Fuel cells are very promising chemical energy conversion devices. Though the first fuel cell was made by William Grove in 1839, they’re just now being explored as a real energy alternative (1). Let’s take a look at how they work: in a fuel cell, electricity is generated by the reaction of hydrogen and oxygen, which forms water. They are similar to batteries and internal combustion engines (ICEs): just as in a combustion engine, where fuel is oxidized, the oxidization of hydrogen generates energy. They’ll work as long as fuel is provided.

Despite these similarities there are some differences that make fuel cells more attractive than batteries and ICEs. A fuel cell works more efficiently and quietly than engines do. When hydrogen is used as fuel, power and drinking water are produced as by-products (2). Having safe by-products answers our concerns regarding older power sources. A battery is dead if it is not re-chargeable; however a fuel cell can be continually reused.

Fuel cells are generally defined by the type of electrolyte used in the cell, and they operate at different temperatures. Alkaline fuel cells (AFCs), proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs), and direct methanol fuel cells (DMFCs) are called low-temperature fuel cells. Phosphoric acid fuel cells (PAFCs) are an intermediate-temperature fuel cell. Molten carbonate fuel cells (MCFCs) and solid oxide fuel cells (SOFCs) are called high-temperature fuel cells (3, 4).

They have been mainly used for stationary, transportation, and portable applications. Since the need for electricity in daily life has dramatically increased, reliable and efficient power supplies have become necessary. Over 2,000 stationary fuel cell systems have been built in hotels, schools, and hospitals. Stationary power generation is considered more commercialized among the other fuel cell applications. Today, these systems have reached an efficiency of 40% when a hydrocarbon is used as fuel. Fuel cell systems are also used in telecommunication systems, and these cells provide power between 1 and 5 kW (5).

Fuel cells have been identified as the most probable alternative power source for transportation applications in place of internal combustion engines (ICEs). There are two distinct features of fuel cells that make them a better choice than ICEs. First, their carbon dioxide gas emissions are nearly zero. Second, fuel cells are much more efficient than ICEs – about two to three times (6). Ballard Power Systems have been developing zero-emission-vehicles by using PEMFCs, which have low operating temperatures and a higher power density.

NASA decided to use fuel cells on American spacecrafts in the 1960s. The advantage of using them in spacecraft was that while they were generating electric power, they produced drinkable water for the astronauts. A fuel cell was used as an integral part of the power supply PEMFCs (1kW) in the Gemini crafts and AFCs (1kW) in the Apollo crafts, both of which were a part of NASA’s human spaceflight programs (6).

Portable applications of fuel cells offer electrical power when reaching the electrical grid is not possible. When they are used as power sources outdoors, they help to avoid air and noise pollution (4). Because these portable fuel cells are lighter and more durable than batteries, they have been considered as alternative power sources for mobile phones, laptop computers, and some electronic devices (5). They are also used by the military in battle. A 4 kW PEM generator was built for the U.S. military by Intelligent Energy Ltd., out of Europe (7). Since direct methanol fuel cell systems are much lighter than the indirect systems, they are mostly used as portable power systems.

Although fuel cells have benefits when compared to other power sources, they are not widely used because of their high cost. In 2010, the Energy Information Administration released that the cost of fuel cells is $6.83 per installed watt, which is almost 7 times more expensive than a natural-gas turbine generator plant (8). In 2008, the Honda Clarity produced one of the first hydrogen-powered automobiles; these require very expensive catalysts: platinum (9). A catalyst makes the chemical reactions occur faster. Platinum is still the best catalyst, so this explains the prohibitive cost. A cheaper substitute for platinum is needed for use in automobiles. Another problem is that hydrogen is widely used as fuel for transportation applications. Until there is a sufficient hydrogen infrastructure, car manufacturers will find it hard to mass produce cars that use fuel cells.

Cetin is a freelance science writer.

References

1. Grove, W. R. (1839). On voltaic series and the combination of gases by platinum. Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, Series 3,14, 127-130.
2. Hoogers, G. (2003). Fuel Cell Technology Handbook. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
3. Mekhilef, S., Saidur, R., Safari, A. (2012). Comparative study of different fuel cell technologies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 16, 981-989.
4. Gencoglu, M. T., Ural, Z. (2009). Design of a PEM fuel cell system for residential application. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 34, 5242-5248.
5. Andujar, J., Segura, F. (2009). Fuel cells: History and updating. A walk along two centuries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 13, 2309-2322.
6. Iovine, John. “Fuel Cells.(composition, energy-generating processes and industry developments and innovations).” Poptronics. Poptronix, Inc. 2001. Retrieved May 17, 2012 from High Beam Research: http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-69015426.html
7. Cowey, K., Green, K., Mepsted, G., Reeve, R. (2004). Portable and military fuel cells. Current Opinion in Solid State and Materials Science 8, 367-371.
8. Administration, U. E. (2010, November). Updated Capital Cost Estimates for Electricity Generation Plants. Retrieved from http://205.254.135.24/oiaf/beck_plantcosts.
9. Muller, R. A. (2012). Energy for Future Presidents: The Science Behind The Headlines. New York: W.W. Norton Company, Inc.

