A blog of my record of interesting things I came across throughout the course of Science 325 at Marylhurst University that relate to alternative energy and the environment.
After wind, sun, currents and tides, a company is preparing to make clean electricity by harnessing another natural phenomenon, the energy-unleashing encounter of freshwater and seawater.
"It is a form of renewable energy which, unlike solar or wind power, produces a predictable and stable amount of energy regardless of the weather," explained Stein Erik Skilhagen, in charge of the project at state-owned Statkraft, which specialises in renewable energies.
Osmotic energy is based on the principle that nature is constantly seeking balance, and plays on the different concentration levels of liquids.
When freshwater and seawater meet on either side of a membrane -- a thin layer that retains salt but lets water pass -- freshwater is drawn towards the seawater side. The flow puts pressure on the seawater side, and that pressure can be used to drive a turbine, producing electricity.
NASA and the Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR) have successfully launched a nine-foot rocket to a height of 1,300ft using an environmentally-friendly rocket propellant made of a mixture of water and “nanoscale aluminum” powder. The fuel, called ALICE, has the consistency of toothpaste with a high burn rate and achieved a maximum thrust of 650 pounds during this test.
The aluminum-ice, or ALICE, propellant is considered “green” because it produces essentially hydrogen gas and aluminum oxide. This is compared to current space shuttle flights, which consume about 773 tons of the oxidizer ammonium perchlorate in the solid booster rockets, with about 230 tons of hydrochloric acid appearing immediately in the exhaust from such flights.
ALICE provides thrust through a chemical reaction between water and aluminum. As the aluminum ignites, water molecules provide oxygen and hydrogen to fuel the combustion until all of the powder is burned. The key to the propellant’s performance is the tiny size of the aluminum particles, which have a diameter of about 80 nanometers. The nanoparticles combust more rapidly than larger particles and enable better control over the reaction and the rocket’s thrust.
350 is the most important number in the world—it's what scientists say is the safe upper limit for carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, 350 parts per million (ppm).
Two years ago, after leading climatologists observed rapid ice melt in the Arctic and other frightening signs of climate change, they issued a series of studies showing that the planet faced both human and natural disaster if atmospheric concentrations of CO2 remained above 350 parts per million.
Everyone from Al Gore to the U.N.’s top climate scientist has now embraced this goal as necessary for stabilizing the planet and preventing complete disaster. Now the trick is getting our leaders to pay attention and craft policies that will put the world on track to get to 350.
Is 350 scientifically possible?
Right now, mostly because we’ve burned so much fossil fuel, the atmospheric concentration of co2 is 390 ppm—that’s way too high, and it’s why ice is melting, drought is spreading, forests are dying. To bring that number down, the first task is to stop putting more carbon into the atmosphere. That means a very fast transition to sun and wind and other renewable forms of power. If we can stop pouring more carbon into the atmosphere, then forests and oceans will slowly suck some of it out of the air and return us to safe levels.
Is 350 politically possible?
It’s very hard. It means switching off fossil fuel much more quickly than governments and corporations have been planning. Our best chance to speed up that process will come in December in Copenhagen, when the world’s nations meet to agree on a new climate treaty. Right now, they’re not planning to do enough. But we can change that--if we mobilize the world to swift and bold climate action.
What is the day of action?
On October 24, the International Day of Climate Action will cover almost every country on earth, the most widespread day of environmental action in the planet’s history.
There will be big rallies in big cities, and incredible creative actions across the globe: mountain climbers on our highest peaks with banners, underwater demonstrations in island nations threatened by sea level rise, churches and mosques and synagogues and ashrams engaged in symbolic action, star athletes organizing mass bike rides--and hundreds upon hundreds of community events to raise awareness of the need for urgent action.
Every event will highlight the number 350--and people will gather at some point for a big group photo depicting that all important message. At 350.org, we'll assemble all the photos for a gigantic, global, visual petition.
The thousands of events on October 24 will drive 350 and all that it represents into the human imagination, and change the negotiating environment as we head towards the crucial UN Climate Negotiations in Copenhagen in December of 2009. Copenhagen may well be the pivotal moment that determines whether or not we get the planet out of the climate crisis, and your actions on October 24 will help our leaders realize we need a real solution that pays attention to the science.
How will this make a difference?
October 24 has finally put the focus where it needs to be: on the science and the citizens, not the special interests and the backroom deals.
People have sent in thousands of images of citizens gathering at important places around the world—from the melting peaks of Mt. Everest to the sinking beaches of the Maldives—displaying the number 350 in a creative way. 350.org staff will display these photos on the big screens in Times Square and projecting them at the UN headquarters. Those photos are appearing in newspapers large and small—the same newspapers that politicians all over the world use as a barometer of public opinion. We're also delivering copies of the images—and the stories that go with them—to national delegates, environment ministers, and heads of state the world over.
But more importantly, grassroots global action will be useful to put pressure on the huge UN Climate meeting in Copenhagen. Together we can remind our leaders that they need to take physical reality—and not political expediency—into account when they're making decisions about our collective future. 350 is a clear and specific goal (unlike vague demands to "stop global warming") that helps move the negotiations in the direction science and justice demand. We'll make sure your voice is heard, and this debate is re-framed in time to make a difference.
Marylhurst participated in this but I do not know how many people turned out for the event. Weasle words "scientists" and "leading climatologists" made me suspicious of the claims but I admire their effort at inclusive politics.
This fall, a group of Portland State University researchers will install solar panels over a series of small eco-roofs.
Once relegated to the fringe, interest in solar energy is higher now in the U.S. than it’s ever been, owing to a confluence of factors: rising global demand for energy, increased urgency to find non-polluting power sources, and security concerns about access to energy sources.
For those reasons, solar reflects the “Holy Grail” of renewable energy options. While the world consumes an average rate of 15 terawatts (TW) of energy, experts have identified 600 TW of readily accessible solar output. Solar power is clean and carbon-free, a critical element to reducing current and future carbon emissions, which are a major contributor to global climate change.
Simply put, “Solar energy is going to save the world.”
Well, that's a relief. We can all go back to sleep now.
You know, I predicted this. In 2003, I kept saying that pretty soon it would be trendy to be "green" and every company in the US would claim to be "sustainable" and "eco-friendly" and my personal favorite, "responsible". This is so sad. It turns out it is easy being green.
A handful of scientists organized a petition to change the official statement of the American Physical Society from one that admits anthropogenic affects on global climate change to a position much more skeptical.
The proposed new statement included the idea, "Current climate models appear insufficiently reliable to properly account for natural and anthropogenic contributions to past climate change, much less project future climate."
The APS council voted to maintain their 2007 stated position "The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring." and, "Because the complexity of the climate makes accurate prediction difficult, the APS urges an enhanced effort to understand the effects of human activity on the Earth’s climate, and to provide the technological options for meeting the climate challenge in the near and longer terms."
I am relieved that at least some of the brightest scientists are not giving in to pressure to pander to the political interests of those who would divert attention from limiting the responsibility of those with the technological capacity to have contributed to global climate change.
The APS promotes the use of technology to find ways to curb the effects of the global climate change caused by technology.
I am a student at Marylhurst University. Some of these blogs are for classes I took. Some of these blogs are for research I do. Some of these blogs are from me to you.
