Author: Emissions

Last updated on September 21st, 2023

Bio-diesel has been around ages. Several car manufacturers have allowed the use of bio-diesel-blended fuel in their products. Bio-diesel is a fuel produced from organic sources like vegetable oil and animal fat. Its production is relatively simple and it’s compatible with most diesel engines.

Exactly how beneficial is this alternative? There are a few catches. Most importantly, bio-diesel is only environmentally beneficial when produced in limited quantities. Bio-diesel produced by focused cultivation of crops results in the loss of forest land. This counteracts the pollution-reducing properties of bio-diesel, as trees are the primary converters of CO₂.

Bio-diesel by itself doesn’t release a lower amount of greenhouse gases as compared to fossil fuels. Its beauty is in the production. Producing bio-diesel (mostly from plant stocks) takes up atmospheric CO2, which is then released back into the atmosphere by burning. This means no net change in the overall atmospheric content of CO₂, as opposed to fossil fuel burning, which adds to the overall atmospheric CO₂ levels. Bio-diesel is, however, a cleaner fuel. It has a much lower proportion of particulate emissions and sulfurous by-products. Some varieties of bio-diesel have been found to reduce the overall release of GHG’s by 57-86%.

It also has more efficient performance characteristics. Bio-diesel has a certain number between 48 and 60 as opposed to that of petrol, diesel, which is generally around 40. The cetane number is a measure of efficiency and, in extension, emissions of the fuel. Moving on to other geopolitical benefits, bio-diesel, being indigenously produced, is an economic boon. It is cheap and can be easily produced. Greater use reduces the nation’s burden on foreign fuel, reducing the trade deficit. As it is a domestic product, the production also provides a lot of job opportunities.

So what are the problems with bio-diesel? Not many, actually

The major problem pertaining to bio-diesel production is the CO₂ emission at the production stage. A lot of bio-diesel comes from plants like soy, sugar cane and palm oil. These require huge plantations to grow. Growing and managing such plantations requires a lot of energy in itself. Growing crops specifically for bio-diesel production requires a careful balance of the amount of energy being invested and the yields. Also, this takes up a sizable portion of a nation’s arable land, placing a strain on its food cultivation. Sometimes, this results in a conversion of even more forest land into agricultural land. Deforestation reduces the earth’s CO₂ recycling capacity.

Another problem is the prevalence of diesel engines in the market. Vehicles running solely on bio-diesel are a bad idea for a variety of reasons (presently, at least). Therefore, bio-diesel has been restricted to use as an additive. Most engines require re-calibration to function properly with such mixed fuel. However, the last few years have seen an increasing number of car manufacturers making vehicles with engines that accept certain specific mixes of bio-diesel. The growth potential for bio-diesel is infinite. If managed properly, the day may not be far off when all cars run on domestically-produced, clean and high-performance bio-diesel. This, however, requires a fair amount of caution and planning as such an idea is just as likely to backfire.

Last updated on March 21st, 2018

Recent reports suggest that the EU will soon be adopting tougher standards on vehicle emissions. They will also update their testing rules. The aim is to get results which will be closer to realistic driving conditions. The new standards will come into play in 2016. First of all, however, they will need to be improved by Frans Timmermans. He holds the position of vice president of the European Commission.

The current standards are the New European Drive Cycle protocol or NEDC. This has been criticized as unrealistic and optimistic. It seems that this is having a large effect. The testing process of the Environmental Protection Agency in the US uses their own protocol. They report fuel economy numbers on European cars as much lower than the NEDC does.

Car manufacturers are not pleased with the suggested changes. They are already able to game the system in a way that is beneficial to them. There have been reports that some manufacturers are trying to stop the changes altogether. It is believed that this is one of the reasons why it will take so long to go into force. In the public eye, they claim that they need more time to change their processes. When the standards come into force, cars will need to have lower emissions overall. Whether they find a new way to play the system or not will likely not change that.

