Global Warming??

After seeing the graph on page 169 of our text which shows the dramatic temperature increace since the industrial revolution that has grown steeper since the 70's, I cant imagine that anyone truly beleives global warming is not happening. Many people just dont care about the environment or think a little warmer weather would be nice. However these people are ignorant to the horrific effects of globel warming that have been happening over the past decades, as well as being unaware of the positive feed back loop where warmer weather produces more greenhouse gases and like the graphs this happens at an exponential rate. However, just saying the temperature is increasing gives skeptics to much to work with. So to aid the class in proving to people everywhere that global warming is happening and is bad I have two links. The first link shows two different NASA studies about the shrinking of the ice caps, and the second link discusses the decline of the frogs.

Thermohaline Circulation Shutdown!?!?

In our reading for Wednesday, the authors mention that " the most dramatic- although unlikely- effect of global warming would be a change in the circulation patterns of water in the Atlantic Ocean" (224). The change in circulation these authors are referring to would be a slowing of the Gulf Stream, resulting in a decrease of warm water transport to northern latitudes. Obviously, they seem to think- as did the majority of the scientific community by 2006- that this is very unlikely. However, in the spring of 2004 NOAA reported satellite data that supported the opposite as did two other studies in 2005, which found warm water circulation to northern latitudes to be 30% of 1992 fluxes. Interestingly, I could not find any explanations by the scientific community (2006 and later) that explained the 2004-2005 cooling results and explain why they were not a trend that could be extended into the future. Therefore, I am not sure what to believe!

The Global Warming Debate.

As I was excited to finally start reading the chapter on global warming in our book, I began to think about the movie, An Inconvenient Truth (with Al Gore). I only watched the first half of the movie, and to be honest nothing he was saying was new to me. I could be biased on my opinion about the movie since I did not see how it ended, but I was a little bit disappointed. Yes Al Gore spit out a bunch of scary statistics, but I didn't think he really influenced people on how to change their act. Since, technically we cannot prove that global warming is caused by humans, what is our point in fighting it? Are we trying to make sure everyone knows the issue and how humans possibly are in danger? or rather are we trying to make a conscious effort to stop any affect we might have on the situation.

Personally, my standpoint on the whole global warming debate is that, the general public already knows that global warming, is essentially just that. I think that the focus of the media and the government should be focused on educating the general public on exactly how, as an individual, one can help the situation out. For example, in the movie Al Gore kept giving horrifying statistics and facts, but didn't really offer a way to connect a reaction that I think would be important to our main goal--to reduce greenhouse emissions. Whether or not the facts are exactly true or whether the predictions made by scientists are fully supported, there is the chemistry behind all of our daily processes that does go to show that their worries stem from something.

While I was looking online to find some of the opposing views to the Global Warming hype, I stumbled across this article written by Capitalism Magazine about how the public is forced into accepting the views that the scientists and media has due to the fact that no one will allow a public disclaimer about how the global warming hype might not be as important as we originally thought. It is very interesting to hear other sides to the story, especially from someone who is not a scientist and only a journalist, but those people are out there.

Carbon Dioxide Bubbles in Ice Cores

Chapter 4 mentions constructing past carbon dioxide profiles from the air trapped in ice cores, which I thought needed more explanation. Ice forms as new snow accumulates on top of old snow increasing the pressure. The increased pressure forms the crystalline lattice, which consists of open air spaces where carbon dioxide can be trapped during the time period of formation. With the aid of dating techniques, scientists can date each ice deposition and determine the amount of carbon dioxide present at that time period. The graph above shows how the amount of carbon dioxide and aerosols in the atmosphere was correlated to temperature (higher carbon dioxide concentrations equals higher temperatures) for the Vostok Ice Core in Greenland. For more information on ice cores and their use as paleoclimate proxies visit this page.

