78,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Wissenschaft und neue Technologien
- Sprache: Englisch
Provides an accessible and relatable approach for understanding how much energy we use in our day-to-day lives
Daily Energy Use and Carbon Emissions enables readers to directly evaluate their energy use, estimate the resulting carbon emissions, and use the information to better appreciate and address the impact their activities have on climate change. Using quantities and terms rooted in everyday life, this easy-to-understand textbook helps readers determine the energy they consume driving a car, preparing a meal, charging electronic devices, heating and cooling a house or apartment, and more.
Throughout the text, clear explanations, accurate information, and numerous real-world examples help readers to answer key energy questions such as: How much energy does your house use in a month? What impact will turning off lightbulbs in your home have on energy conservation? Which car emits more CO2 into the atmosphere per mile, a 50 MPG gasoline car or a 100 MPG equivalent electric car? Demonstrating the relation between daily energy use, carbon emissions, and everyday activities in a new way, this innovative textbook:
- Examines daily activities within the context of the basic needs: energy, food, air, and water
- Covers topics such as daily water use, renewable energy, water and energy sources, transportation, concrete and steel, and carbon capture and storage
- Includes discussion of energy and CO2 emissions relative to infrastructure and population growth
- Provides supplemental teaching material including PowerPoint slides, illustrative examples, homework assignments, discussion questions, and classroom quizzes with answers
Daily Energy Use and Carbon Emissions: Fundamentals and Applications for Students and Professionals is a perfect textbook for students and instructors in Environmental Engineering programs, and an essential read for those pursuing careers in areas related to energy, environment, and climate change.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 615
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2022
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Preface
HOW THIS BOOK CAN HELP YOU UNDERSTAND ENERGY USE AND CLIMATE CHANGE
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 A VERY BRIEF HISTORY OF ENERGY USE
