“We will be embracing a star.”

From Legal Insurrection

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) groundbreaking spacecraft, the Parker Solar Probe, was launched in 2018 to study the Sun’s outer corona.

It is the fastest object ever built on Earth, capable of reaching speeds up to 430,000 mph at its closest approach to the Sun…which is required to avoid being pulled in due to enormous gravitational forces.

The spacecraft is performing better than expected and will now make its closest approach to the Sun on Christmas Eve.

Parker Solar Probe will pass 6.1 million kilometers from the sun at 6:53 a.m. Eastern Dec. 24, the closest approach to the sun by this or any other spacecraft. At the time of closest approach, the spacecraft will be traveling 191 kilometers per second.

The spacecraft launched in 2018 and used a series of gravity-assist flybys of Venus to lower its perihelion. The final Venus flyby, on Nov. 6, set up the spacecraft for this perihelion, the closest the spacecraft will fly to the sun on its mission.

“On Christmas Eve of this year, Parker Solar Probe will be the closest humanmade object ever to a star,” said Nour Rawafi, project scientist for the mission at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab (APL), during a media roundtable at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union Dec. 10. “We will be embracing a star.”

It won’t be known how the probe did for a few days after this approach, as it will be out of communication range.

Parker planned to get more than seven times closer to the sun than previous spacecraft, hitting 430,000 mph (690,000 kph) at closest approach. It’s the fastest spacecraft ever built and is outfitted with a heat shield that can withstand scorching temperatures up to 2,500 degrees Fahrenheit (1,371 degrees Celsius).

It’ll continue circling the sun at this distance until at least September. Scientists hope to better understand why the corona is hundreds of times hotter than the sun’s surface and what drives the solar wind, the supersonic stream of charged particles constantly blasting away from the sun.

Legal Insurrection readers may recall I reported on a coronal “hole” in the Sun, as big as 20 Earths, back in 2023. I have also noted the recent uptick in solar storms as well.

The Parker Probe, named after Eugene Newman Parker (the physicist who first theorized the existence of solar wind), is designed to obtain data that will help scientists understand this phenomenon.

…[T}he first images from the close encounter will likely be beamed back to Earth sometime in January, the agency said.

As the Parker Solar Probe swoops close to the sun, it will likely fly through plumes of solar plasma and could even dive into active regions of the star, [Kelly Korreck, a program scientist in NASA’s heliophysics division] said.

The mission was designed to study the outermost part of the sun’s atmosphere, an ultrahot region known as the corona. Scientists are keen to observe the corona up close because researchers have long puzzled over why the outer layer of the sun’s atmosphere is hundreds of times hotter than the star’s surface.

Observing the corona will also help researchers study how storms that brew on the sun’s surface erupt into space. The probe will, for instance, be able to observe streams of the highest-energy solar particles as they are hurled from the sun, exploding into the cosmos at supersonic speeds.

If the probe completes a successful flyby, the data obtained will hopefully lead to a better understanding of solar behavior and an enhanced appreciation of its influence on Earth.

However, I will conclude with a little humor that fellow Star Trek fans may appreciate.

Actual photos of Parker Solar Probe on Christmas Eve 2024. pic.twitter.com/P67WP606Xv

— lawrence (@lcagee) December 23, 2024

So-called nuclear waste still has 97% of its electricity potential yet to be realized.

Ronald Stein, P.E. is an engineer, columnist on energy literacy at America Out Loud NEWS, and advisor on energy literacy for the Heartland Institute and CFACT, and co-author of the Pulitzer Prize nominated book “Clean Energy Exploitations.”

Oliver Hemmers has a Doctorate in Physics from the Institute of Radiation and Nuclear Physics at the Technical University of Berlin, Germany. He was a Researcher in Physics, the Executive Director of UNLV’s Harry Reid Center and C- level executive.

Steve Curtis has a Master’s degree in Health Physics from UNLV.  He has spent decades studying spent fuel issues in Nevada and worked as a technical field team leader for nuclear search and characterization missions for the Department of Energy.  He is currently engaged in education, speaking, and writing in favor of nuclear power returning to the United States, especially from recycling spent nuclear fuel in fast reactors.

Co-authored by Ronald Stein,  Oliver Hemmers, and Steve Curtis

Published December 23, 2024 at America Out Loud NEWS

Today’s so-called nuclear waste is only slightly used nuclear fuel, as only about 3% of its potential has been realized before it is classified as “waste”. Thus, we are burying fuel which still has 97% of its potential for generating electricity that has yet to be realized.

Here’s an energy analogy:

• Imagine your outrage if the United States’ policy was: If you fill up your gas tank, you can only drive your car twenty miles before you must empty the tank and store the remaining gas in a certified container to be buried in the ground forever and pay extra for the privilege.  Sounds like a policy that would not be beneficial to US citizens.  It may even motivate you to protest loudly and fire all the leaders that imposed that on you.  Well, this is the policy we labor under today when we use some of the nuclear reactor fuel’s potential.

For over 70 years, nuclear has been producing the safest, emissions free, most reliable, and least expensive electricity for France, the US Navy, and others around the world, that is available today.

