According the the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 2012, carbon dioxide (CO2) made up about 82% of calculated United States greenhouse gas emissions produced by humans. The primary source of human CO2 emissions is from the burning of fossil fuels (coal, natural gas, and oil) for energy. According to the 2010 “Global Carbon Project,” combustion of fossil fuels make up about 91% of all human’s CO2 emissions. The primary sources of human CO2 emissions in the U.S. can be broken down into the following categories according to the EPA website: electricity, transportation, and industry.

Electricity accounts for about 38% of total U.S. CO2 emissions and 31% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions (2012). The burning of Fossil Fuels for electrical energy is the leading source of CO2 outflow in the U.S. Also, Burning coal to produceelectricity produces a significantly higher amount of CO2 than burning oil or natural gas.

Transportation accounts for about 32% of total U.S. CO2 emissions and 27% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions (2012). The burning of gasoline and diesel fossil fuels is what is meant by “transportation.”

Industry accounts for about 14% of total U.S. CO2 emissions and 12% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions (2012). Many industrial CO2 emissions do not include any combustion of fossil fuels, but chemical reaction CO2 emissions such as the production of various metals and cements.

“Carbon dioxide is constantly being exchanged among the atmosphere, ocean, and land surface as it is both produced and absorbed by many microorganisms, plants, and animals. However, emissions and removal of CO2 by these natural processes tend to balance” (EPA). The best way to reduce human CO2 emissions is by reducing fossil fuel consumption. This can be made possible by installing energy efficient appliances and also by creating awareness of the issue.

Now I’m going to calculate my individual “carbon footprint” to show how much CO2 one person can emit.

Home Energy: In my one bedroom apartment in Pennsylvania, it is predicted that with my energy conscious every day activities, my estimated impact is about 7.8 tons of CO2 eq/year.

Driving and Flying: Based on my large vehicle driving about 50,000 mi/year and the 8 flights I have taken this last school year, this adds about 57 tons of CO2 eq/year to my total.

Diet and Food: Considering I eat meat regularly and rarely eat organic food, 5 tons of CO2 eq/year has been added to my total.

Recycling and Waste: Based on my irregular recycling habits, I add 0.8 tons of CO2 eq/year.

7.8 + 57 + 5 + 0.8 = 70.6 tons of CO2 is the amount I produce per year based on my daily activities.

The average person in the U.S. emits about 27 tons of CO2/year.

70 – 27 = 43 tons of CO2/year —> This means that I produce about 2.5x the amount of CO2 than the average person per year. I candefinitely say it is the travel and transportation that is the reason this number is so high. If I were to completely eliminate the travel and flights, I would produce about 13 tons/year vs. 70. Considering this is a very unrealistic change in lifestyle, I will calculate the difference it would make if I were to invest in a hybrid vehicle.

With a hybrid vehicle (same distance per year and including flights) : about 35 tons

35 ÷ 57 x 100 = 61.4%

100 – 61.4 = 38.6%

If I were to invest in a hybrid car (price of vehicle not included in calculation), I would be emitting about 40% less CO2 into the air which would make a huge difference.

According to the Global Energy Statistical Yearbook of 2014, the overall total U.S energy consumption was at 2,187 Mtoe (tonne of oil equivalent unit of energy) at the end of 2013 right under China at 3,013 Mtoe.

2187 ÷ 3013 ≈ 0.73 x 100 = 73%

100 – 73 = 27%

This means that the U.S. consumes about 27% less energy than China, which seems good. But how does this compare based on the varying number in population? Well:

The U.S. Population (2013) ≈ 316.1 million

316.1mil ÷ 2187 ≈ 145,000 (About 145,000 people contribute to 1 Mtoe of energy consumption)

China’s Population (2013) ≈ 1.36 billion

1.36bil ÷ 3013 ≈ 151,000 (About 151, 000 people contribute to 1 Mtoe of energy consumption)

Once population is added into the equation, we can see the following: although China is the leading country for energy consumption annually as a whole, comparably to the U.S. in terms of population, China consumes less energy per person than the U.S. That difference of about 6,000 people (151,000 – 145,000) per 1 Mtoe of energy consumption makes all the difference.

Now, let’s view the difference in energy consumption of the U.S. compared to one of the lowest recorded energy consuming countries, New Zealand, at 20 Mtoe annual consumption. The U.S. consumption in total is significantly higher.

20 ÷ 2187 ≈ 0.01 x 100 = 1%

This number represents the percentage of New Zealand’s energy consumption in comparison to the U.S. In laymen’s terms, New Zealand was recorded using 1% of the total annual energy consumption compared to the U.S. But again, let’s look at the numbers when population is added into the function:

As we know: per about 145,000 people in the U.S., there is 1 Mtoe of energy consumption

New Zealand’s population (2013) ≈ 4.47 million

4.47mil ÷ 20 ≈ 223,500 (About 223,500 people contribute to 1 Mtoe of energy consumption)

Considering how significant the difference in people per 1 Mtoe of energy consumption in the U.S. vs. New Zealand, we see that not only is New zealand using more energy, but they are more energy efficient than the U.S.

When compared to the year of 2000, the U.S. energy consumption was not only at the top of the list, but actually more than the current number, weighing in at 2,269 Mtoe. Below is the calculation of the percentage decrease the U.S. has had in energy consumption from 2000-2013.