1.2 EARLY ENERGY AND POWER FOR TRANSPORTATION AND ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION
1.3 ENERGY AND THE CHALLENGE OF GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE
1.4 LOOKING TO THE FUTURE: THE AGE OF ELECTRO‐MECHANICAL/CHEMICAL ENERGY CONVERSION AND STORAGE
1.5 WHY D, C, AND w UNITS?
References
CHAPTER 2: ENERGY USE
2.1 UNITS OF ENERGY AND POWER
2.2 COMPARING DIFFERENT ENERGY UNITS USING kWh
2.3 ENERGY USE IN THE US WITH A FOCUS ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE FUTURE
2.4 ENERGY USE AROUND THE WORLD
2.5 NEXT STEPS
2.6 HOW MUCH ENERGY SHOULD WE USE?
References
CHAPTER 3: DAILY ENERGY UNIT D
3.1 DEFINING THE DAILY ENERGY UNIT D
3.2 EXAMPLES USING D
3.3 PRIMARY ENERGY CONSUMPTION WHEN USING ELECTRICITY IN UNITS OF D
3.4 YOUR LIFE IN D UNITS
3.5 ENERGY AND ELECTRICITY USED COMPARED TO FOSSIL FUEL USE BY DIFFERENT COUNTRIES
3.6 CREATING GREEN D
References
CHAPTER 4: DAILY CO
2
EMISSION UNIT C
4.1 DEFINING THE DAILY CARBON EMISSION UNIT C
4.2 CO
2
EMISSIONS FROM DIFFERENT FUELS
4.3 EMISSIONS OF CO
2
FOR DELIVERED ELECTRICITY
4.4 CARBON EMISSIONS FOR PEOPLE IN UNITS OF C
4.5 REDUCING GLOBAL CO
2
AND OTHER GHG EMISSIONS
References
CHAPTER 5: DAILY WATER UNIT
5.1 ENGINEERED AND NATURAL WATER SYSTEMS
5.2 WATER USE AND THE DAILY WATER USE UNIT w
5.3 ENERGY USE FOR OUR WATER INFRASTRUCTURE
5.4 ENERGY USE FOR WATER TREATMENT
5.5 ENERGY FOR USED WATER TREATMENT
5.6 DESALINATION
5.7 ENERGY STORAGE USING WATER
5.8 CO
2
EMISSIONS AND PROJECT DRAWDOWN SOLUTIONS
References
CHAPTER 6: RENEWABLE ENERGY
6.1 INTRODUCTION
6.2 SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAICS
6.3 Wind Electricity
6.4 GEOTHERMAL ELECTRICITY
6.5 BIOMASS ENERGY
6.6 HYDROGEN GAS PRODUCTION USING RENEWABLE ENERGY
6.7 COSTS OF RENEWABLE VERSUS CONVENTIONAL ENERGY SOURCES
6.8 ENERGY STORAGE IN BATTERIES
6.9 IMPACT OF RENEWABLE ENERGY ON REDUCING CARBON EMISSIONS
References
CHAPTER 7: WATER – AN ENERGY SOURCE
7.1 EXTRACTING ENERGY FROM WATER
7.2 HYDROPOWER
7.3 HOW MUCH ENERGY IS IN USED WATER (WASTEWATER)?
7.4 METHANE PRODUCTION FROM BIOMASS IN WASTEWATERS
7.5 ELECTRICITY GENERATION USING MICROBIAL FUEL CELLS (MFC)
7.6 HYDROGEN PRODUCTION USING MICROBIAL ELECTROLYSIS CELLS (MEC)
7.7 ELECTRICITY GENERATION USING SALINITY GRADIENTS
References
CHAPTER 8: FOOD
8.1 THE ENERGY BURDEN OF FOOD
8.2 ENERGY NEEDED TO PUT FOOD IN YOUR HOME
8.3 CO
2
EMISSIONS AND OUR CARBON “FOOD PRINT”
8.4 WATER FOR FOOD THAT YOU EAT EVERY DAY
8.5 ENERGY FOR AMMONIA PRODUCTION (AND H2) FOR FERTILIZERS
8.6 USING THE ENERGY UNIT D FOR OUR DIET
8.7 FOOD WASTE AND OTHER FOOD‐RELATED CO
2
EMISSIONS
References
CHAPTER 9: HEATING AND BUILDINGS
9.1 HEATING AND INSULATION
9.2 COMPARING HEATING SYSTEMS BASED ON CARBON EMISSIONS
9.3 ENERGY RATINGS
9.4 GEOTHERMAL HEATING
9.5 WATER HEATERS
9.6 HOME AND BUILDING ENERGY ANALYSIS FROM DRAWDOWN
References
CHAPTER 10: COOLING AND REFRIGERATION
10.1 WHY ENERGY FOR COOLING IS INCREASINGLY IMPORTANT
10.2 ENERGY USE FOR REFRIGERATORS
10.3 ENERGY USE FOR AIR CONDITIONERS
10.4 UNDERSTANDING ENERGY UNITS FOR COOLING
10.5 COOLING OPTIONS
10.6 REFRIGERANTS AND GHGs
References
CHAPTER 11: CARS
11.1 WHY CARS MATTER FOR CLIMATE CHANGE
11.2 INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES AND CARBON EMISSIONS
11.3 UNDERSTANDING ENERGY USE BY ELECTRIC CARS
11.4 CARBON EMISSIONS FROM CARS WITH DIFFERENT FUELS
11.5 HYDROGEN FUEL CELL VEHICLES (HFCV)
11.6 AUTOMOBILES OF THE FUTURE
References
CHAPTER 12: TRANSPORTATION
12.1 MY ENERGY USE FOR TRANSPORTATION
12.2 ENERGY USE FOR TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS
12.3 AIR TRAVEL AND HIGH‐SPEED RAIL
12.4 ENERGY FOR PAVEMENT MATERIALS
12.5 WHAT FUELS WILL BE USED IN THE FUTURE FOR TRUCKS, SHIPS, AND PLANES?
12.6 DRAWDOWN TRANSPORTATION RELATED SOLUTIONS
References
CHAPTER 13: CONCRETE AND STEEL
13.1 ENERGY USE FOR BUILDING MATERIALS
13.2 CONCRETE AND CEMENT
13.3 STEEL
13.4 DRAWDOWN SOLUTIONS FOR CEMENT AND STEEL
References
CHAPTER 14: ASSESSMENT AND OUTLOOK
14.1 ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE WILL REQUIRE BOTH RENEWABLE ENERGY AND CARBON CAPTURE
14.2 ASSESSING POSSIBLE CHANGES TO OUR OWN DAILY ENERGY CONSUMPTION
14.3 HOW MUCH CO
2
CAN WE CAPTURE INTO BIOMASS AND THE DEEP SUBSURFACE?
14.4 MAJOR CHANGES TO THE WATER INFRASTRUCTURE WITH RENEWABLE ENERGY
14.5 HOW MUCH CAN THE WORLD REDUCE ENERGY CONSUMPTION AND CARBON EMISSIONS?
14.6 REDUCING CO
2
EMISSIONS FROM FOSSIL FUELS WILL NOT BE ENOUGH
References
APPENDIX 1: CONVERSION FACTORS
APPENDIX 2: ENERGY RELATED TO ELECTRICITY GENERATION IN THE UNITED STATES
Reference
APPENDIX 3: WORLD AND US POPULATION
Reference
APPENDIX 4: WORLD ENERGY USE
Reference
APPENDIX 5: CO
2
EMISSIONS
References
APPENDIX 6: HOURS OF PEAK SOLAR IN THE UNITED STATES
References
INDEX
End User License Agreement
List of Tables
Chapter 2
Table 2.1 Examples of some common energy units and conversions.
Table 2.2 Comparison of power and energy at 1, 10, and 24 h for a 100 W (inc...
Table 2.3 Comparison of typical amounts of light and power produced by incan...
Table 2.4 Energy for different uses in various units.
Table 2.5 Energy content for 1 gal of three liquid fuels (gasoline, diesel, ...
Table 2.6 Primary energy consumed in the United States: original, including ...
Table 2.7 Primary energy for electricity generation in the United States in ...
Table 2.8 Additional electricity additions and losses relative to overall co...
Table 2.9 Estimated or reported energy efficiencies for electricity generati...
Table 2.10 Examples of power used (continuous) per person in kW, or the tota...
Chapter 3
Table 3.1 Calories needed for an average American (Man, 90 kg, 175 cm tall; ...
Table 3.2 Calories needed for people on average in China (Man, 66 kg, 167 cm...
Table 3.3 Energy for different uses converted from kWh per day to units of D...
Table 3.4 Energy use in homes by percentage and D units for the house assumi...
Table 3.5 Energy use by some appliances and devices in a house, assuming a c...
Table 3.6 Electricity production in units of D for the US: D
e
= electricity,...
Chapter 4
Table 4.1 CO
2
emissions per day in units of lb/d and C for different energy ...
Table 4.2 D and C units and ratios for different fuels, assuming 1 gal (liqu...
Table 4.3 Fuel energy (D) and carbon emissions (C) needed to produce 1 D
e
of...
Table 4.4 CO
2
emissions reported for the United States based on different so...
Table 4.5 Top countries in CO
2
emissions along with some contrasting other e...
Table 4.6 The top 10 most impactful solutions to climate change in terms of ...
Chapter 5
Table 5.1 Average water use reported in different studies based on year and ...
Table 5.2 Electrical energy use for water treatment based on either public w...
Table 5.3 Electrical energy use for used water treatment based on either pub...
Table 5.4 Different estimates of electricity use for desalination facilities...
Chapter 6
Table 6.1. Costs for solar panel installations sorted by number of years for...
Table 6.2. Fuels and methods of H
2
gas production with typical colors assign...
Table 6.3. Possible reductions in CO
2
emissions (Gt) over a period of 30 yea...
Chapter 7
Table 7.1 Examples of power densities in microbial fuel cells normalized to ...
Table 7.2 Examples of rates of hydrogen or methane production in MECs and es...
Chapter 8
Table 8.1 Calculation of the primary energy sources, in terms of energy used...
Table 8.2. Carbon emissions and water use for different types of burgers.
Table 8.3 Water used to produce the different items for three different meal...
Table 8.4. Possible reduction in CO
2
emissions over a 30‐year period (2020–2...
Table 8.5. Possible reduction in CO
2
emissions due to improvements in land u...
Chapter 9
Table 9.1 The energy used and costs for heating a typical house and carbon e...
Table 9.2 The energy used for different water heaters based on primary energ...
Table 9.3 Possible reductions in CO
2
emissions (GT) over a period of 30 y (f...
Chapter 10
Table 10.1 The number in the first column corresponds to the solution listed...
