ICE and heat replacing FIRE and smoke; the application of concentrated SOLAR power technology and INVISIBLE light to reduce greenhouse gases
Presently, the electrical power generation sector is the highest producer of greenhouse gases (GHGs), and natural gas powered combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) power plants are the most efficient type of thermal  power plant (operating at 58% efficiency). This means that for every 100 units of heat energy released from the combustion of natural gas (a fossil fuel) 58 units of electrical energy can be made available to the consumer. By comparison, non-fossil fuel thermal power plants (NFFTPPs) such as nuclear, geothermal & concentrated solar power (CSP) plants [1,2,3,4,5,6,7] have the following efficiencies; (33 to 36)%, (10 to 15)% & (14 to 32)% respectively. It is clear, that for GHG-free thermal power to become competitive with Natural gas-CCGT and drastically reduce global GHG emissions, non-fossil fuel thermal power plants must attain the efficiency of those of Natural gas-CCGT. The latter operate by expanding combustion gases at the following temperatures; (1200 to 1400) degrees Celsius through gas turbines [8,9]. Exhaust gases, slightly cooled upon exiting the gas turbine, are still hot enough to pass through a heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) , and produce steam which then expands through a steam-turbine. The passage of gas & steam through the gas & steam turbines respectively induces shaft rotation which generates electricity by means of dynamos. It is the dual-use of both gas & steam turbines that allows the natural gas CCGT power plant to exceed the efficiency of single-use steam-turbine (only) driven NFFTPPs (such as nuclear, geothermal & CSP plants). Until now, the option to adapt NFFTPPs to CCGT technology was less available due to the former's lower (safe-operating or maximum-available) temperatures. At last, a Thermal Efficiency Enhancing Unit (TEEU) is proposed to safely increase non-fossil fuel power plant operating temperature & electrical power output to the levels of natural gas combined cycle gas turbine power plants.
Insert (i) Above.
Category of the action
Reducing emissions from electric power sector.
What actions do you propose?
Insert (ii) Above: Overview of six figures depicting thermal efficiency enhancing unit (TEEU) upgrading operating temperature (too low for a gas turbine efficiency) produce gas of thousands of Kelvin in temperature (for gas turbine injection)
Insert (iii) Above: The United Kingdom of Great Britain Intellectual Property Office (IPO) has affirmed the novelty of the TEEU in the above search report 
Notes to judges:
A response to objections raised by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Climate Colab assessment in 2015 is outlined in more detail  and summarised below.
Novelty: All Thermal Efficiency Enhancing Unit (TEEU) embodiments are applied for patents, and have reached the publication stage . The United Kingdom of Great Britain Intellectual Property Office (IPO) has affirmed the novelty of the TEEU. However TEEU was given a low grade in regards to its novelty by the MIT Climate Colab assessment in 2015 . Despite this, the IPO patent search report above attests to the contrary. It should be noted that the "collimator" design has now been upgraded to exclude refractors (lenses), only use reflectors (mirrors) and is more compact than the collimator of the 2015 proposal.
Feasibility (Technical); the 2015 contest claim that a TEEU fitted non-fossil fueled thermal power plant (NFFTPP) can reach 58% thermal efficiency was disputed by the MIT Climate CoLab assessment , which stated that “No manipulation of the steam will raise these first law efficiencies to anywhere near 58%”. As a result, steam, which was used for demonstrative purposes only in the 2015 proposal has been replaced by low expansion fluids (LEFs) such as "Thermoil"; a fluid which does not undergo phase change during a heating cycle peaking under 400 degrees Celsius. Water vaporizes at 100 degrees Celsius unless pressurized. It should be noted that LEF is not used for combustion in the TEEU and theoretically bears no environmental impact due to its closed loop operation as a coolant only. The proposal author has taken the thermodynamic analysis  on board with gratitude and a maximum value of 51% was offered by MIT instead. EnthalpIQ presently proposes the use of TEEU to upgrade NFFTPP temperature to utilise combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) technology as well as the use of thermoelectric generators or TEGs (which are not heat engines) to harvest low grade heat (LGH) from the steam-turbine exhaust. With this measure, 58% total plant efficiency is feasible. Alternative analysis has shown that in fact, the TEEU mark I with work done by (miniature) rocket propulsion (65% thermal efficiency maximum ) to increase target internal energy for gas turbine injection without a coupled compressor (thermal efficiency 90%[x]) can expect less than (the product of the two aforesaid efficiencies) 58.5%; a level MIT assessment [x] prohibited with steam (which is not used here).
