*Sergio Cuenca García*Álvaro Alarcón Onieva*Rafael García Moreno
Global warming has become perhaps the most complicated issue facing world leaders. Warnings from the scientific community are becominglouder, as an increasing body of science points to rising dangers from theongoing buildup of human-related greenhouse gases — produced mainly by the burning of fossil fuels and forests. Global emissions of carbon dioxide jumped by the largest amount on record in 2010, upending the notion that the brief decline during the recession might persist through the recovery. Emissions rose 5.9percent in 2010, according to the Global Carbon Project, an internationalcollaboration of scientists. The increase solidified a trend of ever-rising emissions that scientists fear will make it difficult, if not impossible, to forestall severe climate change in coming decades.However, the technological, economic and political issues that have to be resolved before a concerted worldwide effort to reduce emissions canbegin have gotten no simpler, particularly in the face of a global economic slowdown.
For almost two decades, the United Nations has sponsored annual global talks, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, an international treaty signed by 194 countries to cooperatively discuss global climate change and its impact. The conferences operate on the principle of consensus, meaning that any of the participating nations can hold up an agreement. The conflicts and controversies discussed are monotonously familiar: the differing obligations of industrialized and developing nations, the question of who will pay to help poor nations adapt, the urgency of protecting tropical forests and the need to rapidly develop and deploy clean energy technology. But the meetings have often ended in disillusionment, with incremental political progress but little real impact on the climate. The negotiating process itself has come under fire from some quarters, including the poorest nations who believe their needs are being neglected in the fight among the major economic powers. Criticism has also come from a small but vocal band of climate-change skeptics, many of them members of the United States Congress, who doubt the existence of human influence on the climate and ridicule international efforts to deal with it. Global Warming is caused by many things. The causes are split up into two groups, man-made or anthropogenic causes, and natural causes.
* Natural CausesNatural causes are causes created by nature. One natural cause is a release of methane gas from arctic tundra and wetlands. Methane is a green house gas. A greenhouse gas is a gas that traps heat in the earths atmosphere. Another natural cause is that the earth goes through a cycle of climate change. This climate change usually lasts about 40,000 years.
*Man-made Causes Man-made causes probably do the most damage. There are many man-made causes. Pollution is one of the biggest man-made problems. Pollution comes in many shapes and sizes. Burning fossil fuels is one thing that causes pollution. Fossil fuels are fuels made of organic matter such as coal, or oil. When fossil fuels are burned they give off a green house gas called CO2. Also mining coal and oil allows methane to escape. How does it escape? Methane is naturally in the ground. When coal or oil is mined you have to dig up the earth a little. When you dig up the fossil fuels you dig up the methane as well. Another major man-made cause of Global Warming is population. More people means more food, and more methods of transportation, right? That means more methane because there will be more burning of fossil fuels, and more agriculture. Now your probably thinking, "Wait a minute, you said agriculture is going to be damaged by Global Warming, but now youre saying agriculture is going to help cause Global Warming?" Well, have you ever been in a barn filled with animals and you smell something terrible? Youre smelling methane. Another source of methane is manure. Because more food is needed we have to raise food. Animals like cows are a source of food which means more manure and methane. Another problem with the increasing population is transportation. More people means more cars, and more cars means more pollution. Also, many people have more than one car. Since CO2 contributes to global warming, the increase in population makes the problem worse because we breathe out CO2. Also, the trees that convert our CO2 to oxygen are being demolished because were using the land that we cut the trees down from as property for our homes and buildings. We are not replacing the trees (an important part of our eco system), so we are constantly taking advantage of our natural resources and giving nothing back in return.
The planet is warming, from North Pole to South Pole, and everywhere in between. Globally, the mercury is already up more than 1 degree Fahrenheit (0.8 degree Celsius), and even more in sensitive polar regions. And the effects of rising temperatures aren’t waiting for some far-flung future. They’re happening right now. Signs are appearing all over, and some of them are surprising. The heat is not only melting glaciers and sea ice, it’s also shifting precipitation patterns and setting animals on the move. Some impacts from increasing temperatures are already happening. Ice is melting worldwide, especially at the Earth’s poles. This includes mountain glaciers, ice sheets covering West Antarctica and Greenland, and Arctic sea ice. Researcher Bill Fraser has tracked the decline of the Adélie penguins on Antarctica, where their numbers have fallen from 32,000 breeding pairs to 11,000 in 30 years. Sea level rise became faster over the last century. Some butterflies, foxes, and alpine plants have moved farther north or to higher, cooler areas. Precipitation (rain and snowfall) has increased across the globe, on average. Spruce bark beetles have boomed in Alaska thanks to 20 years of warm summers. The insects have chewed up 4 million acres of spruce trees.