Chapter 11
Table 11.1 Fuel equivalent ratings for electric vehicles in kWh and mpg equi...
Table 11.2 Emissions in units of C based on 37 mi/d (13,500 mi/y).
Table 11.3 Three Project Drawdown solutions related to cars.
Chapter 12
Table 12.1 Calculated D values for different modes of transportation based o...
Table 12.2 Mitigation plans for reducing CO
2
emissions for transportation op...
Table 12.3 Possible reduction in CO
2
emissions due to improvements in transp...
Chapter 13
Table 13.1 Composition, volume, lower heating value, and total energy for ty...
Chapter 14
Table 14.1 Global greenhouse gas emissions for 2019 based on CO
2
equivalents...
Appendix 1
Table A1.1 Conversion factors based on electrical grid energy and primary or...
Table A1.2 Conversion factors based on electrical grid energy and primary or...
Appendix 2
Table A2.1 Primary energy (EJ) used for electricity production in the United...
Table A2.2 Primary energy (EJ) used for electricity production in the United...
Table A2.3 Electricity production (EJ) for the United States.
Table A2.4 Electricity generation (EJ) in the United States.
Table A2.5 Average power plant efficiencies calculated from heat rates using...
Appendix 3
Table A3.1 Population of the United States and the world from 1950 to 2019.
Appendix 4
Table A4.1 World annual total energy use (EJ) for select countries and all c...
Table A4.2 World annual electricity use (EJ) for select countries and all co...
Table A4.3 Daily energy use per person per day, in units of D, for select co...
Table A4.4 Electricity generation (EJ) using renewables and other sources fo...
Table A4.5 Electricity generation (EJ) for renewables and C‐neutral and foss...
Appendix 5
Table A5.1 World annual CO
2
emissions (Gt) for select countries and all coun...
Table A5.2 GHG gas emissions by the US in CO
2
equivalents (Gt/y).
Appendix 6
Table A6.1 Hours of peak solar light estimated from maps produced by the Nat...
List of Illustrations
Chapter 1
Figure 1.1 Global greenhouse gas emissions by economic sector.
Figure 1.2 Possible scenarios for global fossil fuel emissions and their imp...
Figure 1.3 CO
2
emissions by different countries in the past century.
Figure 1.4 Wood was the original fuel (left) but over time we have learned t...
Figure 1.5 To better understand quantities in our lives related to the energ...
Chapter 2
Figure 2.1 Energy sources and flows in the United States in 2019, based on a...
Figure 2.2 Conversion factors for large‐scale energy production. The recomme...
Figure 2.3 Primary energy (EJ) for electricity generation calculated for the...
Figure 2.4 Primary energy sources for (a) electricity production and (b) all...
Figure 2.5 Electricity (EJ) used by the United States in 2019 based on energ...
Figure 2.6 Electricity (14.22 EJ) produced for use in the United States in 2...
Figure 2.7 Energy in the fuel used for primary energy for (a) all uses and (...
Figure 2.8 Change in renewable energy sources over time.
Figure 2.9 Total energy use between 2009 and 2019 separated into different r...
Figure 2.10 Energy use for electricity generation in 2019 separated into dif...
Chapter 3
Figure 3.1 Energy use in units of D for a person the United States (2019) ca...
Figure 3.2 A hypothetical D footprint based on prime energy use per person: ...
Figure 3.3 A revised footprint of energy use based on (a) the total primary ...
Figure 3.4 Energy use in units of D for different regions and select countri...
Figure 3.5 Energy (EJ) in electricity generated (D
e
) using data from Dudley ...
Figure 3.6 Electricity as a portion of the total energy use for four main se...
Figure 3.7 Energy input as a function of the four main sections of use, and ...
Chapter 4
Figure 4.1 Daily carbon emissions in units of C for a person in the United S...
Figure 4.2 Daily carbon emissions in units of C with the assumptions of D:C ...
Figure 4.3 Sources of major GHGs in the United States in 2018.
Figure 4.4 Impact of different global events on CO
2
emissions over several d...
Chapter 5
Figure 5.1 Water use in the United States in 2011 data normalized to the tot...
Figure 5.2 Typical water use in the home separate by uses, with all numbers ...
Figure 5.3 Energy flow diagram related only to water use in units of trillio...
Figure 5.4 Energy use for the water infrastructure in units of D, and the CO
Figure 5.5 Energy use in D units for water services based on primary energy ...
Figure 5.6 Distribution of energy for water treatment through water intake t...
Figure 5.7 Distribution of energy for a used water treatment plant.
Figure 5.8 Locations of pumped storage facilities in the United States which...
Chapter 6
Figure 6.1 The number of peak sun hours by zone.
Figure 6.2 Comparison of electricity generation produced and used in 2020 ve...
Figure 6.3 Wind speed map for the US states in m/s at a height of 80 m.
Figure 6.4 Where wind energy is used in the US states.
Figure 6.5 Photograph of the MorningStar solar home at Penn State showing it...
Figure 6.6 Map of temperatures at a drilling depth of 7 km (∼4 mi).
Figure 6.7 Schematic representation of the reactions and ions for two types ...
Figure 6.8 Comparison of costs of conventional versus renewable energy sourc...
Figure 6.9 Ragone plots show how the different types of batteries and capaci...
Chapter 7
Figure 7.1 Hydropower production in the United States from 1950 to 1990, and...
Figure 7.2 Hydropower past and present, for a total capacity of 79.6 GW, and...
Figure 7.3 Methane generation from organic matter treating relatively dilute...
Figure 7.4 (a) Schematic, and (b) photograph of a microbial fuel cell used t...
Figure 7.5 The maximum theoretical power per volume of
total water
that can ...
Chapter 8
Figure 8.1 Distribution of energy sources by percent for the food system in ...
Figure 8.2 Energy sources for food production: (a) Energy sources, with the ...
Figure 8.3 Distribution of energy consumption (percent) for eight different ...
Figure 8.4 Comparison of energy as a percentage of 1 D (2000 Calories) in th...
Figure 8.5 Carbon emissions estimated using the fossil fuel data in Figure 8...
Figure 8.6 Hydrogen production (a) as a pure gas in for a total of 73.9 Mt/y...
Figure 8.7 A summary of the processes needed to prepare H
2
gas for its conve...
Figure 8.8 Annual CO
2
emissions due to the food supply energy consumption in...