Currently, it is thought that a number of tricks are employed to play the figures. For example, windows and doors can be taped up to lower the amount of air resistance. Fake roads which are far too smooth compared to the real thing are used. High air temperatures, which are unlikely in real situations can also be employed. Some cars even have a low emission mode, which is triggered when the front wheels only are spinning. This is because the back wheels are normally stationary when the tests are being conducted.

Research suggests that the real emissions figures are on average seven times higher than the standard. Some models may even be running at twenty-two times that. Only one car out of sixteen looked at by the Council on Clean Transportation met the limit. This is 80 mg/km of nitrogen oxide emissions. This is obviously not great for our battle against pollution.

There is some hope that the push towards greener cars and vehicles will help in this area. If the vehicles on the roads are electric or hybrid, the standards will not be abused as much. In the meantime, there are still plenty of old cars on the roads. Until these more harmful models are retired, pollution will continue to be a big issue. We can expect to hear more about the plans to tackle this by September. Then we will understand the changes to the regulations as well. This gives more than enough time for manufacturers to state their arguments. When the final legalization goes through, however, they will be forced to comply.

 

Last updated on March 21st, 2018

General Motors has announced the recall of 67,000 of its Cadillac ATS sedans, a range of compact sports models in the company’s luxury segment. The news follows the last week’s recalls by Land Rover and Mercedes Benz, bringing the problem of road safety to the luxury car sector once again. Just like with other car makers, this recall affects models that were manufactured between 2013 and 2015 – the newest Cadillacs available on the market.

General Motors cites faulty sunroof controls as the reason for the recall. If a non-recessed switch controlling the sunroof retraction is touched, it could cause the roof to close unexpectedly. The problem here is the amount of force required to activate the switch – it is much less than allowed by federal safety rules.

General Motors discovered the problem last month while testing the Cadillac 2016 model. It has already started repairs on the non-released cars and sent the repair guidelines to its dealerships. The fix for the Cadillacs will involve replacing the switch plates in the affected cars. As far as General Motors can tell, the problem concerns cars only sold in the United States and Canada, not overseas.

The wave of recalls in recent weeks and months serves as a good reminder that any car can be prone to defects, luxury or budget or otherwise. Car companies generally do a good job of identifying, recalling and repairing affected vehicles. Not only their reputation is on the line, but the law is firmly on the side of the consumer in these matters. However, the U.S. law lacks an important clause that protects a more vulnerable car buyer – the used car buyer.

There are estimated 238 millions of cars driving along the American roads, and a whopping 47 million of them may have unaddressed recall defects. If the number seems shocking, consider that 25 percent of car owners who receive a recall notice never bother to get the car to a dealership to get it fixed. Whether they continue driving it or decide to sell it, the car drives on without the necessary repairs, potentially becoming a safety threat. Even if the defect does not affect drivability, it gets passed along to the next owner and could accumulate more problems down the line.

The main issue with used cars having recall defects is that dealerships selling them are under no obligation to fix them. Not only that, but dealerships also do not have to disclose recall notices to potential buyers. This failure to disclose may lead to accidents and fatalities if the recall on a given car model concerns safety. However, dealerships rarely withhold information from potential buyers on purpose: they may simply lack the means to check for recalls on cars that they put on their lots. A federal database that allows dealerships to verify the recall status of their cars went live in August 2014. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is now pushing for legislation that would also oblige used-car dealers to make fixes to recalled cars before selling them.

Last updated on March 21st, 2018

The Scottish Government announced plans to tackle public sector vehicle emissions recently. The Minister for Transport and Islands, Derek Mackay, outlined plans to invest £2.5 million. The initiative will be known as “Switched on Fleets”. The overall aim of the program is to increase the number of electric vehicles being driven in Scotland.

More than 200 electric vehicles have already been introduced to Scottish Local Councils. The goal of the government is even more ambitious than that, however. They want to ensure that there is no petrol or diesel-fueled vehicles in their service by 2050. With just 35 years to complete this plan, the investment is timely. Starting early will be the key to achieving success.

