Our group's topic for round table discussion is to investigate one or more technologies to mitigate climate change and give the reason why certain citizen groups should support, promote or oppose the technologies. For this topic, I read several relavant articles on the web page and found two of them especially helpful for writing assignment two.
The first passage is called: Innovative technologies to mitigate climate change.In this passage, its author, Dr Ulrich Eberl , gives Siemens as an example and shows how companies can help to mitigate climate. According to him, the most efficient way to combat climate change is to employ innovative technologies that increase the efficiency of power generation, transmission and utilisation in industry, buildings and transportation. From his statements, the technologies he mentioned can roughly be classified into two groups. One is how to improve the current manufacturing faciliyies and the other is finding new energy sources. The parts I am interested in are NANO TECHNOLOGY FOR HIGH PERFORMANCE GAS TURBINES and VIRTUAL RENEWABLE ENERGY NETWORKS.
Nano technology for high performance gas turbines is a great way to improve power plant efficiency. The materials in a gas turbine, for example, have to withstand very high temperatures of up to 1,500ºC. The combustion chamber is also subjected to high pressure and a glowing hot tornado of gas that passes through at a speed of 100 metres per second. Finally, the turbine blades are exposed to centrifugal forces equivalent to 10,000 times the acceleration due to the Earth’s gravity. If Siemens can successfully put this technology into practice, a facility of this kind will achieve an efficiency rating of 60 per cent (by comparison, the best coal-fired plants reach 46 per cent). This will definitely reduce CO2 emmision by a huge amount and can earn the company a great profit.
Virtual renewable energy networks, also known as smart grids is a process where small, distributed plants that use biomass or geothermal sources, combined heat and power plants, and plants with fluctuating outputs (wind, solar) are to be integrated into the existing network hierarchy without disturbances. Siemens developers are working on smart grid systems that bring together the most diverse electricity sources to form ‘virtual power plants’. Smart grids can turn specific consumers on and off in order to balance out peak loads, thereby creating a dynamic balance in the power network rather than the static one that exists today. By doing this , the company can earn as much as €2 billion per year. For me, this huge profit is a good reason why Siemens should focus on this technology.
The second article I found interesting is quite different from the first one. It is called Climate Change Debate Hinges On Economics. In this article, the auther did not mention specific technology. Instead, he talked about whether the public are able to accept the technology which costs us a lot. Although energy and climate experts say the world already possesses the technological know-how for trimming greenhouse gas emissions enough to slow the perilous rise in the Earth's temperatures, the energy legislation considered by US Congress so far will make barely a dent in the problem, while farther-reaching climate proposals stand a remote chance of passage. Ways to mitigate climate change are there: in the rescearchers' labs and on our books but not in our real life.
This passage is very easy to read and do not have any technical terms. I chose it as my WA2 resource because it gives rise to another consideration of the climate change problem. It is true that everyone wants to protect the environment but what if the price for that is too high? Technology is useless if the public does not accept it. Every coin has two sides. Maybe next time when we face environmental problem, we should view it in a different manner.
Eberl, U. (2007). Innovative technologies to mitigate climate change. Climate Action Programme. Retrieved on Feb 28th 2009 from http://www.climateactionprogramme.org/insights/article/.
Mufson, S.(2007). Climate Change Debate Hinges On Economics. Washington Post Sunday, July 15, 2007; Page A01. Retrieved on Feb 28th 2009 from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/14/AR2007071401246.html.
2009年2月28日星期六
2009年2月1日星期日
Portfolio 3
This Friday we heard three preentations on climate change and global warming.
The first lecture was Andrew Palmer. In his presentation he first summarised all the crisis we face today's world. Then, among them, he talked about frontier technologies which can mitigate climate change. The two methods he mentioned were carbon dioxide capture and storage and put articles into atmosphere. Unfortunately, these two methods are difficult to implement. For the first one, carbon dioxide capture and storage, the idea is quite simple but joint effort from all countries is needed. For the second one, it requires advanced space technology and most countries in the world cannot afford this. Besides technologies, Prof. Palmer also talked about politics. He mentioned that politicians always prefer short-term interest to long-term ones. They do not recognize envoronmental problems as of the greatest priority. Thus, fund and effort that ought to put into it are reduced. " If unchecked global warming is the greatest trouble in 100 years, then we are lucky indeed.", he ended his presentation.
After Prof. Palmer it was Dr. Sovacool who gave us another presentation. He analyzed environmental problems in a systemetic approach and brought about quite different ideas. Comparing with Prof. Palmer, Dr Sovacool stressed not only technology but also our social considerations. He gave us two case studies: renewable energy and electrical cars. Both of them showed that technology can succeed technically, but fail socially. Market failures and barriers, political and regulatory obstacles, cultural and behavioral challenges are things we cannot ignore. Finally, he concluded that technology is part of social system. The failure and acceptance of certain tachnologies can sometimes have nothing to do with technical feasibility, and instead relates to contests over power and interest.
The last presentation was made by A/P Bala and talked about something very conventional. The topic was : climate change : assessment and mitigation. He gave quite a lot of convincing data which shows temperature on earth is indeed increasing, and predicted the potential consequences of enhanced global warming. After that, he mentioned several factors affecting the earth's temperature and what a warmer earth can bring to all creatures. Lastly, he gave suggestions on what individuals and governments should do to mitigate climate change.
This lecture on environmental issue is very interesting and informative. The part that interests me most is Dr. Sovacool's STS method of evaluating technologies. After his presentation, I realised that being engineers, we should have a good understanding of social and political issues as well as technologies.
