At the core of most proposals is the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions through reducing energy waste and switching to cleaner energy sources. Frequently discussed energy conservation methods include increasing the fuel efficiency of vehicles (often through hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and electric cars and improving conventional automobiles), individual-lifestyle changes and changing business practices. Newly developed technologies and currently available technologies including renewable energy (such as solar power, tidal and ocean energy, geothermal power, and wind power) and more controversially nuclear power and the use of carbon sinks, carbon credits, and taxation are aimed more precisely at countering continued greenhouse gas emissions. More radical proposals which may be grouped with mitigation include biosequestration of atmospheric carbon dioxide and geoengineering techniques ranging from carbon sequestration projects such as carbon dioxide air capture, to solar radiation management schemes such as the creation of stratospheric sulfur aerosols. The ever-increasing global population and the planned growth of national GDPs based on current technologies are counter-productive to most of these proposals.

Alternative energy sources

Renewable energy

One means of reducing carbon emissions is the further development of renewable energy such as wind power. Scientists have advanced a plan to power 100% of the world’s energy with wind, hydroelectric, and solar power by the year 2030, recommending renewable energy subsidies and a price on carbon reflecting its cost for flood and related expenses.

Greenhouse gas emissions result from fossil fuel-based electricity generation. Currently governments subsidize fossil fuels by $557 billion per year. However, in some countries, government action has boosted the development of renewable energy technologies—for example, a program to put solar panels on the roofs of a million homes has made Japan a world leader in that technology, and Denmark’s support for wind power ensured its former leadership of that sector. In 2005, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger promised an initiative to install a million solar roofs in California, which became the California Solar Initiative. Most forms of renewable energy generate no appreciable amounts of greenhouse gases except for biofuels derived from biomass.

In some cases, such as with hydroelectric dams, there are unexpected results. One study shows that a hydroelectric dam in the Amazon has 3.6 times larger greenhouse effect per kW•h than electricity production from oil, due to large scale emission of methane from decaying organic material. This effect applies in particular to dams created by simply flooding a large area, without first clearing it of vegetation. There are however investigations into underwater turbines that do not require a dam. And pumped-storage hydroelectricity can use water reservoirs at different altitudes to store wind and solar power.

In June 2005, the chief executive of BT allegedly became the first head of a British company to admit that climate change is already affecting his company, and affecting its business, and announced plans to source much of its substantial energy use from renewable sources. He noted that, ””Since the beginning of the year, the media has been showing us images of Greenland glaciers crashing into the sea, Mount Kilimanjaro devoid of its ice cap and Scotland reeling from floods and gales. All down to natural weather cycles? I think not.””

Nuclear power

Nuclear power currently produces over 15% of the world’s electricity. Due to its low emittance of greenhouse gases (comparable to wind power) and reliability it is seen as a possible alternative to fossil fuels, but is controversial for reasons of capital cost and possible environmental impacts. Also, there are political impacts in some countries.

The bulk of CO2 emission from nuclear power plants can be eliminated if nuclear power plants themselves generate the electricity required during the uranium enrichment process (already being done in France and to some extent by the Tennessee Valley Authority’s many nuclear units in the U.S.). In addition, gas centrifuge technology has/will greatly reduced the energy required for enrichment, thus reducing the LCA carbon emissions per kilowatt-hour (see Piketon plant).

Current uranium production is expected to be adequate at current consumption rates for about a century (from uranium mining, see also peak uranium). There are a number of alternative nuclear fission technologies, such as breeder reactors, (see generation IV reactors) which could vastly extend fuel supplies if successfully developed and utilized. Lower-risk thorium cycles have been demonstrated in the past.

Nuclear fusion is another variant of providing nuclear energy, but it will not provide any immediate mitigation to global warming as the time horizon for its commercial deployment is expected to be after 2050.

Carbon intensity of fossil fuels

Natural gas (predominantly methane) produces less greenhouses gases per energy unit gained than oil which in turn produces less than coal, principally because coal has a larger ratio of carbon to hydrogen. The combustion of natural gas emits almost 30 percent less carbon dioxide than oil, and just under 45 percent less carbon dioxide than coal. In addition, there are also other environmental benefits.

A study performed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Gas Research Institute (GRI) in 1997 sought to discover whether the reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from increased natural gas (predominantly methane) use would be offset by a possible increased level of methane emissions from sources such as leaks and emissions. The study concluded that the reduction in emissions from increased natural gas use strongly outweighs the detrimental effects of increased methane emissions. Thus the increased use of natural gas in the place of other, dirtier fossil fuels can serve to lessen the emission of greenhouse gases in the United States.

Most mitigation proposals imply& — rather than directly state& — an eventual reduction in global fossil fuel production. Also proposed are direct quotas on global fossil fuel production.

Energy efficiency and conservation

Reducing fuel use by improvements in efficiency provides environmental benefits and as well as net cost savings to the energy user. Building insulation, fluorescent lighting, and public transportation are some of the most effective means of conserving energy, and by extension, the environment. However, Jevons paradox poses a challenge to the goal of reducing overall energy use (and thus environmental impact) by energy conservation methods. Improved efficiency lowers cost, which in turn increases demand. To ensure that increases in efficiency actually reduces energy use, a tax must be imposed to remove any cost savings from improved efficiency.

Energy conservation is the practice of increasing the efficiency of use of energy in order to achieve higher useful output for the same energy consumption. This may result in increase of national security, personal security, financial capital, human comfort and environmental value. Individuals and organizations that are direct consumers of energy may want to conserve energy in order to reduce energy costs and promote environmental values. Industrial and commercial users may want to increase efficiency and maximize profit.

On a larger scale, energy conservation is an element of energy policy. The need to increase the available supply of energy (for example, through the creation of new power plants, or by the importation of more energy) is lessened if societal demand for energy can be reduced, or if growth in demand can be slowed. This makes energy conservation an important part of the debate over climate change and the replacement of non-renewable resources with renewable energy. Encouraging energy conservation among consumers is often advocated as a cheaper or more environmentally sensitive alternative to increased energy production.