We pay huge government subsidies for wind and solar to generate occasional electricity, depending on favorable weather conditions, and much smaller subsidies for coal, natural gas, and nuclear to generate continuous, uninterruptable, and dispatchable electricity.

For nuclear generated electricity, our government has struggled for almost 45 years to fulfill their responsibility to “dispose” of our “nuclear waste”.  Since only about 3% of the electricity potential is realized from this fuel, let’s call it slightly used nuclear fuel (SUNF).

Today, we are on the crown of a revolutionary innovation in electricity production, held back only by our Federal Government.

It turns out that a technology for producing electricity most efficiently is one called “fast reactor recycling”, or “fast breeder reactors”.  If you want more technical terminology, one design is called “molten salt reactors”.  Surprisingly, this technology has been around since before the current light water reactor technology existed, but political factors moved the dial toward the less efficient technology of light water reactors.  Again, to be fair, light water reactors have worked well, has produced extremely low-cost electricity, and has the best industrial safety record in the United States.  But if we can do better, why not?

Since plenty of uranium was available in the early days for light water reactors, it was thought that we did not have to recycle our nuclear fuel after we used only 3% of the available potential.  This left the sticky issue of “what happens to the SUNF left over”?  The best brains in our government could only come up with: “why not bury it in the ground?” 

Well, burying that slightly used fuel sounded good in the late 1970s, so our President, Jimmy Carter, created an executive declaration that it would be forbidden to recycle our SUNF.  So, it was stated, and so it was ordered. 

The SUNF materials were collected at nuclear sites around the US.  Again, to be fair, the material is compact, solid, and very safely stored, so the solution seemed to be OK until a later generation could venture a better solution.  But no generation has yet done so.

The promise of electricity from nuclear power proceeded and President Reagan rescinded the recycle ban of SUNF in 1982.

“Let’s bury the SUNF” initiated resistance.  The pesky Constitutional issue of states’ rights popped up and no state would “consent to accept” the stuff, even though Federal law ordered them to (well, to be fair, ordered Nevada to take it).  Like anything forced upon anyone, it was met by fierce resistance.  State’s rights won out and Nevada has been successful in denying acceptance of this material to this day, despite the Federal Law being still in force.  So much for big brother’s bully stick.

Today, we have amassed about 90,000 tons (a volume that can fit in a large Walmart store-sized building).  Yet still, no “burial” solution is forthcoming from the Federal Government.

• Storage: there is enough SUNF in storage to power the entire USA for centuries to come and enough depleted uranium in storage to last for several thousand years at today’s electricity production rates for the entire US.
• Production: In addition, there is more SUNF produced per year from the existing nuclear power plants (that only power about 20% of the US) than what would be needed to power the entire US with electricity from fast-reactors with the SUNF produced by light water reactors. Unless we shut down the existing nuclear power plants we will never catch up with fast reactors

Technology exists today (remember, since the late 1940s) to fission, essentially, all the remaining 97% of the fuel.  This means (rounding down) 30 times more electricity can be produced from this SUNF (slightly used, right?).  Better yet, we have privately capitalized companies with technology that is ready to go.  At 10 cents per kWh (nobody gets electricity that cheap anymore), the material sitting on our reactor sites now is worth $100 trillion. 

• Yes, that is three times our national debt.  It is equivalent to $300,000 per person in the United States. 
• It is enough to power the current US demand for 270 years.

Nobody has been hurt or killed in 70 years of normal commercial operation of nuclear reactors around the world in 70 years and nuclear power supplies 10% of our worldwide electricity that is continuous, uninterruptable, dispatchable, and zero-emissions. The land mass for nuclear is miniscule compared to that for wind and solar, that can only generate occasional electricity under favorable weather conditions.

Chernobyl was not an accident in the normal operations of a nuclear reactor since all safety provisions were purposely defeated to allow the accident to happen.  It is misleading to call it an “accident”. 

Today, nuclear waste is the key to Unlimited Electricity, as that “so-called nuclear waste”, the slightly used nuclear fuel (SUNF), still has 97% of its electricity potential yet to be realized.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table. 

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

From THE DAILY SCEPTIC

by Chris Morrison

Dramatic evidence has been published in a number of recent science papers that carbon dioxide levels are already ‘saturated’, meaning little or no further warming is to be expected and rising CO₂ levels are all beneficial.

Half of human emissions are being quickly pushed back into the biosphere, the scientists say, causing substantial, famine-busting plant growth, while the rest is entering a ‘saturated’ atmosphere and having a minimal effect on global temperatures. One of the papers accepting the human involvement in rising CO₂ is published by the CO₂ Coalition, which notes: “We like CO₂, so should you.”

None of this work will be reported in the mainstream since it disrupts a ‘settled’ climate science narrative tied to the political Net Zero fantasy. But the opinion that humans control the climate thermostat by releasing CO₂, leading to runaway temperatures, belongs to a dark period in science when it was captured to promote political aims. However, work continues in sceptical climate circles to understand how a number of gases with warming properties behave in a chaotic, non-linear atmosphere. Two recently-published papers found that doubling CO₂ in the atmosphere led to minimal temperature increases. The calculated figures can be considered to be in margin of error territory and on past observational evidence they pose no threat to the climate on Earth. They also destroy the shaky scientific foundation upon which Net Zero rests.

