Compose a 300-word (minimum) essay on the topic below. Essays must

Compose a 300-word (minimum) essay on the topic below.
Essays must be double-spaced and use APA-style in-text
citations to reference ideas or quotes that are not your own. You
must include a separate bibliography.
What would happen if the market price of nuclear-generated
electricity included all the costs of the fuel cycle? Explain. How
are the costs of the nuclear fuel cycle paid today? How would
this affect the use of nuclear power to produce electricity? How
would this affect the development of sustainable energy?
You should cite and quote from assigned readings, AVP's,
videos, and module activities to support the ideas in your essay.
Compose a 300
-
word
(minimum) essay on the topic below. Essays must be double
-
spaced
and use APA
-
style in
-
text citations to reference ideas or quotes that are not your own.
You
What would happen if the market price of

nuclear
-
generated electricity included all the
costs of the fuel cycle? Explain. How are the costs of the
nuclear fuel cycle paid today?
How would this affect the use of nuclear power to produce
electricity? How would this
affect the development of sustai
nable energy?
videos, and module activities to
support the ideas in your essay.
Compose a 300-word (minimum) essay on the topic below.
Essays must be double-spaced
and use APA-style in-text citations to reference ideas or quotes
that are not your own. You
What would happen if the market price of nuclear-generated
electricity included all the
costs of the fuel cycle? Explain. How are the costs of the
nuclear fuel cycle paid today?
How would this affect the use of nuclear power to produce
electricity? How would this
affect the development of sustainable energy?
videos, and module activities to
support the ideas in your essay.

Living in the Environment (MindTap Course List)
20th Edition
ISBN-13: 978-0357142202, ISBN-10: 0170291502
FUNDING FOR THIS PROGRAM IS
PROVIDED BY ANNENBERG MEDIA.
Narrator: THE WORLD NEEDS
ENERGY.
AND NEARLY 80% OF IT COMES
FROM BURNING FOSSIL FUELS --
OIL, NATURAL GAS, AND COAL.
BUT BURNING THESE FUELS
EMITS CARBON DIOXIDE
A GREENHOUSE GAS THAT
CONTRIBUTES TO CLIMATE
CHANGE.
HOW CAN WE CONTINUE TO
SUPPL YOUR EVER-GROWING
NEED FOR POWER
WITHOUT DAMAGING THE
ENVIRONMENT?
ONE POSSIBILITY IS TO PUT THE
CARBON DIOXIDE
BACK WHERE IT CAME FROM -- IN

UNDERGROUND ROCK
FORMATIONS.
THE MIDWEST REGIONAL CARBON
SEQUESTRATION PARTNERSHIP
IS INVESTIGATING THIS STRATEGY
WHICH WILL HELP MITIGATE THE
EFFECTS
OF THE CONTINUED USE OF
FOSSIL FUELS FOR ENERGY.
RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES
https://www.learner.org/series/the-habitable-planet-a-systems-
approach-to-environmental-science/energy-challenges/energy-
challenges-video/
ARE ANOTHER OPTION.
AND IN GOLDEN, COLORADO
THE NATURAL RENEWABLE
ENERGY LABORATORY
IS TRYING TO SCALE UP
PROCESSES FOR CREATING
BIOFUELS
FROM THE PRODUCTS OF
AMERICAN FARMS
THEIR GOAL IS TO SUPPLY
UP TO A THIRD OF THE
COUNTRY'S GASOLINE NEEDS
WITHIN 25 YEARS.
BOTH PROJECTS ARE PUSHING
THE LIMITS OF MODERN SCIENCE
IN HOPES OF LEADING THE WAY
TO A MORE SUSTAINABLE ENERGY
FUTURE.

40% OF THE WORLD'S
ELECTRICITY COMES FROM COAL.
COAL IS THE FOSSILIZED REMAINS
OF ANCIENT VEGETATION.
AND WITH GLOBAL RESERVES
THAT COULD LAST OVER 250
YEARS
IT IS THE CHEAPEST AND MOST
ABUNDANT
NON-RENEWABLE ENERGY
SOURCE AVAILABLE.
BUT BURNING COAL PRODUCES
EXHAUST PRODUCTS
INCLUDING NOT JUST WATER
VAPOR
WHICH IS MOST OF WHAT WE SEE
COMING OUT OF SMOKESTACKS
BUT ALSO CARBON DIOXIDE
AN INVISIBLE GREENHOUSE GAS
THAT CONTRIBUTES TO CLIMATE
CHANGE.
AS THE NEED FOR ENERGY
AROUND THE WORLD
CONTINUES TO GROW
NEW COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS
THAT WILL LAST 50 YEARS OR
MORE
COME ONLINE EVERY WEEK.
COAL WILL POWER THE WORLD
FOR DECADES.
HOW CAN WE CONTINUE TO USE
THIS INEXPENSIVE AND PLENTIFUL

RESOURCE
WITHOUT FURTHER DAMAGING
THE ENVIRONMENT?
Dr. Gupta: THE WAY TO TAKE CARE
OF REDUCING CARBON DIOXIDE
IS YOU HAVE MULTIPLE OPTIONS.
DEFINITELY YOU NEED TO
INCREASE
THE EFFICIENCY OF YOUR
ENERGY USE.
YOU ALSO NEED TO LOOK AT
RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES
LIKE SOLAR ENERGY, WIND
ENERGY.
BUT IT IS CLEARLY RECOGNIZED
BY THE RESEARCH COMMUNITY
THAT YOU NEED A THIRD SET OF
TECHNOLOGIES
THAT CAN PROVIDE A MEANS TO
KEEP USING FOSSIL FUELS
ESPECIALLY COAL, WHICH IS OUR
MOST ABUNDANT FOSSIL FUEL
IN AN ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND
MANNER.
Narrator: NEERAJ GUPTA IS A
GEOLOGIST
WITH BATTELLE MEMORIAL
INSTITUTE
A SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
ENTERPRISE
THAT IS RESEARCHING THE
FEASIBILITY AND COST
OF CAPTURING CARBON DIOXIDE

FROM POWER PLANTS
AND INJECTING IT INTO
UNDERGROUND ROCK
FORMATIONS
A PROCESS CALLED CARBON
CAPTURE AND SEQUESTRATION.
Dr. Gupta: WE CALL IT CCS.
YOU ARE PUTTING THE CO2 BACK
INTO THE GROUND.
SO JUST LIKE YOU PRODUCE
FOSSIL FUELS
LIKE COAL AND OIL AND GAS
FROM THE DEEP GEOLOGIC
FORMATIONS
FROM THE SEDIMENTARY LAYERS
YOU'RE USING THE SAME TYPE OF
LAYERS
AND PUTTING CO2 BACK INTO THE
GROUND WHERE IT CAME FROM.
Narrator: IN BELMONT COUNTY,
OHIO
BATTELLE IS COLLABORATING
WITH FirstEnergy CORP.
WHO IS HOSTING THE PROJECT
AT THEIR R.E. BURGER
COAL-FIRED POWER PLANT.
STEPS AWAY FROM THE PLANT,
CREWS WORK AROUND THE
CLOCK
DRILLING A 2 1/2-KILOMETER, OR
8,000-FOOT, HOLE
SEARCHING FOR RESERVOIRS

DEEP UNDERGROUND
THAT CAN HOLD THE PLANT'S
CARBON DIOXIDE.
THIS IS ONE OF BATTELLE
MEMORIAL INSTITUTE'S
RESEARCH SITES
THAT ARE A PART
OF THE MIDWEST REGIONAL
CARBON SEQUESTRATION
PARTNERSHIP
ONE OF SEVEN U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF ENERGY PROGRAMS
BEING CONDUCTED ACROSS THE
UNITED STATES
THAT ARE STUDYING CARBON
CAPTURE AND SEQUESTRATION
AS ONE OPTION FOR MITIGATING
CLIMATE CHANGE.
CO2 IS ROUTINELY SEPARATED
AND CAPTURED
AS A BY PRODUCT FROM
INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES.
BUT THESE CAPTURE
TECHNOLOGIES
ARE NOT COST-EFFECTIVE ON
THIS SCALE
AND ARE BEING FURTHER
DEVELOPED.
THE OBSTACLE FOR
SEQUESTRATION, HOWEVER, IS
NOT COST.
FOR YEARS, CARBON DIOXIDE

HAS BEEN PUMPED INTO THE
GROUND
TO ENHANCE OIL RECOVERY.
THE CHALLENGE NOW IS TO TEST
THIS TECHNOLOGY
FOR LONG-TERM STORAGE.
PHIL JAGUCKI IS A GEOLOGIST ON
THE PROJECT.
Jagucki: CARBON DIOXIDE IS
INJECTED
INTO THE GROUND EVERY DAY.
BUT WE WANT TO PUT IT IN AND
KEEP IT DOWN THERE
AND WE NEED TO FIND WAYS TO
MONITOR IT
SO THAT WE CAN VERIFY THAT
IT'S STAYING UNDERGROUND
THAT IT'S BEHAVING AS WE
INTENDED OR AS WE HAD
PLANNED.
AND SO THAT'S THE KNOWLEDGE
GAP THAT WE HAVE TO FILL.
WHEN IS THE LAST SURVEY?
IF YOU THINK OF THE ANALOGY
OF THE OIL AND GAS FIELDS
THAT MATERIAL HAS BEEN DOWN
THERE FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS.
WHEN WE PUT CO2 IN
IT SHOULD REMAIN THERE FOR
MILLIONS OF YEARS.
Narrator: THE FIRST REQUIREMENT
FOR A GOOD POTENTIAL ROCK

RESERVOIR IS POROSITY.
THE TARGET ROCK MUST HAVE
ENOUGH TINY SPACES BETWEEN
ROCK GRAINS
TO ABSORB THE CO2.
Dr. Gupta: YOU CAN IMAGINE, FOR
EXAMPLE
MAYBE A SPONGE.
AND IF YOU PUT A DROP OF
WATER ON SOME PIECES OF
ROCK
THAT WATER IS IMMEDIATELY
ABSORBED.
Narrator: NEAR THE SURFACE
POROUS ROCKS LIKE THESE ACT
AS AQUIFERS FOR DRINKING
WATER.
BUT AS YOU GET DEEPER, THIS IS
NOT THE CASE.
LAYERS OF POROUS ROCK CAN
CONTAIN OIL, GAS
OR IN THIS CASE, BRINE, OR
SALTY WATER.
Dr. Gupta: YOU WANT TO MAKE
SURE
THAT THE CO2 THAT YOU INJECT
IS DEEPER THAN ANY
FRESHWATER SOURCES OF
GROUNDWATER.
SO AS YOU GO DEEPER
THAT HIGH-SALINITY WATER IS
NOT USEABLE NOW
OR IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE

FOR ANY OTHER USES.
THAT'S WHY IT CAN BE USED FOR
INJECTION.
Narrator: THESE BRINE, OR SALTY
RESERVOIRS
CAN BE AN IDEAL LOCATION FOR
CARBON SEQUESTRATION.
BUT JUST AS CRITICAL AS THEIR
POROSITY
IS THEIR PERMEABILITY
ALLOWING THE CARBON DIOXIDE
TO MOVE THROUGH THE ROCK'S
PORES.
BUT PERMEABILITY CAN ENABLE
THE CO2
TO MOVE UPWARDS AND ESCAPE
TO THE SURFACE
MAKING A NONPOROUS
IMPERMEABLE LAYER ABOVE THE
RESERVOIR
KNOWN AS CAP ROCK
ANOTHER IMPORTANT,
NECESSARY CHARACTERISTIC.
Dr. Gupta: IT WOULD BE LIKE A
PIECE OF SHALE-TYPE ROCK
WHERE YOU PUT A DROP OF
WATER
AND IT DOESN'T GET ABSORBED
VERY QUICKLY OR NOT AT ALL.
THAT'S A CAP ROCK, AND THAT
PREVENTS THE LEAKAGE OF CO2.

Narrator: WHEN SANDSTONE AND
SHALE SAMPLES
ARE BOTH INJECTED WITH BLUE
DYE
AND VIEWEDUNDER THE SAME
MAGNIFICATION
YOU CAN SEE THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN AN IMPERMEABLE,
NONPOROUS ROCK
AND ONE WHICH IS POROUS AND
PERMEABLE.
THE FIRST STEP IN LOOKING
FOR POTENTIAL GEOLOGICAL
STORAGE SITES
WITH THESE CRITICAL
CHARACTERISTICS
IS A SEISMIC SURVEY OF THE
POTENTIAL AREA.
Jagucki: THE SEISMIC SURVEY
ALLOWS US TO COVER A LARGER
AREA
WITHOUT HAVING TO DRILL WELLS
EVERYWHERE.
WE CAME OUT HERE WITH
TRUCKS
THAT ARE EQUIPPED TO VIBRATE
THE GROUND.
A LOT OF PEOPLE CALL THEM
THUMPER TRUCKS.
WE HAVE A SERIES OF
MICROPHONES STUCK INTO THE
GROUND

TO MEASURE THAT SOUND
AS IT PASSES DOWN AND THEN
COMES BACK UP.
AND WE RAN ABOUT FIVE MILES
NORTH TO SOUTH
AND ABOUT FIVE MILES EAST TO
WEST
SO THAT COVERS A FAIRLY LARGE
AREA.
Narrator: THE PRELIMINARY
IMAGES TRANSLATED FROM THE
VIBRATIONS
SUGGESTED THAT THE BELMONT
COUNTY SITE
WAS AN OPTIMAL, NON-FAULTED
GEOLOGIC LOCATION
FOR CARBON SEQUESTRATION
SHOWING LAYERS OF POROUS
SANDSTONE
CAPPED BY EVEN THICKER
LAYERS OF IMPERMEABLE ROCK.
THE TWO LAYERS THEY ARE
INTERESTED IN
AS POTENTIAL INJECTION ZONES
ARE THE ORISKANY LAYER
WHICH IS AROUND 1,800 METERS,
OR 6,000 FEET
BELOW THE SURFACE, AND THE
CLINTON LAYER
ANOTHER 600 METERS, OR 2,000
FEET, LOWER.
THE NEXT STEP IS TO DRILL A

