Summary
As the era of “Peak Oil” is being reached, many people are looking for alternative fuel supplies. One fuel is another fossil fuel called natural gas. Natural gas is located in multiple places, but a large reserve is found nearby in the Marcellus shale that extends from New York to Tennessee. But to obtain this gas, companies need to drill in local areas. A large debate is being held over whether the drilling should be allowed in the region. The anti-drilling argument is strongly against the use of the new drilling technique of hydraulic-fracturing, or “fracking.” The process requires sending mass quantities of water carrying hazardous chemicals into the ground, causing fractures in the shale so that the gas can be pumped up. A reason people do not want this to occur is because the chemicals could taint the local water supply, many of the chemicals may be left in the ground and spread unchecked. Also, no one knows to what extend the fractures spread, so more than just the shale could be cracked. Pro-drilling arguments center on stating that the other side of the debate has wrong facts. “Fracking” is actually safe and the drilling has been conducted for many years. Plus, the “fracking” occurs below the water table, so none of the water supply will be affected. Mostly, the pro-drilling argument holds up past examples and throws facts out to support the potentially new economic boom that would occur from the drilling.
Answers:
The main concerns for the anti-drilling group is that the hydraulic-fracturing drilling process will cause hazardous and irreversible environmental pollution to the water supply and bedrock foundations that are underneath people’s feet. Plus, they do not want harmful chemicals released into the earth in any amount, let along unregulated amounts.
The main concern for the pro-drilling group is that drilling in the region has been successfully accomplished for many years and hydraulic-fracturing has been deemed safe by the EPA. Plus, if the drilling is allowed it would be a great economic boost to New York and provide more financial security to the people in the region.
Questions:
1-Is there any way to pump the chemicals out and into a filter that will only attract the chemical residue found in the water used to collect the gas from the hydraulic-fracturing?
2-Has there been any research into a less hazardous form of drilling that could effectively recover the gas without the use of “fracking?”
3-Has there been any cases of the “fracking” causing sink holes from too many cracks in the underground rock foundation, and if so, what are the chances of more sink holes appearing and could they hurt the economy more than the gas profits?
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Summary
The world is close to reaching, or has reached, its Peak Oil. After Peak Oil, prices will climb and our fossil fuel dependent culture will become increasingly more difficult to sustain. One nation that has already passed their “Peak Oil” is Cuba. Cuba received much of its oil from the former Soviet Union, but once that collapsed, Cuba had to find a way to successfully live with reduced oil consumption. Since 1990, Cuba has accomplished a life with little oil. Even though it is a poor country, Cuba is a leader in the medical world, with great health education, free health care, good diets, and a prevent first method that has created the same life expectancy as the United States. Doctors live in the community and go to the people that need treatment, saving the sources needed to bring patients to hospital. Doctors of Cuba treat medicine as a “vocation, not a job.” Cuba also has an established education system. While not many people go to college, they all attend school for 12 years. At school, they also learn skills like farming, auto repair, and sewing, becoming self-reliant. A large part of Cuba’s success is their ride sharing. The “Camel” a 300 person bus and a strong commitment to car-pooling have helped to decrease the oil used. Some “taxis” and “buses” are mule drawn wagons, again saving oil. Plus, Cuban homes are smaller than the average American home, needing less energy to maintain upkeep. Cubans also live several generations together, saving space for others. Along with smaller homes, many people are moving back to rural areas. Instead of crowding the cities, they live off their own land, because they have learned how. Even under a heavy US embargo, Cuba has created a sustainable society that exists with little oil reliance, a skill that will be needed around the world sooner than later.
Answers:
Ways Cuba was able to sustain their society after the loss of fossil fuel imports were by establishing a strong health care program that lets the population live higher quality lives, learning practical skills at a young age, car-pooling and mass public transportation to reduce oil use, smaller housing, and migrating out of cities and back to the country.
Relocalization is a reasonable response to reduced energy because it would create a sustainable community without the large need for outside supplies that would cost high energy amounts to produce, transport, and store. Relocalization has the merits of every community making their own food and other products around their home, saving money and keeping spent money in the local economy, but it has the drawback of not every resource needed can be obtained in the community, also life-styles would decrease as creature comforts decline and more emphasis is placed on hard work on the land to grow food or make hand crafts.
Questions:
1-Cuba’s health care contains doctors that work for little money incentive because they live in a society that allows poorer living standards. Can a materialistic culture make it possible for doctors to achieve the doctor title by lowering medical school costs, living costs, and other high prices found in society?
2-The lower oil needed and slower transportation works in a smaller island nation but how effective would that method be in a nation like the United States with a lot more land?
3-How does the communist regime of Cuba effect the mandatory schools and skills taught at those schools?
The world is close to reaching, or has reached, its Peak Oil. After Peak Oil, prices will climb and our fossil fuel dependent culture will become increasingly more difficult to sustain. One nation that has already passed their “Peak Oil” is Cuba. Cuba received much of its oil from the former Soviet Union, but once that collapsed, Cuba had to find a way to successfully live with reduced oil consumption. Since 1990, Cuba has accomplished a life with little oil. Even though it is a poor country, Cuba is a leader in the medical world, with great health education, free health care, good diets, and a prevent first method that has created the same life expectancy as the United States. Doctors live in the community and go to the people that need treatment, saving the sources needed to bring patients to hospital. Doctors of Cuba treat medicine as a “vocation, not a job.” Cuba also has an established education system. While not many people go to college, they all attend school for 12 years. At school, they also learn skills like farming, auto repair, and sewing, becoming self-reliant. A large part of Cuba’s success is their ride sharing. The “Camel” a 300 person bus and a strong commitment to car-pooling have helped to decrease the oil used. Some “taxis” and “buses” are mule drawn wagons, again saving oil. Plus, Cuban homes are smaller than the average American home, needing less energy to maintain upkeep. Cubans also live several generations together, saving space for others. Along with smaller homes, many people are moving back to rural areas. Instead of crowding the cities, they live off their own land, because they have learned how. Even under a heavy US embargo, Cuba has created a sustainable society that exists with little oil reliance, a skill that will be needed around the world sooner than later.