Other effects could happen later this century, if warming continues. Sea levels are expected to rise between 7 and 23 inches (18 and 59 centimeters) by the end of the century, and continued melting at the poles could add between 4 and 8 inches (10 to 20 centimeters). Hurricanes and other storms are likely to become stronger. Species that depend on one another may become out of sync. For example, plants could bloom earlier than their pollinating insects become active. Floods and droughts will become more common. Rainfall in Ethiopia, where droughts are already common, could decline by 10 percent over the next 50 years. Less fresh water will be available. If the Quelccaya ice cap in Peru continues to melt at its current rate, it will be gone by 2100, leaving thousands of people who rely on it for drinking water and electricity without a source of either. Some diseases will spread, such as malaria carried by mosquitoes. Ecosystems will change—some species will move farther north or become more successful; others won’t be able to move and could become extinct. Wildlife research scientist Martyn Obbard has found that since the mid-1980s, with less ice on which to live and fish for food, polar bears have gotten considerably skinnier. Polar bear biologist Ian Stirling has found a similar pattern in Hudson Bay. He fears that if sea ice disappears, the polar bears will as well.
*Green building solution Which is cheaper to build a house with, a spruce timber 2 by 4 or a steel stud? It might cost less to build a house using lumber, but is it cheaper in the long run? Especially when one considers the cost of greenhouse emissions and how they are affected by loss of trees. But steel must be refined and molded using plenty of energy. Which of these uses more power and consequently causes a larger carbon footprint? It is difficult to say, but choice of build materials is a definite part of how we can change the way we build homes and other buildings so as to save money and energy. Choice of building materials is just one part of what is known as green building. Green building can best be described as the birth to grave process of building. From choosing a site through architectural design, choice of materials, construction, occupancy and eventual demolish, every aspect of a building’s effect on the environment is considered. Paramount among these is energy efficiency as part of the dwelling use.
Green building can be taken to as simple or as extreme a degree as one desires. For example simply choosing darker shingles in a colder climate is passive energy conservation. Placing solar photovoltaic cells on that same roof will actually produce more power than is used within the building at times. Let’s break down the various components of green building for examination beginning with sitting and design. These two are closely tied together. Sitting considers factors such as exposure to sun and wind. Placing a home so that it faces west during the afternoon sun has been a form or energy conservation practiced for years. Likewise we reverse the placement of our building in warmer areas. Consider now that we incorporate design elements to further our efficiency. We might use large double paned windows in the northern climate to allow a useful warming greenhouse effect in one location or smaller tinted glass in the hotter locales. Choosing where we place our building and then incorporating design elements that save on heating and cooling are fundamentals of green building. Energy efficiency can be taken much further of course. Taking a quick look at energy use in the home leads us to the conclusion that the majority of our power costs are
placed in heating and air conditioning, hot water, lighting and cooking. Green building techniques for inside climate control include air pipe ventilation, rooftop solar panels and geothermal heat exchangers. These can cool your home, make hot water and power your lights. Most importantly they drastically reduce your dependency on electricity as furnished by your power company and in this way they save you a great deal of money over the lifespan of your home. Water conservation is a major aspect of green building. Simply by diverting gray water from your sewer to your lawn you achieve two goals. You protect diminishment of fresh water supplies while watering your lawn. Point of use water treatment saves money right from its inclusion in construction. Of course, what you choose to build your house out of is as large a factor today as it was 1000 years ago when native peoples were digging caves into cliff walls. Obviously this was a wonderful example of materials efficiency. But one doesn’t need to live in a cave to be materials energy efficient. Building materials made from compacted earth and natural stone accomplish much the same effect. Using recycled materials such as our steel 2 by 4 reduce our home cost in terms of carbon, as do polyurethane blocks, planks and siding made from recycled plastic and demolition debris. There is no reason that any home has to be built at the cost of a hundred acres of trees. Simple systems such as passive lighting (skylights) and air pipe ventilation can drastically improve the quality of life for occupants. Use of natural building materials almost guarantees fewer volatile particles and a higher indoor air quality. Most man-made materials release minute amounts of health damaging toxic gases. There is a reason why we call it “Fresh Air”.
