ENGLISH: Impressum: Jörg Nathusius, Schlierbergstr. 19, 79100 Freiburg, GERMANY, Greenlandgreenenergy@gmail.com , nonprofit project
A.
For the first time, I have succeeded in presenting my thesis: quantity and price parity between e-fuels and fossil fuels, based on facts and studies:
Is that the breakthrough? A liter of e-heating oil for less than 30 EUR cents? This statement is based on: Audi study on RE-Morocco, 2.07 EUR cents / kWh and 48% efficiency / 52% conversion losses: 1.14 EUR / liter eDiesel / eheating oil excluding taxes https://www.ifkm.kit.edu/1648.php Not takes into account electricity price of EUR 0.43 to 1 cent / kWh by another location for renewable energy (Greenland, Abu Dhabi https://efahrer.chip.de/news/1-cent-pro-kilowattstunde-diese-solaranlage-knackt-alle-rekorde_102326 ? fbclid = IwAR0eC2VoCQYLuQvbtfYQaq6OQQge1CBS_L3Zqe0aRWVMaW8kWOl6MxOgkFA; Texas: https://www.rechargenews.com/transition/green-hydrogen-could-whmatch-grey-to-2023-owerley -1-848266), not taken into account: efficiency increase to 60% through Sunfire (2 instead of 3 process steps in the synthesis https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOawGXRRJFY&feature=youtu.be). The increase in efficiency alone reduces the price by 25%! The lower electricity price by 16 EUR cents / Liter eDiesel: 114: 5 x 4 - 16 = 75 EUR cents / liter of eheating oil excluding taxes. And the giant scaleffects are not included! The prices of RE fall due to the economies of scale and the learning curve with the installed capacity. Such a price degression is also to be expected in the synthesis of P-t-X. Henry Ford doesn't just work on cars!
Each time the installed capacity is doubled, the price of solar power is reduced by 36%, that of onshore wind power by 27% and that of offshore wind power by 10% (see https://www.capital.de/wirtschaft-politik/warum-erneuerbare-energien-immer-guenstiger-werden
In the following, I only consider wind power + P-t-X technology, for which I apply a total degression of 27% (note: an electrolyzer is also just a wind turbine :-).
The installed wind power capacity worldwide is 0.6 TW.
In Greenland alone, an offshore grid can be provided (is frozen water :-) 10 TW can be installed: 16 times more!
The current global output has to be doubled almost 5 times each time to reach 10 TW.
Result if you subtract 27% 5 times, the price drops to 40% of the initial value. From 75 EUR cents / liter of eheating oil, 30 EUR cents / liter of eheating oil / eDiesel.
Result: if I am right, we are free of a lot of worries.
It looks even better with solar energy (see above)
At 30 EUR cents / production costs per liter of e-fuel, there is enough meat on the bone for profit, taxes and duties!
Update from 09/15/2021: Recently I am no longer alone: The Obrist Group in Lustenau, Austria, has developed a process for the production of green fuels that 1. is cheap: 33.3 EUR-Cents/Liter RE-Methanol (5.1 kWh) and 2. even has a negative CO2 footprint (storing part of the CO2 extracted from the atmosphere as graphite): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEBi0iKgyb8 That would even be priced attractivly enough a a substitute for heating oil in Germany!
Update vom 21.09.2021: There is another study with a fitting result to my thesis: costs of 1 EUR-Cent/kWh in 2050. The efficency of the e-fuel-syntheis is 60%: 16 EUR-Cent are the costs for the needed current for a liter diesel. The same for e-gas. The result for the price level is the same (s. above): https://www.pv-magazine.de/2021/09/20/kosten-fuer-solarstrom-wasserstoff-sinken-bis-2030-auf-07-bis-180-euro-pro-kilogramm/?fbclid=IwAR1rnU601tdRRg6ONpWBtZZLoBS94D1CrOHxRbYcLjEBws0zGUtzLzKdNxA ; True Cost of Solar Hydrogen; https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/solr.202100487
Update from January 9th, 2022: Greenland will start a bidding process for its hydropower this year (up to 800 TWh/a). A second bidding process for wind power will be possible 2025 (at least 40,000 TWh/a). Source: Greenland Government, special advisor Ms. Ane Wraae Nielsen
There will be enough for everyone! Australia alone can harvest the total world energy requirement of 140,000 TWh / a in the outback over an area of 3.5 million km² on an area using PV. Much more astonishing: Greenland, my discovery, can at least generate the world's total energy demand, assuming an offshore grid, on an area of only 40,000 km², or only 4% of the available area (1 million km²) using wind power. Tip at this point why that is so: in Australia the sun shines 2.5 times as strong as in Germany. That makes 2.5 times as much yield per area. Not bad. But in Greenland the wind blows 3 times faster and four times more steadily than in Germany and in the formula for wind power v = speed to the power of 3: v³).
