A discussion concerning the contribution that recent developments in transport technologies could make to environmental sustainability.
By L.Everitt / Novelty Dispenser (c)
Introduction and definitions
I shall analyse and discuss recent examples of technological developments from within both transport and other sectors and their positive and negative implications for environmental sustainability. I will also look at social, economic, cultural, legal and political motivations which are deeply interconnected with transport, technology and the future of our environment.
When I say technology, I mean the application of scientific or organized knowledge, including any tool or technique, product or process, method, organization or system to practical tasks.
By environmental sustainability I mean our ability to maintain an harmonious coexistence within our natural habitat – its capacity to replenish our consumption of its vital resources, its ecological productivity and diversity – in a way which is practical, ethical and rational and does not compromise our future ability to do so.
Positive and negative effects
Two examples of recent developments in transport technologies are energy crops (including biofuels such as ethanol, methanol and biodiesel) and hydrogen. Both have potential as either low carbon or even carbon-neutral alternative vehicle fuels for the future and may eventually help to reduce dependence upon foreign imports of ‘dirty’ fossil fuels such as oil for petroleum. They are however very different technologies in other respects.
Theoretically, biofuel production can be a CO2 neutral process. The biomass needed for fuel production could mitigate any emissions released when burning (or during the production stage) by growing new biomass to reabsorb it. The biomass itself can be obtained from a wide variety of sources, such as natural gas or gasifying wood to produce liquid methanol, which has a high-octane rating and is used today as racing fuel. Ethanol is a widely used vehicle fuel and can be obtained from almost any fermentable vegetable source of sugar (Morris, R. and Carr, S., 2006a). Brazil and the United States lead the industrial world in ethanol production, accounting together for 70% of the world’s total (Ribando, Clare & Yacobucci, Brent D., 2007) and nearly 90% of ethanol used for fuel (The World Bank, 2008). Brazil’s sugar cane-based industry is far more efficient than the U.S. corn-based industry. Sugar cane ethanol has an energy balance 7 times greater than ethanol produced from corn (Budny, D & Sotero, P, 2007). In the UK biodiesel research has concentrated on rape methyl ester produced from oil seed rape and has the advantage of being rapidly biodegradable if spilt (Morris, R. and Carr, S., 2006b). Biodiesel production produces valuable by-products such as glycerine and cattle feed (Morris, R. and Carr, S., 2006c).
Things are not all so rosy, however. Methanol is highly toxic and hydrophilic. Biofuels generally have a low energy density, requiring greater storage capacity and suffer from ‘cold starting’ difficulties (and so are often blended with with conventional petrol). The production process is potentially energy intensive and consumes a lot of water. More recently, there has also been rising concern over switching crops over to the production of corn-ethanol which is now competing directly with corn for food and affecting other food crops too.
Hydrogen on the other hand, has three times the energy density of petrol per unit weight and therefore potentially far more efficient fuel source (Morris, R. and Carr, S., 2006d). NASA uses hydrogen to launch Space Shuttles into space. Hydrogen promises a CO2-free future and potentially emits water as the only by-product. It could be cooled into liquid for convenient handling and used as vehicle fuel using a number of rapidly advancing production techniques. These include metal-hydrides, combined hydrogen-rich methanol re-processing, thermolysis, production via electrolysis of water (using ‘clean’ wind or photovoltaic power) etc.
Although somewhat misinformed public suspicion about hydrogen’s safety has largely subsided there are many barriers to adoption. There are still concerns about how to dispense and use it in the most efficient manner and it is still an emerging technology. The timeframe in which challenges may be overcome is likely to be at least several decades, and hydrogen vehicles may never become broadly available (Talbot, D., 2007 & Squatriglia, C., 2008).
Other influences on environmental sustainability
According to Ray Kurzweil, renown futurist and technological innovator;
“We’re going to clean up the environment and replace fossil fuels with renewable forms of energy – that’s an exciting prospect. All of these phenomena or trends will reach tipping points very soon and will be quite transformative within the next 20 years.”
Patterson, L. (2008) Earth & Sky article; ‘Ray Kurzweil’s vision of the future’.
This is based on what he calls the ‘Law of Accelerating Returns’ which extends Moore’s law to describe an exponential growth of technological progress. He continues;
“We will meet all of our energy needs with nano-engineered (engineered at the molecular scale) solar panels that are very efficient and inexpensive. We’ll need to capture only about 3 parts in 10,000 of the sunlight that falls on the Earth to meet all of our projected energy needs.”