Cost-benefit analysis of piracy

To begin, I want to analyze piracy free from any ethical or normative judgments. Piracy is an act, and like any other act, it has costs and benefits. A utility calculation or a cost-benefit analysis shows that the material benefits far outweigh the minimal material costs of piracy. Entertainment media usually has a monetary price that must be paid in order to consume it, like buying tickets to watch a movie at the theater. On the other hand, given that the individual possesses the technical knowledge, the individual can receive the same entertainment for free if he chooses to pirate the media instead of buying it. While some individuals who pirate are caught and do pay fees, the probability of these negative consequences are very small. Given no other external factors, this cost-benefit analysis indicates that the materialistic benefits outweigh the materialistic costs.

Additionally, from a behavioral perspective, piracy makes sense. When a person commits piracy, they are immediately presented with the benefit of entertainment or utility. The behavior is immediately rewarded and reinforced. The costs are not immediately evident, and can be easily overlooked, because the probability of being caught and punished for pirating is very small. In contrast to the act of physically stealing the DVD of a movie, the act of illegally downloading the movie is much less risky and only entails the seemingly innocent pressing of buttons. When contemplating whether to physically steal another DVD of a movie, the person would weigh whether the entertainment benefit is really worth suffering the stress and energy as well as the high risk of being caught and punished by the law. When contemplating whether to illegally download a movie, the person would only need to weigh whether the entertainment benefit is greater than pressing some buttons. With such low risks and such immediate gratification, the behavior of piracy is easily engrained.

This cost-benefit analysis in a vacuum free from any external forces like ethics, morality, and religion sufficiently shows why piracy is so prevalent. It is easy and rewarding. However, people do not live in a vacuum.

The ethical factor

If piracy is theft, then it is unethical, immoral, and wrong. And it is indeed theft. All digital media whether film, music, ebooks, or games are products of another’s hard work. Just like a farmer’s crops or an author’s book, digital media would not exist but for the producer. Thus, similarly, the producer has taken ownership of digital media by production. Modern copyright and digital rights laws are evidence of this societal norm. So, if it is wrong, why do some people pirate digital media anyway?

When a person is given the choice between paying for the entertainment and consuming it for free, ethical principles clash with desire. In order to resolve cognitive dissonance, the discomfort caused by the clash of conflicting inner-beliefs, individuals will attempt to justify their actions and alter their beliefs (1). In the case of piracy, an individual might conclude that the producers of the entertainment media are already wealthy and do not need more money. Alternatively, the individual may decide that his financial circumstances do not allow him to pay for the products, forcing him to illegally obtain them. Ultimately, these justifications allow the individual to live more comfortably with their decision to pirate the product.

Justifying piracy

In addition to common justifications for any other ethical violations, piracy has a unique justification due to the unique nature of digital media. This unique justification is that the illegal downloading of digital media does not harm the producer, because it does not represent a loss of revenue for the producer of the game, movie, or song. Given the digital nature of entertainment media, a pirated copy of a game does not directly mean a loss of revenue equal to the price of the game. For example, when an item in the physical world, such as a watch, is stolen from a store, the store loses money that is equal to the sum of the cost of the watch and the profit from the sale of the watch. If the thief had not stolen the watch, the store could have sold it to someone else. In contrast, when an individual obtains a pirated copy of a digital media, the ability of the producer to sell a copy of the digital media to someone else is not inhibited in anyway. In other words, the benefits or entertainment experienced by the individual who chooses to pirate does not result in a loss for the producer. Those who have this justification would then conclude that piracy only has positive consequences.

This justification, unique to digital products, has two main deficiencies. First, piracy can lead to loss of revenue to the producer if a person who would have otherwise purchased the product chooses to pirate it. Aggregating all the individual acts of piracy can lead to a cumulative loss of revenue of many millions of dollars. Second, loss of revenue is not the only reason piracy is immoral. The primary reason why piracy is unethical is because it constitutes a taking of another property, violating another’s fundamental property rights. If a producer chooses to share its property with only those who pay for it, then the taking of that property without paying for it is a violation of fundamental property rights. An independent showing of damage or loss of revenue is not necessary to prove its wrongness.

Habit

Another possible explanation for the prevalence of piracy is habit. Once an individual has committed piracy, despite ethical prescriptive to the contrary, the individual experiences the benefits and joys of that piece of entertainment. As previously mentioned, this immediate reward can lead to a cycle that constantly reinforces the behavior until it has become habitual. The case study of the video game, Proun, can provide some insight.

Proun, a low budget game, was released under the pay-what-you-want pricing method which allows consumers to legally obtain the product at whatever price they decide to pay including for zero dollars. In other words, people could legally get the game for free from the developer’s official website. Essentially, the developer removed monetary concerns from the utility calculation. According to the released statistics, approximately 40% of used copies were pirated (2). Individuals chose to pirate the game, despite being able to obtain the game legally for free.

