0
Want this question answered?
Be notified when an answer is posted
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Where does global warming take place?
Many things cause global warming. One thing that causes global warming is electrical pollution. Electricity causes pollution in many ways, some worse than others. In most cases, fossil fuels are burned to create electricity. Fossil fuels are made of dead plants and animals. Some examples of fossil fuels are oil and petroleum. Many pollutants (chemicals that pollute the air, water, and land) are sent into the air when fossil fuels are burned. Some of these chemicals are called greenhouse gasses. We use these sources of energy much more than the sources that give off less pollution. Petroleum, one of the sources of energy, is used a lot. It is used for transportation, making electricity, and making many other things. Although this source of energy gives off a lot of pollution, it is used for 38% of the United States' energy.
What type of energy is being developed to replace fossil fuels?
The only sources of energy are:- 1) Sunlight - falling on the Earth's surface each day (plants are best at using this) and it is this energy which is our food and wood fires etc. We can turn parts of plants into direct (e.g. bio-diesel) replacements for fossil fuels. However, there is no way that bio-fuels can be produced in enough quantities to replace fossil fuels and producing them at all damages more of the wild environment and leaves people will less food. 2) Wind and Waves - actually wind causes the waves and it is Sunlight (heat) that drives the wind - we can and are making more use of energy from wind and waves to help us reduce use of fossil fuels. 3) Hydroelectric energy - we are already using this energy source where practical and again it must be appreciated that the source of this energy is the Sun's heat. 4) Geothermal Energy - the inside of the Earth is hot and in some rare locations (e.g. Iceland) this heat can be harvested and used. Geothermal energy is not a viable replacement for fossil fuels. 5) Tidal energy - this energy is the kinetic energy stored in Earth's spinning on its axis. The Moon pulls up a tidal wave twice a day and it is certainly possible to make more use of tidal energy by building barrages across estuaries and installing power turbines. The problem is the impact on the estuarine biome and silting up. Installing turbines in tidal channels is also possible but salt water is very corrosive and encrusting biological growth on these turbines seems to make this option difficult to do. 6) Fossil Fuels - these are stores ancient Sunlight energy gathered by plants and in animals that died millions of years ago. Geological processes trapped their dead bodies in the rocks and time and pressures have turned these into coal, oil and gas. They are very rich in energy (they have a high energy density) and our civilization has flourished by using them - the environmental cost of this is air pollution and an increase of CO2 in the air causing global warming. 7) Nuclear energy fission - nuclear power stations that use fissionable materials can be built to generate much more of our energy needs than at present. However nuclear power stations cost a lot to build and even more to decommission and if there is an accident vast numbers of people can be made ill (although to be fair the CO2 pollution caused by burning may prove worse). 8) Nuclear energy fusion - we are attempting to develop an industrially viable fusion reactor but at the moment this has not been possible. If we success then this may indeed prove to be a true replacement for fossil fuels. [Cold fusion - this relates to the above and scientifically what was reported has not bee reproduced by other people, so this looks like it was a hoax]. 9) Satellite energy stations - the idea here is to put up spacecraft to gather extra sunlight and beam the gathered energy back to earth. The trouble is that space is a very harsh environment and the energy beams needed to get the electricity back to earth would be very very dangerous....all the proposals made so far do not appear viable. Therefore as you can see there are no realistic alternatives to fossil fuels. This is worrying because if you look at things using an analogy of a man earning a living thus:- a) Man gets paid a wage for working (= daily sunlight - wind, tide and hydro) b) Man has inherited a fortune from a relative (= fossil fuels) c) Man has property, a house and some land (= nuclear, geothermal) Then this man can have a great time living it up and spending his fortune and mortgaging his property but when this is used up has to go back to living on his wages with a bump. This analogy mirrors mankind's activity since the industrial revolution. Will our much vaunted civilization and charter of human rights stand up to the coming crash. One more thought, all the world is talking about fossil fuels being responsible for Global Warming, and while this is indirectly true, the root cause is people using them - the problem is too many people for the world to support. While visiting China last year, I realized that China was the only country in the world actually addressing this with its on birth per person policy.
Is liquid plus air a pure substance?
No. To start with, air is not a pure substance, and mixiong it with something else just makes it worse.
Is ethanol a fossil fuel?
There seem to be doubts about this as far as production from corn is concerned, but of course if the desired product is vehicle fuel, and you have to use fossil fuels that would not be suitable for vehicle fuel, you still get what you want, even if the effects on global warming are to make it worse. Production from sugar cane seems less energy intensive, but then you can't grow sugar cane in the mid west. In the end people are going to have to decide priorities and my guess is that vehicle fuel will win over environmental damage and loss of food to the rest of the world.
Is global warming get better or worse and why?
It gets worse beacuse people still cut down trees.
What makes wind power worse than fossil fuels?