Chapter 9
Figure 9.1 Energy Star labels for (a) a furnace rated in AFUE and (b) a heat...
Figure 9.2 Examples of Energy Star labels for water heaters fueled by: (a) n...
Chapter 10
Figure 10.1 Example of an Energy Star tag for a 27 ft
3
refrigerator showing ...
Figure 10.2 Example of an Energy Star tag for the same air conditioner, with...
Figure 10.3 Average energy use by location in the United States showing cost...
Chapter 11
Figure 11.1 Comparison of energy sources for cars in the US. Alternative fue...
Figure 11.2 Planning document for the state of California on the fuels used ...
Chapter 12
Figure 12.1 Three prototype H‐fueled airplanes announced by Airbus.
Chapter 13
Figure 13.1 Growth in CO
2
emissions from cement production for the world, Ch...
Figure 13.2 Possible reduction in CO
2
emissions due to a variety of approach...
Figure 13.3 An example of a new steel building being constructed in State Co...
Figure 13.4 Steel use globally based on sector.
Figure 13.5 Distribution of global CO
2
annual emissions (Gt) for different i...
Figure 13.6 Distribution of energy US based on percentage for a total annual...
Figure 13.7 Annual CO
2
emissions for different materials.
Chapter 14
Figure 14.1 Carbon reduction scenario that suggests by 2050 we will not be a...
Figure 14.2 (a) Hypothetical D footprint for one person based on the primary...
Figure 14.3 (a) Daily carbon emissions in units of C associated with energy ...
Figure 14.4 Fuel sources for light‐, medium‐, and heavy‐duty vehicles in the...
Figure 14.5 Low‐carbon fuel sources for three scenarios for California in 20...
Figure 14.6 Impact of land use on soil organic carbon (SOC) over a period of...
Figure 14.7 Maximum possible climate mitigation solutions for CO
2
capture (G...
Figure 14.8 Annual mitigation of CO
2
enabled by conversion of pasture, cropl...
Figure 14.9 Global CO
2
emissions predicted by the IEA for years 2015–2060 ba...
Figure 14.10 Global GHG or CO
2
emissions reported by several different agenc...
Guide
Cover Page
Table of Contents
Title Page
Copyright
PREFACE
Begin Reading
APPENDIX 1 CONVERSION FACTORS
APPENDIX 2 ENERGY RELATED TO ELECTRICITY GENERATION IN THE UNITED STATES
APPENDIX 3 WORLD AND US POPULATION
APPENDIX 4 WORLD ENERGY USE
APPENDIX 5 CO2 EMISSIONS
APPENDIX 6 HOURS OF PEAK SOLAR IN THE UNITED STATES
INDEX
WILEY END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
Pages
iv
ix
x
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
251
252
253
254
255
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
Daily Energy Use and Carbon Emissions
Fundamentals and Applications for Students and Professionals
Bruce E. Logan
State CollegePennsylvania, USA
This edition first published 2022
© 2022 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, except as permitted by law. Advice on how to obtain permission to reuse material from this title is available at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.
The right of Bruce E. Logan to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with law.
Registered Office
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA
Editorial Office
111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA
For details of our global editorial offices, customer services, and more information about Wiley products, visit us at www.wiley.com.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats and by print‐on‐demand. Some content that appears in standard print versions of this book may not be available in other formats.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty
In view of ongoing research, equipment modifications, changes in governmental regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to the use of experimental reagents, equipment, and devices, the reader is urged to review and evaluate the information provided in the package insert or instructions for each chemical, piece of equipment, reagent, or device for, among other things, any changes in the instructions or indication of usage and for added warnings and precautions. While the publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this work, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and specifically disclaim all warranties, including without limitation any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives, written sales materials, or promotional statements for this work. The fact that an organization, website, or product is referred to in this work as a citation and/or potential source of further information does not mean that the publisher and authors endorse the information or services the organization, website, or product may provide or recommendations it may make. This work is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a specialist where appropriate. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read. Neither the publisher nor the authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.
Library of Congress Cataloging‐in‐Publication Data applied for:
ISBN: 9781119831013
Cover image: © Ryoji Yoshimoto/Getty Images
Cover design by Wiley
Preface
For over 20 y, I have been researching renewable energy solutions, particularly those that can be used for the energy sustainability of the water infrastructure. In the middle of 2019, I started to realize how few people, even well‐educated scientists and engineers, understood how much energy they used. Everyone I talked to was clearly concerned about lowering CO2 emissions and addressing climate change, but it seemed that there was a general absence in understanding about how much energy they used and how their own activities were connected to CO2 emissions. Many could tell you how much money they spent on electricity or natural gas for their home, but not how much energy they used or the amount of CO2 produced. About the only thing people could recall about CO2 emissions was some vague number from an airplane trip. There was a clear lack of a connection between energy use in their daily lives and the resulting CO2 emissions. These conversations led me to realize how limited my education had been on the magnitude of my own energy use, the energy use by an average person in the United States, or energy used by people in other countries. I knew very little about possible solutions to climate change or how much climate would be impacted by a specific reduction in energy use, despite all my years of work on developing renewable energy technologies. To tackle climate change, I realized that we would all need a better understanding of the sources and amounts of CO2 emissions and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) that were occurring from our own activities.
In looking for ways to convey energy use or CO2 emissions in plain language, I did not find many good examples. The best book that addressed these topics within the context of climate change was Drawdown, by Paul Hawken. While that book summarized the global importance of climate change and quantified possible solutions, the activities needed to reduce carbon emissions, and units given for numbers (gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalents), felt disconnected from my own life. To really become engaged in climate solutions I discovered, I needed a lot more information and a way to connect energy use to carbon emissions for specific activities. I set out to find the answers I needed, and writing this book helped to organize that material into something that could be used by me and others for the same purpose.
HOW THIS BOOK CAN HELP YOU UNDERSTAND ENERGY USE AND CLIMATE CHANGE
The purpose of this book is to provide information, examples, and calculations to address energy use and carbon emissions in our own lives. For example, how much electricity does your house use in a month? How does energy used for your car compare to that for your home? Will turning off lights in your home have a larger impact on CO2 emissions than turning down the thermostat or driving 10 less miles a week? It has been difficult to answer these questions because you cannot directly compare these activities as different methods are used to describe the amount of energy used. Electricity for your house is likely billed in kilowatt hours (kWh), natural gas is quantified in units of therms (or CCF), and energy purchased for your car by the volume of gasoline. Even if you could put all these into the same units of kWh, how do you translate these energy uses into CO2 emissions?
