Tag Archives: CI

Peering through the Smog

So far, this blog has explored various different alternative energy sources, from the large-scale power of nuclear energy, to the rising potential of solar energy, to the controversial use of biofuels as energy. As it comes to a close, I’d like to investigate the other side of the story, and shed light on the energy “bad guys” that drive the need for alternative energy sources in the first place. Let’s take a look at the worst offenders: coal, natural gas, and oil, to get a perspective on what it is we’re fighting against.

A Miner’s Life For Me

As a native of northeastern Pennsylvania, coal is especially of interest to me. It represents an industry that has had a dramatic impact on this country and the lives of its people. I am descended from coal miners on both sides. I had many relatives die of black lung. My grandfather pulled his father’s crushed body out of the mine at the age of twelve. The history of coal mining is indeed covered in soot.

But is it behind us? Although coal production is not nearly as prevalent as it was during the industrial revolution, it is far from extinct. According to the World Coal Association, the US is the world’s second largest producer of coal behind China, at one thousand megatons per year. If you’re like me, you may be wondering where this coal is. Obviously we don’t use it to cook our food much anymore. It turns out it’s main use is for “steam coal” for use in power plants. You burn the coal and it heats water that steams up and turns turbines.

When it comes to being environmentally friendly, coal is about as unfriendly as it gets. There are a ton of pollution problems associated with coal mining and burning. It releases heavy, poisonous compounds into the air and water (mmm Mercury), causes acid rain, contributes to black lung and cancer,  produces HUGE greenhouse gas emissions, and is downright dangerous to get out of the ground. Poisonous gas and mine cave-ins continue to cause the death of many a miner. And with all of this, its still an extremely inefficient source of energy. Not good.

An aerial view of a particularly nasty Russian mine cave-in. Oops.

So what can we do about the coal issue? Mainly, I think we shouldn’t forget about it. Our history is covered in soot, and modern times are not clean by any means. We must remember that coal is there and try to cut down on its continued use. What do you think? Did you know we still produced coal? Does it impact your family too? What solutions can you think of?

Liquid Gold: Oil and Natural Gas

As problematic as coal is, it isn’t nearly as widespread as the king of energy use: fossil fuels. Oil and natural gas are two major fossil fuels that we are absolutely dependent on, and that the Earth is not thanking us for.

Oil is a viscous liquid formed from pressurized organic material. It is hard to extract, non-renewable, and therefore expensive. It is also hard on the environment in terms of greenhouse gas emissions and the disastrous effects it has when spilled. This is the stuff that fuels our vehicles and powers our plants. It is also a major player in many a political power struggle with the Middle East: in short, it’s trouble on many counts, and reducing its use would be both easy on the Earth and our wallets.

You may have noticed that the Cata buses advertise that they run on “natural gas”. Like me, you may have wondered what that meant. It’s generally accepted that oil is bad news. But natural gas must be better, huh? Being that it’s “natural” and all…

Erm, well, not really. Natural gas is a colorless, odorless fuel made up of mostly methane found underground that is much more widespread than oil. It is mainly used in power plants and for domestic purposes, but it can be compressed and used for automobiles like our Cata buses. True, it does have fewer greenhouse gas emissions than oil, and it isn’t as deadly when released into the environment (besides the occasional explosion). It’s home-grown nature also makes it a lot better for international relations. it still releases toxins and its hands are far from clean when it comes to the environment.

If you’ve been reading Tim’s blog, you know why. You get natural gas by hydraulic fracking, a process involving shooting water into the ground to get natural gas and causing all sorts of problems (toxins and flaming drinking water and earthquakes and such). What’s different about fracking is that affects US, here and now, because its happening right here in PA and is only becoming more prevalent. If we aren’t careful, its our water supply that will be polluted, our forests leveled, and our bodies subjected to whatever chemicals creep up from below.

