VIEWS: 9 PAGES: 48 POSTED ON: 7/26/2011
4 Energy and the Oil wells in California. Future GOALS When you have finished this chapter you Fossil Fuels • Define geothermal energy and give some should be able to complete the goals • methods of using it. 4.5 Liquid Fuels given for each section below: Vehicles Are the Biggest Users 4.10 Clean Energy II • Compare the average fuel efficiency of cars Variable Sources The Energy Problem in the United States with that of cars • Describe ways to make use of the energy 4.1 Population and Prosperity elsewhere and give some reasons for the contents of sunlight, wind, tides, and waves. What Drives World Energy Demand difference. 4.11 Energy Storage • State the approximate year in which • Give the advantages and disadvantages of Options for Variable Sources and Vehicles world population is expected to level off, hybrid cars. • Describe methods of bulk storage of elec- what the maximum population might 4.6 Natural Gas tric energy. then be, and which two countries then The Least Bad Fossil Fuel • Explain the difference between storage would have the most people. • Explain why natural gas is the least batteries and fuel cells. 4.2 Energy Consumption objectionable fossil fuel. • Compare electric, hybrid, and fuel-cell cars. High Today, Higher Tomorrow • Describe shale and clathrate sources of 4.12 Biofuels • Explain why energy demand is likely to natural gas. Yes, But grow faster than world population. 4.7 Coal • Compare the advantages and disadvan- • Identify the various fossil fuels, trace their Plentiful but Worst for the Environment tages of the various biofuel sources. energy contents to their ultimate origin, • List the advantages and disadvantages of • Explain the attractions of cellulosic ethanol. and compare their reserves. coal as a fuel and account for its wide and 4.3 Global Warming increasing use despite the severity of the Strategies for the Future A Serious Threat disadvantages. 4.13 Conservation • Discuss the evidence for global warming. • Describe the carbon capture and storage Less Is More • State the probable maximum global tem- method of dealing with CO2 emissions • Give examples of opportunities to con- perature rise that would avoid large-scale from power plants. serve energy in everyday life. catastrophe. 4.14 What Governments Must Do • Describe what such a catstrophe would Alternative Sources Their Role Is Crucial involve. 4.8 A Nuclear World? • Describe what is meant by a cap-and- 4.4 Carbon Dioxide and the Greenhouse Perhaps On the Way trade system for controlling CO2 emis- Effect • Compare nuclear fission and nuclear sions and compare it with a carbon tax. The Cause of Global Warming fusion as energy sources. • Compare the average annual CO2 emissions • Explain the greenhouse effect and how it • State the approximate percentage of per person in the United States and China, acts to heat the atmosphere. electricity in the United States that comes their total emissions, and their positions on • State the role of carbon dioxide in global from nuclear energy and explain why no controlling these emissions. Account for the warming and give examples of other new nuclear plants have been built for importance of these countries in CO2 control. greenhouse gases. many years. • Give the reasons why the Copenhagen • Outline the role of deforestation in global 4.9 Clean Energy I conference on CO2 emissions warming. Continuous Sources was a failure. 93 94 4-2 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future The rise of modern civilization would have been impossible without the dis- covery of vast resources of energy and the development of ways to trans- form it into useful forms. All that we do requires energy. The more energy we have at our command, the better we can satisfy our desires for food, clothing, shelter, warmth, light, transport, communication, and manufac- tured goods. Unfortunately oil and natural gas, the most convenient fuels, although currently abundant, have become expensive, have limited reserves, and, together with the more plentiful coal, are largely responsible for global warming through the carbon dioxide their burning produces. Other energy sources have handicaps of one kind or another, some serious, as well as good features. Nuclear fusion, the ultimate energy source, remains a tech- nology of the future at best. At the same time, world population is increasing and people everywhere seek better lives, both factors that bring a need for more and more energy. The Industrial Revolution of the nineteenth century was powered largely by coal; in the twentieth century oil and gas became the leading fuels. Nothing is more important today than the choice and implementation of an appropri- ate energy strategy for the twenty-first century. This is an unusual chapter for this book both because it is nontechni- cal and because it covers some of the essential social, economic, and even political dimensions of its subject, which does not exist in a vacuum. The decisions that businesses and governments make now and in the future are critical, and it is essential that they be made in full view of an informed pub- lic. In this chapter the energy problem in all its complexity is considered in one place so how its various parts fit together is clear. Even though scientific elements that cannot be properly discussed this early in the book are left for later chapters, the basic ideas are all here so that those who do not cover the entire text can view the situation as a whole and appreciate how it affects them (and how they affect it). The Energy Problem The energy problem has three elements: 1. Ever-increasing demand for energy driven by an expanding world popu- lation and its growing prosperity. 2. Inevitable decline in the economical supply of fossil fuels, which now furnish about 85 percent of the world’s energy. 3. Carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels is the chief contributor to the global warming that affects life on earth. We will look at these matters in turn before going on to examine present and future sources of energy and then considering how best to secure the future while continuing to meet the most essential of our needs. 4.1 Population and Prosperity What Drives World Energy Demand For most of the hundred thousand or so years that modern humans have existed there were too few of them to have much effect on their resources or environments. Twelve thousand years ago, when agriculture began, the world’s human population was probably about 5 million. It was perhaps 500 million in 1650, 1 billion in 1850, and 1.6 billion as recently as 1900. It is about 7 billion today and is climbing rapidly (Fig. 4-1). The current rate of The Energy Problem 4-3 95 population increase is a little over 230,000 per day—another United States 12 every 4 years, another China every 18 years. 10 Future Population It is obvious that the world’s population cannot keep Billions of people 8 growing at the present rate, and indeed must decrease. Already, according to the U.N. Environment Program, “the human population is now so large 6 that the amount of resources needed to sustain it exceeds what is available at current consumption patterns.” An average fertility rate of 2.1 children per 4 woman (the 0.1 takes into account girls who do not live to adulthood) means a constant population. Over 60 countries have already reached this rate or 2 even less; it is 2.05 in the United States, 1.2 in Japan and South Korea, 1.3 in Spain and Italy. In other countries, however, fertility rates are higher. In sub- 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 A.D. Saharan Africa, the overall fertility rate is 5.4. Africa’s population is expected to quadruple before stabilizing, the last region to do so. Year The annual rate of unintended pregnancies worldwide is thought to be comparable to the rate of population increase. Poverty, low status of women, Figure 4-1 World population according to United Nations figures— ignorance, tradition, and the doctrines of some religions all contribute to currently about 7 billion. Estimates rising populations by obstructing access to the safe and efficient family plan- for future population vary widely. ning methods already used in much of the world. Nevertheless, a global shift Shown is an optimistic projection with to smaller families, with every child a wanted child, has begun. In China, a peak of about 9.2 billion in 2050. An whose population is now 1.3 billion, fertility halved between 1970 and 1996; eventual decrease in population would in Bangladesh, with 150 million people, a similar reduction took even less be the first since the Black Death of the time. fourteenth century. Unless the decrease As Fig. 4-1 shows, hopeful but plausible estimates of world population occurs in time, resources of all kinds will suggest a leveling off at around 9.2 billion by 2050, 1½ more Chinas for the give out and the environment, already earth to support than today. (If current fertility rates were unchanged, there under threat, will turn hostile. would be over a billion more of us than that.) By 2050 India is likely to have passed China as the most populous nation and might then have more people than there were in the entire world in 1900. After peaking in 2050 the curve of Fig. 4-1 is projected to turn downward. If that happens, an eventual popu- lation fall to a stable size that permits comfortable lives for everybody might then occur. What would a sustainable population count for the earth be? Half of today’s figure? A third? Even less? Nobody knows because any estimate must involve a wide variety of factors, many without reliable numbers attached. What is clear, however, is that there are too many people today for the world to support for much longer both their demands on natural resources and their assaults on the environment in which they live. Prosperity In parallel with a ballooning population is a broad rise in pros- perity. In 1990 nearly 30 percent of the world’s people lived on less than the equivalent of $1/day; today the proportion (still a disgrace) is down to half that, which means more energy use per person. Higher up the economic lad- der, life is also getting better, which has the same effect. As an example of what this implies for the future, we can compare car ownership in China (1.3 billion people) with that in the United States (310 million people). These were recently about 40 and 800 cars/1000 people, respectively. Incomes in China are increasing by 9 to 10 percent/year (China expects to expand its middle class to at least half its population by 2020) and in 2009 it became the world’s largest car market. Even if China never catches up with the car ownership rate of the United States, in time there will be hundreds of millions more cars there gobbling up fuel of some kind. In India (1.1 billion largely poor people), whose population and economy are both growing steadily, car sales are increasing by over 20 percent each year; some new cars there cost as little as $2500. The world’s automotive fleet, now over 900 million cars, is expected to grow to 2 billion by 2050. 96 4-4 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future 4.2 Energy Consumption High Today, Higher Tomorrow As the world economy expands, so does its consumption of energy. In the advanced countries, the standard of living is already high and their popu- lations are stable, so their need for energy is unlikely to grow very much. Indeed, this need may even decline as their energy use becomes more effi- cient. Elsewhere, rates of energy consumption are still low, less than 1 kW per person for more than half the people of the world compared with about 10.5 kW per person in the United States (Fig. 4-2). These people seek bet- ter lives, which means more energy, and their numbers are swelling, which means still more energy. About a tenth of all spending in the United States goes to energy. Figure 4-3 shows world energy consumption from 1980 to the present together with three projections for the future. The middle curve assumes an average annual rise in energy use of 1 percent in the advanced countries and a 3 percent rise in other countries, figures thought to be realistic. The bottom curve corresponds to a lower rate of economic growth than anticipated and the top curve to a higher rate. The midrange estimate for 2030 is nearly one and a half times today’s energy consumption. Almost all the energy available to us today has a single source—the sun. Light and heat reach us directly from the sun; food and wood owe their energy content to photosynthesis (Sec. 13.12) powered by sunlight falling on plants; water power exists because the sun’s heat evaporates water from the oceans that falls later as rain and snow on high ground; wind power comes Figure 4-2 Energy consumption per person, kW Energy use per person in various countries. The energy needs of 10.5 the huge populations at the lower end 10.0 of the list are increasing. China alone has a population of 1.3 billion and its energy consumption is growing at over 6.0 5.6 four times the world average; it has 5.1 5.0 accounted for 80 percent of the world’s new power plants in recent years and 2.4 is expected to continue doing so for 1.7 1.5 years to come. The United Kingdom 0.7 0.3 consists of England, Scotland, Wales, 0 es a n m e na a and Northern Ireland. Senegal is a fairly l l i ga si pa ag di az do at hi us In ne Ja er Br St C ng typical African country. R av Se Ki d te ld d ni or te U W ni U Figure 4-3 Annual world energy 1000 Total energy consumption, EJ High economic growth consumption 1980–2030. The energy Projected economic growth unit is the exojoule (EJ), where 800 Low economic growth 1 EJ = 1018 J = 24 million tons of oil equivalent. Most of the future increase 600 in energy consumption is expected to come from developing countries with 400 large populations, mainly China and India. 200 0 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 Estimated Year The Energy Problem 4-5 97 from motions in the atmosphere due to unequal heating of the earth’s surface Renewable (hydroelectric, wind, by the sun. The fossil fuels coal, oil, and natural gas were formed from the solar, etc.) remains of plants and animals that contain energy derived from sunlight mil- Nuclear 9% lions of years ago. Only nuclear energy, tidal energy, and heat from sources 6% inside the earth cannot be traced to the sun’s rays (Figs. 4-4 and 4-5). Future Sources Fossil fuels, which today furnish by far the greatest part of the world’s energy, cannot last forever. As their reserves decline, their prices will go up accordingly, which is already happening. The increased cost of Natural gas Coal 24% 23% energy will burden all economies, especially those of developing countries, which use energy less efficiently. For instance, China needs over twice as much energy as the United States does per unit of output. The Stone Age did not end because the world ran out of stones but Oil 38% because superior technologies came into being. The same will be true for fos- sil fuels: well before they actually run out, they will be replaced because they have become too expensive, both in terms of money and in terms of the harm Fossil fuels they cause to the environment. Then renewable and nuclear (fission and, Figure 4-4 Sources of commercial perhaps, fusion) energies will become the principal energy sources. energy production worldwide. Fossil Petroleum—more familiarly, oil—will be the first fossil fuel whose trend fuels are responsible for 85 percent of in Fig. 4-5 will begin to turn downward. At present, the world uses over 85 the world’s energy consumption (apart million barrels of oil per day (a quarter of that by the United States) and from firewood, still widely used, which demand is still rising. And at least 3.5 million barrels of oil per day of new is not included here). The percentages production capacity is needed each year to offset the declining flow from for energy sources in the United States old wells. Where will all this oil come from? More oil is still being found and are not very different from those of methods exist to extract some of the oil that remains in old wells, though at the world as a whole. However, China’s more expense per barrel. However, the last year in which more oil was dis- figures are quite different: coal provides 1 2 _ times as much of its energy as the 2 covered than consumed was more than a quarter of a century ago, and by world average with correspondingly now two barrels of oil are burned for every barrel discovered. smaller proportions for other sources. Sooner or later—probably before 2030, possibly as soon as 2020—oil The world total is around 12 billion tons of production will reach a peak and start to decline. The flow of oil will not stop oil equivalent. (An average family car burns then, of course, but its price will soar. This will bring about a drastic change about 1 ton of oil equivalent per year.) in the world’s patterns of energy use that will be hard to adjust to because oil burns efficiently and is easy to extract, process, store, and transport. Seventy percent of the oil used today goes into fuels that power ships, trains, aircraft, cars, and trucks, and oil is a valued feedstock for synthetic material of all kinds. Renewable Natural gas fuels the power stations that generate a fifth of the electricity used 9% in the United States (Fig. 4-6) and provides heat for more than half its homes. Reserves of natural gas far exceed those of oil, though new technology will be required to exploit the largest deposits (Sec. 4.6). But it, too, will not last forever. Nuclear 300 20% Energy consumption, EJ 250 Oil Natural gas Coal 200 21% 49% Coal 150 Gas 100 Renewable 50 Oil Nuclear 1% 0 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 Figure 4-6 Sources of electric energy in the United States. In Europe, the Estimated contribution of renewable sources is Year 16 percent, a level not expected to be Figure 4-5 Annual world energy consumption from various sources. Serious international action to reached in the United States until at moderate global warming would reduce the projected rises in fossil-fuel use and increase the others. least 2030. 98 4-6 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future Even though the coal we consume every year took about 2 million years to accumulate, apparently—the data are not entirely reliable—enough remains for perhaps a century at the present rate of consumption, less if coal use continues to increase at its current rate. Coal reserves are equivalent in energy content to several times oil reserves. Coal is the cheapest fossil fuel. Before 1941, coal was the world’s chief fuel, and it is likely to return to first place when oil and gas run out. As with them, coal prices are headed upward, more than tripling in the past decade, and will increase even faster as pro- duction declines. Nonfossil Sources Nuclear fuel reserves exceed those of fossil fuels. Besides having an abundant fuel supply, a properly built and properly operat- ing nuclear plant is in many respects an excellent energy source. Nuclear energy is already responsible for about a fifth of the electricity generated in the United States, and in a number of other countries the proportion is even higher; in France it is three-quarters. After a period of being largely out of favor, nuclear energy is about to come into wider use, as discussed in Sec. 4.8. What about the energy of direct sunlight, of winds and tides, of fall- ing water, of trees and plants, of the earth’s own internal heat? After all, the technologies needed to exploit these renewable resources already exist and are steadily improving. Though their contributions will certainly help, it is unlikely that such sources will supply a large part of the world’s energy needs for decades to come. In every case, the required installation is either expensive (though decreasingly so) for the energy obtained, or practical only in favorable locations, or both. Some cannot provide energy reliably all the time, and most of them need a lot of space. Although fossil fuels clearly cannot cope indefinitely with expected energy demand, with the help of nuclear and renewable technologies there are suffi- cient reserves of fossil fuels to last at least much of the rest of this century. But there is another consideration: the billions of tons of carbon dioxide produced each year by the burning of fossil fuels are mainly responsible for the warm- ing of the atmosphere that is going on today, a warming that seems sure to have serious consequences for our planet. To continue burning fossil fuels at the ever-increasing rates of Fig. 4-5 is a recipe for disaster, as we shall see next. 4.3 Global Warming A Serious Threat The average temperature of the earth’s surface and the atmosphere just above it has varied throughout the earth’s history. Warm spells and cold ones have alternated, including ice ages in which immense sheets of ice blanketed much of the globe, but the changes back and forth occurred over relatively long periods of time (see Chap. 14). In recent years a totally new pattern of change has begun in which the earth is warming up much faster than it ever has before (Fig. 4-7), a rise of about 0.5°C in the past 30 years and still climbing. The earth’s atmosphere is not heated directly by sunlight but indirectly through the greenhouse effect described in Secs. 4.4 and 14.4. The chief agent responsible for the greenhouse effect in the atmosphere is the gas carbon dioxide (CO2), and global warming is chiefly due to its growing CO2 content. (The symbol CO2 means that each carbon dioxide molecule consists of two oxygen atoms bonded to a carbon atom.) Some consequences of increasing world temperatures are already obvi- ous. Sea ice in the Arctic is melting steadily and in 20 years or so the North Pole is likely to be free of ice in the summer, for the first time in 3 million years. Similar melting is taking place around the Antarctic continent (Fig. 4-8). The Energy Problem 4-7 99 Signs of Warming Increasing air temperatures, shrink- and more common worldwide. In tidings for the still-swelling world ing glaciers, and rising seas are not the United States, the Atlantic and population. the only signs that the world is get- Pacific coastal regions are becom- Also ominous is the effect of ting hotter. The oceans store far ing wetter while some of the central rising temperatures on the spread more heat than the atmosphere, states can expect to be increasingly of disease. Previously safe parts of so changes in their temperatures starved of water. the Mediterranean Sea now host are more significant—and they, Not all is bad for now: spring toxic warm-water algae. Milder too, are climbing. Hurricanes and comes earlier every year, which winters have allowed the ticks that other tropical storms, whose energy lengthens the growing season in the carry Lyme disease to spread farther comes from warm ocean water, are high latitudes to increase food pro- across North America and Scandi- becoming stronger. Storms else- duction there. But some plants and navia. Mosquitoes, which are vec- where are becoming more frequent animals are already having trouble tors of such maladies as malaria and more severe. keeping up with their new environ- and dengue fever, range over a Climate patterns are changing ments, and a quarter of all species larger part of the world than before, as well, with record rainfalls in some may die out by 2100. Overall crop and because their metabolism goes areas and record droughts in others. yields sooner or later will decline as up with temperature, they also feed Deserts in Africa and central Asia temperatures go up and droughts more often. There are many more are spreading. Wildfires are more occur more frequently, unwelcome examples. Figure 4-7 Average global surface Departures in temperature from the 0.5 temperatures for the past thousand years. Temperatures are continuing to 1961–1990 average, °C rise sharply. 