The approach used in this book was to address energy within the context of the full energy–food–climate–water nexus, in ways that are comprehensible and relevant to our daily lives. While we can say how much energy is used by the United States compared to another country in units of TWh, EJ, or quads, those energy units are all very large numbers that have no relevance to our own lives. The first step was to convert large numbers into smaller numbers that have meaning for individuals. Social math is a method to explain and compare large numbers in ways that are both understandable and compelling. For example, saying that something is equal to a penny in an Olympic‐sized swimming pool provides a clear image of the enormous volume of water relative to the size of that penny. Therefore, I needed a social math approach.
To better express our personal energy and water use and CO2 emissions relative to our lives, I decided to examine energy‐consuming activities within the context of the minimum amounts of energy and other related things, that we need to be alive, which are energy/food, air/carbon emissions, and water. To address units that could be more easily understood, I redefined these activities using baseline units of D, C, and w. One D is the energy in the food we eat every day, 1 C is how much CO2 we release from eating that food, and 1 w is the minimum water we need to drink every day. Now, we can compare the energy in a gallon of gasoline (15.3 D) to the energy in food we eat every day (1 D) or the average electricity used in a US home (13 D). Energy use becomes more meaningful when we calculate how much energy it took to put 1 D of food on the table in our homes or how many D it takes to feed people in other countries. We can never use much less energy than 1 D in the long‐term, so the question is how much more energy do we use than that in our food? For example, how much energy does it take to produce that food or to travel to work and elsewhere in the world? These energy uses can now be calculated and compared on a daily basis in units of D.
Units other than D, C, and w are also used here as needed to make the amounts of energy understandable in different contexts, for example energy use by countries, but the focus in the book is on what you do and how much energy you use for your own activities. Several chapters are also devoted to considering energy and CO2 emissions relative to our infrastructure as those amounts of energy or emissions are relevant to our lives as we add to our infrastructure to accommodate an increasing number of people on the planet.
A book like this requires research into many different technical fields and peer review to make sure the facts and calculations are correct. I was very fortunate to have help from several colleagues and friends in reviewing different sections and chapters. I would like to thank Charlie Anderson, Gahyun Baek, Vikash Gayah, Zhanzhao Li, Aleksandra Radlinska, Mohammad (Mim) Rahimi, Farshad Rajabipour, Le Shi, Erica Smithwick, and Susan Stewart. Thanks also to all of my colleagues for many lively and insightful conversations on energy use, climate change, and the environment.
State College, PennsylvaniaJune 2021
BRUCE E. LOGAN
CHAPTER 1INTRODUCTION
1.1 A VERY BRIEF HISTORY OF ENERGY USE
For most of the history of mankind, there was no need for a unit of energy: It was all about having enough food to eat and perhaps a fire to stay warm. Animal domestication created the additional burden of needing to ensure a food supply for the animals, but the food‐energy loop was small and centered on food and warmth. Around 5500 y ago, people started riding horses and mankind entered the bronze age with people learning to mine and heat metals to make better tools (and weapons). Human energy needs then became more than about getting enough food for our own energy needs, it also meant providing food for horses and other animals and having sufficient energy to craft tools.
From these early days when people first learned to make and use fire, our global population has remained bound to the concept of burning things. The history of energy use shows that most efforts to obtain energy were centered on finding different things to burn. Wood and other biomass were burned to provide heat from a fire, and then, coal was used as a more efficient energy source due to its greater energy density. Later on, we transitioned to oil and then natural gas, with oil being transformed into many other materials we could burn such as gasoline, kerosene, and jet fuel.
So here we are today with an energy infrastructure based primarily on distributing various kinds of fuels around the world to be burned and provide the energy we use to drive our cars, heat our homes, produce electricity, run factories, and maintain communities. We are used to an abundance of fossil fuels and thus have little direct connections to how much energy we use other than the cost at the gas pump to fill up our car or the money we use to pay our gas or electric bills. It is difficult to sum up the energy from these different sources because they mostly all have different units. One of the purposes of this book is to better connect us to the amount of energy we use to develop an appreciation of how it ties into our daily lives. Another purpose is to show that you can use this knowledge to reduce energy consumption and greatly decrease carbon emissions from fossil fuels into our environment.
In the first few chapters of this book, we will examine the vast array of energy units in our lives and gain an appreciation of where we are today in energy use and carbon emissions. In subsequent chapters, we will explore how much energy we use in our own lives and activities through the daily energy unit D, carbon emissions via the unit C, and water use using the unit w. Once we have examined our own activities using these three units, we can then examine energy use for our built infrastructure and see how much change we need for energy and water consumption to significantly reduce the amounts of carbon emissions in our lifetimes.
1.2 EARLY ENERGY AND POWER FOR TRANSPORTATION AND ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION
It is easy to imagine the path that led to defining the power of an engine in terms of horsepower, since engines were developed to provide an alternative power source to horses for work or transportation. The Scottish engineer James Watt is credited with term as he showed back in the late 18th century that steam engines he invented and developed were superior in the work they could do compared to one or even many horses. There was no “standard horse” in those days, and it is now considered that one horse with above average strength was used to provide the first definition of 1 horsepower (hp). The power provided by a horse was likely closer to its “maximum power” than the sustainable amount of power by a horse over a long period of time.
It does seem rather amazing that after all these years that in the United States we are still using a term such as horsepower for a car, motorcycle, or truck. One way to convey how much power is in a car engine is to relate units of horsepower to those of Watts (W) used for electricity. Thus, we can state that 1 hp equals 746 W or 0.746 kilowatts (kW). An old fashioned incandescent light bulb uses about 100 W, and a modern light emitting diode (LED) unit produces about the same light using only 14–20 W. It seems fitting to have these electrical power units named in honor of the engineer James Watt. Describing the power of a car engine in horsepower does not necessarily tell us how much of that power is being used. For example, car rated at 100 hp will not run continuously at this maximum power rating. Instead, you will use only a fraction of that total horsepower when you drive to the store or take a trip on a highway. Thus, our daily lives we are more connected to the energy used by a car in terms of gallons of gasoline consumed rather than hp or kW. For energy, many different units can be used such as Calories for food, megajoules (MJ) for gasoline, or kilowatt hours (kWh) for the energy used over a certain period of time. The amount of energy used per time is defined as power.
