In class we were taught how to put together a motor vehicle out of lego pieces. I was familiar with putting together and operating a robotic motor vehicle from a few classes I had taken in high school a few years ago.

After putting together the robot, we were instructed to perform different tasks with it, such as rotating the wheels in certain directions, at certain speeds.

We learned how to measure the distance a wheel travels by calculating the circumference of a wheel: pi * diameter. The diameter of my wheel was 5.5, therefore the circumference was 17.3. After converting the circumference into meters, my wheel was .173 meters.

My results after the three power levels were this:

Level 50/1 second:

wheel rotated one time, 360 degrees rotation, .173 meter distance, velocity .173 meters, distance with ruler .22, % error: 23.9%

Level 75/1 second:

wheel turned 1.35, 482 degree wheel rotation, .2317 meter distance, velocity .2317, distance with ruler .26, % error: 11.64%

Level 100/1 second:

wheel turned 2.17, 778 degree rotation, .375 meter distance, velocity .375, distance with ruler .39, % error: 4.38%

Hydrofracking, also known as slick water hydraulic fracturing, is one of the newest developments in natural gas extraction. Companies such as Halliburton Inc., Schlumberger Inc., and Messina Inc. are a few companies that created this process and displayed what it does. (“NOON”).

The process of hydrofracking makes mining for natural gas in dense shale much more economically possible, in comparison to when it was not before. Hydrofracking is much different than the other techniques of natural gas drilling. Hydrofracking uses much more water and uses it’s “slick water” which helps release the gas and it is less damaging because it is not drilling into the site. (“NOON”).

Even though hydrofracking seems like a much better alternative to regular natural gas drilling, it uses up to 6-8 gallons of freshwater per fracking. (“NOON”). After injecting the water and the proppant, there are many chemical-based additives added to make a more timely, efficient, and economic process to the hydrofracking process. This offers many benefits but it also adds risk of water getting polluted by these chemicals.

When hydrofracking is active, it operates 24/7, seven days a week. Mass amounts of toxins, radioactive and liquid waste are produced during the process and are released into the environment afterwards. Regular operations of hydrofracking can adversely impact the environment and public health, such as the public water system and air quality. (Eckel).

This past January, the state of New York declared that hydrofracking could be conducted in their state after the state’s Health Department did many tests. (Hakim). The main concern when deciding whether to allow hydrofracking or not in the state of New York was whether it was a health concern due to the chemicals but fortunately it is not. “By implementing the proposed mitigation measures, the Department expects that human chemical exposures during normal HVHF operations — short for high-volume hydraulic fracturing — will be prevented or reduced below levels of significant health concern.” (Hakim)

Hydrofracking seems to be a bad solution to natural gas drilling because even though it is faster and more efficient, the risks of the public’s health are not worth it and hopefully a better solution will turn up in the future.

References:

Eckel, Sarah. “NATURAL GAS HYDRO-FRACKING IN SHALE.” Citizens Campaign for the Environment. 22 Jan 2013: n. page. Web. 21 Feb. 2013. <http://www.citizenscampaign.org/campaigns/hydro-fracking.asp>.

Hakim, Danny. “Gas Drilling Is Called Safe in New York .” New York Times. 03 Jan 2013: n. page. Web. 21 Feb. 2013. <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/03/nyregion/hydrofracking-safe-says-ny-health-dept-analysis.html>.

“What is Hydrofracking?.” Neighbors of the Onondaga Nation. n.d. n. page. Web. 21 Feb. 2013. <http://www.peacecouncil.net/NOON/hydrofrac/HdryoFrac2.htm>.

Within the next twelve years, the automobile industry is under pressure to raise the fuel economy on their cars or face a fine from the government. “U.S. automakers have until 2025 to raise the fuel economy on their cars and trucks to 54.5 miles per gallon—double the current standard—or face government fines,” says Jeff Green, a writer for Business Week online. This is not going to be an easy challenge for the automobile industry but it will be incredibly beneficial for everyone and it will be a good, new standard to have set for the industry.

Jeff Green believes that the source of this new standard is the Pentagon. The government researchers have been working with the military to compare how their vehicles function and how they can bring this to all U.S. carmakers and make it cheaper. “The military operates in very extreme environments… If we can make these vehicles function under those conditions, we should be able to implement them in commercial applications that are cheaper and very reliable,” says Al Schumacher, assistant associate director of ground vehicle power and mobility at the military’s Tank Automotive Research and Development and Engineering Center. (Green).