The race, then, has begun. We need energy, and we are consuming it at a faster and faster rate every year. In order to fuel our growing hunger for it, we are torching our resources, and this is no longer a far-away affair. With smog covering our cities like a blanket the energy crisis on our doorstep, it is more important than ever to branch out into alternative energy. We need to build nuclear power plants, use solar energy, and innovate our biofuels. We have to start harnessing the wind and the water and stop contaminating it. We have to experiment with and discover other energy options and make the ones we have more efficient. We can only hope that as humans, we are just as good at creating as destroying, because if not, we will be consumed.

I hope you have enjoyed this blog’s insights into alternative energy, and I hope it has given you a new perspective on the energy crisis. What stake, if any, do you feel that you have in the issue?

 

 

 

 

Biofuels: Feeding our Engines

Cars aren’t the only thing that run on energy. Even as you read this, you are converting food into energy. If we can’t depend on oil or the sun, can we feed our cars in the same way?

The answer is, yes. The concept of biofuel involves converting food crops into ethanol as a form of energy. This isn’t a new concept: plant-based ethanol can already be found in your cars engine, and gasoline itself is just ancient plant-based fuel. Henry Ford actually planned on fueling his car with plant ethanol, but went for gasoline instead because it was cheaper. Now that the tables have turned, and biofuels are much cheaper than oil, should we depend more on them?

The concept behind them is great from a sustainability standpoint. If we grow our fuel, we can’t run out: its quite renewable. Crops are also cheap: the US has vast empty farmlands on which to grow them. Also, ideally  global warming could be slowed down because the plants we would use to grow the fuel would absorb the carbon dioxide that the fuel would release as car exhaust. Neat solution, right? This inspirational video seems to think so:

 

Unfortunately, it’s too neat. Biofuels don’t involve shoving plants into our engines: they need to be converted into fuel first. And that requires…more fuel. Oil and coal are used to burn the crops down into ethanol-form. Kind of defeats the point, doesn’t it? What’s more, the pesticides and plastic used to grow the crops would not be all that environmentally friendly. In other words, plant-based fuels are far from “green”.

What’s more, these fuels would require A LOT of plant material. It would take about 500 pounds of crops to fill the tank of an SUV. We have a lot of farmland, but not that much. This means that even if we use biofuels, it would be pretty impossible to depend on them if they are made the way they are currently.

One argument against biofuels is that we shouldn’t waste our food on fuel. If we feed our crops to our cars, what will we eat? Well, let’s see. What are they using for plant-based ethanol? (For those of you who saw my TED Talk, you know what’s coming…)

Corn. Well, corn and grass. Most people don’t eat grass. And if you saw my Ted Talk, you know that people don’t eat the corn we’re talking about here either. This corn is not corn on the cob. It isn’t edible. This is the chemically refined corn in soda that makes people fat and that makes cows so sick that they have to be killed for beef before they die. So, I’m calling foul on this one. We won’t be wasting our food, because we can’t eat it anyway.

Still, biofuels present some issues. They have a great concept behind them, but in practice aren’t as eco-friendly or small-scale as we’d like them to be. I think the idea has potential, though. If we change our technique of making the ethanol to be more “green” and to use less material, then I think this idea could be a fantastic alternative energy resource. There’s a lot of research going into this already, involving different plants and refining techniques, including some research here at Penn State. And obviously, I wouldn’t mind seeing some of that corn burned. But what do you think of the biofuel option? Do you think its worth pursuing, or is it more trouble than its worth? Do you see any other problems with it that I may have missed?

Here Comes the Sun!!

You may recall my exploration of nuclear energy and all of its glories and pitfalls. Now it may be time to look another energy source that isn’t always on our radar, but that is literally in our face. Or shining on it.

For us and just about every other living thing on Earth, the Sun is a pretty big deal. It does a fairly consistent job of providing us with heat and light…energy, in other words. This makes it a pretty obvious candidate for an alternative energy resource. Simple, right?

sun (640x400)

Feel the burn!!!

According to National Geographic, the sun beams enough energy to earth in one hour to satisfy global energy requirements for one year. So much for an “energy crisis”. huh? What is going on here? Are we taking advantage of our convenient raging fireball of energy?