Answers:
Ways Cuba was able to sustain their society after the loss of fossil fuel imports were by establishing a strong health care program that lets the population live higher quality lives, learning practical skills at a young age, car-pooling and mass public transportation to reduce oil use, smaller housing, and migrating out of cities and back to the country.
Relocalization is a reasonable response to reduced energy because it would create a sustainable community without the large need for outside supplies that would cost high energy amounts to produce, transport, and store. Relocalization has the merits of every community making their own food and other products around their home, saving money and keeping spent money in the local economy, but it has the drawback of not every resource needed can be obtained in the community, also life-styles would decrease as creature comforts decline and more emphasis is placed on hard work on the land to grow food or make hand crafts.
Questions:
1-Cuba’s health care contains doctors that work for little money incentive because they live in a society that allows poorer living standards. Can a materialistic culture make it possible for doctors to achieve the doctor title by lowering medical school costs, living costs, and other high prices found in society?
2-The lower oil needed and slower transportation works in a smaller island nation but how effective would that method be in a nation like the United States with a lot more land?
3-How does the communist regime of Cuba effect the mandatory schools and skills taught at those schools?
Monday, January 25, 2010
Summary 2
Hydrocarbons are the basis of modern society. Just about every daily used object is made from hydrocarbons. Our culture is founded on hydrocarbons. Oil, particularly, is the biggest hydrocarbon used today. The problem with such a strong dependence on oil is that it is not a renewable source. Over the decades of extensive use, oil reserves have begun to deplete. M. King Hubbert predicted that Peak Oil would strike around present time. Peak Oil is when the energy used to retrieve oil is higher than the energy used to from the oil. As an oil well is tapped and the pressure drops, the cost to drill the oil climbed above the profits from selling the oil. Already the US and Russia have passed their Peak Oil and soon around 2010 the world’s Peak Oil will be reached. Besides oil, natural gas, another hydrocarbon, is being used as a fuel source. While drilling for natural gas is usually cheaper than oil drilling, there is not enough natural gas to cover national energy needs. Natural gas is less dense than oil, so much more is needed for the same energy levels, but there is just not enough gas to be obtained.
With the fall of oil, the fall of agriculture will follow quickly. At the moment, only two nations are major exporters of grain, the US and Canada. Higher population and decreased oil fuel could cause at least the US to stop exporting grain, hurting the economy and possibly starving millions of people to death. The agriculture system needs to undergo changes to prevent such a catastrophe. Changes like renewable energy sources, environmentally friendly methods, and population control need to be considered to save the world from a major disaster. North Korea is an example of what type of disaster is waiting for the rest of the world. With little oil resources and poor soil, North Korea was dependent on imports from the Soviet Union. After the Soviet collapse, North Korea’s oil supplies dwindled and could not support their agriculture and industry infrastructure fell apart. Soon people were out of work and starving and North Korea has to rely heavily on outside help. The whole world could suffer the same collapse and there is no outside help for the rest of the world.
Answers:
Fossil Fuels have added to the dangerously vulnerable state of modern agriculture by the mass production of the crops that feed the present day giant populations are only possible by using machines that only run by fossil fuels. Agriculture production is run by fossil fuels, so when they fail, agriculture fails.
Lessons the US can learn from North Korea’s collapse is that over reliance on oil and poor treatment of soil can and will lead to crop failure, starvation, and economic pains because with an inefficient oil supply and poor soil, a present day agriculture cannot produce enough crops to fuel the population
4-Will passing the Peak Oil mark speed up the possible crash of the national agriculture infrastructure so that it is too late to save?
5-How did North Korea’s communist policies directly affect how oil was used in North Korea’s economy?
6-Have the use of hydrocarbons become the downfall of the world as the heavy reliance cannot be easily switched off and the hydrocarbon source cannot last?
Hydrocarbons are the basis of modern society. Just about every daily used object is made from hydrocarbons. Our culture is founded on hydrocarbons. Oil, particularly, is the biggest hydrocarbon used today. The problem with such a strong dependence on oil is that it is not a renewable source. Over the decades of extensive use, oil reserves have begun to deplete. M. King Hubbert predicted that Peak Oil would strike around present time. Peak Oil is when the energy used to retrieve oil is higher than the energy used to from the oil. As an oil well is tapped and the pressure drops, the cost to drill the oil climbed above the profits from selling the oil. Already the US and Russia have passed their Peak Oil and soon around 2010 the world’s Peak Oil will be reached. Besides oil, natural gas, another hydrocarbon, is being used as a fuel source. While drilling for natural gas is usually cheaper than oil drilling, there is not enough natural gas to cover national energy needs. Natural gas is less dense than oil, so much more is needed for the same energy levels, but there is just not enough gas to be obtained.
With the fall of oil, the fall of agriculture will follow quickly. At the moment, only two nations are major exporters of grain, the US and Canada. Higher population and decreased oil fuel could cause at least the US to stop exporting grain, hurting the economy and possibly starving millions of people to death. The agriculture system needs to undergo changes to prevent such a catastrophe. Changes like renewable energy sources, environmentally friendly methods, and population control need to be considered to save the world from a major disaster. North Korea is an example of what type of disaster is waiting for the rest of the world. With little oil resources and poor soil, North Korea was dependent on imports from the Soviet Union. After the Soviet collapse, North Korea’s oil supplies dwindled and could not support their agriculture and industry infrastructure fell apart. Soon people were out of work and starving and North Korea has to rely heavily on outside help. The whole world could suffer the same collapse and there is no outside help for the rest of the world.
Answers:
Fossil Fuels have added to the dangerously vulnerable state of modern agriculture by the mass production of the crops that feed the present day giant populations are only possible by using machines that only run by fossil fuels. Agriculture production is run by fossil fuels, so when they fail, agriculture fails.
