User talk:Technoaudioguy

Green Technologies: Is it possible? Imagine a world where all vehicles run on electricity with zero emissions; where the energy to power these vehicles is produced by wind generation farms with little impact on the surrounding ecosystem. Think about it! Close your eyes for a brief moment and imagine a world where your home is manufactured from recycled materials developed to last forever. That world would be a utopia for most; or so it would seem. The question then becomes, is this type of world truly attainable? Over the past two decades a great deal of emphasis has been placed on energy conservation, environmental awareness and minimizing our dependence on fossil fuels. These three topics are so controversial that they have been the focus of discussion in Presidential debates, Congressional hearings and even critically analyzed among some of the world’s leading experts in environmental study. Billions of dollars have been invested in developing technologies to help minimize our carbon footprint on the environment. Everything from energy efficient light bulbs, to construction materials created from recycled plastic drinking bottles is being marketed to consumers as environmentally conscious. Marketing firms have even created crafty buzz words for it. It has been called everything from “Green Technology” to “Being Green”. Buyers beware! Being green is more than just purchasing energy smart bulbs from your local hardware store. It is more than just purchasing an electric vehicle that emits zero carbon emissions. Green technology is about conserving energy and reducing your carbon footprint with as little environmental impact as possible. As consumers it is important we arm ourselves with the tools necessary to make conscious decisions to protect our environment. Knowledge, awareness and research are the key attributes to understanding the term “Being Green”. Compact Florescent (CFL) bulbs are a great example of technology invented to reduce our demand on energy. The main premise is marketed to our reduction of electricity consumption, which in turn reduces our demand on coal-fired electric power plants. This ideology is true in some instances; but this is not the only solution. The average consumer may not be aware that CFL’s contain a small trace of mercury. Depending on the manufacturer, these mercury levels can range anywhere from 3-6 milligrams per bulb (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Experts would even argue that compared to the mercury emissions of a coal fired power plant, these numbers are miniscule. However, a closer look at CFL’s introduces a greater common threat to our environment. It is the threat to our landfills, health and local ecosystems. Each year over 330 million CFL’s are sold to consumers in the United States (U.S). Approximately 270 million were sent to landfills in 2007. That is .13 metric tons of mercury being introduced into U.S. landfills each year (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Some environmentalists would argue the level of mercury emitted from CFL’s and deposited in landfills is far less than that of the demand placed on electric municipalities coupled with incandescent bulbs. The facts are very clear; the mercury levels associated with CFL’s in landfills is a concentrated level as opposed to a cumulative level dissipated over time and geographic area. These concentrations pose a direct threat to water tables, soil conditions and local wildlife within that ecosystem. They also pose a threat to individuals tasked with the manufacturing and disposal of CFL’s. In one instance, a factory in Foshan, China reported 68 out of 72 factory workers required hospitalization for mercury poisoning after excessive exposure to the material as part of the assembly line production. In another factory 121 out of 123 workers were poisoned (Pomfret). One employee contained mercury levels in excess of 150 times the reasonable standard (Sheridan). Although CFL’s reduce energy consumption and our demand on fossil fuels to generate electricity, they are not “Green Technology”. In fact they introduce a greater threat to our ecosystem than any other consumer based product on the market today. As our dependence on foreign oil increases, the demand for electric powered transportation has also increased. While there is no denying that electric powered vehicles and even hybrid gas/electric powered vehicles are far more energy efficient than a normal gas combustion vehicle, the question still remains. Are we trading one problem for another? The main power plant in many of these Hybrid Electric (HE) vehicles is composed of several hundred pounds of Lithium-Ion batteries (Squatriglia). In today’s market this is the battery of choice because it presents the least harmful impact on the environment. These batteries typically have an expendable run time of 10 years before they require replacement. Disposing of the batteries at some point is going to introduce a significant problem to our environment (Mats, Lars and Orlenius 579). Environmentalist estimate in 5 years the proper disposal of electric car batteries will be an issue that needs to be addressed. Many car manufacturers, such as Toyota, recycle the materials associated with the batteries with one exception. The alkaline contained in the battery has to be neutralized before sending it to a landfill. It is this concentration of material that poses the most significant impact. Proper disposal proves to be costly. The inconvenience and cost associated with proper disposal introduces challenges into the new technology. Consumers are likely to improperly dispose of the material due to the significant cost of properly disposing of it. High concentrations of alkaline from expended batteries could potentially leach into nearby water