WELL
OVER 2,400 METERS, OR 8,000
FEET, DEEP
TO CONFIRM THESE FINDINGS.
TO REACH THIS DEPTH
CREWS OF FOUR WORK 24 HOURS
A DAY
DRILLING AT A RATE OF ABOUT
TWO MINUTES PER FOOT
BY ADDING 30-FOOT SECTIONS OF
DRILL PIPE ONE AT A TIME.
Meggyesy: BASICALLY, THEY'RE
GONNA PICK THOSE UP
AND THEY ARE GOING TO PUT IT
DOWN IN THE HOLE
AND PICK UP ANOTHER ONE.
EVERY TIME THEY WANT TO DO
SOMETHING WITH A BIT
THEY HAVE TO PULL ALL OF THAT
PIPE BACK OUT
AND THEY HAVE TO PUT IT ALL
BACK IN AGAIN.
Narrator: AS THEY DRILL THE HOLE
THEY CONTINUOUSLY TAKE ROCK
SAMPLES
TO DETERMINE IF THE LAYERS
THEY SAW ON THE SEISMIC
SURVEY
ARE ACTUALLY THERE.
Meggyesy: WE HAVE A BUNCH OF
VERY LARGE AIR COMPRESSORS
BIGGER THAN A PICKUP TRUCK,
THAT ARE BLOWING

COMPRESSED AIR
DOWN THROUGH THE DRILL PIPE,
OUT THE BIT
AND IS PICKING UP THE DEBRIS AS
WE'RE DRILLING.
IT'S LIFTING IT ALL THE WAY BACK
UP OUT THE HOLE
AND IT BLOWS IT OUTAT THE
BLOW PITS.
Jagucki: AS THAT FLUID COMES
OUT
WE CAN LITERALLY HOLD A
BUCKET UNDER THE END OF IT
AND WE GET SOME WATER AND
CUTTINGS IN IT.
AND THEN WE GIVE THAT SAMPLE
TO OUR MUD LOGGER
AND THE MUD LOGGER LOOKS AT
THE CUTTINGS.
HE CAN TELL WHAT TYPE OF
ROCK WE'RE IN.
Narrator: AT APPROXIMATELY 1.8
KILOMETERS
OR 5,800 FEET, DOWN
THE TEAM EXPECTS TO FIND THE
SANDSTONE
THAT IS PART OF THE ORISKANY
ROCK LAYER
ONE OF THE POTENTIAL
INJECTION ZONES.
BUT SO FAR, THERE IS NO SIGN
OF THAT LAYER.

Jagucki: WE LOGGED ANOTHER
WELL
ABOUT 30 MILES NORTH OF HERE,
AND THAT SANDSTONE WAS
PRESENT.
SOME OF OUR OTHER REGIONAL
DATA TELLS US THAT IT'S HERE.
BUT IT'S AT THIS PARTICULAR
LOCATION.
THAT'S WHY IT'S SO IMPORTANT
TO GET SITE-SPECIFIC
INFORMATION
BECAUSE NO MATTER HOW GOOD
YOUR REGIONAL INFORMATION IS
UNTIL YOU VERIFY IT ON-SITE,
YOU JUST DON'T KNOW.
Narrator: AT ABOUT 5,900 FEET
THE SAND GRAINS FROM THE
ORISKANY LAYER START TO
APPEAR.
Jagucki: WE WERE GLAD WHEN WE
FOUND THE ORISKANY
SANDSTONE.
THAT PROVIDES A GOOD
POTENTIAL TARGET
FOR US TO DO OUR EXPERIMENT.
AND IT'S DEEP BELOW GROUND
SURFACE.
IT'S OVER A MILE DOWN. IT'S WELL
CONTAINED.
IT'S GOT THOUSANDS OF FEET OF
SHALE ABOVE IT
THAT FORM A VERY GOOD

CONTAINMENT LAYER.
Narrator: ADDITIONAL TESTS ARE
DONE.
WELL LOGGING MEASURES FLUID
LEVELS
THAT ACT AS A PROXY OF
POROSITY IN THE ROCK
INDICATING LAYERS OF POROUS
SANDSTONE
AND NONPOROUS SHALE.
AND CORE SAMPLES ARE
COMPARED TO PREVIOUS
EXAMPLES
TAKEN OVER DECADES FROM
OHIO GEOLOGICAL SURVEYS LAB.
THIS DATA WILL PROVIDE THE
EXACT DEPTH AND
CHARACTERISTICS
OF THE ROCK LAYERS.
ONCE THESE EVALUATIONS ARE
COMPLETE
THE ROCK WILL BE TESTED
BY INJECTING ABOUT TWO DAYS'
WORTH OF PLANT CO2 EMISSIONS
AND MONITORING WHETHER ANY
OF IT IS LEAKING UP TO THE
SURFACE.
IF THIS TECHNOLOGY PROVES
FEASIBLE
AND ECONOMICALLY VIABLE

THEN CARBON SEQUESTRATION
HOLDS GREAT PROMISE
AS BEING PART OF THE SOLUTION
TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE
AFFORDABLE ENERGY
WITHOUT CONTRIBUTING TO
CLIMATE CHANGE.
Dr. Gupta: WE HAVE TO CLEARLY
RECOGNIZE
THAT THIS IS ONE OF SEVERAL
OPTIONS THAT WE HAVE TO
DEPLOY.
IT IS NOT THE ONLY OPTION.
BUT THIS OPTION, IF IT CAN BE
USED
LIKE WE ARE TRYING TO SHOW
WITH OUR RESEARCH
WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT PART
OF THE PORTFOLIO OF
TECHNOLOGIES
FOR REDUCING CO2 EMISSIONS.
Narrator: CARBON CAPTURE AND
SEQUESTRATION
IS JUST ONE PART OF THE
EFFORT
IN PROVIDING A SUSTAINABLE
ENERGY FUTURE.
RENEWABLE FORMS OF ENERGY,
SUCH AS SOLAR AND WIND
ALONG WITH ENERGY EFFICIENCY

ARE ALSO VITAL COMPONENTS TO
THIS STRATEGY
HOLDING PROMISE THAT WE WILL
BE ABLE TO MEET THE
CHALLENGE
OF POWERING OUR HOMES AND
OUR BUSINESSES
IN A LESS DAMAGING WAY.
BUT WE STILL NEED TO GET
AROUND.
350 MILLION GALLONS OF
PETROLEUM
IS BURNED EVERY DAY IN THE
UNITED STATES
MOST OF IT FOR
TRANSPORTATION
EMITTING APPROXIMATELY 700
MILLION METRIC TONS
OF CARBON DIOXIDE A YEAR.
AND THE WORLDWIDE DEMAND
FOR FUEL IS ONLY GOING UP
CREATING A PRESSING NEED FOR
NEW RENEWABLE FUELS.
Douglas: THE URGENCY TO FIND
RENEWABLE TRANSPORTATION
FUELS IS AT LEAST TWOFOLD.
ONE IS ENERGY SECURITY.
OUR NATION IS ALMOST WHOLLY
DEPENDENT
FOR TRANSPORTATION FUELS ON
PETROLEUM PRODUCTS.

AND MOST OF THAT PETROLEUM
COMES FROM OVERSEAS.
AND IT IS BECOMING MORE AND
MORE SCARCE
AND HARDER AND HARDER TO
FIND.
IN ADDITION TO THAT
BURNING OF PETROLEUM IN
CARS, BUSES, PLANES
HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AS A
PRIMARY CONTRIBUTOR
TO THE AMOUNT OF CARBON
DIOXIDE
THAT'S GOING INTO THE
ATMOSPHERE
WHICH COULD CONTRIBUTE TO
CLIMATE CHANGE.
AND SO THERE'S AN
ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT
TO FINDING A RENEWABLE
RESOURCE.
Narrator: AT THE NATIONAL
RENEWABLE ENERGY
LABORATORY
OR NREL, IN GOLDEN, COLORADO
SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS
WORKING FOR NREL's BIOMASS
PROGRAM
ARE DEVELOPING NEW WAYS TO
GET FUEL FROM PLANTS.

THEIR GOAL IS TO REPLACE
A THIRD OF THE UNITED STATES'
GASOLINE CONSUMPTION
WITH PLANT-BASED BIOFUELS, OR
ETHANOL, BY THE YEAR 2030.
Douglas: WHEN YOU BURN FOSSIL
FUELS
YOU'RE RELEASING CARBON
DIOXIDE
THAT WAS FIXED IN THE EARTH
MILLIONS OF YEARS AGO
WHEN THOSE ANCIENT PLANTS
DIED.
BUT WHEN YOU'RE USING A
BIO-BASED FUEL LIKE ETHANOL
YOU'RE ACTUALLY ONLY
RELEASING CARBON DIOXIDE
THAT WAS ONLY RECENTLY FIXED
BY THE PLANTS
AND THEN THE PLANTS THAT
YOU'RE GROWING FOR NEXT
YEAR'S CROP
WILL THEN FIX THAT CARBON
BACK AGAIN.
SO THE CARBON CYCLE IS
NEARLY 100% COMPLETE.
Narrator: TODAY, MOST OF THE
ETHANOL
PRODUCED IN THE UNITED
STATES COMES FROM CORN.
THE PROCESS IS NOT MUCH
DIFFERENT

FROM THAT OF MAKING WINE OR
BREWING BEER.
IN LARGE-SCALE PLANTS ALL
OVER THE MIDWEST
THE STARCH IN CORN KERNELS IS
CONVERTED TO SUGARS
WHICH ARE THEN FERMENTED
WITH YEAST.
THE END PRODUCT OF THIS
FERMENTATION
IS THEN DISTILLED TO SEPARATE
THE ETHANOL.
BUT THERE ARE LIMITATIONS
TO INCREASING THE PRODUCTION
OF CORN ETHANOL.
CORN IS ALREADY A VALUABLE
COMMODITY.
IT IS AN INGREDIENT IN MANY OF
THE FOODS WE EAT
AND ALSO USED AS FEED FOR
LIVESTOCK.
Douglas: WE THINK WE CAN GO
TO ABOUT 15 BILLION GALLONS OF
ETHANOL A YEAR
FROM CORN KERNELS.
BUT ANYTHING BEYOND THAT
THE COMPETITION BETWEEN FUEL
AND FOOD
STARTS TO TAKE PLACE.
AND SO TO GET MORE
THAN 15 BILLION GALLONS OF
ETHANOL A YEAR

WE NEED TO GO TO OTHER
METHODS.
AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE
INTERESTED IN TRYING TO LEARN
HOW TO ECONOMICALLY MAKE
ETHANOL FROM THE CELLULOSIC
MATERIALS --
THAT IS, THE STALKS, STEMS,
LEAVES --
THE NONEDIBLE PARTS OF THE
PLANT.
Narrator: CELLULOSIC MATERIAL,
OR BIOMASS
IS BASICALLY THE FIBROUS,
WOODY
AND GENERALLY INEDIBLE
PORTIONS OF PLANTS.
AND IT IS THE MOST PLENTIFUL
BIOLOGICAL MATERIAL ON EARTH.
THE CHALLENGE FOR NREL
SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS
LIKE ANDY ADEN
IS TO DESIGN COST-EFFECTIVE
CONVERSION PLANTS
THAT CAN CREATE FUEL FROM
MANY DIFFERENT TYPES OF
BIOMASS.
Aden: THERE ARE LOTS OF
DIFFERENT TYPES OF BIOMASS.
THERE ARE AGRICULTURAL
RESIDUES, LIKE CORN STOVER OR
WHEAT STRAW
THINGS THAT ARE CURRENTLY

LEFT IN THE FIELD
AFTER THE GRAIN HAS BEEN
HARVESTED.
THERE ARE WOOD TYPES OF
FEED STOCKS THAT ARE BIOMASS
--
WOOD CHIPS LIKE POPLAR, FOR
EXAMPLE.
IT'S A VERY FAST-GROWING TREE
AND YOU CAN POTENTIALLY HAVE
PLANTATIONS OF THIS MATERIAL
THAT CAN PRODUCE LARGE
AMOUNTS OF BIOMASS FOR FUEL
ALL THE WAY EVEN TO A PRAIRIE
GRASS LIKE SWITCH GRASS.
THE BENEFITS OF THIS MATERIAL
IS IT'S VERY DROUGHT-TOLERANT
AND YOU CAN GET A LOT MORE
TONNAGE OF THIS MATERIAL
OFF OF AN ACRE OF LAND.
SO THERE ARE A LOT OF
REASONS AND A LOT OF
ADDITIONAL BENEFITS
FOR USING BIOMASS AS A
SOURCE OF ETHANOL
AS OPPOSED TO JUST CORN
GRAIN
ONE OF WHICH IS THERE'S A LOT
MORE OF IT OUT THERE
THE SECOND OF WHICH IS YOU
AVOID THE FOOD-VERSUS-FUEL
ISSUES.
THE THIRD POTENTIAL BENEFIT IS

TO FARMERS IN RURAL AMERICA
BECAUSE IT ADDS ADDITIONAL
MARKETS
FOR THEM TO SELL MATERIALS
INTO.
Narrator: BUT THERE ARE MANY
OBSTACLES
IN CREATING ETHANOL FROM
CELLULOSIC MATERIAL.
THROUGH PHOTOSYNTHESIS
PLANTS MAKE SUGARS THAT
THEY USE FOR ENERGY TO
GROW.
SOME OF THOSE SUGARS ARE
BONDED TOGETHER AND STORED
CREATING STARCHES, LIKE THE
STARCH IN A CORN KERNEL
THAT CAN BE USED LATER FOR
ENERGY.
THESE STARCHES ARE EASILY
BROKEN DOWN
MAKING THEM AN ATTRACTIVE
SOURCE FOR ETHANOL
CONVERSION.
BUT SOME SUGARS ARE BONDED
DIFFERENTLY, INTO LONG CHAINS
LIKE STEEL GIRDERS WITHIN
PLANT CELL WALLS.
SPECIFICALLY, THERE ARE THREE
PRIMARY COMPONENTS OF
BIOMASS --
CELLULOSE, HEMICELLULOSE,

AND THE POLYMER LIGNIN
WHICH FILLS THE REMAINING
SPACES IN THE PLANT CELL WALL.
PLANTS EVOLVED SO THAT THESE
MATERIALS WOULD LAST A LONG
TIME
AND BE CHEMICALLY DIFFICULT
TO BREAK DOWN
MAKING THE BIOMASS
CONVERSION PROCESS
CHALLENGING.
NREL HAS CREATED A PILOT
PLANT
TO TEST WAYSTO IMPROVE THE
PROCESS
OF BREAKING DOWN THE
CELLULOSIC MATERIAL
AND MAKE THE SUGARS
AVAILABLE FOR FERMENTATION.
THE FIRST STEP IN THE
PROCESSIS PRETREATMENT.
Aden: NATURE HAS REALLY MADE
THESE MATERIALS
TO BE RESISTANT TO BEING
BROKEN DOWN.
SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE TO DO
SOME PREPROCESSING
TO BREAK APART THE CELLULOSE
AND THE HEMICELLULOSE
FROM THE LIGNIN.
AND THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS
IN THE PRETREATMENT PART OF
THE PROCESS.