And Australia will provide the world with up to 1 billion tons of green H2 per year!
If you don't have a goal, you won't achieve it!
The starting point is an Audi study on RE-Morocco, 2.07 EUR cents / kWh and 48% efficiency / 52% conversion losses:
1.14 EUR / liter eDiesel / eheating oil excluding taxes
(https://www.ifkm.kit.edu/ downloads / 2019_12_17_Seminar_KIT_Audi.pdf).
The Audi study does not take into account the progress made regarding the electricity price at other locations: 0.43 EUR to 1 cent / kWh
(e.g. Greenland, Abu Dhabi https://efahrer.chip.de/news/1-cent-pro -kilowatt-hour-this-solar-system-cracks-all-records_102326; Texas:
https://www.rechargenews.com/transition/green-hydrogen-could-match-grey-by-2023-thanks-to-5-mwh-wind -power-morgan-stanley / 2-1-848266).
Not taken into account, nor does it take into account an increase in efficiency to 60% through Sunfire (2 instead of 3 process steps in the
synthesis https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOawGXRRJFY&feature=youtu.be).
The increase in efficiency alone lowers the price by 25%! The lower electricity price by 16 EUR cents / liter of eDiesel:
114: 5 x 4 - 16 = 75 EUR cents / liter of e-heating oil excluding taxes.
The prices of RE fall due to the economies of scale and the learning curve with the installed capacity. Such a price degression is also to be expected in the synthesis of P-t-X. Henry Ford doesn't just work on cars!
Each time the installed capacity is doubled, the price of solar power is reduced by 36%, that of onshore wind power by 27% and that of offshore wind power by 10% (see https://www.capital.de/wirtschaft-politik/warum-erneuerbare-energien-immer-guenstiger-werden
In the following, I only consider wind power + P-t-X technology, for which I apply a total degression of 27% (note: an electrolyzer is also just a wind turbine :-).
The installed wind power capacity worldwide is 0.6 TW.
In Greenland alone, an offshore grid can be provided (is frozen water :-) 10 TW can be installed: 16 times more!
The current global output has to be doubled almost 5 times each time to reach 10 TW.
Result if you subtract 27% 5 times, the price drops to 40% of the initial value. From 75 EUR cents / liter of eheating oil, 30 EUR cents / liter of eheating oil / eDiesel.
Result: if I am right, we are free of a lot of worries.
It looks even better with solar energy (see above)
At 30 EUR cents / production costs per liter of e-fuel, there is enough meat on the bone for profit, taxes and duties!
Very important!
What conditions does the market ramp-up of green P-t-X need? Quite simply: a statutory, step-by-step reduction in fossil energy imports by 2045. Doesn't cost anything, is 100% effective. This is the only way to get the necessary huge investments going!
B.
See if you want to multiply another idea of mine to achieve the energy transition precisely in time:
KEEP IT SIMPLE!
All countries around the world should legally cut down fossil gas and oil by 3.33% every year. This means a reduction of 100% within 30 years till 2050.
Are you concerned, that we may get a lack of energy, if we use every year 3,33% less fossil energy? Don't worry. Energy consumption started to decrease already before the corona virus came. AND I have many facts and ideas to supply people with enough and cheap RE...
-------------
And here is the background of my thesis and it's developement:
Two years ago I got seriously concerned, that there is no bright light on it, when, what, where, how much and how costy should be done, to do energy transition as fast, as secure, and as cheap as possible.
So I started looking by myself, where to harvest wind on the earth as cheap as possible? And after 15 minutes, I discovered the biggest and strongest wind field on our planet. Not bad for someone who just started his hobby.
1.
:And there are others too:
Goverment of Greenland: Ilisimatusarnermullu Naalakkersuisoqarfik - Ministry of Industry, Energy and Research:
"Thank you for your informative email. I have forwarded your email to some relevant parties in Greenland to make them aware of your inquiry. The Ministry of Industry, Energy and Research will look further at your request and return if we should have any questions or wish for further dialogue. There might be input from relevant parties, who also recieved your email."
Most famous research institute in Switzerland and Germany about the item: extension of the existing study with Greenlandic wind power:
Prognos AG, Berlin antwortet auf meine Anfrage hin, die vorliegende Studie hinsichtlich Grönland zu erweitern:
"Wir würden es für durchaus sinnvoll erachten, wenn etwaige Folgestudien ... beauftragt würden."