The first lecture was Andrew Palmer. In his presentation he first summarised all the crisis we face today's world. Then, among them, he talked about frontier technologies which can mitigate climate change. The two methods he mentioned were carbon dioxide capture and storage and put articles into atmosphere. Unfortunately, these two methods are difficult to implement. For the first one, carbon dioxide capture and storage, the idea is quite simple but joint effort from all countries is needed. For the second one, it requires advanced space technology and most countries in the world cannot afford this. Besides technologies, Prof. Palmer also talked about politics. He mentioned that politicians always prefer short-term interest to long-term ones. They do not recognize envoronmental problems as of the greatest priority. Thus, fund and effort that ought to put into it are reduced. " If unchecked global warming is the greatest trouble in 100 years, then we are lucky indeed.", he ended his presentation.
After Prof. Palmer it was Dr. Sovacool who gave us another presentation. He analyzed environmental problems in a systemetic approach and brought about quite different ideas. Comparing with Prof. Palmer, Dr Sovacool stressed not only technology but also our social considerations. He gave us two case studies: renewable energy and electrical cars. Both of them showed that technology can succeed technically, but fail socially. Market failures and barriers, political and regulatory obstacles, cultural and behavioral challenges are things we cannot ignore. Finally, he concluded that technology is part of social system. The failure and acceptance of certain tachnologies can sometimes have nothing to do with technical feasibility, and instead relates to contests over power and interest.
The last presentation was made by A/P Bala and talked about something very conventional. The topic was : climate change : assessment and mitigation. He gave quite a lot of convincing data which shows temperature on earth is indeed increasing, and predicted the potential consequences of enhanced global warming. After that, he mentioned several factors affecting the earth's temperature and what a warmer earth can bring to all creatures. Lastly, he gave suggestions on what individuals and governments should do to mitigate climate change.
This lecture on environmental issue is very interesting and informative. The part that interests me most is Dr. Sovacool's STS method of evaluating technologies. After his presentation, I realised that being engineers, we should have a good understanding of social and political issues as well as technologies.
Portfolio 2
Global warming is now a topic that we can talk about during our tea time. To the majority, it is nothing more than affairs and anecdotes which we are quite familiar with. In 2007, this topic was brought up again because of a well-known documentary video: an inconvenient truth.
This video first interests me because of its starring - Al Gore, the former US Vice President. It is hard to imagine a politician busy giving speeches but not for election. Al Gore is definitely a strong speaker. Watching his presentation, I cannot help thinking: what does global warming mean to all of us?
Well, to the public, we have to admit that global warming is just a phrase to us. It has no practical meaning. Yes, we know that after industrialization, our world's temperature increases dramatically. However, this fact up to now still has not make any striking influence on people's daily life. When summer time is extremely hot, people rush to places with air-conditioning. When sand storm is comming, people stay in big shopping malls for the whole day, swearing at the terrible weather. It is a pity that public pay little attention on climate change, but we cannot blame them. Ignorance leads to adaptation and this is not somebody's fault.
Then, what can governments do to resolve this problem? The answer is qiute clear-- make policies to guide people to do things in a correct way. This is quite a useful method. For example in China since last year, free plastic bags in shopping malls and supermarkets have been abandoned. By making such a small change, the usage of plastic bags falls incredibly and this is the power for politics. However, this power may have side effects. A good example is that US and China still refuse to accept Kyoto. Perhaps it is not our duty to comment on such sensitive environmental and political issue.
Besides governments, there is a group of people who play important role on environmental issues. They are environmentalists like Gore and thousands of scientists who work on this problem. By now, there are still many people who believe that greenhouse gases are not caused by mankind but by natural effect. They need to be convinced by scientific proof. Meanwhile, environmentalists, by many ways, are trying to tell the public that our mother earth is bearing a hot weather and now it is time to do something.
Although president Bush did not like the movie and doubted its reliability, An Inconvenient truth is a sucess for sure. It marks that movie can go beyond entertainment.
This video first interests me because of its starring - Al Gore, the former US Vice President. It is hard to imagine a politician busy giving speeches but not for election. Al Gore is definitely a strong speaker. Watching his presentation, I cannot help thinking: what does global warming mean to all of us?
Well, to the public, we have to admit that global warming is just a phrase to us. It has no practical meaning. Yes, we know that after industrialization, our world's temperature increases dramatically. However, this fact up to now still has not make any striking influence on people's daily life. When summer time is extremely hot, people rush to places with air-conditioning. When sand storm is comming, people stay in big shopping malls for the whole day, swearing at the terrible weather. It is a pity that public pay little attention on climate change, but we cannot blame them. Ignorance leads to adaptation and this is not somebody's fault.
Then, what can governments do to resolve this problem? The answer is qiute clear-- make policies to guide people to do things in a correct way. This is quite a useful method. For example in China since last year, free plastic bags in shopping malls and supermarkets have been abandoned. By making such a small change, the usage of plastic bags falls incredibly and this is the power for politics. However, this power may have side effects. A good example is that US and China still refuse to accept Kyoto. Perhaps it is not our duty to comment on such sensitive environmental and political issue.
Besides governments, there is a group of people who play important role on environmental issues. They are environmentalists like Gore and thousands of scientists who work on this problem. By now, there are still many people who believe that greenhouse gases are not caused by mankind but by natural effect. They need to be convinced by scientific proof. Meanwhile, environmentalists, by many ways, are trying to tell the public that our mother earth is bearing a hot weather and now it is time to do something.
Although president Bush did not like the movie and doubted its reliability, An Inconvenient truth is a sucess for sure. It marks that movie can go beyond entertainment.
订阅：
博文 (Atom)