The volcano eruption interferes with airplane travel demonstrating part of our future

On March 20, 2010 and then on April 14, the Eyjafjallajokull Volcano in Iceland erupted. This led to widespread disruption of air travel in Europe from 15 April, grounding planes and affecting the travel plans of millions of passengers worldwide. What I'm finding interesting isn't the direct effect this eruption has put on airlines and airline travelers, but what it demonstrates about our future as oil supplies tighten.

The eruption's aftermath affected travel around the world, with air space across more than 20 European countries remaining largely closed until April 20. The volcano erupts on a very long time scale, with the last eruption lasting (on and off) for over a year between 1821 and 1823. Since previous eruptions of Eyjafjallajökull have been followed by eruptions at its larger neighbour, Katla, there is some concern for a larger eruption to occur very soon. The Icelandic Meteorological Office published a study last December pointing to a rise in seismic activity that obviously was a precursor to this eruption.

The news is full of reports of economic trouble being faced by airlines, and by the inconvenience to travelers. The airlines problem is that, being unable to conduct flights, they cannot earn revenue, while at the same time they're spending money just from airplane ownership and other operations. As a result there are calls for an airline bailout. And of course the traveler inconvenience makes for heart wrenching stories with people struggling to find a way to get home from their holiday trip.

What this demonstrates is the clinging to the way things are. The situation is a disruption of normalcy, and the stories are entirely about the effort to return to normal. The airlines are returning back to business as usual, and the travelers are breathing a sigh of relief that normal travel routines will resume.

This specific instance is obviously a temporary disruption. Well, "temporary" in this case is determined by the length of the eruption and the actual effect of the airborn ash on airplanes. Air travel was grounded because of policies stemming from experience that turbine powered jet airplanes, when exposed to silicate ash from volcanoes, experience engine failure which would tend to cause an airplane crash. In any case, as a temporary disruption it isn't worth much pondering except for the discussion over better determination of the how much ash it takes to actually ground all air travel.

What I think it demonstrates though is the future when rising oil prices, due to depletion of oil production, will be a long term disruption of airlines functioning as business entities. One reason airplanes have become the dominant form of world travel, and global airplane travel has caused globalization, is due to the cheap oil that's fueled this great orgy of high energy living.

As oil prices rise (due to peak oil) airline travel will be less affordable causing a decline in travel. When that occurs airline companies will be facing a similar financial problem to the one they face today, declining revenue and a fleet of expensive airplanes on the tarmac demanding maintenance, insurance, and other costs. Unlike today, in that future it won't be a temporary disruption, the supply of oil based fuels will simply rise, and rise, and rise even more, with no end in sight.

Today's struggle to return to normalcy will seem like a minor blip in a couple months. It demonstrates that the airline executives and travelers will struggle for normalcy before giving up on airline travel. It demonstrates that in our future there will be an oil price shock that drives the airlines out of business, and there will be worldwide denial over the issue, and a worldwide struggle to return to the normalcy we experience today.

Links: 

Ash Turns Routine Flights Into Overland Odysseys

Links: 

2010 eruptions of Eyjafjallajökull

Links: 

Airlines Urge State Aid After Industry Chaos

Links: 

In Ash’s Wake, E.U. to Hasten Plan to Merge Airspace

A study on the real cost of food

The real cost of a bag of salad: You pay 99p. Africa pays 50 litres of fresh water goes into the real cost of cheap groceries shipped from halfway around the world. More and more every product, from groceries on upward, is shipped around a global free market. The high lord muckety mucks who make all the decisions seem to think free trade is the solution to all economic problems. But what of other problems it creates?

In this specific case the article discusses the issue of groceries. For example, a bag of lettuce, grown halfway across the world, and shipped to your grocery store, and hopefully you'll remember to eat it before it rots. Maybe that lettuce is grown, as the article suggests, in a farming region where water is a scarce commodity, like Kenya. It may cost you a dollar to buy that bag of lettuce, but it costs the farmer 50 liters of water, and then there's the transportation and preparation costs and resources expenditures.

The article focusses primarily on water resources. One of the growing worldwide problems is maintaining water supplies for everything people are doing. But one should remember as you look at the article, hand in hand with water supply issues is oil and energy supply problems.