Transport Minister Derek Mackay, said: “I am delighted to be launching this new initiative, which is providing expert analysis highlighting where electric vehicles can be most effectively introduced into fleets. We are also backing this analysis with £2.5 million of funding to enable councils and their partners to act by buying or leasing electric cars and vans.
“We are committed to freeing our towns, cities, and communities from the damaging effects of petrol and diesel-fuelled vehicles and Switched On Fleets takes us further down the road to achieving this. More electric vehicles on the roads is an important step in increasing awareness among drivers that there are viable alternatives to petrol and diesel cars.”The manifesto for change from fossil-fuelled vehicles has already seen more than £17 million of investment since 2013. Some of this money has gone towards installing public charge points across Scotland. More than six hundred of these now exist. Two hundred more have been placed in non-public locations. These include workplaces, private residences, and council buildings. Scotland is now leading the rest of the UK in the electric car take up. Four out of five councils in Scotland have switched to electric cars.Colin Ferguson, CEO of Switched On Fleets partner, Route Monkey, said: “Our evidence-based analysis for Switched-On Fleets enables Councils to make informed choices for electric vehicle deployment so that these vehicles deliver cost savings as well as environmental benefits. Working closely with the Energy Saving Trust, we can help Scotland’s public sector fleets remain at the forefront of electric vehicle adoption.”

Scottish residents can currently accept a grant of £5,000 towards the purchase of an electric car. £8,000 is available for those who wish to purchase a van. No road tax applies to electric vehicles either. Scottish buyers can also get a home charge point for free. Fuel is much cheaper, normally around 13p less per mile. This is helping electric vehicles to become more affordable. Most have a range of up to one hundred miles before recharging. Some hybrid models can go much further with an added petrol or diesel system. Many manufacturers now offer electric versions for purchase. These include Nissan, Renault, Volkswagen, BMW, and more. It is becoming easier than ever to go green in Scotland.

 

Last updated on September 21st, 2023

Incredible ideas seem to come to the fore when the future of the planet is at stake. The most recent developments in the Hydrail has shown that the planet has enough brain power to see this through, however, not enough time. The clock is ticking for governments to meet their 2020 targets. This is simply not just a strategy for emission reductions, it is the very essence of our survival.

In a time of need, new inventions seem to flourish. Ordinarily people would laugh off new inventions as improbable or unlikely to succeed. Sometimes inventions or alternative methods happen after the effect, which we’re hoping will not be the case. The history of the world refers that the best inventions are usually the ones that come along when we run out of options. By applying their minds, these inventors and scientists are pushing beyond boundaries to reclaim the beauty of the earth. It takes every person on the planet to make this work by being aware.

Harnessing the assistance of the ocean

Pretty much the forest of the sea, photosynthesizing plankton need our bad guys to make food. The CO2 in the air would be used by the plankton to make food. Iron stimulates the growth of plankton, therefore more iron in the ocean should then mean more plankton. More plankton would then obviously mean less CO2. This all seems like a great idea, however, the ocean’s ecosystem is very fragile and a lot more testing is needed to see just what the effect is on the ocean.

White goat

This is by far one of the most bizarre inventions ever, however, we have to take into consideration the speed with which the human race uses up toilet paper. Office paper that needs to be recycled is fed in on one side and in half an hour a toilet roll pops out.

Sulfur rockets

Scientists believe that by having more sulfur in the atmosphere, it will reduce the temperate of the atmosphere and thus reduce global warming. Acid rain is the unfortunate by-product of this idea and causes other problems for our environment. Sulfur would also continuously have to be injected into the atmosphere for this to be effective.

Hydroponic and Vertical Farming

The combination of hydroponic and vertical farming has a huge effect on the environment. With vertical farming, less land is needed to cultivate the produce. It also involves less water which is great for the environment. The vertical farms would be on a rotational basis, allowing each row of plants enough light for sufficient growth.

Using the garbage to rebuild

Chicken feathers, carton boxes, tin cans and plastics have all been ear-marked for re-use. Chicken feathers are proposed as the new component for shopping bags, which would give a higher probability of being biodegradable. Inventors have also discovered ways of making sturdy yet appealing furniture out of trash. Of late, trash is compacted into building blocks which are used for building houses.