car emissions lab
What do you do while driving? It may be more harmful than you think. Transportation devices as a whole still contribute almost half of the nitrogen oxides (NOx) introduced into the atmosphere today. Nitrogen oxides contribute to acid rain, the greenhouse effect, deterioration of the ozone layer and smog. The catalytic converter present in most modern cars changes nitrogen oxides back into nitrogen and oxygen using unburned gasoline. One downfall to these catalytic converters is that they only work on warm/hot engines. This means that, once a car is started, until the time the engine is “warm”, the tailpipe is essentially, emitting high levels of pollutants to the environment.
In this lab, vehicle exhaust is tested for both nitrogen oxides and particulates when the car is cool and when the car is warmed up. Since NO2 absorbs visible light, standard calibration curves for NO2 and nitrogen absorbing solutions were made. Also, using a SMPS system, that measures particulates in the air, particulate output and NOx output were assessed for seven different vehicles.
The results are as follows. From our results of hot vs. cold starts, we were expecting to find higher concentrations of NO2 on “cold starts” for each car, and lower concentrations for “hot engines”. It is interesting to note that the cars do not all exhibit the same behavior over time (the cool exhaust contains less NOx, or vice versa). While on day two of collecting data from cars, 3 of the 4 cars tested did follow our predictions (the 4th car however was the extremely old corolla, most likely not having a catalytic converter), almost the entire opposite trend happened on the first day of car sampling. Therefore according to our data, no exact conclusion could be drawn regarding the catalytic converter assumption that lower emissions of NO2 would result from a warm engine. In order of highest to lowest cold start NOx emissions the cars are as follows: Jetta, Corolla, Civic, Villager, Saab, Alero, and Echo. As for the hot, the cars rank Corolla, Saab, Villager, Alero, Civic, Echo, and Jetta. The Villager, Jetta and Civic produce much lower concentrations once they have warmed up, while the Corolla almost appears to have a malfunctioning catalytic converter.
The data from the SMPS was also analyzed and graphed, showing total particle numbers and particle volumes.
All the cars except the Jetta and Civic have greatly reduced particulate emissions once they are warm.
In conclusion, it seems that the production of nitrogen oxides in vehicle emissions is very unpredictable. However, once cars are warm they tend to greatly reduce their particulate emissions.

indoor air pollution

I just wanted to add to Lauren's blog "are we really concious of the air we breath?". After reading her blog I realized that most of us are not. I know I wasn't . After reading chapter 2 I became more concerned with indoor air pollution mainly because I grew up using a wood stove. I'm not sure if any of you guys have ever used one but I never realized how much it was polluting the air. In fact, until now I used to enjoy the smell of wood burning. I am currently concerned with how having a fire stove can affect our health short term and long term. If you’re indoor air quality concerns you too. Here is a guide that lets you know how to reduce indoor air pollution.

Vehicle Emissions Experiment 2-12-07/2-14-07

When a cars engine runs it reacts N₂ and O₂ during combustion under high heat creating NO as a by product. NO is a harmful chemical to be released into the air because it can undergo further chemical reactions leading to NO₂. Together, NO and NO₂ are referred to as NO_x. These chemicals are important because they are involved in numerous photochemical reactions that lead to the creation of low altitude ozone O₃, which is a primary component of smog. NO_x can also react to create acid rain. According to the EPA (2003), vehicles contributed to 55 % of the total man made source of NO_X emissions (http://www.epa.gov/air/urbanair/nox/index.html). We all drive cars, so each of us has a level of responsibility in creation of smog and acid rain; it is important to us to understand just how much Nox is being released by our cars.

Particulate matter is also created by the engines mechanical processes and released in emissions. Particulates also contribute to smog and therefore contribute to health problems correlated with this phenomenon. Some studies have even correlated increased levels of smog to death rate (Baird and Cann, 2005). The sizes of particles are important because the small, man made particles are inhaled directly into lungs; our bodies are not adapted to processing or filtering them or otherwise protecting us. Larger particles can be trapped by our bodies, and are less harmful to the environment because they do not stay in the air as long before settling out. The size and the amount of particulate matter that is released by our vehicles was also a focus of the study.