Residential buildings, commercial buildings, and the transportation of people and freight use the majority of the energy consumed by the United States each year. Specifically, the industrial sector uses 38 percent of total energy, closely followed by the transportation sector at 28 percent, the residential sector at 19 percent, and the commercial sector at 16 percent. On a community level, transportation can account for 40 to 50 percent of total energy use, and residential buildings use another 20 to 30 percent.

In developed nations, the way of life today is completely dependent on abundant supplies of energy. Energy is needed to heat, cool, and light homes, fuel cars, and power offices. Energy is also critical for manufacturing the products used every day, including the cement, concrete and bricks that shape our communities.

While the U.S represents only five percent of the world’s population, it consumes 25 percent of its energy and generates about 25 percent of its total greenhouse gas emissions. U.S. citizens, for example, use more energy per capita for transportation than do citizens of any other industrialized nation—which in part, reflects the greater distances traveled by Americans compared with citizens of other nations.

Transport

Modern energy efficient technologies, such as plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and development of new technologies, such as hydrogen cars, may reduce the consumption of petroleum and emissions of carbon dioxide. A shift from air transport and truck transport to electric rail transport

would reduce emissions significantly.

Increased use of biofuels (such as biodiesel and biobutanol, that can be used in 100% concentration in today’s diesel and gasoline engines) could also reduce emissions if produced environmentally efficiently, especially in conjunction with regular hybrids and plug-in hybrids. For electric vehicles, the reduction of carbon emissions will improve further if the way the required electricity is generated is low-carbon (from renewable energy sources).

Effective urban planning to reduce sprawl would decrease Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT), lowering emissions from transportation. Increased use of public transport can also reduce greenhouse gas emissions per passenger kilometer.

Urban planning

Urban planning also has an effect on energy use. Between 1982 and 1997, the amount of land consumed for urban development in the United States increased by 47 percent while the nation’s population grew by only 17 percent.

Inefficient land use development practices have increased infrastructure costs as well as the amount of energy needed for transportation, community services, and buildings.

At the same time, a growing number of citizens and government officials have begun advocating a smarter approach to land use planning. These smart growth practices include compact community development, multiple transportation choices, mixed land uses, and practices to conserve green space. These programs offer environmental, economic, and quality-of-life benefits; and they also serve to reduce energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions.

Approaches such as New Urbanism and Transit-oriented development seek to reduce distances travelled, especially by private vehicles, encourage public transit and make walking and cycling more attractive options. This is achieved through medium-density, mixed-use planning and the concentration of housing within walking distance of town centers and transport nodes.

Smarter growth land use policies have both a direct and indirect effect on energy consuming behavior. For example, transportation energy usage, the number one user of petroleum fuels, could be significantly reduced through more compact and mixed use land development patterns, which in turn could be served by a greater variety of non-automotive based transportation choices.

Building design

Emissions from housing are substantial, and government-supported energy efficiency programmes can make a difference.

New buildings can be constructed using passive solar building design, low-energy building, or zero-energy building techniques, using renewable heat sources. Existing buildings can be made more efficient through the use of insulation, high-efficiency appliances (particularly hot water heaters and furnaces), double- or triple-glazed gas-filled windows, external window shades, and building orientation and siting. Renewable heat sources such as shallow geothermal and passive solar energy reduce the amount of greenhouse gasses emitted. In addition to designing buildings which are more energy efficient to heat, it is possible to design buildings that are more energy efficient to cool by using lighter-coloured, more reflective materials in the development of urban areas (e.g. by painting roofs white) and planting trees. This saves energy because it cools buildings and reduces the urban heat island effect thus reducing the use of air conditioning.

Reforestation and avoided deforestation

Almost 20% (8 GtCO2/year) of total greenhouse-gas emissions were from deforestation in 2007. The Stern Review found that, based on the opportunity costs of the landuse that would no longer be available for agriculture if deforestation were avoided, emission savings from avoided deforestation could potentially reduce CO2 emissions for under $5/tCO2, possiblly as little as $1/tCO2. Afforestation and reforestation could save at least another 1GtCO2/year, at an estimated cost of $5/tCO2 to $15/tCO2. The Review determined these figures by assessing 8 countries responsible for 70% of global deforestation emissions.

Pristine temperate forest has been shown to store three times more carbon than IPCC estimates took into account, and 60% more carbon than plantation forest. Preventing these forests from being logged would have significant effects.

Further significant savings from other non-energy-related-emissions could be gained through cuts to agricultural emissions, fugitive emissions, waste emissions, and emissions from various industrial processes.

Eliminating waste methane

Methane is a significantly more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. Burning one molecule of methane generates one molecule of carbon dioxide. Accordingly, burning methane which would otherwise be released into the atmosphere (such as at oil wells, landfills, coal mines, waste treatment plants, etc.) provides a net greenhouse gas emissions benefit. However, reducing the amount of waste methane produced in the first place has an even greater beneficial impact, as might other approaches to productive use of otherwise-wasted methane.

In terms of prevention, vaccines are in the works in Australia to reduce significant global warming contributions from methane released by livestock via flatulence and eructation.

Geoengineering

Geoengineering is seen by some as an alternative to mitigation and adaptation, but by others as an entirely separate response to climate change. In a literature assessment, Barker ”et al.” (2007) described geoengineering as a type of mitigation policy. IPCC (2007) concluded that geoengineering options, such as ocean fertilization to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, remained largely unproven. It was judged that reliable cost estimates for geoengineering had not yet been published.