Lessons the US can learn from North Korea’s collapse is that over reliance on oil and poor treatment of soil can and will lead to crop failure, starvation, and economic pains because with an inefficient oil supply and poor soil, a present day agriculture cannot produce enough crops to fuel the population
4-Will passing the Peak Oil mark speed up the possible crash of the national agriculture infrastructure so that it is too late to save?
5-How did North Korea’s communist policies directly affect how oil was used in North Korea’s economy?
6-Have the use of hydrocarbons become the downfall of the world as the heavy reliance cannot be easily switched off and the hydrocarbon source cannot last?
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Summary 1
The invention of the car helped to shape our culture into what it is today. With a personal automobile, the nation became open to the public like never before. When Henry Ford created the assembly line and began to mass produce cars, like the Model T, he turned the car from a rich man’s leisure activity into mainstream mode of transportation. Automobiles were seen as the future by almost everyone. Car companies began to buy and kill public transit like electric trolleys and trains. Plus, the government created funds for highways and gave loans to car makers, but not to public transit. Throughout the early twentieth century cars began to dominate. Also, they helped to mechanized farms, which would lead to rapid overproduction and ultimately the death of many farms. Then, after the Great Depression hit, the building craze of highways through Long Island by Robert Moses helped to cement the car’s reign over culture. Moses was able to gain large loans to use as he wanted to create the roads he wanted and turn areas into “parking lots.” He also refused to include any future public transit plans into his work. Along with highways, the government and banks gave post war loans to private homes just outside of the cities. It was more cost effective to buy a house in the suburb than rent. Massive suburbs spread across the landscape, and the only way to travel between work and home was a car. These factors helped to establish the car as the dominant figure in society. Consequently, with such a dependence on cars, society’s backbone was made by oil, the lifeblood of cars.
Summary 2
Hydrocarbons are the basis of modern society. Just about every daily used object is made from hydrocarbons. Our culture is founded on hydrocarbons. Oil, particularly, is the biggest hydrocarbon used today. The problem with such a strong dependence on oil is that it is not a renewable source. Over the decades of extensive use, oil reserves have begun to deplete. M. King Hubbert predicted that Peak Oil would strike around present time. Peak Oil is when the energy used to retrieve oil is higher than the energy used to from the oil. As an oil well is tapped and the pressure drops, the cost to drill the oil climbed above the profits from selling the oil. Already the US and Russia have passed their Peak Oil and soon around 2010 the world’s Peak Oil will be reached. Besides oil, natural gas, another hydrocarbon, is being used as a fuel source. While drilling for natural gas is usually cheaper than oil drilling, there is not enough natural gas to cover national energy needs. Natural gas is less dense than oil, so much more is needed for the same energy levels, but there is just not enough gas to be obtained.
With the fall of oil, the fall of agriculture will follow quickly. At the moment, only two nations are major exporters of grain, the US and Canada. Higher population and decreased oil fuel could cause at least the US to stop exporting grain, hurting the economy and possibly starving millions of people to death. The agriculture system needs to undergo changes to prevent such a catastrophe. Changes like renewable energy sources, environmentally friendly methods, and population control need to be considered to save the world from a major disaster. North Korea is an example of what type of disaster is waiting for the rest of the world. With little oil resources and poor soil, North Korea was dependent on imports from the Soviet Union. After the Soviet collapse, North Korea’s oil supplies dwindled and could not support their agriculture and industry infrastructure fell apart. Soon people were out of work and starving and North Korea has to rely heavily on outside help. The whole world could suffer the same collapse and there is no outside help for the rest of the world.
Answers:
The car/tractor craze helped to shape American culture by allowing people to “escape” from the rest of their lives, allowing rapid mass production of agriculture products, it gave the ability to see the country and to live further away from their work, helping to produce the suburbs, and killed public transit, creating the oil backbone that is still present today.
Energy contributed to the post war housing boom and development by allowing for effective way to heat and run houses and appliances, creating the ability to live in a private home and by fueling cars, allowing people to live outside cities because they could now commute to work over distances.
Questions:
1-How exactly was Robert Moses able to gather so much capital and stay outside the government’s check system to make southern New York into his own image of the future? Also, did he have any oil company connections?
2-Why did the government decide cars were the future of America? Was there outside pressure from political contributors with oil ties?
3-Were there any government interference, from progressives, on car companies gaining such a control on transportation in the society?
4-Will passing the Peak Oil mark speed up the possible crash of the national agriculture infrastructure so that it is too late to save?
5-How did North Korea’s communist policies directly affect how oil was used in North Korea’s economy?
6-Have the use of hydrocarbons become the downfall of the world as the heavy reliance cannot be easily switched off and the hydrocarbon source cannot last?6-Have the use of hydrocarbons become the downfall of the world as the heavy reliance cannot be easily switched off and the hydrocarbon source cannot last?
The invention of the car helped to shape our culture into what it is today. With a personal automobile, the nation became open to the public like never before. When Henry Ford created the assembly line and began to mass produce cars, like the Model T, he turned the car from a rich man’s leisure activity into mainstream mode of transportation. Automobiles were seen as the future by almost everyone. Car companies began to buy and kill public transit like electric trolleys and trains. Plus, the government created funds for highways and gave loans to car makers, but not to public transit. Throughout the early twentieth century cars began to dominate. Also, they helped to mechanized farms, which would lead to rapid overproduction and ultimately the death of many farms. Then, after the Great Depression hit, the building craze of highways through Long Island by Robert Moses helped to cement the car’s reign over culture. Moses was able to gain large loans to use as he wanted to create the roads he wanted and turn areas into “parking lots.” He also refused to include any future public transit plans into his work. Along with highways, the government and banks gave post war loans to private homes just outside of the cities. It was more cost effective to buy a house in the suburb than rent. Massive suburbs spread across the landscape, and the only way to travel between work and home was a car. These factors helped to establish the car as the dominant figure in society. Consequently, with such a dependence on cars, society’s backbone was made by oil, the lifeblood of cars.