Example 1.1
Sarah drives to work every day in her car that uses 1 gal of gas for the 20 mi round trip that takes about 20 min each way. (a) What is the energy in kWh needed to bring her to work? Assume a gallon of gas contains 127 MJ of energy. (b) How much horsepower does it take for the 10‐mi drive to work?
For a single trip of 10 mi that uses a half of a gallon of gasoline, we can calculate the energy used with the conversion factor of 3.6 MJ/kWh as:
The energy that was used was expended over a period of 20 min. Thus, to calculate power, we need to divide energy by time, so the result in power (W) is as follows:
To convert this to horsepower, we use the conversion factor that 1 hp = 746 W or 0.746 kW, or
From this calculation, we can see that this amount of power would have required 71 horses. Of course, even using 71 horses, it is unlikely that she could have arrived to work on time. A horse walks at about 4 mph, so whether she used 1 or 71 horses, if she moved at 4 mph, it would have taken 2.5 h to get to work.
The first engines to replace the horse were steam engines, which use an external combustion system fueled by coal or wood, to produce the steam. Internal combustion engines (ICEs) produce power by burning the fuel within the engine and have the advantage of not needing to use water to transfer the energy from the external combustion chamber to the engine.
Electricity production has not, until very recently, changed from the basic approach of steam engine in the sense that there is an external system that uses a fuel to produce steam, with the steam used drive a turbine that is then used to make electricity. Fuels for electricity production have evolved separately from the turbine systems. Therefore, steam engines that burned wood were replaced by power plants that produced steam from coal, oil, and natural gas. Electricity production has therefore greatly impacted how we use fossil fuels.
Looking back in time to where we first made a transition from a wood economy into a modern society, the transformation is best identified as the start of the Industrial Revolution, which is considered to be a period from 1760 to the early 1820s (1820–1840). This rapid rise in industrial production required increased use of steam and waterpower for manufacturing of chemicals, materials such as iron and textiles, and tools. Wood and coal sustained growth for a period of time but additional sources of energy were eventually needed to sustain our increasingly industrialized societies.
The impact of the industrial revolution on timber and wood resources was enormous in some locations. For example, in Pennsylvania and elsewhere in the northeastern United States, blast furnaces were used to produce iron materials needed for new industrial age, but these furnaces required coke, and coke production required large amounts of wood. Vast tracks of land were nearly completely leveled to run the furnaces in the 1800s leaving much of the land bare and releasing huge amounts of carbon stored in these forests into the air. Many decades were subsequently needed for the recovery and regrowth of these forests after they were cleared for this use. The use of wood used in these furnaces was eventually replaced with anthracite coal, shifting efforts from clearing the land of trees to mining coal.
The Discovery of Oil and the Next Age of Burning Things
The first oil use may have occurred as early as 600 BCE in China, but for the modern world, there were two notable events in the United States: oil first discovered in 1859 in Titusville, PA, and the subsequent operation of that oil well; and the Spindletop Hill oil discovery in Texas in 1901. Most large oil companies have their origins associated this Texas oilfield due to its enormous productivity. The high energy density of oil and its relative ease of extraction led to its prominence in the energy portfolio of the United States and the world in modern times.
Even the development of electricity production from nuclear fuels did not change this basic relationship between using a fuel to heat water, and then the steam being used to make electricity. Energy captured from nuclear fission is used no differently than that from combustion of fuels in steam power plants. Using a source of nuclear energy does have the advantage of not releasing the carbon in fossil fuels as CO2 into the atmosphere, but the overall process remains tied heating water to produce steam. Nuclear production of electricity is also currently the most expensive way to produce electricity in the United States, and the radioactive waste has no permanent solution leaving future generations to deal with this waste product. A sufficient amount of fuel for nuclear reactors is also a big concern. The availability of uranium could enable the production of 100 TWh of electricity and thus a continuous use of 10 TW of power. However, based on using known existing supplies of uranium for nuclear fuel that rate of power generation would deplete uranium stores in less than a decade. There is also no way to quickly ramp up the use of nuclear fuel in the United States. A typical nuclear plant produces 1 gigawatt (GW), or a billion watts, and it takes 10 or more years to construct this type of plant in the United States. The last two nuclear power plants that went into operation in the United States were in 1996 and 2016 (US Energy Information Administration, 2020a). A total of 17 nuclear power plants have been shut down in the US, although two more units are anticipated to be added at an existing site in Georgia in 2021 and 2022 (US Energy Information Administration, 2020b).
Whether nuclear power plants can be economically operated in the future is not clear. For example, the Three Mile Island plant in Pennsylvania shut down due to high operating costs, and many operating nuclear power plants are 38 y old and reaching the end of their projected lifetimes. Furthermore, there is still no permanent solution for nuclear waste in the United States. The cost of a serious accident at a nuclear power plant, while remote, can be extremely high if one occurs. For example, addressing the damages of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident could exceed US $200 billion, and decontaminating the Fukushima site in Japan that was destroyed by a tsunami could cost US $470–$660 billion. Thus, despite the ability of nuclear power plants to produce electricity without CO2 emissions, it does not seem reasonable that many additional nuclear power plants will be built in the US soon or that nuclear power can increase as a part of the US electrical power grid. However, nuclear power is projected to increase globally by 6% based on the analysis of the International Energy Agency (IEA) for meeting CO2 reductions needed to avoid a global increase of more than 2°C by 2050 (IEA, 2017).
1.3 ENERGY AND THE CHALLENGE OF GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE
The main motivation for renewable energy today is reducing emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs), with CO2 released from burning fossil fuels as the main GHG of concern. The link between global warming and CO2 emissions in the industrial age is clear and irrefutable. The main discussions now center around what can be done to curtail those emissions.
Much of the discussion on curbing GHGs focuses on power plants that make electricity and fuels used for transportation. However, electricity and heat production account for just 25% of all GHG emissions, and transportation (as a category) about 14% (Fig. 1.1). A nearly equal percentage of GHGs (24%) arise from agriculture, forestry, and other land use activities. Transportation is less (14%), with industry accounting for about 21% of all GHG emissions. Such information on emissions from these different sources is useful when we contemplate where we can effectively reduce GHG emissions from the perspective of changes that we could make in our own lives that might impact these GHG emissions.