WE START TO USE ACID AS A
CHEMICAL HYDROLYSIS AGENT --
HYDROLYSIS REALLY MEANS
ADDING WATER TO A REACTION --
TO BEGIN TO BREAK DOWN THE
BIOMASS
INTO ITS INDIVIDUAL PIECES
AND GET SOME OF THE THOSE
SUGARS INTO SOLUTION.
Narrator: THIS PRETREATMENT
PROCESS
RELEASES THE SUGARS IN THE
HEMICELLULOSE.
BUT THE CELLULOSE REMAINS
SOMEWHAT INTACT
LEADING TO THE NEXT STEP
IN BREAKING DOWN THE
CELLULOSIC MATERIAL.
Aden: ONCE WE'VE PRETREATED
THE BIOMASS
WE BRING THAT PRETREATED
BIOMASS, IN A SLURRY OR A
PASTE
INTO OUR FERMENTERS HERE.
AND THIS IS WHERE WE ADD OUR
CELLULASE ENZYME
INTO THE PROCESS.
CELLULASE ENZYME IS SIMPLY A
NATURAL PROTEIN
THAT ACTS AS A CATALYST TO
BREAK DOWN THE CELLULOSE
INTO ITS INDIVIDUAL SUGAR
UNITS.

ONCE WE HAVE THAT MIXTURE OF
SUGARS
THAT HAS COME FROM THE
PRETREATMENT
AND FROM USING THE ENZYMES
WE CAN FERMENT THAT MIXTURE
OF SUGARS THEN
INTO FUEL ETHANOL.
Narrator: THE ENZYMES USED
TO BREAK DOWN THE CELLULOSIC
MATERIAL
ARE AN EXPENSIVE PART OF THIS
PROCESS.
NREL's EXTENSIVE BIOCHEMICAL
LABORATORIES
ALONG WITH INDUSTRY
PARTNERS, HAVE BROUGHT THE
COST DOWN
FROM $5 PER GALLON OF
ETHANOL PRODUCED
TO ABOUT 20 CENTS PER GALLON.
BUT THIS COST HAS TO BE
REDUCED EVEN FURTHER
TO COMPETE WITH CORN
ETHANOL AND TRADITIONAL
PETROLEUM.
BILL ADNEY IS RESEARCHING NEW
WAYS
TO IMPROVE THESE ENZYMES
USING BIOTECHNOLOGY.
Dr. Adney: ENZYMES ARE
IMPORTANT IN NATURE

IN THE BREAKDOWN OF BIOMASS.
THEY'RE FOUND ALL OVER THE
PLACE, WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT
IT.
COMPOST PILES WOULD BE ONE
EXAMPLE OF A PLACE
WHERE YOU WOULD FIND
CELLULOSE-DEGRADING
ENZYMES.
AND WE'VE LOOKED ALL SORTS
OF PLACES.
Narrator: ONE PLACE THEY
LOOKED WAS YELLOWSTONE
NATIONAL PARK.
Dr. Adney: WE WERE LOOKING FOR
ENZYMES
THAT COULD SURVIVE AT HIGH
TEMPERATURE.
SO WE LOOKED AT SOME OF THE
BIOMASS
THAT'S DECAYING IN THE HOT
SPRINGS.
Narrator: WHAT THEY FOUND WAS
A BACTERIUM
THAT FEEDS ON THE ORGANIC
DEBRIST HAT FALLS INTO HOT
SPRINGS.
THE ENZYME THEY ISOLATED
FROM THE BACTERIUM
ATTACHES ITSELF TO THE CHAIN
OF SUGARS IN CELLULOSE
AND BREAKS IT APART.
Dr. Adney: THIS PARTICULAR

ENZYME
WE'VE DONE SOME ENGINEERING
ON
AND HAVE BEEN ABLE TO
IMPROVE THE ACTIVITY
BY ABOUT 12% TO 15%.
Narrator: WHILE THIS ENZYME
BREAKS THE CHAIN
IT DOES NOT RELEASE THE
SUGARS.
THAT IS THE JOB OF ANOTHER
ENZYME
ONE THAT WAS DISCOVERED
NEARLY 50 YEARS AGO.
Dr. Adney: IN THE LATE '50s, EARLY
'60s
IT WAS AN ISSUE WITH THE ARMY
UNIFORMS IN THE TROPIC AREAS.
THEY FOUND THAT THEY WERE
DEGRADING RAPIDLY.
SO THE ARMY BEGAN TO
INVESTIGATE WHY THIS WAS
OCCURRING.
AND ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS
THEY ISOLATED WAS A FUNGUS
THAT PRODUCED ENZYMES THAT
BROKE DOWN THE COTTON
MATERIAL
FOUND IN THE SOLDERS'
UNIFORMS.
THESE ENZYMES ARE VERY
UNIQUE.

THEY ARE TERMED PROCESSIVE
ENZYMES.
SO ONCE THEY ATTACH TO A
CHAIN, THEY MOVE
PROCESSIVELY DOWN
RELEASING THE SUGAR AS THEY
MOVE ALONG.
THIS PARTICULAR ENZYME
IS PROBABLY THE SINGLE MOST
IMPORTANT ENZYME
IN BIOMASS CONVERSION AT THIS
TIME.
YET WE DON'T KNOW HOW IT
REALLY WORKS.
Narrator: BY GAINING A BETTER
UNDERSTANDING
OF HOW THESE ENZYMES WORK
AND ENGINEERING THEM TO
FUNCTION MORE EFFECTIVELY
RESEARCHERS AT NREL WILL
IMPROVE THE
BIOMASS-CONVERSION PROCESS
EVEN FURTHER.
ONCE THE ENZYMES HAVE
BROKEN DOWN THE SUGAR
CHAINS
FERMENTATION ORGANISMS ARE
ADDED
TO TURN THOSE SUGARS INTO
ETHANOL.
IN THIS PART OF THE PROCESS,
TOO, PROGRESS NEEDS TO BE
MADE.

Aden: IN THE CURRENT
CORN-ETHANOL INDUSTRY
THE YEAST THEY USE TO
FERMENT THE GLUCOSE INTO
ETHANOL
IS VERY GOOD AT WHAT IT DOES.
IN THIS PROCESS, WE HAVE A
MIXTURE OF SUGARS --
GLUCOSE, XYLOSE, MANNOSE,
AND OTHER SUGARS.
WE HAVE ORGANISMS
ENGINEERED
TO BE ABLE TO FERMENT SOME
OF THOSE SUGARS
PRIMARILY GLUCOSE AND
XYLOSE, AT THE SAME TIME
BUT THEY DON'T DO IT AS
EFFICIENTLY AS THEY NEED TO
AND WE'D LIKE TO ENGINEER
THEM TO DO OTHER SUGARS AS
WELL
TO MAKE THIS A MORE EFFICIENT
PROCESS
AND GET MORE ETHANOL
FOR EVERY POUND OF BIOMASS
THAT WE BRING IN.
Narrator: AT NREL
THEY ARE CONTINUALLY
ENGINEERING THESE ORGANISMS
TO BECOME MORE EFFICIENT
IN HOPES OF ONE DAY
PRODUCING A SINGLE

FERMENTING ORGANISM
THAT CAN TOLERATE HIGH
CONCENTRATIONS OF ETHANOL
AND WORK ON ALL SUGARS AT
ONCE.
BUT ALL OF THESE PROCESSES
TAKE A LOT OF ENERGY.
AND HERE IN THE PILOT PLANT
THEY ARE WORKING ON A
SOLUTION TO THAT AS WELL
BY USING THE LAST REMAINING
PIECE
OF THE CELLULOSIC MATERIAL,
THE LIGNIN.
Aden: THAT LIGNIN PLAYS A VERY
IMPORTANT PART
IN THE ENERGY PICTURE OF THIS
PROCESS.
BECAUSE CELLULOSIC BIOMASS
HAS THIS LIGNIN COMPONENT
THAT CAN BE USED FOR A
FUEL,YOU DON'T HAVE TO BUY
COAL.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO BUY
NATURAL GAS.
YOU CAN BE A SELF-SUSTAINING
ENERGY PLANT LIKE THIS
BY BURNING THIS LIGNIN
RESIDUE.
YOU COULD NOT ONLY PROVIDE
ALL OF THE ENERGY NEEDS
FOR A PROCESSING PLANT SUCH

AS THIS
YOU COULD ALSO POTENTIALLY
SELL A GREEN ENERGY
BYPRODUCT
TO THE LOCAL POWER GRID.
Narrator: BY MAXIMIZING THE
ENERGY POTENTIAL
OF CELLULOSIC MATERIAL
NREL's BIOMASS PROGRAMIS
HELPING TO PAVE THE WAY
TO A NEW ENERGY FUTURE.
Douglas: WITH ADDED
EFFICIENCIES
WE THINK WE COULD VERY
EASILY GET TO THE POINT
WHERE HALF OR MORE OF THE
LIQUID FUELS USED IN THE U.S.
COULD BE GROWN HERE IN THE
U.S. ON AN ANNUAL AND CYCLICAL
BASIS.
SO WE WOULD BE GROWING OUR
OWN TRANSPORTATION FUEL.
Narrator: BIOMASS FUELS
ALONG WITH OTHER RENEWABLE
ENERGY SOURCES
CARBON SEQUESTRATION
NUCLEAR ENERGY, AND NEW
EFFICIENCIES
WILL ALL CONTRIBUTE TO
PROVIDING AFFORDABLE ENERGY
FOR OUR RAPIDLY INCREASING
GLOBAL POPULATION

AND REDUCE THE IMPACT
OF CLIMATE-CHANGING
GREENHOUSE GASES.
PROVIDED BY ANNENBERG MEDIA.
FOR INFORMATION ABOUT THIS
AND OTHER ANNENBERG MEDIA
PROGRAMS, CALL...
AND VISIT US AT...
PROVIDED BY...
[ HORN HONKS ]
Narrator: AIR POLLUTION --
WE CAN'T ALWAYS SEE IT, BUT ITS
EFFECTS CAN BE DEADLY.
TO FIND WAYS TO REDUCE ITS
IMPACT
WE NEED TO KNOW EXACTLY
WHAT POLLUTANTS ARE EMITTED
AND HOW THEY CHANGE AS THEY
TRAVEL THROUGH THE
ATMOSPHERE.
AT THIS POINT, WE PRIMARILY

HAVE SULFATE PARTICLES.
USING CUTTING-EDGE
INSTRUMENTS
AERODYNE RESEARCH
CAN DETECT TINY
CONCENTRATIONS OF
POLLUTANTS IN REAL TIME
TRACKING THEM BACK TO THEIR
SOURCES
AND SHOWING HOW THEY EVOLVE
HOUR BY HOUR
UNDER THE EFFECTS OF
SUNLIGHT AND WEATHER.
IN MEXICO CITY
LUISA MOLINA IS LEADING A
GROUP OF OVER 450 SCIENTISTS
IN THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE
STUDY EVER CONDUCTED
OF ONE CITY'S AIR EMISSIONS.
SAMPLING ITS PLUME OF
POLLUTANTS FROM CRADLE TO
GRAVE
THE TEAM HOPES TO LEARN HOW
THE CITY'S POLLUTION
AFFECTS THE SURROUNDING
REGIONS AND EVEN THE GLOBAL
CLIMATE.
TODAY, THE RAPID INCREASE OF
POPULATION AND
INDUSTRIALIZATION
IS CAUSING INCREASING
CONCERNS ABOUT AIR

POLLUTION.
BOTH RESEARCHERS HOPE TO
DISCOVER
WHAT'S CAUSING THE MOST
DAMAGE
AND FIND WAYS TO REDUCE THE
HUMAN AND GLOBAL IMPACT.
[ HORN HONKS ]
Kolb: ONE OF THE REAL FACTS
THAT WE ALL HAVE TO DEAL WITH
IS THAT PEOPLE MAKE POLLUTION
AND AS THE POPULATION OF THE
EARTH GROWS
UNLESS WE'RE VERY CLEVER AND
WORK VERY HARD
THE LEVELS OF POLLUTION WE
ALL HAVE TO LIVE WITH
WILL GROW ALONG WITH IT.
WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND
WHICH POLLUTANTS ARE THE
ONES THAT WEMUSTCONTROL
AND WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH
EITHER CHANGES IN OUR
TECHNOLOGY
OR CHANGES IN OUR LIFESTYLES
WHICH REDUCE THE HEAVY
POLLUTION BURDENS
THAT WE EMIT INTO THE
ATMOSPHERE.
Narrator: CHARLES KOLB IS
PRESIDENT OF AERODYNE

RESEARCH
A COMPANY THAT SPECIALIZES IN
STUDYING AIR POLLUTION
AND DESIGNING INSTRUMENTS TO
HELP MEASURE IT.
A NEW AEROSOL MASSSPEC
BODY.
Kolb: OUR AIR-POLLUTION
RESEARCH
FOCUSES ON WHAT'S EMITTED BY
VARIOUS POLLUTION SOURCES --
CARS, TRUCKS, PLANES,
FACTORIES, AND MANY OTHER
SOURCES --
AND TO UNDERSTAND HOW THEY
CHANGE THE ATMOSPHERE
AND HOW THAT CHANGED
ATMOSPHERE
TURNS AROUND AND IMPACTS
PEOPLE AND THE CLIMATE
AND THE ECOSYSTEMS THAT WE
WANT TO PRESERVE.
Narrator: AIR POLLUTANTS EXIST
AS HARMFUL GASES
OR AS AEROSOLS.
AEROSOLS ARE MICROSCOPIC
SOLID OR LIQUID PARTICLES
SUSPENDED IN THE AIR
AND THESE POLLUTANTS CAN
HAVE DEADLY EFFECTS.
Kolb: MOST OF US CAN ONLY
SURVIVE A MINUTE OR SO

WITHOUT A FRESH BREATH OF AIR
AND IF THE AIR CONTAINS
SUBSTANCES
WHICH ARE GOING TO REALLY
HURT YOUR HEALTH
YOU'D HATE TO THINK THAT
YOU'RE SHORTENING YOUR LIFE
WITH EVERY BREATH OF AIR YOU
TAKE.
Narrator: THE WORST
AIR-POLLUTION DISASTER ON
RECORD
OCCURRED IN LONDON IN
DECEMBER OF 1952.
AT THIS TIME, LONDONERS STILL
CONSUMED LOTS OF COAL
WHICH LED TO LARGE AMOUNTS
OF POLLUTANTS IN THE AIR
INCLUDING BLACK CARBON, OR
SOOT PARTICLES
AND SULFUR DIOXIDE.
AND THIS TOXIC MIX TURNED
FATAL.
Kolb: THE PARTICLE LOADING GOT
SO HEAVY DURING ONE EPISODE
THAT THE SO-CALLED KILLER
FOGS
ACTUALLY KILLED MANY
THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE
OVER ABOUT A WEEK AND A HALF.