Nothing much. Wind power is free, renewable, non-polluting, and doesn't cause global warming. Fossil fuels are all exactly the opposite, expensive, non-renewable, polluting, and causing global warming. Some birds get killed by the blades, but far more are killed on the electricity pylons, as well as by fossil-fuel burning vehicles and airplanes.
What could happen to Global Warming?
If we can make enough changes, then we might be able to slow it down. We have to stop burning fossil fuels (coal, oil and natural gas). If we do nothing, it will get worse and worse.
Is hydrogen envirometally friendly when burnt?
Yes, hydrogen burns with oxygen to produce water vapor. However, producing hydrogen takes a lot of electricity, which is mostly generated from fossil fuels, so the net impact on the environment, for the same amount of energy, is worse than simply burning fossil fuels directly.
Is global warming getting worse because of humans?
Yes. But we can prevent it, stop using fossil fuels and electricity too much and hopefully global warming can slow down.
Why is fossil fuels worse then hydroelectric power?
Fossil fuels are worst than hydroelectric power because when they are burnt to harness their energy, they release CO2, a greenhouse gas, this enhances the effects of global warming and as once fossil fuels have been mined and burnt, they are gone and will not reacumilate again for millions of years whereas hydroelectricity doesn't burn any carbon, releasing no CO2 and hydroelectricity's original source of power will never run out, making it much more efficient.
How are windmills worse than fossil fuel?
They are not. It's the other way round. Fossil fuels (coal, oil and natural gas), when burnt, release carbon dioxide, a powerful greenhouse gas responsible for global warming. Wind turbines generate electricity without any pollution, using renewable energy, which is the way of the future.
Should you pick the scabies out of your skin or does that make them worse?
Makes them worse
Which fuels produce the most air pollution?
Both coal and petroleum are worse than natural gas. Without any scrubbers, the worst air polluter is coal. With scrubbers, it's a tough call. Oil in the form of gasoline, emits huge amounts of greenhouse gases. On a btu basis, I would suggest coal is the worst. See related link.
Where does global warming take place?
Many things cause global warming. One thing that causes global warming is electrical pollution. Electricity causes pollution in many ways, some worse than others. In most cases, fossil fuels are burned to create electricity. Fossil fuels are made of dead plants and animals. Some examples of fossil fuels are oil and petroleum. Many pollutants (chemicals that pollute the air, water, and land) are sent into the air when fossil fuels are burned. Some of these chemicals are called greenhouse gasses. We use these sources of energy much more than the sources that give off less pollution. Petroleum, one of the sources of energy, is used a lot. It is used for transportation, making electricity, and making many other things. Although this source of energy gives off a lot of pollution, it is used for 38% of the United States' energy.
Why does fossil fuel use in the US make the US vulnerable to the political wishes of foreign countries?
The US is a net importer of fossil fuels which means that fossil fuels used in the United States come from foreign countries. If those fuels are needed to run the industries and cars that power the American economy, than the US can be held hostage by those foreign countries by their choice to deprive us of the necessary fossil fuels. This actually happened in 1973 with the Arab Oil Embargo, when Arab countries were incensed by US support for Israel and therefore cut oil production in order to hold the US (and other Western nations) hostage and force the US (and other Western nations) to cave to their demands to cease support for Israel. Thankfully, the US was able to remain uncowed, but other nations like Japan were in a much worse position and have pursued a Pro-Arab foreign policy from 1973 onwards.
Why is it important to use Eco friendly fuels in vehicles?
Because if we harm the environment, that would make our life worse.
How does the burning of fossil fuels affect the environment?
Burning fossil fuels, especially coal, is a dirty process. Incomplete combustion of coal and oil produces particulate matter. Heavier particulates produce an annoying dirty grit, and lighter particulates can be inhaled deeply and become a health hazard. In addition to the desired combustion of organic molecules, impurities such as sulfur also burn and produce potentially dangerous oxides. Since the air is made of 80% nitrogen, nitrogen is combusted along with the fuel at high temperatures, releasing nitrous oxides. Since fossil fuels are composed mainly of carbon by weight, all fossil fuels produce carbon dioxide when burned. In the atmosphere, the sulfur and nitrous oxides produce sulfuric acid and nitric acid, respectively, which can lead to acid rain. The carbon dioxide helps trap heat in the atmosphere - contributing to the potential warming of the earth. In this lecture-discussion we will examine major local, regional, and global environmental effects of burning fossil fuels. These are respectively particulates, smog and acid rain, and global warming. The importance of particulates has long been acknowledged, and major particlulate emissions control measures have been launched in many countries. Evidence for acid rain is readily available, and the effects from impact on forests and lakes to crumbling ancient Greek structures have confirmed its presence, but its overall environmental/economic importance remains a matter of controversy. It is now widely accepted that human activities have contributed to a noticeable average global warming trend in the twentieth century. However, there are differential impacts of this global trend on regional climate, agriculture, storm damage, and other effects in different parts of the world. This complicates both the assessment of global effects of atmospheric emissions and international negotiations over requisite changes in fossil fuel use.
