(http://www.dailytech.com/Military+Biofuel+Costs+Slashed+Thanks+to+Massive+Navy+Purchase/article23454.htm)  

1.      My Capstone Idea 

My topic of interest for my capstone project is bio-fuel technology and specifically blue green algae and its use as a form of alternative energy.  Algae bio-fuel has been a passion of mine since I first heard about a few years back. The concept is fascinating to me and the amount of research on the subject in recent years is quite abundant.

This project connects to the broader context of energy and sustainability policy because the potential for mass production on algal fuels in future markets is a hot topic right now. Debate and controversy surround the feasibility and economic benefits of investing in algal fuels as an alternative energy source.

The purpose of my final capstone project will be to demonstrate from an unbiased and objective point of view the benefits and costs associated with mass producing algal bio-fuels on a mass scale. I will do this by attempting to grow and harvest my own blue green algae using researched methods of agriculture currently used in the field and then converting those harvested algae to a usable form of biodiesel. I will test the accuracy of energy output from the bio-fuel and compare it to standard petroleum based fuel sources as a comparison. 

(http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/biofuel/review7.php)

2.      Things I know and things I need to learn

                  This idea came to me while researching information on algae fuel production and alternative energy sources. The articles I found then lead me to videos on the subject where I came across a demonstration by a chemical engineer on the ease of producing biodiesel fuel from simple blue green algae. I then came up with the idea of repeating that experiment as basis for a capstone project.

            There are other similar questions and ideas I can investigate as I work toward completing this capstone project. Some of these questions could be a cost comparison of making biodiesel fuel from corn and soy by-products as well as blue green algae so that I can further develop my findings on the subject.

(http://www.greenchipstocks.com/articles/investing-algae-biofuel/253)

3.      Where I'll take this idea from here 

In the ESP program there are several courses that will be directly beneficial to my successfully completing my capstone project idea. A few of these courses include EGEE 401: Energy in a Changing World and METEO 469: Understanding Global Warming. These two courses will allow me to fully understand the impact of fuel emissions on the environment as well as the need for advanced and alternative fuel methods for future generations.

A few sources that I can access to help me learn more on the subject include: leading industry corporations in the field of bio-fuel technology, such as Sapphire Energy and Solaxyme. Keeping up with current events in the energy markets and news media on the progress of algal fuel will provide me with the most accurate and current data on the topic.

The following are a few videos that briefly summarize algae bio-fuel production.

Algae into Biofuel from Sam Moritz on Vimeo.

      The following information was provided by Peter Kahare and was written February 20, 2012 in an article titled "Innovation and Diversification Are Key for Kenya's Renewable Energy Industry" based on a report conducted by the organization, Christian Aid.

1.        "High costs of fuel on the international market mean that Kenyans will have to pay more for electricity consumption" - Joseph Njoroge, Kenya Power and Lighting Company.

2.       57.7 % of power in Kenya comes from imported oil, large hydropower and thermal electricity

3.       Only 5% of rural populations have access to electricity in Kenya.

4.       Approximately 51% of urban populations have access to electricity in Kenya.

5.       67% of the entire country of Kenya's population uses biomass as an energy source.

6.       Kenya receives the equivalent of 300 million tones of oil in solar insulation a day.

7.       Only 2% of the total geothermal potential has been exploited in Kenya.

I thought this article was great, in both context and scope. It provided all of the important information regarding Kenya's electrical power usage and needs in order to allow the reader to full understand the scope of the issue at hand. With numbers like 5% of rural populations have electricity, it's hard not to grasp the concept of the difficulty facing Kenyans in their energy crisis. There were some holes in the article though.  There are some improvements that could be added which might help others understand the issue even more. Such as, offering a comparison number of rural populations in Kenya versus the United States or China or any other well known economy. What constitutes rural in the U.S. in comparison to what rural constitutes in Kenya might make a difference in understanding the numbers presented as data in the report. There is a difference between 5% of 1000 and 5% of 100,000 in terms of population. One of the major numbers that stuck out for me and that I could personally relate to was that Kenya receives the equivalent of 300 million tones of oil in solar insulation. Those are huge numbers. If they had the resources and abilities to properly harness solar energy as a renewable energy source comparable to their import of oil as an energy source the potential effects are obvious.