In order to investigate these two common pollutants from car emissions we conducted an experiment to identify the concentration of NO_x and the size and concentration of particulate matter in seven different car models. The cars that were tested ranged in age from 1979 to 2001 and included small models such as a Corolla and Jetta. The NO_x was tested by collecting air samples directly from the tail pipe of the running cars. Air samples were mixed with an NO absorbing solution that then reacted to give us a measurable amount of color. A UV vis-spectrophotometer was used to measure this difference in color. By creating a set of standard solutions with known concentrations that were measured by the UV vis- spectrophotometer a calibration curve was calculated. The concentration of the NO_x in the car emissions could then be visually compared to the standard solutions and a concentration was calculated in units of parts per million (ppm). This tells us how many particles of NO_x there are in relation to all the particles in the air. The particulate matter was measured separately using a Scanning Mobility Particle Sizing (SMPS) device. This device calculates the concentration and size of particulate matter using several pieces of machinery and a computer.

Figure 1 illustrates NO_x concentration data from four of the cars that were tested. We observed that total NO_x generally starts out at a relatively high range, and decreases for most cars after warm-up. This trend likely results from the fact that all cars that we tested use catalytic converters designed to reduce emissions, which do not begin to work until the cars are warm. Newer cars were built under emission regulations that have become increasingly more stringent. This is supported by the data that showed overall NO_x was the highest in older vehicles and the lowest in newer vehicles.

The data from Scanning Mobility Particle Sizing (SMPS) system of the 2001 Jetta and the 1979 Corolla (Figure 2) show the amount of particles at the range of sizes from 0-1000 nm in diameter. The important thing to notice is that for the Corolla the majority of particles are released before the car has warmed up and before the catalytic converter starts to work. For the Jetta the opposite is true, the majority of the particles are released after the car has warmed up. The sizes of the particles are slightly smaller also in the Jetta than the 100 nm particles released during the cold start of the Corolla. The regulation of large particulate matter in the newer Jetta might be allowing for the smaller particles to be released and go less noticed.

All of the data helps us to make observations about the composition of car emissions and connect it directly to creation of air pollution. As the world continues to modernize man made pollutants are becoming more noticeable and problematic. Specifically, increased vehicle emissions of NO_X and particulates are polluting most moderately sized cities. Understanding how cars release these harmful pollutants increases our awareness of the issue and hopefully will help us to create future solutions

Are We Really Conscious of the Air We Breath?

As I was finishing up reading the last part of chapter 2 in our book, I was starting to think about each single breath I was taking. I have always known that air is composed of many particles, but never did I realize that they were infact solid particles and for that matte, particles that could possibly harm my health. Of course small, random exposure to these particles could for the most part mean no harm, but wouldn't it be nice to know what you are breathing in. As I was walking past the construction site this morning, across form the IPJ, they were sanding something that was producing a giant white cloud of particulates. After reading chapter 2, I was honestly nervous to breath in as I walked by. Not that the construction workers hvae much of a choice in their job tasks, but it made me think to a much broader picture. How much are we really conscious of as we live our day to day lives? Is it possible that if the public was more aware on specific hazards to their health, they might change their lifestyles for the better?

As I was reading my weekly Time Magazine, this week had an article on "Greenhoouse Airlines" and how 1.6% of greenhouse gases is due inpart to airplanes. It was interesting because it also mentioned that although this was a small percentage, the carbon released was at higher altitudes than ground level and thus had a greater warming effect. Apparently, long flights are equivelent to months of driving SUV's. That's somehting that I am sure not many people have thought about. The article also mentioned how the Prince of Wales made a public effort to cut back on his flights last year. It just makes me wonder how many more people might cut back on their flights if they were made conscious of the decisions they make.

