SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Discussion around limiting climate change primarily focusses on whether the best results can be gained by individuals changing how they act, or governments introducing new legislation.
Now though, University of Leeds academics Dr Rob Lawlor and Dr Helen Morley from the Inter-Disciplinary Ethics Applied Centre suggest engineering professionals could also play a pivotal role, and could provide a co-ordinated response helping to mitigate climate change.
Writing in the journal Science and Engineering Ethics, they say engineering professional institutions could take a stand in tackling climate change by developing a declaration imposing restrictions and requirements on members.
"A strong and coordinated action by the engineering profession could itself make a significant difference in how we respond to climate change," they said.
"We know many engineers and firms make great efforts to be as environmentally friendly as possible, and research is carried out and supported by the sector to help reduce its impact on the world. We're suggesting that concerted action could improve this process further."
Quoting 2014 research by Richard Heede from the Climate Accountability Institute, they say nearly two-thirds of historic carbon dioxide and methane emissions could be attributed to crude oil and natural gas producers, coal extractors, and cement producers. These are industries typically enabled by the engineering profession.
They're looking at you, VW engineers.
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Sunday March 19 2017, @02:37PM (2 children)
Wasn't sure whether to respond here or above, but this thread has gone a bit further down the line, although at a bit of a tangent.
> I can't tell you how I know, but this is factually incorrect. So evidently you do not know whereof thou speaks.
Right, so "somehow" you just know it isn't. If this was a religion I could understand that as the concept of "faith", but I can't accept that here. While I am not a VW employee I have talked to those who are, and they told me those were the two options available in some reasonable time frame and cost. However this is in Europe, maybe VW USA has other plans.
> A couple things about this discussion you should look into. NOx is not particulate.
Just to clarify, I am well aware of the fact it isn't.
> What is it?
http://www.alentecinc.com/papers/NOx/The%20formation%20of%20NOx_files/The%20formation%20of%20NOx.htm [alentecinc.com]
> Second, what kinds of particulates do diesel engines produce, and how?
Sooty ones, carbon deposits primarily afaik. I guess you can see it as sequestering carbon in its particulate filter as you put it, along with coating the rest of the engine in soot.
> third, familiarize yourself with the physics and chemistry of diesels, especially after that doozy about "lean burn" leaving residues of "incomplete combustion", it is the exact opposite, and it is the opposite of the particulate problem,
Well, I was the one who said that, so to respond:
"However, the lean-burning nature of diesel engines and the high temperatures and pressures of the combustion process result in significant production of gaseous nitrogen oxides (NOx), an air pollutant that constitutes a unique challenge with regard to their reduction." -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_exhaust [wikipedia.org]
"NOx production is highest (B) at fuel-to-air combustion ratios of 5–7% O2 (25–45% excess air)." -- http://www.alentecinc.com/papers/NOx/The%20formation%20of%20NOx_files/The%20formation%20of%20NOx.htm [alentecinc.com]
Says right there. Lean burn does result in higher generation of NOx emissions. I am not sure if Diesels have higher combustion temps than petrols. Just that they have a higher CR due to using compression ignition (I suspect they would, but I haven't looked that closely).
Is particulate a problem? I thought the VW scandal was primarily about NOx emissions. Particulates from Diesel engines don't travel far, and are supposed to be filtered out by the filters.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Sunday March 19 2017, @07:18PM (1 child)
Looking back, you were not wrong, just unclear, Unixnut.
Well, I was the one who said that, so to respond:
"However, the lean-burning nature of diesel engines and the high temperatures and pressures of the combustion process result in significant production of gaseous nitrogen oxides (NOx), an air pollutant that constitutes a unique challenge with regard to their reduction." -- " rel="url2html-23525">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_exhaust
Yep, lean burn is the benefit, and the curse.
"NOx production is highest (B) at fuel-to-air combustion ratios of 5–7% O2 (25–45% excess air)." -- http://www.alentecinc.com/papers/NOx/The%20formation%20of%20NOx_files/The%20formation%20of%20NOx.htm [alentecinc.com]
Says right there. Lean burn does result in higher generation of NOx emissions. I am not sure if Diesels have higher combustion temps than petrols. Just that they have a higher CR due to using compression ignition (I suspect they would, but I haven't looked that closely).
Well, you seem to have a better grasp than some ACs here! But my nitpick was with your use of the term "incomplete combustion" by which I assumed you meant unburned or incompletely burned fuel. This is what typically produces particulates, namely, soot. (And this is "sequestered" even if it goes out the stack, ain't CO2, for sure!) But now I see that what you meant was incomplete combustion of the oxygen! Now that is what a lean burn is! Lean on fuel, excess O2. So what happens in that diesel engine cylinder at those high pressures and temps, when all the hydrocarbon is gone? We burn the air itself. Nitrogen burning! So you are right, Unixnut.
Now just think if all these ethical engineers, the ones who refuse to work for the Empire on Death Stars and such, could come up with an engine that could just run on air, an internal oxygenation process. We could call it, "breathing"!
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Tuesday March 21 2017, @10:58AM
It is quite alright. Yes I meant that for a volume of air, not all the Oxygen is consumed. My apologies for the miscommunication.
English is not my first language, and I do have situations like this where I don't use the correct terminology or otherwise say things in a way that can be misunderstood.
> Now just think if all these ethical engineers, the ones who refuse to work for the Empire on Death Stars and such, could come up with an engine that could just run on air, an internal oxygenation process. We could call it, "breathing"!
How does that work? Biology is an even weaker suit for me compared to engines, but we breathe in Oxygen, we do some oxidation reaction with fuel from food, and we expel CO2. It sounds just like when you burn fuel in an engine, just that an engine produces a lot more heat, and a lot more power, than we do.