For example ... In Egypt, vegetables have become such an important export that the government has threatened military action against any country upstream that dams the Nile or its tributaries. Maintaining water supply threatens world peace.

For example ... Almost everybody in Europe who has eaten Kenyan beans or Kenyan strawberries or gazed at Kenyan roses has bought Naivasha water. It is sucking the lake dry. Naivasha is a lake in Kenya that's beeing overutilized to provide water for a range of uses. Water abuse is causing environmental degradation.

Transport and environment: facing a dilemma

The European Environment Agency (part of the EU) has published a study about transportaion, pollution, and economics titled Transport and environment: facing a dilemma.

Green Car Congress has a summary: European Environment Agency Report on the Transportation Dilemma

It goes into a 23% increase in greenhouse emissions from transportation since 1990, in Europe. Those increases have largely offset decreases in greenhouse emissions from other sectors. Since that puts at risk meeting the Kyoto meeting goals on greenhouse emissions reduction, they're
looking at several angles of transportation and reduction of emissions in that sector.

They give these key messages:

Freight transport volumes grow with no clear signs of decoupling from GDP

More goods are transported farther and more frequently. This results in increased CO2 emissions and slows the decline in air pollutant emissions. Relative decoupling of growth in freight volumes from economic growth has only been achieved in the EU-10, where the growth in GDP exceeds the high growth in transport volume.

Passenger transport volumes have paralleled economic growth

Passenger transport volumes have grown in most Member States. Relative decoupling has been achieved in only five new EU Member States. It is, however, likely that with time development in the EU-10 will parallel the older ones.

Greenhouse gas emissions from transport are growing

Transport's energy consumption (and their emission of greenhouse gases) are increasing steadily because transport volumes are growing faster than the energy efficiency of different means of transport. The increase in greenhouse gas emissions from transport threatens European progress towards its Kyoto targets. Therefore, additional policy initiatives and instruments are needed.

Harmful emissions decline, but air quality problems require continued attention

Transport, especially road transport, is becoming cleaner because of increasingly strict emission standards for the different transport modes. Nevertheless, air quality in cities does not yet meet the limit values set by European regulation and still has a major negative impact on human health.

Road freight continues to gain market share

Road transport has gained a greater and rising share of the freight market. This development constitutes a move farther away from the EU objective of stabilising the share at its 1998 level. At present, there are policy initiatives aimed at a modal shift for long-distance and large-scale transport.

Air passenger transport grows, while the share of road and rail remain constant

Changing the modal split towards rail transport and away from passenger cars is not being achieved. There are still no signs of this common transport policy goal being met. Both modes are growing at the same rate as total passenger transport volume. In addition, the share of aviation is increasing whereas the share of bus and coach is decreasing.

Developments in fuels contribute to emission reductions

All countries where data are currently available have met the 2005 limit value for low sulphur content in road transport fuels. The remaining ones are expected to hit their targets as well. In addition, some countries have already achieved the 2009 target on zero sulphur fuels. Moreover, steps towards sulphur reduction are being taken in other modes. However, much work remains to be done.

The share of biofuels is increasing, although currently reported shares are below the targets of the biofuels directive.

Car occupancy and lorry load factors decline in countries for which data are available

There are few data available on occupancy rates and load factors. Data for those countries show average occupancy rates for passenger cars are lower than a decade ago. Growing car ownership, the decreasing average size of households and disperse spatial patterns are the main causes for low occupancy rates. The limited data available also show a trend towards poorer use of heavy goods vehicle capacity. Apparently, the higher transport costs, resulting from lower utilisation, are exceeded by benefits such as reduced production costs. A reverse of these market trends could reduce environmental impact.

New technology can cut emissions and fuel consumption, but more effort is needed to achieve CO2 targets

New engine and vehicle technologies have entered the market, reducing pollutant emissions and improving fuel efficiency. Although the fuel efficiency of passenger cars has improved in recent years, more effort is required from car manufacturers to meet the goals of the voluntary CO2 commitment. Additional effort will be required by all stakeholders to bring the Community's objective of 120 g of CO2/km within reach.

Price structures are increasingly aligned with and yet well below external costs level

There are a number of initiatives to align price structures better with the external impact of transport. However, transport prices are generally well below the marginal social cost level. This is resulting in over-consumption of transport. Further improvement of transport pricing is an opportunity to better balance the benefits and negative impacts of transport.