Judging by this Monthly Energy Review from 2012 by the EIA…no. Unfortunately, it’s not the grey part of the pie chart we’re focusing on here…

In order to understand what’s going on here we need to delve a bit into the technology behind solar energy. Most solar cells are photovoltaic cells made up of silicon-based semiconducting materials (that are also useful in the computer you’re eyeballing right now). Light hits the cells, exciting electrons that flow through the cell, generating electricity. Solar power plants function on a much larger scale, concentrating sunlight with mirrors to heat water and turn turbines (sound familiar? nuclear plants do the same thing).

Unfortunately, although this technology exists, it is very expensive. The silicone in the cells is very pricey and in demand, so installing solar panels on a residential home costs an average of 14 thousand dollars. What’s more, the panels are not very efficient, with a maximum efficiency of about 30%. And if it’s a cloudy day, guess what: no energy. For many people, this makes more sure forms of energy better investments.

It must also be taken into consideration, however, that solar energy is a silent and very clean source of energy. Sunlight never goes out, it makes no noise, gives off no pollution, and always shows up eventually. Coal, on the other hand, gives off massive amounts of dangerous pollutants, but makes up about 40% of the US’s energy every year! They also pay for themselves: it takes about 5 years to pay for the solar panels in money saved on your energy bill, and solar panels last about 30 years. What’s more, many energy companies will pay residents for excess electricity generated on their panels! Not a bad deal, right?

What’s more, the technology is evolving fast. According to MIT’s Technology Review, there are countless new solar devices brewing that promise to be better, faster, more reliable, and much less expensive. Prices are falling and the technology is evolving. What do you think? Do you think that our future holds solar-powered craziness or has the sun had its day?

Solar Cars- Pretty Sweet Right?

Solar power has a ton of potential, but in order for it to reach this potential we need to give it a chance. If more people were to invest in it and create a higher demand for its development and advancement, someday we might all be driving fancy solar-powered cars and living off clean, sustainable energy. It may be, however that the solar panel has seen its prime. We know it exists, after all, and yet we still use oil and coal that tear up our environment. Do you think solar energy is a worthy investment, despite its patchy prices and dependability? Or should we continue the search for more reliable clean energy resources?

I personally think that we should focus on solar power, especially when it comes to things like cars. If we could use it to reduce oil dependency, I think it’s worth it. And although it’s an expensive investment, it seems to pay off generously in the end. You can actually make money off of solar panels, after all! That said, I think we can give the technology a little more time to develop, as long as we remember it’s there.

After all, the sun isn’t going anywhere.

 

 

Tower Terror: The Nuclear Energy Issue

On the 11th of March, 2011, the world held its tongue. In Japan, following a massive tsunami and earthquake, three nuclear reactors in the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station melted down, releasing radioactive elements that could hold dangerous consequences to the people exposed to them. It also served as a reminder to all of the disasters at Chernobyl in 1986 and Three Mile Island in 1979, causing many to look at those great steaming towers lining the horizon with new apprehension.

I grew up within a few miles of a nuclear power plant. I remember thinking it was a cloud machine as a kid, and the sirens that announced meltdown drills every first Monday of the month never phased me. However, after what happened in Japan, I wasn’t so sure I wanted the power plant so close. I was in Europe that March, and Europe’s response to the meltdown was anything but positive. Germany even vowed to close down all of its nuclear power plants as a response.

Nuclear power plants are big, expensive operations whose purpose is to boil water to turn turbines and generate electricity. The heat used to boil the water comes from nuclear fission reactions, where Uranium or Plutonium fuel rods undergo radioactive decay, releasing massive amounts of energy. When a reactor “melts down”, the reactor core is not kept cool enough to contain the reaction, and the heat is able to melt through all confinements, exposing the radioactive fuel rods to the environment. The radiation released can do quite a lot of damage: too much exposure in one dose is a very efficient way to kill a person, and exposure can lead to cancer, and death later. What’s more, the fuel can remain dangerously radioactive for thousands of years.