If “heat” is qualified as wasteful or “unusable” energy, then for the collimator, what would normally be considered “mechanical work” in other heat engines (thermal expansion under pressure) is considered as “heat”.
This is because the TEEU’s preferred energy transfer modes within the coolant inlet, heat exchanger, heat bath, spherical emitter and coolant outlet are conduction & convection with minimal thermal expansion or gaseous phase change.
For this reason, water is not boiled by a power plant heat source, but rather LEF (used for concentrated solar power or CSP is proposed as its volume does not change as much as water and transfer mechanical energy wastefully and prematurely at a given temperature range).
The TEEU’s preferred energy transfer mode from collimator spherical emitter surface to receiver’s solid particulate surface is radiation.
The TEEU’s preferred energy transfer mode at the solid propellant particulates is convection upon radiation absorption.
The TEEU’s preferred energy transfer mode at the target is conduction upon solid propellant remnant impact. The heated target conducts heat to a fluid for convection through a gas turbine.
Feasibility (Financial); it was found that TEEU mark I was potentially more efficient than the other embodiments because it does not rely upon piston tubes and heads for energy transfer. Hence, with the large machinery avoided, the cheaper CSP-type units may be used. TEEU technology is a medley of “ice & fire”. That is to say, it uses cryogenic and thermal technologies. Also, a closed infra-red reflector such as the collimator can be made & maintained more cheaply than an open parabolic reflector susceptible to weather conditions as is the case with CSP. Power plant heat sources can run at higher temperatures without the requirement of water pressurization. Additionally, typical NFFTPP thermal radiation flux density is ~ 20 times that of terrestrial solar irradiance, hence the TEEU reflector area & costs are < 20 times that of CSP per unit of generated electricity (because the thermal efficiency is also potentially higher than that of CSP). The “return on investment” [x] comes from the sale of TEEU (product) & releasing more available useful energy (service) to end-users whilst still making a saving on costs (reduction of expenses) associated with CSP land area & water utilization, geothermal borehole drilling depths and nuclear fuel purchase & waste management.
Presentation; the length of the present proposal has been reduced in line with feedback from MIT assessment [x]. It is hoped that the amount of data has not “impeded the persuasive nature of the study” whilst retaining some figures to illustrate a request for more information given by an assessor[x].
Physical Actions to be Adopted
The end-goal of the reduction of greenhouse gases (GHGs) from electrical power generation will come about by use of the TEEUs, which can adapt NFFTPPs into CCGT power plants.
Let us assume that there is a first "body" that is highly populated by atoms with certain values of "energy per atom". The TEEU transfers most of the "total energy" of the first body of atoms to a second body of atoms. The second body is less-populated by atoms than the first body of atoms. Therefore, the second body's "energy per atom" values are greater than the first body's energy per atom values.
For an alternative explanation: On a large scale, a vast power plant's (primary) heat source typically at temperatures of a few hundred degrees Celsius [2,3,4,11,12,13,14] can create a smaller secondary heat source of over a thousand degrees Celsius if TEEUs are used; hence, for large primary heat-sources (only hot enough to have driven a steam turbine), TEEUs can create secondary heat-sources (hot enough to drive a gas turbine!).
Additionally; low grade heat (LGH), which is only presently useful for consumer heating demand (in the locality of the power plant responsible for rejecting the LGH), can soon be upgraded in temperature to decompose GHGs or drive a Stirling engine or TEG (as three non-exhaustive examples). Generated electricity can thus be exported to sites that are remote from the LGH source (or power-plant exhaust).
Traditionally, a heat source (nuclear, geothermal or CSP) transfers heat to water and the water vaporizes to become steam, which expands through a steam turbine at a few hundreds of degrees Celsius. Subsequent turbine blade rotation results in electrical power generation at up to 36 % efficiency .
For TEEU, the working fluid here is not water but LEF [x] (used in CSP [x] applications). Volumetric fluid expansion or pressurization of any sort is to be mitigated for the first stage of TEEU operation as depicted in insert (ii), figure 2. LEF is heated by the heat-source and channeled to pass through a spherical radiator.