Narrator: THANKS TO
REGULATIONS TO REDUCE THESE
POLLUTANTS
EVENTS LIKE THIS ARE RARE
TODAY.
HOWEVER, PUBLIC HEALTH
OFFICIAL SESTIMATE
THAT 70,000 AMERICANS DIE
PREMATURELY EACH YEAR
DUE TO AIR POLLUTION.
IN ORDER TO MONITOR THESE
POLLUTANTS
KOLB AND HIS TEAM AT
AERODYNE RESEARCH
DEVELOPED A SERIES
OF REVOLUTIONARY
LABORATORY-GRADE
INSTRUMENTS
THAT COULD BE DEPLOYED FROM
A MOBILE VAN.
Kolb: WE'VE DEVELOPED SOME
VERY CAPABLE
AND VERY FAST RESEARCH
INSTRUMENTS
THAT CAN BE DEPLOYED IN THE
ATMOSPHERE
AND MEASURE RIGHT AWAY
WHAT'S THERE.
Narrator: TRADITIONALLY
SAMPLES HAD TO BE BROUGHT

BACK TO THE LAB TO BE
ANALYZED
BUT WITH THE MOBILE VAN,
MEASUREMENTS ARE
INSTANTANEOUS.
THE BENEFIT OF USING REAL-TIME
INSTRUMENTATION
IS THAT IT MAXIMIZES THE
SCIENTIFIC IMPACT
THAT WE'RE ABLE TO HAVE WHEN
WE'RE OUT IN THE FIELD.
IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE PICKING UP
A GOOD SULFATE PLUME.
Kolb: THE MOBILE LAB IS
EQUIPPED WITH INSTRUMENTS
THAT CAN MEASURE EVERY
SECOND OR SO.
IF YOU'RE CHARACTERIZING AN
EMISSIONS SOURCE
AND ITS EMISSIONS ARE
CHANGING SECOND BY SECOND
AS A VEHICLE MIGHT AS IT STOPS
AND STARTS
OR ACCELERATES OR GOES UP A
HILL
THEN IF YOU DON'T MEASURE
SECOND BY SECOND
YOU WON'T GET THE RIGHT
ANSWER.
NITRATES? YEAH, I SEE SOME
NITRATES.
Narrator: ONE KEY INSTRUMENT
IS AERODYNE'S AEROSOL MASS

SPECTROMETER
WHICH MEASURES THE TINY
SUSPENDED PARTICLES
IN THE ATMOSPHERE.
WHAT'S REALLY SPECIAL ABOUT
IT
IS THAT USUALLY WHEN YOU'RE
LOOKING AT PARTICLES
YOU JUST KNOW SORT OF HOW
MANY PARTICLES ARE IN YOUR
SAMPLE.
BUT WHAT THE AMS IS CAPABLE
OF DOING
IS TELLING YOU WHAT THE
CHEMICAL SPECIES
OF EACH OF THOSE PARTICLES IS.
YOU CAN SAY, "OH, YOU KNOW,
THERE'S 1,000 PARTICLES
IN THIS CUBIC CENTIMETER OF
AIR,"
ROUGHLY THIS BIG, BUT YOU CAN
ALSO SAY
"OH, A CERTAIN FRACTION OF
THEM ARE SULFATE
"A CERTAIN FRACTION OF THEM
ARE SOME SORT OF ORGANIC
A CERTAIN FRACTION OF THEM
ARE NITRATE,"
ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
AND SO THAT GIVES YOU A MUCH
STRONGER CAPABILITY
BECAUSE IT TURNS OUT THAT THE
WAY THESE PARTICLES

INTERACT WITH THE
ENVIRONMENT, FOR INSTANCE
HOW THEY MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT
AFFECT GLOBAL WARMING
DEPENDS UPON THEIR
COMPOSITION.
AND HOW THEY MIGHT AFFECT OR
MIGHT NOT AFFECT HUMAN
HEALTH
DEPENDS ON THEIR COMPOSITION
AS WELL AS THEIR SIZE.
Herndon: IF YOU'RE CONCERNED
ABOUT THE HEALTH IMPACTS
YOU'RE MOST CONCERNED
ABOUT THE SIZE OF PARTICLES
THAT ARE SUFFICIENTLY SMALL
SO THAT THEY GO INTO YOUR
LUNGS
DEEP INTO YOUR LUNGS, ALONG
WITH THE GAS FLOW.
AND IN THAT CASE
YOU COULD ACTUALLY BE
INTRODUCING SOME THINGS
INTO YOUR BODY, INTO YOUR
BLOODSTREAM, QUICKLY
THAT HAVE NO BUSINESS BEING
THERE.
Narrator: PARTICLES LESS THAN 10
MICROMETERS IN DIAMETER
JUST A FRACTION OF THE WIDTH
OF A HUMAN HAIR

CAN LODGE DEEP INTO THE
LUNGS.
THOSE SMALLER THAN 2.5
MICROMETERS
CLASSIFIED AS "FINE PARTICLES,"
HAVE BEEN LINKED TO THE MOST
SERIOUS HEALTH PROBLEMS.
Kolb: IT CAN LEAD TO A NUMBER
OF MEDICAL COMPLICATIONS
INCLUDING NOT JUST LUNG
DISEASE --
EMPHYSEMA, ASTHMA, POSSIBLY
LUNG CANCER --
BUT CAN ALSO PUT A VERY HIGH
STRAIN ON YOUR HEART
AND CAN LEAD TO HEART
ATTACKS.
Narrator: AERODYNE MEASURES
BOTH THE HAZARDOUS
PARTICLES
AND THE POLLUTANT GASES
BEING EMITTED FROM VARIOUS
SOURCES.
YOU'D THINK YOU'D SEE SOME
SULFATE, BUT I DON'T KNOW.
Kolb: WE WANT TO USE OUR
MOBILE LABORATORY
TO UNDERSTAND POLLUTANTS
THAT ARE DIRECTLY EMITTED
INTO THE ATMOSPHERE.
WE CALL THOSE "PRIMARY

POLLUTANTS."
WITH A MOBILE LABORATORY
YOU CAN ACTUALLY MAP OUT THE
DISTRIBUTION
OF THE AIR POLLUTANTS
SO THAT YOU HAVE A MUCH
BETTER PICTURE
OF HOW THE POLLUTANTS ARE
DISPERSED
AROUND, SAY, A CITY, OR
AROUND A FACTORY COMPLEX.
IN ADDITION, YOU CAN LOCATE
SOURCES OF POLLUTANTS
BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE A
CONCENTRATION IN A PLUME
AND YOU CAN THEN USE THE
MOBILE LABORATORY
TO ACTUALLY FOLLOW THE
PLUME BACK TO THE SOURCE.
Narrator: VEHICLE EMISSIONS ARE
ONE OF THE SOURCES
OF PRIMARY POLLUTANTS
TRACKED BY AERODYNE.
WHILE THE EMISSIONS FROM AN
INDIVIDUAL CAR
ARE RELATIVELY LOW COMPARED
WITH FACTORIES
IN MANY CITIES, THE MILLIONS OF
VEHICLES ON THE ROAD
ADD UP TO BE THE MOST SERIOUS
THREAT TO CLEAN AIR.

VEHICLE EXHAUST POLLUTANTS
INCLUDE AEROSOLS
AND THESE GASES...
USING THEIR TRACE-GAS
DETECTOR
THE AERODYNE TEAM CAN
MONITOR THESE POLLUTANT
GASES
EVEN AT VERY LOW LEVELS.
BUT THESE POLLUTANTS, BY
THEMSELVES
ARE NOT THE ONLY CONCERN.
SOME PRIMARY POLLUTANTS,
SUCH AS NOx
BECOME EVEN MORE
DANGEROUS
WHEN THEY BEGIN A COMPLEX
CHEMICAL REACTION
AFTER BEING EXPOSED TO
SUNLIGHT.
SECOND BIG JOB WITH THE
MOBILE LAB
IS TO GO OUT AND ACTUALLY
THEN SEE WHAT HAPPENS
TO THOSE PRIMARY POLLUTANTS
AS THEY COOK IN THE
ATMOSPHERE.
THIS CHEMISTRY CAN CREATE
WHAT WE CALL "SECONDARY
POLLUTANTS."
IT CAN CHEMICALLY CHANGE THE

POLLUTANTS
THAT WERE EMITTED INTO THE
ATMOSPHERE
INTO DIFFERENT AND SOMETIMES
MORE DANGEROUS CHEMICALS.
Narrator: ONE SECONDARY
POLLUTANT THAT CONCERNS
SCIENTISTS IS OZONE.
OZONE IS A GAS MADE UP OF 3
OXYGEN MOLECULES
AND IT CAN HAVE BOTH GOOD
AND BAD EFFECTS
DEPENDING ON WHERE IT'S
LOCATED.
THE STRATOSPHERIC OZONE
LAYER
PROTECTS THE EARTH FROM
HARMFUL ULTRAVIOLET RAYS
BUT GROUND-LEVEL OZONE, IN
THE TROPOSPHERE
IS HIGHLY REACTIVE
AND CAN CAUSE IRRITATION OF
THE RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
PERMANENTLY SCARRING LUNG
TISSUE.
Kolb: OZONE IS A VERY POWERFUL
OXIDANT.
IT CAN KIND OF BLEACH THE
CELLS IN YOUR BODY
AND CAN CREATE A LOT OF
SERIOUS PROBLEMS
BOTH TO PEOPLE, TO OTHER

ANIMALS, AND TO PLANTS.
Narrator: THE MAIN PRECURSORS
IN CREATING OZONE
ARE NITROGEN OXIDES
EMITTED FROM VEHICLES AND
OTHER COMBUSTION SOURCES
AND HYDROCARBONS, THE
RESULT OF COMBUSTION
OTHER INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES,
AND VEGETATION.
WHEN THESE POLLUTANTS
INTERACT IN THE PRESENCE OF
SUNLIGHT
THEY PRODUCE GROUND-LEVEL
OZONE.
SUNLIGHT CAUSES NITROGEN
DIOXIDE, NO2
TO SEPARATE INTO NITRIC OXIDE,
"NO," AND AN OXYGEN ATOM.
THE OXYGEN ATOM
ADDS TO NATURALLY OCCURRING
MOLECULAR OXYGEN, OR O2
TO CREATE OZONE.
BUT THIS IS JUST THE FIRST STEP
IN A CHAIN REACTION OF OZONE
PRODUCTION.
THE REMAINING NITRIC OXIDE
REACTS WITH UNSTABLE
MOLECULES
THAT ARE PRODUCTS OF
HYDROCARBONS
OXIDIZING IN THE ATMOSPHERE

RECREATING NITROGEN DIOXIDE
CAUSING A VICIOUS CYCLE OF
OZONE PRODUCTION.
Kolb: SO OZONE GETS FORMED AS
A SECONDARY POLLUTANT.
IT'S NOT EMITTED DIRECTLY
AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO
UNDERSTAND
NOT ONLY HOW MUCH OZONE IS
IN THE ATMOSPHERE
BUT HOW MUCH OF ITS
PRECURSOR CHEMICALS ARE
THERE
SO WE CAN PREDICT WHAT THE
OZONE WILL LOOK LIKE
AS THE WIND BLOWS THAT
CHEMICAL MIXTURE ACROSS THE
COUNTRYSIDE.
Narrator: AERODYNE'S VAN HAS
BEEN DEPLOYED ALL OVER
NORTH AMERICA
TO HELP ENGINEERS AND
PLANNERS IDENTIFY THE BEST
STRATEGIES
TO REDUCE POLLUTANTS FROM
INDUSTRIES
AND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS.
Kolb: WE'VE WORKED WITH THE
METROPOLITAN TRANSIT
AUTHORITY
IN NEW YORK CITY
THAT RUNS ABOUT A THIRD OF

THE CITY'S BUSES
TO DETERMINE WHICH TYPES OF
BUSES
EMIT WHAT KINDS OF
POLLUTANTS.
SO ONE CAN TAKE THE MOBILE
LAB AND FOLLOW THE BUSES
AS THEY GO ABOUT THEIR
ROUTES IN THE CITY.
AND AS THEY STOP AND START,
TAKE ON PASSENGERS
ACCELERATE, SLOW DOWN
ONE CAN SEE HOW BOTH THE
PARTICLE POLLUTANTS
AND THE GASEOUS POLLUTANTS
THEY EMIT CHANGE.
THEN YOU CAN TAKE THE SAME
TYPE OF BUS
AND PUT SOME
EMISSION-CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY ON IT --
MAYBE A TRAP THAT TRAPS AND
BURNS THE PARTICLES --
AND YOU CAN SEE WHAT EFFECT
THAT HAS ON THE PARTICLE
EMISSIONS
AND ALSO WHAT EFFECT IT HAS
ON THE GASEOUS EMISSIONS.
Narrator: WHEN KOLB'S TEAM
TESTED THESE BUSES
THEY FOUND SOME UNEXPECTED

RESULTS.
Kolb: THE DIESEL BUSES WITH
PARTICLE TRAPS
DID, INDEED, EMIT ONLY ABOUT A
QUARTER OF THE PARTICLES
THAT NORMAL DIESEL BUSES
EMITTED
BUT THEY DID EMIT A LARGE
AMOUNT OF NITROGEN DIOXIDE
WHICH IS, AGAIN, A GAS THAT IS A
TOXIC AIR POLLUTANT.
SO YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL
WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO SOLVE
ONE POLLUTION PROBLEM
THAT YOU DON'T CREATE A
SECOND POLLUTION PROBLEM
WHICH MAY BE AS SERIOUS AS
THE FIRST ONE.
Narrator: IN EUROPE AND THE
UNITED STATES
POLICIES HAVE BEEN PUT IN
PLACE TO REDUCE AIR
POLLUTION.
THE CLEAN AIR ACT OF 1970,
WHICH SET LIMITS
ON CONCENTRATIONS OF
CERTAIN POLLUTANTS
ALONG WITH SUBSEQUENT
PROGRAMS
HAS SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVED
AIR QUALITY.

