save
Street lights and as highway lights are always on. It can be less and it can be off many times.
Silent use: every night befor you go to sleep you simply shut off the complete group(s) of electricity you don’t need at night and you save hundreds of Euros per year.
You have your energy on an app? Take an old cell phone, install the app and put the phone on the place where the clock in your living room is. It will change your consumption rapidly.
Dont take a drink on a terrace with their heaters on.
Connect your dish washing machine to the hot water tap.
Investing in solar panels on your roof would save at this moment 10%. What does your bank give you?
Start an energy company.
Take the stairs instead of the elevator
Put an electric blanket on your couch
Airports: make air strips with a steep angle: the plane goes down to start and it goes up when landing.
Subsidise saltwater batteries for domestic use (and other batteries without biocides), to reduce the stress on the electricity net and you prevent ‘burning’ energy
Some months ago, when the gas and oil prices blew sky high, I advised a friend how to lower the consumption. He did it until he could affort his gas bill.
I spoke him last week. Here is the discussion.
What you do, really fossilfree, Peter, that is special.
“It is a choice. You can do it.”
I cannot. You know how I live.
It is a choice
Man, I live in a badly insulated house.”
Why this defending mode? I did not answer to finance your landlord. Just check what you can.
You know I hardly can do a thing.
Sorry, I estimate you as an intelligent friend, live your life the way you want. So you can. But if you really want help, I have some proposals.
Ok then.
What do you mean with “OK then”. It sounds like you already know them. Which is true. But I will repeat them, just to provoke. You have an induction cooker? You use a pressure cooker? You put it in the insulation box to cook it ready?
Come on Peter!
Come on what?
You wrote that already in your blogs, you told it.
Ah, so you DO this already? I don’t believe that
To be honest, no.
How is the draught between your doors and between your windows? How many rooms do you heat now when the gas prices went down? How do you do your transport?
You know we both need a car, we live 7 kilometers from the first busstop.
You live 12 kilometers from a city train station with every 15 minutes a train leaving, true?
Yes, true, but you think we can afford a taxi, that would be about 3 to 5 times a week for me, and also that amount for Caroline.
You are both self employed. So you can plan. Though?
Yes for sure. What do you mean?
The same as earlier. I estimate you as an intelligent friend, you live your life the way you want. So you can. But if you really want help in case you have a moment of zero creative energie, then I can give you some advises. Like getting rid of two cars and buy a second hand electric car, serving you 5 to 7 years. And you can taxi each other to the station. You save about 500 Euro a month and in the car together is quality time. True?
OK.
What, again, do you mean with “OK”? Don’t you want to hear them? Don’t you want the help I offer you?
Perhaps not.
That is fine. Perhaps you prefer to stick to fossils. OK. You only reduce your gas consumption till the level that you can pay it. Fine to me. You only reduce your fuel expenses till the level you can pay them. That is OK to me, we are friends for ever. But tell me, why?
The way you describe it, that sounds like addiction.
I don’t know, Is it?
I think I am biased. I am programmed. I don’t know. Yes, perhaps it is addiction. Yes perhaps I like to heat my house with gas, perhaps I love to drive a diesel car. Indeed, I have no rationalities. It feels like being programmed. I must be influenced by 50 years of commercials?
I don’t know. But it sounds to me that being fossil free could mean more to you.
Yeah, perhaps. It can be a break through. A freedom.