0.0 −0.5 −1.0 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 Year Figure 4-8 Much of Antarctica is surrounded by giant ice shelves fed by glaciers on shore. Global warming has led to the breakup of large sections of the ice shelves, which drift out to sea as icebergs and eventually melt. Because the shelves are floating to start with, their melting does not raise sea level, but meltwater from the Antarctic ice cap itself will continue to do so as global warming proceeds. If the Antarctic and Greenland ice caps were to melt, sea level would rise by at least 10 m, which would drastically change the map of the world’s land areas. Complete melting would take a long time, but once well under way it would be irreversible because seawater and bare ground absorb sunlight more efficiently than ice, an excellent reflector, does. 100 4-8 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future Conflicts to Come Sea Level The melting of sea ice does not affect sea level, just as the melt- ing of an ice cube in a glass of water does not change the water level, but the The large-scale disruptions of melting of ice on land is another story. Global warming is causing sea level normal life that global warming to rise at 3.4 mm/year today, almost twice as fast as a decade ago and still seems to be on the way to bring- accelerating. Although much of the rise is due to water expanding as it is ing about are not likely to be heated, as most substances do, the melting of the vast glaciers of Greenland met passively by those involved. and Antarctica is responsible for a growing proportion. It is entirely possible that within The polar icecaps are on the way to melting on a scale large enough to the lifetimes of many people inundate coastal regions everywhere. This will leave huge numbers of people alive today, hundreds of mil- to be resettled on higher ground; nearly half the world’s population now lives lions of Latin Americans, Afri- on or near coasts, a proportion expected to be three-quarters in the not-too- cans, and Asians will run short of freshwater and food. Ris- distant future. Even before gondolas fill the flooded streets of coastal cities, ing seas made worse by storm the underground water deposits that supply most of their freshwater will surges will add to the misery. have been contaminated by seawater. How will the rest of the How much higher will sea level go? If present trends in carbon diox- world, by then already near or ide emissions continue, a minimum sea-level rise of 1 m by 2100 can be at the limit of its ability to sup- expected, possibly as much as twice that. Even a 1-m rise would displace port its own populations, react at least 140 million coastal dwellers. If all the proposed programs to reduce to the refugees swarming in, world carbon dioxide emissions are actually carried out, the rise would still desperate to survive? We all be around 0.75 m. In any case, the melting will not stop in 2100 but will know the answer. An alarm- persist as long as elevated temperatures do, raising sea level yet more in cen- ist view? Not according to the turies to come. U.N. Panel on Climate Change, the U.N. Security Council, the Future Temperatures The average surface temperature since 1880 has gone Pentagon, and other worried up by about 0.83°C. Sunlight is reflected back into space by ice, and the loss observers. Only if both global population and CO2 emissions of ice means much more solar energy absorbed by the land and sea that it begin to fall very soon is there once covered. The result is a feedback loop that accelerates global warming. any prospect of a peaceful This means that time is not on our side: action taken now would make a big- world of thriving people in the ger difference than the same action taken later. future. It is generally agreed that a global temperature increase of 2°C beyond preindustrial values is the most that can be tolerated without catastrophic impacts on human (and all other) life. A rise of 2°C may not seem like much, but to keep it from being exceeded would mean drastic changes in the world’s ways of producing and using energy. Such changes would be very expensive and affect the lives of almost everybody. At the other extreme, most calculations of the result of doing nothing beyond the measures already being taken suggest a global temperature rise of over 4°C by 2100. The earth would then be warmer than it has been for 55 million years with environmental changes on a huge scale. The middle and tropical latitudes would be too hot and dry to support the variety of living things they now do, with surviving humans crowded together in the polar regions. How many people could such a planet support? Maybe a billion or two, certainly far less than the projected 9.2 billion of Fig. 4-1, which does not take global warming into account. In the rest of this chapter, we will see what is responsible for global warming and what can—must—be done to prevent such a nightmare future. 4.4 Carbon Dioxide and the Greenhouse Effect The Cause of Global Warming Every body of matter radiates light regardless of its temperature; the hotter it is, the more it gives off (see Fig. 5-6). The radiation from something very hot, such as the sun, is obvious because its glow is mainly visible light. The radiation from something at room temperature, however, is chiefly infrared The Energy Problem 4-9 101 light to which the eye is not sensitive. The interior of a greenhouse is warmer Soot than the outside air because the glass of its windows is transparent to vis- ible light from the sun whereas the infrared light given off by its contents is Although an enhanced green- absorbed by the glass, so that the incoming energy is trapped. house effect is the chief contrib- As discussed in Sec. 14.4, this greenhouse effect is largely responsible utor to global warming, recent for heating the earth’s atmosphere and its surface. The visible light from the studies show that another sun that reaches the surface is reradiated as infrared light that is readily important factor is soot, which absorbed by several gases in the atmosphere. One of the most important of consists of black carbon par- these gases is carbon dioxide. As a result, the atmosphere is heated mainly ticles produced when various from below by the earth and only to a smaller extent from above by the sun, fuels are incompletely burned. Soot may be responsible for as as shown in Fig. 14-12. Without the greenhouse effect, the earth’s surface much as 18 percent of global would average −18°C instead of its current average of 15°C. warming. A good deal of soot enters the atmosphere from Atmospheric CO2 Is Increasing In the past, the total energy that the earth old, inefficient diesel engines, and its atmosphere reradiated back into space equalled the total energy but most apparently comes they received from the sun. However, the CO2 content of the atmosphere from primitive cooking stoves is steadily increasing, which means that the earth and its atmosphere are widely used in parts of Africa absorbing energy at a greater rate than before and are heating up. The result and Asia with wood and dung is global warming. as fuel. As the soot particles Even if the CO2 content of the atmosphere were to stop rising, there absorb sunlight, they heat up would still be a time lag until the earth’s surface reached a final temperature and warm the air around them. at which the energy input and output flows were in balance. The temperature Because soot particles stay surge in recent years shown in Fig. 4-7 is only about half of what is needed aloft for only a few weeks and to equalize the energy flows, so global warming will continue until that hap- so do not accumulate in the atmosphere the way greenhouse pens no matter what action is taken. Because CO2 persists in the atmosphere gases do, replacing the primi- for about a century after entering it, global temperatures would then fall very tive stoves with efficient ones gradually. Time is not on our side. (about $20 each) would have an Analyzing air bubbles trapped in Greenland and Antarctic ice shows that immediate effect. If, say, 20 mil- the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is currently 27 percent higher than lion stoves were replaced with at any time in the past 650,000 years. The chief cause in recent times is the help from developed countries burning of fossil fuels to generate electricity; heat our homes; propel our (the stove users themselves cars, trains, ships, and airplanes; and power various industrial processes. All have incomes of only about $2/ but 15 percent of the world’s energy comes from carbon-based fuels. Each day), the cost would be $400 kilogram of carbon burned yields 3.7 kg of CO2, and at present our chimneys million, an extremely modest and exhaust pipes pour out about 30 billion tons of CO2 per year. sum to slow global warming by a useful amount. The United States and China are by far the largest emitters of CO2 (Figs. 4-9 and 4-10). In 2000, total Chinese emissions, then half those of the United States, were expected to catch up around 2025. They actually did so Figure 4-9 Annual carbon dioxide 20 19.1 emissions from fossil fuels per person Metric tons of carbon dioxide in various countries in 2007. (1 metric ton = 1000 kg) per person per year 15 11.2 9.7 10 8.6 5 4.5 4.6 1.8 1.2 0.4 0 es ia n om e na a l l i ga pa ag di az ss at hi d In ne Br Ja er Ru St C ng av Se d Ki te ld d ni or te U W ni U 102 4-10 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future Population, million persons Population, million persons 1200 1200 800 800 400 400 0 0 2 4 6 2 4 6 Total CO2 emitted, billion metric tons/year Total CO2 emitted, billion metric tons/year 5 5 ar ar ye ye s/ s/ n n to to 10 10 ri c ri c et et m m n, n, so so 15 15 er er rp rp pe pe 20 20 ed ed CHINA INDIA itt itt em em 2 2 O O C C Population, million persons Population, million persons 1200 1200 800 800 400 400 0 0 2 4 6 2 4 6 Total CO2 emitted, billion metric tons/year Total CO2 emitted, billion metric tons/year 5 5 r r ea ea /y /y ns ns to to 10 10 ric ric et et m m n, n, so so 15 15 er er rp rp pe pe 20 20 ed ed UNITED STATES UNITED KINGDOM itt itt em em 2 2 O O C C Figure 4-10 Population and annual CO2 emissions from fossil fuels of four countries in 2007. China and India have the largest populations, with three out of eight of the world’s people between them. For now India emits less than a fifth as much CO2 per person as China does. China and the United States each account for a fifth of the world’s CO2 emissions, but there are over four times as many Chinese. The United Kingdom, whose CO2 emissions per person are about twice China’s and half those of the United States, is a fairly typical industrialized country. CO2 emissions from most less-developed countries are very small, only about 400 kg per person per year in Africa’s Senegal, for example, but because such countries are largely agricultural they will suffer most from global warming. in 2007 and are still rising much more rapidly than those of the United States as China continues its dash to industrialize. As we can see from Fig. 4-11, the CO2 content of the atmosphere, now around 390 ppm, has gone up by over 35 percent since 1860 and is currently growing at 2 ppm/year. The increase represents about half the CO2 from burning fossil fuels; the rest is absorbed by the oceans, soils, and forests. As fossil fuels continue to be burned at a high rate, the greenhouse “window” becomes a better and better trap for heat and the ultimate temperature of The Energy Problem 4-11 103 390 Figure 4-11 Carbon dioxide 380 concentration in the atmosphere since 1860, in parts per million (ppm). 370 The total today is nearly 3 trillion tons. There was little change in CO2 CO2 concentration, ppm 360 concentration in the 10 thousand years 350 before 1860. If CO2 emissions do not 340 fall significantly, its concentration is expected to climb to at least 500 ppm 330 in this century. The resulting enhanced 320 greenhouse effect will then push global 310 temperatures past the threshold for severe and long-lasting environmental 300 damage. 290 280 1870 1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990 2010 Year the earth’s surface will continue to go up. If nothing is done, by 2100 atmo- spheric CO2 is projected to reach 965 ppm with a disastrous temperature rise of perhaps 4.8°C. Many climate scientists think that the CO2 concentration in the atmo- sphere should not exceed 450 ppm to prevent global temperatures from Other Greenhouse Gases Although CO2 is the most important wetlands, in the production of fossil of the greenhouse gases human fuels, in the decay of organic mat- N2O activities are responsible for, it is ter (for instance in landfills), in rice 6% not the only one (Fig. 4-12). Fol- growing, and, in surprising quanti- CH4 lowing it in significance are the ties, as by-products of the digestion 15% CFCs and HCFCs, a group of arti- of food by cattle, sheep, and ter- ficially made gases mainly used in mites. A cow belches 200 liters or so CO2 refrigeration and air-conditioning of methane every day. CFCs and HCFCs 55% (Sec. 14.1). They leak into the Methane in vast quantities— 24% atmosphere in much smaller perhaps 50 billion tons—from the amounts than Fig. 4-12 suggests, but decomposition of organic remains are highly efficient as greenhouse has been locked into the frozen gases—1 kg of most of them is equiv- lands of Siberia and northern Can- alent to several tons of CO2—and ada for thousands of years. Now remain active for several decades. global warming is melting the per- Figure 4-12 The contributions to The quoted figure of 24 percent mafrost and methane is bubbling global warming of the chief greenhouse corresponds to their contribution to out—an estimated 100,000 tons gases. global warming. every summer day from Siberia’s Next in its impact on global peat bogs alone. Like the increased the atmosphere of around 120 years. warming is methane, the chief con- absorption of sunlight by newly It is given off when fossil fuels and stituent of natural gas. A methane ice-free areas of polar lands and organic matter are burned, when molecule consists of four hydrogen sea, this is another feedback loop fertilizers are used (3 to 5 percent of atoms bonded to a carbon atom, so that accelerates global warming. the nitrogen added by them to the its chemical formula is CH4. Meth- The methane concentration in the soil ends up as N2O), and in vari- ane is 23 times as efficient as CO2 atmosphere today from all sources ous industrial processes. Rainfor- in trapping heat but fortunately has is over twice what it was in prein- ests and the oceans also emit some the short lifetime in the atmosphere dustrial times. N2O. The N2O concentration in the of about a dozen years. About 600 Nitrous oxide, N2O, is 310 atmosphere, now 18 percent over million tons of methane are released times as potent a greenhouse gas as its preindustrial level, is also on the annually into the atmosphere from CO2 and has an average lifetime in way up. 104 4-12 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future Deforestation Every year 50,000 square miles Another unfortunate aspect of Indonesia releases more CO2 of rainforest are destroyed, for deforestation comes from the fact through deforestation than any the most part to create farmland. that CO2 and water are the raw other country, which puts it into About half the tropical forests that materials from which trees, like all third place, behind the United the world once had are now gone, plants, manufacture carbohydrates States and China, as a source of CO2 which has reduced the diversity with the help of sunlight (Sec. emissions due to human activity. of living things. As a rule, the soil 13.12). A typical rainforest tree Large-scale deforestation continues under a tropical forest is poor and (one of around 200 billion) removes in Brazil, which gains it fourth place wears out after only a few crops, 22 kg of CO2 from the atmosphere in this list. Many tropical countries and additional forest is then cleared. every year, a process that stops when have lost most of their rainforests: Trees are about half carbon, and cut- the tree is cut down. Today forest the Philippines, 90 percent; Mada- ting them down to rot or be burned growth absorbs about as much CO2 gascar, 95 percent; Haiti, 99 percent. adds an estimated 3 billion tons of as China emits—more than all the Figure 4-13 shows how large the CO2 annually into the atmosphere, world’s cars, trucks, trains, aircraft, contribution of deforestation is to almost a fifth of total CO2 emissions. and ships emit. overall greenhouse gas emissions. Waste Other Electricity 4% 13% generation and heat 25% Agriculture 13% Figure 4-13 Origins of greenhouse gas Transport Deforestation emissions. 13% 18% Industry 14% rising beyond 2°C, which might permit civilized human life, not just mere survival at best. This would require CO2 emissions to peak in this decade and then drop to less than half of their present rate by 2050. In December 2009, representatives, including many leaders, of 193 coun- tries met in Copenhagen to come up with definite plans to accomplish this goal. They could not agree on almost anything, but many promised to take various measures to moderate the increase in emissions. An assessment of these promises suggests a CO2 concentration in 2100 of 755 ppm, nearly double today’s value, which implies in turn a temperature rise of 3.8°C. Even adding in more-or-less vague measures that a number of countries said they would consider only reduces these figures to 590 ppm and 2.9°C—still too much. Section 4.14 considers the kinds and extents of the actions (not words) governments would have to take to avoid foreseeable disaster. Fossil Fuels Coal, oil, and natural gas are called fossil fuels because they were formed millions of years ago by the partial decay of the remains of swamp plants (coal) and marine organisms such as algae and plankton (oil and natural gas); see Sec. 16.15. Coal consists mainly of carbon, oil and natural gas consist of both carbon and hydrogen. Burning coal liberates energy as its Fossil Fuels 4-13 105 carbon combines chemically with oxygen from the air to form carbon diox- ide. Burning natural gas and fuels such as gasoline liberates more energy per gram (Fig. 4-14) as their carbon and hydrogen combine with oxygen to form carbon dioxide and water vapor, respectively. Figure 4-15 shows the recent and projected CO2 emissions traceable to the various fossil fuels. Fossil fuels today provide about 85 percent of world energy consump- tion (Fig. 4-4). Oil and natural gas are versatile and convenient to trans- port and use, but they are growing increasingly expensive as they become harder to extract from declining reserves. Oil prices have more than tri- pled in the past decade. Coal is relatively cheap and its widely distributed reserves are greater, but burning coal does the most damage to the envi- ronment. Various schemes have been proposed to utilize fossil fuels more efficiently and cleanly. Some of these schemes are more practical than oth- ers, but in the long run the role of fossil fuels in energy production will have to decline. Another consideration in the case of the United States is that, because it imports two-thirds of the oil it uses (and has only 3 percent of world reserves), it is vulnerable to disruptions in its oil supply such as the 1973 143 Figure 4-14 Energy contents of 140 various fuels. Shown are the number of kilojoules of energy liberated when 1 g 120 of each fuel is burned. Carbohydrates provide much of the energy in our diets 100 (see Sec. 13.11). These fuels produce Kilojoules/gram carbon dioxide (coal), water (hydrogen), 80 or both when burned. 