Last updated on March 21st, 2018

Due to anticipated reductions in fuel tax revenues, the state of Oregon has been contemplating changing its tax system for 12 years.  They piloted alternative programs in 2007 and 2013.  Finally, this year, they’re implementing a new experimental program.  It’s referred to as a road usage tax program.  They’ll be the first state in the nation to put such a program to the test.   There was an initial meeting held by the ODOT to get community input and act as an open forum.  Though it had an extremely low attendance, the program has continued to have much criticism, both within the state and nationwide.

The Oregon Department of Transportation is recruiting 5000 volunteer drivers to sign up for the program.  You can log onto their website, www.oregon.gov/odot/pages/index.aspx to find out the details of joining the program.  The program begins on July 1^st of this year.

The volunteer drivers will track their mileage, and be charged $0.015 per mile traveled.  The ODOT’s proposed program offers a few options for tracking your mileage.  The first, most controversial and criticized way is to use GPS monitoring.  Many find this to be a blatant governmental invasion of privacy.  The second, less obtrusive way is an odometer reading instrument.  The third, and most likely to be used way is a mileage journal.  This is the type of data collection that many states have already honored for mileage recording for tax purposes.  You can even purchase such journals in many office supply stores.  The state firmly implies stiff penalties for misrepresentation or false mileage reporting.

The most confusing part of the program has got to be the way the tax collection is proposed.  The driver, having reported mileage, receives a bill from the ODOT.  The driver then pays the bill.  After the tax funds are received, the driver receives a refund check to offset the amount paid in fuel tax, collected at $.30 per gallon.  This process seems complicated and confusing.  It also seems to leave plenty of room for overages and underage galore.  Refreshingly, the state has commissioned a private firm to handle processing of the revenues and rebates.

The program is being called the “OreGo” volunteer program.  The program funds are for roads and bridges as fuel tax revenues are.  To gain an idea of the scope of the need for such a program, the state’s budget for roads and bridge construction since 2013 is 50 billion dollars.  The current fuel tax for last year only brought in 34 billion.  This can be credited to more fuel-efficient cars and a statewide rise in the use of public transportation.  It’s not surprising, with such deficits that the state would be the first to implement this new approach.  It is, however, ironic since Oregon was the first state in our nation to implement the gas tax in 1919.

Though being met with resistance and criticism, it must be recognized that Oregon is leading the way in providing for future road works with its citizens’ obvious commitment to environmentally sound transportation practices.

Last updated on March 21st, 2018

If the Kyoto protocol taught the world anything, it was firstly that global warming exists. It also taught us that man was responsible. Man’s responsibility does not end with acknowledging this, however, they need to take drastic action.

Plans are implemented and governments are held responsible. Let’s have a look at some of the plans that have been implemented across the world.

Germany

Germany has undertaken a project called “Energiewende” or energy transition. They are implementing a few strategies, however, it seems that Germany might just miss its 2020 target. Instead of the emissions-reducing, Germany’s emissions have actually increased. Germany seems to be holding the companies responsible for their own emissions, and a type of emissions cap will be set for the various industries. They will sell permits to these companies. Should the company find a way to reduce its emissions, they are allowed to sell their permits to other companies. Incentives are the draw card for households and companies by implementing tax cuts for those reducing emissions.

South Africa

Carbon neutrality and recycling are terms that have just recently landed home in South Africa. The threat of high emissions is still something that seems to be taking time for corporates to prioritize. The government is, however, looking to hold corporates responsible, and no one is exempted. The latest battle regarding emissions involve the parastatal, Eskom, not being able to meet their emissions targets. This would result in large fines, something the energy provide just cannot absorb. There have been major outage problems in South Africa with rolling blackouts called load shedding affecting households and business. Whether the parastatal will piggyback on this forever, remains to be seen.

Venezuela

Venezuela has implemented a mixture of EU and US legislation where emissions are concerned. Their seemingly heaviest contributor to emissions are vehicles. They focus specifically on heavy cargo vehicles. Companies face steep fines should their vehicles be in contravention of the emissions standards.