Time Magazine, "Greenhouse Airlines" by Brian Walsh; February 12, 2007
www.time.com

Pint-sized car engine

Well I just finished my group's discussion section, so I am really feeling emissions data and ways to increase the efficiency of an internal combustion engine. And then, all of a sudden, as I am just going along mindin my own business...an article about what some MIT geniuses are doing currently. No...It couldn’t be, I mean what? A pint-sized engine....nawwww. YESSSSSS! So it turns out that for several years "MIT researchers have been developing a half-sized gasoline engine that performs like its full-sized cousin but offers fuel efficiency approaching that of today's hybrid engine system--at a far lower cost. The key? Carefully controlled injection of ethanol, an increasingly common biofuel, directly into the engine's cylinders when there's a hill to be climbed or a car to be passed."
I mean if that doesn’t sound interesting then maybe some of the stats will blow your mind. Like that this new engine will go 30% farther on a gallon of fuel than a typical gas engine. And, if all cars had this engine today, we would be using 30 billion gallons of gasoline..yea GASOLINE, NOT OIL. Also, the emissions would be much cleaner due to the ethanol supplementation. That’s huge!

Read up on this at the following website: http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2006/engine.html

Cheers!
-Alex Dru

Free Lectures Relating to Topics from Class!

The San Diego History Museum has a lecture series entitled, "Global Climate Change: Perspectives and Solutions", which are free to the public! The three remaining lectures are about clean energy, air pollution and human health, and global warming. Here is a link to find out the dates, presenters, and more information about their lecture topics: SDNHM

Bush Doing Some Good (kinda)

To tell the truth, I always felt my home town of NYC was a fairly clean place to live in terms of atmospheric pollution, at least compared to the other citys i have travelled to around the world. I never experienced the burning stink of the smog I found in Los Angeles, Rome, or Tokyo nor did I ever see the yellow haze that signifies it. But i will say that for the 15 years or so that I have had formative memories of the place, the statues and monuments that give the city much of its character have been "melting." It is disturbingly easy to track the effect acid rain has had on these beautiful public works of art were a timespan of only several years is needed to discern extreme superficial damage. This article is relieving in the fact that it represents some amount of recognition of the problem and the resulting changes in policy need to rectify it. Since the press release was dated in late 2003, it would be most intresting to see scientific data on the effect these stringent laws have had in the past 3 years. I will surely look. Due to the fact that a large part of the damaging SO2 and SH2 are not produced in New York state, inter-state co-operation seems to have great promise in helping problems like this all around the country, and these laws are indicative of that co-operation. Hopefully in time to prevent the noble visage's of my memories from degrading into formless masses.
http://www.senate.gov/~schumer/SchumerWebsite/pressroom/press_releases/PR02265.html

Particulate Matter in Santiago's Smog

Santiago Smog Moves to the Suburbs Latin Trade, Dec, 1998 by Greg Brown http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BEK/is_12_6/ai_54760281
"Where indeed? Chile's environmental review board, known as the Conama (Comision Nacional del Medio Ambiente), admits it is far behind and stretched financially on issues such as toxic waste and garbage dumps. Meanwhile, independent university experts note that forcing the purchase of catalytic cars and trucks is not the answer. Some 85% of the pollution infecting the capital is particulate matter--ground-up tire tread, leaves and dust--which hangs in the air after traffic stirs it up. The sheer number of autos and buses moving around in the city pushes pollution counts higher, not simply the volume of exhaust from their tailpipes."
The smog is so dense in the city that when I was visiting in the summer of 2005 and climbed one of the large hills that overlooked the city you could see the sea of smog lapping up against the hills and up to the edge of the Andes. Although catalytic converters are useful for reducing the emissions of NOx, as seen here in the article about Santiago, the smog problem is far reaching past one chemical process. The particulate matter that plays a central role in the smog is not identified. Chemistry can be done to specify what are the main components of the particulate matter and then address directly their sources and create solutions to the problem. The seriousness of addressing all of the factors that contribute to smog is seen here. Simply implementing the use of catalytic converters is not going to take away from the other conditions that contribute to the smog.