Chapter 28 of the National Academy of Sciences report ”Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming: Mitigation, Adaptation, and the Science Base” (1992) defined geoengineering as “options that would involve large-scale engineering of our environment in order to combat or counteract the effects of changes in atmospheric chemistry.” They evaluated a range of options to try to give preliminary answers to two questions: can these options work and could they be carried out with a reasonable cost. They also sought to encourage discussion of a third question& — what adverse side effects might there be. The following types of option were examined: reforestation, increasing ocean absorption of carbon dioxide (carbon sequestration) and screening out some sunlight. NAS also argued “Engineered countermeasures need to be evaluated but should not be implemented without broad understanding of the direct effects and the potential side effects, the ethical issues, and the risks.”.

Greenhouse gas remediation

Carbon sequestration has been proposed as a method of reducing the amount of radiative forcing. Carbon sequestration is a term that describes processes that remove carbon from the atmosphere. A variety of means of artificially capturing and storing carbon, as well as of enhancing natural sequestration processes, are being explored. The main natural process is photosynthesis by plants and single-celled organisms (see biosequestration). Artificial processes vary, and concerns have been expressed about their long-term effects.

Although they require land, natural sinks can be enhanced by reforestation and afforestation carbon offsets, which fix carbon dioxide for as little as $0.11 per metric ton.

Biochar

Charcoal, or biochar, created by pyrolysis of biomass can be buried to create terra preta. The production of biochar may or may not involve energy recovery. The intention is that the carbon in the biomass is removed from the atmosphere for a longer period of time than would otherwise be the case.

Biofuels

During its growth, biomass traps carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through photosynthesis. When the biomass decomposes or is combusted, the carbon is again released as carbon dioxide. This process is part of the global carbon cycle. Through the use of biomass for energy and materials, e.g. in biomass fuelled power plants, parts of this cycle is controlled by man. Combining these biomass systems with carbon capture and storage technologies, so called bio-energy with carbon capture and storage, BECCS, is achieved. BECCS systems results in net-negative carbon dioxide emissions, i.e. the removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

In comparison with other geoengineering options, BECCS has been suggested as a low-risk, near-term tool to effectively remove carbon from the atmosphere.

Carbon air capture

It is notable that the availability of cheap energy and appropriate sites for geological storage of carbon may make carbon dioxide air capture viable commercially. It is, however, generally expected that carbon dioxide air capture may be uneconomic when compared to carbon capture and storage from major sources& — in particular, fossil fuel powered power stations, refineries, etc. In such cases, costs of energy produced will grow significantly. However, captured CO2 can be used to force more crude oil out of oil fields, as Statoil and Shell have made plans to do. CO2 can also be used in commercial greenhouses, giving an opportunity to kick-start the technology. Some attempts have been made to use algae to capture smokestack emissions, notably the GreenFuel Technologies Corporation, who have now shut down operations. This technology has not reached commercial level yet.

Carbon capture and storage

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a plan to mitigate climate change by capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from large point sources such as power plants and subsequently storing it away safely instead of releasing it into the atmosphere. The potential impact of CCS is huge. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says CCS could contribute between 10% and 55% of the cumulative worldwide carbon-mitigation effort over the next 90 years. The Agency says CCS is “the most important single new technology for CO2 savings” in power generation and industry. Though it requires up to 40% more energy to run a CCS coal power plant than a regular coal plant, CCS could potentially capture about 90% of all the carbon emitted by the plant. Norway, which first began storing CO2, has cut its emissions by almost a million tons a year, or about 3% of the country’s 1990 levels.

Technology for capturing of CO2 is already commercially available for large CO2 emitters, such as power plants. Storage of CO2, on the other hand is a relatively untried concept and as yet (2007) no powerplant operates with a full carbon capture and storage system. When this technique is used with biomass, the technique is known as biomass energy with carbon capture and storage and may be carbon negative. CCS applied to a modern conventional power plant could reduce CO2 emissions to the atmosphere by approximately 80-90% compared to a plant without CCS.

Storage of the CO2 is envisaged either in deep geological formations, deep oceans, or in the form of mineral carbonates. Geological formations are currently considered the most promising, and these are estimated to have a storage capacity of at least 2000 Gt CO2. IPCC estimates that the economic potential of CCS could be between 10% and 55% of the total carbon mitigation effort until year 2100.

In October 2007, the Bureau of Economic Geology at The University of Texas at Austin received a 10-year, $38 million subcontract to conduct the first intensively monitored, long-term project in the United States studying the feasibility of injecting a large volume of CO2 for underground storage. The project is a research program of the Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (SECARB), funded by the National Energy Technology Laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). The SECARB partnership will demonstrate CO2 injection rate and storage capacity in the Tuscaloosa-Woodbine geologic system that stretches from Texas to Florida. The region has the potential to store more than 200 billion tons of CO2 from major point sources in the region, equal to about 33 years of U.S. emissions overall at present rates. Beginning in fall 2007, the project will inject CO2 at the rate of one million tons per year, for up to 1.5 years, into brine up to below the land surface near the Cranfield oil field about east of Natchez, Mississippi. Experimental equipment will measure the ability of the subsurface to accept and retain CO2.

Seeding oceans with iron

:”See also: Iron fertilization”

The so-called Geritol solution to global warming, first proposed by oceanographer John Martin, is a carbon sequestration strategy whimsically named for a tonic advertised to treat the effects of iron-poor blood. It is motivated by evidence that seeding the oceans with iron will increase phytoplankton populations, and thereby draw more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. A report in Nature, 10 October 1996, by K. H. Coale et al., measured the effects of seeding equatorial Pacific waters with iron, finding that 700& grams of CO2 were fixed by the resulting phytoplankton bloom per 1& gram of iron seeded. Lenton and Vaughan found this technique to be potentially useful, but limited in its total capacity.

Opponents of this approach argue that fertilizing the ocean is dangerous and lacks any guarantee of efficacy. The original researchers themselves assert that, far from being a panacea for global warming, iron seeding may be entirely ineffective. Among their concerns are that nobody knows where the carbon goes after it is absorbed by phytoplankton. Instead of being drawn down to the ocean floor and acting as a carbon sink, the carbon could be reabsorbed by the water, effectively negating any initial gain. They also express concern that any attempt at geoengineering could result in massive, unpredictable changes to the environment. They point out that, considering the immense damage caused by adding nutrients to lakes and ponds, it would be a logical conclusion that adding nutrients to the ocean would also cause environmental damage. Large-scale growth in phytoplankton could reduce oxygen levels, creating dead zones where the ocean cannot support marine-life. They suggest that there is even the possibility that blooms would release more carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gas in the form of methane than it would sequester.