The Paris Climate Agreement on climate change, signed by nearly 200 nations in December of 2015, focused on reducing CO2 and other GHG emissions with the goal of not exceeding a global temperature rise of 1.5°C (2.7°F) by 2050. To work toward this goal, these nations have pledged to reduce CO2 emissions by various amounts, but based on the analysis of Hausfather and Peters (2020), the extent of these pledges is not sufficient to achieve this 1.5°C goal (Fig. 1.2). With current pledges to reduce GHG emissions, we are on a path that might result in a 2.5–3.0°C (4.5–5.4°F) increase. Therefore, not only do these nations need to adhere to these pledges going into the future, much greater changes are also needed to further reduce CO2 and other GHG emissions. If we do not take appreciable steps toward reducing GHG emissions, a 4°C (7.2°F) scenario seems more likely on average, with the worst‐case scenario reaching an increase of 5°C (9°F) or more (Fig. 1.2). Note that these averages are for increases in land and water temperatures combined. Land temperatures can average ∼60% higher than these averages, raising the possibility of a rise of 8°C (>14°F) for land temperatures on average, and extreme event temperatures could produce periods of temperatures much higher than these averages (Voosen, 2021). Land temperatures are already averaging nearly 2°C higher than pre‐industrial averages (Voosen, 2021). Such changes will be profound in terms of the kinds of temperatures that we experience in our daily lives for the coming decades. A more detailed assessment of CO2 emissions and methods of carbon capture and storage are presented in Chapter 14.
Figure 1.1 Global greenhouse gas emissions by economic sector.
Source: Adapted from US Environmental Protection Agency (2020).
Figure 1.2 Possible scenarios for global fossil fuel emissions and their impact on global average temperature changes. Key: historical, data for global emissions from 1980 through 2020; pledged, reductions by countries; temperatures show the global rise from mitigation needed to reach the Paris agreement goal of 1.5°C, weak mitigation leading to 3°C, average predictions with no climate policies of 4°C and worst‐case scenario with no climate policies of 5°C.
Source: Adapted from Hausfather and Peters (2020).
Figure 1.3 CO2 emissions by different countries in the past century.
Source: Adapted from Ritchie and Roser (2020).
There are enormous political and social challenges for reducing CO2 emissions as the wealthier countries that generally emit higher amounts of CO2 can greatly reduce their emissions while still enjoying a relatively comfortable lifestyle. The United States is one of the largest emitters of CO2 per person, but in recent years, CO2 emissions by the United States have been declining (Fig. 1.3). However, over this same period, many high CO2 emitting industries have moved overseas, with many to China. Through rapid industrialization in China, and this country becoming a center for global manufacturing, China's CO2 emissions have greatly accelerated and now exceed those of the United States.
Many nations in the world are considered to be “energy poor” and desire to increase the standard of living for their citizens, which would greatly increase CO2 emissions if these standards were raised by consumption of fossil fuels. As a result, nations in Asia and other Pacific countries, along with India, are now on a path to substantially increase CO2 emissions. Also, if demand for petroleum declines and oil prices drop, less expensive oil might become more attractive for use in many developing countries and this increased use could negate efforts by industrialized nations to reduce GHG emissions through their own reductions in CO2 emissions. Some sources of GHG emissions are difficult to link to a specific country, such as international travel. When GHG emissions from international travel are separated into a single category, these emissions are larger than those of some countries (Fig. 1.3). Energy use and CO2 emissions from cars and other forms of travel are further discussed in Chapters 9 and 10.
The need for energy by many people in the world is enormous, and not only because people would like a more Western lifestyle, but also because many people in the world need energy just to meet basic needs for clean drinking water and sanitation. For example, roughly 1 billion people lack sufficient access to potable water, over 2 billion lack safe drinking water in their homes, and over 4 billion people lack adequate sanitation (Osseiran, 2017). Modern sanitation is expensive. If other countries in the world follow the same path as the United States for modernizing their water infrastructure using the same technologies in the United States, for example, the increase in CO2 emissions would be enormous based on typical energy use by the United States. An often cited number related to energy use for the water infrastructure is that approximately 3–4% of electricity production in the United States is used for the water infrastructure, which includes pumping, water treatment and distribution, and wastewater collection and treatment. However, there is much additional energy use associated with the water infrastructure that is missed in only examining electricity use, as further discussed in Chapter 5. These energy costs also do not include other costs not directly related to the electricity and energy use. One assessment of wastewater treatment of in the United States estimated that the annual cost was $25 billion (WIN, 2001). It will take the cooperation of all countries around the globe to reduce CO2 and other GHG emissions into our shared global atmosphere, while at the same time addressing poverty and a lack of sufficient water, sanitation, and food for a large part of the world's population.
1.4 LOOKING TO THE FUTURE: THE AGE OF ELECTRO‐MECHANICAL/CHEMICAL ENERGY CONVERSION AND STORAGE
The 20th century will be considered as the age of oil, or more generally, the age of “burning things” since energy use was all about extracting energy from fossil fuels. However, the 21st century needs to become the age of electro‐mechanical/chemical energy based on an energy system that captures energy directly as electrical power without the need to burn fuels. Electromechanical systems, which operate based on using turbines to convert motion in one form into work or electricity are the oldest form of noncombustion‐based energy conversion, but other methods have developed based on chemical catalysts and materials such as those used in solar cells. In 2019, 16.4% of energy used for electricity production was indicated by the US Energy Information Administration to be provided by renewables (wind, hydro, solar, and geothermal). As discussed in Chapter 2, these numbers are inflated based on assuming electricity production using renewables has the same efficiency as a fossil fuel power plant. Renewables were actually 6.9% of the primary energy used for electricity production and accounted for 16.7% of the electricity generated for consumers. Nuclear and biomass, categorized here as carbon neutral, accounted for 21.2% of electricity production. For a carbon‐neutral energy infrastructure, we need to develop to the maximum extent possible ways to harness energy without needing to burn fuels (Fig. 1.4). The status of renewable energy use for our daily lives is addressed in subsequent chapters. In this chapter, we briefly examine the rise of these technologies over time.