Because of this, some think that nuclear power plants are more trouble than they’re worth. The risk of damage to the reactor, and the possible apocalyptic results of such a thing, do not justify such an elaborate way to boil water. They also fear that the production of radioactive compounds should be avoided, because their use as weapons is a very good way to destroy the world, very quickly. Is it worth it, especially if these near-disasters and meltdowns like Fukushima keep happening?

Some would argue, yes. Most nuclear reactors are not, with the exception of those in Japan, located on fault lines. They are protected by layer upon layer of concrete and are quite regulated. The radioactive fuel is also different from that used in atomic bombs, so that lovely mushroom cloud we all picture in our “worst case scenario” image wouldn’t actually happen.

Most importantly, nuclear power plants produce clean, renewable energy… and a lot of it. In an age of energy crisis, where oil prices continue to rise and the hunt for oil is destroying the environment  can we afford to ignore such a valuable source of energy? We’ve learned a lot since Chernobyl, and the chances of a meltdown in a well-regulated power plant are now slim to none. Nuclear energy creates jobs, has little environmental impact, and pays for itself in the amount of energy it produces. Should we close down the nuclear power program because it has a million-to-one chance of disaster? After all, the oil industry and coal industry do much more environmental and health damage already.

I think we need to prioritize when it comes to energy sources. Is fear an adequate justification for inaction? Non-renewable energy resources are non-renewable, after all. We need to find ways to replace them before they run out, and nuclear energy does just that. However, I think that the risks involved with mismanaging nuclear power mean that  we need to regulate it and use it efficiently. For example, the use of the heat given off in the reaction to boil water is not a very efficient energy concept. I think we need to revolutionize it to make it safer and more reliable.

Another concept is the idea of nuclear fusion reactors. These would produce MUCH more energy without leaving behind radioactive waste. However, they would mean containing the heat of the sun. If we can’t keep fission reactors from melting down, how can we hope to control fusion cores?

 

Concept of a Fusion Reactor (magnetic field/ solenoid concept)

 

Perhaps what is needed more than anything in response to the energy crisis is education. Fear of new technology needs to be replaced with understanding and new ideas about how to recognize the risks and shortcomings and improve upon them. But should new ideas be used to improve potentially dangerous technologies or to search for new ones? How do we weigh the safety of future generations with our own security? What is our priority when dealing with energy sources?

These issues pertain to both nuclear energy and other energy sources as the debate over dependence on power plants goes on. After all, no matter where we get it from, energy is something we desperately need.

CI Ideas

I think I’d like to do my CI blog on energy. I’d like to focus on and think about how the idea ‘clean’ energy is being sold to the populace, whether truthful or not. I can go into four different forms of energy, their pros and cons from a civic standpoint, and why they have or have not become popular. For example, I can focus on oil, nuclear, wind, solar, and more creative ones like corn oil. I can talk about fracking, “natural” gas, and coal. I like this topic because it is significant, it has depth, and it’s interesting to me. I’d love to explore some more of the science behind these forms of energy.

To give myself a head start on this topic, I naturally turned to google.

This is a website community devoted to calling people to act against fracking. http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/water/fracking/ Similarly, this a website for a movie devoted to persuading viewers to stop fracking. http://www.gaslandthemovie.com/whats-fracking

As a response, this website offers a different perspective, supporting fracking despite attackers. http://www.what-is-fracking.com/ Here is a news article describing a conflict arising from these conflicting claims http://online.wsj.com/article/AP95320671aa53407a9281b662a9fea257.html

Here is a news article on advances in solar energy. http://www.wlfi.com/dpp/news/local/seminar-series-touches-on-solar-energy-research-efforts

This is a clean energy intitiative website that describes nuclear power. http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-and-you/affect/nuclear.html

This is a blog that allows users to brainstorm new forms of sustainable energy. Its a great way for the public to interact and communicate. http://blog.humanimpactsinstitute.org/2012/03/creativity-and-renewable-energy-at-sxsw-what-is-your-commitment/