Climate Change "Changes" and Consequences
I am an advocate of systems thinking to understand and work through complex situations. An important systems thinking concept is the "unintended consequence." Does an action within a system risk consequences that are not intended or desirable? For example, what are the desired outcomes and possible risks or negative results of expanding renewable energy technologies like wind and solar? This article focuses on electric cars and alternative transportation. Share your views. https://www.anthropocenemagazine.org/2023/02/should-your-next-car-be-electric-or-no-car-at-all/
I feel that there are better ways for renewable energy than wind. In order to use the wind power, the weather would have to generate enough wind to power the wind generators, which is not often. Better ways is using waste to generate energy, because there waste is more abundant than wind.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your idea, unless wind generators are built in areas that are windy, there are too many uncertainties when relying on solely the wind to generate power. As for waste, it is abundant anywhere and doesn't vary from place to place as much as wind does and can be done in a wider variety of regions than a wind generator farm.
DeleteI agree there are better options than wind and solar wind and solar plants take up lots of land and can be very inefficient. They do not make much power per square foot compared to nuclear. Nuclear energy has been proven to work and it is already largely used in America and can be both profitable and sustainable as the waste from these plants is negligible.
DeleteElectric vehicles - interesting, right? These vehicles soared up into the market a few years ago and only expanded, leading to political impact as well. Was it one of the greatest advancements among humans? Yes, it arguably is. However, we are blinded by electric vehicles for their incentives and "eco-friendly" ability. We feel more responsible and good about receiving funds from the government for buying electric vehicles, certainly without considering that it still needs more work. Public transit may be more attractive for the general public when they are electrified. Also, it is more affordable for the lower-class individuals/families who cannot afford electric cars. Cars should not be prioritized, but other things should be focused as well. This article was a good reminder for everyone that we have to keep making progress, and we cannot rest on one thing that seems viable.
ReplyDeleteThis is an article that also talks about the positive aspects of EVs as well as parts of what was mentioned in the article provided:
https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/are-electric-vehicles-definitely-better-climate-gas-powered-cars#:~:text=Yes%3A%20although%20electric%20cars'%20batteries,cleaner%20under%20nearly%20any%20conditions.&text=Although%20many%20fully%20electric%20vehicles,claim%20is%20not%20quite%20true
While I agree that other forms of transportation should be prioritized to reduce the impact we are making on our climate, cars are not going anywhere. Therefore, we should look to the research available, which shows that EV's are better for the environment despite the pollution from manufacturing batteries. Annual vehicle miles traveled in the United States has continually grown since the 70's, with no signs of slowing down. If people are becoming increasingly dependent on cars, then we should prioritize making them as eco-friendly as possible.
DeleteHi Daniel. I agree with you that public transit may be more effective. It is so unrealistic for everyone to go out and buy a new electric vehicle. And while this change may happen slowly it would still take decades to be fully implemented. In addition we also have. a problem with trash so it also would negativity effect the planet to have everyones gas fueled cars in a junk yard. Public transit could help day to day as it would mean less vehicles on the road and you could still use your car on some occasions.
DeleteI agree with all of the points being made. We should switch to electric vehicles to bring down carbon emissions and we should offer incentives and better inform the general public about these new EVs. In the world we currently live in, I believe this is the best solution to move our way into a no carbon emission world due to factors that electric light rail and bus can't give us. Time wasted waiting for the bus, stopping at each stop, going to your nearest station, and more, are some of the reasons why I think that. While they certainly produce less carbon, like the article said, cars are inevitable due to their sheer convenience and will not disappear in the foreseeable future. Slowly but surely, I believe that we can transition to EVs and possibly with better and more transits, to fully electric buses and light rail.
ReplyDeleteI found this article, https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-23-105635#:~:text=Did%20This%20Study-,In%20December%202021%2C%20the%20Biden%20Administration%20issued%20an%20Executive%20Order,vehicle%20acquisitions%20beginning%20in%202027, that talks more about the Biden administration and how they've affected zero emission vehicles.
Andrew, Thanks for sharing your perspective. There is a clear benefit to the environmental pollution aspect by switching to EVs due to the lack of greenhouse gas emissions. I like how you mentioned giving people incentives for purchasing EVs. There is currently some great incentives to purchasing an electric vehicle if you qualify. Here is a link to the IRS's explanation of how those incentives work for EV buyers:
Deletehttps://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/credits-for-new-clean-vehicles-purchased-in-2023-or-after
I definitely think that actions within a system risk consequences that are unintended and often undesirable. In economics these are known as "negative externalities", and I think transitioning to renewable energies do have a potential for unintended negative ramifications. For example, they might make energy more expensive and less accessible to the poor. I also have read that solar farms can contribute to habitat degradation. As far as this article on electric vehicles, I appreciate that they included arguments both for an against electric vehicles. Although I do think that electric vehicles can be a great alternative to gas vehicles for environmental reasons (especially as technology improves), I think that electric vehicles are not solely the answer to reducing carbon emissions from transportation. The focus also needs to be on things like increasing accessibility to public transportation and making roads more bike-accessible, as well as the idea the article brought up of making gas-powered vehicles more efficient and environmentally friendly.