Solar radiation management

Some scientists have suggested using aerosols and/or sulfate dust to alter the Earth’s albedo, or reflectivity, as an emergency measure to increase global dimming and thus stave off the effects of global warming. A 0.5% albedo increase would roughly halve the effect of CO2 doubling. In 1974, Russian expert Mikhail Budyko suggested that if global warming became a problem, we could cool down the planet by burning sulfur in the stratosphere, which would create a haze. Paul Crutzen suggests that this would cost 25 to 50 billion dollars/year. It would, however, increase the environmental problem of acid rain (although optimized engineering is thought to reduce this to insignificant levels)and drought.

An alternative technique, which may be more benign, is marine cloud brightening. Others have proposed building a literal solar shade in space.

Pacala and Socolow: 15 programs

Pacala and Socolow of Princeton

See also:

have proposed a program to reduce CO2 emissions by 1 billion metric tons per year − or 25 billion tons over the 50-year period. The proposed 15 different programs, any seven of which could achieve the goal, are:

# more efficient vehicles − increase fuel economy from 30 to 60 mpg (7.8 to 3.9 L/100& km) for 2 billion vehicles,

# reduce use of vehicles − improve urban design to reduce miles driven from 10,000 to 5,000 miles (16,000 to 8,000& km) per year for 2 billion vehicles,

# efficient buildings − reduce energy consumption by 25%,

# improve efficiency of coal plants from today’s 40% to 60%,

# replace 1,400 GW (gigawatt) of coal power plants with natural gas,

# capture and store carbon emitted from 800 GW of new coal plants,

# capture and reuse hydrogen created by #6 above,

# capture and store carbon from coal to syn fuels conversion at ,

# displace 700 GW of coal power with nuclear,

# add 2 million 1 MW wind turbines (50 times current capacity),

# displace 700 GW of coal with 2,000 GW (peak) solar power (700 times current capacity),

# produce hydrogen fuel from 4 million 1 MW wind turbines,

# use biomass to make fuel to displace oil (100 times current capacity),

# stop de-forestation and re-establish 300 million hectares of new tree plantations,

# conservation tillage − apply to all crop land (10 times current usage).

”Nature.com” argued in June 2008 that “If we are to have confidence in our ability to stabilize carbon dioxide levels below 450 p.p.m. emissions must average less than 5 billion metric tons of carbon per year over the century. This means accelerating the deployment of the wedges so they begin to take effect in 2015 and are completely operational in much less time than originally modelled by Socolow and Pacala.”

Societal controls

Another method being examined is to make carbon a new currency by introducing tradeable “Personal Carbon Credits”. The idea being it will encourage and motivate individuals to reduce their ‘carbon footprint’ by the way they live. Each citizen will receive a free annual quota of carbon that they can use to travel, buy food, and go about their business. It has been suggested that by using this concept it could actually solve two problems; pollution and poverty, old age pensioners will actually be better off because they fly less often, so they can cash in their quota at the end of the year to pay heating bills, etc.

Population

Various organizations promote population control as a means for mitigating global warming. Proposed measures include improving access to family planning and reproductive health care and information, reducing natalistic politics, public education about the consequences of continued population growth, and improving access of women to education and economic opportunities.

Population control efforts are impeded by there being somewhat of a taboo in some countries against considering any such efforts. Also, various religions discourage or prohibit some or all forms of birth control.

Population size has a different per capita effect on global warming in different countries, since the per capita production of anthropogenic greenhouse gases varies greatly by country.

Non-CO2 greenhouse gases

Action has been suggested on methane, soot, HFCs, and other climate drivers, in addition to that proposed for CO2 . Emissions of some of these actors are considered by the Kyoto Protocol.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Climate change mitigation, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

In 2007, several automobile manufacturers announced that future vehicles will use aspects of hybrid electric technology to reduce fuel consumption without the use of the hybrid drivetrain. Regenerative braking can be used to recapture energy and stored to power electrical accessories, such as air conditioning. Shutting down the engine at idle can also be used to reduce fuel consumption and reduce emissions without the addition of a hybrid drivetrain. In both cases, some of the advantages of hybrid electric technology are gained while additional cost and weight may be limited to the addition of larger batteries and starter motors. There is no standard terminology for such vehicles, although they may be termed mild hybrids.

Engines and fuel sources=

Fossil fuels

Free-piston engines could be used to generate electricity as efficiently as, and less expensively than, fuel cells.

;Gasoline

Gasoline engines are used in most hybrid electric designs, and will likely remain dominant for the foreseeable future. While petroleum-derived gasoline is the primary fuel, it is possible to mix in varying levels of ethanol created from renewable energy sources. Like most modern ICE powered vehicles, HEVs can typically use up to about 15% bioethanol. Manufacturers may move to flexible fuel engines, which would increase allowable ratios, but no plans are in place at present.

;Diesel

Diesel-electric HEVs use a diesel engine for power generation. Diesels have advantages when delivering constant power for long periods of time, suffering less wear while operating at higher efficiency. The diesel engine’s high torque, combined with hybrid technology, may offer substantially improved mileage. Most diesel vehicles can use 100% pure biofuels (biodiesel), so they can use but do not need petroleum at all for fuel (although mixes of biofuel and petroleum are more common, and petroleum may be needed for lubrication). If diesel-electric HEVs were in use, this benefit would likely also apply. Diesel-electric hybrid drivetrains have begun to appear in commercial vehicles (particularly buses); as of 2007, no light duty diesel-electric hybrid passenger cars are currently available, although prototypes exist. Peugeot is expected to produce a diesel-electric hybrid version of its 308 in late 2008 for the European market.

