Shrinking or growing? Controversy about sea ice continues
Much climate change theory is contradicted by other science
Robin Trow is scathing in his criticism of climate change sceptics but I am proud to be one (Letters, PE July).
Although I do not dismiss all elements of the man-made climate change theory, I believe there is sufficient uncertainty that we should not be “betting the farm” on it in the way that we appear to be doing.
Too many of the things the man-made climate change theory tells me are true are contradicted by other science. The greatest of these is the enormous error bars that appear on every version of the hockey stick graph that I have ever seen. Going back further than a couple of hundred years, the experimental error on this data is nearly as great as the recent CO2 increases that are supposed to be giving us so much concern.
We are told that the melting Arctic ice cap is causing sea levels to rise. This ice cap is denser than the sea on which it floats and so on melting would cause sea levels to fall.
The theory also suggests that the acceleration in the loss of Arctic ice proves that the temperature is increasing. It no more proves this than grains of sugar dissolving faster than a sugar lump prove that one cup of tea is hotter than another.
The most recent news from the Antarctic is that sea ice is increasing; the man-made climate change rationalisation of this is that the ice under the cap is melting, and refreezing when it hits the ocean. Even if this were credulous, it pokes a hole in
R T Martin’s otherwise interesting observations about latent heat in the same issue of PE.
Since the global temperature has stabilised and the phrase global warming has been dropped in favour of climate change, we are told that only this theory can explain the more extreme weather we are recording. This is also not true. We have increased our monitoring of weather metrics dramatically to the point where we measure them everywhere, to several decimal places. So not only should it be unsurprising to find more extremes, it is inevitable that we will.
Andy Fitton, Derby
Sceptics deserve air time
It is almost laughable to drag in “great vested interests’’ as regards maintaining the production and consumption of fossil fuels. There are no 19th-century coalmine owners around now.
Yes, there are large corporations supplying thermal/coking coal to countries all over the world. Not least China and India, where there is a vested interest in improving life’s chances for a third of the world’s population.
The latter need coal – and gas – much more than fancy arguments about climate change. Both would start to drop burning fossil fuels tomorrow given alternative energy sources that are plentiful, cheap and relatively clean. But there aren’t any.
Fission power is expensive and renewables little different. Fusion power is 40 years away.
There are small-minded vested interests. The editor of the BBC Today programme was taken to task for allowing Lord Lawson, a climate change sceptic, too much air time. So the climate change collective has a great deal of political leverage. But to outsiders it is truly banal that they should be so obsessed with who can say what and for how long.
The increasingly powerful climate change collective wants to stamp out dissent. It is this insidious control that is the problem. Let science look after itself. The climate change lobby should stop throwing stones at sceptic greenhouses.
William Ralph, Oxford
Look for opportunities
It is disappointing to find with regularity a letter in PE denying that man-made climate change is occurring. Martin Beaney wrote that “for the last 15 years there has been no rise in temperature in spite of rising carbon dioxide”, but this is just not true (PE June).
Nasa summarises that “since 1880 the 20 warmest years have occurred since 1981 with all 10 of the warmest years occurring in the past 12 years”. Not to mention sea level rise, warming and acidifying oceans, and shrinking ice sheets.
The debate should be about the opportunities, which we should be looking for in building a low-carbon economy and in adapting to the climate change that is already starting to occur.
Rick Lupton, Cambridge
Ban those patio heaters
The article “Stop the melt” mentioned that Coca-Cola has CO2 made and then shipped to its plant (PE July). This is ultimately released into the atmosphere. Then there is the CO2 that is used in life-jacket inflators and similar products that is ultimately released into the atmosphere.
It seems odd that we are releasing so much CO2 gratuitously and no government is doing anything to stop it. Shouldn’t patio heaters be banned as this is global warming by definition?
Martin Roberts-Jones, Eastleigh, Hampshire
The dangers of certainty
Robin Trow should realise that a sceptic is not necessarily a denier, and that in science scepticism is preferable to absolute certainty (Letters, PE July).
Stanley Smith, Dursley, Glos
War work: Oil pipeline being made in preparation for the D-Day invasion
Problems with Pluto
The Archive article “Powering the invasion” states that “Operation Pluto began on 12 August 1944. Two sets of Hais and Hamel lines were laid to Cherbourg in France, and pumping began” (PE July).
In reality, Operation Pluto laid the first pipeline from the Isle of Wight to Cherbourg on 24 June 1944. It was on 10 August, seven weeks late, that HMS Latimer set out to lay the first Hais cable.
The ship sailed to Cherbourg and on 12 August started laying cable from Urville-Nacqueville to Sandown. However, one of the escorting warships caught the cable with her anchor such that it was damaged beyond repair.
A second cable lay was carried out by HMS Sancroft on 14 August but that also ended in disaster. As Sir Donald Banks, who was in charge of Operation Pluto, wrote: “The technique of cable laying had been mastered but we were not yet sufficiently versed in connecting the shore ends, nor in effecting repairs to leaks caused fairly close inshore through these faulty operations.”
Pluto continued to be delayed by failures and it was not until 18 September that a Hais cable was finally commissioned. On 22 September it was finally brought into operation, three months late.
However, the cable was only providing 250 tons per day. The planning had been that at full capacity the Bambi lines would provide 3,300 tons per day. The first successful lay of a Hamel pipe took place on 29 September and pumping proceeded using both systems. On 3 October an attempt was made to increase the pressure in the Hais cable from 50 to 70bar. At first all went well, but suddenly the pressure fell to nothing, indicating that the cable had failed. Shortly afterwards the Hamel pipe also failed.
Banks recorded how “elation was changed into funereal gloom”. On 4 October the Bambi operation was abandoned and all efforts were shifted to Dumbo.