These changes in the automobile industry started in 2007 during the Bush administration and Obama continued to raise these standards in 2009. (Newman). While the Republican party is opposed to these changes, everyone else is thrilled about these new standards and all the benefits that will follow. “Without a doubt, the new rules have been a win-win for everybody…It’s a win for consumers, a win for manufacturers, and a win for the environment,” says Jesse Toprak, a car researcher from TrueCar.com. Among a long list of changes, automakers have been coming out with new technology that boost mileage, such as advanced powertrains and transmissions. (Newman).

People have been responding well to the already-started changes that the automobile industry has been making to increase gas mileage, such as smart cars. Six of the 10 best-selling vehicles in America are small cars, and one of the most popular pickup models on the market is a Ford F-Series with a high-mileage, six-cylinder engine. (Vlasic).

The White House has made these regulations and standards high and will not budge on them and luckily the automobile industry and carmakers are cooperating. This is going to be nothing but positive for the economy, financially and environmentally.

References:

Green, Jeff. “Better Gas Mileage, Thanks to the Pentagon.” Business Week. 17 May 2012: n. page. Web. 21 Feb. 2013. <http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-05-17/better-gas-mileage-thanks-to-the-pentagon>.

Newman, Rick. “Tough Government Gas Mileage Rules Good for Drivers, Auto Industry.” US News. 27 Aug 2012: n. page. Web. 21 Feb. 2013. <http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/rick-newman/2012/08/27/tough-government-gas-mileage-rules-good-for-drivers-auto-industry>.

Vlasic, Bill. “Carmakers Back Strict New Rules for Gas Mileage.” New York Times. 28 Jul 2011: n. page. Web. 21 Feb. 2013.

After the destructive and devastating Hurricane Sandy destroyed New York and New Jersey neighborhoods and most of their land, it has been discussed amongst many whether global warming had a part in why this Hurricane occurred and how destructive it was.

Scientist Kevin E. Trenberth, from the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, believes that “human-induced global warming has been raising the overall temperature of the surface ocean, by about one degree Fahrenheit since the 1970s. So global warming very likely contributed a notable fraction of the energy on which the storm thrived — perhaps as much as 10 percent.” (Gillis).

George Lakoff, a professor of linguistics from Berkley College also believes that global warming has a huge effect on Hurricane Sandy occurring. He believes global warming systemically caused Hurricane Sandy. “Yes, global warming systemically caused Hurricane Sandy — and the Midwest droughts and the fires in Colorado and Texas, as well as other extreme weather disasters around the world. Let’s say it out loud, it was causation, systemic causation.” (Lakoff). George continues to explain how systemic causation isn’t as noticed as direct causation, which is why it needs to be understood and paid attention to because it’s effects are just as intense as direct causation. George stated, “Global warming heated the water of the Gulf and Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean, resulting in greatly increased energy and water vapor in the air above the water. When that happens, extremely energetic and wet storms occur more frequently and ferociously. These systemic effects of global warming came together to produce the ferocity and magnitude of Hurricane Sandy.” (Lakoff).

George Lakoff’s observation of this systemic causation of global warming causing Hurricane Sandy is very accurate and makes perfect sense as to why that hurricane ever occurred.

Other sources say that global warming may not have been the main cause of Hurricane Sandy, but due to the climate changes that we have been having from global warming, that led to cause the effects and conditions of Hurricane Sandy to be worse than they normally would have been. (Main).

Sources:

Gillis, Justin. “Did Global Warming Contribute to Hurricane Sandy’s Devastation?.” New York Times. (2012): n. page. Web. 31 Jan. 2013. <http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/did-global-warming-contribute-to-hurricane-sandys-devastation/>.

Lakoff, George. “Global warming systemically caused Hurricane Sandy .” Berkeley Blog. (2012): n. page. Web. 31 Jan. 2013. <http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2012/11/05/global-warming-systemically-caused-hurricane-sandy/>.

Main, Douglas. “Climate Change Partly To Blame For Hurricane Sandy.” Live Science. (2012): n. page. Web. 31 Jan. 2013. <http://www.livescience.com/24566-hurricane-sandy-climate-change.html>.

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.