Kolb: SINCE 1970, WE'VE HAD
FAIRLY STRICT LAWS
WHICH HAVE HELPED STOP THE
INCREASE
IN BAD AIR-POLLUTION EPISODES
AND, IN FACT, IN MOST CITIES
HAVE DECREASED THEM.
BUT IN CITIES WITH RAPID
GROWTH AND WITH CHALLENGING
CLIMATES --
CLIMATES THAT CAN LEAD TO A
LOT OF CHEMISTRY IN THE AIR
AND A LOT OF SECONDARY
POLLUTION FORMATION
THERE ARE CERTAINLY STILL BIG
CHALLENGES LEFT.
Narrator: DEVELOPING INNOVATIVE
WAYS
TO MEASURE PRIMARY AND
SECONDARY POLLUTANTS
IS A NECESSARY FIRST STEP
IN CREATING EFFECTIVE
STRATEGIES FOR PROTECTING
HUMAN HEALTH.
BUT MEASURING THE LOCAL AIR
POLLUTION
FROM CARS AND FACTORIES IS
JUST ONE PIECE OF THE PUZZLE.
ATMOSPHERIC CIRCULATION

CARRIES POLLUTANT STREAMS
FAR BEYOND THE METROPOLITAN
AREAS WHERE THEY ARE
CREATED
CAUSING REGIONAL AND EVEN
GLOBAL EFFECTS.
AND SO THE POLLUTIONS THAT
ARE CREATED
IN THE LARGE MEGACITIES IN
CHINA
CAN DELIVER VERY HIGH LEVELS
OF POLLUTANTS
ALL ACROSS THE UNITED STATES
JUST AS THE POLLUTION THAT'S
CREATED IN THE MIDWEST
AND THE EASTERN PART OF THE
UNITED STATES
REACHES ALL THE WAY TO
EUROPE.
IT ONLY TAKES ABOUT TWO
WEEKS
FOR AIR TO GO ALL THE WAY
AROUND THE WORLD.
Narrator: AND SOME POLLUTANTS
SUCH AS AEROSOLS
AND GREENHOUSE GASES LIKE
CARBON DIOXIDE AND OZONE
EVEN AFFECT THE GLOBAL
CLIMATE.
SO WE DON'T HAVE THE LUXURY
OF THINKING
THAT IT'S OTHER PEOPLE'S

AIR-POLLUTION PROBLEMS
OTHER PEOPLE'S CLIMATE
PROBLEMS.
IF THEY'RE HAVING PROBLEMS
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE
PROBLEMS, TOO.
Narrator: AND ONE OF THE
BIGGEST EMERGING THREATS
TO THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT
IS INCREASED AIR POLLUTION
FROM MEGACITIES.
A MEGACITY IS DEFINED AS
HAVING 10 MILLION OR MORE
INHABITANTS.
CURRENTLY, THERE ARE OVER 20
MEGACITIES WORLDWIDE
AND THAT NUMBER CONTINUES
TO GROW AT AN ALARMING RATE.
HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF
PEOPLE CURRENTLY LIVE IN
THESE CITIES
AND IT IS PROJECTED THAT BY
THE MIDDLE OF THE CENTURY
THIS NUMBER WILL BE MULTIPLIED
MANY TIMES OVER
WITH 60% OF THE WORLD'S
POPULATION
LIVING IN URBAN AREAS.
THIS RAPID GROWTH
MEANS AN EVER-RISING TOLL TO
HUMAN HEALTH

UNLESS WE GAIN A BETTER
UNDERSTANDING
OF THE LIFE CYCLE OF AIR
POLLUTANTS.
AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT'S
BEING DONE IN MEXICO CITY
FOR THE MILAGRO PROJECT
THE LARGEST COORDINATED
STUDY EVER CONDUCTED
OF MEGACITY AIR POLLUTION.
1, 2, 3.
LUISA MOLINA IS THE PROJECT
COORDINATOR
AND ONE OF THE LEAD
SCIENTISTS ON THIS EFFORT.
Molina: "MILAGRO" STANDS FOR
"MEGACITY INITIATIVE LOCAL AND
GLOBAL RESEARCH
OBSERVATIONS."
AND WE WERE VERY, VERY
PLEASED
THAT WE WERE ABLE TO FIND AN
ACRONYM, MILAGRO
THAT NOT ONLY FIT THE THEMES
OF OUR MEASUREMENT
CAMPAIGN
BUT IT ALSO MEANS "MIRACLE" IN
SPANISH.
Narrator: IN MARCH 2006
MOLINA GATHERED AN
INTERNATIONAL TEAM OF MORE

THAN 450 SCIENTISTS
TO INVESTIGATE THE EFFECTS OF
LOCAL POLLUTION IN MEXICO CITY
ON THE SURROUNDING REGIONS
AND THE GLOBAL ATMOSPHERE.
THE SCIENTISTS REPRESENT
OVER 50 ACADEMIC AND
RESEARCH INSTITUTIONS
FROM MEXICO, EUROPE, AND THE
UNITED STATES
INCLUDING NASA, THE
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
AND THE NATIONAL SCIENCE
FOUNDATION.
MEXICO CITY IS AN IDEAL
LOCATION FOR MILAGRO'S
MEGACITY RESEARCH.
SURROUNDED ON THREE SIDES
BY MOUNTAINS
POLLUTANTS BECOME TRAPPED
WITHIN THE CITY.
Molina: THERE ARE MANY
REASONS FOR SELECTING
MEXICO CITY.
FIRST OF ALL, MEXICO CITY IS
ONE OF THE LARGEST
MEGACITIES.
IT HAS ABOUT 20 MILLION PEOPLE.
IT IS IN A TROPICAL LATITUDE
SO IT'S REPRESENTATIVE OF

MANY OF THE FUTURE
MEGACITIES
WHICH WILL BE IN ASIA, IN AFRICA.
MEXICO CITY IS AT A HIGH
ALTITUDE
AND THE SOLAR RADIATION IS
VERY STRONG
AND THE PHOTOCHEMISTRY, IT IS
VERY REACTIVE.
AND OF COURSE, WHAT WE HOPE
IS THAT WHAT WE LEARN FROM
MEXICO CITY
IT WILL PROVIDE INSIGHT FOR US
SO THAT WE CAN USE THAT
INSIGHT AND UNDERSTANDING
AND APPLY IT TO OTHER FUTURE
MEGACITIES.
Narrator: WHILE MANY PREVIOUS
STUDIES
REVEALED A GREAT DEAL ABOUT
POLLUTION WITHIN MEXICO CITY
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE
POLLUTION AFTER IT LEFT THE
CITY
AND WHAT ITS EFFECTS WERE ON
THE REGION AND THE GLOBE
HAD NEVER BEEN
SYSTEMATICALLY STUDIED UNTIL
MILAGRO.
SO YOU HAVE ALL THIS
POLLUTION COMING OUT
FROM BURNING OF FOSSIL FUELS,

FROM CARS, FROM INDUSTRY.
AND SO THE POLLUTANTS THAT
EMITTED LOCALLY
THE LOCAL EFFECTS WOULD BE
ON THE HEALTH OF THE
POPULATION
AND ON THE AIR QUALITY.
BUT THEN THEY COULD ALSO --
THE REGIONAL IMPACT
WHICH WOULD AFFECT THE
ECOSYSTEM.
AND THEN, ALSO, THERE'S THE
GLOBAL IMPACT
THAT WOULD AFFECT THE
CLIMATE.
SO THIS IS VERY SERIOUS.
Narrator: 24 HOURS A DAY FOR 30
DAYS
THE MILAGRO TEAM COLLECTED
DATA
USING AIRPLANES, RADARS,
WEATHER BALLOONS
AND DOZENS OF SCIENTIFIC
INSTRUMENTS.
I BROUGHT HERE TO MEXICO CITY
AN INSTRUMENT WHICH I CALL
THE DIFFERENTIAL
SUPERSATURATION SEPARATOR.
OUR INSTRUMENT IS CALLED
A LONG-PATH DIFFERENTIAL
OPTICAL ABSORPTION
SPECTROMETER.

PHOTOELECTRIC AEROSOL
SENSOR.
A PROTON TRANSFER MASS
SPECTROMETER.
THIS IS WHAT WE CALL A CAPS
PROBE, WHICH STANDS FOR
"CLOUD AEROSOL AND
PRECIPITATION SPECTRA" PROBE.
WHAT IT MEASURES IS AEROSOL
PARTICLES
WHICH ARE THE VERY FINE
PARTICLES IN THE AIR.
AS WE FLY, IT'S IN FRONT OF THE
PLANE
BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE
ENGINE EXHAUST IF IT WAS
FURTHER BACK
SO IT SEES THE AIR FIRST.
AEROSOL AIR COMES THROUGH
THIS PROBE
AND WHAT IS DETECTED IS THE
SIZE OF THE PARTICLES.
BY SIMULTANEOUSLY AND
COLLABORATIVELY GATHERING
THEIR DATA
THE SCIENTISTS WILL HAVE
BETTER INFORMATION
TO CREATE NEW MODELS
FOR PREDICTING THE TRANSPORT
OF POLLUTION
OVER WIDE GEOGRAPHIC AREAS.
Molina: THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS

STUDY, OF MILAGRO
IS TO FOLLOW THE PLUMES
AND FIND OUT WHERE AND
HOWAND WHEN
THE PLUMES ARE TRANSPORTED
TO OTHER REGIONS.
AND SO IT IS VERY IMPORTANT
FOR US
NOT ONLY JUST TO LOOK AT ONE
SITE
BUT TO LOOK AT VARIOUS SITES.
Narrator: TO STUDY THE
MOVEMENT OF PLUMES
THE RESEARCHERS HAVE THREE
MAIN FIXED GROUND SITES --
"T0," LOCATED IN THE CENTER OF
THE CITY
AND T1 AND T2, TWO POINTS
NORTH OF THE CITY
WHERE THE PREVAILING WINDS
ARE EXPECTED TO CARRY THE
PLUMES.
AT THESE SITES, RESEARCH
TEAMS MEASURE TRACE GASES
AEROSOL CONCENTRATIONS, AND
SOLAR-RADIATION LEVELS
AS WELL AS METEOROLOGICAL
DATA.
Molina: WE HAVE TO MEASURE THE
PRESSURE
WE MEASURE THE TEMPERATURE

WE MEASURE THE RELATIVE
HUMIDITY
AND THE WIND SPEED -- THE WIND
DIRECTION.
THESE ALL AFFECT THE
TRANSPORT OF THE POLLUTANTS.
Narrator: THE AERODYNE TEAM
TRAVELED TO MEXICO CITY
AS PART OF THE MILAGRO
CAMPAIGN.
TO HELP MONITOR THE PLUME
THEY SET UP THEIR MOBILE LAB
IN A UNIQUE, ELEVATED LOCATION
BETWEEN T0 AND T1, CALLED
PICO DE TRES PADRES.
WE'RE ABOUT A THOUSAND
METERS ABOVE EACH OF THESE
TWO SITES.
SO WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY AT
THIS LOCATION
TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE
LOFTED PLUME THAT'S COMING
TO US.
Narrator: IN THE MORNING
THIS LOCATION HAS RELATIVELY
CLEAN AIR
SINCE IT IS ABOVE THE
BOUNDARY LAYER
A LAYER NEAR THE GROUND
THAT DOES NOT MIX WELL WITH
THE ATMOSPHERE ABOVE.

THIS LAYER TRAPS THE
POLLUTION BELOW
IN THE BASIN OF MEXICO CITY.
BUT AS THE SUN HEATS THE
EARTH, THE BOUNDARY LAYER
RISES.
Herndon: BUT WHAT WE'RE
OBSERVING RIGHT NOW --
WE'RE ABOVE THE MIXING
HEIGHT.
ALL OF THE POLLUTION AND
EMISSIONS THAT ARE TAKING
PLACE
ARE NOT ABLE TO MIX UP AND
COME UP TO THIS LOCATION.
WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT THE SUN
COMES UP
AND BEGINS TO HEAT THE
SURFACE OF THE EARTH.
AND JUST LIKE PUTTING A PAN OF
BOILING WATER ONTO THE STOVE
IT BEGINS TO MIX AND BOIL,
MOVING THE AIR UPWARD,
UPWARD.
AND SO IT MIXES UP AND UP AND
UP.
AND WE'RE LOCATED UP HERE AT
THIS LOCATION
AND SUDDENLY WE BEGIN TO SEE
MUCH OF THE CITY POLLUTION
AND EMISSIONS COMING TO US
BUT IT'S A BIT LATER THAN WHEN
THE SUN COMES UP.