Eight Taiwanese scientists led by Professor Peng-Sheng Wei found that the sensitivity of the climate to a rise in CO₂ atmospheric levels from 100 to 400 parts per million (ppm) was “negligibly small” at 0.3°C. The paper is complex and examines heat transfers as a function of longitude, latitude and altitude “as well as diffuse radiation determined by absorption bands based on wavelength, temperature and the concentration or pressure of carbon dioxide vapour”. What the scientists are looking at here is the narrow absorption bands within the infrared (IR) spectrum that allow ‘greenhouse’ gases to trap heat and warm the planet. Many argue that after a certain level the gases ‘saturate’ and lose most of their warming properties. One simple way to understand this is to observe that doubling insulation in a loft will not trap twice as much heat. The saturation hypothesis would appear to explain how CO₂ has been 10-15 times higher in the past without runaway temperatures, while the anthropogenic warming opinion does little more than provide scientific cover for a dodgy but fashionable extreme eco scare.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change claims a climate sensitivity number based on doubling CO₂ levels of around 3°C. But many climate models ramp up mass public hysteria by using ‘pathways’ with much larger and highly improbably estimates. The latter form the basis of numerous ‘scientists say’ stories faithfully reported by unquestioning mainstream media. The Taiwanese scientists found that ground temperature warming of 0.3°C was associated with the increase from 100 ppm to 350 ppm and there was no additional warming at all as CO₂ rose further from 350 ppm to 400 ppm. The current level of CO₂ in the atmosphere is 420 ppm.

Seven Austrian scientists have also recently concentrated on CO₂ and the infrared spectrum, noting that a future doubling of the gas up to 800 ppm “shows no increase in the IR absorption for the 15 u-central peak”. It is concluded that this can lead to 0.5°C warming at most. The scientists argue that climate models and their CO₂ influences should be revised. Much more experimental evidence about IR radiation should be collected “before appointing current warming trends and climate change mechanisms monocausal to greenhouse gas theories”.

The recent papers on CO₂ saturation are not the only ones to have been published lately. Earlier this year a group of Polish scientists led by Dr. Jan Kubicki supplied three papers arguing that above 400 ppm, “the CO₂ concentration can no longer cause any increase in temperature”. In 2023, three scientists including Atmospheric Professor Yi Huang of McGill University stated that: “Transmission in the CO₂ band centre is unchanged by increased CO₂ as the absorption is already saturated.” In Chen et al. 2023, it is reported that CO₂ had a severely reduced warming effect past pre-industrial concentrations. It was also noted that water vapour and cloud influences overlap and thus dominate absorption in the CO₂ IR band. In 2022, the German Physics Professor Dieter Schildnecht set the CO₂ saturation level at just 300 ppm.

The CO₂ Coalition is an educational foundation that says it provides facts, resources and information about the “vital role” CO₂ plays in the environment. It recently published a detailed paper that accepted humans had contributed most of the CO₂ that has entered the atmosphere in industrial times. The paper is sub-titled: “How human emissions are restoring vital atmospheric CO₂.” The coalition has long promoted the role that saturation plays in tempering the effect of a number of gases with warming properties. Attention is often drawn in its work to the part played by water vapour that makes up around 4% of the atmosphere and contributes as much as 80% of the Earth’s vital warming. It saturates over large parts of the IR spectrum, reducing the effect of other gases in their own specific bands. The coalition’s board includes the distinguished Professor William Happer, who has long argued the merits of the saturation hypothesis, and it was recently joined by the 2022 Nobel Physics Laureate Dr. John Clauser.

Levels of CO₂ have been much higher in the past, with evidence of vibrant animal and plant life. Many plants evolved to thrive with higher levels than they feed on today, a period some scientists argue is one of CO₂ denudation. In its recently published paper, the coalition observes that the higher the CO₂ content in the atmosphere, the greater the pressure from physical processes to drive CO₂ into the oceans and vegetation.

This is borne out by considerable evidence, although the recent substantial ‘greening’ of the planet is largely hidden from readers reliant on mainstream media. In fact the new ‘green revolution’ is feeding the world. The authors of a recent science paper, Charles Taylor and Wolfram Schlenker, state: “We consistently find a large fertilisation effect; a 1 ppm increase in CO₂ equates to a 0.4%, 0.6%, 1% yield increase for corn, soybean and wheat respectively.” The heavy greening of the Earth can be seen in a map first published in Donohue/CSIRO 2015 and republished in another recent paper from the CO₂ Coalition. This examined the nutritive value of plants growing in enhanced CO₂ concentrations.

The map was produced from satellite leaf data and shows that greening between 1982-2012 grew by 20-30% in India, West Australia, the Sahel and the Anatolian highlands. A more recent paper Chen et al. 2024 found that greening had actually accelerated in the last two decades. The increase in CO₂ was found to be the dominant driver of the positive trend of the Leaf Area Index over most of the global land surface.

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.