A few more thoughts this week on carbon pricing but, if I may, from the perspective of science.
One of the most important chemical reactions is combustion. It requires three things - a fuel, an oxidant and a source of ignition.
For a candle, the fuel is the wax you are burning, the oxidant is the oxygen in the air around us and the source of ignition is usually a match or lighter.
For an automobile engine, the fuel is gasoline or some equivalent material, again the air provides oxygen, and the source of ignition is a spark plug.
The combustion of every hydrocarbon is a reaction between oxygen, carbon and hydrogen to produce carbon dioxide and water if everything is in perfect balance. Other products are generated if the balance is off but the key is that combustion generates energy.
So what is meant by the term "clean fuels?" Any combustion reaction involving carbon-based compounds results in the same end product - carbon dioxide. It can't be avoided.
And by now, most people understand increasing the carbon dioxide level in our atmosphere is having detrimental effects on the Earth's climate.
Shouldn't a "clean fuel" mean it produces no carbon dioxide?
One would think that was the definition.
Certainly some fuels appear to be clean such as hydrogen which when it is combined with oxygen and ignited generates nothing but water as a product. In this case, with no carbon in the fuel, there is no carbon in the products. It must be clean, right?
While hydrogen might sound like the perfect fuel to drive our economy, it has some major drawbacks. It doesn't exist in its gaseous form in our atmosphere or anywhere else on the planet.
In order to use hydrogen as a fuel, we need to generate it from something else and the process requires energy. Presently, the largest supplier of hydrogen is the petroleum industry which generates the gas by stripping hydrogen atoms off of hydrocarbons.
In order for hydrogen to be a perfectly "clean fuel", the hydrogen needs to be generated electrolytically by breaking down water molecules. This can be done with solar cells or directly by using specific photolytic chemical reactions but the efficiency of these processes is not particularly high.
Perhaps more to the point, solar cells are not carbon neutral as they require an awful lot of energy to make and create an awful lot of waste in the process.
Does this mean "clean fuel" is an oxymoron? Perhaps.
For example, claims that natural gas is a clean fuel are absurd.
A kilogram of natural gas produces 2.45 kilograms of carbon dioxide during combustion while generating 10.8 kWh of electricity.
A kilogram of coal, on the other hand, generates 2.93 kilograms of carbon dioxide but only 2.8 kWh of electricity. On a carbon-dioxide-emission basis, natural gas is over 4.5 times as efficient as coal. No question that natural gas is cleaner than coal.
In fact it has a better electrical output per kilogram of carbon dioxide emitted ratio than any other fossil fuel.
But that doesn't mean it is a clean fuel. It still results in carbon dioxide emissions. Already policy analysts are pointing out natural gas is, at best, a stop gap measure in our search for a clean fuel. A carbon tax will not change the laws of thermodynamics.
The switchover occurring in the power generation industry from coal to natural gas has lowered our present output of carbon dioxide from electrical generation. As more power plants are converted and more countries employ natural gas, carbon dioxide emissions will decline.
However, other sources of carbon dioxide will make up the slack because our economy is built on fossil fuels.
Furthermore, the increasing demand for electricity will mean carbon dioxide levels from electrical generation, even with natural gas, will continue to rise.
If the Center for American Progress is to be believed, we only have until 2030 to figure things out if we want a stable climate.
The answer is to find alternative methods for power generation which are not as carbon expensive.
B.C.'s hydro-electrical power generation is one example of a cleaner energy source. It generates over 41.6 kWh of electricity per kilogram of carbon dioxide emitted during the lifetime of the dams and reservoirs. It is ten times cleaner than natural gas. Unfortunately, there is a limited capacity for hydro-electric power.
We should be investing in research to find alternative means of running our economy. Devices using less power and cars running on alternative fuels would be a good start. But the electric car isn't the answer if the source of electricity is natural gas power plants.
Of course, it will take a lot of political will and foresight to realize we have backed the wrong energy horse and need to find another, better one.