WE'RE SEEING INCREASES IN
CARBON MONOXIDE
CARBON DIOXIDE, AND NOx.
Narrator: AS THE SUN PEAKS AND
CONTINUES THROUGH THE
AFTERNOON
THE POLLUTANTS CHEMICALLY
CHANGE AS THEY REACT IN THE
ATMOSPHERE.
Herndon: WHAT WE OBSERVED AT
T0
WE SAW A MIXTURE OF PRIMARY
AND SECONDARY POLLUTANT
SPECIES.
UP HERE, THE CHARACTER OF
JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING WE
HAVE SEEN
INDICATES THAT IT'S VERY
SECONDARY, VERY PROCESSED.
SO, FROM THAT POINT OF VIEW
WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO
LOOK AT THE FIRST STEPS
AS THE PLUME IS MOVING
DOWNWIND AS TO WHAT IS
HAPPENING
WHAT CHANGES ARE TAKING
PLACE
IN THE COMPOSITION OF THOSE
EMISSIONS.
Narrator: IN ADDITION TO GROUND
SITES

RESEARCHERS ALSO MEASURED
POLLUTANTS
FROM AIRPLANES AND
SATELLITES
TO CORROBORATE THEIR DATA
AND TO HELP TRACK THE PLUME.
Molina: IT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR
US TO DO AN INTEGRATED
MEASUREMENT.
IN ORDER FOR YOU TO LOOK AT
THE OUTFLOW
NOT ONLY DO YOU NEED A
GROUND BASE
BUT YOU ALSO NEED TO HAVE A
LARGER COVERAGE
SO THE AIRPLANE IS VERY
ESSENTIAL.
AND THEN THE SATELLITE
OBSERVATION
PROVIDE EVEN LARGER INTO
SPACE.
WE WANTED TO USE DIFFERENT
TECHNIQUES
THAT COMPLEMENT EACH OTHER
SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR US
TO HAVE COMPLIMENTARY
MEASUREMENTS.
IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO HAVE
INTERCOMPARISON.
IN FACT, SOME OF THE
MEASUREMENTS DURING THE
CAMPAIGN
WERE DESIGNED EXACTLY FOR

THAT PURPOSE.
Narrator: LONG-TERM, MILAGRO
WILL LEAD TO BETTER MODELS
OF HOW EMISSIONS ARE
TRANSPORTED AND
TRANSFORMED
HELPING COUNTRIES MANAGE
AND IMPROVE AIR QUALITY.
PRELIMINARY DATA SHOW THAT
THE AEROSOL PLUME FROM
MEXICO CITY
TRAVELS OUTSIDE THE CITY AND
RISES HIGH INTO THE
TROPOSPHERE.
HERE, THE PREVAILING
HIGH-ALTITUDE WINDS
CAN POTENTIALLY TRANSPORT
THE POLLUTANTS LONG
DISTANCES
EVEN ACROSS CONTINENTS.
BUT IT WILL BE MANY YEARS
BEFORE MOLINA AND HER TEAM
HAVE DEFINITIVE RESULTS.
Molina: MILAGRO -- RIGHT NOW WE
ONLY FINISH THE FIRST PHASE
ONE
THE MEASUREMENT, THE
OBSERVATION STAGE.
AND THEN THE NEXT PHASE IS
NOW WE ARE IN THE PROCESS

OF DOING THE DATA ANALYSIS
SO WE HAVE ALL OF THIS TONS
AND TONS OF DATA.
THEN ALL THIS INFORMATION ARE
NOW FIT INTO MODELS.
THEN WE ARE GOING TO PRESENT
THE RESULTS
TO THE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT.
Narrator: WHILE THE MEXICAN
GOVERNMENT
HAS RECENTLY MADE STRIDES IN
REDUCING EMISSIONS
WITH STRICTER REGULATION
POLICIES AND CLEANER FUEL
MEXICO CITY IS JUST ONE OF A
GROWING NUMBER OF
MEGACITIES.
Molina: WE HOPE THAT BY
STUDYING MEXICO CITY
USE THIS AS A CASE STUDY
THEN WE CAN FIND OUT HOW
WOULD THE FUTURE MEGACITIES
THAT ARE COMING UP
HOW WOULD THEY INFLUENCE
THE ATMOSPHERIC
COMPOSITIONS
ON A LARGE RREGIONAL-GLOBAL
SCALE.
Kolb: IF WE DON'T CONTROL THE
CHANGES WE MAKE TO THE
ATMOSPHERE

THE ATMOSPHERE MAY BEGIN TO
CONTROL
HOW MANY OF US ARE LEFT ON
THE PLANET.
SO IT'S VITAL THAT WE
UNDERSTAND
WHAT HAPPENS TO THE
POLLUTANTS WE EMIT
AND WE UNDERSTAND HOW TO
BETTER CONTROL THEM
SO THE PLANET CAN CONTINUE
TO BE A HABITABLE PLACE
FOR BOTH PEOPLE AND THE REST
OF THE CREATURES WE SHARE IT
WITH.
ENV330 Module 5a AVP Transcript
Title Slide
Narrator: Our current energy path is unsustainable, as illustrated
by the BP Deepwater Gulf of Mexico
disaster, perhaps the single largest degradation of natural
capital in history. Our ever increasing
population, each with an exponentially increasing energy
demand has caused us to take larger and larger
environmental risks to try to satisfy our insatiable appetite for
ever increasing amounts of energy. With
every additional 1000 barrels of oil or 1000 lbs. of coal burned,
we add hundreds of tons of CO2 to the
atmosphere, causing ever accelerating Global Climate Change.
We are clearly on a dangerously

unsustainable path.
We must transition to sustainable energy sources, and increase
the efficiency of all energy using
activities. There is no other viable option.
Slide 2
Title: Energy Consumption
Slide content:
[image of a big city at night from the air]
Narrator: The total annual energy use in the US has almost
tripled in the last 60 years, although per
capita US consumption has begun to level off in the last 20
years. In the last 25 years unsustainable US
coal and oil consumption has increased dramatically and is
projected to continue increasing dramatically
for the next few decades.
Per capita energy consumption in the US, Scandinavia, Saudi
Arabia and Australia far exceed per capita
energy use anywhere else in the world – with a few minor
exceptions. Global use of renewable,
sustainable energy is almost three times as great as in the US,
where only about 7% of energy is
sustainably produced. The global use of Geothermal, Solar and
Wind power is 2 ½ times greater in other
countries than in the US.
Why do you think the world as a whole relies more on
renewable energy than the United States does?
Slide 3

Title: Our Unsustainable Approach to Meeting Our Energy
Needs
Slide Content:
[image of a body of water with sludge covering the watergrass]
Narrator: The recent BP Gulf of Mexico oil spill is an ongoing
environmental tragedy which illustrates the
folly of our unsustainable approach to meeting our energy
needs. This environmental catastrophe will
have ecological and economic ramifications for decades.
Perhaps it will stimulate public and
governmental change towards a sustainable, green, renewable
energy future – if we are wise enough to
make the change.
Slide 4
Title: Political Response to BP Oil Spill in Gulf
Slide Content:
[image of President and Michelle Obama and Secretary of the
Navy Ray Mabus standing on a dock]
Narrator: President Barack Obama stated, in response to the BP
Oil spill: “the time has come, once and
for all, for this nation to embrace a clean energy future”.
He also stated that the nation “must acknowledge that there are
inherent risks to drilling four miles
beneath the surface of the Earth, risks that are bound to increase
the harder oil extraction becomes.”

Additionally he stated “if we refuse to take into account the full
cost of our fossil fuel addiction – if we don’t
factor in the environmental costs and national security costs and
the true economic costs – we will have
missed our best chance.”
He went on to discuss the need to create more energy efficient
cars and homes, more nuclear power
plants, and rolling back the tax breaks given to oil companies.
These are hopeful signs that perhaps the US government will
finally act to push us into a sustainable
energy future!
Slide 5
Title: Net Energy Ratios
Slide Content:
[image of an electric heater]
Narrator: In considering which energy sources are sustainable,
we must consider their net energy ratios
for particular tasks. The net energy ratio calculation takes into
account all the energy used to discover,
mine, transport and use the energy source. A useful rule of
thumb is that any energies with low net
ratios, like nuclear energy, usually have to be heavily
subsidized by the taxpayer to keep its price
artificially low so that it can compete in the marketplace with
high net energy sources such as solar and
ethanol. In other words, subsidies and tax breaks must be used
to level the playing field for inefficient, low
net energy power sources.
Question: Are you OK with government using your tax dollars

in this way? Can you think of a more
sustainable way that government could use your tax dollars to
encourage renewable energy development
and production?
Let’s compare the net energy efficiency for heating a building
using nuclear generated electricity to run an
electric resistance heater. Compare it with using passive solar to
heat the building. Passive solar energy
is using free sunlight energy and intelligent architectural design
of buildings to maximize this “free” source
of energy.
Net energy efficiency is calculated by multiplying the
efficiencies at each step of the process from the
source to the end usage. Using nuclear power to heat the space
is only 14% efficient, whereas using
passive solar heating is 90% efficient! And, if the entire
nuclear fuel cycle efficiencies are considered –
the storage and production of long-term nuclear waste -- the
nuclear option is only about 8% efficient,
that is, there is a 92% WASTE of energy compared with only an
8% waste of energy using passive solar.
So, for heating buildings, using passive solar, and using natural
gas have the highest net energy ratios,
whereas electric heating using nuclear generated electricity, has
the worst.
Question: What is the source of energy you use in your home?
In your office? How are they heated?
Although coal has the highest net energy ratio for high-
temperature industrial heat generation, it has a
very low net energy ratio for heating buildings. To be an Earth
sustaining society we must learn to use
the appropriate energy for each task so as not to further

degrade natural capital.
For transportation, ethanol from sugarcane residues or rapidly
growing switch grass, makes the most
sense whereas corn ethanol, oil shale and coal liquefaction the
least sense. Using gasoline for
transportation has only half the net energy benefits of using
ethanol from sugarcane residue, as has been
done in Brazil for decades.
Question: Why do you think we continue to use inefficient
ecologically destructive energies with low net
energy ratios that require government tax subsidies? It makes
no scientific or economic sense!
Slide 6
Title: The Nuclear Fuel Cycle
Slide Content:
[image of a large nuclear power plant]
Narrator: Let’s consider the Nuclear Fuel Cycle. In order to
account for the REAL costs of nuclear
power, one must include the entire life cycle, and all the costs
of nuclear energy. This includes not only
the mining, processing, transportation, power plant production,
and transmission of electric energy I just
mentioned. To truly compare the real costs of nuclear power
generation we must ALSO consider the
long-term storage of radioactive wastes – and I DO MEAN
LONG TERM - 1000’s to 10’s of thousands of
years - from mining to the operation of the nuclear power plant

(the whole plant becomes a radioactive
disposal issue eventually), to the cost of protection of the
facilities from terrorists, and the protection of the
radioactive wastes from terrorists who could use it to create
nuclear weapons, and to the cost of safely
transporting all the radioactive wastes to a permanent storage
facility that must be maintained and
protected for thousands of years!
By the way, NO SAFE PERMANENT STORAGE FACILITY
HAS BEEN FOUND YET, after 50 years of
searching.
No wonder the nuclear power industry must receive such huge
subsidies from the government in order to
be profitable!
Questions:
-generated
electricity should include all the
costs of the fuel cycle?
ar and wind be
cheaper in comparison to
nuclear if we had to pay the whole cost of nuclear power in our
electric bills, or if it was
included in the price of goods or services using those energies?
l
Climate change caused by the
burning of fossil fuels like coal and oil in our electric bills?
End of Presentation

Chapter 16
·
·
· Core Case StudySaving Energy and Money
· 16.1A New Energy Transition
· 16.1aEstablishing New Energy Priorities
· 16.2Reducing Energy Waste
· 16.2aWe Waste a Lot of Energy and Money
· 16.2bImproving Energy Efficiency in Industries and Utilities
· 16.2cBuilding a Smarter and More Energy-Efficient Electrical
Grid
· 16.2dMaking Transportation More Energy-Efficient
· 16.2eSwitching to Energy-Efficient Vehicles
· 16.2fBuildings That Save Energy and Money
· 16.2gAir Conditioning and Climate Change
· 16.hSaving Energy and Money in Existing Buildings
· 16.2iWhy Are We Wasting So Much Energy and Money?
· 16.2jRelying More on Renewable Energy
· 16.3Solar Energy
· 16.3aHeating Buildings and Water with Solar Energy
· 16.3bCooling Buildings Naturally
· 16.3cConcentrating Sunlight to Produce High-Temperature
Heat and Electricity
· 16.3dUsing Solar Cells to Produce Electricity
· 16.4Wind Energy
· 16.4aUsing Wind to Produce Electricity
· 16.5Geothermal Energy
· 16.5aTapping into the Earth’s Internal Heat
· 16.6Biomass Energy
· 16.6aProducing Energy by Burning Solid Biomass
· 16.6bUsing Liquid Biofuels to Power Vehicles
· 16.7Hydropower
· 16.7aProducing Electricity from Falling and Flowing Water

· 16.8Hydrogen
· 16.8aWill Hydrogen Save Us?
· 16.9A More Sustainable Energy Future
· 16.9aShifting to a New Energy Economy
· Tying It All TogetherSaving Energy and Money and Reducing
Our Environmental Impact
· Chapter Review
· Critical Thinking
· Doing Environmental Science
· Data Analysis
16.1aEstablishing New Energy Priorities
Shifting to new energy resources is not new. The world has
shifted from primary dependence on wood to coal, then from
coal to oil, and then to our current dependence on a mixture of
oil, natural gas, and coal as new technologies made these three
energy resources more available and affordable. Each of these
shifts in key energy resources took about 50 to 60 years.
Making an energy shift involves making an enormous
investment in scientific research, engineering, research,
technology, and infrastructure to develop and spread the use of
new energy resources.
Currently, the world gets 85% of its commercial energy, and the
United States gets 80% of its commercial energy from three
carbon-containing fossil fuels—oil, coal, and natural gas
(Figure 15.2). These energy resources have supported
tremendous economic growth and improved the lives of many
people.
However, many people are awakening to the fact that burning
fossil fuels, especially coal, plays an important role in three of
the world’s most serious environmental problems: air pollution,
climate change, and ocean acidification. Fossil fuels are
affordable because their market prices do not include these and
other harmful health and environmental effects. In addition,
they have been receiving government (taxpayer) subsides for
decades, even though they are well-established and profitable
businesses.

