Discussion Board -> Exam questions
Topic: Exam questions

Description: post your answers below! good luck studying!


    Created: 2007-12-01 - alexandra: questions 1-3

    1. Give an overview of the basic societal and infrastructure reasons which cause Americans to drive more roadmiles each successive year. What steps could be taken (other than just making gas more expensive to effectively curb this behavior?
    Reasons:
    -lack of centralization of infrastructure (i.e. schools, grocery stores, banks, gym,
    work, etc.) you have to drive around a lot to get everywhere
    -people don’t make one multipurpose trip, they make several separate errand runs
    -we have negative perceptions about the safety and cleanliness of public
    transportation
    -public transportation often doesn’t go where we need it to go
    -as Americans we harbor a strong desire for personal time (i.e. commuting alone)
    Solutions:
    -try to centralize stuff, the concept of the eco-village, or just a village format
    (Europe can be an example with local grocery stores and bakeries and banks etc.)
    -work on public transit PR, it can be clean, safe
    -increase public transportation lines and hours of operation, make it a viable
    option
    -look at the private public transportation (i.e. the pods)
    -improve carpooling incentives
    -improve fuel efficiency which may not decrease roadmiles but makes them less
    damaging

    2. Explain why the European Union countries serve as good examples of government driven initiatives in the area of renewable energy. Cite some specific projects or policies and discuss why you think Europe is better able to attack this issue than the U.S.
    -Europe has several advantages in my opinion
    - the existence of the European Union and thus the potential of cooperative
    action
    -smaller physical area to work with, they have already reached their
    physical limits in non-renewable resource extraction largely speaking,
    they must make a change, also this ensures cooperation, lack of
    cooperation from one country can equal disaster for all in such a small
    area
    -the European population strikes me as generally more politically and
    environmentally aware
    -also many European countries maintain their historic infrastructure and
    thus are not as car friendly making public transit a necessity and not an
    option.
    -Projects
    -energy efficient cars, I think this may be partly because the effects of
    pollution are so immediately visible in Europe, it doesn’t necessarily
    float into the countryside. Also consistently higher taxes on gas helps
    ensure that people won’t drive without energy efficiency.
    -trains are used largely for the transport of goods and people within
    Europe. Heavy subsidies from the governments
    -maybe other people can speak more to projects in other countries, I don’t remember all the presentations.

    3. Discuss and analyze specific obstacles (physical, environmental, economic, social, political) to the widespread integration of renewable energy into the American economy. How would you propose to eliminate or reduce these obstacles?
    -physical: the U.S. is pretty large and this makes some renewable energy sources
    difficult. For example areas that maybe would be ideal for solar or wind are often
    at a fair distance from the grid making distribution of energy difficult.
    -to solve this we need to solve the storage issue
    -environmental: while I’m not sure wind turbines are of great danger to birds,
    certainly paving over AZ or Nevada with PV cell arrays would have some degree
    of impact on the environment. Also the infrastructure required for a lot of these
    energy sources would have some degree of impact on the environment.
    -I think by using some combination of many sorts of renewable energy
    we could certainly overcome any major environmental issue.
    -social: I think one of the largest social issues is the NIMBY issue, along with consumptive habits
    -these are difficult issues to deal with, I think strong PR campaigns for
    renewables would be a start in addressing NIMBY

    -political: I think a huge problem is that it is political suicide right now to try to
    look at anything in the long term. Also the influence of oil companies and
    auto industries on politics is a problem as well
    - I’m not really sure of solutions here, certainly we need to not penalize
    lawmakers who are looking ahead but not necessarily making short term
    changes
    -as for industry influences on politics, I think that’s a huge issue in terms
    of campaign fundraising and campaign finance reform that needs to be
    addressed at a national level for everything, not just energy issues.
    -- by Anon.

      Created: 2007-12-03 - QUESTION 2
          2. Explain why the European Union countries serve as good examples of government driven initiatives in the area of renewable energy. Cite some specific projects or policies and discuss why you think Europe is able to better attack this issue than the US.

      I think one of the reasons European Union countries have been so aggressive in expanding their energy output from renewables is because of the Kyoto Protocol.  Germany, the world leader in renewable energies, has consistently increased its goal to reduce its greenhouse emissions in order to comply with and surpass the goal imposed by the Kyoto Protocol.  Please note that the United States has not signed the Kyoto Protocol, therefore it has yet to make a commitment to find ways reduce its greenhouse emissions, be it through conservation or renewables.  Since we do not have a target or a goal to meet, and the rest of the world is not monitoring our progress, there is not much of an incentive for us to do what Germany, and Spain, and the rest of the EU countries are doing.  

      In order to comply with the Kyoto Protocol, EU countries have adapted a tactic of government-driven policies when it comes to the issue of renewables.  Getting an entire nation to participate in a unified effort seems to me to be a far more successful technique than participation at the individual level, which seems to be the case for the U.S.  In the U.S, it seems that we focus on how much energy households would save by doing this and that, but we don’t focus much on how much our whole country would benefit if the effort was unified.  I do believe the individualistic mentality is holding us back as a nation when it comes to being more proactive in terms of finding and creating alternative energy sources.  

      Here are some examples of government-driven policies in Europe that work:  subsidized loans for those who wish to invest in renewables, Feed-In-Tariffs (i.e. Germany, Spain, etc ‡ The "Feed-in Law" in Germany permits customers to receive preferential tariffs for solar generated electricity depending on the nature and size of the installation), conservation efforts, gasoline taxes, and etc.

      Here are some examples of specific policies that have been extremely successful in Germany:  

      GERMAN RENEWABLE ENERGY LAW:  Guarantees that for a limited time, the nation’s electric utility companies must buy  all wind, solar, and other renewable power at a price per kw/hr higher than that of power generated from coal, nuclear of natural gas.   This law is a HUGE incentive to invest in renewables.

      CITIZENS IN ACTION:  Government envisions an 11 percent reduction in electricity use by 2020 through conservation efforts alone and this alone would save 40 million tons of CO2.

      GASOLINE ECO TAX: Gas taxes are increasing by 3 euro cents per liter per year  in Germany. Germans pay nearly $6.50 per gallon for gas. Thanks to the 1999 ecotax, by 2004 fuel consumption dropped by around 7 percent from that year, 6 percent more Germans were riding public transport, and cars with nearly 80 MPG fuel efficiency hit the market – that’s the VW Lupo.

      PHASE-OUT NUCLEAR POWER AGREEMENT: German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and the nation's leading energy companies formally signed an agreement on 11 June 2002 to shut down the country's 19 civilian nuclear power reactors.

      GOALS SPARKED BY THE KYOTO PROTOCOL:  Germany pledged to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 36 percent by 2020 from 1990 levels at the end of last month.

      [Here  is some info from the internet:  The Kyoto Protocol is a protocol to the International Framework Convention on Climate Change with the objective of reducing Greenhouse gases that cause climate change. As stated in the treaty itself, the objective of the Kyoto Protocol is to achieve "stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.�  As of November 2007, 174 parties have ratified the protocol. Of these, 36 countries (plus the EU as a party in its own right) are required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to the levels specified for each of them in the treaty.  A notable exception is the United States. One hundred thirty seven (137) countries have ratified the protocol, but have no obligation beyond monitoring and reporting emissions.]


      -- by Anon.

      Created: 2007-12-01 - Questions 33-35
      Text hear same as in Word File:
      33 What is cellulosic ethanol and why does it hold more promise than grain based ethanol as a source for biofuels?
      *  Conventional ethanol is derived from grains such as corn and wheat or soybeans. This has somewhat limited yield per unit acre of crops grown.