The implication of the Proun case study is that price may not be the sole determinant for pirating behavior. A possible explanation for the observed pirating behavior could be that obtaining entertainment media through illegal means has become habitual to a significant portion of the population. Due to the low risks associated with piracy, individuals who have chosen to pirate media experience no consequences that would deter their actions, making piracy their normal means of acquiring any form of software, irrelevant of whether or not the software is free. In other words, habitual piracy has become legitimate in their eyes. After the initial act, the individual no longer considers the ethicality of their actions. Every subsequent act merely reinforces the habit.

References

1. See also Yerli, Selnur Hatice. “Cognitive Dissonance and the Psychology of Sin.” The Fountain 80, March-April 2011.
2. van Dongen, Joost. “Proun sales data revealed: Proun is a big success! Pay What You Want is not!.” <http://joostdevblog.blogspot.com/2011/10/proun-is-big-success-pay-what-you-want.html>

Airborne drones are becoming commonplace, especially in the civilian world. Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), also known as drones, are aircrafts controlled by a pilot from a remote location on the ground. Drones are increasingly being used, and not just for military purposes. They’re used for agriculture, disaster response, energy production, environmental monitoring, construction, and sports activities. Their use has expanded exponentially in recent years, spurred by technological advancements and easy access to affordable high-tech parts. Drones can fly from several minutes to several days, depending on the technology and the mission, and the cost of having a drone ranges from a few hundred dollars for hobbyists to millions of dollars for military purposes. But as happens with most major technological changes in a society, the increased role of drones is raising privacy and public safety concerns.

Although drones are unmanned vehicles and depend mostly on human intelligence, adaptive control systems and artificial intelligence technologies can allow drones to fly without human intervention. Drones are increasingly becoming autonomous, following a pre-programmed mission, and can even make their own decisions while gathering and sending data back to a ground unit.

Drones are becoming popular for military purposes. They are cheaper than a military aircraft, and flying them remotely means there is no danger for the flight crew. Small drones can get into places where humans cannot, and large drones can fly into war zones to gather surveillance or to take part in military strikes. On the plus side, this will reduce the number of active military personnel in war zones, and reduce casualties. Even the possibility of replacing human drone operators with computer algorithms is in discussion, leaving a machine to make the final decision about whether to end a civilian life or to destroy vital infrastructure (this decision is also called the ‘signature strike’). [1]. Such a possibility raises serious questions about the ethics of war, privacy, and public safety.

Law enforcement officers are already using drones to detect people illegally crossing their nation’s borders. It is already in use by cities in the US for monitoring criminals, for crime fighting, car chases, executing search-and-rescue missions, firefighting and basic surveillance. People are interested in using camera-equipped drones to patrol their homes during police raids, to collect their own evidence.

Another proposed use is in the protection and inspection of infrastructures, and monitoring power lines, dams, levees, and gas pipelines to reduce the cost and manpower for these dangerous, dull, and costly jobs. If they are intelligently deployed in civilian life, drones can be useful in keeping people out of harm’s way.

Drones can assist in search and rescue missions after tornadoes, earthquakes, floods and other natural disasters, especially in places not reachable by, or dangerous to, humans. They can locate survivors and report their location to the ground base [2]. Drones can fly through the dark, pick up heat signatures of bodies using infrared cameras, see through smoke using thermal cameras, record footage using night-vision, and pick up hard-to-hear sounds in dangerous locations. Since they are small, they can easily be transported and deployed in disaster areas, and be up in the air in minutes compared to the longer time requirements required for planes and other rescue vehicles.

An example of this is drones that are already in use monitoring abused wildlife in Kenya and rescuing injured skiers in France [3]. Drones are also extremely useful in monitoring wildfires with minimal cost and little risk of loss of life. NASA is already using drones for monitoring hurricanes, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is monitoring wildlife in the Arctic, and the US Geological Survey (USGS) is mapping remote terrain and performing environmental research.

Drones are becoming an important part of agricultural production. They can help farmers to check if their fields need watering or fertilizing. In Japan, drones are used for precision agriculture, where drones fly over a field and use multispectral cameras to take pictures of the crop and analyze if it is over-watered or under-watered. This allows farmers to precisely determine the right amount water and pesticide to use, and this helps them decrease costs and increase the crop’s yield.

An interesting application of drones is in clean energy production. Some companies are already exploring the use of drones as autonomous wind turbines that would be flown like mechanical kites [4]. The goal is using drones equipped with wind turbines to fly to higher altitudes, where more consistent and powerful wind is available to be harnessed. These drones are lighter and cheaper than wind turbines, and can adjust themselves to the wind streams to maximize their energy harvesting.