60 56 48 40 32 30 20 16 10 0 n ne e al l s e no te ge in id Co ha ol ha ox ra ro as et yd Et on yd M G oh m H rb on Ca rb Ca 50 Figure 4-15 World carbon dioxide Annual CO2 emissions, billion metric tons emissions from fossil fuels (1 metric ton = 1000 kg). The projections are 40 based on current trends continuing and predict a total rise of 2.1 percent Total per year to give 44 billion metric tons 30 1 of CO2 given off in 2030, 1_ times as 2 much as today. To reverse the upward 20 sweep of these curves and keep the Coal earth habitable will require immediate effective action to keep population Oil 10 growth down, to use energy more Natural Gas efficiently, and to replace fossil fuels with nuclear and renewable sources. 0 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 Estimated 106 4-14 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future Arab oil embargo. Making do with less oil would make the country more self- sufficient in energy supply as well as benefitting the environment. 4.5 Liquid Fuels Vehicles Are the Biggest Users The world’s largest producers of crude oil are Saudi Arabia, Russia, the United States, Iran, and China, in that order. Smaller but still substantial amounts come from a number of other countries, as shown in Fig. 4-16. Most new oil wells nowadays are located offshore (Fig. 4-17). The United States, which uses over 20 million barrels per day, is by far the largest consumer of oil, followed by China, Japan, India, and Russia. Transport fuels make up 70 percent of oil products. Gasoline and die- sel fuel are the most common transport fuels and consist of mixtures of various hydrocarbons—chemical compounds of carbon and hydrogen— derived from oil, as described in Chap. 13. In a vehicle engine, the gaseous products of burning fuel, mainly H2O (water) and CO2, expand rapidly because of the intense heat generated by the reaction. This expansion forces down the pistons of the engine, which in turn causes the crankshaft to rotate and provide power to the vehicle wheels (see Sec. 5-13). For every gallon of gasoline burned, over 8 kg of CO2 are produced. A typical sport utility vehicle (SUV) can put 20 kg of CO2 into the atmosphere in a 40-mile commute (Fig. 4.18). Figure 4-16 The chief oil and gas deposits in the world. Figure 4-17 Oil drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico off the Louisiana coast. It is more and more difficult to find new oil deposits to satisfy the world’s increasing appetite. Fossil Fuels 4-15 107 Tar Sands Oil As the cost of oil increases, previously uneconomical 2015. There is more bad news: mining the tar sands has sources are beginning to be exploited, none of them ideal. thus far churned up 160 square miles of land, of which The most important are the tar sands (mixtures of a tarlike only a sixth is being reclaimed at present. And the three material known as bitumen, sand, and clay) found over to five barrels of water that go into the steam needed to a vast area—the size of Florida—in Canada’s province of produce each barrel of tar sands oil, too contaminated Alberta; other large deposits are in Venezuela with smaller afterward for further use, end up stored in toxic ponds ones elsewhere, including Utah. Tar sands worldwide con- that already cover 50 square miles. tain more oil than there is in reserves of ordinary crude Over 100 billion dollars has already been invested in oil, but only some of it is practical to extract. Tar sands Canadian tar sands projects with more on the way. Cur- oil costs far more than crude oil per barrel to produce, rent oil output from tar sands there is 1.3 million barrels in part because converting tar sands to usable oil needs a per day, expected to reach 3.3 million in 2020. U.S. law lot of energy, several times as much as crude oil; most of bans federal agencies from buying fuel from alternative this energy comes from natural gas. Even so, producing sources, such as tar sands, if their production and use oil from tar sands is a profitable business in Canada. result in more greenhouse gas emissions than in the case The CO2 emissions that accompany extracting oil of ordinary sources. But nongovernmental consumers from tar sands range from 1.4 to 4 times the emissions are under no such restrictions, and half the oil Canada in the case of crude oil. They add up to about 3.6 million ships to the United States (9 percent of total imports) tons of CO2 per year now, which is expected to double by comes from tar sands. Saving Fuel Increasing the fuel efficiency of cars and trucks will save money, reduce pollution and global warming, and postpone the day when oil runs out. One approach is to minimize air resistance by designing more streamlined vehicle shapes. SUVs are especially bad in this respect. Engines can be improved; one method is to have several cylinders shut down when less power is needed, others involve direct fuel injection and variable valve timing. Better transmissions would also help, and reducing vehicle weight would pay big dividends. In most of the world, gasoline and diesel fuel are expensive (in Europe, at least twice American prices), so fuel economy is prized and efficient cars are normal. In the United States, where fuel until recently was relatively cheap, fuel economy was ignored by car makers until legislation in 1975 required a minimum of 27.5 mi/gal averaged over a maker’s range of ordinary cars. However, SUVs, vans, and pickups—over half the cars on the road—were not covered by this requirement. As a result, the actual average mileage in the United States is today the lowest in the world, not much over half the current European average of about 40 mi/gal (expected to reach 50 mi/gal in a few years; in Japan it is nearly that high already). Forty percent of the oil consumed in the United States is used by its cars. Hence improving their mileage, fought bitterly by American car makers (just as they did seat belts and pollution controls earlier, showing the same kind of misplaced priorities Figure 4-18 Traffic jam on a multilane that later led two of them into bankruptcy) but finally required by a 2007 law highway. Although water vapor and will make a welcome difference. The eventual average to be met by new cars carbon dioxide are the chief components and light trucks by 2016 is set at 35.5 mi/gal (still less than today’s European of vehicle exhausts, they also contain average). Additional regulations set limits on greenhouse gas emission by carbon monoxide (CO) and various these vehicles. hydrocarbons, which are poisonous, and The fuel economy of American cars is low not only because of their nitrogen oxides, which contribute to acid rain (see Sec. 4.7) through the nitric acid unnecessary size and weight and gas-guzzling engines but also because they form. The hazard of CO comes from 97 percent of them use gasoline engines whereas the more efficient diesel its tendency to combine permanently cars are in the majority elsewhere. The latest diesel engines (unlike older with the hemoglobin in the blood in ones) are quiet, produce little pollution, and are 20 to 40 percent more effi- place of oxygen. This deprives the body cient than gasoline engines. If only a third of American cars and light trucks of some of the oxygen it needs and leads were diesels (the heavy trucks are already), the savings would amount to the to brain damage or death if too much CO equivalent of all the oil imported from Saudi Arabia. Performance is not an is inhaled; no other poison injures or kills issue: a diesel car won the classic 24-h Le Mans race in France recently. as many people as CO. 108 4-16 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future Hybrid Cars A hybrid car has both a gasoline engine and one or more electric motors, which under computer control are used separately or together as driving circumstances require (Fig. 4-19). When not much power is needed, the engine stops and the motors take over. The motors obtain their energy from a set of batteries that are charged both by the engine and by “regenerative braking”—slowing the car is done by using its motors as generators to convert its KE of motion to electric energy for storage. Regen- erative braking reduces the energy cost of city driving by around 20 percent. A smaller than usual gasoline engine, which is more economical with fuel, can be used because the electric motors can supplement it for extra power when accelerating or climbing steep hills. Hybrid cars average twice the mileage of ordinary cars; if all cars in the United States were hybrids, 1.5 bil- Figure 4-19 The Toyota Prius, the pioneer hybrid gasoline- lion barrels of oil would be saved each year. Carbon diox- electric car, has had sales of over 2 million since it first appeared ide emissions from conventional American cars average in 1997 and kept more than 10 million tons of CO2 out of the 452 g per mile, hybrids average 294 g. A new version of atmosphere. Other car makers have begun producing hybrids as hybrids, called “plug-in hybrids,” can have their batter- well. Plug-in hybrids, the next generation, have batteries that can ies recharged from ordinary household outlets and so act be recharged from household outlets as well as by their engines as purely electric cars for short distances such as most and by regenerative braking. Half of all new cars may be plug-in commutes. If the household electricity comes from coal- hybrids by 2025. burning power plants, as about half of American elec- tricity does (Fig. 4-6), the total CO2 emitted per mile rises typically to 150 g, a third as much as in the case of ordi- to an estimated 326 g; if natural gas is the fuel, the total nary cars. This matters because CO2 emissions from falls to 256 g; if alternative sources (nuclear, hydroelec- American cars add up to about 20 percent of the coun- tric, wind, solar) are involved, the total falls even farther, try’s total. 4.6 Natural Gas The Least Bad Fossil Fuel When burned, natural gas combines with oxygen to give carbon dioxide and water vapor, as liquid fuels derived from oil do, but with less pollution. Natu- ral gas consists of the lighter hydrocarbons, chiefly methane. Natural gas is cheaper than oil per unit of energy content, though coal is still cheaper. It is more efficient than other fossil fuels in producing electricity, and its share of world generating capacity, now over 30 percent (21 percent in the United States) is steadily increasing. A gas-fired power plant typically gives off only about half as much CO2 per unit of energy as a conventional coal-fired plant. Also widely used for heating, natural gas is expected to eventually replace oil as the world’s chief energy source until it, too, begins to run out. Natural gas is an important feedstock for manufacturing chemicals of many kinds. The largest producers of natural gas are Russia, the United States, Can- ada, Iran, and Norway, in that order. The United States imports 17 percent of the natural gas it uses, most of it by pipeline from Canada but some by sea from elsewhere as LNG—liquified natural gas (Fig. 4-20). The LNG is regasified at nine special coastal terminals and then carried by pipeline to consumers. China is building a number of such terminals to receive LNG, in its case that originate in undersea fields off the west coast of Australia. New Sources Until now almost all commercial natural gas came from wells drilled down to porous underground rock formations (Sec. 16.15). Over half the world’s gas reserves in such formations are in the three countries Fossil Fuels 4-17 109 Figure 4-20 Natural gas, which is mainly methane, is carried in liquid form at low temperature (methane boils at −161°C) in tankers such as this as well as in pipelines. Liquid methane occupies about 600 times less volume than methane gas. The tanks are spherical to minimize heat flow into them: a sphere has the least surface area for a given volume. The liquid natural gas (LNG) is kept cold by being allowed to evaporate continuously, which absorbs the heat that passes through the tank walls. The gas that comes off is used to power the ship’s engines, so it is not wasted. Perhaps 250 million tons of LNG is shipped around the world each year. of Russia, Iran, and Qatar (a small Arab state in the Middle East). Less than 5 percent is in the United States. Recently, improved methods have been developed to extract natural gas trapped in shale beds in the United States and elsewhere; shale is a type of rock (Fig. 15-16). Adding in the gas from these beds increases world gas reserves by an as-yet imprecise amount but perhaps 50 percent, conceivably even more. Already gas from shale beds in Texas, Louisiana, and Pennsylvania is on the market, and shale projects are starting in Europe, India, and China. About 7 percent of the natural gas in the United States comes from the Barnett shale field in Texas. The giant Marcellus field underlies almost two-thirds of Pennsylvania as well as parts of adjacent states. Shale gas production begins by drilling down to a deposit of gas-filled rock and then forcing in a mix of chemicals and water to break up the rock. Next the water is pumped out and methane, now free, escapes through the bore hole. Many such wells are needed, which can be a problem in populated areas. Another problem is contamination of nearby water supplies by liber- ated methane and the chemicals in the fracturing water. Plans to drill for shale gas in New York State had to be abandoned because of water purity fears. Still, so much shale gas apparently can be extracted in the United States in environmentally acceptable ways that there is even the possibility that its LNG terminals may eventually be converted from methane import to methane export. Under certain circumstances, methane can be trapped inside ice crystals (see Fig. 11-18) to form a methane-rich substance usually called methane clathrate (sometimes methane hydrate or methane ice). Within the earth, natural gas, which is mostly methane, is a product of the decomposition of organic matter by bacteria, as described in Sec. 16.15. Most clathrates are formed when such methane comes in contact with extremely cold water underground where pressures are high. Deposits have turned out to be com- mon under the seabeds of the continental shelves of oceans (Fig. 14-36) and inside and beneath permafrost in such places as Alaska and Siberia. More rarely they occur elsewhere, for instance in sediments on the seabed itself; some years ago a large piece was picked up by a fishing net off the west coast 110 4-18 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future of Canada. Methane clathrates resemble dirty ice, have the consistency of sherbet, and burst into flames when lit by a match. An immense amount of methane is locked up in clathrates; estimates vary from 2 to 10 times the amount of methane in ordinary sources of natural gas. Thus clathrates may contain more energy than that in the reserves of those sources plus the reserves of oil and coal. Unfortunately, collecting the meth- ane in clathrates economically will not be easy because it is not sufficiently concentrated. But the prospect of so much energy almost within reach is so attractive that prospecting for accessible deposits and developing technology to extract their methane are racing ahead. An optimistic but not absurd fore- cast has commercial exploitation starting somewhere as soon as 2015. 4.7 Coal Plentiful but Worst for the Environment Until it was overtaken by oil, coal was the chief energy source under human control. Coal is cheap and its reserves are large. The energy in a dollar’s worth of coal typically costs around $3 in the form of natural gas and $6 in the form of fuel oil. Coal is widely distributed as well as abundant; the United States has a quarter of the world’s reserves—the coal in Illinois alone contains more energy than all the oil in Saudi Arabia (Fig. 4-21). The chief producers of coal are China (40 percent of the world’s total), the United States, India, and Australia (which exports most of the output of its mines). (For information on underground coal fires see Sec. 4.7 at www.mhhe.com/ krauskopf.) The United States uses 90 percent of its mined coal to generate half its electricity in about 600 power plants (Fig. 4-22). China, which relies on coal for two-thirds of its energy, over twice the world average, already burns more coal than the United States, Europe, and Japan combined; by 2030 it will have more than doubled its current usage. Every week one or two new coal- fired power plants open somewhere in China. In all, over a thousand such plants are either newly built or under construction around the world. About 150 of them are in the United States. Unfortunately coal is not an ideal fuel. For the same energy output, coal produces nearly a third more CO2 than oil fuels and about twice as much as natural gas. Burning coal is responsible for 40 percent of the 30 billion tons of CO2 released into the atmosphere per year by human activities (see Fig. 4-15), a proportion that will grow as coal use widens. During the normal 60-year lifespan of a 500 MW coal-fired power plant, it will emit 200 million tons of CO2. Figure 4-21 About half the coal extracted in the United States comes from underground mines such as this one. The rest is gouged in the open from deposits that lie near the surface after the overlying soil has been stripped away. Most of the underground mines are in the eastern part of the country; most of the surface mines are in the western part. The coal currently consumed in the world each year took about 2 million years to accumulate. Fossil Fuels 4-19 111 Figure 4-22 Coal, shown here piled next to an electric power plant in Newark, New Jersey, is the most abundant fossil fuel and is used to produce over half the electric energy generated in the United States. Coal is responsible for more CO2 and other pollutants per unit of energy released than any other source. Concerns about the environmental impact of coal-fired power plants, together with high construction costs and reduced prices for the cleaner natural gas, have led to the cancellation in the past decade of plans for over one hundred such plants in the United States. Several dozen more projected plants await final decisions. If any are approved, they may be along the last built without carbon storage and capture, as described below. Cogeneration As discussed in Sec. 5.14, a basic physical principle called the second law of thermodynamics states that it is impossible to take heat from a source (such as a furnace or a nuclear reactor) and convert all of it to mechanical energy or work (for instance in a steam turbine connected to an electric generator). Some heat, usually a lot, must go to waste. In the case of an electric power station, the actual efficiency is less than half—only about 3–4 J of every 10 J of heat input becomes electric energy. Older power stations just discharge the leftover heat into nearby bod- ies of water or into the atmosphere via cooling towers. Nowadays combined heat and power stations are being built that capture the excess heat and use it for domestic heat and in various industrial applications. Such cogenera- tion conserves fuel and thereby cuts CO2 emissions as well. This is not a technology of the future but a practical way of getting the most out of every ton of fossil fuel burned in a power station and every ton of CO2 it releases. The main obstacle to wider use of cogeneration is that, although the heat is cheap, the piping needed to distribute it is not. Carbon Capture and Storage Because coal, whose use is expected to climb 40 percent by 2030, is going to remain a major energy source for a long time, it is essential to find ways to eliminate, or at least severely reduce, the CO2 that using coal dumps into the atmosphere. A straightforward method is to pump the CO2 from coal-burning plants deep underground for permanent burial. Suitable geological formations are widely available, and if necessary the captured CO2 can be carried by pipeline as much as hundreds of kilome- ters from its source to a storage site. Such carbon capture and storage (CCS) is now being done on a small scale with CO2 liberated in other processes. In Europe’s North Sea, where natural gas from Norwegian wells is contaminated with excessive CO2, a mil- lion tons of CO2 each year are stripped from the natural gas and injected into porous rocks a kilometer below the seabed where it displaces seawater. No CO2 112 4-20 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future