Summary 2
Hydrocarbons are the basis of modern society. Just about every daily used object is made from hydrocarbons. Our culture is founded on hydrocarbons. Oil, particularly, is the biggest hydrocarbon used today. The problem with such a strong dependence on oil is that it is not a renewable source. Over the decades of extensive use, oil reserves have begun to deplete. M. King Hubbert predicted that Peak Oil would strike around present time. Peak Oil is when the energy used to retrieve oil is higher than the energy used to from the oil. As an oil well is tapped and the pressure drops, the cost to drill the oil climbed above the profits from selling the oil. Already the US and Russia have passed their Peak Oil and soon around 2010 the world’s Peak Oil will be reached. Besides oil, natural gas, another hydrocarbon, is being used as a fuel source. While drilling for natural gas is usually cheaper than oil drilling, there is not enough natural gas to cover national energy needs. Natural gas is less dense than oil, so much more is needed for the same energy levels, but there is just not enough gas to be obtained.
With the fall of oil, the fall of agriculture will follow quickly. At the moment, only two nations are major exporters of grain, the US and Canada. Higher population and decreased oil fuel could cause at least the US to stop exporting grain, hurting the economy and possibly starving millions of people to death. The agriculture system needs to undergo changes to prevent such a catastrophe. Changes like renewable energy sources, environmentally friendly methods, and population control need to be considered to save the world from a major disaster. North Korea is an example of what type of disaster is waiting for the rest of the world. With little oil resources and poor soil, North Korea was dependent on imports from the Soviet Union. After the Soviet collapse, North Korea’s oil supplies dwindled and could not support their agriculture and industry infrastructure fell apart. Soon people were out of work and starving and North Korea has to rely heavily on outside help. The whole world could suffer the same collapse and there is no outside help for the rest of the world.
Answers:
The car/tractor craze helped to shape American culture by allowing people to “escape” from the rest of their lives, allowing rapid mass production of agriculture products, it gave the ability to see the country and to live further away from their work, helping to produce the suburbs, and killed public transit, creating the oil backbone that is still present today.
Energy contributed to the post war housing boom and development by allowing for effective way to heat and run houses and appliances, creating the ability to live in a private home and by fueling cars, allowing people to live outside cities because they could now commute to work over distances.
Questions:
1-How exactly was Robert Moses able to gather so much capital and stay outside the government’s check system to make southern New York into his own image of the future? Also, did he have any oil company connections?
2-Why did the government decide cars were the future of America? Was there outside pressure from political contributors with oil ties?
3-Were there any government interference, from progressives, on car companies gaining such a control on transportation in the society?
4-Will passing the Peak Oil mark speed up the possible crash of the national agriculture infrastructure so that it is too late to save?
5-How did North Korea’s communist policies directly affect how oil was used in North Korea’s economy?
6-Have the use of hydrocarbons become the downfall of the world as the heavy reliance cannot be easily switched off and the hydrocarbon source cannot last?6-Have the use of hydrocarbons become the downfall of the world as the heavy reliance cannot be easily switched off and the hydrocarbon source cannot last?
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Summary 1:
English economist William Stanley Jevons made the observation in 1865 that as people became more efficient at using an energy source, the demand for that resource would raise. Better machinery would allow more people to use the fuel and utilize the source to new areas. More people and more machines like engines in use would increase the overall fuel consumption. William Jevons’ example was coal, and he was able to predict the “peak coal” of Britain. As coal was used more efficiently, more coal was mined, and quickly the energy and cost to mine deeper coal reserves was higher than the energy and profit from using the coal. The observation of William Jevons is unofficially a societal law called Jevons’ law. Luckily, at the time oil was soon used to replace coal. Now, though, oil use is in the same predicament as to drill and harvest oil is causing higher demands than profit from selling and using oil. Modern society economies are completely based on oil, though, and if a sense of emergency is not gained by the public, then a “catastrophic” collapse will happen.
Summary 2:
As the earth pushes into the future a new type of economy is going to be needed to prevent an economic “crash.” The new economy would be a “steady-state economy.” A “steady-state economy” is different from a failed growth economy by the fact that it is not meant to grow, but hover. With the comparison between a plane and a helicopter, the “steady-state economy” is the helicopter. By focusing on maintenance and service, not production, the economy can begin to move towards the SSE. Instead of taxing goods, taxes would be placed on production waste, or pollution. Taxes would be on the “bad” part of industry and not on the labor or capital. The unregulated global free trade would have to follow stricter rules, keeping services in the country of origin for the businesses, increasing employment. Plus, the income difference would be minimized by smaller incentives based on production and a minimum and maximum limit for wages for everyone, a set income range. The GDP needs to be separated into two accounts. These two accounts would be profits from growth and the cost of the economic growth. The economy should observe how the constant growth is actually weakening the economy, or causing the plane to stall and hover, which it is not capable of doing. Such changes may not fully stop the potential economic “crash” in the future, but could slow it down and also be good guidelines for the economy after the “crash.”
Answers:
The problem Jevons was worried about was that the more efficient burning of coal would lead to higher mining that would force people to mine deeper for coal and the cost of the new mines would be greater than the profits made by selling and using the coal.
The comparison means that the plane is the current economy in that it is constantly going forward, or growing, but the helicopter is the “steady-state economy” where it is built for hovering, not continuously going forward, the two economic systems are two different methods and should not be treated as the same.
Questions:
1-Is there any economical way to mine for the deeper coal while maintaining higher profits, possibly by using the more efficient machines or coal alternatives? Would it be worth investigating?
2-The “steady-state economy” does have a good argument, but would the part about limiting free trade and making a wage range be gravitating towards communism?
3-Both articles seem to make the point that economic growth with fossil fuels will fail, but do not mention alternative fuels in any depth. Can reusable fuel support society in the next hundred years while at least maintaining the economic level of present times?