Drones are also used by the construction industry. They provide a cost effective way to check the progress of a construction project, help managers inspect hard to reach locations, take architectural photographs, create 3D scans of a building using infrared cameras, survey more precisely, undertake comprehensive safety inspections, and even replace some of a project’s manual labor. Drones recently demonstrated their ability to assemble, brick by brick, a 1:100 scale model of a skyscraper. Researchers are investigating more potential applications of drone technology in construction sector [5].

The most common use of drones will likely be by hobbyists, who have access to cheap, light, camera-equipped machines that can be controlled by smartphones and tablets. Athletes and extreme sports hobbyists are using drones to capture their activities and tricks during snowboarding or skating outings. Climbers have drones follow them for safety and to record and report their progress to base camps. Drones are increasingly being used by amateur or professional photographers to capture footage. While hobbyists can buy drones ready to fly out of the box, many are going the Do-It-Yourself (DIY) route to create customized, specialized aircrafts. Drone hobbyist websites have more than millions of members, and are growing every day. People exchange their experiences, pictures, and schematics, thus enabling their fellow hobbyists to improve their own drones.

Autonomous drone technology is not limited to the skies. Seaborne drones are already deployed in the ocean to monitor coastlines and passageways for pirates [6]. They communicate with an airborne drone for intelligence and can be picked up by a ship or submarine after the mission is completed. They need to be equipped with capabilities to survive for a long time in cold and corrosive seawater, and to tackle the challenges of underwater communication.

The drone industry is growing fast, and is estimated to have created 70,000 jobs and made an economic impact of $13.6 billion in its first three years. With all the benefits this new technology is contributing to our lives, the domestic use of drones has grown; but so have concerns about their privacy, safety, and regulation. Many people are concerned about their potential for abuse. One of the suggestions for government use of drones is limiting their use to a few purposes determined by the law, and specifically for emergency and public safety. Hobbyists and recreational users do not need any special license to fly a drone, but they are encouraged to follow guidelines outlined for public safety. The guidelines mainly suggest operating drones at a sufficient distance from populated areas, and not over or near private properties or lower than 120 meters in altitude. One of the main concerns about the public use of drones is the ease of weaponizing them; they could conceivably be used to attack private targets.

In science fiction movies, intelligent systems and drones can become self-aware and cause serious problems. It is unlikely that drones will become self-aware anytime soon, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t any safety issues about drones. As seen with most secure computer systems, drone can be hacked by a malicious person or group. These groups can take control of the vehicle, access its video feeds, alter data and information sent to ground control units, and spoof GPS systems to manipulate the drone to land or attack a different target.

When technological breakthroughs are achieved in critical areas, as in drones, a series of solid scientific research needs to be conducted before populating the civilian market with the technological products. Governments and civil societies have an important role in regulating the usage of drone. Some of these steps include requiring a warrant for deployment, limiting the data retention time for images and video feeds, establishing an accountability mechanism, and prohibiting the weaponization of domestic drones.

Acknowledgment: This article was produced by Mergeous [7], an online article and project development service for authors and publishers dedicated to the advancement of technologies in the merging realms of science and spiritual thought.

Halil I. Demir is an internet entrepreneur and freelance writer.

References

[1] T. Zakaria and M. Hosenball. “U.S. Drone Guidelines Could Reduce -Signature Strikes,” The Huffington Post, May 23, 2013.

[2] H. Kelly. “Drones: The future of disaster response,” CNN, May 23, 2013.

[3] A. Levy and M. Milian. “Future of Drones: Aerial Assassins or Helpful Hovercrafts?” Bloomberg, May 15, 2013.

[4] K. D. Atherton, “Google Bets $10.7 Million On Drone Intelligence,” Popular Science Magazine, May 16, 2013.

[5] R. Von Ins, “Rise of the Drones,” Georgia Institute of Technology, January 23, 2013.

[6] J. Emspak, “Schools of Sleeper Drones Could Swim Future Seas,” Discovery News, January 25, 2013.

[7] Mergeous, Online article and project development service, mergeous.com

Enviromnental damage ramains a growing concern. Despite rigorous energy efficiency programs and research and development (R&D) efforts on cleaner energy technologies in most developed countries, no developing country views these as priorities. And they have a case: Developed countries, which enjoyed high economic growth for decades by ignoring the environmental consequences, are hindering developing countries’ economic growth. On the other hand, representatives from developed countries say that we are all in the same boat and will sink together if developing countries do not pay attention to environmental consequences.

In December 1997, world leaders gathered in Kyoto to address the problem of global warming and to decide which countries should cut emissions and to what extent. Not surprisingly, developing countries objected to any restriction that might limit their economic growth. Such discussions will become more intense in the aftermath of the Kyoto Protocol.

This article will not address the issue of environmental reparations. Rather, it will discuss the energy markets’ current situation and short-term future trends.

Basic Properties of the Energy Systems

Present-day energy systems have several basic characteristics. All policy makers dealing with energy systems should know these basics by heart.