Figure 4-23 At this facility in Algeria in the Sahara Desert, carbon dioxide found mixed with natural gas is separated out and then pumped 2 km underground. Such sequestration keeps the carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere where it would contribute to global warming by enhancing the greenhouse effect. has been found to be leaking out in over a decade of operation. A similar car- bon capture and storage is being carried out at a gas field in Algeria (Fig. 4-23). Various pilot operations around the world are under way to further develop the technology involved, some of it new. One of them involves taking CO2 produced by an Illinois corn-processing plant and injecting a million tons of it to a depth of 7500 m. In West Virginia, the first CCS trial to involve an actual coal-fired power plant will inject 100,000 tons of liquid CO2 annu- ally (about 1.5 percent of the plant’s emissions) into a sandstone layer 2400 m below the surface. Work on larger-scale experimental CCS projects, usually with government support, has either started or will start soon in China, Canada, Australia, and several European countries. Unfortunately, to separate CO2 from the other flue gases spewed out by a coal-fired power plant and then to bury it might double the cost of the required installation and use a quarter or more of the energy produced. CCS will inevitably be a very expensive way to reduce CO2 emissions. Too expen- sive? At present, other low-carbon energy sources, such as nuclear, wind, solar, and certain biofuels, seem so much more attractive economically that CCS will have a hard time being widely adopted without major government involvement of some kind, carrot (subsidies) and/or stick (a heavy CO2 emis- sions tax, a severe cap-and-trade system; see Sec. 4.14). There is another consideration, but nobody knows yet how serious it is: can CCS induce earthquakes? The buried liquid CO2 exerts high pressures on the porous rock of its reservoir, and in certain geologic formations it is conceivable this could be enough to trigger earthquakes. A small earthquake in 2008 near the North Sea CO2 reservoir, mentioned on the previous page, may—or may not—have been triggered by the injected CO2. Had the quake been stronger, it could have led to a tsunami (Sec. 14.12). Coal Gasiﬁcation A more economical approach to keeping the CO2 from coal burning out of the atmosphere is the integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC), in which coal is first turned into a mixture of gases. An artificial gas fuel—syngas (for “synthesis gas”)—can be made by passing very hot steam over coal to yield a mixture of carbon monoxide and hydrogen. Contami- nants such as sulfur and mercury are readily removed, and the result is a gas fuel that can be burned in a power plant as cleanly as natural gas. Hydrogen could be separated out for use as the energy source for vehicles whose only emissions would be water vapor, H2O. The CO2 from burning syngas is easier to capture than the CO2 from burning coal directly, which makes injecting it underground a more practical proposition. Several syngas power plants have been built and more are on the way, though not yet with provision for CCS. Syngas can be the starting point for a variety of products. One is meth- ane, the chief constituent of natural gas, and indeed a plant in North Dakota has been making methane for use as a fuel from coal since 1984 (Fig. 4-24). Syngas can also be used to create liquid fuels such as gasoline and diesel fuel. This was done on a large scale in oil-short Germany during World War II. Fossil Fuels 4-21 113 Coal Ash Burning coal leaves behind solid residues in the form of rivers, and streams. Recently 77 areas in the United ash. Coal ash contains significant amounts of heavy met- States were found to have water contaminated by heavy als such as arsenic, lead, mercury, and selenium, which metals from ash dumps. The Environmental Protection can cause cancer, neurological problems, and birth Agency has been studying the issue for over 30 years, defects if absorbed by the body. About 130 million tons including a finding that the concentration of arsenic to of coal ash are produced each year in the United States, which people might be exposed by drinking water con- and most of it is simply dumped in 1300 or so locations taminated by coal ash could increase the risk of cancer in 46 states. The rest is used in construction and some by several hundred times. However, it has yet to take any (unbelievably) is even added to soil to improve its ability action. to hold water. In 2008, an earthen dike around a pond filled with a Radioactive elements, notably uranium and tho- mixture of ash and water at a Tennessee Valley Authority rium, are also present in coal ash. Some ash contains generating plant gave way and a billion gallons of toxic so much uranium that recovering it for use as nuclear sludge flooded 300 acres of land around it. Cleanup costs fuel may be an economic proposition. A trial program are an estimated $1 billion. Such events on a smaller for this purpose is under way in China. scale are not unusual wherever coal ash is dumped. Out- The disposal of coal ash is seldom effectively regu- side the coal industry, which opposes regulation or even lated, for instance by requiring the deposit sites to have monitoring of ash dumps, the long-term effects on the impermeable linings and the ash to be stored as dry as health of local human and animal populations of intro- possible. These measures would help prevent the heavy ducing heavy metals from coal ash, both in spills and by metals from leaching into nearby groundwater, lakes, gradual leaching, are a source of concern. Figure 4-24 The Great Plains Synfuels plant near Beulah, North Dakota, in operation since 1984, produces 4.5 million m3 of syngas per day from 18,000 tons of coal. A by-product is CO2, which is sent through a pipeline to Canadian oil fields where it is buried in old wells after helping to recover oil from them. Other profitable by-products include ingredients for fertilizers and raw materials for plastics. However, manufacturing and using these artificial fuels in place of ordinary gasoline and diesel fuel is quite expensive and doubles the overall amount of CO2 produced. With global warming a reality, coal-to-liquid fuels do not seem the way to go. Pollution Even apart from its role in global warming, coal is far from being a desirable fuel. Not only is mining it dangerous and usually leaves large tracts of land unfit for further use, but also the air pollution due to coal burn- ing adversely affects the health of millions of people. The National Academy of Sciences estimates that the cost of health damage due to coal burning in the United States is around $60 billion per year. Toxic substances in coal smoke include mercury, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, and dioxins. Interest- ingly enough, coal-fired power plants expose people living around them to more radioactivity—from traces of uranium, thorium, and radium in their smoke—than do normally operating nuclear plants. Mercury, which attacks the nervous system and is particularly harmful to unborn children, is an especially unfortunate component of coal smoke. Coal-fired plants in the United States discharge 48 tons of mercury each year, 114 4-22 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future Figure 4-25 Acid rain, together with atmospheric sulfur dioxide (which attacks chlorophyll), led to the destruction of this forest in North Carolina. Healthy and abundant forests are needed not only for timber but also because they absorb CO2 from the atmosphere, protect soil from erosion, help prevent floods, furnish habitats for most kinds of land plants and animals, and participate in the water cycle. a major reason why 6 percent of women of childbearing age in this country have enough mercury in their bloodstreams to put a fetus at risk of develop- mental damage. Nearly all states warn their residents about mercury con- tamination in their waters and in fish caught there. Although the Clean Air Act of 1990 required power companies to con- trol mercury emissions, the industry objected that the expense would be too great (according to the Government Accountability Office, it would be pen- nies per month per consumer of electricity) and very few plants were ever equipped for this. Needless nervous system damage in the country was the result. Finally, a lawsuit by environmental and public-health groups led to a 2009 federal court order that obliged the Environmental Protection Agency to begin enforcing the Act, which it agreed to start doing at the end of 2011 by setting limits for toxic power plant emissions. Acid Rain Coal contains several percent of sulfur, and when coal is burned, the sulfur combines with oxygen to form sulfur dioxide, SO2. Every year 50 to 60 million tons of SO2 are released into the atmosphere from this source. Some nitrogen from the air also combines with oxygen in furnaces to form nitrogen oxides; vehicle exhausts also contain nitrogen oxides. The sulfur and nitrogen oxides react with atmospheric moisture to give sulfuric and nitric acids. The result is acid rain (and acid snow) that can be as much as 60 times more acidic than normal rainwater. Acid rain has two main effects on soils. One is to dissolve and carry away valuable plant nutrients. The other is to convert ordinarily harmless alumi- num compounds, abundant in many soils, to toxic varieties. As a result, for- ests are dying (Fig. 4-25) and fish have disappeared from many lakes and rivers due to aluminum washed into them. Drinking water has been contami- nated in a number of regions by metals released by acidified water, such as cadmium and copper besides aluminum. The technology exists for “scrub- bing” sulfur and nitrogen oxides from exhaust gases, and coal-fired power plants built or upgraded after 1977 are supposed to limit emissions of them. However, lax enforcement allowed over 30 upgraded plants to violate the law. Legal action finally began in 2009 to compel the owners of these plants to behave responsibly. In China, by far the largest emitter of sulfur dioxide, acid rain falls on a third of the country, with serious ecological consequences. Alternative Sources We now look at the sources responsible for the 15 percent of commercial energy production that does not involve burning fossil fuels. Although each of these sources has limitations of various kinds, it may be a good choice in certain situations. If the full potential of these sources is realized, the world Alternative Sources 4-23 115 will depend much less, perhaps very little, on fossil fuels with all their short- How Much Land? comings. Of the available alternatives, the only one that can replace fossil fuels on a major scale in the relatively near future is nuclear energy. But other A problem for land-based renew- technologies are rapidly advancing, and eventually it will become clear which able energy sources is that they paths are the best to follow toward a sustainable energy supply for the world. need a lot of land. To serve a Today energy derived from fossil fuels is cheaper than energy from medium-sized city takes some- most alternative sources. There are two reasons. The first is that damage where around 1 GW of electric to the environment is not reflected in the prices of fossil fuels. If this factor power capacity, which could is taken into account, the present cost advantage of fossil fuels disappears. be provided by a single large The second reason is that the technologies based on fossil fuels benefit from fossil-fuel or nuclear plant. How much land would a renew- long experience with them together with economies of scale. As alternative able source require for the same sources mature, these advantages will fade away. capacity? Solar cells would have to cover about 5000 acres (including rooftops), wind tur- 4.8 A Nuclear World? bines over twice that. A 1-GW Perhaps on the Way hydroelectric installation would have to be fed from at least a A nuclear reactor obtains its energy from the fission (breaking apart) of 40-square-mile reservoir or lake, the nuclei of a certain kind of uranium atoms, as described in Chap. 8. In and crops for conversion to bio- a nuclear power plant, steam from boilers heated by such a reactor runs fuel would have to spread across turbines connected to electric generators. In 1951, in Idaho, electricity was 200 square miles of farmland to produced for the first time from a nuclear plant. give 1 GW averaged over a year. Today 443 reactors in 31 countries generate about 450 GW of electric power, a sixth of the world total. Without them over 20 million barrels of oil (or their equivalent in coal or natural gas) would have to be burned every day. France, Belgium, and Taiwan obtain more than half their electricity from nuclear plants, with several other countries close behind (Fig. 4-26). In the United States, nuclear energy is responsible for about 20 percent of its electricity, somewhat more than the world average of 16 percent; there are 104 reactors in 31 states that produce a total of about 100 GW. 80 78 Figure 4-26 Percentage of electric energy in various countries that comes from nuclear power stations. France 70 is more dependent on nuclear energy than any other country; it has 59 60 nuclear power plants. As a result, its 54 emissions of CO2 per kWh of electricity are extremely low. The United States, 50 48 with five times the population of France, has 104 such plants. Percent 40 39 38 37 30 30 20 20 20 18 16 16 10 0 France Belgium Sweden South Korea Hungary Switzerland Japan Spain United States United Kingdom Canada Russia 116 4-24 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future Nuclear Weapons The uranium that fuels nuclear plants, fairly abundant in the earth’s crust, should be able to support a large expansion of nuclear energy in the Natural uranium consists of decades to come, and is not unduly expensive to mine and purify. The price two varieties, 238U and 235U, of of nuclear energy is determined mainly by construction costs, not fuel costs, which only 235U can undergo which may well decrease from their present heights as more plants are built. fission (see Secs. 8.9–8.11). Nat- Nuclear plants do not emit CO2 and so do not contribute to global warming; ural uranium contains only 0.7 if the present ones were fossil-fuel plants, nearly 3 billion more tons of CO2 percent of 235U and must have would be released each year into the atmosphere. this proportion increased to Yet for all the success of nuclear technology, construction has not begun about 3 percent to make reac- on any new nuclear power stations in the United States since 1979. Why not? tor fuel. The process by which natural uranium is enriched in Three Mile Island and Chernobyl In March 1979 failures in its cooling sys- 235 U can be continued further tem disabled one of the reactors at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania, and a until the proportion is over 90 certain amount of radioactive material escaped. Although a reactor cannot percent, and the result is the explode in the way an atomic bomb does, breakdowns due to poor design, active ingredient of one kind shoddy construction, inadequate maintenance, and errors in operation—all of nuclear weapon, or “atomic bomb.” Furthermore, in its present at Three Mile Island—can occur that put large populations at risk. operation a nuclear reactor pro- Although a true catstrophe was narrowly avoided, the Three Mile Island inci- duces another element, pluto- dent made it clear that the hazards associated with nuclear energy are real, nium, that can be separated out and the lack of candor, then and later, by industry and government about from used fuel rods. Like 235U, these hazards was even more worrying. plutonium can also be used in After 1979 it was inevitable that greater safety would have to be built nuclear weapons. into new reactors, adding to their already high cost. In addition, the demand At present nine countries for electricity in the United States was not increasing as fast as expected, are known to possess a total of partly because of efforts toward greater efficiency and partly because of a nearly 23,000 of both kinds of decline in some of the industries (such as steel, cars, and chemicals) that are these weapons of mass destruc- heavy users. As a result, new reactors made less economic sense than before, tion, sufficient to wipe out all human life many times over, and which together with widespread public unease led to a halt in the expansion other countries could develop of nuclear energy in the United States. them if they wished. The threat Elsewhere the situation was different. Nuclear reactors still seemed the of nuclear weapons prolifera- best way to meet the energy needs of many countries without adequate fos- tion is one of the reasons why sil fuel resources. Then, in April 1986, a badly planned test caused a severe not everybody welcomes the accident that destroyed a 1-GW reactor at Chernobyl in Ukraine, then part of expansion of nuclear energy. the Soviet Union. This was the worst environmental disaster of technological origin in history and contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union. The lack of a containment shell, normal elsewhere, allowed nearly 200 tons of radioactive material to escape and be carried around the world by winds. Ukraine, Belarus, and parts of Russia were most affected. The radioactivity in the fallout was 400 times that produced by the Hiroshima atomic bomb. Radi- ation levels in many parts of Europe rose well above usual and are still high enough to represent a hazard in a large area that was downwind of Chernobyl. About 350,000 residents of the Chernobyl vicinity were permanently evacuated from their homes, leaving behind ghost towns and villages. Thou- sands of people became ill, including about 4000 children who developed thyroid cancer. Because cancer and leukemia also have causes other than radiation, the death toll from these maladies due to Chernobyl will never be known; estimates range from thousands to tens of thousands. As in the United States after Three Mile Island, public anxiety over the safety of nuclear programs grew abroad after Chernobyl. Some countries, for instance Italy, then abandoned plans for new reactors and closed down some existing ones. (Italy today has the most expensive electricity in Europe and has begun to build reactors again.) In other countries, for instance France, the logic behind their nuclear programs remained strong enough for them to continue despite Chernobyl. Nuclear Energy Today The latest designs for nuclear plants promise major improvements in efficiency and reliability over previous ones, which makes Alternative Sources 4-25 117 Nuclear Wastes Quite apart from the safety of the reactors themselves not disintegrate in the presence of heat and radiation but is the issue of what to do with the radioactive wastes is easy to drill into, and little groundwater that might they produce. Although a lot of the radioactivity is gone become contaminated. in a few months and much of the rest in a few hundred In 1987 the United States government chose Yucca years, some will continue to be dangerous for millions Mountain in Nevada as the most suitable site it could of years. At present there are no long-term repositories find for storing nuclear wastes indefinitely, but further for nuclear wastes anywhere in the world. Over 60,000 studies that cost over $6 billion brought to light various tons of spent nuclear fuel are being stored in the United serious objections and in 2010 the project was aban- States alone in cooling ponds (to prevent overheating) doned. A new approach is to adapt existing oil-industry at 72 reactor installations where they may leak and are technology to drill holes 5 km deep into hard rock. The vulnerable to terrorist attack. lowest 2 km of each hole would be filled with containers Burying nuclear wastes deep underground would of spent fuel and then securely capped. At such depths, seem to be the best long-term way to dispose of them. there is little chance that groundwater would be con- The right location is easy to specify but not easy to find: taminated, unlike the case of Yucca Mountain where it must be stable geologically with no earthquakes likely, the burial would have been only about 300 m below the no nearby population centers, a type of rock that does surface. modern plants cheaper to run per unit of output than their fossil-fuel cous- ins. They are also safer than before. Together with increasing demand for energy, the result is an international boom in nuclear plants with new ones currently being built in 13 countries. In the United States, over two dozen new nuclear plants are being considered, each of which would cost billions of dollars and take at least 7 years to build. The International Atomic Energy Agency thinks global nuclear capacity might quadruple by 2050 if renewable sources and carbon capture technology are not successful on large enough scales. But even if the enormous costs could be met, the speed of nuclear expansion could be limited by shortages of skilled workers, of the needed construction materials, and of manufacturing capacity; for instance, Japan has the only steelworks anywhere able to forge reactor containment vessels ($150 million each), and its waiting list is years long. Nuclear Fusion Enormous as the energy produced by splitting a large atomic nucleus into smaller ones is, the joining together of small nuclei to form larger ones gives off even more energy for the same amount of starting materials (see Sec. 8.12). Such nuclear fusion is the energy source of the sun and stars. Here on earth, there are what seem to be realistic hopes that fusion will take over the lead as a source of energy at some time in the future—safe, no greenhouse gases, very little radioactive waste, and abundant fuel, much of it from the oceans. In laboratories, fusion reactors have been built that liberate energy for short periods as predicted by theory. In order to operate continuously and to yield energy on a commercial scale, the reactors must be much larger (a planned experimental reactor called ITER will weigh 23,000 tons), but no fundamental reason is known why such reactors should not be successful. Of course, a technical success is not necessarily an economic success, but if it becomes one before environmental disaster intervenes, fusion energy may be the ultimate solution to our energy problems. 