English economist William Stanley Jevons made the observation in 1865 that as people became more efficient at using an energy source, the demand for that resource would raise. Better machinery would allow more people to use the fuel and utilize the source to new areas. More people and more machines like engines in use would increase the overall fuel consumption. William Jevons’ example was coal, and he was able to predict the “peak coal” of Britain. As coal was used more efficiently, more coal was mined, and quickly the energy and cost to mine deeper coal reserves was higher than the energy and profit from using the coal. The observation of William Jevons is unofficially a societal law called Jevons’ law. Luckily, at the time oil was soon used to replace coal. Now, though, oil use is in the same predicament as to drill and harvest oil is causing higher demands than profit from selling and using oil. Modern society economies are completely based on oil, though, and if a sense of emergency is not gained by the public, then a “catastrophic” collapse will happen.
Summary 2:
As the earth pushes into the future a new type of economy is going to be needed to prevent an economic “crash.” The new economy would be a “steady-state economy.” A “steady-state economy” is different from a failed growth economy by the fact that it is not meant to grow, but hover. With the comparison between a plane and a helicopter, the “steady-state economy” is the helicopter. By focusing on maintenance and service, not production, the economy can begin to move towards the SSE. Instead of taxing goods, taxes would be placed on production waste, or pollution. Taxes would be on the “bad” part of industry and not on the labor or capital. The unregulated global free trade would have to follow stricter rules, keeping services in the country of origin for the businesses, increasing employment. Plus, the income difference would be minimized by smaller incentives based on production and a minimum and maximum limit for wages for everyone, a set income range. The GDP needs to be separated into two accounts. These two accounts would be profits from growth and the cost of the economic growth. The economy should observe how the constant growth is actually weakening the economy, or causing the plane to stall and hover, which it is not capable of doing. Such changes may not fully stop the potential economic “crash” in the future, but could slow it down and also be good guidelines for the economy after the “crash.”
Answers:
The problem Jevons was worried about was that the more efficient burning of coal would lead to higher mining that would force people to mine deeper for coal and the cost of the new mines would be greater than the profits made by selling and using the coal.
The comparison means that the plane is the current economy in that it is constantly going forward, or growing, but the helicopter is the “steady-state economy” where it is built for hovering, not continuously going forward, the two economic systems are two different methods and should not be treated as the same.
Questions:
1-Is there any economical way to mine for the deeper coal while maintaining higher profits, possibly by using the more efficient machines or coal alternatives? Would it be worth investigating?
2-The “steady-state economy” does have a good argument, but would the part about limiting free trade and making a wage range be gravitating towards communism?
3-Both articles seem to make the point that economic growth with fossil fuels will fail, but do not mention alternative fuels in any depth. Can reusable fuel support society in the next hundred years while at least maintaining the economic level of present times?
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
As fuel source efficiencies improved, so too did transportation and information advances. Before fossil fuel advancements, the main way to carry products was by horse drawn carriage or barge. With steam engines and steam turbines, trains became the best way to transport products over land as the train’s engine could produce more power to haul more goods. Also, the railroad tracks combined with the new engines allowed for faster transport, times. Then with time the train engines saw many improvements like the electric trains of today that carry mostly people in urban areas at high speeds of around 200 kilometers an hour. Other forms of transportation also saw advancements. Boats had steam engines and turbines placed on them allowing for much faster travel over water, like a six day trip across the Atlantic. Cars with the gas combustion engine allowed for easier, faster, and efficient personal travel. Gas engines, though produced much air pollution, but the cost of maintaining a car created a greater work force and more economic development. Then airplanes appeared and advanced to intercontinental travel in rapid trips. Plus, pipelines to move oil from wells to refineries allowed more gas engines to be used across the globe as more oil was brought to the refineries. Along with faster transportation, information could travel faster with telephones, cell phones, with the invention of the microchip, computers became efficient at immediate information sharing and the internet was developed. With greater rates of travel and information sharing, businesses could transport more goods to necessary locations quicker, creating a more efficient economy.
Answers:
Better transport allowed for more efficient economy by allowing greater amount of products to be carried over greater distances at faster rates. By using more advanced methods of transportation, businesses could move their resources anywhere for cheap prices rapidly, creating greater profit margins.
More efficient information communication could reduce fuel use by allowing people to send important information over distances by the internet or phone and not need to run an engine to carry themselves to the other person. Plus, if orders are sent by internet, then they could be gathered by nearby areas, if possible, rather than sending the product from a different location and using energy fuels.
Questions:
1-As new transportation advancements were made, what made gas combustion engines in cars so good that the steady progress of improvements was brought to a halt?
2-If pipelines were so good at transporting oil over a large distance, why have people not looked at tube transport for other things like people? (inspired by cartoon versions of the future and reading)
3-What is the environmental impact of the modern bullet trains and what is the possibility of spreading their use outside of urban regions? Would it be cost effective?
Answers:
Better transport allowed for more efficient economy by allowing greater amount of products to be carried over greater distances at faster rates. By using more advanced methods of transportation, businesses could move their resources anywhere for cheap prices rapidly, creating greater profit margins.
More efficient information communication could reduce fuel use by allowing people to send important information over distances by the internet or phone and not need to run an engine to carry themselves to the other person. Plus, if orders are sent by internet, then they could be gathered by nearby areas, if possible, rather than sending the product from a different location and using energy fuels.
Questions:
1-As new transportation advancements were made, what made gas combustion engines in cars so good that the steady progress of improvements was brought to a halt?
2-If pipelines were so good at transporting oil over a large distance, why have people not looked at tube transport for other things like people? (inspired by cartoon versions of the future and reading)
3-What is the environmental impact of the modern bullet trains and what is the possibility of spreading their use outside of urban regions? Would it be cost effective?