          * Cellulosic ethanol can be produced from a wider variety of cellulosic biomass feedstocks including agricultural plant wastes (corn stover, cereal straws, sugarcane bagasse), plant wastes from industrial processes (sawdust, paper pulp) and energy crops grown specifically for fuel production, such as switchgrass

      Promise lies in the following:

      Cellulosic ethanol production substitutes biomass for fossil fuels, changing the emissions calculations, according to Michael Wang of Argonne National Laboratories. An optimistic point of view states that the greenhouse gases produced in the combustion of fossil fuels are offset by the CO2 absorbed during the growth of the biomass. (Need designer crops really to make this happen.)

      Switchgrass for equivalent of 100 billion gallons of gasoline:
      Current average yields are five dry tons per acre.
      With improved breeding techniques this could increase to 15 dry tons per acre
      88 Million acres is then needed to produce the equivalent of 100 billion gallons of gasoline
      Currently 70 million acres of cropland are devoted to growing soybeans for animal feed; switch grass has more animal protein per acre.
      Grain based ethanol requires 175 million acres of crop land! (105 million acres more than what is devoted to switchgrass.)


      34 Is Marx full of crap on his characterization of the state of mind of capitalist laborer or might he actually have real insight here?
      Marx Quote:
      “The activity of the laborer is not his own activity. It belongs to someone else, it is the loss of his self. The result, therefore, is that the human being (the laborer) does not feel himself to be free except in his animal functions: eating, drinking, and reproducing, at his best in his dwelling or in his clothing, etc., and in his human functions he is no more than an animal. The animal becomes human and the human becomes animal. A direct consequence of the estrangement of the humans from the product of their labor, from their life-activity, from their species-being, is the estrangement of humans from humans.�

      It seems like there is some definite insight. Man makes his things and his off time his own and doesn’t want to be further hindered. The alone time in the car, the ease of going places his way on his own time schedule, things like these play a role in the extablishment of the consumer behavior we indulge in, in our capitalist society. We strive to make our off time a comfort against our work time not being out own.


      35 What is the main "physics" problem that limits the ultimate real world efficiency of a PV cell?
      When photons strike a metal, their energy is used to liberate loosely bound electrons and therefore induce a current.
      As the conducting material (silicon) heats up, more frequent collisions of atoms and carriers occur in the material. This causes the internal resistance to increase and the overall ability to carry a current decreases. Thus, as the temperature rises, the efficiency of a silicon PV cell decreases. You can not defeat this fundamental piece of physics without paying an even larger energy cost in cooling.

       

      -- by Anon.

        Created: 2007-12-01 - Questions 33-35
        Same Text as In Attached Word File
         33 What is cellulosic ethanol and why does it hold more promise than grain based ethanol as a source for biofuels?
        *  Conventional ethanol is derived from grains such as corn and wheat or soybeans. This has somewhat limited yield per unit acre of crops grown.

            * Cellulosic ethanol can be produced from a wider variety of cellulosic biomass feedstocks including agricultural plant wastes (corn stover, cereal straws, sugarcane bagasse), plant wastes from industrial processes (sawdust, paper pulp) and energy crops grown specifically for fuel production, such as switchgrass

        Promise lies in the following:

        Cellulosic ethanol production substitutes biomass for fossil fuels, changing the emissions calculations, according to Michael Wang of Argonne National Laboratories. An optimistic point of view states that the greenhouse gases produced in the combustion of fossil fuels are offset by the CO2 absorbed during the growth of the biomass. (Need designer crops really to make this happen.)

        Switchgrass for equivalent of 100 billion gallons of gasoline:
        Current average yields are five dry tons per acre.
        With improved breeding techniques this could increase to 15 dry tons per acre
        88 Million acres is then needed to produce the equivalent of 100 billion gallons of gasoline
        Currently 70 million acres of cropland are devoted to growing soybeans for animal feed; switch grass has more animal protein per acre.
        Grain based ethanol requires 175 million acres of crop land! (105 million acres more than what is devoted to switchgrass.)


        34 Is Marx full of crap on his characterization of the state of mind of capitalist laborer or might he actually have real insight here?
        Marx Quote:
        “The activity of the laborer is not his own activity. It belongs to someone else, it is the loss of his self. The result, therefore, is that the human being (the laborer) does not feel himself to be free except in his animal functions: eating, drinking, and reproducing, at his best in his dwelling or in his clothing, etc., and in his human functions he is no more than an animal. The animal becomes human and the human becomes animal. A direct consequence of the estrangement of the humans from the product of their labor, from their life-activity, from their species-being, is the estrangement of humans from humans.�

        It seems like there is some definite insight. Man makes his things and his off time his own and doesn’t want to be further hindered. The alone time in the car, the ease of going places his way on his own time schedule, things like these play a role in the extablishment of the consumer behavior we indulge in, in our capitalist society. We strive to make our off time a comfort against our work time not being out own.


        35 What is the main "physics" problem that limits the ultimate real world efficiency of a PV cell?
        When photons strike a metal, their energy is used to liberate loosely bound electrons and therefore induce a current.
        As the conducting material (silicon) heats up, more frequent collisions of atoms and carriers occur in the material. This causes the internal resistance to increase and the overall ability to carry a current decreases. Thus, as the temperature rises, the efficiency of a silicon PV cell decreases. You can not defeat this fundamental piece of physics without paying an even larger energy cost in cooling.


        -- by Anon.

          Created: 2007-12-03 - RE: Questions 33-35
          This is basically what Andrea has, but more condensed:

          CONVENTIONAL ETHANOL IS NOT SCALABLE:  We use 450 million acres of land in the U.S. to grow our food. We would need 78 percent of that land to crop enough corn to mane enough conventional ethanol (fuel) to replace our 200 billion gallons/year consumption of gasoline.

          BUT CELLULOSIC ETHANOL IS:  With cellulosic ethanol we would only need 88 million acres (five times less than conventional ethanol) of land to produce 100 billion gallons of fuel, which is half of our energy needs in terms of gasoline consumption. 

          So, in other words, cellulosic biofuels are a scalable technology that can reach 50 percent of our fuel needs!

          -- by Anon.

          Created: 2007-12-01 - 30-32
          30 Defend or refute the following statement: "The scientific method has never had any real impact on the way society or the individuals within a society function":

          I believe that scientific method is often overlooked simply because people never take the time to do basic scientific calculations. For instance, if a person decided to calculate how much energy could be saved via compact flourescent, they would definately buy them.  The scientific method never has impact because no one takes the time to use it.

          31 Demonstrate that 10s of thousands of megawatts of electricity generation, on the scale of US electrical consumption could be saved through the wide spread use of CFLs.

          Regular bulb uses 100W, CFL uses 20W.
          So you have 300million people with say 4 bulbs per person that makes 1.2billion bulbs.
          if you used regular bulbs that would be 100W x 1.2billion bulbs= 120billionW = 120,000MW
          if you used CFL that would be 20W x 1.2billion bulbs= 24billionW = 24,000MW
          So that if you do 120,000MW - 24,000MW you get 96,000MW which is how much energy would be saved.


          32. Provide an explanation, based on the historical price of gas since 1970, for why the US has alternatively made large gains in average fuel efficiency and has not made large gains.

          In the 70's, due to the OPEC embargo and the fact that the wells on U.S. soil were almost all used, the price of gas went way up. In turn the fuel efficiancy of cars went way up. But after a while the price settled again at a low price so cars didn't really have a reason to make developments in fuel effeciancy. In the present day fuel prices are again going up which has sparked interest in more fuel effeciant cars like the hybrid.. 

          -- by Anon.

            Created: 2007-12-03 - QUESTION 32
            From Bothun’s website:  The price of gas reflects elements of its distribution, consumption and source. It is a tale of world instability and global economies. In 1950, the US produced 50% of the world's oil supply. It got this production out of approximately 600 thousand individual oil wells. Between 1950 and 1970 the price of oil fluctuated around some mean trend, based on market conditions.