4.9 Clean Energy I Continuous Sources An ideal energy source should not deplete resources or harm the environ- ment. A number of sources meet these criteria and, despite issues of cost and location in some cases, electricity is starting to come from them in serious 118 4-26 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future amounts: about 5 percent of total electricity in the United States, twice that in Europe. Just what proportion of global energy demand these sources will eventually provide remains to be seen, as does the timescale of their adop- tion, but their increasing popularity is a sign of hope. “Clean” and sustainable energy sources fall into two categories that depend on whether they can supply energy continuously (hydroelectric, geo- thermal) or only at rates that vary with the time of day (solar, tidal) or with weather conditions (wind, waves). We will first look at the two main continu- ous sources, moving water and geothermal heat. Hydroelectricity The kinetic energy of moving water has been used by mills and factories for centuries, and has powered electric generators since 1870 (Fig. 4-27). Hydropower now provides 2.2 percent of the world’s energy with capacity up by over 40 percent since 1980. Norway obtains 99 percent of its electricity from falling water, Brazil 84 percent, Canada 58 percent, and 13 African countries 60 percent or more each. The United States has a total hydroelectric capacity of 96 GW; its largest installation, at the Grand Coulee Dam, produces 6.8 GW. The largest hydro- electric plant now operating anywhere is on the Brazil-Paraguay border and is rated at 14 GW. When completed, the Three Gorges Dam in China, on which work began in 1994, will take the lead with a capacity of 22.4 GW. This dam is the world’s biggest civil engineering project and, together with other such projects there, will increase China’s total hydroelectric output to half again its current 129 GW. Major hydroelectric installations are also under construction or having plans finalized elsewhere, mainly in Asia (a total of 14 GW in India alone) and South America (6.5 GW in Brazil). In Africa, too, more such installations are projected—with a sixth of the world’s population it produces only 4 percent of the world’s electricity. Even when the new dams are completed, only about a third of the world’s hydroelectric potential will have been utilized. But many of the remaining sites cannot be exploited economically for a variety of reasons. Furthermore, Figure 4-27 This hydroelectric installation on the Niagara River in New York State has a capacity of 2.2 GW of electric power. The ultimate source of this power is sunlight, which evaporates water that later falls as rain or snow that drains into the river upstream of the dam. Alternative Sources 4-27 119 Geothermal Heat Pumps Temperatures at the earth’s surface are affected by solar are based on geothermal heat pumps that are like the radiation and by cold and warm air masses carried by heat pump described in Sec. 5.13 except that they use the winds (see Chap. 14). As a result, they may vary a great earth as the heat reservoir instead of the outside air. A geo- deal between day and night, from one day to the next, thermal heat pump is extremely efficient and can transfer and as seasons change. If we dig down only a meter as much as 5 joules of heat for each joule of input energy. or two, though, we will find a fairly steady year-round In winter, the system absorbs heat from the ground by temperature of 7°C to 21°C (45°F to 75°F), depending on means of a fluid, usually water, that flows through buried location. In much of the world, the underground temper- pipes. The heat pump in effect then concentrates the heat ature is higher in winter and lower in summer than the and uses it to raise the temperature of air that is circulated aboveground one. This means that, compared with con- inside the building in ducts. In summer, the system is oper- ventional heating and air-conditioning methods, a huge ated in reverse to extract heat from the hot air in the build- amount of energy would be saved—and a lot less CO2 ing and discharge it to the cooler earth below the surface. emitted—with systems that could heat and cool build- Geothermal heat pump systems are not cheap to ings by transferring heat from the ground in winter and install, but the reduced energy needed means that they to the ground in summer. pay for themselves in a few years. Since they last for 20 Such systems not only exist but are in use in 33 coun- years or more with little maintenance, the long-term sav- tries; in the United States, about a million have already ings are considerable, not to mention the benefits to the been installed with more added every year. The systems environment. an increasingly significant problem with hydropower installations is the social and environmental damage they may cause, for instance by flooding wide areas and turning once fertile river valleys into wastelands unfit for agriculture. The Three Gorges Dam, which created a lake 643 km (about 400 miles) long, has already displaced 1.4 million people. The Chinese govern- ment expects that 3–4 million more people will have to be relocated in years to come as the Three Gorges project causes the bed of the Yangtze River to silt up, its banks to erode, and its waters and those of the lake to become pol- luted. Environmental concerns have even led to the dismantling of a number of existing hydropower dams—nearly a hundred in the United States in the past few years. Geothermal Temperature increases with depth in the earth. As we shall learn in Sec. 15.8, the earth’s heat partly comes from the decay of radioac- tive minerals in its interior and partly is heat remaining from the earth’s early history when it was much hotter than today. In many places water below the surface is hot enough for useful energy to be extracted. One such place is at The Geysers north of San Francisco where turbines pow- ered by natural steam drive generators that produce 750 MW of electricity (Fig. 4-28). Even where suitable hot water or steam is not present under- ground, water from the surface can be pumped into cracks in deep rock formations and then recovered as hot water or steam from wells drilled nearby. Carbon dioxide under pressure can also be used to extract such geothermal heat. Over their respective lifetimes, geothermal power plants produce electricity at less cost than coal-fired plants, the cheapest conven- tional sources. At present 24 countries have geothermal power plants with a total capac- ity of almost 9 GW, and more are being built. Iceland and the Philippines obtain over a quarter of their electricity from such plants. Indonesia hopes to achieve a similar proportion by 2025. Although its current share of the world’s energy supply is only 0.4 percent, a recent study found that geother- mal energy has enormous potential. In the United States, the world’s largest producer of geothermal energy with 2.8 GW of capacity at present and 4 GW more being developed, hot rocks less than 10 km underground could satisfy all of the country’s electrical needs for the foreseeable future. 120 4-28 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future Figure 4-28 This power station at The Geysers, California, runs on geothermal energy. It has been operating since 1960. Besides a role in generating electricity, hot subsurface water is widely used for heating purposes, mainly in buildings (nearly all of Iceland’s build- ings are heated in this way) but also in agriculture to lengthen the growing season for crops. Earthquake Hazards For all its promise, geothermal energy has at least one cloud shadowing its future. Mention was made in Sec. 4.7 of the possibility that earthquakes could occur when CO2 from fossil-fuel power plants is injected into underground reservoirs for storage. Such a risk is even more worrying in geothermal projects that force water at high pressure into hot (over 150°C), dry rocks to fracture them into a network of cracks. Then water is pumped down a bore hole to the network, where it boils. The resulting steam comes to the surface via another hole to drive a steam turbine that powers an electric generator or for district heating. Progress on an installation of this kind in Basel, Switzerland, was stopped in 2006 when a series of small earthquakes was triggered that shook the city; they continued for months afterward. Unaware of the Basel earthquakes, the U.S. Energy Department approved and provided some of the financing for a number of similar projects in this country. The first was to be located in northern California, one of the most earthquake-prone parts of the world. In 2009, when officials finally learned of the Basel events, which they said had not been fully disclosed in the project’s appli- cation (although the company involved disputes this), they ordered work halted. Conventional geothermal plants that use naturally heated water are not usually sources of concern, but clearly the water-injection method requires greater care in the choice of suitable geological regions than has been given thus far. 4.10 Clean Energy II Variable Sources Now we consider clean energy sources whose output is not constant. This is not necessarily a major disadvantage because, when available, their electricity can replace that from fossil-fuel sources even if only intermittently. And, as mentioned later, several methods exist for storing the energy of variable sources until needed. Solar Cells Sunlight is a form of energy in motion and it can deliver a sur- prising amount of power to each square meter on which it falls. In the United States, the average ranges from 87 W/m2 in Alaska to 248 W/m2 in Hawaii. In Chicago, it is 155 W/m2, and at this rate a tennis court there receives solar energy equivalent to that in a gallon of gasoline every hour and a half. Photovoltaic (PV) cells are available that convert the energy in sunlight directly to electricity. Although the supply of sunlight varies with location, time of day, season, and weather, such solar cells have the advantage of no moving parts and almost no maintenance. For a given power output solar Alternative Sources 4-29 121 cells are quite a bit more expensive than fossil-fuel plants, but they have no Solar Water Heating fuel or operating costs. Improving technology is steadily increasing the effi- ciency of solar cells, now as much as 20 percent for commercial cells and Exposing pipe arrays filled with over 40 percent for experimental ones, and dropping their price. water to sunlight is a simple Although solar cells now provide less than 0.2 percent of the world’s elec- and cheap way to capture solar tricity, installed capacity is growing and should at least reach 4 percent of energy for household hot water the total by 2020. Some countries are leaders: Germany, for instance, despite and space heating. About 90 GW its often cloudy skies, has 3 GW of solar cells, over half the world’s solar-cell of solar energy is exploited in capacity, on the roofs of 300,000 homes and businesses. China is installing this way every year worldwide. 2 GW of solar cells on a desert site larger than Manhattan in Inner Mongolia. Two-thirds of this energy is col- lected in China, where by replac- By 2020, this project and others are expected to have enlarged the country’s ing fossil-fuel burning, CO2 solar capacity to 20 GW (which is still only half the capacity of the coal-fired emissions are reduced by several power plants that are being built there every year). India has the same hundred million tons annually. 20 GW target for 2020, rising to 200 GW for 2050; the United States is expected In other countries such to exceed 15 GW of solar capacity by 2020. But if the new ideas currently direct solar water heating is being studied for cheaper, more efficient technology succeed, these projec- less common, only 1.8 percent tions may turn out to be serious underestimates—the advances in computer of the world total in the United technology in the recent past also outran reasonable expectations. States, for instance. Solar water A big advantage of solar cells is that they can be placed close to where heaters are now mandatory on their electricity is to be used, for instance on rooftops (Fig. 4-29). This can new buildings in Hawaii, as mean major savings because it eliminates distribution costs in rural areas they have been since 2006 in parts of Spain. where power lines would otherwise have to be built. In Kenya, more house- holds get their electricity from solar cells than from power plants. Even when electricity grids exist, rooftop solar cells are becoming common. As part of California’s efforts to have more of its energy needs come from renewable sources, the “One Million Solar Roofs” program will have 3 GW of partly subsidized solar panels installed by 2018. Concentrated Solar Power In another approach, called concentrated solar power (CSP), solar energy is first converted into heat, which is then used to produce steam for turbines that drive electric generators. Such installa- tions cost much less than PV ones of the same capacity but are practical only where there is open land with reliable sunshine. In one CSP method, curved mirrors form troughs that focus sunlight on pipes filled with oil that becomes very hot as a result. The hot oil then turns water into steam in a boiler; it can be stored in an insulated tank and can release its heat during the night. Nine Figure 4-29 Array of solar cells being installed over the back porch of a house in California. 122 4-30 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future arrays of this kind in the Mohave Desert in California have been furnishing 354 MW of electricity for over 20 years (Fig. 4-30). An array in Nevada, with 19,300 4-m pipes, yields 64 MW. Instead of using fixed curved mirrors, another CSP system has a large num- ber of movable flat mirrors that track the sun to direct sunlight on a receiver atop a central tower. In the receiver, sunlight heats molten salt that goes to a boiler. This arrangement produces steam at a much higher temperature than trough- type ones do, which improves turbine efficiency (Sec. 5.14). The hot molten salt can be stored to enable electricity to be generated at night, which is done in a 17-MW plant in Spain. New large-scale CSP projects of both kinds are under way around the world, including a $2 billion, 500-MW facility in California. Wind Windmills are nothing new and were once widely used for such tasks as grinding grain and pumping water. Holland alone had 9000 of them. Now windmills are back in fashion for generating electricity, and although they are practical only where winds are powerful and reliable, such winds are found in many parts of the world (Fig. 4-31). Today somewhat over Figure 4-30 This concentrated solar power (CSP) installation in the Mohave Desert uses thousands of curved mirrors to direct sunlight to heat oil that then generates steam to power turbine generators. Figure 4-31 Wind turbine “farm” near Palm Springs, California. Such farms consist of as many as several hundred turbines and can supply energy to tens of thousands of homes and businesses. The largest wind farm in the United States is in Texas and has a capacity of 780 MV. As in the case of solar power, the wind power potential in the United States will exceed its needs for the foreseeable future. Alternative Sources 4-31 123 A Solar Future? How much land would be needed for solar collectors to density of 319 people per square mile whereas the provide all of the 3 TW of power the United States con- United States averages only 82. There is little open sumes? This will tell us whether there is a fundamental land in Europe as well as less sunshine than in the limit to the potential for solar energy in the country. If United States. But not far away lie the empty deserts of we consider land in the sunny Southwest and assume North Africa and the Middle East, which have enough an overall efficiency of 10 percent for a system of collec- area for CSP installations that could satisfy the whole tors plus overnight energy storage facilities, the answer world’s electrical appetite, let alone Europe’s. A group is roughly 52,000 square miles. This is 1.5 percent of the of 12 European industrial, utility, and financial com- total area of the United States; 10 percent of the com- panies is organizing a bold $580 billion project called bined areas of Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico; less Desertec that would use CSP collectors in these deserts than half the area of America’s national parks. So there is to produce 15 percent of Europe’s electricity by 2050. enough land for any desired amount of solar energy, espe- Twenty high-voltage, direct-current power lines (Sec. cially since any realistic scenario for the future would 6.19) would carry the electricity under the Mediterra- have other renewable sources—and perhaps nuclear nean Sea to Europe. Is this a better idea than planting fusion reactors as well—carrying part of the load. more PV panels on European rooftops? Not everybody From a global perspective, the picture changes. thinks so. Europe, for instance, has an average population 2 percent of the world’s electricity comes from wind, slightly more than the proportion in the United States. A typical large modern turbine has three fiberglass- or carbon fiber- reinforced blades 60 m long that turn up to 22 times per minute to generate up to 5 MW. Such a turbine starts to produce electricity at a wind speed of about 9 mi/h, reaches full power at about 31 mi/h, and is shut down to pre- vent damage in storm winds of 56 mi/h or more. Its average output naturally depends on the usual winds at its location, with 40 percent of the maximum considered good. Because turbine efficiency increases with size, 10-MW tur- bines with 75-m blades are in prospect, which would bring the cost of wind electricity closer to those of fossil-fuel or nuclear power plants without their disadvantages. Wind is the world’s fastest-growing (over 20 percent per year) source of renewable emission-free energy; its potential remains barely tapped. Wind turbines have been installed in 80 countries thus far. The global total of wind energy capacity is over 160 GW, up from 59 GW in 2005; the United States has the most, over 50 GW, closely followed by China with Germany, Spain, and India farther behind. In the United States, Texas produces by far the most wind energy, with Iowa, California, and Minnesota next. The country hopes to have 300 GW of wind capacity by 2030, which would provide a fifth of its electrical demand. China, too, is marching ahead, with six giant wind farms planned of 10–20 GW capacity each, plus smaller ones. More and more turbine farms are being sited in shallow offshore waters where they have minimal environmental impact and can take advantage of the stronger and steadier winds there. Such farms are about twice as expen- sive as onshore ones. Denmark (the largest builder of wind turbines) expects to generate half of its electricity by 2025 from offshore turbines; it is over a third of the way there already. Contracts have been signed for nine wind farms with about 6000 giant turbines to be installed off the British coast starting in 2013 at an estimated cost of $120 billion. With a total capacity of 30 GW, the turbines will help the U.K. meet its target of obtaining 40 per- cent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2020. In the United States, a wind farm of 130 turbines with a total capacity of 468 MW proposed for an offshore location south of Cape Cod in Massachusetts finally received fed- eral approval in 2010 after 9 years of opposition from local residents. The 124 4-32 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future farm, which would be the first of its kind in the country, is planned to cover 24 square miles and cost $1 billion. It is expected to be followed by at least half a dozen other wind farms in the shallow waters off the U.S. East Coast and in the Great Lakes. In Europe’s North Sea, which has a great many oil and gas production platforms already in place, wind turbines are beginning to sprout atop them to power their operations; using existing platforms saves a third of the