Beluga Shipping to Try “Wind Hybrid” Kite Propulsion Assist for Cargo Vessel

Here's an interesting idea:  Attach a large kite to a cargo vessel, using the kite similarly to a sail.  It will decrease the fuel required to move the ship.  With decreased fuel you have decreased pollution, especially important as ocean ships tend to use the dirtiest of diesel fuel available.

Now, why use a kite?  Why not use a regular sail?  First, this system can be retrofitted onto existing ships very easily.  Second, there's a technical advantage in that a ship using a kite does not "heel" in heavy wind, keeping the ship and crew safer.

See: Beluga Shipping to Try “Wind Hybrid” Kite Propulsion Assist for Cargo Vessel

Company: Skysails

Suzuki to Bring Subcompact Swift to North America

Suzuki to Bring Subcompact Swift to North America: The idea is to capitalize on the interest in high gas mileage vehicles. What with the high gas prices last year, and that this year will continue with high gas prices, the American Public will certainly be primed for a vehicle like this. The specs quited are impressive, such as a 39mpg fuel economy for the gas version, and 51mpg for diesel.

EV World: Five Chinese Cities Test Clean Hythane Fuel in Buses

This story: Five Chinese Cities Test Clean Hythane Fuel in Buses (evworld.com, Jan 3, 2006) discusses how Hythane has an agreement with five cities in China to test their fuel in city buses. They're getting ready for the 2008 Olympics to be held in China. What's Hythane? That's a good question, because this is the first I've heard of them, but the answer is very interesting.

Hythane (hythane.com) makes a fuel by adding hydrogen to natural gas. They explain it best:

Hydrogen and methane are complimentary vehicle fuels in many ways. Methane has a relatively narrow flammability range that limits the fuel efficiency and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) emissions improvements that are possible at lean air/fuel ratios. The addition of even a small amount of hydrogen, however, extends the lean flammability range significantly. Methane has a slow flame speed, especially in lean air/fuel mixtures, while hydrogen has a flame speed about 8 times faster. Methane is a fairly stable molecule that can be difficult to ignite, but hydrogen has an ignition energy requirement about 25 times lower than methane. Finally, methane can be difficult to completely combust in the engine or catalyze in exhaust aftertreatment converters. In contrast, hydrogen is a powerful combustion stimulant for accelerating the methane combustion within an engine, and hydrogen is also a powerful reducing agent for efficient catalysis at lower exhaust temperatures.

In other words it makes natural gas a better fuel. Hmmm...

Seems to me this gives an interesting adoption advantage over other systems. A battery EV or a fuel cell vehicle both require a wholesale switchover. It's hard to simply make a few changes to an existing vehicle to turn it into a battery EV or fuel cell EV.

On the other hand, vehicles running on compressed natural gas (CNG) are common. And a gasoline engine is very similar to the one which run's CNG. And finally it would allow reuse of the infrastructure that provides gasoline.

End of life automobile recycling

What happens to your car when it's done, finished, and no longer in the world? Does it just go into a landfill? What about all the valuable materials in the car?

The first step is a junk yard where any salvageable parts are removed. My father used to own a junk yard, and once enough parts were removed the bulk of the car was sent to a scrap yard. At the scrap yard the cars were crushed and melted for their metal.

But what about all the plastics and foams and cloths and whatnot in modern cars? What happens to them?

Agreement Will Reduce Auto Shredder Waste in Europe: An agreement between Argonne National Labs and a company in Belgium to set up a plant that can process and recycle the mix of foams and plastics that would otherwise be "scrap" left over from shredding automobiles. Yup, this has the hallmarks of yet another technology invented in America but capitalized upon by foreigners. All because our government leaders have their hands so deeply in Industry's hands that they can't do the right thing.

Argonne and Industry to Tackle End-of-Life Vehicle Recycling: Well, there is hope. This news release talks of cooperation with U.S. industry. And since it is cost effective maybe it will actually be deployed. Here's hoping ;-)

Vehicle Recycling Partnership Plant: That's because Argonne has this facility for automobile recycling. Presumably it's a pilot plant and they don't mean to operate it commercially.

This page:

Recovering Usable Plastics from Automotive Scrap on Argonne's site has more details.