Monday, January 18, 2010
As societies grew, so did the need for fuel sources with a higher energy output. The need for the higher energy output lead to the invention and dominance of fossil fuels. Fossil fuels like coal, the first fossil fuel source truly harvested were burned by people to generate kinetic energy. A main form of the produced kinetic energy was electricity. The electricity was formed by burning coal to produce high temperatures to boil water in a steam engine. The steam would spin a turbine, transforming potential energy into transmission capable and usable kinetic energy. Then, as the search for more efficient energy continued, the steam turbine was invented. Fossil fuels could be used in a smaller engine and produce even more kinetic energy in the form of electricity. With more effective engines, like the steam turbine and later the combustion engine, more fossil fuels like oil, natural gas and more coal were used more to create greater amounts of electricity. More electricity, combined with the better ways to burn fossil fuels lead to lights and more efficient ways to shape and use metals from the ground. The higher quality metals allowed for more technological advanced that opened the doorway for fission and fusion energy, or nuclear energy. The high energy output from nuclear energy was aimed to help reduce the use of fossil fuels, but health problems have helped to hold back nuclear dominance as an energy source.
Answers:
The other energy sources are in the fossil fuel society chapter because some were created to better harvest the potential energy fossil fuels, like the hydro steam engines and turbines, and some were created to ease the reliance of fossil fuels during the search for even greater energy sources in the twentieth century.
The thermal efficiency tends to dramatically increase over time as new energy sources or technology can produce higher and higher temperatures from burning fossil fuels or using nuclear fission.
Questions:
1-Breifly nuclear fusion was mentioned but not described in any detail. What would the energy ratio or thermal production of fusion energy compared to fission energy?
2-Were combustion engines ever used to provide electrical energy to housing like steam turbines were, or were combustion engines utilized only for smaller vehicle transportation.3-Why was there such a higher efficiency of AC electrical power over DC electricity?
Answers:
The other energy sources are in the fossil fuel society chapter because some were created to better harvest the potential energy fossil fuels, like the hydro steam engines and turbines, and some were created to ease the reliance of fossil fuels during the search for even greater energy sources in the twentieth century.
The thermal efficiency tends to dramatically increase over time as new energy sources or technology can produce higher and higher temperatures from burning fossil fuels or using nuclear fission.
Questions:
1-Breifly nuclear fusion was mentioned but not described in any detail. What would the energy ratio or thermal production of fusion energy compared to fission energy?
2-Were combustion engines ever used to provide electrical energy to housing like steam turbines were, or were combustion engines utilized only for smaller vehicle transportation.3-Why was there such a higher efficiency of AC electrical power over DC electricity?
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Before the rise of the Industrial era, people used energy in different ways than modern times. Energy for people in the past was mostly based on what was found in nature. First people were hunters and gatherers and their activities depended on human work for the energy to complete any task. Slowly, people began to devise plans to more efficiently gather and hunt food while conserving human energy output. New tools and ideas like land clearing lead to the rise of shifting cultivation allowed more food collection to maintain optimal human energy levels. Then animals were domesticated. With the domestication of animals and use of plows allowed for a lower human energy needed and a higher concern on getting the most energy out of animals. The advantages of cattle and then horses for work were analyzed and adapted over the years to create the largest energy output from each animal. Plus, people investigate the use of wood and charcoal as fuel for providing external energy. The search for external energy sources lead to the harvesting of water power with waterwheels from streams and rivers. Then the wind with windmills was utilized, both of which produced higher energy output than previous sources. Also, with the wind came sail ships, which would allow long transportation of people across the oceans, again utilizing external energy. Finally copper, iron, and steel were used to create better tools and items to allow for the highest energy to be obtained from other sources. Along with these was the introduction of gunpowder, a high energy origin that people could harvest for multiple uses.
Answers:
The ultimate energy source in a pre-industrial society would be the muscular exertions of people and animals as these were the backbone of “over a millennia of settled societies.”
An innovation from pre-industrial societies was the creation of the windmill because it allowed people to harvest an external energy source that was located in almost any area almost every day.
Disadvantages in the energy sources from the past were that there was not a very high energy output and several sources even needed more energy input to obtain optimal performance, so they were not cost effective.
Questions:
1-When discussing sail ships, the book mentions how the first ship to sail around the world was much smaller than some the ships used by the Romans centuries before, why did the naval technologies of people not be advanced higher earlier in time?
2-Does it seem that the foods from European agriculture allowed for larger densities of settlements and consequently the technological advantage enjoyed by Europe populations for so many centuries?3- Was it the large sailing ships or the revolution of using gunpowder that allowed for European dominance around the 16th century or was it the ability to combine the two?
Answers:
The ultimate energy source in a pre-industrial society would be the muscular exertions of people and animals as these were the backbone of “over a millennia of settled societies.”
An innovation from pre-industrial societies was the creation of the windmill because it allowed people to harvest an external energy source that was located in almost any area almost every day.
Disadvantages in the energy sources from the past were that there was not a very high energy output and several sources even needed more energy input to obtain optimal performance, so they were not cost effective.
Questions:
1-When discussing sail ships, the book mentions how the first ship to sail around the world was much smaller than some the ships used by the Romans centuries before, why did the naval technologies of people not be advanced higher earlier in time?
2-Does it seem that the foods from European agriculture allowed for larger densities of settlements and consequently the technological advantage enjoyed by Europe populations for so many centuries?3- Was it the large sailing ships or the revolution of using gunpowder that allowed for European dominance around the 16th century or was it the ability to combine the two?
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Summaries
China has seen an increase in the problem of acid rain over the past decade. Coal powered plants, which count for 69 percent of China’s energy in 2004, have produced large quantities of air pollutants. Toxins like sulfuric acid can be carried over hundreds of miles in the atmosphere and deposited as precipitation. The acidic precipitation causes severe damage to forest areas in China. Both foliage and soil suffer from negative effects of acid rain. Along with forest defoliation, stream water in regions of acid rain contains a lower pH, which could destroy local ecosystems. China does recognize the problem, though and are giving the problems of air pollution and acid rain high priority. The main framework for pollution reduction is the acid-rain control zone that was created by China as the costs of air pollution at over tens of billions of dollars. Even though the problem is recognized, still the demand for energy in China causes more coal plants to be created and a continuation of environmental hazards. Reduction measures need much more support and execution in China to help prevent further damage by acid rain and air pollution.