cost. Tides The twice daily rise and fall of the tides (Sec. 1.10) is accompanied by corresponding flows of water into and out of bays and river mouths. Har- nessing the considerable energy involved is another old idea: in Europe, tide mills go back to the twelfth century. Tidal power is reliable and has low oper- ating costs. On the other hand, the tidal cycle means that there is no energy output for two periods of a few hours per day, which leaves a large invest- ment idle for that part of the time. There are two main approaches to extracting energy from the tides. One of them involves spanning a narrow inlet on a coast that has a large— over 5 m—tidal range with a dam that traps water on a rising tide and then directs it to turbine generators when the water level outside has dropped. An installation of this kind in the Rance River in northern France has supplied 240 MW of peak electric power since 1966 (Fig. 4-32). In South Korea a new 254 MW tidal power installation, for the time being the world’s largest, will be followed in 2014 by another one whose capacity will be 812 MW and cost $1.9 billion. Even bigger tidal plants are being contemplated elsewhere, for instance in England’s Severn Estuary, where the tidal range of over 13 m is second only to the range in the Bay of Fundy in eastern Canada. Turbine generators set in a 16-km barrage would furnish 8.6 GW of peak power, 5 percent of the country’s needs. On the downside of tidal power, apart from its expense ($30 billion or so for the Severn installation), there is the risk that altering tidal flow patterns may harm local ecosystems. The other approach is to use submerged turbines to drive generators as tidal currents run back and forth past their blades. An undersea tidal farm of this kind can be on a small scale that avoids the cost and environmental issues of a dam. Such farms have been installed off the Norwegian coast and in New York’s East River; locations for others in the United States and else- where are being studied. Waves As anybody who has stood in the surf or watched waves dash against a rocky shore knows, waves carry energy in abundance. A number of schemes Figure 4-32 This 1966 barrage across have been thought up to capture this energy, which ultimately comes from the Rance River in France uses tidal the sun whose uneven heating of the atmosphere causes the winds that ruffle flows to drive turbine generators that the seas. In one of them ocean waves run up a sloping funnel-like channel to supply 240 MW of peak electric power. a reservoir above. Water from the reservoir then powers a turbine generator on its way back down to the ocean. But this simple system is feasible only where the seabed is so shaped that wave energy is focused on a particular spot on a coast and where the winds that drive the waves are usually onshore. A wave energy converter that can be used anywhere, called Pelamis (after a species of sea serpent), employs a series of semisubmerged cylindrical sec- tions 180 m long and 4 m in diameter that are hinged together. The sections swing back and forth relative to one another when waves pass by, and these motions drive pumps that force oil at high pressure to hydraulic motors cou- pled to electric generators. Each section has a maximum output of 750 W. Several Pelamis arrays have been operated in tests off the British and Portu- guese coasts. A number of other wave energy conversion schemes are under development. If all goes well, the future may see 30-MW arrays that would each be spread over a square kilometer of ocean near many of the world’s coasts. Alternative Sources 4-33 125 4.11 Energy Storage Options for Variable Sources and Vehicles Effective ways to store energy on a large scale to even out its supply from variable sources are clearly desirable. In addition, to replace oil-based vehi- cle fuels will require improved or entirely new forms of portable energy stor- age. Storage systems for both purposes are already in limited use, and a great deal of work is going on to improve them and to try to come up with better new ones. Bulk Storage Electric energy from a variable source not needed at a particu- lar time can be stored as gravitational potential energy by using it to pump water up to a high reservoir. Then, at night when there is no sunshine, or when the wind stops, or when the tide is not running, the water is allowed to fall through turbine generators. Four such systems have been installed in Britain and one in California, with two more planned there. In a variant of this arrangement, Denmark sends surplus electricity from its wind farms to Norway to be used instead of electricity from Norwegian hydroelectric plants, thereby conserving water in the reservoirs to use for returning elec- tricity to Denmark when winds there are light. In another scheme, air can be pumped into a sealed underground cavern, an abandoned mine, or an exhausted natural-gas well and the compressed air later released to power a generator. An advantage here is that suitable cav- erns are more common than elevated sites for water reservoirs. Compressed air storage facilities have been operating in Germany since 1978 and in Alabama since 1991, and a large new one is being developed in California. In a storage battery, electric energy is converted into chemical energy that can subsequently be converted back into electric energy (Sec. 12.13). The rechargeable batteries familiar in cars and in electronic devices of many kinds are not suitable for the substantial amounts of energy involved in com- mercial power generation. However, “flow batteries” have been devised in which the energy-rich chemicals of the charged battery do not have to remain there but can be pumped out into separate tanks while fresh starting chemi- cals replace them. Reversing the flow allows the stored energy to return to its original electric form for withdrawal. Flow batteries are more complex than conventional ones and their technology is still being improved. Still, various kinds have been on the market for some time and their capacities are going up; a 432-GJ flow battery is being built for a 15-MW power system in the United Kingdom. Electric Cars Hybrids that use electric motors powered by storage batteries to supplement gasoline engines, as described in Sec. 4.5, were introduced as far back as 1997. All-electric cars (Fig. 4.33) have recently joined hybrids on the road thanks to better storage batteries that can deliver ranges adequate for commuting and journeys of modest length. All storage batteries have the handicap of low energy densities (energy content per kilogram) compared with gasoline and diesel fuel, only 1/300 as much in the case of traditional lead-acid batteries. Lithium-ion batteries of the kind used in electronic equip- ment such as laptop computers have up to six times higher energy densities than lead-acid batteries, but even they are heavy: the Tesla Roadster, the first all-electric car with a range of over 200 miles, is powered by 6831 lithium-ion cells that weigh almost half a ton and take 3.5 h to charge. (The car is named after the electricity pioneer Nikola Tesla.) The overall energy efficiency of an all-electric car, starting from the source of the grid electricity used to charge its batteries, is considerably higher than that of an ordinary car, with the cost per mile a quarter as much. The saving is even greater when the charging is done at night at lower off-peak electricity 126 4-34 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future Figure 4-33 The all-electric Tesla S sedan has a range of up to 300 miles, depending on the battery pack chosen. If the electricity supply is suitable, its batteries can be recharged in 45 min. Discharged batteries can be swapped for fully charged ones in 5 min. rates. An electric car emits no CO2 itself, of course, and the CO2 from the gen- erating plants that produce the electricity used to charge its batteries is less than half that emitted by an ordinary car. Electric cars will be even greener in the future as alternative sources replace fossil-fuel plants. Most of the world’s major car companies are starting to build electric cars, which they expect to take a larger and larger share of the car market. Germany is supporting a program to have a million electric cars on its roads by 2020, and the United States government is helping to finance efforts to improve batteries for electric cars. Thirteen of China’s largest cities will have all-electric bus fleets by 2014. For most driving, the limited range of an electric car is acceptable, espe- cially as charging stations are already being installed in parking lots and garages in the United States and Europe. Two-thirds of American commutes are 15 miles or less each way. Charging times of 3–5 hours are being brought down; the batteries of the Tesla S sedan can be charged in 45 minutes from 480-V outlets, and as little as 10 minutes does not seem impossible for future batteries. To get around the problem of long trips, some manufacturers provide their plug-in electric cars with gasoline-driven generators (or even gasoline propulsion engines), so the result is really a hybrid, not an electric car. The Chevrolet Volt is a hybrid of this kind whose range under battery alone is 40 miles. Another approach is to establish networks of stations that can recharge or even replace batteries low on charge rapidly. Such networks are now being installed in a number of countries by a company called A Better Place; its name comes from what it hopes the world will be if its efforts succeed. Hydrogen and Fuel Cells As we can see in Fig. 4-14, mass for mass, hydrogen liberates more energy when it combines with oxygen than any of the other fuels listed—three times as much as gasoline, for instance. It is a clean fuel as well: the only product of its use is water, with no carbon dioxide or harm- ful pollutants. Unfortunately, although hydrogen is by far the most abundant element in the universe, on earth it is found only in compounds with other elements (notably with oxygen in water, H2O) and must be separated out from them. Therefore hydrogen is really a storage and delivery medium and not a primary fuel in itself. Alternative Sources 4-35 127 Nowadays, hydrogen is usually produced by reacting natural gas with Not a New Idea steam, with CO2 as a by-product. This process depletes a resource and contributes to global warming. Another, more expensive method called In his 1874 novel The Mysteri- electrolysis (Sec. 10.17) involves passing electric current through water to ous Island, one of Jules Verne’s break up its H2O molecules into their hydrogen and oxygen components. characters predicts that “water Electrolysis requires as much input energy as the energy obtained by recom- one day will be employed as bining the hydrogen and oxygen later. If the input energy comes from fossil- fuel, that hydrogen and oxygen fuel plants, as it would today, resources are again not conserved and CO2 which constitute it . . . will fur- is added to the atmosphere. In the long run, to be sure, alternative sources nish an inexhaustible source of could supply clean energy and perhaps bacteria or algae will be found that heat and light . . . Water will be the coal of the future.” Another can liberate hydrogen on a commercial basis from plant materials or during character responds (as do we photosynthesis; they already do so in the laboratory, but inefficiently. all), “I should like to see that.” Hydrogen can be used to provide energy in two ways. One is simply by burning it, which is done in welding torches and in spacecraft propulsion engines. Under development are cars that use hydrogen in place of gasoline in similar engines. The other approach employs fuel cells, devices in which hydrogen and oxygen react directly to produce water and electricity rather than water and heat. Unlike batteries, which also obtain electric current directly from chemical reactions, fuel cells can provide current indefinitely without hav- ing to be replaced or recharged because the working substances are fed in continuously. The electricity output from a hydrogen fuel cell can be used to power an electric vehicle just as electricity from a battery can (Fig. 4-34). As a vehicle fuel, however, hydrogen has a major storage problem because under ordi- nary conditions it is a gas that takes up far too much volume for the energy a car needs. In liquid form, it is compact enough, but to liquify hydrogen means cooling it below −253°C, which takes up to 40 percent of its energy content. Hydrogen can also be squeezed into a suitably smaller space by a pressure about 700 times that of the atmosphere—which means 5 tons per square inch—which also takes energy. In either case, the required tank is quite heavy, though not as heavy as batteries that hold equivalent energy. But even if the problems of fuel-cell technology and of practical hydro- gen production and storage are solved, there is also the chicken-and-egg situ- ation in which nobody wants to install a vastly expensive supply system (the United States has about 160,000 gasoline stations) before cars exist to use Figure 4-34 This prototype bus is powered by fuel cells that operate on hydrogen. Similar technology is used in cars from other manufacturers, which are undergoing road tests, but commercial models are not expected for some time. Such vehicles are more efficient than gasoline- or diesel-fueled ones, and in their operation only water vapor is given off. However, they are more expensive to build and operate than battery-powered electric vehicles, which are expected to be in the majority in the future. 128 4-36 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future them, and nobody wants to buy a fuel-cell car before there are filling sta- tions for it everywhere. The advantages of battery-powered electric cars over their fuel-cell cousins make them by far the favorites to take over the world’s roads. 4.12 Biofuels Yes, But Biofuels made from plant matter are obviously renewable and have the advantage that the CO2 given off when they are burned will be absorbed afterward during photosynthesis by the next crop to be grown (Sec. 13.12). Under the right circumstances they could bring energy independence closer in many countries. However, it is not at all clear that biofuels as a class have yet made much, if any, progress toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions even as they replace fossil fuels. When the entire life cycles of their produc- tion and use are considered, today the only commercial biofuels environmen- tally superior to fossil fuels are ethanol from sugar cane and biodiesel from used cooking oil. Government subsidies for biofuels have cost huge sums, and because most current biofuels are made from food crops, food prices have increased in a number of regions. Fortunately, new biofuel technologies are on the way that will not compete with food crops. The simplest way to use crops—and organic wastes such as municipal garbage, manure, scrap paper, and so on—for energy is just to burn them, either by themselves to make steam to heat buildings and generate electricity or in coal-fired power plants alongside coal. More and more installations of both kinds are coming into use, waste disposal being an especial attraction in many cities. However, a number of problems, such as supply limitations and pollution control, make this approach unlikely to provide more than a relatively small fraction of the world’s total energy needs. Biofuels for vehicles are a different story. Ethanol—the alcohol in bev- erages such as wine, beer, and whiskey—yields almost two-thirds as much energy when burned as gasoline and can be added to or even be used instead of gasoline in car engines. Henry Ford’s first Model T cars, introduced in 1908, could run on either ethanol or gasoline. Diesel engines cannot run on ethanol, but “biodiesel” made from various plant oils and animal fats can similarly supplement or replace diesel fuel derived from petroleum. Vehicle biofuels are receiving more and more attention with over 40 countries encouraging their use by various subsidies and requirements. Worldwide ethanol production has more than tripled since 2000 and biodie- sel even more. The United States, the European Union, and China have set ambitious targets for vehicle biofuels, in the case of the United States a four- fold increase in alternatives to gasoline by 2022. Currently biofuels provide about 2 percent of the energy used globally for transport. Ethanol Fuel ethanol in the United States, the world’s leading producer, comes from corn; in Brazil, in second place, it comes from sugar cane. The two countries share 90 percent of the total market. Sugar cane is about 10 times as efficient as most other plants in utilizing solar energy. The sugar in its juice can be directly fermented by yeasts into ethanol, which is then extracted by distillation. In Brazil, which has large areas of land suitable for sugar cane cultivation, all cars use ethanol, either by itself or blended with gasoline. This has cut Brazil’s consumption of gaso- line in half and lowered its CO2 emissions considerably. There is less air pol- lution in Brazilian cities as well. China is a customer of Brazilian ethanol in the hope of similarly reducing the pollution of its urban air, among the world’s worst. Alternative Sources 4-37 129 Algae to the Rescue? Certain algae can produce an oil whose conversion to various bio- fuels is straightforward. This approach was studied in the 1970s and 1980s but experiments stopped when crude oil became cheaper. In new work to carry the idea further, suitable algae, some genetically modified for the purpose, are being grown in ponds that have CO2 bub- bled up through them for the algae to use with water and sunlight in the photosynthesis that nourishes them. If the CO2 is piped in from fossil-fuel plants, their CO2 emis- sions would be used productively, a better alternative to just releasing them into the atmosphere or even to burying them underground. An acre of soybeans can yield Figure 4-35 Reactors at the 1.04-GW Redhawk gas-fired power plant in Arizona 60 gallons of biofuel per year and an use algae to convert some of its CO2 emissions to biodiesel with the help of water acre of corn 260 gallons, whereas an and sunlight. acre of algae might be able to yield more than 2000 gallons without using agricultural land. If deriving would correspond to only a few per- light, with CO2 circulated through biofuel from algae proves practical cent of the area used for the coun- them (Fig. 4-35). In both cases, on the scale required, which is not try’s agriculture. it seems possible for sewage or certain, all the transport fuel needs Another method being tried has fertilizer-laden agricultural runoff of the United States could perhaps the algae confined to water-filled water to provide the other nutrients be supplied from ponds whose area plastic containers exposed to sun- algae require, another plus. In the United States, a lot of fossil-fuel energy is needed to grow corn and to process it into ethanol (the starch in the corn must first be converted into sugars). As a result, each gallon of corn ethanol takes five to eight times the energy to produce as a gallon of cane ethanol and is accordingly more expensive. Using corn ethanol instead of gasoline does little to reduce net CO2 emissions; if coal is one of the fossil fuels used to produce the ethanol, the result is an increase in CO2 emissions. (Using cane ethanol gives a reduc- tion of 90 percent.) When forests and grasslands are cleared to grow corn, around a century may be needed before there is any CO2 benefit. Then what are the attractions of corn ethanol in the United States? To begin with, there are generous subsidies to corn farmers and a tax credit for converting corn to ethanol that costs taxpayers over $5 billion per year. Sec- ond, a 2007 law requires that increasing minimum amounts of corn ethanol be used in vehicle fuels, so there is a guaranteed market for it. Third, the government maintains the price of sugar too high for it to be an economical source of ethanol, and a substantial tariff keeps out cheap cane ethanol from Brazil. Finally, high oil prices make ethanol more competitive with gasoline (though oil prices tend to vary considerably and when they come down, etha- nol production does too). As the problematic aspects of corn ethanol come into focus, a number of countries are reducing or eliminating the subsidies and other inducements for its use that once seemed like good ideas. The United States, the largest producer and user by far, is studying ways to reduce the environmental costs of biofuels, especially those of corn ethanol. 