Englisch translation: "We would consider it quite reasonable, if any follow-up studies ... would be commissioned."
The prime minister of Baden-Württemberg, part of Germany with 500 Billion GDP and the home of Mercedes and Porsche: Ministerpräsident Kretschmann:
"...im Auftrag von Herrn Ministerpräsident Winfried Kretschmann danke ich Ihnen für Ihre E-Mail vom 1. Juni 2019 und Ihre Ausarbeitung "Energiewende erfolgreich und sozial gestalten - die Spaltung der Gesellschaft überwinden - die Demokratie sichern. Auf Veranlassung des Herrn Ministerpräsidenten habe ich den Text dem fachlich zuständigen Ministerium für Umwelt, Klima und Energiewirtschaft weitergeleitet...". Antwort des Umweltministeriums leider: Erneuerbare Energien sollen erst langfristig importiert werden...
English translation: "... on behalf of Prime Minister Winfried Kretschmann, I thank you for your e-mail of 1 June 2019 and your elaboration" engergy transition successful and socially responsible - overcome the division of society - ensure democracy. At the instigation of the Prime Minister, I forwarded the text to the competent Ministry of Environment, Climate and Energy .... ". The answer of the Ministry of environment, it is sad, green energy should be imported not now, but sometimes in the future...
research institute: frontier economics ltd. Köln: Herr Dr. David Bothe
"... Danke auch für diese sehr interessanten Ausführungen zu Grönland, die ich so in der Form noch in keinem der einschlägigen Studien und Foren gesehen habe. Ich werde das gerne bei nächster Gelegenheit einmal in den entsprechenden Fachrunden zur Diskussion stellen – falls sich hieraus etwas ergibt, würde ich mich auf jeden Fall wieder melden..."
English translation: "... Thanks also for these very interesting comments on Greenland, which I have not seen in such form in any of the relevant studies and forums, and I will be happy to put it up for discussion at the next opportunity - if it comes from that I'll definitely get back to you ... "
Club of famous German companies of mechanical engeering: VDMA: Matthias Zelinger:
"...erstmal herzlichen Dank für Ihren konstruktiven Einwurf und Ergänzung der Diskussion....Ebenso wie der Sonnengürtel für Fotovoltaik, kommt als Produktionsstandort potentiell natürlich auch der "Starkwindgürtel" für Windenergiekapazitäten in Frage...."
English translation: "... first of all thank you very much for your constructive objection and supplementing the discussion .... Like the sunbelt for photovoltaics, as a potential production site the potential of the" strong wind belt "for wind energy capacities is of course in question ...."
I hope, we will see one up to 3 studies and their results in 2020.
More than 300 people of politics, economics and science I contacted. And with about 20 I am in touch now. Prof. Bernd Schips (compare article: https://www.nzz.ch/meinung/lieber-e-fuels-elektromobilitaet-lohnt-nur-im-nahbereich-ld.1488118) is interested too.
Now the details of the theses: Ernst and Nathusius
Greenland is part of the heavy wind zones on the earth. The most heavy winds are normally on the top of the mountains and in subpolar reagions (statement of Deutscher Wetterdienst). Greenland is both!!! The iceshield of Greenland is high (2000 - 3200 m.o.s.) and located in the subartic ocean. The air is much cooler and has more energy, than the warm one in Europe. And: "The load factor, a measure of efficiency of energy usage, of Greenland wind power could reach 80%, compared with 20% for onshore wind and 45% for offshore wind in Belgium." (vgl. Damien Ernst, https://www.montelnews.com/en/story/giant-greenland-wind-farms-could-power-eu-us--report/927297
And Greenland is very, very big! 1000000 qkm without the coasts and the National Park North-East. If you take the measure of offshore windparks there is enough space for 2 millons of 5MW wind turbines. The ice shield is not drifting, almost flat and the wind is not slowed down by mountains, trees, etc.
source: https://globalwindatlas.info/
And these are the facts:
An insane amount of power: It is discussed how high the mean wind speed on the ice sheet in Greenland actually is. As secured, one can assume a wind speed at least 3 times more than in Germany: ~ 10.7 m / s (full load hours 80% instead of 20% as in Germany; see below chapter C.2.).
Source: https://windy.app/forecast2/spot/74559/Denmark+-+Greenland/statistics
However, with the Piteraq there is a regular fall wind during the 7 summer months, the speed of which is 10 times higher than in Germany: instead of 3.5 m / s it is 35 m / s (my contact at VW also assumes this; https: // de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piteraq). And since with wind a doubling of the speed goes hand in hand with an increase of the energy in the third power (formula for wind power: P = 1 / 2pAv³; A: flow area, p: density of the air; v: wind speed), this means with a 3 times higher wind speed 27 more yield, which has to be taken 4 times more full load hours. Result: 108 times more wind harvest as a minimum than in Germany.