Wind Energy
There were early efforts to capture wind energy using windmills around 500–900 AD, with most applications for pumping water or grinding grain. The Dutch are perhaps best known for their use of windmills dating back to the 11th century, with the number of windmills reaching over 10,000 there at one time, although estimates are that only about 1000 of these windmills remain today. The primary use of these early windmills by the Dutch was to pump water out of the lower lands to make them useful for food production. Windmills were used in the United States primarily to grind grain, pump water, and provide mechanical energy for sawmills to cut wood. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, small wind generators (turbines) were used to produce electricity, but the electrification of the grid in the 1930s that provided easier access to electricity saw an overall decline in their use. The use of wind power to produce electricity has more recently grown substantially, reaching 8% of all electricity produced in the United States in 2019. Electricity generation using wind power has also grown around the world, with over 1.13 trillion kWh generated around the world by 129 countries.
Figure 1.4 Wood was the original fuel (left) but over time we have learned to make use of truly renewable sources of energy that do not require harvesting or burning fuels using hydropower, wind, and solar energy technologies (right of the arrow).
Hydropower
The first hydropower station that produced electricity using a water turbine occurred in 1882 in Appleton, WI, and by 1889, there were about 200 hydroelectric power plants. Notably, the Hoover Dam opened in 1936 and was initially capable of producing 1.345 GW of electricity (currently rated at 2.08 GW). However, no method of producing electricity comes without other disadvantages. In the case of the Hoover Dam, the construction of a lake for the dam completely altered the river ecosystem and flowrates of the Colorado River. While hydroelectric power stations provided electricity, most of the energy demand in these earlier days was provided by coal that could be used in steam engines. The incandescent lamp, invented in 1879 by Thomas Edison, drove the wider use of electricity for lighting. In 1882, Edison built the first large scale power plant to produce electricity for lighting and other uses, and it was powered by coal. By 1900, less than 2% of the energy used to make electricity in the United States was derived from fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas) compared to about 62% in 2019.
Solar Energy and Electrochemical Conversion
Solar energy has always been used as a source of heat, and as early as the 7th century BCE magnifying glasses were used to make fire and light torches. The birth of the modern electrochemical age began in 1954 at Bell Labs with the invention of the first silicon photovoltaic (PV) cell, which initially had a 4% efficiency in converting light energy into electricity. Another milestone in PV development occurred in 2001 when the Home Depot chain of stores first started selling solar power systems in a few of their stores. Fast forward to today where large solar farms can produce electricity more cheaply than that possible using fossil fuels. For example, the City of Los Angeles recently approved construction of a solar farm that will provide 7% of the electricity used by the city in 2023, at a cost of 1.997 cents/kWh. The system is a 400 megawatt (MW) array that is expected to produce 876,000 MWh of energy per year. For comparison, electricity production using natural gas is around 4 cents/kWh, with the electricity delivered to a residential customer at 13 cents/kWh. This transformation in the cost of electricity produced by solar power will revolutionize electrical power generation in the United States and the world. We currently use in 1 y the amount of energy in the sunlight (4.3 × 1020 J) that strikes the planet for 1 h. We need to harvest a greater percentage of energy from the sun to achieve a more sustainable energy infrastructure.
Biofuels
Burning biomass such as wood is the earliest form of energy harvesting from nature, and the CO2 that is released from the wood is just being returned to the atmosphere as it was previously captured into the biomass. Using biomass in combustion processes, therefore, is a carbon‐neutral method of heat generation and perhaps electricity generation, but there are other environmental issues with this or any combustion‐based process. Thus, this context of electricity from biomass using combustion‐based processes is not as desirable as other electro‐ or mechanical‐conversion processes such as solar or wind energy. Burning wood, especially in uncontrolled environments, can release particulate matter, nitrogen and sulfur oxides, and carbon monoxide as well as lead, mercury, and other hazardous air pollutants. If we view biomass as solar energy storage, then it has the advantage of being able to be transformed into wood or other transportable fuels (such as ethanol or biodiesel). However, the low energy density of biomass makes it uneconomical to transport wood or other forms of biomass very far, and therefore, the point of production of fuels or electricity must be close to the biofuel source. Still, there is an enormous potential for using waste biomass for energy. An analysis by the US Department of Energy (DOE) estimated that there is more than a billion tons of waste biomass that could be converted into useful energy (Perlack et al., 2005).
There are many methods to capture biomass energy into fuels, with ethanol as the best‐known example. Corn ethanol, however, has few net environmental benefits, and the separation of the ethanol from water is energy intensive. Biodiesel production is from crops is also marginally energy net positive, and both ethanol and biodiesel are used in low efficiency combustion engines. However, if cellulose rather than food crops is used to produce these biofuels, then the energy and environmental advantages become more pronounced. Alternatively, fermentation of biomass can produce methane or hydrogen gases. However, if the methane is used in an ICE for transportation, then some of the same combustion‐based challenges arise with methane as the other fuels. If H2 gas is used for transportation, it can be used in vehicles powered using fuel cells which can have about twice the energy efficiency of a typical ICE. Complete conversion of the cellulose in waste biomass could power almost all light duty vehicles if they used very efficient hydrogen fuel cells (Logan, 2019). However, only a maximum of 4 mol of H2 can be produced from cellulose by bacterial fermentation, with the balance mostly consisting of acetic acid under optimal conditions (equivalent to 8 mol of H2) remaining as a fermentation end product (Logan, 2004). Therefore, additional methods such as using microbial electrolysis cells are being investigated to convert acetic acid to hydrogen, but additional energy is still needed as the overall reaction is endothermic (Logan et al., 2006, 2008). The use of biomass for producing renewable energy is further addressed in Chapter 6.
Energy Storage
Intermittent production of electricity using wind and solar energy, coupled with highly variable energy demands throughout the day, require efficient energy storage methods. Batteries immediately come to mind for energy storage as they are so commonly used in toys, phones, tools, cars, and other devices. However, many batteries generate electrical power from irreversible chemical reactions. The first modern type of battery was invented by Alessandro Volta in 1800 who constructed the battery from copper and zinc electrodes. This led to the most common type of battery, the zinc‐carbon battery, which are disposable batteries that are still commonly used today. Batteries that cannot be recharged, and thus cannot store electrical energy, are called primary batteries. The first rechargeable battery was the lead acid battery that dates back to 1859. Perhaps surprisingly, lead acid batteries are
