|
PEOPLE
have witnessed heat waves in Paris and the UK, a tsunami
in Phuket, droughts and floods in Eastern Africa,
monsoons in India, snow in Buffalo, El Niño in Southeast
Asia, receding glaciers in the Himalayas, as well as
recent hurricanes and earthquakes all over the globe.
Many claim that these are all signs of
human-induced climate change.
We humans, the proponents argue, burn
oil and its many derivatives to fuel our cars, as well
as cool and light our homes. We still use coal and
natural gas for heating and powering up our factories.
Are the scientific claims made in Al
Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth accurate?
Sad to say, but the answer to that
question is “yes.”
According to recent scientific
investigations, some of the calamities mentioned above
are not natural disasters but are, in reality, effects
of global warming.
There is no longer any doubt that
burning fossil fuels in any form contributes to global
warming. For every drop of fossil fuel that is ignited,
a certain amount of harmful gases are produced such as
carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide from the
tailpipes of motor vehicles. Hydrofluorocarbon emissions
from leaking air conditioners also contribute to global
warming, not to mention the depletion of the ozone
layer.
So, how do we avoid compounding the
problem without sacrificing our ability to move around?
The answer is to search for alternative
sources of energy.
How can humankind reduce the world’s
toxic emissions and greenhouse-gas buildup?
The first step would be to earnestly
pursue the development and use of alternative sources of
energy that are clean and renewable—meaning, free from
harmful emissions and readily available from sustainable
sources.
Excellent examples of these are wind,
solar, geothermal and hydrodynamics (such as wave and
waterfall generators), which are naturally occurring
phenomena that can be harnessed to create electricity
that can provide power on a large scale. Of course,
building the infrastructure to make it possible will
require time and money, but build them we must.
In the micro level, headway has also
been made in technologies that allow current vehicles to
run on fuels that burn with little or no emissions.
Fuel cells, for example, are potentially
very clean, environmen- friendly sources of energy. They
work by producing electricity via an electrochemical
reaction between a “fuel” such as hydrogen and an
oxidant such as oxygen. The reactants (hydrogen and
oxygen) are made to flow into a “cell,” wherein
electrons are separated from protons using a membrane
that acts as a “catalyst” and forced to travel through a
circuit, converting them to electricity.
With fuel cells there is no combustion,
so few harmless gases, if any, and no particulates are
released into the environment. Although the technology
is viable, it is still too expensive for the average
motorist and it will take several years before it will
find its way into production cars. Their potential for
large-scale use is great.
There are also concerns, however, that
using hydrogen to power fuel cells and related
technologies in a variety of large-scale applications
like manufacturing poses risks such as the possibility
of leaks when storing and transporting hydrogen.
Infrastructure designs that carefully eliminate the
potential for leaks can minimize this risk.
In the interim (while these technologies
are still under development), the shift to biofuels
should become a priority.
Although harmful emissions are not
totally eliminated, using biofuels can reduce them.
Biofuels are commonly derived from
“biomass,” which is organic material that is processed
to produce a byproduct that can be used for fuel,
fibers, chemicals or heat.
Biofuels are not limited to the
now-talked-about biodiesel and ethanol-blended gasoline.
Other examples are landfill gas (it is created when
food, wood and other organic waste in a landfill
decomposes under anaerobic or oxygen-free conditions);
anaerobic digester gas (the breakdown of organic
material without the use of oxygen, as opposed to
aerobic digestion); methane (a common, naturally
occurring and human-produced gas); and bioenergy, which
covers a broad range of technologies that use fuel
derived from plant and other waste matter.
The big advantage with biofuels is that
the sources of biomass can be replenished.
Perhaps the greatest strides in the
search for alternative sources of energy can best be
seen in the automotive industry.
During last year’s Michelin Challenge
Bibendum conference in Shanghai, China, a futuristic
black and gray fuel cell-powered F600 Hygenius, a
prototype vehicle from Daimler, was displayed along with
a snazzy red Citroen C-Metisse from the Peugeot stable.
Also on hand were a diesel hybrid power train, electric
plug-in cars, fuel cell-powered vehicles, a quirky
electro-solar powered three-seater—vehicles that
flaunted the future of environment-friendly road
transport.
Well, this writer wonders, while we’re
at it, why not go back to riding bicycles, which is,
perhaps, the most logical and ideal transport that has
been around since the 19th century?
Although the alarm bells are sounding
loudly, humankind should not cringe in fear thinking
that the harm done is irreversible. We should instead
calmly but urgently get our collective acts together and
take steps to arrest the damage to the planet.
Over the years we have acquired ways to
conserve not just our material assets but other types of
resources as well. We must now learn to use what we need
and develop new things even before we actually need
them. We must also learn to live with and within the
limitations of nature’s capacity to provide resources.
The use of non-renewable reserves should not and cannot
be the only way to maintain our economies. We can make a
difference by being responsible for our planet. |