PSA Peugeot Citroën has unveiled two demonstrator vehicles featuring a diesel-electric hybrid drivetrain: the Peugeot 307, Citroën C4 Hybride HDi and Citroën C-Cactus. Volkswagen made a prototype diesel-electric hybrid car that achieved fuel economy, but has yet to sell a hybrid vehicle. General Motors has been testing the Opel Astra Diesel Hybrid. There have been no concrete dates suggested for these vehicles, but press statements have suggested production vehicles would not appear before 2009.

At the Frankfurt Motor Show in September 2009 both Mercedes and BMW displayed diesel-electric hybrids.

Robert Bosch GmbH is supplying hybrid diesel-electric technology to diverse automakers and models, including the Peugeot 308.

So far, production diesel-electric engines have mostly appeared in mass transit buses.

FedEx, along with Eaton Corp. in the USA and Iveco in Europe, has begun deploying a small fleet of Hybrid diesel electric delivery trucks.

As of October 2007 Fedex now operates more than 100 diesel electric hybrids in North America, Asia and Europe.

; Liquefied petroleum gas

In 2009 , Hyundai introduced the Hyundai Elantra LPI Hybrid, which is the first mass-produced hybrid vehicle to run on liquefied petroleum gas (LPG).

;Hydrogen

Hydrogen can be used in cars in two ways: As a combustible heat source, or as a source of electrons for an electric motor. The burning of hydrogen is not being developed in practical terms; it is the hydeogen fuel-cell electric vehicle (HFEV)that is garnering all the attention. Hydrogen fuel cells create electricity that is fed into an electric motor to drives the wheels. Hydrogen is not burned, but it is consumed. This means that molecular hydrogen, H2, is combined with oxygen to form water. 2H2 (4e-) + O2 –> 2H2O (4e-). The molecular hydrogen and oxygen’s mutual affinity drives the fuel cell to separate the electrons from the hydrogen, to use them to power the electric motor, and to return them to the ionized water molecules that were formed when the electron-depleted hydrogen combined with the oxygen in the fuel cell. Recaling that a hydeogen atom is nothing more than a proton and an electron; in essence, the motor is driven by the proton’s atomic attraction to the oxygen nucleus, and the electron’s attraction to the ionized water molecule.

An HFEV is an all-electric car that has an open-source battery in the form of a hydrogen tank and the atmosphere. HFEV’s may also contain closed-cell batteries for the purpose of power storage from regenerative braking, but this does not change the source of the motivation. It means that the HFEV is an electric car with two types of batteries. So, since HFEV’s are purely electric, and do not contain any type of heat engine, they are not hybrids.

Biofuels

Hybrid vehicles might use an internal combustion engine running on biofuels, such as a flexible-fuel engine running on ethanol or engines running on biodiesel. In 2007 Ford produced 20 demonstration Escape Hybrid E85s for real-world testing in fleets in the U.S. Also as a demonstration project, Ford delivered in 2008 the first flexible-fuel plug-in hybrid SUV to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), a Ford Escape Plug-in Hybrid, capable of running on gasoline or E85.

The Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid electric vehicle would be the first commercially available flex-fuel plug-in hybrid capable of adapting the propulsion to the biofuels used in several world markets such as the ethanol blend E85 in the U.S., or E100 in Brazil, or biodiesel in Sweden. The Volt will be E85 flex-fuel capable about a year after its introduction.

Electric machines

In ”split path” vehicles (Toyota, Ford, GM, Chysler) there are two electrical machines, one of which functions as a motor primarily, and the other functions as a generator primarily. One of the primary requirements of these machines is that they are very efficient, as the electrical portion of the energy must be converted from the engine to the generator, through two inverters, through the motor again and then to the wheels.

Most of the electric machines used in hybrid vehicles are brushless DC motors (BLDC). Specifically, they are of a type called an interior permanent magnet (IPM) machine (or motor). These machines are wound similarly to the induction motors found in a typical home, but (for high efficiency) use very strong rare earth magnets in the rotor. These magnets contain neodymium, iron and boron, and are therefore called Neodymium magnets. The magnet material is expensive, and its cost is one of the limiting factors in the use of these machines.

Design considerations

In some cases, manufacturers are producing HEVs that use the added energy provided by the hybrid systems to give vehicles a power boost, rather than significantly improved fuel efficiency compared to their traditional counterparts. The trade-off between added performance and improved fuel efficiency is partly controlled by the software within the hybrid system and partly the result of the engine, battery and motor size. In the future, manufacturers may provide HEV owners with the ability to partially control this balance (fuel efficiency vs. added performance) as they wish, through a user-controlled setting. Toyota announced in January, 2006 that it was considering a “high-efficiency” button.

Conversion kits

One can buy a stock hybrid or convert a stock petroleum car to a hybrid electric vehicle using an aftermarket hybrid kit.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Hybrid electric vehicle, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

Most cars on the road today in Brazil can run on blends of up to 25% ethanol, and motor vehicle manufacturers already produce vehicles designed to run on much higher ethanol blends. Most car makers in Brazil sell flexible-fuel cars, trucks, and minivans that can use gasoline and ethanol blends ranging from pure gasoline up to 100% ethanol (E100). In 2009, 90% of cars produced that year ran on sugarcane ethanol.

Brazil is the second largest producer of ethanol in the world and is the largest exporter of the fuel. In 2008, Brazil produced 454,000 bbl/d of ethanol, up from 365,000 in 2007. All gasoline in Brazil contains ethanol, with blending levels varying from 20-25%. Over half of all cars in the country are of the flex-fuel variety, meaning that they can run on 100 percent ethanol or an ethanol-gasoline mixture. According to ANP, Brazil also produced about 20,000 bbl/d of biodiesel in 2008, and the agency has enacted a three-percent blending requirement for domestic diesel sales.