supplies. A similar case can be made for removing hazardous materials in the event of an accident. According to the National Data Book in 2009 there were approximately 6.8 million car crashes resulting in property damage reported in the U. (U.S. National Highway Traffice Safety Administration, Traffic Safety Facts, annual.) S. As the transition to electric powered transportation becomes more prevalent, further cases of high energy electric fuel cells rupturing will become a reality, thus exposing passengers, emergency responders and our environment to the hazardous materials contained in the Lithium-Ion batteries. Even the Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for many of these new and emerging technologies is confusing. According to the MSDS of one manufacturer’s Lithium-Ion battery, exposure to fire and inhalation of the fumes can be hazardous. In section 5 of the MSDS, the manufacturer identifies suitable extinguishing methods as “water or other extinguishing media appropriate for surrounding the fire. (A123 Systems 3)” The MSDS also identifies the potential risks of hydrogen gas in confined spaces when water is used. In section 6 of the MSDS the environmental precautions lists the material as hazardous and stipulates the prevention of the material from contaminating soils and entering sewers and waterways is mandatory. This is in direct contradiction to proper extinguishing and handling methods (A123 Systems 4). Should emergency responders extinguish a fire using water? How is the material contained if water is used? Imagine the delays and impact this will have on our transportation infrastructure and local ecosystems as hazardous materials crews arrive to clean up potential spills. The introduction of CFL’s and HE vehicles is a step in the right direction for sustainability and the reduction of our dependence on fossil energies, but we still need to take into account the long term consequences associated with the technology. Today we are trading one problem for another. These products are marketed to consumers as environmentally safe and a green technology. This could not be further from the truth. Consumers need to become more product conscious savvy when selecting environmentally green technology. It is important to research products and consider the consequences each product has on our environment, both immediately and long term. Legislation could even be drafted requiring corporations to report on the environmental impact of products. A large problem facing consumers is with manufacturing companies. They have always operated on the premise that the world’s resources are infinite and the earth’s capacity for waste is also infinite (Kotler 132). Companies focus on the bottom line and profitability instead of conservation. They market products as energy efficient, even though the long term impacts are astonishing. As deforestation takes place and our demand on fossil fuels increase, society is becoming more aware of the finite resources available. It is time business follows suite. According to Philip Kotler from the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University companies need to realize that resources are finite and the earth’s capacity for waste and pollution is also finite (Kotler 133). Consumers are becoming the major factor in placing this demand on corporations. It is through awareness, implementation and legislation the greatest accomplishments in energy conservation will take place. Consumer demand on organizations to produce products that are environmentally efficient is the first step in the long road to developing a new greener society. Websites such as climatecounts.org identifies consumer friendly organizations that are not only measuring their carbon footprint, but they are also helping to develop technologies for consumers to manage their footprint. Another consumer website izzitgreen.com focuses on environmentally green products created for consumers by manufactures. It serves as a search engine to provide consumers with information on specific product categories deemed environmentally green. Creating awareness, implementing a lifestyle change and supporting businesses whose interests align with the environment is the only way to attain the utopia described earlier. It is time consumers align their buying power with our environment and make a stand for a green energy efficient planet. That is what “Being Green” is all about. It is about making a concerted effort to do what is right for the environment and put our own self interests aside should they not align with what is environmentally sound.

Works Cited A123 Systems. "U.S. National Highway Traffice Safety Administration, Traffic Safety Facts, annual." Material Safety Data Sheet. U.S. National Highway Traffice Safety Administration, Traffic Safety Facts, annual., 2006. Kotler, Philip. "Reinventing Marketing to Manage the Environmental Imperative." Journal of Marketing July 2011: 132-135. Mats, Zackrisson, Avellan Lars and Jessica Orlenius. "Life Cycle Assessment of Lithium-Ion Batteries for Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles." Journal of Cleaner Production 2010: 1517-1527. Pomfret, James. Over 100 China factory workers suffer mercury poisoning. Hong Kong: Reuter, 2010. Sheridan, Michael. Green lightbulbs poison workers. 3 May 2009. 20 November 2011 . Squatriglia, Chuck. "Chevrolet Volt Fire Prompts Federal Inquiry of EV Batteries." Wired 11 November 2011. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Information on Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs (CFLs) and Mercury. November 2010. 20 November 2011 http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/promotions/change_light/downloads/Fact_Sheet_Mercury.pdf. "U.S. National Highway Traffice Safety Administration, Traffic Safety Facts, annual." 2009.