            Around 1970, however, oil production in the Mideast began coming on line (I think Bothun means offline here?) and US imports of foreign oil increased. As soon as our reliance on these imports grew to the point where we became dependent on it for private transportation, the Arab Oil Embargo was announced which caused the price of gas to quickly rise, lead to the exploitation of a limited oil reserve in Alaska, and ultimately lead to the Exxon Valdez  disaster.

            The price of gas remained high until the early 80s when the Arab Oil Cartel begin to fall apart. After this collapse, the price of gas was as cheap as it has ever been. In fact, during the late 80's, gasoline was 50% of its 1950 cost! The slight rise in the price of gas at the close of the 80's reflects increased taxation.

            So, I definitely we did not make large gains in fuel efficiency AFTER the Arab Oil Cartel fell apart in the early 80s and the price of gas was cheap again, there was no longer an incentive for alternatives to gasoline.  We did make progress in the seventies when the price of gas was extremely high, but obviously it was not that much because to this day our average fuel efficiency is low when compared to other countries (and even if we compare it to the fuel efficiencies of the past).  We are just now starting to make progress because the threat of running out of oil or paying high prices for oil is real again, coupled with the threat of Global Warming from the CO2 emissions created by vehicles.)


            -- by Anon.

              Created: 2007-12-03 - QUESTION 32 EXPLANATION FROM WIKIPEDIA
              The 1973 oil crisis began on October 17, 1973, when the members of Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC, consisting of the Arab members of OPEC plus Egypt and Syria) announced, as a result of the ongoing Yom Kippur War, that they would no longer ship petroleum to nations that had supported Israel in its conflict with Syria and Egypt (the United States, its allies in Western Europe, and Japan).

              About the same time, OPEC members agreed to use their leverage over the world price-setting mechanism for oil in order to raise world oil prices, after the failure of negotiations with the "Seven Sisters" earlier in the month. Because of the dependence of the industrialized world on crude oil and the predominant role of OPEC as a global supplier, these price increases were dramatically inflationary to the economies of the targeted countries, while at the same time suppressive of economic activity. The targeted countries responded with a wide variety of new, and mostly permanent, initiatives to contain their further dependency.

              Meanwhile, the shock produced chaos in the West. In the United States, the retail price of a gallon of gasoline rose from a national average of 38.5 cents in May 1973 to 55.1 cents in June 1974. Meanwhile, New York Stock Exchange shares lost $97 billion in value in six weeks.

              In the U.S., drivers of vehicles with license plates having an odd number as the last digit (or a vanity license plate) were allowed to purchase gasoline for their cars only on odd-numbered days of the month, while drivers of vehicles with even-numbered license plates were allowed to purchase fuel only on even-numbered days.

              The U.S. government response to the embargo was quick but of limited effectiveness. A National Maximum Speed Limit of 55 mph (88 km/h) was imposed to help reduce consumption. President Nixon named William Simon as an official "energy czar," and in 1977, a cabinet-level Department of Energy was created, leading to the creation of the United States's Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The National Energy Act of 1978 was also a response to this crisis.

              Year-round daylight saving time was implemented: at 2:00 a.m. local time on January 6, 1974, clocks were advanced one hour across the nation. The move spawned significant criticism because it forced many children to commute to school before sunrise. As a result, the clocks were turned back on the last Sunday in October as originally scheduled, and in 1975 clocks were set forward one hour at 2:00 a.m. on February 23. The pre-existing daylight-saving rules, calling for the clocks to be advanced one hour on the last Sunday in April, were restored in 1976.

              The crisis also prompted a call for individuals and businesses to conserve energy — most notably a campaign by the Advertising Council using the tag line "Don't Be Fuelish." Many newspapers carried full-page advertisements that featured cut-outs which could be attached to light switches that had the slogan "Last Out, Lights Out: Don't Be Fuelish" emblazoned thereon.

              The U.S. "Big Three" automakers' first order of business after Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards were enacted was to downsize existing automobile categories. By the end of the 1970s, 121-inch wheelbase vehicles with a 4,500 pound gross weight were a thing of the past. Before the mass production of automatic overdrive transmissions and electronic fuel injection, the traditional front engine/rear wheel drive layout was being phased out for the more efficient front engine/front wheel drive, starting with compact cars. Using the Volkswagen Rabbit as the archetype, much of Detroit went to front wheel drive after 1980 in response to CAFE's 27.5 mile per gallon fuel consumption mandate.

              The energy crisis led to greater interest in renewable energy and spurred research in solar power and wind power. It also led to greater pressure to exploit North American oil sources, and increased the West's dependence on coal and nuclear power.


              -- by Anon.

            Created: 2007-12-01 - Questions 17, 20, 21

            17. Give an explanation of why it seems to be that Americans have the attitude that its their manifest destiny to organize and maintain a highly consumptive society

            One can gain some insight from ideological and historical roots in the United States.

            Ideology in the United States is based on the classical liberal notion of the individual and on a competitive economic system. The Declaration of Independence claims that individuals have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (or “life, liberty, and property� in the words of John Locke.) The men who articulated the foundations of United States’ Government, focused on citizens’ rights, not our responsibilities to one another, let alone to our natural home or the other creatures we share it with. Adam Smith claimed that competition, guided by the invisible hand of the market, would lead to the greatest surplus for all. However, he could not conceive of that surplus being bounded by limited resources.

            These ideologies arose within the historical context of the rise of capitalism, colonialism, and industrialization. Because of the size of the territory and the country’s global economic status, people in the United States have rarely felt limited in terms of resources. Conservation, therefore, has not typically been a main part of North Americans’ mindset.

            20. What is the 84 million barrels per day problem and how is that likely to effect the world in the near term future?   (I'm not sure about the second half  of this question.)

            Our worldwide infrastructure supports the processing of 84 million barrels a day and we have now approached that.

            There are various possible scenarios about what will happen in terms of energy production. Some predict that both oil production and the production of energy from alternative sources will increase (most optimistic), others see alternative energy virtually replacing oil (optimistic.) On the other hand, some believe that peak oil is nigh and alternative energy will not be able to replace the losses (pessimistic.) In the middle is a plateau scenario in which energy production remains fairly constant (oil production decreases and alternative energy makes up the difference.)

            I think that governments’ and citizens’ choices right now in regards to energy conservation and investing in renewable will highly influence which track we end up on. In my opinion, we will most likely see the pessimistic or plateau scenario play out because the current strategy is to just keep drilling.


            21. Qualitatively discuss how the physical geography of a planet may shape the way that its resources are used by its "intelligent" civilization.

            If civilizations emerge limited by geographic bounds (such as ocean, mountains, desserts) they will be more likely to think of using their resources in sustainable ways. It’s not a good idea to use up all your resources if there’s no where else to go. Our Earth’s geography is mostly made up of large, traversable continents. This has made it possible for most human settlements to pick up and leave when sources of food and shelter run out.


            -- by Anon.

              Created: 2007-12-02 - Q's 11-14
              ???
              -- by Anon.

                Created: 2007-12-03 - RE: Q's 11-14
                I am not seeing question 14 in the attachment ... Is it supposed to be in there?
                -- by Anon.

                Created: 2007-12-02 - 24-26
                24. some steps that you would take to motivate a reduction in personal vehicle miles driven:
                    
                1.    Tax fossil fuel
                2.    Provide incentives for using biofuels and alternative means of transportation.

                3.    Initiate new means of public transportation that also address Marx’s point of the alienation/dehumanization of the laborer such as personal pod public transport. An example of such transportation can be seen in the personal sky tran, or the Vancouver skytrain.
                 