First, energy systems develop slowly because they require significant capital and infrastructure that can be replaced only gradually. There are two important consequences resulting from this fact:

•Intense capital requirements are a strong barrier to average-sized firms. Thus, energy systems are seldom run by private enterprises. In most countries they are constructed and run by the state, and a separate government body deals with energy issues. Energy systems have been dominated by heavy regulations even in most market-oriented economies. The recent trend of deregulation is an exception rather than the norm.

•Even if a state realizes that current energy systems can be improved significantly (e.g., switching to other fuel types or deregulating the market), making changes to a huge, functioning infrastructure is a slow and painful process. It is relatively easy to make changes during the initial stages of an energy system. But as time passes, this becomes more difficult.

As in most cases, good planning is essential. A state must be very careful when building its energy systems, and should pay attention to underlying energy market trends. Important lessons can be learned from the long history of mistakes committed by developing countries. And if a developing country fails to keep up with recent trends, it may find itself trapped by its own hands in an inherently inefficient system for decades.

Second, energy systems are heavily reliant on fossil fuels. Historically, coal has been a prominent energy resource in most countries. Despite its widely acknowledged negative impact on human health and the environment, it still dominates energy systems in such developing countries as India and China. In most countries, oil is the primary energy source.

Oil was one of the most influential key factors of the twentieth century. Just by looking at the traffic on our teeming highways or the modern political landscape, we can understand how profoundly oil has changed the way we live and handle international politics. In the light of the oil crises of 1973 and 1980, the reverse-shock of 1986, and another crisis during the Gulf War of 1990, the need to diversify away from oil becomes abundantly clear.

Environmental concerns also support the case against oil. This is how natural gas, a slightly cleaner fossil fuel, gradually entered the picture. Given the current energy systems’ dependence on these fossil fuels and the fact that energy systems change slowly, oil, coal and natural gas will continue to be dominant for years.

Third, the driving force behind the dynamic of switching from one fuel type to another is economics. Fuel types with smaller unit costs survive in the long run. Oil, for example, now has the lowest unit cost (cost per unit of energy) in most regions of the world.1

Given this, cleaner fuel (e.g., solar energy) still have a long way to go before becoming economically viable. Why would you pay $5 for what you can get for $3? Countries that use non-oil energy resources do this for a number of reasons, such as they do not have natural resources and so transporting oil ends up costing more, or they have abundant natural energy resources of other types. But, in general, economics is the most important issue here.

Introducing New Fuels

What trajectory does the unit cost follow when a new fuel is introduced? Consider photovoltaic (PV) cells. The term photovoltaic refers to a family of technologies that convert light directly into electricity. PV technology is an appealing alternative-it is a renewable, environmentally benign, and domestically secure energy source. It is modular and can be scaled up to meet demand.2 However, unit cost is currently high compared to fossil fuels.

A new technology’s unit cost is believed to follow a learning (or experience) curve as a function of installed capacity. As shown in Figure 1, technologies may experience declining costs due to their increasing adoption by society. This decline may be attributed to several factors:

• Technology innovation and manufacturing improvements: Costs may decline due to a better understanding of the underlying science, progress in related fields, or via learning by doing as well as learning by using.

• Economies of scale: Unit cost is a function of total production. Products produced in large quantities have lower unit costs. Most new fuel types have high unit costs, and demand is too low to encourage large-scale production. It almost seems paradoxical. But there are ways to break this cycle. Regulations encouraging usage of new fuel types may be enforced, consumers who have priorities other than cost may be targeted to expand the current market, or the cost may drop low enough for the technology to become attractive even for low production levels.

In achieving economies of scale, consumer demand should he considered. A major concern for the end-use consumer is convenience. The value of oil would be much lower if gas stations were not located all over the country. The same issue applies to fuel cells and electric cars. They will not be as convenient as conventional cars until the proper infrastructure exists.

Since 1960s, cooperative investments by manufacturers and governments have resulted in the accumulation of experience within the solar industry and the subsequent cost reduction of PV systems. Significant cost reductions have occurred in both the PV modules that house the solar cells, and the ancillary components (known as balance-of-system). Between 1968 and 1998, the global cumulative installed capacity of PV modules doubled more than thirteen times, from 95 kW to 950 MW, while costs ($/Wp) were reduced by an average of 20.2% for each doubling.4

Trends for Different Fuel Types

After this overview of energy systems, lets look at the trends for specific fuel types. Figure 2 is taken from International Energy Outlook 2000 (IEO2000), an annual report published by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).5 It displays projections of energy usage by fuel type up to 2020. The highlights following the figure are summarized from the reports contents.

Coal: Carbon dioxide is a very effective greenhouse gas and contributes significantly to global warming. Since coal is the most carbon-intensive fuel, global climate change debates focus on reducing its use. Coal use also has significant public health consequences, due to particulate matter emissions. Historically, coal has been a major source of energy. Although it has lost market share to petroleum products, natural gas, and nuclear power in the last decades, it remains a key source of energy, especially for generating electricity. In the IEO2000 reference case, coals share of total energy consumption falls only slightly, from 24 percent in 1997 to 22 percent in 2020 (Figure 3). Its historical share is nearly maintained, because large increases in energy use are projected for developing Asian countries, where coal continues to dominate many national fuel markets. China and India are projected to account for 97 percent of the worlds total increase in coal use.