The Centre of the spherical radiator coincides with the common focal point of a plurality of elliptical reflecting surfaces. Hence, the radiator acts like a point-source of heat. Thermal radiation from its outer surface will radially-diverge and can be reflected and concentrated onto the foci of parabolic reflectors, which in turn produce a plurality of collimated thermal radiation beams.
One of the aforesaid beams enters into the receiver as depicted in figure 3 of the same insert. The receiver is a vessel whose pressure is controlled so as not to impede the acceleration of solid particulate propellant or ice crystals. Propellant of the required chemical identity is irradiated by the collimator's thermal radiation beam in the evacuated receiver as depicted in figure 4 of the same insert. The ice crystals absorb heat on their irradiated surfaces and gas is ejected at speeds determined by the temperature of the heat-source as depicted in figure 5 of the same insert. By conservation of momentum, the ice remnants recoil in the opposite direction to the gas expansion.
The remnants thrust (like tiny rockets; loosely resembling comets) towards the target which absorbs the ice remnants & decelerate them rapidly as depicted by figure 6 of the same insert. Acquired ice crystal remnant kinetic energy during the acceleration phase is rapidly transformed into internal energy upon target-collision; thereby heating the target in the same way a meteorite dramatically heats its impact site on earth's surface. This is described adequately in the field of "terminal ballistics" with phenomena such as "contact and compression" [17,18]. Hence, the temperature of the ice - impacted target can be selected by allowing the ice to accelerate to the correspondingly required velocities.
To reiterate, the ice crystals are made to accelerate to high velocities (cool & fast). Ignoring thermal motion at ambient temperatures, the atoms' mean positions within the crystal travel together as a group (predominantly) through the evacuated space within the receiver in a single direction and at the same speed. Upon impact with the target, the ice remnant or group of atoms cannot continue to travel as before and are momentarily stationary. However, the atoms within the group or crystal remnant each retain their kinetic energy but now scatter and travel in different directions to one another. This increase in "random" atomic speed (compared to the pre-collision state) is represented by an increase in temperature of the crystal remnant (hot & momentarily still) which soon becomes a gas. The temperature can exceed that of the heat source which gave rise to the ice remnant's acceleration to begin with! The elevated temperatures are caused by the target's internal energy increase.
The heated LEF was cooled by transferring its heat to the spherical radiator for radiation and reflection through the collimator. The now-cooled LEF, returns from the collimator, back towards the heat-source to be re-heated. Thereby regulating the temperature of the heat-source, completing the cycle.
Insert (iv) Above: Compares a conventional power plant (left) with one using the Thermal Efficiency Enhancing Unit or TEEU (Right). Compare thickness of "power" arrows.
Social actions are required from the top down. New policies can come in force when it is proven that nuclear waste production can be greatly reduced by TEEU. The economic incentives of safely handling & storing less nuclear waste over several future generations are self-evident. Public evolution of behavioral norms will have small impact in comparisons to larger organizations managing nuclear power. An earnest effort to reduce humanity's carbon footprint will lead to the increased use of nuclear energy. With public concern, the pressure for nuclear energy suppliers to operate safely will be naturally applied. Neglect of mature versions of the TEEU in light of the aforesaid scenario would be criminally myopic in light of radiological public threat.
The proposal shows that reliable, cost-effective TEEUs allow for electricity to be produced cheaply & safely at greater quantity. Energy supplier profits will increase & consumer energy bills will decrease along with GHG emission.
Insert (v) Table
Who will take these actions?
For 3 years, industrial or academia based partners have been sought after. EnthalpIQ has found the General Electric (GE) company to be mildly interested, the concentrated solar power companies to be surprisingly uncooperative and some national Universities regrettably unhelpful.
It would come as no surprise to the author that continuation on this tack will result in more years of stifled implementation and escalation.
EnthalpIQ believes at that least one type of actor will have the vision to stay as far ahead of their competitors for as long as possible, and cannot afford to be second-best: The military; the Navy in particular.
Insert (viii) Above: Reservoir diagram
The United States (US) Navy vessels that are nuclear powered can use smaller reactors or derive more power from their existing ones. Fossil fuel powered vessels may therefore be replaced with small nuclear fission reactors.
Insert (ix) Above: Thermal efficiency enhancing unit (TEEU) as heat-pump (enhanced heat source), coupling primary heat source (left) and heat engine (gas turbine; right).