However the windpower density in the south of Greenland is 34 times higher than in Germany/which means 3400% more wind power harvest! The top solar power lacations have only 250% more energy to earn than in Germany. 
On the whole island we have still 5 time more harvest: 
- Theoretically on the 1 Mio. Km² is space enough for 2 Mio. 22,5 MW wind turbines. 45 TW would be installed. In a year the harvest would be 315.000 TWh, which is more than 200% on the needed energy on earth. But if Greenland would provide for North America and Europe for example 1/3 of the energy needed in the world, 1/6 of the ice sheet (not included the National Park North-East!) would be enough for this result.
The Foundations of the wind turbines on ice:
MeNa-states (look above).
Poor conditions to harvest wind in MeNa regions (North Africa/Middle East), solar power is better, but these countries have no stability for investors! How to defend a 1000 Km² sunfield against attackers? It will be costy. How about the bad effects of sandstorms on the mirrors of the power plants? I never saw such calculations!
altitudes of the Greenland ice field: very high!
The transport of the current by submarine cable to Europe costs 6 EUR-cent/kWh (is confirmed by Prof. Ernst). The result: Greenland green electricity can be delivered for 7 EUR-cents/kWh at the coasts of Europe. Not a bad price if you compare it with other renewable energies. And it can be delivered in masses: 20.000 TWh p. a. for Europe would be available.
The study of the Prognos institute (https://www.prognos.com/en/publications/publications/816/show/5bdf1146a5ce34591f175b9dcb2c57e8/) tells: 0,70 EUR / litre e-fuel is possible 2050, based on the MeNa regions.
My thesis: 0,50 EUR / liter e-fuel is possible now, based on production in Greenland.
And the current will be much and cheap. It can be sold for a x-times less than today!
Why?
Source: https://windy.app/forecast2/spot/74559/Denmark+-+Greenland/statistics
However, with the Piteraq there is a regular fall wind during the 7 summer months, the speed of which is 10 times higher than in Germany: instead of 3.5 m / s it is 35 m / s (my contact at VW also assumes this; https: // de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piteraq).And since with wind a doubling of the speed goes hand in hand with an increase of the energy in the third power (formula for wind power: P = 1 / 2pAv³; A: flow area, p: density of the air; v: wind speed), this means with a 3 times higher wind speed 27 more yield, which has to be taken 4 times more full load hours. Result: 108 times more wind harvest as a minimum than in Germany.At 10 times more wind speed = 1000 times more wind power per area flowed through. The south part of the ice sheet will be enough to supply the whole world with green energy for an unbeatable low price. An insane amount of green energy: 100 up to 1000 times more wind power per km². That's a lot. Why do we still need the fusion reactors? In Greenland, one can produce X times the world's total energy needs. Even if in the end it should only be 100+ times more energy per km². 40,000 Km² in the south of the ice sheet will be enough. And since there are already typhoon-proof wind turbines in Japan (Challenergy Windturbines: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200903-the-wind-turbines-standing-up-to-the-worlds-worst-storms) which can also cope with wind speeds of 67 m / s, there is no question that these extreme wind conditions on the ice sheet can also be harnessed. Assuming an offshore grid, up to 2 million conventional low-duty 5 MW wind turbines fit on the ice field, which would correspond to an installed amount of 10 TW. That would be 70,000 TWh / a, or half of the world's total energy consumption. But since there is now up to 1000 times more power, you certainly only need a fraction of the area to generate the world's total energy demand in electricity or P-t-X, < 80.000 - 133,000 Km², and that at unbeatable prices! Much cheaper than shown in the intro.
How much do we need?
The world needed in 2008: 143,000 TWh. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weltenergiebedarf
EU energy needed " 20,600 TWh
USA energy needed " 26,400 TWh
The world needed in 2008: 143,000 TWh. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weltenergiebedarf
EU energy needed " 20,600 TWh
USA energy needed " 26,400 TWh
As unbelievable its sounds, Greenland could supply half of the energy the wold needs! And we do not need fossil hydrocarbons of Greenland.
We have to learn newly: current is much and cheap!
Look on the big scale effects. Nowadays worldwide the power of wind turbines is: 0.6 TW. This is 15 times more on one place than todayspread throughout the world.
We can expect, that the price for wind turbines will drop maybe to a ten times lower price!