                4.    Combine technologies—why not have solar panels or wind turbines on your skytrain.

                5.    Have personal vehicle miles driven be at the forefront of future municipal planning.  I would also make a law (because I am czar) that every adult must live without a vehicle for a year as a way to teach people how to organize trips in order to make them more efficient (people would actively consolidate errands if they were expending their own physical energy i.e. biking/walking or even using public transport)

                 
                25. Why is US incapable of long-term infrastructure planning?
                    1. We are wedded to the Business as Usual scenario

                2. POLITICS: raising taxes in order to fund  large-scale projects does not win     
                                elections.  
                3.It is physically impossible for the US people to think more than three years ahead.  

                4. We can’t do simple math, we do not understand levelized costs, and we only pay attention to the sticker price.  Why else would we not all be using CFBs?

                26.  Why is the US wedded to the BAU scenario?
                 1.This has worked for us thus far: US cultural history—we have a legacy of American “exceptionalism�, the frontier phenomenon, land is an endless resource.

                2. Policy continues to be based on how we perceive human’s role and our general mentality is that we are at the top of the food chain and therefore we do not need to alter our behavior.


                -- by Anon.

                  Created: 2007-12-02 - Questions 4-6 Melissa
                  4 Critically discuss the comparative relative advantages and disadvantages of Wind vs Solar Energy as a production line renewable energy source.

                  Wind energy is easier to implement on a large scale than Solar energy.  Solar energy is not as efficient as wind energy simply because the (tell me if I got the term wrong, please) incidental energy is higher.  (Solar energy only being available approimately 10 hours per day on average throughout the year.)  Also, WInd turbines require fewer materials than solar panels and are easier to erect.  Wind farms can produce more energy per square km than solar farms. 

                  5 Critically discuss the possibilities for having a hydrogen economy. Identify what you think are the main obstacles and propose solutions to overcome them.

                  Main obstacles of Hydrogen economy:

                  Storage -- storage is an obstacle because hydrogen has an enormous mass at room temperature.  To store it it needs to be under extreme pressure or liquified.  Hydrogen is liquid only at extremely low temperatures.  Basically, to store hydrogen, you are expending more energy than it produces.

                  Transportation -- this is related to the storage problem because to transport hydrogen, you need to store it.  Pipelines are not a good option because you'd have to either cool or pressurize the entire pipeline. 

                  Production -- as of right now, most hydrogen is produced in plants powered by LNG or other non-renewable resources. 

                  Solutions:

                  Storage  -- carbon nanotubes are one technology that is being engineered for hydrogen storage.  Also, there are ways to store it in alloys so that the reaction to get the hydrogen takes place on location (like in the car) with a chemical reaction.  There are also glass microspheres and tablets.

                  Transportation -- the new methods of storage aid in transportation as well.  I really don't know much about this, so if anyone has any more knowledge, feel free to contribute.

                  Production -- switching to solar or wind power to produce hydrogen is one example.  This also aids in the issue transporting energy from isolated solar/wind farms. It can be converted it to hydrogen on site and then transporting it to stations and people as hydrogen.

                  6                   Discuss how solar concentrating power systems work.

                  Basically, solar power concetrating systems uses a system of mirrors or magnification to concentrating the solar power onto one spot.  For exaple, solar trough systems concentrate the energy on a tube filled with oil that heats up and provides energy to the grid.  The biggest problem with these is overheating.  Often the materials can't withstand the extreme heat from concentrated solar energy.

                  -- by Anon.

                    Created: 2007-12-02 - Q's 7-9

                    7. The NIMBY phenomena (Not in my backyard) is becoming increasingly powerful for several reasons. The American attitude of maintaining the status quo comes to mind because of the selfish nature of refusing renewables in a time of dramatic consumption and scarcity. In addition, elected officials that represent certain districts where environmental technologies could be employed are often committed first to re-election and not to what is best for their constituents in the long run.

                    Money and political clout tend to win in NIMBY situations.

                    Media portrayal can lead to misperceptions about large facilities near populations.

                     

                    8. Parallels between the energy dilemma of the 1930s and today?

                    I am really not sure on this one guys, so maybe some people can post some ideas…

                     One possible parallel could be the drastic increase in cars on the road during this time. As well as the obvious economic downturn.

                     9. Levelized costs are determined by factors which have effects on the overall cost-effectiveness of the production facility over time.

                     The three determining factors are capital costs, fixed costs and variable costs.

                     Capital costs include such expenditures as land acquisition, installation costs, and manufacturing costs.

                     Fixed cost includes operation costs and annual maintenance prices.

                     Finally, variable costs are normally related to distribution costs.

                    When factored together, the levelized cost gives an accurate pay back time for the investment.

                     


                    -- by Anon.

                      Created: 2007-12-02 - RE: Q's 7-9
                      #8 expansion:
                      In the 1930s depression era public works were a greater part of the government's plan for energy generation even though we were had a lesser amount of wealth. 

                      The hydro electric dams in Washington which were built in the 1930s are a good example of proactive public works energy programs. 

                      -- by Anon.

                        Created: 2007-12-02 - RE: Q's 7-9
                        Also on NIMBY....

                        people tend to be concerned with property values when it comes to big facilities. 
                        They have the capital, so paying extra to preserve property value is deemed more important than renewables.

                        -- by Anon.

                          Created: 2007-12-04 - RE: Q's 7-9
                          To answer the second part of the question:  What is the logical outcome of basing environmental policy on NIMBY kinds of reactions?

                          NIMBY reactions makke policy implementation difficult -> may lead to failure!

                          -- by Anon.

                      Created: 2007-12-02 - Questions 15-18
                      I'm not completely sure about number 18 so if anyone has any answers feel free to suggest them.
                      -- by Anon.

                        Created: 2007-12-04 - QUESTION 16
                        Here's something I found online:

                        Engineering Challenges

                        The design and installation of a cost-effective pipe to transport large quantities of cold water to the surface (i.e., cold water pipe, CWP) presented an engineering challenge of significant magnitude complicated by a lack of evolutionary experience. This challenge was meet in the USA with a program relying on computer-aided analytical studies integrated with laboratory and at-sea tests. The greatest outcome achieved has been the design, fabrication, transportation, deployment and test at-sea of an instrumented 2.4 m diameter, 120 m long, fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP) sandwich construction pipe attached to a barge. The data obtained was used to validate the design technology developed for pipes suspended from floating OTEC plants. This type of pipe is recommended for floating OTEC plants. For land-based plants there is a validated design for high-density polyethylene pipes of diameter less than 1.6 m. In the case of larger diameter pipes offshore techniques used to deploy large segmented pipes made of steel, concrete or FRP are applicable. Pressurized pipes made of reinforced elastomeric fabrics (e.g., soft pipes), with pumps located at the cold water intake, seem to offer the most innovative alternative to conventional concepts. However, the operability of pumps in 800 m to 1000 m water depths over extended periods must be verified and the inspection, maintenance and repair (IM&R) constraints established before soft pipes can be used in practical designs.

                        Other components for OTEC floating plants that present engineering challenges are the position keeping system and the attachment of the submarine power cable to the floating plant. Deep ocean-mooring systems, designed for water depths of more than 1000 m, or dynamic positioning thrusters developed by the offshore industry can be used for position keeping. The warm water intake and the mixed return water also provide the momentum necessary to position the surface vessel. The offshore industry also provides the engineering and technological backgrounds required to design and install the riser for the submarine power cable.

                        The design of OTEC CWPs, mooring systems and the submarine power cable must take into consideration survivability loads as well as fatigue induced loads. The first kind is based on extreme environmental phenomena, with a relatively long return period, that might result in ultimate strength failure while the second kind might result in fatigue-induced failure through normal operations.

                        The part in red:  I actually remember Bothun talking about it in class.

                        -- by Anon.

                        Created: 2007-12-02 - questions 31-33

                        31. Demonstrate that 10s of thousands of megawatts of electricity generation, on the scale of US electrical consumption could be saved through the wide spread use of CFLs.