In the 1970s surface waters in the Adirondack region was found to be acidic, starting large scale surveys to assess the damage caused by acid rain. Stream water suffers the strongest influence from acid rain. The studies have found that strongly acidic anions and base cations or base-cation surplus (BCS) has affected the stream water of the Adirondacks. To better understand the acidic change in stream water, 200 streams were analyzed in the Western Adirondack Stream Survey from 2003 to 2005. Precipitation amount was measured and sampling was carried out in different months over the two years at the streams in the Adirondacks. Also pH and BCS were analyzed in each stream. The data collected was then used to determine which streams were acidified by acid rain. Chronic acidification was then discovered in over one third of the streams surveyed, mostly in the higher elevations of the eastern Adirondacks. Mostly, the study was to support the theory that BCS was a strong identifier of acidification in streams from acid rain. The stream chemistry is the best indicator at the moment.
Answers:
The main contributors to acid rain are sulfuric and nitrogen based air pollutants expelled from dirty coal and oil plants that are carried over distance in the atmosphere and deposited as precipitation. The lowest pH listed in the readings was in Sudbury, Canada at around 3.0, while other places in China range from 5.0 4.0 and the average Adirondack stream was about a pH of 6.0. Acid rain impacts are defoliation of forest trees, soil damage, and ecosystem damage as stream waters and other surface waters become acidic, creating toxic environments for many forms of life. The focus of acid rain research is to determine the damage to vegetation and to see how acidic surface waters become from acid rain deposits. To solve the problem, stricter monitoring of coal plants and the reduction of dirty coal plants are being implemented, but not at any great rate. There can only be a solution to help decrease the amount of pollutants put into the air, but the acidic contaminates already in the atmosphere cannot be removed and the surface water cannot be neutralized without more chemicals.
1) For the streams in the Adirondacks, do the acidic streams run into larger bodies of water and have any significant damage on lake or pond ecosystems that could further affect the region?
2) China’s reduction policies do not seem to be very specific in working to fix the amount of air pollutants pumped into the atmosphere, for a growing economy like China, why are not more jobs being offered to help solve the acid rain problem more assertively? It seems like a potentially strong economical job market for the future.
3) Why has there not been a higher public push for the reduction of acid rain world wide as it seems to be a problem that effects everyplace as the air pollutants can travel far before deposited?
China has seen an increase in the problem of acid rain over the past decade. Coal powered plants, which count for 69 percent of China’s energy in 2004, have produced large quantities of air pollutants. Toxins like sulfuric acid can be carried over hundreds of miles in the atmosphere and deposited as precipitation. The acidic precipitation causes severe damage to forest areas in China. Both foliage and soil suffer from negative effects of acid rain. Along with forest defoliation, stream water in regions of acid rain contains a lower pH, which could destroy local ecosystems. China does recognize the problem, though and are giving the problems of air pollution and acid rain high priority. The main framework for pollution reduction is the acid-rain control zone that was created by China as the costs of air pollution at over tens of billions of dollars. Even though the problem is recognized, still the demand for energy in China causes more coal plants to be created and a continuation of environmental hazards. Reduction measures need much more support and execution in China to help prevent further damage by acid rain and air pollution.
In the 1970s surface waters in the Adirondack region was found to be acidic, starting large scale surveys to assess the damage caused by acid rain. Stream water suffers the strongest influence from acid rain. The studies have found that strongly acidic anions and base cations or base-cation surplus (BCS) has affected the stream water of the Adirondacks. To better understand the acidic change in stream water, 200 streams were analyzed in the Western Adirondack Stream Survey from 2003 to 2005. Precipitation amount was measured and sampling was carried out in different months over the two years at the streams in the Adirondacks. Also pH and BCS were analyzed in each stream. The data collected was then used to determine which streams were acidified by acid rain. Chronic acidification was then discovered in over one third of the streams surveyed, mostly in the higher elevations of the eastern Adirondacks. Mostly, the study was to support the theory that BCS was a strong identifier of acidification in streams from acid rain. The stream chemistry is the best indicator at the moment.
Answers:
The main contributors to acid rain are sulfuric and nitrogen based air pollutants expelled from dirty coal and oil plants that are carried over distance in the atmosphere and deposited as precipitation. The lowest pH listed in the readings was in Sudbury, Canada at around 3.0, while other places in China range from 5.0 4.0 and the average Adirondack stream was about a pH of 6.0. Acid rain impacts are defoliation of forest trees, soil damage, and ecosystem damage as stream waters and other surface waters become acidic, creating toxic environments for many forms of life. The focus of acid rain research is to determine the damage to vegetation and to see how acidic surface waters become from acid rain deposits. To solve the problem, stricter monitoring of coal plants and the reduction of dirty coal plants are being implemented, but not at any great rate. There can only be a solution to help decrease the amount of pollutants put into the air, but the acidic contaminates already in the atmosphere cannot be removed and the surface water cannot be neutralized without more chemicals.
1) For the streams in the Adirondacks, do the acidic streams run into larger bodies of water and have any significant damage on lake or pond ecosystems that could further affect the region?
2) China’s reduction policies do not seem to be very specific in working to fix the amount of air pollutants pumped into the atmosphere, for a growing economy like China, why are not more jobs being offered to help solve the acid rain problem more assertively? It seems like a potentially strong economical job market for the future.
3) Why has there not been a higher public push for the reduction of acid rain world wide as it seems to be a problem that effects everyplace as the air pollutants can travel far before deposited?