According to many scientists, energy experts, and energy
economists, over the next 50 to 60 years and beyond, we need to
and can make a new energy transition by
1. improving energy efficiency and reducing energy waste;
2. decreasing our dependence on nonrenewable fossil fuels;
3. relying more on a mix of renewable energy from the sun,
wind, the earth’s interior heat (geothermal energy), and
hydropower to produce most of the world’s electricity;
4. developing modern smart electrical grids to distribute
electricity produced from renewable and nonrenewable energy
resources; and
5. shifting to much greater dependence on electric cars, buses,
scooters, and other vehicles with batteries that are recharged by
electricity produced by solar cells and wind turbines.
Energy researchers and analysts point out that it is both
technologically and economically feasible to make a transition
toward getting most of our electricity from the sun and wind
over the next 50-60 years. It would also be a way to implement
the solar energy principle of sustainability globally.
This restructuring of the global energy system and economy
over the next 50 to 60 years and beyond will save money, create
profitable business and investment opportunities, and provide
jobs. For example, building and installing solar cells and wind
turbines (on land and at sea) will create thousands of jobs. It
will also save lives by sharply reducing air pollution and by
helping keep climate change and ocean acidification from
spiraling out of control and creating ecological and economic
chaos. Finally, it will increase our positive environmental
impact, and pass the world on to future generations in better
shape than we found it, in keeping with the ethical principle of
sustainability.
This energy shift is being driven by the availability of perpetual
supplies of clean and increasingly cheaper solar and wind
energy throughout the world. Advances in solar cell and wind
turbine technology have been steadily reducing the cost of using
wind and solar energy to produce electricity. This is in contrast

to fossil fuels, which are dependent on finite supplies that are
not widely distributed, are controlled by a few countries, and
are subject to fluctuating prices based on supply and demand.
In this new technology-driven energy economy, an increasing
percentage of the world’s electricity will be produced locally
from available sun and wind and regionally from solar cell
power plants and wind farms. It will be transmitted to
consumers through modern, interactive, smart electrical grids.
Homeowners and businesses with solar panels on their land or
their roofs (or roof coverings that contain solar cells) will be
able to heat and cool their homes and businesses, run electrical
devices, charge hybrid or electric cars, and sell the excess
electricity they produce. The United States will benefit
economically, because making such a market-based shift will
set off an explosion of innovations in energy efficiency,
renewable energy, and battery technology that will create
millions of jobs. Old energy technologies would be replaced by
cleaner and cheaper new energy technologies. According to
economists, this is how creative capitalism works.
Like any major societal change, this shift will not be easy.
However, to many analysts the current and long-term harmful
environmental, health, and economic benefits of making this
shift far outweigh any temporary harmful effects this shift
might cause.
This shift is underway and gaining momentum as the cost of
electricity produced from the sun and wind continues its rapid
fall and investors see a way to make money on two of the
world’s fastest growing businesses. Germany, Sweden, and
Denmark have made significant progress in this energy resource
transition.
Costa Rica is a global leader in this transition, as well as in
reforestation (Chapter 10Core Case Study). It gets none of its
electricity from burning coal and more than 90% of its
electricity from renewable resources—hydropower, geothermal
energy, and wind and solar power. Costa Rica’s National
Decarbonization Plan calls for having electric passenger trains

in service by 2022 and having nearly a third of its buses running
on electricity by 2035. It also envisions nearly all of its cars
and buses running on electricity by 2050, supported by battery
recharging stations throughout the country. If this ambitious
plan succeeds, it will show the world how a small country can
make a transition to a new and more sustainable energy system.
The United States has yet to commit to making the new energy
shift. The reasons are complex, but this is partly because of
more than four decades of opposition by politically and
economically powerful fossil fuel and electric utility
companies. The only question is whether we have the political
and ethical will to make this vitally important economic and
environmental transition.
16.2aWe Waste a Lot of Energy and Money
Improving energy efficiency and wasting less energy are key
strategies in using energy more sustainability. Energy
efficiency is a measure of how much useful work we can get
from each unit of energy. Improving energy efficiency means
using less energy to provide the same amount of work. We can
do this by using more energy-efficient cars, heating and cooling
systems, light bulbs (such as LED bulbs), appliances,
computers, and industrial processes.
43%
Percentage of energy used in the United States that is
unnecessarily wasted.
No energy-using device operates at 100% efficiency because
some energy is always lost to the environment as low -quality
heat, as required by the second law of thermodynamics
(see Chapter 2). About 84% of all commercial energy used in
the United States is wasted (Figure 16.2). About 41% of this
energy unavoidably ends up as low-quality waste heat in the
environment because of the degradation of energy quality
imposed by the second law of thermodynamics. The other 43%
is wasted unnecessarily, mostly due to the inefficiency of
industrial motors, motor vehicles, power plants, light bulbs, and
numerous other devices. This wasted energy is the country’s

largest untapped source of energy. Reducing this huge waste of
energy would save consumers money and reduce our harmful
environmental impact from energy use. According to energy
experts, the United States has more potential for improving
energy efficiency than any other country.
Figure 16.2
Flow of commercial energy through the U.S. economy. Only
16% of the country’s high-quality energy ends up performing
useful tasks.
Critical Thinking:
1. What are two examples of unnecessary energy waste?
(Compiled by the authors using data from U.S. Department of
Energy.)
Another reason for our costly and wasteful use of energy is that
many people live and work in poorly insulated, leaky houses
and buildings that require excessive heating during cold weather
and excessive cooling during hot weather (see Figure 16.1). In
addition, about 75% of Americans who commute to work do this
mostly alone in energy-inefficient vehicles, and only 5% rely on
more energy-efficient mass transit.
A major way in which we waste energy and money is through
heavy reliance on widely used energy-inefficient technologies.
One example is datacenters, which process all online
information (such as data on social media sites) and provide
cloud-based data storage for users. These data centers–some of
them as big as two football fields–require huge amounts of
energy to operate and to cool because of the massive heat
thrown off by their rows and rows of servers. Typically, these
centers use only 10% of the electrical energy they consume. The
other 90% is lost as waste heat. These data centers run 24 hours
a day at their maximum capacities, regardless of the demand.
Some data companies are reducing their environmental impact
by getting the electricity they use mostly or totally from solar
and wind energy.
Another example of energy waste is internal combustion engine,

which propels most motor vehicles. It wastes about 75% of the
high-quality energy in its gasoline fuel. Thus, only about 25%
of the money people spend on gasoline provides them with
transportation. The other 75% pays for waste heat released into
the atmosphere.
We could cut much of this energy waste by changing our
behavior. Energy conservation means reducing or eliminating
the unnecessary waste of energy. If you ride your bicycle to
school or work rather than driving a car, you are practicing
energy conservation. Another way to waste less energy and
money is to turn off lights and electronic devices when you are
finished using them.
Improving energy efficiency and conserving energy have
numerous economic, health, and environmental benefits (Figure
16.3). To most energy analysts, they are the quickest, cleanest,
and usually the cheapest ways to provide more energy, reduce
pollution and environmental degradation, and slow climate
change and ocean acidification.
Figure 16.3
Improving energy efficiency and conserving energy can have
important benefits.
Critical Thinking:
1. Which two of these benefits do you think are the most
important? Why?
Top: Dmitry Raikin/ Shutterstock.com. Center: V. J.
Matthew/ Shutterstock.com. Bottom: andrea
lehmkuhl/ Shutterstock.com.
However, improving energy efficiency and conserving energy
are not always an option for people who cannot afford to invest
in them. As a result, these people are unable to reduce their
energy bills. There is a growing network of public and private
programs designed to upgrade energy efficiency in public
housing units, provide affordable tax credits for energy
efficiency upgrades, and assist individual homeowners in
improving energy efficiency. Many are calling for increasing

such efforts.16.2bImproving Energy Efficiency in Industries and
Utilities
Industry accounts for about 36% of the world’s energy
consumption and 33% of U.S. energy consumption. Industries
that use the most energy are those that produce petroleum,
chemicals, cement, steel, aluminum, and paper and wood
products.
Utility companies and industries can save energy by
using cogeneration to produce two useful forms of energy from
the same fuel source. For example, the steam used for
generating electricity in a power or industrial plant can be
captured and used again to heat the plant or other nearby
buildings. The energy efficiency of cogeneration systems is 60–
80%, compared to 25–35% for coal-fired and nuclear power
plants. Denmark uses cogeneration to produce 38% of its
electricity compared to 12% in the United States.
Inefficient motors account for 60% of the electricity used in
U.S. industry. Industries can save energy and money by using
more energy-efficient variable-speed electric motors that run at
the minimum speed needed for each job. In contrast, standard
electric motors run at full speed with their output throttled to
match the task. This is somewhat like using one foot to push the
gas pedal to the floorboard of your car and putting your other
foot on the brake pedal to control its speed.
Recycling materials such as steel and other metals can save
energy and money in industry. For example, producing steel
from recycled scrap iron uses 75% less high-quality energy than
does producing steel from virgin iron ore and emits 40% less .
Industries can also save energy by using energy-efficient LED
lighting; installing smart meters to monitor energy use; and
shutting off computers, printers, and nonessential lights when
they are not being used.
A growing number of major corporations are saving money by
improving energy efficiency. For example, between 1990 and
2015, Dow Chemical Company, which operates 165
manufacturing plants in 37 countries, saved $27 billion in a

comprehensive program to improve energy efficiency, and these
efforts continue. Ford Motor Company saves $1 million a year
by turning off computers that are not in use.16.2cBuilding a
Smarter and More Energy-Efficient Electrical Grid
In the United States, electricity is delivered to consumers
through an electrical grid. The U.S. electrical grid system,
designed more than 100 years ago, is inefficient and outdated.
According to former U.S. energy secretary Bill Richardson,
“We’re a major superpower with a third-world electrical grid
system.”
There is increasing pressure to convert and expand the outdated
U.S. electrical grid system into a smart grid. This new grid
would be a digitally controlled, ultra-high-voltage (UHV), and
high-capacity system with superefficient transmission lines. It
would be less vulnerable to power outages because it could
quickly adjust for a major power loss in one part of the country
by automatically rerouting available electricity from other parts
of the country. A national network of wind farms and solar
power connected to a smart grid would make the sun and wind
reliable sources of electricity around the clock without having
expensive backup systems. Without such a grid, the contribution
of wind and solar energy is unlikely to expand as projected.
According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), building
such a grid would cost the United States up to $800 billion over
the next 20 years. However, it would save the U.S. economy $2
trillion during that period. So far, the U.S. Congress has not
authorized significant funding for this vital component of the
country’s energy and economic future. Meanwhile, China is
investing in establishing a smart national electrical grid
system.The two fastest growing energy resources in the world
and in the United States are solar and wind energy used to
produce electricity. However, this growth will be limited unless
wind farms and solar cell power plants built in sparsely
populated areas or at sea can be connected to a smart grid. A
national network of wind farms and solar cell power plants in
the United States would make the sun and wind reliable sources

of electricity around the clock. Without such a grid, the United
States will not reap the environmental and economic advantages
of relying on the sun and wind to produce most of its
electricity. 16.2dMaking Transportation More Energy-Efficient
In 1975, the U.S. Congress established Corporate Average Fuel
Economy (CAFE) standards to improve the average fuel
economy of new cars and light trucks, vans, and sport utility
vehicles (SUVs) in the United States. Between 1973 and 2015,
these standards increased the average fuel economy for such
vehicles in the United States from 5 kilometers per liter,
or kpl (11.9 miles per gallon, or mpg) to 10.6 kpl (24.9 mpg).
The government fuel-economy goal has been 23.3 kpl (54.5
mpg) by 2025 (South Korea, the European Union, and Canada
have even higher goals). According to the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), this would provide $100 billion of
benefits from reduced air pollution while lowering carbon
dioxide emissions and reducing oil imports because of more
efficient transportation.
However, in 2018, the EPA and the U.S. Department of
Transportation, under pressure from some automakers, proposed
reducing the fuel-economy goal to 12 kpl (29 mpg) and
prohibiting California and 13 other states from car emission
standards higher than those set by the federal government, a
privilege granted under the 1970 Clean Air Act.
Critics of these government proposals point out that since the
mid-1970s motor vehicle air pollution, including emissions of
climate-changing per kilometer of travel has dropped sharply
and motor vehicle fatalities have dropped 65% as average fuel
economy has increased. They also point out that not promoting
a shift to much higher fuel economy standards would reduce
efforts to slow climate change.
Energy experts project that by 2040, all new cars and light
trucks sold in the United States could get more than 43 kpl (100
mpg) using available technology. Part of this is due to new and
more efficient internal combustion engines. Achieving this level
of fuel efficiency is an important way to reduce energy waste,

save consumers money, cut air pollution, and slow climate
change and ocean acidification.
However, many consumers buy energy-inefficient sport-utility
vehicles (SUVs) and pickup trucks, which are more profitable
for automakers and accounted for 60% of new vehicles sales in
the United States in 2018. One reason for this is that most
consumers are unaware that gasoline costs them much more than
the price they pay at the pump. A number of hidden gasoline
costs not included in the price of gasoline include government
subsidies and tax breaks for oil companies, car manufacturers,
and road builders. Hidden costs also include costs related to
pollution control and cleanup and higher medical bills and
health insurance premiums resulting from illnesses caused by
air and water pollution related to the production and use of
motor vehicles. The International Center for Technology
Assessment estimated that the hidden costs of gasoline for U.S.
consumers amount to $3.18 per liter ($12.00 per gallon).
One way to include more of these hidden costs in the market
price is through higher gasoline taxes—an application of the
full-cost pricing principle of sustainability. However, higher
gas taxes are politically unpopular, especially in the United
States. Some analysts call for increasing U.S. gasoline taxes and
reducing payroll and income taxes to offset any additional
financial burden to consumers. Another way for governments to
encourage higher energy efficiency in transportation is to give
consumers significant tax breaks or other economic incentives
to encourage them to buy more fuel-efficient vehicles.
Other ways to save energy and money in transportation include
building or expanding mass transit systems within cities,
constructing high-speed rail lines between cities (as is done in
Japan, much of Europe, and China), and carrying more freight
by rail instead of in heavy trucks. Another approach is to
encourage bicycle use by building bike lanes along highways
and city streets
16.hSaving Energy and Money in Existing Buildings
Here are ways to reduce energy use in existing buildings and to

