Green Car Congress
About GCC Contact  RSS Subscribe Twitter headlines

« Imperial Petroleum Racks Up First DEP Biodiesel Sales | Main | Zipcar to Double Fleet in San Francisco Area and Expand into Chicago »

Print this post

Sandia Labs Proposes Energy Surety Model

12 July 2006

Surety
Sandia’s view of uncertainties over energy futures. Click to enlarge.

With concerns that energy use will rapidly increase over the next several years while fossil fuels diminish as well as numerous other energy uncertainties including the results of climate change, Sandia National Laboratories is proposing applying the principles of surety to energy.

Energy surety takes an integrated approach to achieving safety, security, reliability, recoverability and sustainability objectives for the nation’s civilian and military energy systems. Patterned after Sandia’s many decades of applying surety principles to weapon systems, the approach includes choosing the best mix of fuels and applying conservation principles to all steps, starting with energy production and ending with final use, even using what would normally be characterized as waste heat and mass.

The sustainability model was the most difficult to create because sustainability was not a system requirement in the original weapons system surety approach.

—Margie Tatro, director of Energy, Infrastructure & Knowledge Systems Center

Sandia defined sustainability in both qualitative and thermodynamic terms.

Tatro, together with Rush Robinett, senior manager of Sandia’s Energy and Infrastructure Futures Group and others in the center designed the new model and detailed it in a recently-released internal sandia report, Toward an Energy Surety Future.

Energy is all around us—just look at the power of hurricanes and tsunamis. It’s not the lack of energy that’s the problem, it’s a knowledge shortage of how to manage and harness that energy. We believe the energy surety approach is the best way to do this. If we don’t follow this model, the whole world, including the US, could find itself living a lifestyle of the Third World.

—Rush Robinett

The report outlines a three-step strategy for moving toward better matching of energy resources with energy needs.

As humans, we are in a never-ending battle with the second law of thermodynamics, constantly using exergy to support ourselves and our surroundings in an environment in which we are in nonequilibrium. This activity (which consumes exergy) is in keeping with nature’s biological tendency to use resources to create “order” around us. This consumption expands until the resources become exhausted and equilibrium with competing life forms is reached, but to let this natural process run to its normal conclusion would not be consistent with our current view of “civilized societies” because of the implications of societal collapse upon complete resource depletion.

We offer a three-step strategy for moving toward better matching of our exergy resources with our exergy needs. As a first step, we must improve the second law efficiency of energy conversion, transport and use processes. Secondly, we must attempt to close the cycle of the same processes taking into consideration the interactions with the earth’s biosphere, at least when open cycles provide undesired consequences. The final step to obtain true sustainability into the indefinite future would be to harvest the earth’s persistent exergy sources at no greater rate than which they are being made available to us.

Efficiency. The first step is to squeeze every unit of available energy from the current supplies. This goes beyond the implementation of higher-efficiency electricity-consuming devices (lighting, appliances, and motors) and vehicles (diesels and hybrids) to include waste-to-energy options such as the extraction of methane from landfills and the conversion of biomass wastes to liquid fuels. Making better use of limited fossil supplies will allow the country to buy time while it moves down the path towards energy surety, Tatro says.

Population control. Holding the world’s population to a level that the earth can sustain and capping energy demand at some point are also parts of step one. To address demand, consumer needs for energy must be reduced. The traditional view of an expanding world population and economy must level off or it could surge to the point of “resource exhaustion, social upheaval, disease epidemic, and then collapse,” notes the report. An ultimate plan must have some commitment to hold growing populations in check.

Conservation. A final part of the initial step is to limit the use of fossil fuel resources—although the magnitude of potentially recoverable fossil fuels may never be known. Conservation must be a major part of the surety plan.

Storage. The second step involves storing energy for later use when there is no wind, the sun is obscured, or an energy supply is disrupted. Currently, energy storage techniques are used in limited ways, ranging from battery-powered units to managing brief interruptions to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Examples that could provide expanded energy storage include solar production of hydrogen for fuel cells, solar-powered conversion of carbon dioxide and water to liquid fuels, and energy storage from solar thermal collectors.

Fusion. Step three is to learn how to reproduce the sun’s fusion process on earth in a safe, secure, reliable, and sustainable way. “Though we do not know if fusion can succeed as a practical terrestrial energy source, we believe that its promise is worth extensive investment,” the report says.