130 4-38 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future Food Versus Fuel Cellulosic Ethanol Fortunately the drawbacks to corn ethanol apply with much less force to cellulosic ethanol. Cellulose is the main constituent of Increasingly worrying is the all plants (Sec. 13.11) and agricultural waste, wood, and certain grasses are use of agricultural land for fuel cheap and abundant sources; municipal waste contains a great deal of cel- rather than for food in a time lulose. Some grasses yield several times as much ethanol per acre as corn of expanding population (see and can grow on poor agricultural land. Furthermore obtaining ethanol from Fig. 4-1): 230,000 new mouths cellulose involves far less fossil-fuel energy than in the case of corn ethanol, every day. The corn needed for and up to a 70 percent reduction in CO2 emissions. Starting from sugar cane the ethanol to fill an SUV’s fuel is even better, but there is far more cellulose available and at less cost. The tank would feed a person for trouble is that, while going from cellulose to ethanol has been done in a year. Over a fifth of the corn the laboratory, it is not quite practical to do so on an industrial scale. But harvest in the United States— which produces 40 percent of sooner or later workable methods will inevitably be found, and cellulosic the world’s corn—already goes ethanol is likely to push aside corn ethanol on its way to becoming a major to make ethanol, a proportion vehicle fuel. Some think cellulosic ethanol rather than electricity will power still climbing. the cars of the future. Ethanol is not the only biofuel that can be made from The diversion of corn to cellulosic raw materials, of which over 1.3 billion tons annually are thought fuel has helped drive its price to be available in the United States without affecting the food supply. sharply upward everywhere, as has happened with other Biodiesel A century ago some of Rudolf Diesel’s first engines ran on peanut crops that farmers are replac- oil. Vegetable oils, now in processed form, are once again powering such ing with corn. With animal feed engines either by themselves or in blends with ordinary diesel fuel. Soy, more expensive, meat and dairy palm, rapeseed (canola), cottonseed, and sunflower oils are all feedstocks products also cost more. For for biodiesel. Vegetable oils and animal fats that have already been used for the world’s poor, many of them cooking, charmingly known in the trade as “yellow grease,” are a cheaper in Africa, this is bad news that source of biodiesel but their supply is more limited. Soybeans are respon- is getting worse as corn ethanol production rises. Both of the sible for most of the biodiesel produced in the United States, with an energy U.N.’s food agencies regard bio- yield of 2 J for each joule of input. Other oils have even better yields and need fuel production warily; a report considerably less land. On an overall basis, biodiesel use involves less CO2 to one of them concluded that emission—the amount of reduction depends on the source—than the use of using food crops for biofuels is conventional diesel fuel or of ethanol from corn. Biodiesel is at present more “a crime against humanity.” expensive to produce than conventional diesel fuel, but, as with ethanol, its sale is subsidized or required, or both, in many countries, including the United States, and its share of the market is going up. In the United States, biodiesel use is expected to increase by 50 percent to 630 million gallons per year by 2020, about a sixth of it coming from yellow grease and the rest from soybeans. Although biodiesel is a relatively green fuel in itself, growing the crops from which it comes may not be. For instance, the rapeseed that is the pri- mary oil source in Europe often needs so much fertilizer made using natural gas that overall CO2 emissions remain high. Even worse are destructive farm- ing practices in some countries. In a notorious case, Indonesian swamps are being drained and the peat under them burned to make room for palm-oil plantations. The result is 2 billion tons of CO2 entering the atmosphere annu- ally, 8 percent of global CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels—far more CO2 than using the palm oil grown there could ever save in the future. The European Union now bans the import of biofuels whose production involves degrading the environment in ways such as this. Strategies for the Future Clearly no simple solution to the problem of providing safe, clean, cheap, and abundant energy is possible in the near future. But there is much that can be done, first of all by improving the efficiency of energy use, which gives a much better return on investment than any form of energy generation. A serious effort could probably save the United States at least half of the elec- tricity it now consumes, for instance. This would mean changes in how we Strategies for the Future 4-39 131 live: technology alone could not do the job. Also essential is to sensibly utilize the various available renewable sources and to expand the production of fis- sion nuclear energy, all the while trying to make fusion energy practical as soon as possible. If the world’s population also stabilizes or, better, decreases, social disaster (starvation, war) and environmental catastrophe (a planet unfit for life) may well be avoided even if fusion never becomes practical. 4.13 Conservation Less Is More Our children and grandchildren will have to live with the results of what is done (and not done) today about the energy problem and the global warm- ing and resource depletion that are part of it. Is there anything we, as users of energy in our personal lives and in our work, can do that will earn their respect? The answer is yes, taking conservation seriously can make a real dif- ference if enough of us participate, and our pocketbooks will benefit as well. As the saying goes, not to be part of the solution is to be part of the problem. Major opportunities to save energy during their years of use come in the intelligent design and careful construction of new buildings, both residen- tial and commercial. The best new buildings need less than 20 percent as much energy as older ones for heating, cooling, and lighting. Existing homes almost always benefit from better insulation (including double glazing) and attention to excluding drafts. Upgrading to more efficient space and water heaters, kitchen and laundry appliances, and so forth usually pay for them- selves in lower running costs while helping the planet by reducing energy use. Simply painting roofs white can cut the electricity consumed by air- conditioning by as much as 20 percent; a move to “cool roofs” is under way in many warm parts of the world (Fig. 4-36). (In fact, roads cover so much area that using light-colored surfaces instead of black ones would reflect enough sunlight back into space to moderate global warming by a useful amount.) In everyday life, replacing ordinary lightbulbs with energy-saving ones, loading dishwashers full, not using hot water in clothes washers, and hang- ing laundry out to dry all help, as does setting thermostats for heating lower than usual in winter and for air-conditioning higher than usual in summer. Buying fuel-efficient cars, driving them at moderate speeds, and sharing Figure 4-36 Rooftops painted white, such as this one in Washington, D.C., reflect rather than absorb sunlight and so reduce the energy consumed by air- conditioning in summer. 132 4-40 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future New Lightbulbs In an ordinary incandescent light- longer. A compact fluorescent light- has been completed in some coun- bulb a tungsten filament glows bulb (CFL), like the ones shown in tries, for instance Australia and when heated by the passage of an Fig. 4-37, that replaces an ordinary Brazil. electric current. Such bulbs are bulb of the same brightness saves Eventually light-emitting diodes very inefficient; about 95 percent of several times its additional cost (LEDs) may well take over the light- the energy they consume becomes each year in electricity bills and ing market. LEDs employ microchip heat, and there are billions of hundreds of pounds of CO2 emitted technology like that used in modern them—perhaps 4 billion in the by a fossil-fuel power plant. electronic devices and are compact, United States alone, using 9 per- A 2007 law calls for phasing rugged, and versatile. The best cur- cent of all its electricity. They last out 100-W incandescent bulbs in rent ones are two to three times as around 1000 hours. the United States in stages between efficient as CFLs and last 50,000 In a fluorescent tube an elec- 2012 and 2014 in favor of energy- hours, with room for improvement tric discharge causes the atoms saving bulbs such as CFLs. The on both counts. Another advan- in a mercury vapor to emit invis- result will be to cut $18 billion per tage is that, unlike CFLs, they have ible ultraviolet light. A coating of a year from electricity charges and no mercury to dispose of safely material called a phosphor on the reduce CO2 emissions by about when discarded. LEDs are already inside of the glass tube absorbs the 160 million tons, equivalent to tak- widely used in instrument light- ultraviolet light and, in a process ing tens of millions of cars off the ing, flashlights, traffic signals, called fluorescence, gives off vis- roads or shutting down as many as street lights, and car headlights— ible light. Fluorescent lamps are 80 coal-fired power plants. Phas- a few among an increasing list about 5 times as efficient as incan- ing out incandescent bulbs is under of applications—but are still too descent ones and last up to 10 times way in Europe and elsewhere, and expensive for general lighting. Figure 4-37 A compact fluorescent bulb uses much less power for a given light output than an ordinary incandescent bulb. rides instead of going alone have always been good ideas, as is keeping in mind that buses and trains average as little as a tenth as much energy per passenger-mile as cars do. Everything counts: just switching computers, audio and video equipment, coffeemakers, and other devices off instead of leaving them on standby at night would eliminate at least 5 percent of resi- dential energy use in the United States, equivalent to the output of 18 typical power stations. Recycling can help: to recycle aluminum uses less than 9 percent as much energy as to refine it from its ores, and billions of aluminum cans are discarded every year. Recycling other metals, glass, plastic bottles, paper, and cardboard also conserves energy and raw materials and is kinder to the envi- ronment than burial in landfills or burning in incinerators. San Francisco’s Strategies for the Future 4-41 133 recycling rate of 70 percent, well above the U.S. average of 33 percent, shows Smart Meters what can be done. Industry, too, cannot continue with business as usual. As with individ- A “smart” electric meter in a uals, those companies that have adopted better practices have often found home tells its residents at any them to save money as well as contributing to a healthy planet. Thus DuPont time how much electricity is has cut CO2 emissions severely in recent years while saving billions of dollars being consumed (in some cases in energy costs through greater efficiency. General Electric is another con- by which circuits) so they can vert and has brought its CO2 emissions down despite an expansion that oth- manage its use efficiently. A erwise would have increased them. GE is sure that clean and energy-efficient local utility’s cost of electricity technologies are its future. increases with demand above a certain base level, and its rates These are not isolated examples: environmental awareness is now more to large businesses are changed and more accepted as part of good corporate citizenship. A recent survey of accordingly during each day. business leaders around the world put environmental concerns at the top Smart meters enable the util- of a list of the issues that will be most important to their companies in the ity to vary its rates to homes near future. Even the oil giant ExxonMobil, once a leading skeptic of global that have them in the same warming and of the need for alternative energy sources, is now spending way. Thus, home customers can $300 million to develop biofuels from algae; it also supports taxing CO2 emis- reduce their bills by running sions and is reducing its own. power-hungry appliances dur- The U.S. Climate Action Partnership consists of several dozen major ing off-peak periods, of which firms in a variety of fields that find global warming no idle threat and intend the utility informs them. This to work together to help combat it. They have called for “strong” federal benefits the utility industry as well because, by evening out action. But plenty of business interests, including the 3-million-member U.S. demand, less reserve capacity Chamber of Commerce (which has an annual war chest of $200 million), is needed. The meters also let are fighting against all global warming legislation. A number of Chamber customers avoid waste whose members have left it over this issue, including Apple and the utilities Pacific amount they may not have been Gas and Electric, Exelon, and PNM Resources (“we see climate change as the aware of, and allow utilities to most pressing environmental and economic issue of our time”). detect service interruptions as they occur. In 2009, the U.S. Energy Department provided 4.14 What Governments Must Do $3.4 billion to help pay for 18 Their Role Is Crucial million smart meters, with util- ities putting in $4.7 billion of Governments everywhere have become aware of the gravity of the energy their own. problem and of the need for them to respond, though few are acting with the urgency required. An obvious step is to impose the highest feasible effi- ciency standards for appliances, buildings, and vehicles. As long ago as 1975, California began to introduce regulations that required greater efficiencies in energy use, with the result that average energy consumption per person there has changed little since then although in the rest of the United States it has increased by 50 percent. California consumers are saving $6 billion per year in energy costs. A key element in California’s strategy was to decouple utility profits from electricity sales—the profits of utilities there depend on the success of their energy efficiency programs. Elsewhere, because they profit from waste, utilities have no interest in energy efficiency. California pioneered efficiency standards for appliances, which helped the entire country because it is not economical for manufacturers to have separate product lines for different states. As an example of the result, the average energy used by refrigerators in the United States declined by 75 percent even as their sizes increased and their prices fell. A more recent measure worth being copied requires that, by 2020, all new residential buildings consume zero net energy; for commercial buildings, the deadline is 2030. Another step is to use both incentives and regulations to promote solar, wind, geothermal, cellulosic ethanol, and other renewable clean energy sources while avoiding such blind alleys as corn ethanol. Nuclear energy should similarly be encouraged to expand. Above all, every effort should be made to phase out fossil fuels, especially coal. Because coal will nevertheless 134 4-42 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future continue to be burned in quantity for a long time to come, developing ways to capture and bury the resulting CO2 must be accelerated. Subsidies that encourage the production and use of fossil fuels, still common in the world (the United States spends over $10 billion per year on them), cannot con- tinue. The International Energy Agency calculates that, if such subsidies were scrapped, this step alone would eventually reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions by around 10 percent. A different facet of the energy problem is deforestation, which as we saw in Fig. 4-13 gives rise to 18 percent of worldwide greenhouse gas emis- sions. A U.N. program called REDD—for Reducing Emissions from Defor- estation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries—is under way to do what its name suggests by having rich countries subsidize poor ones to invest in low-emission paths to development instead of plundering their forests. The most cost-effective means of helping to curb global warming is to provide family planning aid to people who want it but have little or no access for the reasons given in Sec. 4.1. According to one careful study, each dollar spent on family planning results in nearly five times the reduction in green- house gas emissions as the same dollar spent on technological fixes such as those based on solar and wind energies. Although religious leaders who oppose family planning have managed to keep the subject taboo in public discussions, population growth is becoming more and more recognized as a significant factor in global warming. The U.N. Population Fund, for instance, has made clear the link, and in a letter urging the U.S. administration to increase funding for family planning, a group of members of Congress stated that it “should be part of larger strategies for climate change mitigation and adaptation.” Carbon Tax Subsidizing alternative energy sources to shrink the gaps between their costs and those of fossil fuels and setting mandatory targets for their use in place of fossil sources both have roles to play in reducing CO2 emissions. However, most economists feel that a more direct approach is also needed. The simplest, fairest, most transparent, and most effective such approach is to levy a tax—usually called a carbon tax for short—on the amount of CO2 emitted in the production and use of a fossil fuel. In this way polluters would pay for the harm they do to the environment, which would encour- age them to reduce their emissions. A carbon tax would be easy to admin- ister and hard to avoid, and its rate could be adjusted from time to time to achieve the desired total CO2 reduction. Several countries already have car- bon taxes, and others are considering them. Sweden has had a carbon tax since 1991, which has lowered CO2 emissions by 20 percent while allowing its economy to grow by 44 percent. Because in the United States voting for a new tax is regarded as political suicide, a carbon tax stands little chance of being enacted despite its obvious advantages. Perhaps the chance would be greater if the tax money were distributed among the country’s citizens, as has been proposed. Cap-and-Trade Another approach is to use a cap-and-trade system in which a regionwide total (the cap) is set for annual CO2 emissions. The gov- ernment then auctions or gives away permits to emit CO2 that add up to the overall ceiling. Companies that do not use their entire quotas can sell the leftover permits to companies whose emissions exceed their quotas. A proper choice of the cap would make the price of traded permits high enough to serve as an incentive to big emitters such as power companies to invest in greater efficiency, carbon capture and storage, and clean technologies. If the permits are auctioned, the government receives money that can be used to Strategies for the Future 4-43 135 help ease the transition to clean alternative energy. If permits are free, there Carbon Offsets is the problem of distributing them fairly. This can easily result in a large cap being set so that all emitters are satisfied with their quotas—and emis- A carbon offset is a credit to sions are reduced by little or nothing. Either way the price of traded permits, emit CO2 that a company in a unlike a tax, would vary with general economic conditions and other unpre- cap-and-trade system receives dictable factors, which would add a new element of uncertainty for busi- in exchange for financing an nesses planning future investments. emission-reduction project in a The European Union’s Emission Trading System (ETS), the world’s larg- poor country. For example, the est, began operating in 2005 and illustrates the problems that can arise in CO2 emissions saved by build- such a scheme. Free permits were issued, but many polluting industries ing a hydroelectric installation in, say, India could be sold as were exempted and the caps were set so high that companies in the system offsets to coal-burning compa- received generous quotas. As a result, CO2 emissions rose, not fell, in the nies elsewhere to allow them to ETS and electric utilities found it cheaper to continue to fuel their furnaces emit a corresponding amount with coal than to switch to less-polluting natural gas. Even though their of CO2. In principle, such pro- permits were free and they did not have to buy others, utilities in various jects would not go ahead with- countries raised their charges to consumers, for which they blamed the ETS. out the offset money, but in The German utility RWE, the largest CO2 emitter in Europe, collected about practice many have turned out $6.5 billion in this way before being forced to stop. The ETS was so poorly to already exist (a third in the designed and run that in one 18-month period outright fraud cost it case of hydroelectric ones) or $7.4 billion before being discovered. would be developed in any case. Starting in 2013, ETS permits will be auctioned, not free, in the hope of Even worse, carbon offsets have been sold for planting trees finally making fossil-fuel use sufficiently expensive to encourage investments while existing forests in the in reducing CO2 emissions. Meeting a 2020 target of a 20 percent reduction same country are cut down, so might increase elecricity bills by 10–15 percent, considered a fair price for the result is again a net increase the expected benefits. However, the new system, like the old, has important in emissions as the buyer gets loopholes. One of them is that some member countries, for instance Poland cheap credits to pour CO2 into and Germany, both heavy coal