What really happens to the environment when you drive?
This week I want to talk about the negative externalities of motor vehicles. I will not point fingers at Isaac Newton for discovering laws of motion, nor will I blame the engineers and inventors who discovered that fuel carries energy that is very practical for transport. However, because evolution is all about adapting to surroundings it is worth taking a look at the damage and solutions that have stemmed from burning fossil fuels.
Author William Black of Sustainable Transportation and Solutions has considered the policies, prevention costs, and externalities that factor into the impact that motor vehicles have on the environment. I will focus on two negatives of automobile travel: environmental degradation and negative impacts on public health.
Let’s start by taking a look at air quality and the ‘urban ozone’ mentioned in The Full Cost of Transportation, Sustainable Transportation and Solutions. The emissions that come from our gasoline powered vehicles include nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and particulate matter. These cause a plethora of ailments to the human body. Not only that, they also create the urban ozone which perpetuates these environmental and health issues. The urban ozone is largely due to motor vehicles. This ozone is formed by a combination of hydrocarbons and nitrous oxides in the presence of sunlight. The ozone we commonly know is high in the air and oxygen rich. However, another level of ozone is created in our atmosphere from vehicle exhaust and other fossil fuel combustion, which forms ozone through chemical reactions. The concentration of ozone generated from emissions has increased in concentration somewhere between 100-200 percent since the industrial revolution (The Ozone We Breath). Ozone concentration at ground level can also stress plants and cause drought, deteriorate electronics, rubber, plastic, paint, and fabric (The Ozone We Breath).
The next two forms of pollution are acid rain and stratospheric ozone depletion. When the nitric acids and sulfuric acids from our cars become airborne, air currents rise and mix with water and oxygen and acid rain is created. The rain goes into the soils and makes them even more acidic. The impacts are vast and includes huge affects on the aquatic environment like reduced fish population, it damages forests, causes public health problems (notably respiratory), damages property and architecture, and corrosion. It has been found by scientists that burning of fossil fuels is the main cause (gsu.edu). So why isn't this cost really considered in policies?
The last point I'll touch on is stratospheric ozone depletion from transportation. We are protected by the ozone layer that decreases incoming ultraviolet solar radiation. It is understood by now that there is a hole developing in the ozone layer over the southern polar region caused by numerous forms of emissions, notably CFC's (chlorofluorocarbons) which cars are actually not majorly responsible for producing. It is difficult to determine how responsible the transportation sector is for this, but it is important to consider going into the future.
In conclusion, William Black has suggested that transportation plays a huge role in air pollution, yet it is not yet heavily focused on as a cost in the transportation sector. Perhaps alternative energy will be a solution we focus on.
Question time: What policies are already in place to reduce emissions? What policies would you like to see proposed to protect our environment and our health?
Written by Lacey Clark
Edited by Sachi Arakawa
Citations
Black, W. The Full Costs of Transportation. In Sustainable Transportation and Solutions. 89-116.
Other sources include: EPA.GOV, The Ozone We Breath from NASA.GOV, http://www2.gsu.edu/~mstnrhx/EnviroBio%20Projects/AcidRain/causes.html, and class discussions.
This is such a good point -- vehicle emissions have become almost entirely connected to climate change in public policy discussions (for good reason!), but we often lose track of their more immediate consequences (clean air, ozone health, etc). There are serious public health issues associated with motor vehicles in cities, and we almost never discuss the full costs of those externalities. In other industries, we often fine polluters and others that negatively impact public health. Although we set caps on vehicle emissions, we don't force polluters (in this case, drivers) to bear any of the costs associated with their contribution to dirty air (aside from the cost of emissions inspections). With the centrality of motor vehicles to our transportation system and way of life, policymakers often accept their externalities rather than confront the hard choices to improve public health. This not only applies to air quality, but also the 35k-40k people that are killed in motor vehicle crash every year.
ReplyDeleteVery interesting post! In response to your question, a policy that I would like to see in place is a requirement for manufacturers of hybrid and electric cars (e.g. Toyota and Nissan) to have to pay for carbon offset for the energy it takes to create the car batteries. Unfortunately, producing the battery alone emits a lot of carbon, so these types of cars are not as environmentally-friendly as they seem. I would hope that the money for this offset would not just be made by the car buyers.
ReplyDelete