Green building costs on average just 5% more than current standardized construction The practices. That number would drop to the point of a direct savings if green building were to become the standard. As with almost every energy-saving vehicle, we can drastically reduce costs if we increase volume. Green building returns a savings of 50 to 70 percent on energy costs over the life time of a building. Yes, addition of items like solar panels and geothermal underground pipes is a supplemental cost. But the initial cost of these electricity bill lowering features has been proven to quickly pay for itself. One doesn’t have to build a two hundred foot tall wind turbine in their front yard to save on energy costs. Simple procedures like proper site planning and choice of construction materials can cut a new home’s energy bill by 25% instantly. And while monetary savings are important, the true savings from green building is not measured in dollars. Rather it should be counted in overall improved quality of life in the home and office and overall improved health of the planet Earth.
*Utilizing Geothermal Energy for Power, Heating and Cooling Advancement in Solar Energy Technology. The atmosphere, oceans and land mass of the Earth absorbs enough energy from the sun in one hour to power the entire planet for one year. Surely we are clever enough to capture some of this magnificent force and use it to fuel our environment Solar energy and its use can be divided into two areas. Those are static or passive solar energy collection and dynamic, or perhaps better termed, kinetic solar energy collection and use. An example of passive solar energy collection would be building a house so that the windows face the morning sun in colder climates. An even more rudimentary example would be that of an alligator sunning himself on the edge of the water. In both cases the sun’s energy is simply absorbed for warmth. And the simplest use of solar energy is as the very daylight we walk about in. Our Earth automatically uses the power of the sun in millions of ways. Not the least of which is photosynthesis by plants for production of oxygen for our atmosphere. Ours is an inherently rechargeable renewable world, provided we use our resources such as solar energy wisely.
To that end, we must examine dynamic solar energy collection for the production of warmth and light. When you walk though almost any shopping mall built in the last twenty years you will probably notice a flood of bright natural light all around you. Most large malls and department stores are built with double paned insulated windows that allow light to enter yet keep heating or cooling locked inside. But what happens when the sun follows its arc away from those windows? Active solar lighting can use mirrors that track with the sun’s movement and then reflect light into fiber optic cable that can carry that light into any part of our same department store. We can create transfer warmth through various forms of solar thermal energy. Since the 1950s it has not been uncommon to see simple glass paned boxes filled with copper pipes used to help heat water for swimming pools and boilers. These low temperature collectors are fine for space heating but there are far more effective ways to heat water with the sun’s rays and put that water to work. High temperature parabolic shaped mirrors can heat water to far greater temperatures than made possible by our simple rooftop hot boxes. In fact bowl and trough type mirrors can boil water to steam which in turn uses a turbine to generate electricity for heating, air conditioning and general power supply. When properly applied, this concentrated solar power can supply 50% of the power needs for a modern factory. Concentrated Solar Power is one half of our method for creating electricity from the sun’s radiant energy.