Bambi had only delivered 3,300 tons of fuel, equivalent to only one day of Pluto pumping in the original planning. The total amount of fuel delivered to the Allied armies from D-Day to
10 May 1945, when organised German resistance ceased, was 5.2 million tons. Bambi had delivered less than 0.1% of this, but at a huge cost in resources.
As the official history states, “Pluto contributed nothing to Allied supplies at the time that would have been most valuable – that is when no regular oil ports were available on the Continent and the Allies were relying on the unsatisfactory Port-en-Bessin.”
Dumbo, the pipelines from Dungeness to Boulogne, was more successful than Bambi but only 370,000 tons, 8% of the fuel delivered to the Allied forces on the Continent, was by Pluto. The rest being by tanker or by airlift.
According to the official history, Dumbo did not reach its peak flow-rate until after the war with Germany was over.
Major-General Tickell, who was in charge of fuel for 21st Army Group, concluded that “we gained very little from Pluto and Dumbo”. The official history said: “Dumbo was more successful; but at a time when success was of less importance. It made no substantial contribution until the campaign in Western Europe was already more than half over.”
Your article praises Pluto but in fact its success, when measuring the amount of fuel that was planned to be delivered compared to what was achieved, was low.
Tim Whittle, Redhill, Surrey
Power plants out at sea
Your article on small modular reactors made no mention of those that have been in maritime service for years in submarines, aircraft carriers and ice breakers (“Flatpack reactors,” PE July). They are in production for new British submarines. It should be possible to produce enough extra ones to build a new nuclear power station on one of the closed sites. This should be cheaper and quicker than developing new designs. They could then be used as a basis for development of improved designs for the future.
B G Pearce, Stanstead Abbotts
Size matters: Big nuclear reactors could soon become outmoded
Site reactors underground
A subject that tends to be swept under the carpet when groups of small modular reactors are proposed is that of secondary containment. If early modules are to be in operation while later ones are being constructed, a common secondary containment would be ruled out, making fuel handling and maintenance more expensive.
This would seem to be a further argument for underground siting of modules with individual secondary containments; these would have to dissipate decay heat to the surroundings while allowing refuelling and maintenance equipment to traverse across a row of modules at ground level, carrying their own temporary containment barriers.
Sam Hosegood, Wareham, Dorset
Salt for safety
China has a well-funded programme with the goal of building a prototype molten salt reactor in 10 years. No one will be commissioning large third-generation nuclear reactors in 10 to 15 years’ time.
The main reason for moving towards molten salt reactors (or pebble-bed high-temperature gas reactors) is that they can have simplified safety systems and can be engineered to be inherently safe on power fail. High temperatures mean higher efficiencies, process heat production and less water usage. With passive naturally convected air cooling to remove decay heat, they can be made fail safe on power fail.
I am looking to the feasibility of making a 3m-diameter, 18m-high molten salt reactor vessel in three parts using a ceramic matrix composite construction. This material maintains its integrity very well above 1,000ºC, and is extremely corrosion resistant.
In regards to plutonium-thorium Mox, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) doesn’t even have this on its radar. If I were in charge of the NDA I would be talking with Thor Energy and the National Nulcear Laboratory, Chinese AP1000 developers, and regulators in both countries as to how plutonium-thorium Mox might be qualified for use in the AP1000 reactor. I say this because three of these reactors are due to be built at Moorside, close to the NDA’s Sellafield site.
As a by-product of using plutonium-thorium Mox there would be a significant amount of U-233 left over in the spent fuel. This could be mixed with thorium and U-238 in various proportions and used by the UK in its own programme to develop a molten salt reactor.
James Arathoon, Hertfordshire
Hazards in the road ahead
Alfred Reading wrote in about flail tanks used in the Second World War (Letters, PE July). My company, Pearson Engineering, specialises in just the sort of equipment mentioned.
Flail tanks are still used today. They aren’t tanks any more, they are dedicated vehicles, and are more often used by humanitarian de-mining organisations (such as the Halo Trust). The military does use similar equipment to protect soldiers. One common tool is a mine plough, which is like its agricultural equivalent but is pushed in front of a tank to dig up mines and improvised explosive devices (IEDs) to create a safe lane for passage.
Where digging up the road is not feasible, and for smaller vehicles which lack power to push a plough, a roller system is used. These apply a high amount of force onto the road in front of the vehicle to activate mines and IEDs in a similar fashion to the flail.
Some modern vehicles that aren’t tanks also have better protection from floor injuries. The floors are deformable to cushion the impact, and the seats are mounted on air cushions to insulate the soldier from the force.
Alex Wilkinson, Newcastle upon Tyne
Batley holds the key
You reported on plans for a high-speed rail line for the North (News, PE July). I wish to comment as a regular user of the trans-Pennine route.
It is not only that services are slow but there is also a chronic lack of capacity. As most of the line used to be four-track it should be possible to construct this cost effectively. The only bottleneck would be at the Leeds end but this could be overcome by a short new link from Batley and the reopening of Gildersome tunnel, then use of the old Leeds New line formation with two additional tracks into Leeds station.
With this extra capacity and improved journey times from Leeds to Manchester and Liverpool, this would transform rail travel across northern England.
Alan Haigh, Leeds
Destructive potential
The letter from Eric Staley about the wrecking of the Mulberry harbour in 1944 is a salutary reminder that the recent past can hold important lessons (PE July).
I discovered some interesting facts about the harbour design when examining the size of the structures that would be required to obtain useful electrical power output from wave machines.
Even a moderate summer squall in the Channel can destroy reinforced concrete and steel structures weighing several hundred thousand tonnes.
Which towns would volunteer to host sub-surface wave machines when the scale is appreciated? They would spoil the vista out to sea whilst threatening such havoc on the shoreline which might take decades to rectify.
Paul Spare, Davenham