China

Those who remember the Beijing Olympics will also remember the smog that surrounded the Bird’s Nest Stadium. An eye-opener into the terrible pollution in China but also something to be concerned about where the environment is concerned. China is known as the manufacturing power in the world, closely followed by India. China does, however, seem to take it seriously, as an emissions deal has been struck with the US. Barack Obama and Xi Jinping met late 2014 to discuss the deal. This deal will have an indelible effect on the world and could affect meaningful deals with Paris, according to Ban Ki-moon.

Russia

Even though Russia managed to reduce their emissions by almost a quarter since 1992, they are still the third largest contributor per capita in the region. Gas emissions seem to be the biggest concern. Alternative sources for fuel and heating are top of mind here. Developing renewable energy resources is key to delivering their strategy of meeting the 2020 target.

Last updated on March 21st, 2018

There’s a laudable trend directly affecting the reduction in carbon emission!  If this trend continues, the U.S. would no longer be the largest emitter of greenhouse gases by 2040.

What is this trend?  This is the continuing decline of two cars-households.

Survey research conducted by KPMG, a major global accounting and research entity, indicates that by 2040 fewer than 47% of American households will have multiple vehicles.  Currently, 57% of American households still have two or more cars.  This predicted 10% reduction in dual car ownership is due to several factors, one of them is increasing financial burden.

The other contributing factors identified in the report are increased urbanization, telecommuting, changes in travel preferences among the younger generation, and growing traffic congestion in big metro areas. With new cars typically costing the average families $31,000, families are looking at cheaper options with no fixed costs.

In major cities across America, car sharing companies like Zipcar, on-demand car services like Uber, and even bike shares are making significant headway, this is especially true in over 400 American Universities and colleges all across the country.

Car-sharing is an economical alternative for college students.  Take this information, for instance, membership with Zipcar costs just $60/year or $6/month and hourly rates start at just $8.25/hour with their Occasional Driving Plan membership.  College-aged members reported that they save around $600 per month using car-sharing scheme compared to owning their own car.

The flow-on benefits are also noteworthy.  Members of car sharing programs report a 46% increase in public transit trips, a 10% increase in bicycling trips and a 26% increase in walking trips since joining up. Significantly, a study by the National Academy of Sciences found that each shared car takes about 15 private cars off the road.  This is the sort of data that the American people need to hear.

The strategy is clearly twofold.  Save college kids money through cost-sharing, and at the same time get them hooked on the concept.  Over the next the few years, these young college kids would be the movers and shakers of modern, environmentally friendly metro and urban areas.

More and more people are also deciding to live in moderately walkable places that are not crazy expensive. But for those in more expensive, more gentrified neighborhoods, couples are also finding that when they’re not spending extra money maintaining two vehicles it is actually more affordable to live near work.

Significantly reduced gas emission is a direct result of all this declining trend.  About 19.64 pounds of carbon dioxide (CO2) are produced from burning a gallon of gasoline that does not contain ethanol and about 22.38 pounds of CO2 are produced by burning a gallon of diesel fuel. Multiply that by 1,000,000 cars and you could just about understand why Earth is choking.

Although it is possible to buy biodiesel fuel in many states, it is still carbon-emitting.  Even using 100% biodiesel, cars still emit 20.13 pounds of CO2.

Car-sharing and power walking are clearly the answer!

Last updated on March 21st, 2018

If you are shopping for a new car, fuel economy is probably one of the first things on your mind. Gas prices in the United States are currently one of the lowest in years, but they will inevitably rise again. The amount of gas your car requires will directly influence your decision to drive it when you have a choice of transportation. If you drive often, saving on fuel is essential. Most new cars are considerably more fuel-efficient than their predecessors, but what if you didn’t want to pay for gas at all? Here are the top five most fuel-efficient cars in the United States. All of them are electric.