Montreal Protocol

and successive agreements have had are shown in Figure 2 by illustrating the fact that the The book only mentions the Montreal Protocol briefly near the end of the first chapter and outlines what chemicals have been banned. After further investigation on the topic I came across a link that goes into more detail about the protocol (http://exchange.unido.org/cmsupload/1509_2791686912_ozone.pdf). In this brochure you can see how many billions of dollars have been given to different countries and organizations to conduct research for finding alternative chemicals which do not damage the ozone. Another interesting fact was to see the amount of reduction of CFCs, HCFCs, methyl chloroform, etc. that has occurred in developed and developing countries since the Montreal Protocol was established (Table 2). The impact the original protocol and successive agreements had compared with if no action was taken is illustrated in Figure 2. I thought it was very interesting to see the predicted abundance of ozone depleting substances in the stratosphere if no action was taken. There is a lot more information about the Montreal Protocol and successive agreements in this brochure and I hope you take a look at it and better understand the impact it has had.

Hydrofloroethers?!

Our reading for class on wed was about the various HCFC's and CFC's that all still destroy ozone molecules either by forming chlorine radicals which migrate to the stratosphere, or in the case of HCFC's have very potent short term effects. The scientific community has been attempting to synth a molecule which is inert and still can still clean electronic components, work in refrigeration, and serve as carrier compounds in lubricants. There is much work and testing to be done, and it is known that hydrofloroethers will breakdown by the OH radical scrubbing process described in class, but the products of this reaction may inadvertantly carry a high greenhouse gas potential. Still I found the abstract and journal artical interesting on these organic compounds. Who knows what future effects they may have in store...

Web address for the PDF.
http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/article.cgi/jpcafh/2005/109/i02/pdf/jp047860c.pdf

San Diego has a UV Monitoring Site!

After we discussed the loss of mid-latitude ozone, I began to wonder if any monitoring of the ozone loss in the San Diego region was currently under study. Interestingly, the National Science Foundation has one of its six UV monitoring sites in San Diego! A high resolution spectroradiometer is installed and operating to record the UV data, which unfortunately could not be obtained. (The NSF site requires one to be registered to access the data.) However, it spans from present to 1992. Also, on this site was a Student's Guide to Ozone and UV, which was a nice summary of the basics we have been discussing in class.Here is the website in case you want to review: SD UV

Human Lives affected by the Antarctic Ozone Hole?

When we started discussing the ozone hole and its anthropogenic origins, the deleterious effects on our atmosphere's chemistry made it easy to overlook the human lives affected in the southern hemisphere. Pronged by the book's statement that ground UV-B levels of light are increased by 3-6x during the appearance of the ozone hole in the spring, I found an article on PubMed about Punta Arenas, Chile, a medium-sized city located on the extreme southern tip of South America, whose inhabitants over the past 15 springs have been seeing an increase in severe sunburns and photosensitivity disorders. I believe this study is essential for a community whose risk of overexposure to UV rays is high. This way, individuals can become educated and learn how to lower their personal exposure risk and avoid sunburns that could eventually lead to malignant melanomas.

For the full article visit: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11807429&dopt=Abstract

Ozone depletion over the Arctic region

According to our book, the Arctic ozone hole appears on a larger scale during cooler periods. I was wondering if these cold periods were related to the climate cycle ENSO (El Nino-Southern Oscillation) and more specifically the La Nina part of the cycle when temperatures are cooler then normal. If the ozone hole and La Nina are connected is there a way to predict when the next La Nina year is going to be and begin preparing experiments to test ways to make the hole less severe during the colder periods. These experiments could lead to possible solutions for the future when hydrogen becomes a predominate source of energy and more water is released into the stratosphere and leads to longer and more severe cooling periods and more PSCs in the air.

For more information on ENSO go to: http://www.research.noaa.gov/climate/t_elnino.html
on this site you can also connect to other areas of NOAA research about climates.