Sunday, April 20, 2008
A Cleaner, Leaner Jet Age Has Arrived
This article goes into the issue of pollution, mainly concerning the often overlooked industry of flying as a source of global warming. According to the article " Aviation is responsible for about 2 percent of global emissions of greenhouse gasses, and that share will rise as air travel continues to grow." I found this article insightful not only because I am interested in flying, but because it easily relates to what we are studying in science communication. While most of the general public is not aware of it, several major airlines companies are making major strides in their efforts of making travel, and their planes more 'green.' Overall, this article is very insightful as to these steps that the airline companies are taking and the future of air travel in general.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I did not realize the high emission rate of greenhouse gases from planes until I took a Carbon Footprint test online. While my footprint was relatively low, the few times I fly every year contributed to nearly 50% of my carbon output. I found this article very interesting because it does illuminate some of the problems with air travel. I never would have expected that driving my old (and probably inefficient) car would have such a comparatively low emission rate to taking a huge jet designed on the cutting-edge of technology.
I think some of the options that the article cites for ways to improve air travel and make it as "green" as possible are fascinating and resourceful. However, I do question whether ethanol would be a sufficient and sustainable fuel replacement. I recently heard a Cornell professor speak about how ethanol in theory is a good idea, but that it is not a sustainable process because it does not produce the high percent yields per land and money use we need to support our consumer-driven nation.
I think his lecture overlaps with the jet fuel issue. In order to make improvements, the changes must be scientific, but they also must stem from a human committment to use drastically less. But, how do we use less when it comes to flying? Our world is so globally connected and dependent at this point, it does not seem like the rate of air travel is likely to decrease.
Composite material to build the outside chassis of the plane is a great idea for reducing fuel comsumption. I feel this material should also be used in many of the other modes of transportation that uses high amount of fuel ex. trucks, buses, and even cars. I loved the fact that airplane engine makers are aware of the high fuel cost, and global warming which has compelled them to look for more efficient alternative means to save energy and maximize productivity. Having a larger fan in the front to slow down the air passing through and maximizizing the air flowing in while reducing the amount of fuel needed to generate the same if not better amount of thrust is a great idea! However I do not support the fact of replacing the fuel with ethanol. Since even though you are solving the problem at one end you are creating a problem at the other end. With the rising global poverty and hunger, I don't think that maximizing agricultural yields for fuel production rather than food production is a good idea.
I think it's great that airplane manufacturers are taking these steps towards making planes that are better for the environment. I defintely agree with Tashi though that using ethanol as a fuel source would be poor choice. After reading the article it did not even occur to me the negative impact using ethanol could have on food production, but after reading the previous two posts it seems that using ethanol would not be a better alternative. There were also some parts of that article that stood out to me. For one, the idea of using composites seems to be a great way to improve airplanes so that they are more environmentally friendly. However, one part of the article stated, "Using composites to improve passenger comfort is a trend in aviation. Companies building private jets have switched to composites but used the weight advantage to build a bigger plane, rather than a plane of the same size with a lighter weight." I found this unsettling because the whole point of using composites was to make the planes better for the environment, yet private planes are just taking advantage of this by making larger planes. I also think that changing the planes to make them better for the environment is a much more practical way to reduce the emission rates of greenhouse gasses than cutting down on plane travel.
Dr. Pimentel, a professor here at Cornell specifically stated the ethanol, even if produced in greater quantities, will not be used for planes. Therefore, because airplane travel is a large part of transportation today, with the desire to see the world, there will still be energy problems.
Also, it's important to note, however, that airplane travel allows science to flourish and the two are interconnected. By traveling, scientists get new specimens and can interact with scientists directly from around the world, learning new and important information. Airplane travel has become such a part of our society that it would be quite hard to get rid of it. Although the airlines say they are trying to make it green, the problems associated with airplane usuage still exist. Also, even if all passengers were to purchase carbon offsets, this might sound great in theory but it doesn't necessarily reduce the damage since this action doesn't directly contribute to actions such as planting trees, etc.
Flying today has become as much a part as everyday transportation as hopping in your car and going to work. People need to take a business trip and they think to themselves, "Hmmm 4 hour drive from New York City to Ithaca, Ny to give a speech at Cornell or 1 hour flight." DING. The answer is air travel ladies and gentlemen.
Individuals, activist groups, and legislation (among others) have been trying to clean up the air for years. Now, airlines think they ought to try clear the skies of the wastes they put in it. DING.
Airlines trying to invent new technology is a great idea. Though their methods may not be the most practical(using composites but making bigger planes) it is a step in the right direction. The airline company needs to crawl before they can walk (or fly).
Making airplanes "Greener" is a pressing issue. The amount of air travel is increasing exponentially. The job needs to get done ASAP. Alas, the monkey wrench in the engine is actually the fuel. Over and over again, from cars to planes, the pressing issue is fuel. How will we safely run our equipment? Maybe less percent jet fuel. Maybe ethanol. Maybe electricity. Maybe a combination of them all, but somehow, someway, these planes need to be revamped. I commend the airlines companies for finally getting it together and trying to help out the enviornment, not just their pockets.
I too have taken the Carbon Footprint test online. And while it is interesting to note its outcome, try playing with the numbers a bit. There is a certain threshold where flying is actually results in less pollution than driving. Thus the idea that flying contributes grossly to global warming should be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
Additionally, as Jessica noted, certain biofuels which are popularized as being “environmentally friendly” are often influenced by the organizations promoting them. For example, many agricultural organizations endorse ethanol’s viability as a biofuel. As a result, the federal government subsidizes its production – thus producers win, not just because their product is in greater demand, but also because the government is funding its production.
Post a Comment