                        CFL calculation, basically what we did in class:

                        Each (20 W) bulb per 100W replacement saves 80W, per hour.  80W times ten~ish bulbs is 800W per hour. (or Watt hours,Wh ) This is 800Wh times approximately 100 million homes (US pop is ~300 mill, roughly 3 ppl per home) or 80 000 000 000 Wh, or dividing by 1000000 is 80 000 MWh.

                        He didn't do this in class, but you could, I think, even take it one more step by doing 80 000 MWh times5 hours~ish a day times 365 days, about 8000 hours, and get 640 000 000 MW over the course of a year, from HOUSEHOLDS ALONE, not counting commericial spaces and yuppie houses with 30+ lightbulbs.

                        32. Provide an explanation, based on the historical price of gas since 1970, for why the US has alternatively made large gains in average fuel efficiency and has not made large gains.

                        Am reading through some lectures...it basically seems like we got  a lot of improvement aftr the oil shock, then we realized there were other options, oil shock ends, innovation grinds to a halt. The innovation seems to rely heavily on oil prices, because car manf. are forced to pay attn to the mileage then. hope the other person has found a bit more if this overlapped.

                        33. What is cellulosic ethanol and why does it hold more promise than grain based ethanol as a source for biofuels?

                        Grain based: using just the corn kernels

                        Cellulosic: using the corn kernels, the husk, the stalk, the leaves, the silk, everything.

                        cellulosic ethanol is made by breaking down the fibers of a plant, fibers that hold sugar, so that we can ferment the sugar into ethanol. That's maybe portly worded, but its the basic concept. The cellulosic process yield much much higher productivity gains in plants harvested for energy output, because you can use everything that grows on every square inch of the land. It yields little to no waste (because waste is used for livestock, or burned for fuel) unlike grain-based.  Cellulosic is easier with plants that 'break down' easier that corn, like native/prairie grasses, and this is a double advantage because they are easier to grow, can grow with less water, are *scalable* and are simply going to yield a net energy positive and fairly clean fuel.  


                        -- by Anon.

                          Created: 2007-12-02 - 25-27

                          25) The United States is not exactly a self-sacrificing country. Our continued strive for bigger and better things usually blind us to what really needs to be done. The population is often ignorant to what the future holds and can’t see the repercussions of current events in the future. The simple cost of conservation, say in fluorescent light bulbs, tends to be too expensive to upgrade, and thus many people do not see the benefits of the future. (a 20 watt bulb that has the same luminescence of a 100 watt bulb saves energy!)

                          26) America is tied into the Business as Usual scenario because we believe that we are the biggest and best. In order to maintain that image, we must continue to improve our economy and by improving our economy, the usage of energy increases. Therefore we continue to use more energy in an increasing manner and although ideas have been implemented in conserving energy, our need to be better than the next country trumps the need to save resources.

                          27) Average Joe likes the way things work out for him. He consumes what can be provided for him. In order to change his views, perhaps supply needs to not meet the demand. For the Average Joe, gasoline is abundant (albeit expensive as hell). But what if there is a shortage? Average Joe no longer has the means to get as much gas as he wants and therefore must conserve his usage of his Ford Excursion. Joe can no longer use his SUV as much for his work and therefore makes less money. Joe now has to conserve his money. This situation might convince Collective Joe (all the people in the country) that if he had planned ahead and conserved energy, there would still be some to go around.


                          -- by Anon.

                            Created: 2007-12-02 - Questions 19-22
                            1. Explain how Hubbert was able to use his formalism to estimate when peak production/consumption of oil would occur for the US and which factor his prediction is most sensitive to.
                              1. Hubbert assumed that the intrinstic shape of the production curve for prod. In US was bell-shaped because
                                1. the production curve of individual oil wells were also bell-shaped
                              2. He estimated the total reserves R of U.S. reserves.  This was the integrated area under the Hubbert curve
                              3. Hubbert found the rate of exponential growth (k) to be around 3% from data for U.S. oil production during 1946-1955.
                              4. Using the ratio of percent prod. from 1946-1955 and the amount of total reserve R, Hubbert formulated the exact bell curve for U.S. oil prod. The time at R/2 would be peak production
                              5. Note: depletion timescale based on equation Te = 1/k * ln (Rk/ro +1), where 1/k term is far more important because the other term grows relatively slower due to its logarithmic nature
                            2. What is the 84 million barrels per day problem and how is that likely to effect the world in the near term future?
                              1. constant oil distribution of 84 mbpd (been like this for 3-4 years already), with rising demand currently surpassing supply (to be made worse by emergence of India, China

                              2. problem is an aging and inadequate refinement infrastructure.  Due to the decine/plateau of oil production, it is highly unlikely that new refineries will be built.  Refineries are already working at peak production.
                            3. Qualitatively discuss how the physical geography of a planet may shape the way that its resources are used by its "intelligent" civilization.
                              1. Large continents: view of land, resources, planet as infinite/ boundless
                              2. small islands: view of earth as finite, this is immediately recognized by inhabitants, and thus care must be taken to ensure survival for many generations à conservation/sustainability, à much different resource management plan
                              3. *it’s a matter of consumption rate vs. scale of discovery, which the globalized world has slowly started to realize.
                            4. Describe some of the current problems associated with the storage of Hydrogen and some of the solutions which have been proposed.
                              1. low capacity of batteries
                              2. high energy cost of cryogenic storage at high pressures and low temperatures, expensive, corrosive nature of hydrogen à new, expensive storage containers or pipelines need to big large, and are not practical for installation, nor for maintenance, also hydrogen is much denser than hydrocarbons, so high weight to volume ratio could present problems for carrying/transporting hydrogen
                              3. solutions: carbon nanotubes or spheres, chemical storage by reusable chemical compounds that undergo chemical rxn to release hydrogen, ammonia, metal hydride batteries

                            -- by Anon.

                              Created: 2007-12-03 - QUESTION 22
                                22. Describe some of the current problems associated with the storage of Hydrogen and some of the solutions that have been proposed.

                              PROBLEMS ‡

                              1. WEIGHT AND VOLUME. The weight and volume of hydrogen storage systems are presently too high, resulting in inadequate vehicle range compared to conventional petroleum fueled vehicles. Materials and components are needed that allow compact, lightweight, hydrogen storage systems while enabling greater than 300-mile range in all light-duty vehicle platforms.

                              2. EFFICIENCY. Energy efficiency is a challenge for all hydrogen storage approaches. The energy required to get hydrogen in and out is an issue for reversible solid-state materials. Life-cycle energy efficiency is a challenge for chemical hydride storage in which the by-product is regenerated off-board. In addition, the energy associated with compression and liquefaction must be considered for compressed and liquid hydrogen technologies.
                                 
                              3. DURABILITY:  Durability of hydrogen storage systems is inadequate. Materials and components are needed that allow hydrogen storage systems with a lifetime of 1500 cycles.
                              4. REFUELING TIME. Refueling times are too long. There is a need to develop hydrogen storage systems with refueling times of less than three minutes, over the lifetime of the system.

                              5. COST. The cost of on-board hydrogen storage systems is too high, particularly in comparison with conventional storage systems for petroleum fuels. Low-cost materials and components for hydrogen storage systems are needed, as well as low-cost, high-volume manufacturing methods.

                              6. CODES & STANDARDS. Applicable codes and standards for hydrogen storage systems and interface technologies, which will facilitate implementation/commercialization and assure safety and public acceptance, have not been established. Standardized hardware and operating procedures, and applicable codes and standards, are required.

                              DON’T FORGET:  Hydrogen is incredibly explosive (Hindenburg disaster). More explosive than natural gas.