The importance of ethanol in Brazil’s domestic transportation fuels market will only increase in the future. According to Petrobrás, ethanol accounts for more than 50 percent of current light vehicle fuel demand, and the company expects this to increase to over 80% by 2020. Because ethanol production continues to grow faster than domestic demand, Brazil has sought to increase ethanol exports. According to industry sources, Brazil’s ethanol exports reached 86,000 bbl/d in 2008, with 13,000 bbl/d going to the United States. Brazil is the largest ethanol exporter in the world, holding over 90% of the global export market.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Renewable energy in Brazil, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

Examples of energy sources include:

* Fossil fuels

* Nuclear fuels (e.g., uranium and plutonium)

* Radiation from the sun

* Mechanical energy from wind, rivers, tides, etc.

* Bio-fuels derived from biomass, in turn having consumed soil nutrients during growth.

* Heat from within the earth (geothermal radiation)

The term net energy gain can be used in slightly different ways:

Non-sustainables

The usual definition of net energy gain compares the energy required to extract energy (that is, to find it, remove it from the ground, refine it, and ship it to the energy user) with the amount of energy produced and transmitted to a user from some (typically underground) energy resource. To better understand this, assume an economy has a certain amount of finite oil reserves that are still underground, unextracted. To get to that energy, some of the extracted oil needs to be consumed in the extraction process to run the engines driving the pumps, therefore after extraction the net energy produced will be less than the amount of energy in the ground before extraction, because some had to be used up.

The extraction energy can be viewed in one of two ways: profitable extractable (NEG>0) or nonprofitable extractable (NEG
Adapted from the Wikipedia article Net energy gain, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

**Hydrogen

**Biofuels

**Liquid nitrogen

**Oxyhydrogen

**Hydrogen peroxide

*Biological

**Starch

**Glycogen

*Electrochemical

**Batteries

**Flow batteries

**Fuel cells

*Electrical

**Capacitor

**Supercapacitor

**Superconducting magnetic energy storage (SMES)

*Mechanical

**Compressed air energy storage (CAES)

**Flywheel energy storage

**Hydraulic accumulator

**Hydroelectric energy storage

**Spring

**Gravitational potential energy

*Thermal

**Ice Storage

**Molten salt

**Cryogenic liquid air or nitrogen

**Seasonal thermal store

**Solar pond

**Hot bricks

**Steam accumulator

**Fireless locomotive

**Eutectic system

*Fuel Conservation storage

Hydrogen

Hydrogen is also being developed as an electrical power storage medium. Hydrogen is not a primary energy source, but a portable energy storage method, because it must first be manufactured by other energy sources in order to be used. However, as a storage medium, it may be a significant factor in using renewable energies. See hydrogen storage.

Underground hydrogen storage is the practice of hydrogen storage in underground caverns, salt domes and depleted oil and gas fields. Large quantities of gaseous hydrogen are stored in underground caverns by ICI for many years without any difficulties. The storage of large quantities of hydrogen underground can function as grid energy storage which is essential for the hydrogen economy. By using a turboexpander the electricity needs for compressed storage on 200 bar amounts to 2.1% of the energy content.

With intermittent renewables such as solar and wind, the output may be fed directly into an electricity grid. At penetrations below 20% of the grid demand, this does not severely change the economics; but beyond about 20% of the total demand, external storage will become important. If these sources are used for electricity to make hydrogen, then they can be utilized fully whenever they are available, opportunistically. Broadly speaking, it does not matter when they cut in or out, the hydrogen is simply stored and used as required. A community based pilot program using wind turbines and hydrogen generators is being undertaken from 2007 for five years in the remote community of Ramea, Newfoundland and Labrador. A similar project has been going on since 2004 on Utsira, a small Norwegian island municipality.

Energy losses are involved in the hydrogen storage cycle of hydrogen production for vehicle applications with electrolysis of water, liquification or compression, and conversion back to electricity. and the hydrogen storage cycle of production for the stationary fuel cell applications like microchp at 93 % with biohydrogen or biological hydrogen production, and conversion to electricity.

About 50& kW·h (180 MJ) of solar energy is required to produce a kilogram of hydrogen, so the cost of the electricity clearly is crucial, even for hydrogen uses other than storage for electrical generation. At $0.03/kWh, common off-peak high-voltage line rate in the United States, this means hydrogen costs $1.50 a kilogram for the electricity, equivalent to $1.50 a U.S. gallon for gasoline if used in a fuel cell vehicle. Other costs would include the electrolyzer plant, hydrogen compressors or liquefaction, storage and transportation, which will be significant.

Biofuels

Various biofuels such as biodiesel, straight vegetable oil, alcohol fuels, or biomass can be used to replace hydrocarbon fuels. Various chemical processes can convert the carbon and hydrogen in coal, natural gas, plant and animal biomass, and organic wastes into short hydrocarbons suitable as replacements for existing hydrocarbon fuels. Examples are Fischer-Tropsch diesel, methanol, dimethyl ether, or syngas. This diesel source was used extensively in World War II in Germany, with limited access to crude oil supplies. Today South Africa produces most of the country’s diesel from coal for similar reasons. A long term oil price above US$35/bbl may make such synthetic liquid fuels economical on a large scale (See coal). Some of the energy in the original source is lost in the conversion process. Historically, coal itself has been used directly for transportation purposes in vehicles and boats using steam engines. And compressed natural gas is being used in special circumstances fuel, for instance in busses for some mass transit agencies.

Synthetic hydrocarbon fuel

Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been, experimentally, converted into hydrocarbon fuel with the help of energy from another source. To be useful industrially, the energy will probably have to come from sunlight using, perhaps, future artificial photosynthesis technology. Another alternative for the energy is electricity or heat from solar energy or nuclear power. Compared to hydrogen, many hydrocarbon fuels have the advantage of being immediately usable in existing engine technology and existing fuel distribution infrastructures. Manufacturing synthetic hydrocarbon fuel reduces the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere until the fuel is burned, when the same amount of carbon dioxide returns to the atmosphere.