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Coal is the least expensive and most plentiful energy source available to the United States. Unfortunately it is also one of the dirtiest fuel sources to use. Acid rain, killer smog, and large emissions of CO2 gas are just some of the negative side effects from coal use. For carbon dioxide emission, in one year the world burned five billion tons of coal and emitted 10 billion tons of carbon dioxide. The atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has increased from 280 ppm to 380 ppm. Plus, as oil supplies dwindle, more coal is used and many of the coal plants are decades old and not environmentally friendly. As more coal is used, a larger push for environmentally sound coal plants is being made. New coal burning plants have been made recently, but not in any large quantities. One new plant in North Dakota pumps their CO2 through a pipe into Canada. There, an oil field pumps the gas into the ground to push oil out for a higher recovery. Underground has enough space to hold all of the projected carbon dioxide emissions “for centuries.” Also, in Tampa, FL a new IGCC, integrated gasification combined cycle, plant was built and produces cleaner air than traditional coal plants and is at least 15 percent more efficient. As more coal is mined in the future, the pressure for new and cleaner coal-burning plants gains more momentum, but the cost still represses building of new, environmentally friendly plants.
Answers:
The IGCC plant is not the solution to global warming because there are still many other forms of pollution that further global warmer besides just coal burning, plus, the IGCC plant still produces flue gases that contain carbon dioxide that contribute to global warming so carbon dioxide emissions are not truly reduced, but the plant can easily be changed to fix that. The reduced pollutants expelled, though, would be a large step towards lowering coal-burning part of global warming. The IGCC plants could help energy crisis, but not as a final solution. At 15 percent more efficient than normal coal plants and can be changed for carbon dioxide storage and shipment for other energy production, but coal will only last for so long and will still produce some pollution, so new energy sources need to be researched.
Questions:
1) Can the emitted carbon dioxide be sent through pipes and pressurized so it can be pumped and spin a third turbine in the IGCC plants for further energy production?
2) Instead of just sending extra carbon dioxide to pump oil out of an oil field, can it be sent to empty oil fields and stored there from not just coal plants but other carbon dioxide producing plants as well?
3) The reading suggests that IGCC plants would be more cost effective over the long run, how much could IGCC plants save over pulverized coal plant adaptations from new legislature?
Vocabulary: Iridescent-property of a surface to appear to change colors as the view angle changes
Answers:
The IGCC plant is not the solution to global warming because there are still many other forms of pollution that further global warmer besides just coal burning, plus, the IGCC plant still produces flue gases that contain carbon dioxide that contribute to global warming so carbon dioxide emissions are not truly reduced, but the plant can easily be changed to fix that. The reduced pollutants expelled, though, would be a large step towards lowering coal-burning part of global warming. The IGCC plants could help energy crisis, but not as a final solution. At 15 percent more efficient than normal coal plants and can be changed for carbon dioxide storage and shipment for other energy production, but coal will only last for so long and will still produce some pollution, so new energy sources need to be researched.
Questions:
1) Can the emitted carbon dioxide be sent through pipes and pressurized so it can be pumped and spin a third turbine in the IGCC plants for further energy production?
2) Instead of just sending extra carbon dioxide to pump oil out of an oil field, can it be sent to empty oil fields and stored there from not just coal plants but other carbon dioxide producing plants as well?
3) The reading suggests that IGCC plants would be more cost effective over the long run, how much could IGCC plants save over pulverized coal plant adaptations from new legislature?
Vocabulary: Iridescent-property of a surface to appear to change colors as the view angle changes
Monday, January 11, 2010
Over 350 million years ago a sedimentary rock formation was deposited under the Appalachian Mountains in the eastern United States. Called the Marcellus Shale, it contains “significant quantities of natural gas.” The deposited organic material was heated and compressed over time in the depths of the Earth, creating hydrocarbons like natural gas occurring in pore spaces in the rock. In the Marcellus Shale there could be gas pressures of 26.5 standard cubic feet of gas per cubic foot of rock and an estimate of 363 trillion cubic feet of recoverable gas that can easily cover the 23 TCF of natural gas used in the United States per year. Natural gas is being explored as it is a cheaper, greener fuel source than oil and directional drilling that produces hydraulic fractures in the shale at a 90 degree angle from the vertical. The drilling, though, requires a large water supply and problems with avoiding surface environmental pollution and incorrect fluid disposal. Three million gallons of water would be needed each treatment and nearly all of that water needs to be recovered for the gas to flow out of the shale. Water disposal technology has not kept pace allowing for adequate development of drilling for the Marcellus Shale gas.
1-The strongest argument against gas drilling is the correct water disposal of the water recovered from the drilling as it could be contaminated and affect local water supplies.
2-I think the credibility of the sources are good, but a couple sources seem to be blogs, so I would question their facts and double check them for good measure.
3-The way figure 7 can be seen as misleading is if one takes the gel as the finished product of drilling for the gas in the Marcellus Shale. Also, the bare hands of the scientist might make people believe the gel is safe for the environment, and it is not.
A) There were several estimates for how much natural gas can be extracted from the Marcellus Shale, and if the lower estimates are correct, what would be the expense of drilling and the profit from selling for the energy companies?
B) Could the water treatment plants be designed with a new filter system that binds the salts in the fluid so that they can be properly removed from the water?
C) Is any new technology being developed to decrease the amount of equipment needed at shale stimulations to help lower the impact on the surrounding environment?
Vocabulary-
Proppant-Sized particles mixed with fracturing fluid to hold fractures open after a hydraulic fracturing treatment.
1-The strongest argument against gas drilling is the correct water disposal of the water recovered from the drilling as it could be contaminated and affect local water supplies.
2-I think the credibility of the sources are good, but a couple sources seem to be blogs, so I would question their facts and double check them for good measure.
3-The way figure 7 can be seen as misleading is if one takes the gel as the finished product of drilling for the gas in the Marcellus Shale. Also, the bare hands of the scientist might make people believe the gel is safe for the environment, and it is not.
A) There were several estimates for how much natural gas can be extracted from the Marcellus Shale, and if the lower estimates are correct, what would be the expense of drilling and the profit from selling for the energy companies?
B) Could the water treatment plants be designed with a new filter system that binds the salts in the fluid so that they can be properly removed from the water?
C) Is any new technology being developed to decrease the amount of equipment needed at shale stimulations to help lower the impact on the surrounding environment?
Vocabulary-
Proppant-Sized particles mixed with fracturing fluid to hold fractures open after a hydraulic fracturing treatment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)