With hundreds of thousands sickened and harmful emissions damaging our environment, it was clear that action needed to be taken to protect ourselves and our planet.  Under President Obama’s Climate Action Plan, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed a Clean Power Plan on June 2, 2014.  This plan will have many benefits for us and future generations.  On top of being beneficial, the plan is also affordable and reliable.   By 2030, this plan will help to reduce carbon pollution by about 30%.  That’s about 730 million metric tonnes of carbon pollution.

The largest source of carbon dioxide emissions in the United States is power plants.  These power plants are contributing to one-third of all domestic greenhouse gas emission.  The Clean Power Plan is aiming to reduce this number by covering 1,000 fossil fuel fired power plants containing 3,000 units.  To ensure success, the EPA is working with stakeholders and giving states flexibility.  Because different states have different needs, states can choose how they will meet their new goals.  While carbon emissions will be reduced, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and PM 2.5 levels will also be reduced.

Many people, especially children and the elderly, are sickened and even die due to the harmful pollution that contributes to soot and smog.  By cutting this pollution by about 25%, about 2,700-6,600 deaths, 140,000-150,000 asthma attacks, 340-3,300 heart attacks, 2,700-2,800 hospital admissions and 470-000-490,000 missed school and work days missed will be avoided.  Clearly, this will save millions of dollars.  It is estimated that with every dollar invested in this plan, American families will see about $7 in health benefits.

When the Clean Power Plan is fully implemented in 2030, everyone will see and feel the benefits in its entirety.  Children and vulnerable Americans will be protected from pollution related health issues, costly climate and weather disasters will eventually be reduced, electricity bills will be about 8% lower than they would have been, and most importantly the United States and our businesses will be at the front of the global movement to produce and consume energy sustainably and reliably.

For the past couple of classes, we have been building robots. The process of building the robot was relatively easy, however, making the robot do exactly what we wanted it to do was challenging. When we finished building the robot we had to program it to move in a circle. To get the robot to move in the circle we had to set the speed at which the wheels rotated. To get the robot to move in a large circle, the difference in the two speeds had to be small. To get it to move in a large circle, the speeds had to have a bigger difference. The challenge was making the robot travel in a circle with a diameter of two feet. After a few attempts, we got very close to making it travel in a circle that was exactly two feet in diameter. Then we attempted to make the robot travel backwards in the same circle.

Today in class, we compared our measurements of how far the robot traveled with the measurements the computer got. To do this we first had to measure the diameter of the wheel on the robot and covert into meters. We got a measurement of .2 meters and then multiplied that by pi to get the circumference of the wheel. Next, set the robot’s power to 75 and set it to run for one second. We measured the distance the robot traveled in centimeters and got 32cm. The computer got 31.5cm so we knew our percent error wasn’t large. To get the percent error you must divide the difference of your measurement and the computer’s measurement by the average. Our percent error for this one was .5%. We tried it again two more times after adjusting the time and speed. Each time we got a different percent error.  I think the measurement of the circumference might have been slightly off, which might have caused the percent error.

Building this robot and making it move is relevant to sustainability, energy and technology because we made it move without have to use anything that would be harmful to the environment.  Improving on this kind of technology would be beneficial because it could potential reduce pollution that is harming our environment.

The automobile industry is making great strides to increase gas mileage in cars.  With new fuel efficiency standards in place and the rise in fuel costs, it is obvious that the automobile industry had to do something to make cars more efficient.  One way they are increasing the amount of gas a car uses per mile is by producing lighter cars.  To make cars lighter automakers are exploring other materials to use for the car’s body instead of the traditional steel.  These other options include advanced high-strength steel and aluminum.  The high-strength steel is still steel, however, it can weigh up to 35 percent less.  This is because the cooling process of the steel was changed and the steel was made stronger. Making the steel stronger means less steel is needed to make a vehicle.  Aluminum is naturally lighter than steel so building cars made of aluminum would decrease their weight, increasing their gas mileage. Decreasing the weight of the car improves its gas mileage because it takes less fuel to move a lighter car.  (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/to-boost-gas-mileage-automakers-explore-lighter-cars/)

Producing cars with smaller engines is another way gas mileage can be increased.  An issue in the past with fuel efficient cars was that they were less powerful than other cars.  To get people to consider buying these cars, the automobile industry has found a way to increase the power in smaller engines, satisfying fuel efficiency standards as well as customers.  According to the article “Tough Government Gas Mileage Rules Good for Driver, Auto Industry” on www.usnews.com, Ford’s F-150 V-6 “ecoboost” generates more horsepower and torque than a V-8, while providing better gas mileage.

The most talked about way the automobile industry is increasing gas mileage is, of course, the hybrid vehicles.  Hybrids are designed to reduce emissions by combining gasoline engine with an electric motor. Some of the ways hybrids are reducing gas mileage are by having regenerative braking, continuously variable transmissions and having engine shut-offs.  Regenerative braking to capture the heat from friction caused by braking and using it to recharge the car’s batteries.  Continuous variable transmissions allow the car to travel at a consistent speed while shifting gears.  This means the car does not have to change speeds while the gears are shifted which reduces the amount of gas that is burned.  In my opinion, the most interesting aspect of hybrid cars is the engine shut-off.  While a car is idle, the gasoline engine shuts off and is then turned back on upon acceleration.  (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/how-do-hybrid-car-designs-aid-in-fuel-efficiency.htm)  With gas prices rising, fuel efficiency standards getting more strict and people becoming more eco-conscious, the automobile industry is continuing to work on increasing gas mileage on cars.

The article “A Lonely Quest for Facts on Genetically Modified Crops” had a lot information on the debate about the use of genetically modified organisms, or G.M.O.s.  The article talked mostly about the different views of many regarding the safety of using G.M.O.s.  Many feel using G.M.O.s will cause harm to us and the environment, while others argued they would cause no harm and that consuming foods with G.M.O.s was no more dangerous than consuming foods without them.  At first, I thought it was obvious that modifying foods was dangerous and would cause us harm.  Then as I was reading the article and reading about the different views of people I began to question if this was really true.  The sections in the article “Sifting Through the Claims” and “Silencing the Scientists” are the parts that had me questioning the credibility of any claims about G.M.O.s, good or bad.  In the the “Sifting through the claims” section they talk about the rats that were used in testing were rats that would get tumors anyway and that the sample size was too small.  It also talks about the hamsters that lost the ability to reproduce after being on a genetically modified soybean diet and how it was later contradicted.  In “Silencing the Scientists” the issue of the university researchers acting as a “mouthpiece for the G.M.O biotech industry” was brought up because of a $600,000 donation from Monsanto to the university for student scholarships.  This made me think, “What claims should you believe and what should you not believe?”  After reading this article, I think that the use of G.M.O.s could potentially be harmful and until scientists know 100% that using them will not harm humans or the environment, they should not be used.

Welcome to Blogs.cas.suffolk.edu. This is your first post. Edit or delete it under Manage>Posts or make a new one under Write>Posts then start blogging! Be sure to visit the Design tab to choose a new look for your blog as well.

Also, for immediate “how-to’s” visit the Tutorials section, or the Getting Started section.