users, were given exemptions for much of the atmosphere. Although car- their emissions. Another is that carbon offsets (see sidebar) also will con- bon offset programs are widely tinue to be allowed. considered to be failures, the companies that profit from them have managed to keep Copenhagen There is general agreement that global temperatures should them in cap-and-trade systems. not increase by more than 2°C if environmental catastrophe is to be avoided. To keep temperatures below this figure, the world’s greenhouse gas emis- sions have to be rolled back to perhaps half their 1990 level. The tools that governments have for the purpose are the direct regulation of fossil-fuel use, subsidies for clean energy sources, carbon taxes, and cap-and-trade systems. Each country or region must choose for itself which one or more of these tools fit its situation best. The big question is how much each country should contribute to the overall reduction needed, whose total cost is estimated at between $500 billion and $1 trillion annually. This seems like a lot, but it is only around 1 percent of world economic output. In December 2009, a two-week confer- ence of 193 countries in Copenhagen considered the matter but could not agree on how the total cost should be apportioned among the various coun- tries. The conference concluded with a statement of broad general princi- ples that should govern such an apportionment, but no details or numbers. However, one of the principles, initially opposed by China and other devel- oping countries, did represent a real step forward: any firm promises of emission cuts would eventually be subject to international monitoring and reporting. On one side of the basic division in Copenhagen were the developed countries, which as a group are rich and responsible for most of the CO2 emissions, past and present, that have led to global warming. On the other side were the developing countries, which as a group contain 85 percent of the world’s population, are poor, and have CO2 emissions well below those of the developed countries (see Fig. 4-9). The developing countries are in the 136 4-44 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future Plan B What if cuts in CO2 emissions made in the future turn out than usual water droplets. The result would be clouds to be too little and too late? Is there a Plan B in that event, that would reflect more sunlight back into space than which is all too possible? In fact, a number of schemes normal clouds. have been suggested to tackle a hyperactive greenhouse Unfortunately there is much doubt about how prac- effect. They fall into two categories. The first involves tical such geoengineering projects would be. Thus calcu- removing excess CO2 from the atmosphere, for exam- lations show that no less than 1.4 billion tons of seawater ple by fertilizing areas of the oceans with iron sulfate to would have to be sprayed aloft each year to stop global stimulate algae (for whom iron is a crucial nutrient often warming, and a trial of the algae method gave disap- in short supply) to flourish and absorb atmospheric CO2. pointing results: predators lost no time in gobbling up When the algae die, their remains, it is assumed, would the algae. There is also the serious matter of the side sink to the sea floor taking the carbon with them. effects of such manipulations of the global environment, The other Plan B category involves reducing the some foreseeable and others that may come as unwel- amount of sunlight that reaches the earth’s surface. One come surprises. While Plan B studies should certainly suggestion for this is to spray seawater into the atmo- continue, there seems to be no sure substitute in sight sphere over the oceans. Evaporation would leave tiny for drastically reducing worldwide CO2 emissions while salt particles to act as condensation nuclei for smaller there is still time. process of raising their standards of living, today relatively low. This means that, as the economies of developing countries grow, so will the amount of energy they use. Since fossil fuels (especially coal) are the cheapest energy sources, their CO2 emissions will also grow. The position in Copenhagen of the developing countries started with a refusal to do anything that would impede their rising prosperity. If the devel- oped countries, already extremely prosperous, want them to curb their CO2 emissions, the developed countries should pay for substituting clean energy for fossil-fuel energy. The developed countries themselves, as the chief emit- ters of CO2, should also take most or all of the burden of decreasing its worldwide total. Furthermore, since the developed countries are responsible for most of the CO2 poured into the atmosphere since the start of the Indus- trial Revolution, these countries should help the others adapt to changing climates. It was not surprising that the developed countries were unhappy with these demands. They were especially disheartened when China and India, with over a third of the world’s population and modernizing fast, would not accept any limits on their future CO2 emissions. (By 2030, China’s economy will have passed that of the United States with India, now eleventh, in third place.) In view of this, the United States would not give a specific target for its own efforts. Since China and the United States, each with 20 percent of the total (Fig. 4-10), are the largest producers of CO2, no other countries would make a firm commitment either. In fact, much of the world is already investing in clean energy projects and expects to continue doing so, but the existing efforts, as mentioned in Sec. 4.4, are far from what is needed to keep temperature rises below 2°C. Although the Copenhagen conference was a disappointment, so important is its objective of worldwide binding agreements to curb global warming that efforts to this end are sure to continue. Unfortunately, there is no time to spare: the later effective action comes, the more it will cost, both in money and in hardships for affected parts of the world. John Holdren, the White House science advisor, sums up the situation in this way: “We’re driving in a car with bad brakes in a fog and heading for a cliff. We know for sure that the cliff is out there. We just don’t know exactly where it is. Prudence would suggest that we should start putting on the brakes.” Multiple Choice 4-45 137 Important Terms and Ideas The fossil fuels coal, oil, and natural gas were formed In nuclear fusion, two small nuclei unite to form by the partial decay of the remains of plants and marine a larger one, a process that also gives off considerable organisms that lived millions of years ago. energy. The sun and stars obtain their energy from nuclear Methane, the main constituent of natural gas, is a com- fusion, but fusion technology for power plants is still under pound of carbon and hydrogen with the chemical formula CH4. development. The greenhouse effect refers to the process by which Geothermal energy comes from the heat of the earth’s a greenhouse is heated: sunlight can enter through its win- interior. dows, but the infrared radiation the warm interior gives off A photovoltaic cell, also called a solar cell, converts is absorbed by glass, so the incoming energy is trapped. The the energy in sunlight directly to electric energy. earth’s atmosphere is heated in a similar way by absorbing In a concentrated solar power (CSP) installation, infrared radiation from the warm earth. Greenhouse gases solar energy is first converted into heat and then into elec- are gases that absorb infrared radiation; the chief ones in tric energy. the atmosphere are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, nitrous In a fuel cell, electric current is produced by means of oxide (N2O), and a group of gases used in refrigeration chemical reactions. called CFCs and HCFCs. Biofuels made from plant matter can supplement or Carbon capture and storage (CCS) involves pumping replace gasoline and diesel fuel. CO2 emitted by power plants or other sources into under- In a cap-and-trade system for controlling CO2 emis- ground reservoirs. sions, an overall cap on them is set for a region and compa- In nuclear fission, a large atomic nucleus (notably a nies there are given or buy at auction permits to emit CO2 nucleus of one kind of uranium atom) splits into smaller whose total equals the cap. Companies that do not use their ones, a process that gives off considerable energy. A nuclear full quotas can sell the leftover permits to companies that reactor produces energy from nuclear fissions that occur at exceed their quotas. a controlled rate. Multiple Choice 1. The number of people in the world may reach a 7. Energy not ultimately derived from solar radiation is maximum in 2050 of about found in a. 1 billion c. 6.7 billion a. tides c. falling water b. 2.5 billion d. 9.2 billion b. waves d. wind 2. Arrange these sources in the order of the energy they 8. If present trends continue, an optimistic average supply to the world today, starting with the source of global temperature increase by 2100 might the most energy. be about a. coal c. renewable a. 1°C c. 4°C b. oil d. nuclear b. 2°C d. 10°C 3. Of the following, the energy source likely to be used up 9. The source that produces the most carbon dioxide per first is joule of energy liberated is a. coal c. natural gas a. coal c. natural gas b. oil d. nuclear b. oil d. nuclear 4. Of the following, the energy source likely to last the 10. The average amount of CO2 emitted each year per longest is person in the United States is about a. coal c. natural gas a. 1 ton c. 5 tons b. oil d. nuclear b. 2 tons d. 20 tons 5. Energy use per person in the United States 11. The radiation from an object at room temperature is today is mainly in the form of a. about the same as the world average a. infrared light b. about 10 percent more than the world average b. visible light c. about one and a half times the world average c. ultraviolet light d. about four times the world average d. any of the above, depending on its color 6. World energy use in 2030 is expected to be 12. The earth’s atmosphere is primarily heated by a. less than today a. direct sunlight b. about the same as today b. sunlight reflected by the earth’s surface c. about one and a half times what it is today c. infrared light radiated by the earth’s surface d. about four times what it is today d. carbon dioxide emissions 138 4-46 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future 13. A gas that does not contribute to global warming is 27. The worst emitters of mercury, which damages the a. methane c. nitrous oxide nervous system, are power plants that use b. nitrogen d. carbon dioxide a. coal c. natural gas 14. Arrange these countries in increasing order of their b. oil d. nuclear energy CO2 emissions per person. 28. Syngas is made from a. China c. United Kingdom a. coal c. natural gas b. United States d. India b. oil d. carbon dioxide 15. The country or countries each responsible for about 29. Of the following countries, the one that obtains the one-fifth of the total of the world’s CO2 emissions is (are) largest proportion of its electricity from nuclear a. China c. Russia energy is b. India d. United States a. France c. Japan 16. Of the following fuels, the one that gives off the most b. China d. United States heat per gram when burned is 30. The proportion of electricity generated in the United a. hydrogen c. gasoline States that comes from nuclear energy is roughly b. methane d. coal a. 1 percent c. 20 percent 17. Of the following fuels, the one that gives off the least b. 5 percent d. 50 percent heat per gram when burned is 31. In the relatively near future, the technology most able a. hydrogen c. gasoline to replace fossil fuels on a large scale is b. methane d. coal a. nuclear c. solar 18. Which of the following is not a fossil fuel? b. wind d. biofuels a. hydrogen c. oil 32. Of the following problems associated with various b. natural gas d. coal energy sources, the least significant for nuclear 19. The proportion of world energy supplied by sources fission is other than fossil fuels is about a. waste disposal a. 15 percent c. 50 percent b. fuel reserves b. 25 percent d. 85 percent c. diversion to weapons manufacture 20. The proportion of oil used by the United States that is d. construction expense imported is about 33. Bright sunlight might deliver energy to an area of a. 1/10 c. 1/2 1 square meter at a rate of b. 1/5 d. 2/3 a. 1 W c. 100 W 21. Most oil today is used for b. 10 W d. 1000 W a. transportation c. electricity 34. The output of which of the following renewable energy b. heating d. lubrication sources varies least? 22. In the United States, coal is chiefly used a. wind c. geothermal a. for heating b. waves d. solar b. to generate electricity 35. Of the following renewable energy sources, the one c. to make syngas that currently produces more of the world’s electricity d. to manufacture plastics than any of the others is 23. Natural gas consists largely of a. wind c. geothermal a. hydrogen c. nitrogen b. waves d. solar b. oxygen d. methane 36. Of the following technologies, the one that may 24. The least polluting of the following fuels is eventually become the chief energy source in the a. coal c. diesel fuel world involves the use of b. gasoline d. natural gas a. nuclear fission c. fuel cells 25. Which of these statements about carbon capture and b. nuclear fusion d. biofuels storage (CCS) is true? 37. Of the following technologies, the one farthest from a. CCS has never been tried, even on a small scale. being a commercial energy source in the near future b. Earthquakes are a potential hazard for CCS. involves the use of c. CCS is relatively cheap. a. nuclear fission c. fuel cells d. There are few underground rock formations b. nuclear fusion d. biofuels suitable for CCS. 38. Biofuels based on which of the following seem to have 26. The impurity in coal that contributes to acid rain is the most promise for the future? a. nitrogen c. carbon a. corn c. soybeans b. sulfur d. chlorine b. cellulose d. algae Exercises 4-47 139 39. Of the following, the strategy for coping with future 40. The least helpful government approach to controlling energy shortages with the most in its favor is to greenhouse gas emissions is a. burn more coal a. a carbon tax b. produce more oil from tar sands b. a cap-and-trade system c. divert more agricultural land to making c. to require increasing use of clean biofuels technologies d. increase energy efficiency and energy d. to subsidize biofuels conservation Exercises 4.1 Population and Prosperity something at ordinary temperatures, such as the 1. What are the three main factors that will require earth’s surface? changes in today’s patterns of energy production 13. What is the nature of the greenhouse effect in the and consumption? earth’s atmosphere? 4.2 Energy Consumption 14. List the chief greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. 2. Even if the developed countries stabilize or reduce What property do they share? their energy consumption in years to come, world- 15. About half the CO2 from burning fossil fuels enters wide energy consumption will increase. What are the atmosphere. What becomes of the rest? the two main reasons for this? 16. (a) Why is deforestation so important in global 3. The average rate of energy consumption per person in warming? (b) In round numbers, which proportion the United States is about how many times the average of worldwide greenhouse gas emissions is due to in China: twice, three times, four times, six times? deforestation: 5 percent, 10 percent, 20 percent, 40 percent? 4. List the fossil fuels in the order in which they will probably be used up. 17. List the fossil fuels in the order in which they contribute to world CO2 emissions. 5. Explain how sunlight is responsible for these energy sources: food, wood, water power, wind 4.5 Liquid Fuels power, fossil fuels. 18. What fuel liberates the most energy per gram when 6. What energy sources cannot be traced to sunlight it burns? What is produced when it burns? falling on the earth? 19. Most of the world’s oil is used as a fuel for what 4.3 Global Warming purpose? 7. Approximately what proportion of the 20. How do the oil reserves in tar sands compare with world’s population lives on or near coasts the reserves of ordinary crude oil? What are some and so may be under future threat from rising of the disadvantages of tar sand oil? sea level? 21. What is regenerative braking and what kinds of 8. (a) Give two reasons why global warming is cars can make use of it? What is the advantage of causing sea level to rise. (b) What is the minimum regenerative braking? sea-level rise expected by 2100: 10 cm, 50 cm, 1 m, 22. What are some of the reasons why the average fuel 10 m? efficiency of cars in the United States is the lowest 9. Once the polar ice sheets have melted beyond a in the world? certain amount, melting will continue even if CO2 4.6 Natural Gas emissions stop rising. Why? 23. The amount of CO2 emitted per kilowatt-hour of 10. The oceans as well as the atmosphere are growing electricity by a gas-fired power plant is about half warmer. What does this imply for tropical storms that emitted by a coal-fired plant. What do you such as hurricanes? think is the reason that coal-fired plants are much more common? 11. When was the last time world temperatures were as high as they are likely to be in 2100 if current rates 24. Why is natural gas rarely used as a vehicle fuel? of CO2 emission continue: hundreds of years ago, 25. What is shale gas? Methane clathrate? Where are thousands of years ago, millions of years ago? they found and why is great interest being shown in 4.4 Carbon Dioxide and the Greenhouse Effect them? 12. Every body of matter radiates light. What is 4.7 Coal characteristic of light radiated by something 26. What are the chief advantages of coal as a fuel? The very hot, such as the sun? Of light radiated by chief disadvantage? 140 4-48 Chapter 4 Energy and the Future 27. Coal is responsible for approximately which 41. What does a photovoltaic cell do? What is another proportion of the electricity generated in the United name for it? States: one-quarter, one-half, three-quarters? 42. What advantages do photovoltaic cells have for 28. Coal smoke contains sulfur and mercury. Why are installation in remote regions? they harmful? 43. Instead of a new 500-MW coal-fired power plant, 29. Why do you think that, per joule of energy liberated a wind farm of turbines rated at 2 MW maximum when they are burned, coal produces more carbon output each is to be installed. If the average turbine dioxide than the other fossil fuels? output is 40 percent of the maximum, how many 30. (a) List the desirable aspects of coal gasification, turbines are needed? the process in which coal is turned into a mixture 44. Explain how tide and wave energies can be captured. of gases called syngas. (b) Is there any way to 45. (a) What major advantage does geothermal energy prevent the CO2 emitted when coal is burned from have over solar, wind, tidal, and wave energies? entering the atmosphere? If so, why is it not widely (b) What is its chief disadvantage? used? 46. List four practical ways to store energy from 4.8 A Nuclear World? noncontinuous energy sources. 31. What is the basic difference between nuclear 4.11 Hydrogen and Fuel Cells fission and nuclear fusion? In what way are they 47. When hydrogen combines with oxygen, a great similar? deal of energy is liberated with only water as the 32. What role does uranium play in nuclear energy product. What are the two main factors that hold production? What is the uranium supply situation? back wider use of hydrogen as a fuel? 33. How does a nuclear power plant produce 48. What are the advantages and disadvantages of electricity? hydrogen fuel cells? 34. Explain why no nuclear power plants were planned 4.12 Biofuels in the United States between 1979 and now but are 49. (a) Why is corn not regarded as an ideal choice for currently being considered for construction. producing ethanol? (b) Cellulose is apparently a 35. List the potential advantages of fusion energy. better choice. Why is it not in wide use? 36. What stands in the way of the immediate use of 50. Why are algae so interesting as a way of producing nuclear fusion as a commercial energy source? biodiesel fuel? 37. Is there anywhere outside of laboratories where 4.13 Conservation fusion energy is produced today? 51. A long-term goal for energy efficiency envisions an 4.9 Clean Energy I average use of 65 GJ per person per year. To what 4.10 Clean Energy II continuous power in kilowatts does this correspond? 38. Give examples of clean sources that can supply 4.14 What Governments Must Do energy continuously and examples of others 52. A major obstacle to a worldwide agreement on whose output varies with time of day and weather reducing greenhouse gas emissions is that the conditions. developing countries want the developed ones to do 39. Of the various clean energy sources, which provides what three things? the most energy worldwide today? 53. Explain the cap-and-trade system for controlling 40. Give several reasons why fossil-fuel energy is CO2 emissions. Is there an alternative means of cheaper than energy from most renewable sources. control?
Pages to are hidden for
"Energy and the Future"Please download to view full document