BMW i3 Giga

This a four-seat hatchback with a rear-wheel-drive that is an electric car through and through. The car has an electric motor and an optional two-cylinder engine generator. The driving range on the motor is 75 miles, but it extends up to 130 miles with the optional engine installed. It takes about 4 hours to fully charge on a 240-volt charger. BMW i3 is a stylish-looking midsize electric car that is agile and fun to drive. Its fuel efficiency equivalent is 139 miles per gallon.

Mitsubishi i-MiEV

Mitsubishi managed to make the cheapest electric car currently available on the market. Priced at $22 500, it is definitely more affordable than BMW i3 or Tesla Model S, but it is not the fastest nor most attractive. The car range is just short of 60 miles. It takes a long time to charge: 21 hours on a standard 110-volt charger or 7 hours on a 240-volt charger. Its fuel efficiency is equivalent to 111 miles per gallon.

Ford Focus Electric

One of the most popular compact sedan models, Ford Focus boasts an electric version that has a fuel efficiency equivalent of 107 miles per gallon. The car runs on a 100-kilowatt electric motor. The battery takes less than 4 hours to charge fully for a 240-volt charger. Ford Focus Electric provides a quiet, agile ride with a range of up to 76 miles.

Nissan Leaf

Nissan Leaf is the most famous mass-produced electric car in the United States. Nissan Leaf has a range of 75 miles, just like Ford Focus Electric, but takes longer to charge (6 hours on a 240-volt charger or 16 hours on the standard 110 volts). The Leaf’s fuel efficiency equivalent is 106 miles per gallon. Overall, it is comparable to Ford Focus Electric, both in price and range, but has a more distinct appearance and more standard features.

Chevrolet Volt

The Chevrolet Volt is equipped with an electric motor and a 1.4-liter engine that extends its driving range from meager 35 miles to over 300 miles. The fuel efficiency equivalent in the electric mode is 99 miles per gallon. When driven with gasoline, the Volt’s fuel efficiency is 32 miles per gallon. The Chevrolet Volt is quiet and responds well to handle, but lacks room in the back and in the trunk. It takes 4 hours to fully charge on a 240-volt charger, whereas the standard 110 volts will extend the charging time to 10 hours.

Last updated on September 21st, 2023

If you live in the USA, you might have to think a bit more before you buy an electric car. The reason? Some areas of the States have it better than others. It turns out that a lot of things depend on where you live. The range your car will have and the emissions that it puts out can be hugely different. It seems that geography is actually a big factor in how your car works!

A report published in Environmental Science and Technology looked at a current electric car, the Nissan Leaf. This is a model that is commercially available right now. Drivers were monitored during their normal days. They found that regional energy sources play a huge part in the range. Climate can also play its part. Of course, all of the estimates from car companies are done at the optimal level. This means that only some consumers will ever see those top results. Others could be looking at a different picture entirely. Hot and cold temperatures can both decrease the efficiency of a vehicle.

Electric vehicles have a few notches against them already. They are great for the environment and this stands very much in their favor. Cost is also a great thing for them. However, they generally only have a 70 to the 100-mile range after one charge. But that figure could be even lower than stated.

It seems that CO2 emissions are highest in the Midwest. This part of the country is the worst place to charge electric vehicles. If you want to really make a difference to the environment, move to the West. This is where the best results can be found. The lowest emission scores were recorded there. If you live in the Upper Midwest, where it can be very cold, the range may fall to 45 miles. In the Southwest, temperatures above 100 F had the same effect.

The differences which they found are large enough to make a big impact. This means that it could have implications for the emissions of electric vehicles. Are they really as great as we all think? It could be that there is more to explore on this topic. There is definitely room for improvement. The main thing to work on at the moment is the battery. It can have a lower rate of efficiency at different temperatures. It is also, of course, true that cars need to be better adapted to weathers. Using the air conditioning to cool down can use a lot more battery power. Similarly, the heating will make a difference when the outside temperature is low.

Some have pointed out that the source of the electric charge matters too. Does your electricity come from coal? If so, you are really driving a coal powered car. More energy solutions are going to be needed in future. This will help to cut emissions even further. That way we can expect to see improvements in the power of the cars as well. It is important to remember that this is still a developing industry.