Biological Issue - Global Warming/Air Pollution

Have you ever been approaching a big city in anticipation only to see a dark seemingly impenetrable haze of soupy pollution that hangs over it day in and day out?  This is becoming more and more common with the continually increasing greenhouse gases that are by-products from the burning of fossil fuels for our energy.  All of these pollutants namely carbon dioxide are little by little contributing to global warming.  The topic of global warming has been a heated debate (no pun intended) to say the least for quite some time now.  Environmentalists fighting on one side and primary consumers of fossil fuels on the other. 

 In the article, “Warming Solution: Just Stop Cold?”  by Mason Inman recently published for National Geographic the idea is proposed of just stopping the production of things that consume fossil fuels.  Obviously this is not easy as just stopping productions of cars, planes and power plants etc. A study published in Science estimated that “if we were to go on using the things we already have, but didn’t build new things that used fossil fuels, then the planet would heat up another 0.5ºF to 1.2ºF (0.3ºC to 0.7ºC).  This threshold is significant for “avoiding the worst impact of climate change” according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Now I wouldn’t go so far as to say that we need to immediately cut all production of all things that consume fossil fuels.  I believe part of the problem of global warming and the excess of greenhouse gases that we have in the atmosphere is due in part to a combination of pride of those who don’t want to give up something that is so beneficial to their business or other organization and lack of creativity.  I believe that a decrease in greenhouse gases and subsequently global warming can be realized by being a little but more creative.  This is why I support the idea of methane liquefaction or turning landfill gases into Liquefied Natural Gas(LNG).

This is a relatively new idea and process that takes the methane gas produced from the decomposition of garbage and runs it through a process called CO2 WASH.  As stated in the article “Feasibility of Landfill Gas (LFG) as a Liquefied Natural Gas Fuel Source for Refuse Trucks” from the Air and Waste Management Association the “ CO2 WASH process is a sophisticated chemical process that separates the carbon dioxide (CO2) and oxygen (O2) from CH4, providing clean LFG with a high CH4 content that can be liquefied to produce LNG for use as vehicle fuel.”  If that doesn’t make sense all you need to know is that by doing that the landfills can then run specialized LNG refuse trucks on this LNG.  

There are several things that can be done with LFG. These include: doing nothing, electricity generation and LNG production. Of these, the production of LNG as a fuel is the most economically feasible.  So if these processes can be done to run refuse trucks at landfills that have traditionally run on diesel fuel, why can’t this process be incorporated into everyday cars?  Case studies in Texas have shown that these LNG refuse trucks have been very successful in several landfills.

In summary there are several pros and cons to methane liquefaction to LNG as a fuel source.  Consider the following:

Pros:

• Less CO2 emissions – help slow global warming
• Garbage in landfills will have a purpose more than just being burned
• Between the 3 options of what to do with LFG, converting it to LNG as a fuel is the most economically feasible
• It’s essentially a renewable resource, in that humans will always have waste so there will always be LFG
• Healthier air quality

Cons

• In the case studies so far LNG refuse vehicles have cost more than a traditional diesel fuel truck.
• This however might not be the case if such technology was incorporated into everyday vehicles
• Not all landfills have the garbage composition to produce LNG from LFG.  It varies based on the type of garbage, climate and age of landfill 

I realize that this technology is in its infancy and that there’s still a lot that needs to be researched, however if more time and resources were put into the development of this technology I think it could serve as a very liable alternate fuel source to replacement fossil fuels over time.

Citations:

• Inman, Mason. "Warming Solution: Just Stop Cold?." National Geographic 9 Sep 2010: n. pag. Web. 14 Sep 2010. <http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/09/100909-energy-warming-stop-building/>.
• Zietsman, Josias, Muhammad E. Bari, Aaron J. Rand, Bhushan Gokhale, and Dominique Lord, Kumar Sunil. "Feasibility of Landfill Gas as a Liquefied Natural Gas Fuel Source for Refuse Trucks." Journal of Air and Waste Management Association 58.May 2008 (2008): 613-619. Web. 14 Sep 2010. <http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=8&hid=15&sid=40c50517-aee0-4cd3-b3fa-3e87af613f8e%40sessionmgr10>.
• Demirbas, A. "Fuel Alternatives to Gasoline." Energy Sources Part B.2 (2007): 311-320. Web. 14 Sep 2010. <Zietsman, Josias, Muhammad E. Bari, Aaron J. Rand, Bhushan Gokhale, and Dominique Lord. "Feasibility of Landfill Gas as a Liquefied Natural Gas Fuel Source for Refuse Trucks." Journal of Air and Waste Management Association 58.May 2008 (2008): 613-619. Web. 14 Sep 2010..>.
• All pictures