Once in operation, TEEU will prove itself viable. Upon declassification, other government's navies and the global civilian energy sector will adopt the technology in land-based non fossil fuel thermal power plants (NFFTPPs). One suspects that GE, Siemens and similar actors will replicate the TEEU with minor variations once the risk of research and development has been mitigated. It may be that only at this stage, academia will engage and give innovative contributions to improve TEEU performance
Insert (x) Above: Possibility of a nuclear power plant consuming fission fuel at reduced rate, using the thermal efficiency enhancing unit (TEEU) to operate a combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) power plant; thereby allowing naval vessels distant travel without refueling, gaseous exhaust (reducing thermal signature) and with no greenhouse gas emissions. A proposal that would have piqued the interest of the late Admiral H. Rickover
Where will these actions be taken?
As above hinted, EnthalpIQ limited has found that its industry & academia contacts simply lack the drive & vision to pursue a concept with high impact, and potential merit. It seems to be is in the interest of these contacts to do the minimum amount of work, to find valuable yet incremental, near-term benefit breakthroughs. Such advances would only slightly put the contacts ahead of their competitors, and gain a marginally large share of the immediate market or quarter of research funding. High impact work comes at a temporal and monetary cost, which the contacts are reluctant to pay.
As a result, it seems that locations for the development of the existing research are limited twofold: To a country and two governmental bodies: The department of energy and the military.
Thermal Efficiency Enhancing Unit ( TEEU ) if developed by the United States (US) Navy will be constructed in the US. Once operational and on Naval vessels, the TEEU will be sailed worldwide, although not accessible to the general public or non-US military entities until the US Navy deem fit. It is feasible that under NATO treaties, other nations will adopt the technology for their Naval vessels or land-based installations. Hence the US and the European Union (EU) will use TEEU. The close association of TEEU with nuclear fission power allows the US government to sublicense TEEU to other governments with security conditions that are usually associated with operating a nuclear power plant.
Upon declassification or imitation by other countries (TEEU is in the public domain after all, although the US navy could possess more developed trade secrets discovered upon implementation), the TEEU will be attempted in China and subsequently any developed country. TEEU can then be exported and implemented in developing countries and hence, worldwide.
EnthalpIQ envisages that despite the initial period of US Navy classification, this approach could be amongst the fastest routes to market saturation on the energy sector.
How much will emissions be reduced or sequestered vs. business as usual levels?
Forecasted for the year 2050:
Assuming Business as Usual (BAU):
1054.33 Mega tonne equivalent of carbon dioxide (MtCO2) greenhouse gas (GHG) will be reduced by use of Thermal Efficiency Enhancing Units (TEEUs) on non-fossil fuel thermal power plants (NFFTPPs). See insert (xi).
There would be a projected 20,550.34 MtCO2eq without TEEU installation and.only 19,496.01MtCO2eq GHG released into the environment with TEEU operation on NFFTPPs.
The BLUE map scenario:
Would completely end (Zero MtCO2eq) global thermal power plant GHG emissions with TEEU installation; Insert (xii).
TEEU installation would convert waste-heat energy into electrical energy which could remove 253 MtCO2eq GHGs by sequestration from the environment.
Insert (xiii): See Insert (xi). Geothermal & solar energy were negligible
Insert (xiv): See Insert (xii). Nuclear, (solar & geo) thermal energy contributions have been increased by the BLUE map policy and the effect "amplified" by TEEUs.
What are other key benefits?
The other desirable Thermal Efficiency Enhancing Unit (TEEU) power-plant usage outcomes are as follows:
Nuclear; can enjoy an efficiency increase that reduces the fuel consumption rate. As a result, less nuclear waste is accumulated over time. The reduction in nuclear waste legacy minimises environmental radioactivity & the cost of its safe disposal. Modest reactor temperatures & high power output.
Geothermal; can benefit from an efficiency increase that reduces the geothermal borehole depth in favour of several shallower boreholes. This is a far cheaper option than tunneling ~5km through the earth's crust; costing millions of United States Dollars.
Solar-thermal (single-axis tracking, more common & less efficient); can match or surpass the dual-axis tracking solar-power tower or solar parabolic dish reflectors in operating temperature. Also for single-axis tracking power-plants, less heliostats will be required; land utilisation and its cost can be reduced; thus enabling other civil uses
What are the proposal’s costs?