. The most commonly thought of use and form of solar energy conversion is that of relying upon solar voltaic cells. These solar cells are also called photovoltaic. First developed in the 1880s, photovoltaic cells rely upon the electronic reaction of certain key elements to the Sun’s rays so as to produce a tap able flow of electrons that are in turned used to create current flow. In short photovoltaic cells turn sunlight into energy. And lest we think we are so clever for figuring out how to do this, consider that plants have been turning sunlight into energy for millions of years. Advances in the development of photovoltaic cells have increased drastically since the oil shortages of the 1970s. This is primarily due to development of silicon technologies. Crystalline silicon cells when working in conjunction with CSP (concentrated solar power) as supplied by parabolic mirrors have improved output from Photovoltaic cells by a factor of 50 since their more basic development in 1954. Increases in demand and subsequent increases in production have lowered the price of solar cells to the point that they are now almost competitive with wind power technology and like their low emissions wind counterparts are far less costly than nuclear power
Energy generation using wind turbinesThe key to understanding Wind farming technology is to break values of the power produced down using simple arithmetic. Indeed, all energy production is a numbers game with each source of power having its appropriate initial and ongoing cost. Factored with these costs must be the price we all pay in terms of CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions. Just as we universally share in the cost of health care due to cigarette smoking we similarly all pay for any damage done to the health of our planet. At the present time, wind farms in the United States produce electricity at a rate of over 20 billion Kilowatts of power. This is enough to provide electricity for 4.9 million households. Not too bad is it? But this same total of power can be produced by just two nuclear plants or if you prefer 40 coal fired power plants In terms of hydroelectric power, the Hoover Dam produces just under 3 billion watts of power. 7 Hoover dams equals all the combined US wind power. So why not just build more giant hydroelectric dams or spread nuclear plants all around the earth?
Debate over safety from nuclear power plants is ongoing and intense. And the amount of greenhouse gas emissions from each of those 40 coal fired plants equals around 3 million tons a year. There are many conclusions we can draw from all of our wind farming arithmetic. The first is that even though we have barely tapped into the viability of using wind power to heat, cool and light our homes, the progress thus far shows that the feasibility is proven. We have the land and we have wind. If we had ten times as much wind provide power generation we could to 50million homes or if you prefer 150 million people. No, this doesn’t mean that our overall energy needs could be so easily met. Industry uses far more energy than housing. Cars, buses, trains, planes and those coal fired power plants themselves massively chew up power and spit out pollutants. Nuclear power releases one fiftieth as much greenhouse gas into the atmosphere than does a coal fired plant. A hydroelectric dam just 10% of that and a wind farm half of the CO2 emissions of the dam. By comparison, greenhouse gas emissions from wind farming is minuscule. But as long as we are doing some math, the accountants will have us calculating the cost of building our wind farm. This is pretty simple. It costs around 5 million dollars to make a one million watt producing wind turbine. This is a cost of five dollars per watt. Coal fired plants have initial costs of around $1.50 per watt. Solar power bounces between 3 and 7 dollars per watt and nuclear power comes in at a cost of a whopping 11 dollars per watt. Now what makes wind turbine technology the most feasible of all of these is two things. The first is the already mentioned clean emissions standards from wind power. The second reason that wind farming is the future for power production worldwide is that once you produce a large enough wind farm the price per watt will plummet drastically. A 100 megawatt wind farm can be built for 100 million dollars, or… a dollar a watt. Want to see proof of how strong an energy source wind power can be? Let’s take a look at the largest wind farm in the world. You won’t find it offshore in the ocean. Although there is a pretty nice wind farm off the coast of Copenhagen. And this working wind farm is not lost in the Australian Outback, even though there are several 200 megawatt wind farms in southern Australia.
New vocabulary : Release: Liberar Traps heat: Atrapa el calor Melting glaciers: Deshielo de los glaciares Boomed: Auge Spruce trees: Abetos Greenhouse: Casa ecológica Warmth: Calor Photovoltaic: Fotovoltaico Spread nuclear plants: Difundir plantas nucleares Hydroelectric dam: Represa hidroeléctrica
-Distribution of the work- Search of information:- Sergio Cuenca García-Rafa García Moreno Confection of the power point:-Alvaro Alarcón Onieva
-Opposing problems-Problems of coordination.Technical problems with computer equipment.-Solutions to these problems-We meet on weekend.We solve this problem using computer equipment for public use of the library lems with computer equipment
Questions 1- What is global warming? 2- Is there really a cause to worry seriously? 3- How can we reduce pollution that causes global warming? 4- The global warming are increasing the temperature all over the world? 5- What effects have the global warming on the earth
6- What it means when we speak about “green building’s” 7- How many kilowatts of power produce a wind farm in the U.S.A? 8- Which are the principal contaminants of the atmosphere? 9- Which are the groups on we can split up the causes of global warming? 10- Are you more concerned about the environment after seen this presentation?