 Resources:

Lesson9_RPS_Flyer.pdf

A brief flyer on the subject can be see here: National RPS Flyer

My original blog entry can be seen here: Lesson 6

            Robert Lamb wrote an article called "How Greenwashing Works" where he talks about the "The Six Sins of Greenwashing". In the article Lamb discusses how companies use greenwashing to falsify claims and deceive customers and investors. According to Lamb, 57 percent of all greenwashing involves companies making a "positive environmental claim about a product, but fails to mention the larger negative factors". We can then take this information and use it to look at an example of greenwashing in the energy industry. The controversial issues of hydraulic fraking are one of the main negative factors of natural gas production. Fluid leaks into nearby ground water and the devestating effects it has had on ecological systems in nearby areas are often brushed under the rug by major natural gas companies.  In the article "Swimming in Natural Gas: The Greenwashing of an Industry" by Adam Federman, it describes the Marcellus Shale situation and how many natural gas drilling companies are marketing natural gas as the "clean" alternative to coil and oil. The Chesapeake Energy Corporation is an important player in the natural gas industry at present and has declared themselves an environmentally friendly operation.  But  Adam Federman disagrees. While reading a local paper in the Pennsylvania area Federemen describes how "Chesapeake had taken out a full page ad on the subject of hydraulic fracturing, describing the process as one that "pumps a pressurized mixture of 99.5% sand and water with a small amount of special purpose additives," into a well bore to shatter the rock and release the gas. The ad goes on to note that, "The additives...include compounds found in common household products." They fail to acknowledge, however, that the fracking formula, which varies from well to well depending on the geology of the region, is considered proprietary and we still do not fully know what is being pumped underground". This is a perfect example of a company claiming the positive environmental impacts of a product while failing to mention the negative ones.

 It could even be stated that the name natural gas is a form of greenwashing too. Methane gas is the gas being talking about when someone says natural gas.  While methane does produce lesser CO2 emissions than coal it still produces significant amounts. Pollution is pollution. Being less pollutant than something else doesn't make it "cleaner" it just makes it less pollutant. By calling it "natural" gas it gives consumers and investors an impression that it is somehow a better choice. But taking the time to check every label and constantly doubt every products environmental friendliness can potentially do more harm than good. By holding advertisement policies and procedures to a stricter level could help solve these issues. Allowing companies and businesses to find loopholes and deceiving consumers through clever advertisement and marketing shouldn't be allowed.  The entire situation is more complicated than simply whether or not a particular product or service is green and environmentally friendly.  All manufacturing has some waste and by-product. There are going to be negative impacts. The key is finding those with the least amount of negatives and the greatest amount of positives. And holding businesses accountable for their products and services.

Sources:

Lamb, Robert.  "How Greenwashing Works" 25 January 2008.  HowStuffWorks.com.  

http://www.howstuffworks.com/greenwashing.htm

Adam Federman. Swimming in Natural Gas: The Greenwashing of an Industry. January 4, 2010.  Earth Island Journal.     

The Marcellus Shale issue is one that has recently been getting quite a lot of attention. When it comes to sustainability ethics, there are many view points and perspectives that need to be taken into consideration. For example, the views of the drilling industry versus the citizens and residents of the areas affected by the drilling, politics, and even environmental officials all have their own parts in the future of the Marcellus Shale formation. With the good comes the bad, and we can easily see how much more complicated the entire issue is.

First, we can examine some of the sustainability practices being used by the natural gas drilling companies and the impacts it might have on citizens in the Marcellus Shale area. According to the Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research, one method the drilling industry has recently been implementing is the reuse of flow back water from the resulting hydraulic fracture process. This water often contains many contaminates and chemicals that must be treated . The reuse of flow back fluids helps mitigate the risk of contaminated discharge that might end up in streams and rivers in the surrounding areas (MCOR). Reusing flow back fluids also helps to decrease the amounts of new water for hydraulic fraturing, therefore requiring less natural resources from the surrounding areas that could be taken away from residents and citizens in the area.