cut energy waste and save money on electricity, heating, and
cooling bills (see Core Case Study):
· Conduct an energy audit to detect air leaks (Figure 16.1).
· Insulate the building and plug air leaks.
· Use energy-efficient (double- or triple-pane) windows.
· Seal leaky heating and cooling ducts in attics and unheated
basements.
· Heat interior spaces more efficiently. In order, the most
energy-efficient ways to heat indoor space are superinsulation
(including plugging leaks); a geothermal heat pump that
transfers heat stored from underground into a home; passive
solar heating; a high-efficiency, conventional heat pump (in
warm climates only); and a high-efficiency natural gas furnace.
· Heat water more efficiently. One option is a roof-mounted
solar hot water heater. Another option is a tankless instant
water heater. It uses natural gas or liquefied petroleum gas (but
not an electric heater, which is inefficient) to deliver hot water
only when it is needed rather than keeping water in a large tank
hot all the time.
· Use energy-efficient appliances. A refrigerator with its freezer
in a drawer on the bottom uses about half as much energy as one
with the freezer on the top or on the side, which allows dense
cold air to flow out quickly when the door is opened.
Microwave ovens use less electricity than electric stoves do for
cooking and 66% less energy than conventional ovens. Front-
loading clothes washers use 55% less energy and 30% less water
than top-loading models use and cut operating costs in half.
· Use energy-efficient computers. According to the EPA, if all
computers sold in the United States met its Energy Star
requirements, consumers would save $1.8 billion a year in
energy costs and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by an amount
equal to that of taking about 2 million cars off the road.
· Use energy-efficient lighting. The DOE estimates that by
switching to energy-efficient LED bulbs over the next 20 years,
U.S. consumers could save money and reduce the demand for
electricity by an amount equal to the output of 40 new power

plants. In recent years, the cost of LED bulbs has fallen by 90%.
They last 25 times longer than traditional incandescent bulbs
(which waste 95% of their energy) and 2.5 times longer than
compact fluorescent bulbs.
· Stop using the standby mode. Consumers can reduce their
energy use and their monthly power bills by plugging their
standby electronic devices into smart power strips that cut off
power to a device when it detects that the device has been
turned off.
Figure 16.8 lists ways in which individuals can cut energy use
and save money in their homes.
Figure 16.8
Individuals matter: People can save energy and money where
they live and reduce their harmful environmental impact.
16.2iWhy Are We Wasting So Much Energy and Money?
Considering its impressive array of economic and environmental
benefits (Figure 16.3), why is there so little emphasis on
reducing energy waste by improving energy efficiency and
conserving energy? One reason is that energy resources such as
fossil fuels and nuclear power are artificially cheap. This is
primarily because of the government subsidies and tax breaks
they receive and because their market prices do not include the
harmful environmental and health costs of producing and using
them. This distortion of the energy marketplace violates the
full-cost pricing principle of sustainability.
Another reason for continuing energy waste is that governments
do not provide significant government tax breaks, rebates, low -
interest and long-term loans, and other economic incentives for
individuals and businesses to invest in improving energy
efficiency. A third reason is that most governments and utility
companies have not put a high priority on educating the public
about the environmental and economic advantages of improving
energy efficiency and conserving energy.
Some critics say an emphasis on improving energy efficiency
does not work because of the rebound effect in which some

people tend to use more energy when they buy energy-efficient
devices. For example, some people who buy a more efficient car
tend to drive more, which offsets some of their energy and
money savings and their reduced environmental impact.
Instead of downplaying efforts to improve energy efficiency,
energy experts call for a major program to educate people about
the rebound effect and its waste of money and long-lasting
harmful health and environmental effects.16.2jRelying More on
Renewable Energy
In addition to reducing energy waste, we can make greater use
of renewable energy from the sun, wind, flowing water,
biomass, and heat from the earth’s interior (geothermal energy).
The lesson from one of nature’s three scientific principles of
sustainability is to rely mostly on solar energy. Most forms of
renewable energy can be traced to the sun, because wind,
flowing water, and biomass would not exist, were it not for
solar energy. Another form of renewable energy is geothermal
energy, or heat from the earth’s interior. All of these sources of
renewable energy are constantly replenished at no cost to us.
In 2018, renewable energy, mostly solar and wind energy,
provided about 8.4% the world’s electricity and 8.2% of U.S.
electricity, according to BP. Studies by the IEA and the United
Nations Environment Programme, project that with increased
and consistent government backing in the form of research and
development funds, subsidies and tax breaks, renewable energy
from the sun and wind could provide as much as 50% of the
world’s electricity by 2050. The U.S. National Renewable
Energy Laboratory (NREL) projects that, with a crash program,
the United States could get as much as 50% of its electricity
from renewable energy sources—mostly wind and solar—by
2050. In 2017, jobs in solar and wind power were growing 12
times faster than the rest of the U.S. economy, according to a
report from the nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund. In 2017,
renewable energy provided about 786,000 jobs in the United
States, 1.2 million in Europe, and 3.8 million in China,
according to the Renewable Energy Agency.

In 2018, California, the world’s fifth largest economy, got 36%
of its electricity from renewable energy resources. That year,
California’s legislature passed a law requiring the state to get
60% of electricity from renewable energy resources by 2030 and
100% by 2045. In 2018, the legislature also passed a law
requiring solar panels on all new homes built after 2020.
According to the IEA, solar and wind are the world’s fastest-
growing energy resources and nuclear energy is the slowest
(Figure 15.24). China has the world’s largest installed capacity
for electricity from wind power and solar cells. It plans to
become the largest user and seller of wind turbines and solar
cells, which are projected to be two of the world’s fastest
growing businesses over the next few decades. China’s goal is
to greatly expand its production of electricity from renewable
wind, sun, and flowing water (hydropower) to help reduce its
use of coal and the resulting outdoor air pollution that kills
about 1.2 million of its citizens each year.
If renewable energy is so great, why does it provide only 11%
of the world’s energy (Figure 15.2, left) and 12% of the energy
used in the United States (Figure 15.2, right)? There are several
reasons.
First, people tend to think that solar and wind energy are too
diffuse, too intermittent and unreliable, and too expensive to
use on a large scale. However, these perceptions are out of date.
In the United States, solar and wind energy have become
cheaper sources of electricity than coal and nuclear power and
are equal to or cheaper than natural gas in some areas. Use of
back-up storage systems for wind and solar power—including
lithium-ion, zinc-air, and sodium-sulfur rechargeable battery
systems is projected to increase tenfold in the next few years.
The use of a new nationwide smart electrical grid could also
help make solar and wind energy reliable sources of electricity
by shifting electricity among different source locations to even
out the power supply regionally and nationally.
Second, since 1950, government tax breaks, subsidies, and
funding for research and development of renewable energy

resources have been much lower than those for fossil fuels and
nuclear power. According to the IEA, global subsidies for fossil
fuels are nearly 10 times more than global subsidies for
renewable energy.
Third, U.S. government subsidies and tax breaks for renewable
energy have been increasing, but Congress must renew them
every few years, which hinders investments in renewable
energy. In contrast, billions of dollars of annual subsidies for
fossil fuels and nuclear power have essentially been guaranteed
for many decades thanks in large part to political pressure from
these industries.
Fourth, the prices for nonrenewable fossil fuels and nuclear
power do not include most of the harmful environmental and
human health costs of producing and using them. As a result,
they are partially shielded from free-market competition with
cleaner renewable sources of energy.
Fifth, history shows that it typically takes 50 to 60 years to
make a shift from one set of key energy resources to another.
Renewable wind and solar energy are the world’s fastest
growing sources of energy, but it will likely take several
decades for them to supply 25% or more of the world’s
electricity.
16.3bCooling Buildings Naturally
Direct solar energy works against us when we want to keep a
building cool. However, we can use indirect solar energy
(mainly wind) to help cool buildings. We can open windows to
take advantage of breezes and use fans to keep the air moving.
When there is no breeze, superinsulatio n and high-efficiency
windows keep hot air outside.
Other ways to keep buildings cool include:
1. blocking the sun with shade trees, broad overhanging eaves,
window awnings, or shades;
2. using a light-colored roof to reflect up to 90% of the sun’s
heat (compared to only 10–15% for a dark-colored roof), or
using a living or green roof; and
3. using geothermal heat pumps to pump cool air from

underground into a building during summer.
Learning from Nature
Some species of African termites stay cool in a hot climate by
building giant mounds that allow air to circulate through them.
Engineers have used this design lesson from nature to cool
buildings naturally, reduce energy use, and save money.
16.3cConcentrating Sunlight to Produce High-Temperature Heat
and Electricity
One of the problems with direct solar energy is that it is
dispersed. Solar thermal systems, also known as concentrated
solar power (CSP), use different methods to collect and
concentrate solar energy to boil water and produce steam for
generating electricity. These systems can be used in deserts and
other open areas with ample sunlight.
One such system uses rows of curved mirrors, called parabolic
troughs, to collect and concentrate sunlight. Each trough
focuses incoming sunlight on a pipe that runs through its center
and is filled with synthetic oil (Figure 16.13). Solar energy
heats this oil to a temperature high enough to boil water and
produce steam that spins a turbine to generate electricity.
Figure 16.13
Solar thermal power: This solar power plant in California’s
Mojave Desert uses curved (parabolic) solar collectors to
concentrate solar energy for producing electricity.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Another solar thermal system (Figure 16.14) uses an array of
computer-controlled mirrors to track the sun and focus its
energy on a central power tower. The concentrated heat is used
to boil water and produce steam that drives turbines to produce
electricity. The heat produced by either of these systems can
also be used to melt a type of salt stored in a large insulated
container. The heat stored in this molten salt backup system can
be released as needed to produce electricity at night or on
cloudy days.
Figure 16.14

Solar thermal power: In this system in California an array of
mirrors tracks the sun and focuses reflected sunlight on a
central receiver to boil the water for producing electricity.
Sandia National Laboratories/National Renewable Energy
Laboratory
Some analysts see solar thermal power as a growing and
important source of the world’s electricity. However, because
solar thermal systems have a low net energy, they require large
government subsidies or tax breaks to be competitive in the
marketplace. These systems also require large volumes of
cooling water for condensing the steam back to water and for
washing the surfaces of the mirrors and parabolic troughs.
However, they are usually built in sunny, arid desert areas
where water is scarce. Figure 16.15 summarizes the major
advantages and disadvantages of using these solar thermal
systems.
Figure 16.15
Using solar energy to generate high-temperature heat and
electricity has advantages and disadvantages.
Critical Thinking:
1. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages? Why or why
not?
Top: Sandia National Laboratories/National Renewable Energy
Laboratory. Bottom: National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
We can also use concentrated solar energy on a smaller scale. In
some sunny areas, people use inexpensive solar cookers to focus
and concentrate sunlight for boiling and sterilizing water
(Figure 16.16, left) and cooking food (Figure 16.16, right).
Solar cookers can replace wood and charcoal fires and reduce
indoor air pollution, a major health hazard in less-developed
nations. They also help reduce deforestation by decreasing the
need for firewood and charcoal made from firewood.
Figure 16.16

Solution
s: Solar cooker (left) in Costa Rica and simple solar oven
(right).
chriss73/ Shutterstock.com; M. Cornelius/ Shutterstock.com
16.3dUsing Solar Cells to Produce Electricity
In 1931, Thomas Edison (inventor of the electric light bulb) told
Henry Ford, “I’d put my money on the sun and solar energy. …
I hope we don’t have to wait until oil and coal run out before
we tackle that.” Edison’s dream is now a reality.
We can convert solar energy directly into electrical energy
using photovoltaic (PV) cells, commonly called solar
cells. Most solar cells are thin transparent wafers of purified
silicon (Si) or polycrystalline silicon with trace amounts of
metals that allow them to produce electricity when sunlight
strikes them. Solar cells are wired together in a panel and many
panels can be connected to produce electricity for a house or a
large solar power plant (Figure 16.17). Such systems can be
connected to electrical grids or to batteries that store the
electrical energy until it is needed. Large solar-cell power
plants are operating in Germany, Spain, Portugal, South Korea,

China, and the southeastern United States. In 2017, factories in
China produced more than two-thirds of the world’s solar cell
panels.
Figure 16.17
Solar cell power plant: Huge arrays of solar cells can be
connected to produce electricity.
Ollyy/ Shutterstock.com
Arrays of solar cells can be mounted on rooftops or
incorporated into almost any type of roofing material.
Nanotechnology and other emerging technologies will likely
allow the manufacturing of solar cells in paper-thin, rigid or
flexible sheets that can be printed like newspapers and attached
to or embedded in other surfaces such as outdoor walls,
windows, drapes, and clothing (to recharge batteries in mobile
phones and other personal electronic devices). Figure
16.18 shows a solar cell village in Germany. Solar power
providers in several countries are putting floating arrays of
solar cell panels on the surfaces of lakes, reservoirs, ponds, and
canals. In 2017, China developed the world’s largest floating
solar farm on a lake. Engineers are developing dirt and water -
repellent coatings to keep solar panels and collectors clean
without having to use water. GREEN CAREER: Solar-cell
technology

Figure 16.18
Solar cell village in Germany.
iStock.com/schmidt-z
Nearly 1.3 billion people, most of them in rural villages in less
developed countries are not connected to an electrical grid. A
growing number of these people are using rooftop solar panels
(Figure 16.19) to power energy-efficient LED lamps that can
replace costly and inefficient kerosene lamps that pollute indoor
air. Expanding off-grid solar-cell systems to additional rural
villages will help hundreds of millions of people lift themselves
out of poverty and reduce their exposure to deadly indoor air
pollution.
Figure 16.19

Compose a 300-word (minimum) essay on the topic below. Essays must

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Compose a 300-word (minimum) essay on the topic below. Essays must

Similar to Compose a 300-word (minimum) essay on the topic below. Essays must (12)

More from LynellBull52

More from LynellBull52 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Compose a 300-word (minimum) essay on the topic below. Essays must