                              SOLUTIONS ‡

                              1. Ammonia storage
                              2. Metal hydride tanks
                              3. Carbon nanontubes
                              4. Glass microspheres
                              5. Liquid Carrier Storage
                              6. Compressed Hydrogen Tanks: The energy density of gaseous hydrogen can be improved by storing hydrogen at higher pressures. This requires material and design improvements in order to ensure tank integrity. Advances in compression technologies are also required to improve efficiencies and reduce the cost of producing high-pressure hydrogen.
                              Liquid Hydrogen Tanks: The energy density of hydrogen can be improved by storing hydrogen in a liquid state. However, the issues with LH2 tanks are hydrogen boil-off, the energy required for hydrogen liquefaction, volume, weight, and tank cost. The energy requirement for hydrogen liquefaction is high; typically 30% of the heating value of hydrogen is required for liquefaction. New approaches that can lower these energy requirements and thus the cost of liquefaction are needed.


                              -- by Anon.

                                Created: 2007-12-03 - QUESTION 20
                                  20. What is the 84 million barrels per day problem and how is that likely to affect the world in the near term future?

                                Oil refineries have been running at full capacity for the last 18 months -> So, if you find oil in your backyard there would be no way to refine it because refineries are already at full capacity. 

                                Production in 2004 averaged about 83.02 million barrels per day, about equal to the world consumption at  82.46 million barrels per day in 2004 (up from about 74 millon b/d in 2002). CONSUMPTION IS INCREASING AT A FASTER RATE THAN THE INCREASE IN PRODUCTION. And at the end of 2005, World demand was expected to exceed world refinery capacity for the first time - demand of 84 million barrels per day versus 83.5 million barrels per day refinery capacity.

                                After two decades of almost continuous growth, global oil production has been stagnant around 84 million barrels a day for the past two years. This, of course, is exactly consistent with the peak oil hypothesis, which predicts that supply constraints will force up prices, destroying growth in demand.

                                It will be some years before we can tell for certain, but it is entirely possible that we're in the middle of peak oil right now.

                                NOT SURE ABOUT THE ACCURACY OF THIS PART:  At current consumption levels, and assuming that oil will be consumed only from reservoirs, known reserves would be gone around 2039, potentially leading to a global energy crisis. However, this ignores any new discoveries, rapidly increasing consumption in China and India, using oil sands, using synthetic petroleum, and other factors that may extend or reduce this estimate.

                                So, to review ‡

                                PROBLEM:  We have reached peak production of oil ‡ Demand for consumption is now higher than what we can produce.

                                EFFECT:  Likely to see really high gas prices in the future and likely to run out of oil eventually at this rate of consumption.

                                -- by Anon.

                              Created: 2007-12-02 - Questions 2-4

                              1.      Explain why the European Union countries serve as good examples of government driven initiatives in the area of renewable energy. Cite some specific projects or policies and discuss why you think Europe is able to better attack this issue than the US.

                                1. “Rhetorical traps� governments have publicly stated they will reduce energy use 20% by 2020

                                2. Aggressively pursuing offshore wind farms, new technologies, building new infrastructure

                                3. Germany: 2nd largest producer of wind power in less than desirable conditions; investing in North Africa solar project

                                4. Spain: big solar power push

                              2.      Discuss and analyze specific obstacles (physical, environmental, economic, social, political) to the widespread integration of renewable energy into the American economy? How would you propose to eliminate or reduce these obstacles?

                                1. Physical: extremely large country geographically; aging electrical grid; footprints of PV panels, turbines, etc.

                                2. Environmental: variability of renewable resources (less than fossil-based fuels)

                                3. Economic: high capital costs of new grid, installing renewable energy technology, conservation requires changes in capitalist thinking

                                4. Social: lack of large-scale social consciousness & consensus about the importance of renewables and decreasing global warming, CO2 emissions, etc.; dependence on personal transportation and trucks to the economy and our way of life; highest consumption per capita in the world means no one wants higher prices of their goods

                                5. Political: politicians looking to be re-elected, and policies that might increase the price of energy (even briefly) anger most constituents; terms are short à lack of long-term solutions

                              3.      Critically discuss the comparative relative advantages and disadvantages of Wind vs Solar Energy as a production line renewable energy source.

                                1. Wind: Has low levelized costs, a small footprint on land, scaleable on a large and small scale, wind always present

                                  1. Cons: Visual pollution problems, erratic nature means energy storage key, expense of transmission lines to remote farms is high

                                2. Solar: readily available resource (for billions of years), CSP (concentrated solar power) technology improving, small scale apps easiest

                                  1. Cons: large $/watt installation costs ($3 in an industry with $1 goal), hard to make large-scale facilities on the 1000 MW scale (15 MW per square km is the average), needs significant energy storage


                              -- by Anon.

                                Created: 2007-12-02 - Questions 12 & 13 - HELP: I need a math person to check number 13, please

                                12. Explain why Flow batteries represent a scalable solution for energy storage.

                                Simply put: electrons collect at the negative terminal of a battery - they must travel from the negative to the positive end of the battery for the chemical reaction to take place that produces energy (this happens when you connect the battery). With a rechargeable battery - electrical energy can be applied to the battery itself to reverse the flow of electrons from the positive back to the negative end of the battery (this requires an adapter).

                                Flow batteries are different. There are two external storage tanks. These tanks contain two different solutions of electrolytes. Each of these electrolyte solutions has a different "redox potential" - a measure of the electrolyte molecules' affinity for electrons. When electricity is needed the two electrolytes are pumped into separate halves of the reaction chamber, where they are kept apart by a thin membrane. The difference in the redox potential of the two solutions drives electric charges through the membrane, generating a current that can be collected by the electrodes. A constant flow of electrolyte is needed to maintain the current. A current driven by an outside force will reverse the electrochemical reaction and regenerate the electrolytes, which can be pumped back into the tanks. Summary: flow batteries differ from regular batteries in two principle ways: 1. The reaction occurs between two electrolytes, rather than between an electrolyte and an electrode and 2. They store the two electrolytes external to the battery and the electrolytes are circulated through the cell stack as required.

                                WHY FLOW BATTERIES ARE SCALABLE: The parts of a battery that are not renewable - the metal anode and cathode and the casing - all remain intact in a flow battery and never have to be discarded. The chemicals that conduct the reaction do not degrade the battery itself. Additionally, zinc and bromine (examples of two electrolytes used – there are many, and some solutions are patented) are readily available resources - unlike lead. For years lead-acid batteries have been the backup for wind and solar systems - but the chemicals that store energy in these batteries remain inside the battery itself. The difference with flow batteries is that when wind or solar power is plentiful the energy-rich chemicals are pumped out of the battery and into storage tanks, allowing fresh chemicals in to soak up more charge.

                                Flow batteries could replace many conventional electricity storage systems - from batteries in electric cars to large-scale hydroelectric pumped storage reservoirs. Flow batteries have the advantage that their storage capacity can be expanded by building larger tanks and adding more chemicals. Additionally, matching supply and demand is particularly difficult with most energy generating systems (whose electricity cannot be stored).

                                 

                                13. Ten gallons of gas has an energy equivalent of about 400 KWhs. For a 1500 Kg vehicle, this translates in to an average fuel economy of 25 mpg or a total range of 250 miles. NiMH batteries currently store energy at the rate of 100 watt hours per kg. How many KG of NiMH batteries would it therefore take to duplicate this 250 mile range?

                                This question is confusing because it asks how many KG of batteries would it take to duplicate 250 miles.  The problem is that the battery gets recharged per mile you drive and can’t be measured in KG at all – the battery stores energy at a rate of 100 watts per kg. 

                                So…

                                For a 1500kg vehicle:

                                1500 / 250 = 6 kg per mile.  (6 kg of gas is used per mile)

                                1 battery stores 100 watts per kg. used.  Or: 600 watts per mile.

                                It takes 400,000 Whs to drive 250 miles. (400 kwhs = 40,000 whs)

                                And the battery stores 150,000 watts in 250 miles (600 x 250)

                                So it would take 2.6 batteries to duplicate the range of 250 miles. 