The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection has also enacted standards that dictate the treatment of any flow back fluids must also be consistent with the same standards used in the treatment of drinking water standards. Another surprising result of hydraulic fracturing necessary for natural gas drilling is the potential to create small earthquakes than can both be felt and cause potential damage to surrounding areas and therefore having an impact on citizens in the area. The U.S. Geological Survey states that pumping waste water from hydraulic fracturing back into the sub-layer of earth "causes small earthquakes, but they are almost always too small to be a safety concern" (USGS.gov).  There is also concern about radioactive materials that are made available to the surface during hydraulic fracturing that could have a negative impact on surrounding environments and citizens. Uranium, radium, and high levels of methane are just a few.

Apart from the environmental and economic impacts that the drilling industry must face, one positive effect of the Marcellus Shale formation is the creation of much needed jobs. This is a sustainability ethic that many citizens in the impacted areas can be thankful for, especially in today's economy.

There are many ethical concerns involved in the debate for and against natural gas drilling. The need for clean burning energy to supply and ever increasing population of humans makes drilling a necessary evil. Our sustainability ethics can help to alleviate some of the negative repercussions associated with the technical aspect of the processes. Finding a balance between doing what we need in to do in order to produce the highest amount of output while causing the least amount of damage and destruction to environments and future populations is a complicated and exhaustive battle. Doing the right thing sometimes requires sacrifice, but at what cost?

(MCOR) http://www.marcellus.psu.edu/resources/faq.php

(USGS.gov) http://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/faq/?faqID=357

References:

Energy in Brief (2012)

      http://www.eia.gov/energy_in_brief/renewable_portfolio_standards.cfm  

The first aspect of the series that I found particularily important was the communication of the experts, both among themselves and with outsiders. I say outsiders because this is the best way I can think of describing the two mindsets when it comes to green and sustainable design. You have those knowledgeable about the field and then you have those who might have incorrect assumptions about what "green" building means. There was one part in the video where the speaker was talking about telling his neighbors about his green home to which his neighbor responded, "oh you mean you put solar panels on your roof?" I think this is a common thought among many people. They tend to associate "green building" with solar panels and that's it. But as we can see from the video it is so much more than that. The Willow School in New Jersey is another great example of communication. Offering a learning environment for the students and visitors to the school offers those involved the opportunity to communicate and dicuss the benefits of "green building". I myself was quite surprised to learn how much detail and thought goes into "green building" and now I will definitely take into consideration all aspects of what it means to build a "green" structure in the future.

Analysis of the building green process is a  substantial process. Every part of the construction from foundation to roofing, from landscape, to waste, to location of the structure on the property are taken into consideration and thoroughly investigated. Building a home or other structure has a major impact on the environment and the population. Future costs and sustainability of the structure needs to be thought through and planned accordingly. Comparing alternative methods of construction and alternative building materials are just some of the analytical aspects shown in the video. I am naturally an analytical personality type myself so I can definitely understand and relate to the notion of how much time, thought, and energy goes into planning every detail of a major construction project. The video also mentioned economic analysis of green building. The idea of first cost versus life costs of the building means the initial costs up front might be more than a conventional building but the life costs of the structure will be significantly lower than a conventional building if designed and executed properly.

One of the first things that struck me while watching "Green Building" was the global perspective of building energy efficient homes and buildings. The 40-40-40 rule states that 40% of the worlds energy is used by buildings for lighting, heating etc. Also, buildings and the materials used to create them account for 40% of materials and resources in the entire world. Finally 40% of all waste comes from buildings through either construction or demolition. Those numbers speak for themselves. The global perspective of the ESP program is easily seen in this video. Being environmentally friendly and energy efficient is about more than just saving energy costs and taking care of nature, it's about prolonging our ability to be able survive with the resources we have available to us now and even a  hundred years from now.

The sustainable ethic shown in the video was echoed several times by several of the speakers in the video. Several of the experts stated that technology had gotten us into our current situation and technology will be needed to get us out. We have become so dependent upon energy in the last 50-70 years, that finding ways of being sustainable for future generations is imperative. Being able to create buildings and structures that limit the need for dependency on conventional energy methods is the best thing we can do for ourselves. Using recyclable building materials and sustainable practices and methods will save us money in the long run and offers us a better living environment.

The energy industry knowledge is what is going to drive the ESP program into the future. 10 years ago building green was still new and not much was known about the benefits, but 10 years from now green building will be more widespread and mainstream. Organizations like LEED, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, are pioneering the way in the field of energy and sustainability policy. Providing the knowledge base and skill sets for the future of green building will allow this field to grow and expand. Engineers, project managers, investors, researchers, and scientists working together to create high efficient green buildings for the future allows us as a whole to help correct the mistakes we've made in the past and lessen our impact on global warming and environmental destruction.

