Đang chuẩn bị nút TẢI XUỐNG, xin hãy chờ
Tải xuống
Hydraulic fracturing, like any deep drilling operation, is subject to the risk of leaks and spills that can cause areas to be contaminated by hazardous waste. In 1980, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) provided for the clean-up of abandoned hazardous waste and established liability to those who released the wastes to pay for clean-up [18]. Yet oil and gas exploration is exempt from clean-up of accidental spills, leaks, and problems from underground injection via the Energy Policy Act of 2005 [19]. Exploration and production companies cannot be held liable for damages under CERCLA, nor may they. | REVIEW www.rsc.org ees Energy Environmental Science Review of solutions to global warming air pollution and energy securityf Mark Z. Jacobson Received 12th June 2008 Accepted 31st October 2008 First published as an Advance Article on the web 1st December 2008 DOI 10.1039 b809990c This paper reviews and ranks major proposed energy-related solutions to global warming air pollution mortality and energy security while considering other impacts of the proposed solutions such as on water supply land use wildlife resource availability thermal pollution water chemical pollution nuclear proliferation and undernutrition. Nine electric power sources and two liquid fuel options are considered. The electricity sources include solar-photovoltaics PV concentrated solar power CSP wind geothermal hydroelectric wave tidal nuclear and coal with carbon capture and storage CCS technology. The liquid fuel options include corn-ethanol E85 and cellulosic-E85. To place the electric and liquid fuel sources on an equal footing we examine their comparative abilities to address the problems mentioned by powering new-technology vehicles including battery-electric vehicles BEVs hydrogen fuel cell vehicles HFCVs and flex-fuel vehicles run on E85. Twelve combinations of energy source-vehicle type are considered. Upon ranking and weighting each combination with respect to each of 11 impact categories four clear divisions of ranking or tiers emerge. Tier 1 highest-ranked includes wind-BEVs and wind-HFCVs. Tier 2 includes CSP-BEVs geothermal-BEVs PV-BEVs tidal-BEVs and wave-BEVs. Tier 3 includes hydro-BEVs nuclear-BEVs and CCS-BEVs. Tier 4 includes corn- and cellulosic-E85. Wind-BEVs ranked first in seven out of 11 categories including the two most important mortality and climate damage reduction. Although HFCVs are much less efficient than BEVs wind-HFCVs are still very clean and were ranked second among all combinations. Tier 2 options provide significant benefits and are recommended. Tier 3 .