                                 

                                The other answer could be 2.5 - 250 / 100.  

                                Maybe I'm missing something.


                                -- by Anon.

                                  Created: 2007-12-02 - Presentations for Team Shark
                                  France!

                                  -- by Anon.

                                    Created: 2007-12-02 - Presentations for Team Shark 2
                                    No to a hydrogen economy!

                                    -- by Anon.

                                      Created: 2007-12-02 - Presentations for Team Shark 3
                                      Solar Future!

                                      -- by Anon.

                                        Created: 2007-12-03 - 28-30
                                        ???
                                        -- by Anon.

                                          Created: 2007-12-03 - RE: 28-30
                                          good answers there, Becca!

                                          -- by Anon.

                                            Created: 2007-12-03 - RE: 28-30
                                            Hey ... I was having a bit of trouble with the posting thing -- My computer always likes to mess with me !!!
                                            -- by Anon.

                                            Created: 2007-12-03 - QUESTION 28

                                            28. Defend or rebuke the following statement: “Conservation is our best and cheapest energy source.� 

                                            Not only does conservation save money and the environment, it also helps secure the world's energy supplies.  So, although renewable energies are a good alternative to using coal or oil, conservation does not require any financial investments, any footprints on land, or any use of our planet’s finite resources.  

                                            No matter how you look at it, all forms of energy technologies, including renewables, require materials be built and have some type of negative environmental impact.  For example, we need steel to build wind turbines and if we plan to switch to a hydrogen economy, we are still required to use a lot of materials to build the infrastructure (i.e. pipes for transport, tanks for storage).  As far as environmental concerns go, aside from the obvious impact of nuclear waste or the carbon emissions of oil and coal technologies, even clean alternatives have some sort of negative impact.  Biomass energy causes farming and air pollution when the materials are burned, hydroelectric dams result in habitat loss, and PV solar systems have a big footprint on land.  And there’s always the idea of visual pollution (but personally I don’t have a problem with it), so that can also be seen as a negative impact of renewables. 

                                            To give an example of why conservation, and not renewables are the best policy, consider the following example:  If people are interested in reducing greenhouse emissions, transportation is one of the best targets by far when considering that 19.2 percent of all CO2 emissions are from transportation.  If people just drove less, not only would we be reducing carbon emissions, but we also won’t be as reliant on gas.  So, instead of throwing our money to foreign governments that sell us oil, we could use it to invest in more constructive programs or even renewable technologies. 

                                            Here’s a quote that emphasizes my point:  “We don't need to reinvent building technology and develop new expensive sources of energy, we just have to remember that Conservation is the World's best energy source, and build half as much twice as well.� 

                                            Once again, conservation costs us nothing financially and environmentally.  In fact, it’s a very profitable – It just requires a little bit of personal sacrifice, perhaps in the form of comfort – something most people are not willing to part with.


                                            -- by Anon.

                                              Created: 2007-12-03 - QUESTION 30

                                              30. Defend or refute the following statement: "The scientific method has never had any real impact on the way society or the individuals within a society function."

                                              [I could be totally wrong about this, but here’s how the answer I got based on my understanding of the question.]

                                              Here’s a definition that I got of the SCIENTIFIC METHOD from online: 

                                              The scientific method is the best way yet discovered for winnowing the truth from lies and delusion. The simple version looks something like this:

                                              1. Observe some aspect of the universe.

                                              2. Invent a tentative description, called a hypothesis, that is consistent with what you have observed.

                                              3. Use the hypothesis to make predictions.

                                              4. Test those predictions by experiments or further observations and modify the hypothesis in the light of your results.

                                              5. Repeat steps 3 and 4 until there are no discrepancies between theory and experiment and/or observation.

                                              When consistency is obtained the hypothesis becomes a theory and provides a coherent set of propositions which explain a class of phenomena. A theory is then a framework within which observations are explained and predictions are made.

                                              HERE’S MY ANSWER:  I think our society relies heavily on the scientific method.  Take global warming for example – That’s a hypothesis that researchers have to test by predictions or experimentation.  After proving that global warming endangers our planet, especially our species, researchers can further use the scientific method to come up with a solution for the problem.  The truth is that we do take the time to make the calculations needed to come up with solutions, but we don’t take time or care enough to implement the solutions.  The problem does not lie in the scientific method – but lack of action on behalf of the human species.

                                              Not all countries and individuals fit into this example, for there are always exceptions, but as Bothun said in class à The reason our society has not changed its ways in terms of energy consumption habits is not because we lack means to do it but because we do not care enough to do it.  If we would truly care enough, we could change as a society – and the scientific method would be there show us the ways/means/methods we need to use to purse such a change/progress.


                                              -- by Anon.

                                                Created: 2007-12-03 - QUESTION 29

                                                  29. Explain how a hierarchical worldview naturally leads to treating nature as a consumable.

                                                 

                                                ANSWER:  In Bothun’s words, as humans we think that we are uniquely positioned at the center of the Universe and special because we are different from animals, which we consider inferior to us.  Thanks to our arrogance, we feel we are entitled to own and therefore destroy what surrounds us in order to consume it à i.e., nature.  Our arrogance therefore leads to a failure to recognize that the Earth is a connected system and that our heavy consumption habits are threatening to put the Universe out of order because we are damaging that connection.  Furthermore our inability to enact long term proactive strategies and decision-making leads us to over-consume, which poses an even bigger threat to our current situation.  [See slides for Week 2 for more on this.]
                                                -- by Anon.

                                          Created: 2007-12-03 - FINAL EXAM STUDY GUIDE WITH ANSWERS
                                          Just thought it might be easier to print out if all the answers were in one file!

                                          -- by Anon.

                                            Created: 2007-12-03 - RE: FINAL EXAM STUDY GUIDE WITH ANSWERS
                                            Thank you so much. You're amazing. I was just about to do this

                                            -- by Anon.

                                            Created: 2007-12-03 - 34-36
                                            34) Simply, Marx's Theory of Alienation is based upon his observation that, in emerging industrial production, under capitalism, workers inevitably lose control of their lives and selves in not having any control of their work. Workers, thus, never become autonomous, self-realized human beings in any significant sense (except the way the bourgeois wants the worker to be realized). Alienation in capitalist societies occurs because in work each contributes to the common wealth, but can only express this fundamentally social aspect of individuality through a production system that is not (publicly) social, but privately owned, for which each individual functions as an instrument, not as a social being.

                                            35) Aside from the fact that the climate limits sunlight by 53% (only 47% of the sunlight reaches the surface of the earth) the physics issue with PV cells is in the materials itself. To make use of the photoelectric effect, a material is needed that is a good conducter of electricity. However, since other forms of material other than silicon are exotic, silicon is the best choice for PV cells. A problem, however, is that efficiency decreases by 0.5% for every 1 degree C increase in temperature and operating temperature of roof top PV array is usually 20-40 degrees C higher than the air temperature. Thus the physics issue is the ability to recieve enough volts from solar energy to move the valence electrons into the conduction band while facing increasing resistance is the silicon heats up.


                                            -- by Anon.

                                              Created: 2007-12-03 - 24
                                                24. Your made transportation czar for the US. Discuss some steps that you would take to motivate a reduction in personal vehicle miles driven.