(2007) CNN Money Magazine ‘Ray Kurzweil on: The future of personal technology’.
This is a positive outlook for a sustainable future. Since our sun provides us with potentially many thousand times more energy than we could ever conceivably use, solar power may well become the ultimate future renewable if only it can harness this abundant power source. It is a potentially convenient and easily scalable technology and breakthroughs may well be on the horizon; one of the most well known being in photovoltaics, which convert sunlight directly into electricity. Currently they remain expensive but if Kurzweil is right, exponential growth in these technologies may mean they become very cheap and feasible much sooner than we imagine.
According to statistics released by Solarbuzz – a solar research group, the amount of megawatts of photovoltaics rose by about 50% from 2003 to 2004, MarketWatch of Dow Jones reported that the solar power industry grew 30% every year from 2000 to 2005, indicating that solar power growth is accelerating, and that solar power is able to compete in modern energy markets (Hasan, R., 2006a). Solar panel prices fell 60% from 1995 to 2005 (Hasan, R., 2006b).
However, the photovoltaics industry currently uses exotic and hazardous materials in the production process. There may also be pollution from manufacturing and a need to dispose of old PV cells carefully, some of the advanced cells contain toxic materials (Morris, R. and Carr, S., 2006e).
Internet giant Google have pioneered research and investment into clean, sustainable technologies. They may be indicative of future trends if more companies begin to realise that renewable technologies like solar power are not only good for the environment but their ‘green image’, and more importantly, their profits.
Dr. Larry Brilliant, Executive Director of Google.org said, “Clean energy technology can dramatically shift how we make and use energy for our cars and homes by charging cars through an electric grid powered by solar or other renewable energy sources, and selling power back to the electric grid when it’s needed most. This approach can quadruple the fuel efficiency of cars on the road today and improve grid stability”.
Interestingly what is only briefly mentioned here is yet another exciting idea: the potential for bringing about a change in the relationship between the transportation and utility sectors. Vehicle-to-grid (V2G) describes a system in which power can be sold to the electrical power grid by an electric-drive motor vehicle that is connected to the grid when it is not in use for transportation (Cleveland, C J. & Morris, C. 2006). V2G could be used with ‘grid-able vehicles’, such as battery electric or plug-in hybrid-electric vehicles. Because most vehicles are parked for a vast majority of the time, their batteries could be used to let electricity flow from the car to the power lines and back, with economic value to both the utility companies and their consumers. An wide-scale and expensive overhaul of our outdated electric grid is not on the cards any time soon, though!
These future technologies are exciting but the looming threat of climate change seems to have brought about some strong if naïve social and political momentum. Whilst there are many who firmly believe government has a keen role to play in persuading us to adopt cleaner, greener habits, there are also those who strongly oppose any such political action. Indeed the case of ethanol subsidies in the U.S is one such example.
One in 20 of all cereal grains produced in the world this year will end up in the petrol tank of U.S cars, a country that is aggressively increasing the use of food for fuel (Goodall, C., 2008a). Rising costs of food are being blamed in part because of this. Indian economist Amartya Sen won the Nobel Prize for demonstrating that most famines are caused not by lack of food but by governments’ ill-advised intrusions into the functioning of markets. Even Brazilian president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva argued that the way of tackling the food crisis is to increase food supply and that obstacles to this are the protectionist policies of the rich world – according to Lula, the world would not be facing a food crisis, “if developing countries had been stimulated in a free-market context” (Foley, C., 2008).
Could it be that the way to environmental sustainability then is through less government and political intervention in free societies and their markets? Respected economist Murray Rothbard put it thus,
“In so far as the outpouring of smoke by factories pollutes the air and damages the persons or property of others, it is an invasive act. Air pollution, then is not an example of a defect in a system of absolute property rights, but of failure on the part of the government to preserve property rights.”
Rothbard, M. (2001) ‘Man, Economy and State’.
Emissions would be significantly reduced in a free market, as companies who do emit pollutants could face proper legal action by their ‘polluters’. Although a person may do whatever he wishes with his own land, if he damages land belonging to others, he should have to bear the costs of the damage. It simplifies the endless complexities of our current interventionist state-capitalist economic system, providing an elegant and voluntary method of resolving environmental dilemmas. The pollution problem is really a ‘problem’ of property rights, in disguise. The market is the only mechanism able to create the correct economic penalties and incentives which allow green business to have more prosperous business, which makes sense – it is fair and rational. It may indeed be postulated that ‘dirty’ fossil fuels (such as oil) have been able to out-compete ‘clean’ renewable fuels on the market because of precisely that; they are dirty. Oil companies have been allowed to externalise their actual costs onto the environment through air, sea and land pollution which otherwise they would have had to compensate for. This externalisation is eventually always paid for unfairly by government programs (through taxation) or private organisations and individuals, including all various ‘hidden’ social costs of ill-health, poverty etc.