Methane

Methane is the simplest hydrocarbon with the molecular formula CH4. Methane could be produced from electricity of renewable energies. Methane can be stored more easily than hydrogen and the transportation, storage and combustion infrastructure are mature (pipelines, gasometers, power plants).

As hydrogen and oxygen are produced in the electrolysis of water,

:2H2O → 2H2 + O2

hydrogen would then be reacted with carbon dioxide in Sabatier process, producing methane and water.

:CO2 + 4H2 → CH4 + 2H2O

Methane would be stored and used to produce electricity later. Produced water would be recycled back to the electrolysis stage, reducing the need for new pure water. In the electrolysis stage oxygen would also be stored for methane combustion in a pure oxygen environment in an adjacent power plant, eliminating e.g. nitrogen oxides. In the combustion of methane, carbon dioxide and water are produced.

:CH4 + 2O2 → CO2 + 2H2O

Produced carbon dioxide would be recycled back to boost the Sabatier process and water would be recycled back to the electrolysis stage. The carbon dioxide produced by methane combustion would be turned back to methane, thus producing no greenhouse gases. Methane production, storage and adjacent combustion would recycle all the reaction products, creating a cycle.

Boron, silicon, and zinc

Boron, silicon, lithium, and zinc have been proposed as energy storage solutions.

Mechanical storage

Energy can be stored in water pumped to a higher elevation using pumped storage methods, in compressed air, or in spinning flywheels.

1& kg mass elevated to 1000 m can store 9.8 kJ energy. This is equivalent with 1& kg mass accelerated to 140 m/s. 1& kg water’s temperature can be elevated by 2.34 degrees Celsius using the same amount of energy. Admittedly, this is a bit of an unfair comparison, but it makes it easy to see how it is possible to store more energy in 1 m3 of cheap rock or sand than 1 m3 of lead-acid battery, even if the battery is also moved to a higher elevation, not just charged.

Compressed air energy storage technology stores low cost off-peak energy, in the form of compressed air in an underground reservoir. The air is then released during peak load hours and heated with the exhaust heat of a standard combustion turbine. This heated air is converted to energy through expansion turbines to produce electricity. A CAES plant has been in existence in McIntosh, Alabama since 1991 and has run successfully. Other applications are possible. Walker Architects published the first CO2 gas CAES application, proposing the use of sequestered CO2 for Energy Storage on October 24, 2008.

Several companies have done preliminary design work for vehicles using compressed air power.

Thermal storage

Thermal storage is the temporary storage or removal of heat for later use. An example of thermal storage is the storage of solar heat energy during the day to be used at a later time for heating at night. In the HVAC/R field, this type of application using thermal storage for heating is less common than using thermal storage for cooling. An example of the storage of “cold” heat removal for later use is ice made during the cooler night time hours for use during the hot daylight hours. This ice storage is produced when electrical utility rates are lower. This is often referred to as “off-peak” cooling.

When used for the proper application with the appropriate design, off-peak cooling systems can lower energy costs. The U.S. Green Building Council has developed the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) program to encourage the design of high-performance buildings that will help protect our environment. The increased levels of energy performance by utilizing off-peak cooling may qualify of credits toward LEED Certification.

The advantages of thermal storage are:

* Commercial electrical rates are lower at night.

* It takes less energy to make ice when the ambient temperature is cool at night. Source energy (energy from the power plant) is saved.

* A smaller, more efficient system can do the job of a much larger unit by running for more hours.

For more information on thermal storage, see

Renewable energy storage

Many renewable energy energy sources (most notably solar and wind) produce intermittent power. Wherever intermittent power sources reach high levels of grid penetration, energy storage becomes one option to provide reliable energy supplies. Other options include recourse to peaking power plants, and smart grids with advanced energy demand management. The latter involves bringing “prices to devices”, i.e. making electrical equipment and appliances able to adjust their operation to seek the lowest spot price of electricity. On a grid with a high penetration of renewables, low spot prices would correspond to times of high availability of wind and/or sunshine.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Energy storage, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

* Anaerobic digestion

* Composting

* Fuel cells

* Fuels for automobiles (besides gasoline and diesel)

** Alcohol (either ethanol or methanol)

** Biodiesel

** Vegetable oil

* Greywater

* Solar panels

** Silicon-based

** Photosynthetic “Gratzel cells” (Titanium dioxide)

* Landfill gas extraction from landfills

* Mechanical biological treatment

* Recycling

* Wind generators

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Alternative technology, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

Joel Sheltrown was elected from the 103rd House District to the Michigan House of Representatives in 2004 and subsequently re-elected in 2006 and 2008. Over the three elections, Sheltrown has performed 15 points above the Democratic Party base in the 103rd House District. He is the only Democratic legislative candidate in Michigan history to win a majority of votes in Missaukee County, the second most Republican county in the state.

As a member of the Democratic majority in the Michigan House of Representatives, Joel Sheltrown was appointed to chair the House Tourism, Outdoor Recreation and Natural Resources Committee in 2007 and re-appointed in 2009. Sheltrown has focused the committee’s attention on economic development by increasing funding for promotion of Michigan’s tourism industry through the award winning Pure Michigan campaign and by supporting broader recreational opportunity and access. Joel Sheltrown was the primary sponsor of a new state law allowing All-terrain vehicles to access county roads. He organized a hunters’ coalition that won broader inclusion of crossbows in the archery deer hunting season.

Joel Sheltrown is a centrist Democrat. He takes traditionally conservative stands on constitutional issues such as the right to life, the Second Amendment, personal feedoms and parental rights. Joel Sheltrown is a life member of the National Rifle Association. He is a supporter of the labor movement, public education and a progressive tax structure. He has been an advocate of a hybrid economic model pursuing both an active state role in job creation and job security and a passive role through the elimination of many regulations that hinder business growth. Sheltrown favors the elimination of the Michigan Business Tax and Michigan’s personal property tax and their replacement with either a state Value Added Tax or a progressive consumption tax.