I don't think there is a line between where one of these learning outcomes stops and another begins. In order for energy and sustainability policy to work successfully, I think all five of these objectives need to exist together and simultaneously. All people involved in a green building project should be looking behind them and ahead of them at the same time. Thinking about future impacts, costs, and sustainability of the structure are equally important, not one more than the other. And communicating these ideas to all involved and the public is a major part of making this work as well.

 Providing energy is a serious business. We depend on energy now a days for virtually everything. Our dependence on this energy can potentially be devastating if we don't take the necessary precautions and respect it. Solar, Wind, Nuclear, Fossil fuels, and bio-fuels are only a few of the types of energy we need to develop and perfect for our future. Nothing on this planet is infinite or limitless. If I don't go into environmental engineering/management, the idea of sustainability consulting also appeals to me. Helping businesses make the best decisions about both energy production and conservation mean a lot to me. It's amazing the effect that small changes can have. A million small changes adds up one big major change. We just have to start somewhere. Knowledge is power, and with that power comes great responsibility. I'm not sure who said that but it is definitely true.

The ESP program at World Campus has a more real feel to it that other online programs I had experienced and researched. Students interact with instructors and other students in real time and via lectures. It was more about engaged learning and useful practical knowledge. I had seen other programs and experienced other online learning formats that consisted of a list of reading material, some end of the lesson discussion questions, and a 1500 word essay every week for 5 weeks, with little to no instructor feedback or support. This to me isn't online learning, this self taught learning. I want to feel the same connection and challenge I feel sitting in a classroom on campus surrounded by like minded people and learning from an experienced teacher. World Campus is as close to that as I have been able to find.

The ESP instructors are leading experts in the global energy field. The instructors I've had so far have all had experience working in various fields that contribute to their knowledge base and teaching. You don't have an English major teaching math. You someone who used to work for a multitude of energy companies teaching energy and earth science economics. That makes more sense to me that the other. What I really want out of ESP is the ability to make decisions in my job that are based on leading industry standards and so that I can offer alternative view points on prospective design projects. ESP at Penn State is the right choice for me, it offers me the education I want at the convience and time that I want it, and it gives me an upper hand in my career field and future career endeavors.

Still undecided and extremely cautious about making a potentially bad decision I might end up paying for later, I went with my gut and got my Associates of Science in General Science with the intent of transferring to a four year university to finish out the Bachelors degree once I made up my mind what I actually wanted to do. After graduating in the Fall of 2007 with my A.S., I had an opportunity to go to work as a temp/intern at a nuclear fuel fabrication facility. I desperately needed a job between semesters and considered it a great opportunity to build on professional experience.

 I initially was hired as a CAD operator and took electronic ACAD files from engineers and modified and revised them per design requests. Most of the work involved replacing obsolete machines and equipment out on the manufacturing floor with newer more advanced technology, or installing completely new equipment from outside vendors. I gained experience in the corporate world and became exposed to project management, business management, electrical, mechanical and chemical engineering and design and quickly absorbed as much of this information as I could. A little more than a year later I was offered a direct position as an engineering technician, in which I still do CAD work but I also offer design support to engineers and participate in project management to a degree.

Now you may be wondering what any of this has to do with Biology or Architecture, and for a while I found myself asking the same question. After the first 3 months working at Westinghouse, I came to the conclusion that this was too much of an opportunity to leave and return to school (of which is  I STILL wasn't sure what to major in) so I remained at Westinghouse and have been for the last 4 ½ years. I never lost sight of my love for science, nature, or the environment and made my mind up finally. I knew obtaining my bachelors degree was an accomplishment I wanted to pursue, as well as, a requirement for future career goals. I needed to find a major that incorporated my current work field, my future career goals, was something I was interested in personally, and did not compromise my current full-time day job. Energy and Sustainability Policy at Penn State offers me all of these options and more. ESP is about global energy needs, affects of sustainable living practices on the world, and how we can have an effect on the future generations based on the decisions we make today. I am both surprised and happy about how I came to be at Penn State. It was an unexpected turn of events, and definitely not one that I had originally planned on. But I know this is the best choice I could have made!