Oil: Oil use will grow in absolute terms, but even optimistic oil supply scenarios predict that its share in the fuel mix will decline gradually. Despite efforts to reduce reliance on Middle Eastern oil, as well as advances in technical capability, new oil reserves are not compensating for depleted ones. The experts estimates of vast oil reserves in the Caspian and Tarim basins proved to be somewhat high, and the latest probes have been partially disappointing. According to EIA estimates, the share of the Persian Culf supplies is likely to increase in the coming years. Economic theory says that prices rise as supply declines. Oil prices have been quite volatile and can be expected to remain so in the future, principally as the result of unforeseen political and social circumstances. Without attempting to predict any crisis, the IEO2000 forecast shows a gradual rise in world oil prices. Oil currently provides a larger share of world energy consumption than any other energy source and is expected to remain in that position throughout the forecast period. Its share of total energy consumption declines slightly, however, from 39 percent in 1997 to 38 percent in 2020, as countries in many parts of the world switch to natural gas and other fuels, particularly for electricity generation. World oil consumption is projected to increase by 1.9 percent annually over projection period. Most of the growth in oil use is projected for the transportation sector, where few alternatives are currently economical.

Natural Gas: Natural gas remains the fastest growing component of global energy consumption. Over the IEO2000 forecast period, its use is projected to more than double in the reference case, reaching 167 trillion cubic feet. The natural gas share of total energy consumption increases from 22 percent in 1997 to 29 percent in 2020. It also accounts for the largest increment in electricity generation. Combined-cycle gas turbine power plants offer some of the highest commercially available plant efficiencies, and natural gas is environmentally attractive because it emits less sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide, and particulate matter than either oil or coal.

World Energy Consumption Shares Type: 1970-2000

In the industrialized world, natural gas consumption has the largest projected increase among the major fuels, increasingly becoming the choice for new power generation because of its environmental and economic advantages. Its incremental use in developing countries is expected to supply both power generation and other uses, such as town gas and fuel for industry. Despite concerns about the extent of natural gas reserves worldwide, current proven reserves suffice for this markets steady development without a substantial price increase.

Nuclear Power: The prospects for nuclear power are uncertain, despite a projected growth rate of 2.5 percent per year in total electricty demand through 2020. In the IEO2000 reference case, global nuclear capacity is projected to increase to 368 gigawatts in 2010 and then gradually fall to 303 gigawatts in 2020. Aggressive plans to expand nuclear capacity, mainly in Asia, lead to a near-term increase. However, plant retirements in America and other countries exceed total new additions worldwide, and produce a decline later in the forecast. The International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis [IIASA] is one of the authorities on energy issues.

IIASA projections [which extend until 2100] hold a slightly pessimistic view of nuclear energy. Nuclear energy production has stagnated for several decades, and IIASA suggests that this will continue. Currently, nuclear energy is prominent in only a handful of countries. Not many nuclear plants are being built, and existing ones are being dismantled. With large up-front capital costs, plant safety, and recycling nuclear material after dismantling issues, this option is becoming less and less attractive. Public opposition, already strong in the US and Europe, is growing in Asia. Nuclear safety issues moved to the forefront in Asia in 1999 after several leaks at nuclear power plants in South Korea and China, and the serious accident in a reprocessing facility in Tokaimura, Japan. Such events are likely to raise concerns about Asias aggressive plans for nuclear capacity expansion. IIASA predicts that if a safer and cheaper new generatinn of nuclear plants is introduced, nuclear powers ultimate share in fuel mix will grow. Otherwise, it eventually will come to an end.

Renewables: The development of renewable resources is constrained in the IEO2000 reference case projections by expectations that fossil fuel prices will remain relatively low, and that, as a result, renewables will have a difficult time competing. Failing a strong global commitment to environmental programs, such as the limitation and reduction of greenhouse gases outlined in the Kyotu Protocol, it is difficult to foresee significant and widespread increases in renewable energy use. Modest growth in renewabte energy is projected to continue, maintaining an 8 percent share of total energy consumption. Nevertheless, in the long run, as other fossil fuel types become more expensive due to depletion and R&D efforts push the unit cost further down, new opportunities will emerge. Even conservative estimates predict that the worlds energy will rely considerably on renewables before 2100.7

Conclusion

In this article,we highlighted several basic characteristics of energy systems, and drew attention to some underlying trends for particular fuel types. Based on this information, we can say that:Energy systems are capital-intensive and hard to change once they have been built. Therefore, developing countries should track energy system trends closely and build their energy systems according to their future needs. The most important factor influencing the decision of which energy source to use is economics. Until a resources unit cost is competitive with others, it will not enjoy widespread acceptance and usage. Fossil fuels will dominate energy markets in the short run. The shares of coal and oil in the fuel mix will remain relatively constant until 2020, while the market for natural gas will expand rapidly. Nuclear power will survive only if a new generation of safer and cheaper reactors is introduced. Renewables will be the ultimate choice of the future. Currently, however, they cannot compete successfully on cost with conventional fuels.

