Month: March 2022

For my final blog post of the year, I wanted to look into the various energy sources that are used. With all of the talk of climate change in the news, there is often a lot of terms that are thrown out and can honestly be confusing sometimes. I think that laying out the popular energy sources that we use will help clear up some of the confusion (mostly for myself!).

Fossil Fuels: The phrase fossil fuels is an umbrella term that covers a variety of non-renewable source gathered from the Earth. It includes oil, coal and natural gas, all of which make up a total of 81% of the United States’ energy. These sources are all created from the remains of once living organisms, hence the term fossil fuels. Although the United States currently has an abundance of many fossil fuels, these sources cannot be reused and are very horrible for the environment due to their emission of greenhouse gases. To put it into perspective, the United States mines 900 million tons of coal every year, almost all of which was used to generate electricity. This coal is then burned to run power plants.

Natural gas is another type of fossil fuel and can even be found in college laboratories. Usually composing of majority methane gas, the gas is burned similar to coal to produce the energy. It is used to heat about half of the homes in the United States and is typically the better of the evils as it produces less undesirable byproducts than oil or coal.

Nuclear Energy: Nuclear power plants generate energy by a process called fission, in which heavy metal atoms are split into smaller parts generating lots of energy. Nuclear energy provides 20% of the electricity generation. Research is currently being done on the process of fusion, which is the opposite of fission and if completed successfully could save the world’s energy crisis!

Renewable Sources: Although they are the best the best source of energy as they can they are renewable, renewable sources sadly only make up around 11% of the electricity generation in the United States. Some of these sources include wind and solar energy, but also include biomass energy. Biomass is biological matter than is used for fuel. This includes things like wood; broken pieces of wood can be used to generate energy!

When going to many restaurants on campus for a drink, it is now more likely than ever that you will be handed a paper straw along with your beverage rather than a traditional plastic straw. This change came to be with the rising concerns of plastic waste. Although I really do hate how mushy the get, I am glad that this step has been taken to combat plastic pollution. However, as I’ve done more research, I continue to ask myself, “Are paper straws a permanent replacement?”

After alarming statistics were released about plastic in the ocean (did you know 14 million tons of plastic ends up in the ocean every year?), many companies such as those listed above announced that they will transition to using paper straws. This change was made because it simply makes sense; paper straws stem from trees which are renewable and much better than creating a non-biodegradable product.

However, this is just a surface comparison. We must look into how paper straws are actually being made. Paper straws require that we cut down trees (leading to more deforestation causing devastating effects on its inhabitants), pulped and pressed into a tube. This process takes a lot of energy, and ironically, usually comes from non-renewable sources such as fossil fuels. As explained in previous blogs, this leads to more production of greenhouse gases and accelerates climate change.

Don’t get me wrong, paper straws are certainly better than plastic straws; paper straws are biodegradable and do not harm animals as much. However, it seems that paper straws are simply shifting the issue to affect a different part of the environment rather than finding a solution. Additionally, although paper straws are recyclable, most recycling companies will not accept food-contaminated materials, meaning that paper straws might not be recycled in the end.

The best solution that I know of, is metal straws! Metal straws, like a reusable water bottle, can be taken anywhere and used in replacement of paper/plastic straws. They may be tedious to carry around, but really do make a difference. You could also not use a straw at all, especially when at  a restaurant with regular cups.

Today, I wanted to talk about something that we are all familiar with, recycling! Recycling is basis of sustainability; if we can re-use materials, then we can lower the amount of waste being produced. Over time, institutions have created policies to increase recycling of trash. I want to focus on Penn State’s efforts, what they have done and where their efforts fall short.

I’m sure we have all noticed the trash cans that are located all around Penn State’s campus. These divided trash cans are meant to promote recycling of materials; sorting materials makes it easier for them to be taken to the appropriate place and recycled. This is an amazing step towards environmental sustainability! The signs above each of the trash cans are clear and easy to read, increasing the chance that students will place their waste in the correct bins. These steps have encouraged students to create clubs such as the “Penn State Waste Stream Task Force” which promises to “create fiscally, environmentally, and socially responsible goals and principles to guide the University’s procurement, operational, and solid waste management decisions.”

However, there is a major issue. A closer look into these signs and a little bit of research reveals that Penn State does not actually recycle Styrofoam. This is surprising as styrofoam is clearly labeled under one of the trash chutes as recyclable. When I looked into it, I found out that starting in 2012, Penn State no longer recycled polystyrene. They claim that due to “changes in the market, all styrofoam/polystyrene must go to a landfill.” Regardless of if I  agree with it or not, economically it makes complete sense; it costs a lot of money to recycle styrofoam and with changes market prices, it may be too disadvantageous to recycle. The real problem is why the signs have not been updated. According to the sustainability website, Penn State “realizes that our signs have yet to reflect this change, and we are working on updating them.” Considering it has been 10 years since the change, I think that this is an unacceptable reason.

I also think that if styrofoam is no longer going to be recycled, that we should not be using it. Styrofoam is being used all over the dining halls and can be easily replaced with better and recyclable materials!