2187 ÷ 2269 ≈ 0.96 x 100 = 96%

100 – 96 = 4%

Going from the highest rated/recorded energy consuming country in 2000 at 2,269 Mtoe, the U.S. has actually decreased consumption since then to 2,187, and is now second on the list. In 2000, the U.S. population was about 282.2 million, and considering the energy consumption in 2000 was higher then with a lower population, we can see that the U.S. has become more energy efficient overall. For more information on the subject and statistics regarding the subject, click here.

Now let’s consider a couple questions: 1) Why has this energy consumption gone down in the U.S.?   2) Why do we need to conserve and limit energy consumption?

Well first off, energy consumption has decreased most likely due to the new awareness of subject within the last decade or so. There are new technologies to save energy such as energy efficient light bulbs, plugs and outlets, heaters, kitchen appliances, and many more. Second, in order to obtain energy through burning fossil fuels, gasses, and other natural resources, these processes are very harmful to our environment. These resources are scarce and very limited as well and the burning of these materials are very disruptive to the natural balance of our environment. In order to sustain our planet the way it is, we need to limit this energy consumption through natural resources of this matter. However, there is still an alternative! Due to new technology and research, we have a whole new world of energy conservation at our fingertips. We have the ability to convert solar power, wind power, thermal power, and other non-harmful resources into useful energy available in our every day lives. These means of power are non-harmful and even resourceful. We even have the ability to convert waste products into power. With more research, the idea of nearly unlimited power is completely realistic and possible without destroying our environment and ecosystem. For more info on the “coming era of unlimited, free, clean energy,” click here.

References: https://yearbook.enerdata.net 

http://venturebeat.com/2014/09/21/the-coming-era-of-unlimited-and-free-clean-energy/

According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the average American uses about 100 gallons of water per day. Although the Earth is covered by water (nearly 70%), less than 1% is clean, fresh, and available for human use and consumption. Between 5-10% of American households have been recorded with over 90 gallons of water used a day from leaks in faucets, pipes, etc. According to the EPA, if the 5% of American homes that leaked the most were to invest the money to replace and/or repair the leaks, it would save over 177 billion gallons of water annually. It may seem like a waste of money to invest in the repair, but fixing those leaks could actually SAVE you money.

The average American household pays about $500 per year on water and sewer bills. If a household were to fix the leaks as well as install water efficient appliances, the annual water bills could decrease more than $170. By installing water-efficient appliances, you could also save over 500 gallons of water. The less water use, the more you save on the water bill!

If all running toilets and inefficient toilets were replaced with water-efficient ones, over 640 billion gallons of water would be saved annually, and to give a visual of how much that really is, that amount of water is the equivalent of about 15 days of flowing water through the Niagara Falls. There are so many ways to save water, and something so small could make such a huge impact! Think of how much money could be saved by saving water.

Resource: http://www.epa.gov/watersense/about_us/facts.html

I am currently in an astronomy class, and we are learning about gravity. We learned how to calculate the difference of gravity in different planets and stars. The formula is gravity = mass ÷ (radius)^2.  As an example, we calculated the difference in gravity between the Earth and the moon. The moon is about 1/10 the mass of Earth and about 1/4 the radius. To figure out the difference, you much plug in the numbers into the equation. (g=gravity  m=mass  r=radius  ☾=moon  O=earth)

g☾=m☾÷(radius☾) ^2=(mO/10)÷(rO/4)^2=16/100gO

In pain English, this formula helps show us that the moon has about 16% of the gravity of Earth meaning in comparison, a jump would be higher and you’d feel lighter. What helps determine gravity of a planet, star, or moon, is its size, radius, and distance from the sun. As a planet’s mass increases with all else constant, the jump will be shorter meaning more gravity; as mass decreases with all else constant, the jump will be higher meaning less gravity. As the radius of a planet increases with all else constant, the jump will double the amount the radius increased (if it increases x3, your jump will increase x9), meaning less gravity. As the radius decreases, all else constant, the jump will decrease in height meaning more gravity.

This subject seemed extremely relevant to last week’s topics of comparisons in sizes and measurements because this subject helps us compare levels of gravity in the solar systems and puts them in laymen’s terms. Also, we had previously looked at the scale of different things in our solar system, so the subject seemed reasonable.

Resource: ASTRO Notes from the class and Video game from the class.

I’m Kira, and I’m a sophomore studying risk management. I chose to take this course not for a GQ, but because it genuinely seemed to be an interesting class. I am planning on going in a different direction than originally planned which will lead me to a different school next semester for welding. I think this course is relevant to me mainly because my intended subject of study involves the use of various natural resources (gas, metals, etc.) I  think that “sustainability” is simply the method of either staying alive or lasting. This can mean literal living beings maintaining life, or figuratively speaking, something like  the “life” of a river before it dries up. “Resilience” is the capability something has to recover from losses or replenish depleting resources. For this blog, it is required that I attach a photo and a hyperlink, so here is a photo of a puppy I found, and here is the link to a game (related to math) I used to play around on as a child! I suppose you have to see how long you can sustain your lemonade stand!   AND>>>>  http://www.coolmath-games.com/0-lemonade-stand