Footnotes

1. Although the cost of extraction rises as the amount of oil remaining underground decreases, extraction technology also advances and pushes the cost down. Transporting oil from the field to the marketplace is added to the extraction (or purchasing) cost.
2. Christopher Harmon, Experience Curves of Photovoltaic Technology (March 2000). The entire report is available on IIASA web site: http: www.iiasa.ac.at/Publications/Documents lR-00-014.pdf
3. Netherlands Energy Research Foundation (ECN at Petten), &#8220;Endogenous Technological Change in Energy System Models.&#8221; Paper presented at the 1999 IIASA conference.
4. IIASA-WEC. 1998.
5. International Energy Outlook 2000 is available on the EIAs Web site: http: www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/index.html.
6. N. Nakicenovic, A. Gruebler, and A. McDonald, Global Energy Perspectives (Cambridge. UK: 1998).
7. Experts differ over what exactly is included in this category. For practical purposes, renewables cover all energy sources except coal, oil, natural gas, and nuclear. Therefore this group includes, but is not limited to, hydroelectricity, wave, wind, biomass, and solar energy.

Since the mid-1980s, there has been increasing interest in developing so-called “electronic noses” (e-noses), that is, electronic instruments that can detect and recognize simple and complex odors.1 And since the mid-1990s, nearly 20 years after the concept was originally published, the commercialization of e-noses has started to take place. The main reasons for this delay were the complex nature of the problem and the need for advanced technologies. However, the recent development of microsensor technology has led to low-cost integrated chemical sensors and application-specific microprocessing devices. This, coupled with our greater understanding of artificial intelligence, has allowed us to construct electronic instruments that perform in a manner similar to our own olfactory system.

E-noses are now being developed as systems for the automated detection and classification of odors, vapors, and gases. They are generally composed of a chemical sensing system (e.g., sensor array or spectrometer) and a pattern recognition system, such as an artificial neural network (ANN). At Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), e-noses use ANN technology for the automated identification of volatile chemicals used in environmental and medical applications.2

The electronic nose works as follows. While a chemical vapor or odor is blown over a sensor array, sensor signals are digitized and fed into a computer. The ANN (implemented in software) then identifies the chemical. The benefits of e-noses include compactness, portability, real-time analysis, and automation.

FOOD INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS

Currently, the largest market for e-noses is the food industry. In some instances, e-noses can augment or replace panels of human experts and can reduce the amount of analytical chemistry performed in food production, especially when only qualitative results will do.

An electronic smelling device is a valuable tool for analyzing whether a product has gone bad. Potential applications of e-noses in the food industry are numerous: inspecting and grading food quality by odor; inspecting fish and beverage containers; controlling fermentation, automated flavoring, and microwave cooking; monitoring the ripening of cheese; verifying if orange juice is natural and/or fresh; testing plastic wrap for containing the odor of onions; and classifying grains and blueberry ripeness.

Using human odor panels to evaluate and control the quality of raw materials or finished products is extremely labor intensive, time consuming, expensive, and error prone. E-noses can quickly identify a characteristic odor classified as “good” or “bad” by the odor panel, thereby decreasing the workload, improving throughput, and reducing the cost of screening many samples at different stages of the manufacturing process. The system is applied easily to the manufacture and quality control of perfumes, cosmetics, and fine chemicals, as well as to packaging, monitoring environmental quality, the automotive industry, medical and diagnostic matters, and microbial classification.

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING

The PNNL is exploring the technologies required to perform cost-effective environmental restoration and waste management. This effort includes developing portable, inexpensive systems that can identify contaminants in the field in real time. Environmental applications of e-noses include identifying toxic wastes and household odors; analyzing fuel mixtures; detecting oil leaks; monitoring air quality, factory emissions, and hazardous chemicals; and testing ground water for odors.

MEDICAL APPLICATIONS

Since the sense of smell is important for physicians, an e-nose can be used as a diagnostic tool to examine bodily odors (e.g., breath, wounds, bodily fluids, etc.) and identify possible problems. Odors in the breath can indicate gastrointestinal, sinus, and liver problems, as well as infections and diabetes. Infected wounds and tissues emit distinctive odors, and odors coming from such bodily fluids as blood and urine can indicate liver and bladder problems. Currently, an e-nose for examining wound-related infections is being tested at South Manchester University Hospital.

In similar applications, ANNs have been used to track glucose levels in diabetics, determine ion levels in bodily fluids, and detect such pathological conditions as tuberculosis.