ReplyDeleteJamie,
DeleteI love how you explain that many different solutions can all be used to decrease the environmental impacts humans have on climate change. How would you plan to implement such ideas? I also wanted to know if a more considerable amount of smaller contributions would help reduce the severity of system risk consequences compared to more extensive solution plans. For example, would increasing the accessibility of public transportation, creating more bike-accessible roads, and educating persons on reducing carbon emissions from transportation positively impact the environment more than just switching all vehicles to entirely electric?
I agree that the quickest way to reduce carbon emissions in the United States is not to incentivize alternatives for consumers but rather limit production and manufacturing output. However, even though people could buy an electric car for the same price as a gas vehicle, there are still clearly gas powered options that are cheaper, and people will gear towards that unless there is some sort of incentive to buy electric or if they know that maintenance costs are lower. Encouraging people to continue buying cars instead of finding ways to improve public transportation, walking, and biking alternatives will also severely hinder progress. The United States is built on long distance transportation, and we still have lots of progress to make to transition the transportation industry to a zero emissions one. Wind and solar power are not reliable or efficient enough to power our vehicles and manufacture the materials needed to build them. Despite this, this study (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2096511718300069) by Swedish PhD Tomas Kaberger found that "Low-cost renewable electricity replaces oil, fossil gas and even coal in other sectors." If we are to make significant progress to achieve this, we must first find a direct way to reduce emissions in the transportation industry.
ReplyDeleteAs stated in the article, electric cars would help reduce carbon emissions when compared to gas-powered vehicles, but switching to other electric modes of transportation like electric bikes, buses and rail systems would make much more of an impact on our carbon emissions. I see this as more of a cultural issue with the United States, as most individuals enjoy the freedom of owning their own car. One article from the Foundation of Economic Education that's linked below talks about this exact cultural aspect of America. Many people like driving, but more than that they like the freedom and idea of owning a car. This sentiment isn't likely to end any time soon, so our best bet might be to make sure consumer-owned vehicles take up as little of a carbon footprint as possible. While making electric rail and bus systems would be a much better solution in an ideal world, the truth of today's America is that, as of now, we won't be able to incentivize the use of these public transportation methods enough for the majority of individuals to make the switch.
ReplyDeleteHere's the link to the article referenced above: https://fee.org/articles/freedom-and-the-car/
In short, the solution often time risks an unintended and unforeseen result. A significant example of this is the resources that batteries in most common EV style cars is made of and the effects of the refining process for this mineral. Basically, the refining process to create these batteries is very toxic and causes a significant impact on greenhouse gas pollution that is comparable to fossil fuel vehicles. The greater problem that this process generates is an immediate impact on the environment around the surrounding the process which is significantly more evident than the effects of greenhouse gases. This is due to the difference in outcomes. Climate change is caused by green house gases and results in relatively dirtier environments with a greater range of weather patterns where as lithium refining results in water that is deadly, ground that does not support the growth of life, and air that, when inhaled, can be deadly. This is something few people know about EV cars and therefore can be an unforeseen consequence of an apparently good solution.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree that systems thinking is crucial for understanding and navigating complex situations. When it comes to transitioning to renewable energy technologies like wind and solar, it's important to consider not only the desired outcomes but also potential consequences. In terms of electric cars and alternative transportation, the article raises some though provoking questions. While electric cars have the potential to reduce emissions and mitigate the impacts of climate change, they still have their downsides. The production and disposal of batteries can have negative environmental and social impacts. I believe that a more comprehensive solution is needed, one that involves not just the promotion of electric cars but also the development of alternative transportation options, such as public transportation, or biking.
ReplyDeleteI think that a consequence of this prioritization of electric vehicles could be a widening social inequality. Transportation is one of the single most important factors in social mobility, and the US, unfortunately, is almost entirely structured around cars.
ReplyDeleteThe public transport in Corvallis is better than many, many other places; but I'm completely stranded if I want to go somewhere on the weekend. The busses don't run. If I want to get to Albany, it's over an hour away by bus with all of the waiting and delays; but it's only a 20 minute drive. In my hometown, the bus was so often late or absent in the mornings that I had to run to school a couple of times. I actually abandoned taking the bus altogether after I started biking everywhere. I was fortunate that I could bike everywhere in that town. A lot of the US is far too sprawling for biking to be a feasible alternative to driving for people.