Rather fortuitously, TEEU for the nuclear fission pressured water reactor (PWR) was modeled in 2015[x] and is referred to in the present proposal. PWR are the most common type of nuclear reactor on board naval vessels[x] and the table of insert (v) can be taken to allude to TEEU performance releasing more power from existing installed commercial PWRs. Naval PWRs will differ and although combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) technology may be available, it is unlikely that power plant efficiency will be as high as the earlier claimed value for the analogous land-based CCGT plants, but is anticipated to exceed existing naval vessel performances*.
To manufacture the first TEEU for testing would cost $1,000 to $2,000 (US) Dollars. Once proven, a 10 megawatt thermal (MWt)power output PWR can have a number of TEEUs in a cubic lattice of 8metre (m) x 8m x 8m and produce gas hot enough to drive a CCGT plant’s gas turbine. A loan is used to manufacture the TEEUs and since the power level is relatively low, a reconditioned military jet-engine turbine can be adapted for use. The turbine may be acquired by loan, then the loans can be repaid by selling the generated surplus electricity to the grid or a nearby user. Once successfully and reliably demonstrated, a further loan can be secured since the reactor and TEEU are turning a profit.
To mitigate the negative side effects (radiological, security costs) of running a 10MWt nuclear reactor, an innocuous biomass burner can be set up to test the first TEEU to avoid unnecessary neutron contamination. Operation and decommissioning of nuclear fission power plants contributes to background radiation; however, TEEU operates to increase efficiency and thereby allow less nuclear fission fuel to be used per reactor.
Short-term (5 years to 15 years)
EnthalpIQ limited will seek the United Kingdom Ministry of Defence guidance in regards to development of a single thermal efficiency enhancing unit (TEEU ) by 2016 to 2017. For maximum & swift market penetration, the United States (US) Navy's collaboration will be required. By 2017 to 2018, finalised prototype design or manufacture is underway. By 2019, the TEEU should have undergone initial testing using a biomass (wood-burning) boiler to simulate the nuclear fission pressurised water reactor (PWR) used on naval vessels. By 2023, the replacement of water with higher-boiling point un-pressurised fluid able to work with existing PWR technology is found. Hence successful TEEU trials will allow said technology to be employed in the growing global marine reactor market. By 2027, TEEU maturity and global use on civilian vessels will encroach on the commercial terrestrial power supply sector for non-fossil fuel thermal power plants (NFFTPPs). Terrestrial nuclear power plants will be the first to be upgraded since the analogous marine power plants have nuclear grade TEEUs.
Medium-term (15 years to 50 years)
By 2031, a demand for cheaper (non-nuclear grade) TEEUs due to the realisation that the technology is adaptable for biomass, concentrated solar power (CSP) parabolic trough & geothermal power plants. At this stage a range of different companies will manufacture TEEU. As such, by 2040, all power plants will be TEEU fitted. In a strategic pincer fasion, ground-source heating (GSH) TEEU is sold to the domestic user. The threat of the public generating their own power and marine TEEU success will impel traditional energy suppliers to provide cheaper & cleaner energy by TEEU installation in their thermal power plants. By 2049, the domestic user will be able to harness biomass (firewood) or sunlight energy available on their own land to power their homes.
Long term (50 years to 100 years)
From 2066 to 2166; energy independence for the individual.
The "Proposal for Transportation by vpdrive: External Combustion, Closed loop Steam Engine" mentions that "ICE's are at present 6-13% efficient, depending on application with transportation platforms typically 7&-8%.". Vpdrive mentions the use of a steam driven engine for road transport.
The Stirling engine in the present proposal does not rely upon combustion (except for biomass or wood-burning combustion although it favors concentrated solar power (CSP), geothermal and nuclear fission power plants to derive heat engine power. The present proposal also has an external heat source like that of vpdive in the paragraph above, although the present proposal is mostly seaborne and land-based rather road-vehicle mounted.
Can existing combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) power plants be retrofitted with non-fossil fueled heat sources?
 Aircraft Propulsion and Gas Turbine Engines By Ahmed F. El-Sayed
 Gas Turbines & Jet Propulsion By M.J. Sable M.S. Ramgirpsum/Document/ApplicationNumber/GB1514351.4/05191383-c59d-4388-81db-5176c96571c3/GB2531407-20160215-Search%20report%20%20First.pdf
To be continued...