While the inclusion of visual, aural, and tactile senses into telepresent systems is widespread, the sense of smell has been largely ignored. PNNL recently proposed a more futuristic application of e-noses for telesurgery. In this application, an e-nose would identify odors in a remote surgical environment. These identified odors then would be transmitted electronically to another site, where an odor generation system would recreate them.

The next decade should see the cost of e-noses fall dramatically, with the result that they will be used not only in industry but also in everyday life. They can be used, for example, to detect tainted foods in the refrigerator, ensure clean clothes in the washing machine, detect poor air quality in the car, and perhaps even help us monitor our own health.

FOOTNOTES

1. J. W. Gardner and P. N. Bartlett, Electronic Noses (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1999).
2. http://www.ivanhoe.com/docs/backissues/electronicnose.html.

Daylighting is becoming more popular in commercial buildings and manufacturing facilities in the United States. After Thomas Edison invented the electric light, most architects changed their building plans and designed for more and more artificial lighting. As a result, only a very small percentage of the light used in major buildings and facilities came directly from the sun. Recently, the Europeans have realized the importance of daylighting and begun to use a reasonable percentage of sunlight in their buildings. The Rocky Mountain Institute, Snow-mass, Colorado, has investigated the benefits of daylighting and reported that daylighting increased productivity and reduced absenteeism by 15 percent. Also, sunlight reduces the heating and cooling bill.

In 1993, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. opened a prototype store in Lawrence, Kansas, with nine special skylights designed by Andersen Corp., Bayport, Minnesota. The architectural firm of Leo A. Daly, Omaha, Nebraska, opened an office building in 1983 with l5ft high window walls and a glazed roof. About 50% of its electricity bill for lighting was saved as a result (Reno Gazette-Journal, November 27, 1995). Daylighting is an inexpensive way of lighting interiors since the sun is a ‘free’ light source which can be further exploited by installing skylights on the roof. On an overcast day, the light entering through a 2 sq. ft skylight area is equivalent to three 100-watt light bulbs.

There are two additional reasons for installing skylights. First, the cooling load of a building can be reduced by using daylight. The reason for this is that whereas about 80% of the power of an electric light is converted to heat, sunlight has a far lower heat content and therefore requires far less air-conditioning. Second, just at the time when there is the heaviest demand for electricity (and other utilities) from manufacturing facilities, namely during the summer, sunlight is at its most plentiful and available: in short, skylights can significantly reduce peak load stresses and costs.

An illumination level of 50 footcandles (540 Lux) at the work site is the design standard in industrial facilities. A large portion of this illumination level comes from electric lights of fluorescent and incandescent lamps. Almost 5% of electricity consumption in the US is used up to provide adequate illumination in commercial and industrial buildings.

In production facilities generally, there is a lack of awareness about the energy conservation potential of skylights. Some manufacturers are so unaware about the cost savings that can be achieved by daylighting that they do not have skylights in their production areas, and leave lamps on in work areas throughout daylight hours. In other places which do have them, skylights have been neglected to the extent that they are so dirty they block the incoming sunlight.

Since heating and cooling load are increased with increased skylight surface area, there is a limitation associated with this measure. Some authorities have suggested that the optimum skylight surface area should be reckoned at between 2 and 4% of roof surface area. However, since the measure depends upon local climate conditions, the range should be allowed to vary between 2 and 10%. In many potential sites, heating only (and not cooling) is the principal consideration. Generally, therefore, building designers with heating costs in mind tend to prefer 2% for cold climates and 10% for warm climates.

Heating load and costs will increase when skylights are installed. However, the increase in heating cost is considerably smaller than the saving from reduced lighting cost. The average unit cost of electricity is three times greater than that of natural gas (typically preferred for heating). In any case, heat loss from the skylights can be minimized by double glazing them. In view of the favourable financial balance and the productivity improvements to be expected from daylight working, the benefits from installing skylights generally offset any negative consequences of doing so.

The amount of savings in electric lighting consumption and costs depends on climate and operating periods. The payback period for installing skylights ranges from one to five years. They can be an expensive roof aperture, but it is relevant to note that the lifetime of a skylight is more than twenty years. The skylights need to be cleaned at least once annually, which means that service and maintenance costs are negligible. Skylights are most cost- effective in uninsulated ceilings in climates, like that of southern California, which have no heating season. In such climates, the workplace roof is typically covered with corrugated metal sheets making skylights both easy and cheap to install: corrugated fibreglass sheets can be cut and fitted in place of the metal sheets wherever the skylights are required.

References 

• MURDOCH, B. J. (1985) Illumination Engineering: From Edison’s Lamp to the Laser, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York.
• NUTFER, D. W., BRITTON A. J. and HEFFINGTON W. M. (1993) ‘Conserve Energy to Cut Operating Costs’, Chemical Engineering, September, pp.126-37.
• PIERSON, J. (1995) ‘Natural light gets warm welcome’, Reno Gazette-Journal, November 27, pp.2ff.