Infrastructure and low transportation costs for AfricaTransportation costs in Africa are much higher than in Europe. For example, a container from China to Mozambique costs US$ 2,000 and then US$ 5,000 500 km further to its destination.There are people who want to give Africans a choice: live in poverty or flee to Europe. Last week I spoke to another NGO for development aid: "We have decided that these people should not have electric cars". Yes, this NGO decides how people in poor countries should live. The inimitable arrogance of former colonial masters. Do we want to be like these brutes? Of course not! We have to create circumstances where a "welcome refugees" is answered with a "no thanks, it's much nicer at home". Always remember that the Romans only failed to conquer Germany because the climate was too bad for them.
Transportation costs are much higher in Africa than in Europe. For example, a container from China to Mozambique costs US$ 2,000 and then US$ 5,000 500 km further to its destination. What is the point of producing goods cheaply if they then become too expensive to transport or, in the case of food, spoil during transportation?
Today's technology and proximity to the equator make it possible to skip three major developments: Telephone network with lines, electricity network, rail network.
Let's cover the whole of Africa with circles 80 km in diameter. From circle center to circle center it is 80 km. One circle covers 5,000 km². The whole of Africa is covered with 6,000 circles. That would be the beginning of nationwide electric mobility. In an area the size of Germany, 72 fast-charging settlements. Tesla currently has 186 Superchargers in Germany. I think when the network only had 72, progress was already pretty good. Let's assume €1 million for the smallest version. 6 billion for the whole of Africa. As demand grows, individual estates can be expanded and more fast-charging estates can be set up. A settlement with 16 houses, the typical central structure for energy-optimized settlements and a generously roofed fast-charging station has 1.9 MW of photovoltaics. The battery equipment is typically 4 MWh sodium batteries and 10 MWh iron-air batteries. The continuous output is between 260 kW in the rainforest and 300 kW in the Sahara. In sunny Albalessa Algeria, this is determined by the difference between summer and winter. The weather in Mbarassa Rwanda, on the other hand, is determined by clouds of varying density. Sunshine from sunrise to sunset could not be observed from 2005 to the end of 2020. When I look at the distribution of daily photovoltaic yields, I realize that Salzburg is a very sunny city compared to Mbarasa and what the term rainforest means. 260 kW times 24 hours is 6.24 MWh. The estate and the restaurants at the fast-charging station also have their own requirements. But 6 MWh is enough to charge 80 cars with 45 kWh and 8 large trucks with 300 kWh. At 20 cents per kWh, that's a turnover of €1,200.
Power to methanol plants are offered from 10 MW. The control range is 1 to 10 MW. Hydrogen and CO2 are required as raw materials. Water with a molecular weight of 18 provides 2 hydrogen atoms, methanol with a molecular weight of 32 requires 4 hydrogen atoms. CO2 with a molecular weight of 44 provides one carbon atom, methanol with a molecular weight of 32 requires one. Provided the ratio of raw material to methanol. A fast-charging settlement that charges 20,000 cars per year will typically require less than 1,000 liters of methanol for the generator. Before it becomes more, the fast-charging settlement should be expanded. Methanol is therefore more of an export product, as a raw material for aircraft fuel and for the operation of power plants in winter in countries far from the equator.
How many roads, how much concrete? Let's make a grid. A square with 200 km edge length, one highway from north to south, one from east to west. Four federal highways from north to south, 4 federal highways from east to west. That makes 400 km of highway and 1,600 km of federal highway for this 40,000 km² square. The newsletter of April 28 stated that a settlement with 1,000 houses can supply a cement plant with electricity, which uses it to produce cement for 320,000 tons of concrete. One meter of freeway requires 13.4 t, one meter of main road 3.7 t. This means that there are 11.28 million tons of concrete in one of these 200 km squares. There are also areas in Africa with an existing good road network, but this is only an initial estimate. 750 such squares is the whole of Africa. Are 8.46 billion tons of concrete. To produce this amount in 20 years, 1,300 of these settlements with cement plants are needed.
It is known that concrete production accounts for 8% of global CO2 emissions. Half comes from combustion, the other half from the chemical reaction. With purely electrical production using solar power, one half is already gone. With this method, you get pure CO2. Combustion produces a mixture of CO2 and nitrogen. This CO2 can then be used as a raw material for power to methanol or to produce fruit and vegetables in very dry areas, where CO2 is fed directly to the plants in the greenhouse to avoid high water consumption. Why hasn't there been intensive research into purely electric cement production? Why are there reports of absurd balance sheet falsification tricks, such as mixing valuable carbon into concrete in order to feign a positive climate balance? Because the "save, restrict, renounce" ideology has created mental barriers. These mental barriers lead to considerable social conflict. The "live in poverty or flee to Europe" message is the biggest conflict. If you look at it closely, it is a deeply inhumane ideology. Many of these refugees would be valuable members of society in their home country and could play their part in economic reconstruction. We are damaging these countries, just as we once damaged them as colonial masters.
Net zero emissions means reducing greenhouse gas emissions to a level that nature can absorb. For the rich, this means Maintain poverty, cause poverty, so that enough emission rights remain for the rich.
Planetary cleanup back to 350 ppm CO2 means around 47,000 TWh of electricity to filter 1 ppm CO2 from the atmosphere and recycle it into carbon and oxygen. Who can afford that? Only a rich humanity, 10 billion people in prosperity can do it.
It is a decision between 3 directions:
It's not about whether the shares will be worth 10 times or 100 times more in 20 years' time or whether they will only be worth a few cents. It's about the future of us all. Will there be a big showdown between eco-fascism and yesterday's fossils, or will it be possible to overcome the deep divisions in society and inspire supporters of both sides to work towards a great new goal? Global prosperity and planetary restoration instead of saving, restricting, renouncing and climate catastrophe or peak oil and a little more climate catastrophe. Both sides must be convinced that there is no solution that is even remotely viable. On the one hand, it must be shown that net-zero emissions are a completely inadequate target and that the goal must instead be a planetary clean-up back to 350 ppm CO2. The other side must be shown that solar power enables a higher standard of living than fossil energy. It's about survival! The social situation in 2024 compared to 2004. Extrapolating that to 2044 makes for a horror world! If we are successful and your shares are worth 100 times more, this is just an addition to all the other achievements. One new shareholder said "I with my very modest investment", but €4,000 times €1,000 is also €4 million for all investments up to the opening of the settlement in Unken as a starting point for global expansion. There is a reward program for recommending the share to others. Two of the new shareholders have become shareholders through this reward program. Here are the details. |