In 2007, Joel Sheltrown led the successful effort to build a wide body aircraft hanger at the Oscoda-Wurtsmith Airport furthering development of the aviation industry in northern Michigan. He has also focused on alternative energy development including wind energy, biodiesel, ethanol production including wood cellulose based ethanol and cleaner coal technology. Joel Sheltrown is currently working on legislation to increase career technical education in Michigan to train workers for these emerging fields and legislation to provide for residential green energy production and efficiency municipal loans.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Joel Sheltrown, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

ArtBound started at Southbound 2006, as a showcase of works from the local art community.

EcoBound

EcoBound displayed how recyclable materials and alternative energy were implemented to reduce the environmental impact of the festival. Solar power and biodiesel were used to meet energy needs.

StageBound

StageBound gave unsigned artists an opportunity to perform at Southbound. A requirement of these artists was that they were from the south west regional areas of Western Australia.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Southbound (festival), under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Renewable energy policy, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.

Virtually every major global automaker has a presence in the area including technology and design centers. Oakland County’s ””Automation Alley”” has over 1,800 of world’s advanced technology companies.

There are about 4,000 factories in the area. The automotive headquarters for the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) is in the suburb of Troy. OnStar and GMAC are a source for growth. In spite of foreign competition for market share, Detroit’s automakers have continued to gain volume from previous decades with the expansion of the American and global automotive markets. In 2008, an economic and financial crisis impacted global auto industry sales.

Since the early 2000s recession and the September 11, 2001 attacks, GM, Ford, and Chrysler have struggled to overcome the benefit funds crisis which followed an ensuing volatile stock market which had caused a severe underfunding condition in the respective U.S. pension and benefit funds (OPEB). Although manufacturing in the state grew 6.6 percent from 2001 to 2006, the high speculative price of oil became a factor for the U.S. auto industry during the economic crisis of 2008 impacting industry revenues. During this economic crisis, President George W. Bush extended loans from the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) funds in order to help the GM and Chrysler bridge the recession.

In January 2009, President Barack Obama formed an automotive task force in order to help the industry recover and achieve renewed prosperity for the region. Through 2007, General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler made independent efforts to restore fund pensions and had reached agreements with the United Auto Workers union to transfer the liabilities for their respective health care and benefit funds to a 501(c)(9) Voluntary Employee Beneficiary Association (VEBA) raising prospects for corporate turnaround plans. In spite of these efforts, the severity of the recession required Detroit’s automakers to take additional steps to restructure, including idling many plants. With the U.S. Treasury extending the necessary debtor in possession financing, Chrysler and GM emerged from ‘pre-packaged’ Chapter 11 reorganizations in June and July 2009 respectively. GM plans to issue an initial public offering (IPO) of stock in 2010. As of July 10, 2009, the new GM has over $40B in cash, with its debts reduced to $17B. The company’s reorganized long-term liability obligations of $48.8B include $24.4 B to be paid to the Voluntary Employee Benefits Association (VEBA) trust, $9 B to the U.S. and Canadian governments, and $15 B in liabilities to suppliers and other bills. GM is slated to pay $10 B to the VEBA trust in December 2009 which it may elect to pay from its pension fund, with the remainder being paid in increments from 2012-19. GM isn’t required to make contributions to its pension fund until 2013, but it may elect to if needed, since the company contribued $15.2 B to its pension fund in 2003. Stock market conditions can affect pension and benefit fund values which may affect the plans of GM, Ford, and Chrysler. In February 2009, GM’s combined pension fund had about $85 B in assets. Through April 2009, Ford’s strategy of debt for equity exchanges erased $9.9 B in liabilities (28 percent of its total).

Detroit’s automakers are designing future vehicles like the Chevrolet Volt flex fuel hybrid. In 2006, Ford announced a dramatic increase in production of its hybrid gas-electric models, Ford and GM have also promoted E-85 ethanol capable flexible-fuel vehicles as a viable alternative to gasoline. General Motors has invested heavily in all fuel cell equipped vehicles, while Chrysler is focusing much of its research and development into biodiesel. Two days after the September 11, 2001 attacks, GM announced it had developed the world’s most powerful fuel cell stack capable of powering large commercial vehicles. In 2002, the state of Michigan established NextEnergy, a non-profit corporation whose purpose is to enable commercialization of various energy technologies, especially hydrogen fuel cells. Its main complex is located north of Wayne State University. In August 2009, Michigan and Detroit’s auto industry received $1.36 B in grants from the U.S. Department of Energy for the manufacture of lithium-ion batteries which are expected to generate 6,800 immediate jobs and employ 40,000 in the state by 2020.

In 2008, General Motors’ global sales reached 8.36 million vehicles. The sales revenue from just one of Detroit’s automakers exceeds the combined total for the all of the top companies in many major U.S. cities. On quality, Cadillac outscored all other luxury automakers in two of three quality surveys by AutoPacific, Strategic Vision, and J.D. Power in 2003. Ford led all other automakers in the 2007 J.D. Initial Quality survey.

The area includes a variety of manufacturers and is an important component of U.S. national security. U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM) is headquartered in Metro Detroit together with Selfridge Air National Guard Base. The region has important defense contractors such as General Dynamics. The area is home to Rofin-Sinar, a leading maker of lasers which are used for industrial processes. On June 27, 2009, General Electric announced plans to build a new $100 M center for advanced manufacturing technology and software, in Van Buren Township in Wayne County, expected to employ 1,200 people providing a pay range of $100,000 per year.

With its major port status, the city’s infrastructure accommodates heavy industry. Marathon Oil Company maintains a large refinery in Detroit, expanded to refine oil sands from Canada. Lafarge’s cement distribution facility constructed at the city’s Springwells Industrial Park in 2005 includes North America’s largest cement silo.

Adapted from the Wikipedia article Economy of metropolitan Detroit, under the G. N. U. Free Documentation License. Please also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

No related posts.