In March 2005, the Indian Supreme Court suspended work on the Narmada Valley Development Project in a landmark ruling that ordered that rehabilitation of the displaced people must precede dam construction, however the control of construction and rehabilitation lies with the regional state governments (Morris, R. and Carr, S., 2006f). I have suggested how the free-market might deal with such situations most effectively and efficiently, without unnecessary emotional and financial costs passed on to the poorest and most vulnerable.
Conclusion
There are technologies now in development which can and should meet our growing energy demands in a sustainable fashion. We can no longer afford to ignore the true incentives for behavioural change and technological innovation; simple economics. Make it profitable for companies to invest in cutting edge science and research (at great benefit to the general public) and let the market decide which particular technology prevails. Evolution through competition for resources and survival has been nature’s way of ensuring only the fittest survive. We would do well emulate her example through our economic system. Let ideas compete on a level playing field and players be held justly responsible for ‘dirty tactics’ such as pollution and exploitation, or at least have to make proper compensate when they do.
References
Morris, R. and Carr, S. (2006a) ‘T172 Energy File 2‘, pg 16.
Ribando, Clare & Yacobucci, Brent D. (2007)
‘Ethanol and Other Biofuels: Potential for U.S.-Brazil Energy Cooperation‘. Available from: http://www.wilsoncenter.org/news/docs/CRS%20Report%20on%20US-Brazil%20potential%20cooperation%20on%20biofuels.pdf [accessed 6 June 2008].
The World Bank (2008) ‘Biofuels: The Promise and the Risks’, World Development Report 2008 pg 70-71. Available from: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWDR2008/Resources/2795087-1192112387976/WDR08_05_Focus_B.pdf [Accessed 6 June 2008].
Budny, D & Sotero, P (2007) ‘Brazil Institute Special Report: The Global Dynamics of Biofuels‘. Available from: http://www.wilsoncenter.org/topics/pubs/Brazil_SR_e3.pdf [Accessed 7 June 2008].
Morris, R. and Carr, S. (2006b) ‘T172 Energy File 2‘, pg 17.
Morris, R. and Carr, S. (2006c) ‘T172 Energy File 2‘, pg 17.
Morris, R. and Carr, S. (2006d) ‘T172 Energy File 2‘, pg 17.
Talbot, D (2007) ‘Hell and Hydrogen‘ Technology Review. Available from: http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?ch=specialsections&sc=transportation&id=18301&a= [accessed 8 June 2008].
Squatriglia, C (2008) ‘Hydrogen Cars Won’t Make a Difference for 40 Years’. Available from: http://www.wired.com/cars/energy/news/2008/05/hydrogen [accessed 4 June 2008].
Patterson, L. (2008) Earth & Sky article; ‘Ray Kurzweil’s vision of the future’. Available from: http://www.earthsky.org/radioshows/52313/ray-kurzweils-vision-of-the-future [Accessed 8 June 2008].
Author: Anonymous (2007) CNN Money Magazine ‘Ray Kurzweil on: The future of personal technology‘. Available from: http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2007/moneymag/0709/gallery.whats_ahead.moneymag/5.html [Accessed 8 June 2008].
Hasan, R., (2006a) ‘A Research Report on Solar Power Investment: The Dawn of Solar Power’. Available from: http://www.altenews.com/Solar%20Power%20Research%20Report.pdf [Accessed 2 June 2008].
Hasan, R., (2006b) ‘A Research Report on Solar Power Investment: The Dawn of Solar Power‘. Available from: http://www.altenews.com/Solar%20Power%20Research%20Report.pdf [Accessed 2 June 2008].
Morris, R. and Carr, S. (2006e) ‘T172 Energy File‘ 4, pg 17.
Cleveland, C J. & Morris, C. (2006). ‘Dictionary of Energy’. Pg 473.
Foley, C.(2008) ‘Don’t blame Brazilian biofuels‘ (guardian.co.uk). Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jun/06/biofuels.brazil [Accessed 3 June 2008].
Rothbard, M. (2001) ‘Man, Economy and State‘, Auburn Alabama, Ludwig von Mises Institute
Morris, R. and Carr, S. (2006f) ‘T172 Resources File 4‘, pg 20.