When people talk about expanding public transport, they often talk about trying to fit more people in the busses or trains for efficiency. I disagree that this is the right way to go about things. When I lived in Hungary, public transportation was readily accessible; and part of the reason it was accessible was because the trams or busses came often. If I missed one, it wasn't the end of the world. I could just catch another line that was heading in that general direction or wait ten or fifteen minutes for the next one to come. I think that increased frequency is important to consider. While we will probably need to increase capacity to accommodate peak travel hours, we can't forget about the fact that public transport will also need to be as convenient as driving, or more. Convenience requires that the public transport is readily accessible.
Yes, an action within a system can risk consequences that are unintended or undesirable. And this is very true when it comes to complex systems like the energy system. Expanding renewable energy like wind and solar may come with desired outcomes like reducing the emission of greenhouse gasses, creating new jobs, reducing reliance and use of fossil fuels, etc. However, there is a possibility of negative results that need to be put into consideration. One potential risk is the environmental impact of large scale renewable energy systems. These large renewable energy sites require lots of space. According to an article written by GreenMatch, compared to traditional power stations, we will need to use more land to establish these new renewable energy facilities. Another potential risk is that renewable energy facilities cost a lot to create and it may be difficult to fund the mass production of these facilities. When it comes to expanding renewable energy technology, there are many desirable benefits that come with this tech. But it is essential to also look at the potential undesirable risk that come with renewable energy.
ReplyDeleteLink: https://www.greenmatch.co.uk/blog/2021/09/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-renewable-energy
In all honesty, I'm not a big fan of electric cars as the future of transportation. This is not to say they aren't an improvement, they are much better for the environment then a gas car, without a doubt (the article itself states this), given the choice, I'd go with an EV. But other forms of transportation as a solution to the climate change problem would be so much better. As far as longer distance transit goes, public transit looks like it's the way to go, according to the bar graphs in the article. The article states that "Climate justice is EVs for all", but is that really the case? As the global community advances, would it really be sustainable for every single family unit to own one, maybe multiple, electric vehicles? The amount of mining, and electricity required for something on that scale would be colossal, mining is bad for the environment, and the ability to develop sufficient green energy to support that many EVs is just not there currently. Instead, let's focus on more efficient uses of our resources, things like public transit that can transport a mass amount of people in an energy and space efficient way. And self-sustainability in communities, to reduce the need to pollutant imports/exports.
ReplyDeleteThere will definitely be an unintended consequence in expanding wind/solar and electric cars; whether good or bad. Expanding electric cars to mitigate climate change is a pretty realistic option, since the United States is pretty centered around cars when it comes to transportation. But in doing so, this would widen the social classes by a lot. Vehicles that run on gas are definitely more accessible and cheaper short term than electric vehicles. Expanding wind and solar energy is definitely more environmental friendly than relying on fossil fuels, but it could also be more costly. So we would only see a decrease in carbon emissions from more developed countries that can afford this technology.
ReplyDeleteWhen we discuss topics like the article that Dr. Walker has linked, I will never forget a series of images I saw representing how 60 people look like in different modes of transportation here: https://twitter.com/JimHarris/status/539897264836460544. This visualization has always stuck with me as a Civil Engineering major. As we go into the worlds of EVs those emissions will be reduced, but how can the current infrastructure emit lower emissions if more people were incentivized to use public transit in the first place? This is something that interests me a lot, as transportation engineering is something that has always been around in my life as I spent my childhood growing up in LA.
ReplyDeleteAs with all radical change, especially with regards to changes with the goal of combating climate change, there will be, inevitably, unintended consequences. In the case of the expansion of renewable energy, some unintended consequences could be the effects they have on the land. For example, there have been multiple cases where the widespread of dams and the harnessing of hydropower has unintended consequences on the water sources that they impact. This is especially prevalent in places like China, where the Three Gorges Dam has had environmental impacts on area surrounding the dam reservoirs. This includes erosion, blooding of farmland and destruction of fish breeding habitats.
ReplyDeleteI think that there definitely could be unintended negative consequences that come from the aggressive push for consumers to buy more electric vehicles. While reading the article, I thought of this comparison--though it may not be very strong. I think that the strong push for electric vehicles against gas cars could be similar to the push against cigarettes. Now, I wouldn't really say there was a strong push for vapes, but I think when they were first getting popular many people would talk about how much better they were for you than cigarettes. I think that this thinking is similar to how we talk about electric vehicles and the comparison to something worse makes consumers take less notice of the harm they actually do as well.
ReplyDeleteI agree that we need a change that is quick because of the fast approaching effects of climate change. I think the best solution would be a combination of multiple renewable energy sources. A combination of solar, hydro, and nuclear could all work well together to create a system where they can all rely on each other and produce enough energy for whoever needs it. Until we can find another sustainable and renewable energy source, this may be our best bet.