While it might not be possible to fully accomplish all the goals in the energy surety model, striving toward them is far better than blindly marching toward energy depletion, environmental exhaustion, and esthetic despair, only to discover that the scarce remaining resources are inadequate to meet needs. The big question now is how to make this happen in the real world. The driver may very well be people’s pocketbooks, caused by highly unpredictable fuel prices, coupled with increasing threats of terrorism.

—Rush Robinett

Resources:

July 12, 2006 in Climate Change, Fuel Efficiency, Fuels, Policy, Power Generation, Sustainability | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)

Comments

The key concepts here are "population control" and "reducing energy demand". Both are useful goals but extremely difficult to achieve.

The former has been practiced for decades in China through its one-child policy which includes forced sterilization. Still, when Dr. Strangelove starts talking about a "commitment to hold growing populations in check", this ought to give pause for concern, especially to those living in emerging economies other than China.

Wrt energy demand, an old adage has it that it is hard to make a man understand if his salary depends on his not understanding. And to a greater or lesser extent, all of our salaries depend on energy use. The key, therefore, is to change the economic playing field such that wasting energy ends up reducing corporate profits and personal income. In plain English: carbon taxes.

Posted by: Rafael Seidl | July 13, 2006 at 05:42 AM

Dang, what happened to all the coments?
_
___Also, if a high temp Helium version version could be made with the same meltdown proof capability, then efficiency goes up 50%. Throw in high temp H2 and O2 production via high temp electrolysis, and cogeneration of heat for a paper/plywood plant and the efficiency goes even higher. All said, the thermal efficiency could go from mid 30's to 70-80%. How's that for power?

Posted by: allen Z | July 13, 2006 at 06:06 AM

Helium version of Integral fast reactor.

Posted by: allen Z | July 13, 2006 at 06:07 AM

The hosting service had an outage yesterday that took posting and commenting down. When they restored service, some of the posts--such as this one--and the associated comments were lost.

I could restore the post, but not the comments.

Posted by: Mike | July 13, 2006 at 07:49 AM

It must have gone done just as I put my comment up.

Anyways, I had mentioned the Integral Fast Reactor as an excellent nuclear (fission) technology to employ in the interim since it recovers 95% of the waste for further use in fueling the reactor while the remaining 5% could be turned into Synroc.

Posted by: Patrick | July 13, 2006 at 08:18 AM

Ah Population Control. Any of you ever read "Limits to Growth"?

This is what I love most about enviromentalism. The real problem with the world is that there are too many brown people.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz | July 13, 2006 at 08:36 AM

Population control begins at home. How can we reduce the population of the US over the next few decades? An Americans impact on the environment I'm told is 50 times that of the average African or Asian. If we can't stop immigration then what the Brown people do may be meaningless. OTOH I believe the various forms of solar energy make it possible for 10 billion humans to live in prosperity. It also means defining how much is enough which is quite contrary to the non-negotiable filthy rich American way of life.

Posted by: tom deplume | July 13, 2006 at 11:59 AM

A little nativism to go with your racism.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz | July 13, 2006 at 03:27 PM

White Americans (and Europeans, and Japanese) are already below replacement fertility.  Any on-going population problem isn't caused by them.

Posted by: Engineer-Poet | July 13, 2006 at 08:12 PM

Is it true that the American lifestyle is 50 times more resource and environmentaly destructive then that of a brown person in the developing world? Could this be because of their skill in using human energy?
Could it be that white men have been truly stupid and that human energy is the only true surety?

Posted by: gary | July 15, 2006 at 12:01 PM

I would not hold out for fusion anytime soon...

Posted by: sjc | July 21, 2006 at 06:15 PM

Post a comment
[Please keep comments on topic. Disagreement is fine; insults, abuse or wild diversions are not. Comments not meeting those standards will be deleted. Abuse of another commenter’s email address will result in the banning of the offender from this site. In an attempt to prevent the posting of insulting and abusive comments, this site maintains a list of prohibited words and phrases, which, unfortunately, grows with time. Including one of the prohibited words or phrases will flag the comment as “spam”, and it will be blocked.]

Green Car Congress only allows comments from registered users. To comment, please Sign In.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4fbe53ef00d834d62a0969e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Sandia Labs Proposes Energy Surety Model :

Green Car Congress © 2009 BioAge Group, LLC. All Rights Reserved. | Home | BioAge Group