Climate Change
Scientists monitoring methane emissions in the thawing tundras of the world report something worrisome; methane production is proceeding at a considerably faster pace than was predicated I wasn’t previously aware of the fact, but methane generated in dry soils loses its hydrogen component before reaching the surface, yielding only carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. From bogs, however, the passage of methane through moisture does not alter the chemical makeup of the methane but leaves it enter the atmosphere unmodified. It is estimated but unproven that methane has up to 23 times the heat trapping ability as carbon dioxide. Something else to occupy one’s mind while waiting for sleep.

Carbon Dioxide Capture
Something else I was previously not aware of. Carbon Dioxide sequestration – catching and trapping the stuff before it is released into the atmosphere – is a technology only presently available for new power plants.. CO2 sequestration is frequently spoken of as a solution to the climate change problem, but it appears less attractive as limitations appear. Which is not to say it should be ignored where it can be applied. But it seems inapplicable to the fleet of hundreds of millions of internal combustion engines purring away around the world, or any of the myriad uses of fossil fuel combustion or the myriad uses of methane for chemical conversion processes or space/water heating.

Hurricanes
In the newspaper of 9/12/06 was an article which announced that studies “closing the loop” between global warming and the increased ferocity of storms like Katrina has been established by the National Academy of Sciences. The fate of New Orleans might give the “Who cares?” crowd something to chew on. There are, on the other hand, people – economists and politicians — prepared to dismiss science as silly stuff that should not be allowed to interfere with commerce. The commerce of selling and servicing low mpg vehicles for instance.

Maglev
I noted something in the paper but neglected to save the article. Somebody is proposing a transatlantic tunnel linkage between perhaps Boston, Massachusetts and Bristol, England. The tunnel would contain a vacuum and a maglev roadbed, capable of producing speeds up to 5000 mph. The proposal is theoretically possible but has not been tested. Maglev itself is well along in development, with speeds of 310 MPH envisioned.

Maglev is short for ‘magnetic levitation,’ more than theoretically possible. Japan and Germany have competing designs, both of which reach the same goal, and the designs have been operating on test tracks for a period of time. It is the absence of friction which, even with steel wheels on steel rail is a limiting factor. The 310 mph limit is the result of friction with the air itself. Otherwise, the whole thing operates electromagnetically; the train is lifted magnetically, then electromagnets along the track push and pull the train into motion. As the vehicle moves forward, the pulling magnet must revert to a pushing magnet. Electricity can be switched around as fast as ever you might like, of course, which accounts for the talk of 5000 mpg. New York to London in 54 minutes.

The evacuated tunnel would be one very pricey piece of work. I’m not clear whether the suggested plan put the tunnel underwater or under the sea bed, but in either case that’s an awful lot of bucks and I don’t know how long a construction project of that size might require. Something on the order of generations, I should suppose. We have the ‘chunnel’ between England and France by way of comparison, and that did take a while.

Meanwhile, maglev can certainly be considered an option to the bullet train should we wise up and do something of the sort for intercity transport. For further investigation, simply ask google or equivalent to tell you about maglev. You can quickly find out more than we could possibly cover here.

Ethanol
Consumer Reports, October, 2006 does an evaluation of the Chevrolet Tahoe Flex Fuel Vehicle (FFV), which permits switching between gasoline and E85, a mix of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline. The President has been pushing this as the answer to our country’s dependence on imported oil. The CR report was not encouraging.

Average mileage for the Tahoe on gasoline was 14 mpg, 10 mpg on E85. This was explained in good part on the comparative energy content of the two fuels. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, ethanol has 75,670 Btu per gallon vs. 115,400 Btu for gasoline. For the Tahoe, city mileage dropped to 7 mpg. Manufacturers, according to the CR report. FFVs under production are maximizing for gasoline rather than E85, and re-tuning might make a difference. They also noted that range on a tank of fuel dropped from 440 miles for gas to 300 miles for E85.

What’s going on? The feds are offering splendid subsidies for FFVs, and production is almost entirely limited to large and heavy vehicles. Another goody for the makers, CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards require a company’s total output to average at a certain number (21 mpg at this time). The way FFVs are calculated, they are permitted to claim a 35 mpg rating for FFVs (is that fiction or what?), while everything else must meet the 21 mpg standard. Five million FFVs have been produced since the late 90s. Given the heavy emphasis on light trucks and SUVs, it is estimated that industry saved $1.6 billion in fines because of the FFVs they produce.

It has been estimated that according to a 2005 study by the Union of Concerned Scientists, that FFVs actually increased gasoline consumption in the U.S. rather than the other way around.

This entry was posted on Saturday, September 30th, 2006 at 9:13 am and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.