ReplyDeleteOne of the undesired consequences to using electric vehicles is there wouldn't be the same mount of people who could safely afford electric cars in comparison to gas-powered ones. According to USA today, "Electric cars already cost significantly more than conventional cars." It's debatable whether or not in the long run or with other costs how the two compare, but upfront, electric vehicles are much more. Not as many people have access to electric cars.
ReplyDeleteUSA Today: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2023/02/16/cars-gas-ev-fuel-electricity-rates/11267270002/
Although I believe expanding renewable energy and converting over to electric cars are good choices. I don't believe that renewable energy from just wind and solar can create enough and be reliable as fossil fuels. Even though fossil fuels create a lot of pollution they are also able to sufficient supply our global energy demands. Wind and solar are very dependent energy sources. Wind energy is dependent on how wind it is and needs a good location. Solar energy is reliant on time of the day and weather conditions that allow it to produce the most amount of energy.
ReplyDeleteI think electric cars are a good switch but only if you're able to afford one since most of the electric cars on the market cost more than gas cars.
I recently watched a video that was incredibly relevant to this topic that I will link below. It discusses the work of a company called Zipline who works in aerial logistics systems. With the rise of services like door dash and uber eats, a problem arises because large gas guzzling vehicles are being used to deliver small packages to people's homes. The goal of Zipline is to replace this environmental hazard with a more efficient system that uses drones to accurately deliver packages. Their system also has been proven to work in rural countries. Just two of their sites can deliver important blood donations across the country of Rwanda. Each has a range with a radius of 150 miles and can send out gliders with a speed of 70 miles per hour. Overall, this system shows potential to not only enhance convenience, but reduce the total number of cars on the road whether they are electric or petroleum.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOWDNBu9DkU
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteAs I am a strong believer in electrical vehicles, I think the problem is not automobile transportation itself but the overall use of fossil fuels to power our world. When doing more research about the use of fossil fuels to power our world I found that about 60% of all electricity in the US comes from fossil fuels. (Link below) In order for the switch to electrical vehicles to actually be beneficial, the electricity must also be clean energy. I think this is a big misconception that a lot of people don't understand about electricity because it is publicized as clean and good for the environment. However, I am optimistic about electricity becoming cleaner due to advancements in technologies like the particle accelerator.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-in-the-us.php
Electric vehicles are a great solution on paper, allowing the energy used to transport us to come from renewable sources. However our current methods of storing energy require large amounts of lithium which the mining industry involved with is incredibly unethical and polluting. I think this article does a great job of pointing this out in that the next step in transportation in terms of cutting carbon emissions is reducing the number of vehicles on the road and reinvesting in public transportation. Streetcars and trams do a great job of moving people around efficiently without the use of massive batteries or gas powered engines. In addition I think to power more public transport we ought to rely on tidal energy due to population density along our many coastlines. my source for that is: https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/topics/znrwdp3/articles/z3hwkty#:~:text=Advantages%20and%20disadvantages%20of%20tidal%20energy%201%20Unlike,they%20cause%20to%20marine%20animals%20passing%20through%20them.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the points being made. We must switch to EV as soon as possible, EV will bring down the carbon emissions and in order to enforce this EV rule the government must implement laws that require citizens to purchase EV by a certain date ex. 2040. I believe incorporating more public transport that is electric will also help reduce our carbon emissions, for example, in Seattle they just recently implemented a subway-like system, and it's very effective, but needs to be implemented all over the King County area. Whilst they certainly produce less carbon, cars are inevitable because of the convenience and the societal norms of owning a car. I believe that we can transition to EV and fully electric public transport in the near future.
ReplyDeleteThe largest risk that runs with current plans for renewable and electrification technologies is the raw materials and energy it will take to produce all of the infrastructure around it. Currently, most of these technologies rely on rare earth metals that are collected through deep mining, with sometimes questionable worker ethics in place. One of the most infamous examples is the lithium mines in Africa where many lithium-ion batteries get their lithium. The expansion of these technologies will only further incentivize out-sourcing the mining industries for these raw materials into areas of the globe where people are exploited for profits and a "cleaner world".
ReplyDeleteWhile sad to see older generation cars go to die and observing the surge in electric vehicle popularity, I find it important to look at the benefits of electrical cars when it comes to carbon emissions and sustainability. While the Inflation Reduction Act has extended consumer tax credits and incentivized electric vehicle battery production, there are concerns about whether these measures are the most effective route to reducing emissions. My hope is that more research will be done to simultaneously find better alternatives while switching to this method in order to find the best and least harmful path for the world.
ReplyDeleteResearching on the alternatives, this article wonders about how research towards hydrogen powered vehicles are being worked on, and how plausible it could be for the future of transportation. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0360319986901412
Delete