                                              1. GASOLINE TAX:  Make gas more expensive to force people to drive less.
                                              2. CAMPAIGNS THAT MAKE PEOPLE FEEL GUILTY:  Heavy PR, advertising campaign to make Americans feel bad about driving – Figure out a strong campaign that would show just how damaging pollution and our reliance on foreign fuel is to our country (I.E. Something similar to those cigarette commercials that show a woman with her family and at the end of the commercial they say she has already died from second-hand smoking).  [This is actually what was implemented in the seventies ‡ The crisis also prompted a call for individuals and businesses to conserve energy — most notably a campaign by the Advertising Council using the tag line "Don't Be Fuelish." Many newspapers carried full-page advertisements that featured cut-outs which could be attached to light switches that had the slogan "Last Out, Lights Out: Don't Be Fuelish" emblazoned thereon.]
                                              3. INCENTIVES FOR ALTERNATIVE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION:  I believe the average American drives 12,000-15,000 miles per year.  Maybe people could get some sort of tax deduction if they drive less than 10,000 miles in a calendar year.  Perhaps they could report their odometer reading to the DMV at the beginning of the year and then again at the end of the year to see if they qualify for the deduction.
                                              4. MAKE PERSONAL TRANSPORTATION MORE ATTRACTIVE:  Do what Portland is doing – Invest in light rail so that it takes people virtually everywhere.  Convenience is key!
                                              5. CARPOOLING INCENTIVES
                                              6. ALTERNATE GASOLINE PURCHASING DAYS BASED ON LICENSE PLATE:  [This was a policy implemented by the transportation czar in the 1970s ‡ In the U.S., drivers of vehicles with license plates having an odd number as the last digit (or a vanity license plate) were allowed to purchase gasoline for their cars only on odd-numbered days of the month, while drivers of vehicles with even-numbered license plates were allowed to purchase fuel only on even-numbered days.]  And of course, this one would be extremely difficult to implement.
                                              7. HEALTHY NATION CAMPAIGN AS A PERSONAL INCENTIVE:  Create a nationwide campaign that would stress the importance of walking and biking as alternatives to driving in order to remain healthy and active.  The campaign would focus on the obesity crisis faced by the United States, which is currently costing our millions of dollars in health care costs, and how this crisis is related to our heavy dependence on driving everywhere.  I think such a campaign would have an impact – Think about how crazy people got about the Atkins diet and how popular the diet craze still is.  Walking costs nothing, and if we can convince people that it not only benefits them but our nation and planet as a whole, then perhaps we can start increasing the number of miles walked and biked and reduce those miles we drive.  

                                              -- by Anon.

                                                Created: 2007-12-03 - QUESTION 10 - Anyone know the answer?
                                                Hi there.  I found some info on question 10, but am not sure if I am missing something (probably am!).  Can someone please post here if they have a better answer or the correct answer. I would appreciate it.

                                                10. Explain why wind produced electricity is projected to have the lowest levelized cost of any renewable energy technology.

                                                1.Quick advance in technology ‡ More energy yield
                                                2. Larger plants being built
                                                3. Installed capital costs of wind turbines have decreased
                                                4. Decreased costs of unscheduled and preventative maintenance

                                                SOME FACTS: The output of wind turbines grew 100-fold in 20 years.  It will increase another 5-fold with the utilization of 5 MW turbines.  Development of the technology yields 500 times more energy since 1980.

                                                The cost of electricity from utility-scale wind systems has dropped by more than 80% over the last 20 years.

                                                In the early 1980's, when the first utility-scale wind turbines were installed, wind-generated electricity cost as much as 30 cents per kilowatt-hour. Now, state-of-the-art wind power plants at excellent sites are generating electricity at less than 5 cents/kWh.  Costs are continuing to decline as more and larger plants are built and advanced technology is introduced.

                                                FROM ONLINE: The "levelized" cost of energy—that is, the cost in current dollars of all capital, fuel, and operating and maintenance expenses associated with the plant over its lifetime, divided by the estimated output in kWh over the lifetime of the plant—ranges from 3.8 cents to 6 cents per kWh for conventional combustion turbines.  The levelized cost of wind energy ranges from 3 cents to 6 cents per kWh today (not including the federal PTC), clearly in a competitive range with conventional power generation. The cost of wind energy varies with average wind speed and the size of a wind farm. Since the energy that the wind contains is a function of the cube of its speed, small differences in average winds from site to site mean large differences in production and, therefore, in cost. Larger wind farms provide economies of scale.

                                                ANOTHER ONLINE SOURCE: The installed capital costs of wind-driven generating systems decreased from more than $2,500 per kilowatt (kW) in the early 1980s, to $1,000 per kW or less for large scale installations in the mid-1990s. The costs of unscheduled and preventive maintenance also decreased in the same time period, from more than 5 cents to less than 1 cent per kilowatt-hour (kWh). These improvements have reduced the levelized cost of wind energy systems from more than 15 cents to less than 5 cents per kWh not including the federal 1.5-cent/kWh tax credit now available. Design and manufacturing advances, the further results of ongoing research and development programs, and the realization of large production volumes promise to reduce these costs still further to the range of 2.5 to 3.5 cents per kWh over the next ten years.


                                                -- by Anon.

                                                  Created: 2007-12-03 - Blue Group Spain Presentation
                                                  ???
                                                  -- by Anon.

                                                    Created: 2007-12-03 - Wave energy
                                                    ???
                                                    -- by Anon.

                                                      Created: 2007-12-04 - TIGERS - HYDROGEN STORAGE, PRESENTATION 2
                                                      ???
                                                      -- by Anon.

                                                        Created: 2007-12-04 - TIGERS - GEOTHERMAL POTENTIAL, PRESENTATION 1
                                                        ???
                                                        -- by Anon.

                                                          Created: 2007-12-04 - QUESTION 26
                                                          26. Explain why Americans are so embedded into the Business as Usual concept.

                                                          Americans are embedded in the Business as Usual concept because we think our resources are infinite, therefore we fail to creative long-term proactice strategies.  Our inability to recognize that we are running out of resources possesses another problem:  overconsumption.  So, how is it that we currently feed our consumption habits -> Well, the BAU  strategy is to "mine the planet."  So, what are we doing now that we have stripped our planet of valuable resources that took millions and million of years to be created?   Well, instead of investing in renewable energies, which are LONG-TERM investments in most cases (and remember we are incapable of long-term planning), we are going to continue to "mine the planet," we are just going to do it a bit differently this time around.  So the BAU strategy to save the planet involves LNG development, clean coal, and unconventional fuel (from sand pits ...).  Why all this instead of renewables?  Because this is the FASTEST gateway to an energy economy and this will lead to growth of GDP.

                                                          So, we are embedded in the BAU concept because it provides QUICK fixes --> and we fail to recognize that fast results are not the best strategy to a long lasting problem.

                                                          -- by Anon.

                                                            Created: 2007-12-04 - 14
                                                            "Describe how a Solar Thermal Electric Facility works and is able to deliver electricity 24 hours a day. What are the physical limits to this kind of facility?" These facilities generate electricity by converting solar energy into heat, then using that heat to generate electricity (instead of directly to electricity in the way PVs do). Concentrated Solar Power focuses the solar radiation to a smaller area than the collecting area. 24 hrs because...? Limiting factors: -reliability of Concentrating PV components -weather conditions -heat load -failure of PV material -tracking the sun
                                                            -- by Anon.

                                                              Created: 2007-12-04 - RE: 14
                                                              24 hours: These facilities can deliver electricity when needed, rain or shine, day or night, because the heat they generate can be stored.
                                                              -- by Anon.

                                                              Created: 2007-12-04 - 23
                                                              "Explain why energy storage is a critical component of renewable energy technologies" Many of the renewable energy technologies only operate under certain conditions (direct sun, strong winds, etc), so energy needs to be stored for when those conditions are poor or absent altogether. Is there a more specific answer I should be trying for? This seemed pretty easy.
                                                              -- by Anon.

                                                                Created: 2007-12-04 - 10
                                                                Rebecca, you had quite a lot of info. I said that wind-produced electricity is projected to have the lowest levelized cost of the renewables because wind is highly scalable (so capital and fixed costs can be more offset if scaled to maximum capacity); Additionally, wind has no variable cost, and a relatively long lifetime.
                                                                -- by Anon.