CO2 can be taken out of airconditions, industrie processes or out of melted water on the Greenland ice sheet! Source: https://www.stalberttoday.ca/local-news/rivers-as-carbon-sinks-1649380
And the current can be transported be submarine cable to the EU and the U.S. with losses of 20% only. The same losses you have if you transfer current into gas or pretrol, pt-to-x: source: (https://www.sunfire.de/de/unternehmen/news/detail/durchbruch-fuer-power-to-x-sunfire-nimmt-erste-co-elektrolyse-in-betrieb-und-startet-die-skalierung; https://newmobility.news/2018/08/17/damien-ernst-90-billion-to-start-building-global-grid/)
Please imagine all the benefits: The car with a combustion engine does not emit any CO2 from the first mile. It will become as ecological as a battery car, at least! The infrastructure has not to be changed. The energy transition will not be costy for the people.
And we need these p-t-xes so badly! Volkswagen asked me on the 14.02.2020, if I have reliable proof for the lack in the green heat market of the future, which I predicted in October 2020.
The Problem: More than 50% of the buildings can not be heated by heat pumps! Why? The sites are too small for the underground collectors! Just remind yourself how european cities look like: Many apartment houses etc.
On the 18.02.2020 I could present the proof.
Hydrogen, the savior of the energy transition
Professionals of the heat market in Germany claimed, that they need H2 or p-t-x for energy transition!
It is becoming very clear now, that we need p-t-x not only for airplanes, ships and trucks. We need it for 50% of the heating market as well. And the heating market is 100% bigger than the traffic market regarding energy!
Please push the verification or falsification of our theses!
Please get in touch with Prof. Ernst and me. For your questions we are ready any time.
I am very sure, that the theses of Prof. Ernst an me will become reality. Why? It is very simple: Our theses are the only ones, which tells in details, what, when, where and how much to do the energy transition. And they are cheap for the people and a business case for investors.
Foundation of wind turbines on the ice sheet seems to be not a miracle:
First: Prof. Ernst reported, that there are wind turbines available for the artic conditions ( https://horizon-magazine.eu/article/governments-cop24-should-focus-building-global-electricity-grid-prof-damien-ernst.html).
Good news for a foundation of wind turbines on the ice sheet: The ice sheet is so heavy, it pressed the skin of the earth down in the middle of island (s. the last map below). A very good foudation, done by the nature. The result: Most of the ice does not move! But the surface of the sheet is moving a little:
On the map it is visible, that the move of the ice is faster at the coast and slow at the center of the sheet. Why? Because ice sheet is in its center very flat: The gradient is 0.0025%. Between the altitudes of 2000 and 2500 m.a.s.l. there is a distance of about 200 km. 500 m. :200000 m. = 0,0025% gradient.
But the ice on the surface of the ice sheet is very slow floating by deforming on different altitudes till the not moving base.
What I do not know how deap the floating zone of the ice sheet.
Explanation:
"... ice flow, deformation flow: If the higher parts of a glacier
exert sufficient thrust on the
deeper and thus facing glacier sections, this pressure is
dissipated by a flow of ice." At the
molecular level, ice consists of superimposed molecular layers with
relative weak bond forces
between the individual layers: if the tension on the overlying
layer exceeds the bonding forces
between the layers, the upper one will move faster than the
underlying layer, and thus the entire
ice mass will not shift evenly, but depending on the possibilities
The glaciers and the flanks of
a glacier can often freeze the ice on the upcoming rocks, so that
no movement is possible here ..."
source:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gletscher#Eisflie%C3%9Fen;_Deformationsflie%C3%9Fen
Of course a glacier professional is needed to give valid answers about the condition on the sheet concerning a foundation of wind turbines.
But a pile foundation seems to be possible, based in the none moving zone and the floating ice will pass the piles. How? Either the ice will beInteresting too:
melted by heating or just of the pressure (melting point goes down under pressure).
Or gravity foundation on a wide sleigh which is loaded by ice/water, very much available on the ice sheet:-)
The altitude of the surface of the ice sheet varies in winter and summer time about 4 m by melting and snowing, source: https://www.planet-wissen.de/natur/klima/gletscher/pwiegletscherschmelze100.html
But because of climate warming, the ice sheet absolutely loses about 14 cm per year.
250 Km³ is the loss of ice per year, source: ( https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gr%C3%B6nl%C3%A4ndischer_Eisschild). Calculation: 250 Km³ : 1.800.000 Km² (surface of ice sheet) x 100.000 = 13,88 cmFreiburg i. Br. Germany: 12.06.2022
Kommentare
Kommentar veröffentlichen