Archive for April, 2006

The Debut of 85% Ethanol Fuel

Monday, April 10th, 2006

Would this vacation season be the one where you’ll see more people fueling up on E85? Is the ethanol industry ready to meet the demand?

Spring is here! With the warmer weather people are talking of upcoming vacations this year car trips to the Grand Canyon, Disney World, Niagara Falls and other places of interest. There’s another buzz going around: would this vacation season be the one where you’ll see more people fueling up on 85% ethanol fuel at the gas pump station? Is the ethanol industry ready to meet the demand? These are some of the questions we’ll be looking into for this month’s editorial.  

The 85% ethanol (and 15% gasoline) fuel is commonly called E85 and mainly produced from corn in the US although it can just as well be obtained from molasses and sugar cane. Many car manufacturers’ products are compatible with the use of E85; Daimler Chrysler, Ford, General Motors and Nissan are some of them (http://www.e85fuel.com). Cars that can run on E85 are called ‘flexible fuel vehicles’ (FFVs) and regular gas can be used in them as well.

Last year, US President George Bush signed the Energy Policy Act which declares a renewable fuel standard (RFS) to start at 4 billion gallons this year and to grow to 7.5 billion gallons of renewable fuel in 2012 (http://www.ethanolrfa.org/). What do these numbers mean in the larger picture of actual consumption? The US motor gasoline consumption is around 150 billion gallons per year (http://tonto.eia.doe.gov). Ethanol fuel will hence account for only 2.7% of the total gasoline used in the US in 2006.

The US Department of Energy has compared fuel costs on cars run with regular gas and with E85; the latter costs more on an annual basis but greenhouse emissions are lesser with E85. See http://www.fueleconomy.gov for comparisons between cars based on fuel costs, emissions and miles per gallons. For example, the owner of a 6 cylinder, 3.5 L Chevrolet Impala will spend $1620 USD on gasoline every year as compared to a higher expense of $1901 USD on ethanol fuel. Mile per gallon (MPG) obtained using E85 is lower than that achieved with the use of gasoline. However, for the same car, greenhouse gas emission, as carbon di oxide, is 7.4 tons/year with gasoline, and 5.9 tons/year with E85. Ethanol, like other alternate fuels, will not contain methyl tert butyl ether (MTBE), a carcinogenic fuel additive now banned in several states of the US. Almost all states in the US have ethanol gas stations but the same cannot be said for other countries. The high costs of producing and transporting ethanol fuel as well as the need of specialized dispensing equipment result in increased prices per gallon at the consumer’s end. These factors will impact the extent of E85 fuel use.

On the other hand, besides benefits to the environment, local production of ethanol fuel is expected to reduce the dependence on fuel imports from other countries, provide jobs and strengthen rural economies (http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca). It may very well be the next decade before technological advances allow E85 to achieve the same MPG and cost the same as regular gasoline. Switching over to E85 will then be easier on consumers who would expect the same if not better service from the fuel they use.

Sincerely,
Chitra Gowda, Editor

Original post by Moderator

Case Study: Health & Safety Plan Development

Wednesday, April 5th, 2006

Author discusses the development of a health and safety plan for a industry handling hazardous material. Review by Archana Durai.

The proposed site for investigation is a pesticide plant belonging to a multinational organization founded in 1980. The plant spans in 50 acres in area, situated in an industrial site 25 miles from urban environment. The plant was used to manufacture pesticides and also served as a distribution hub. Operations at site included manufacture of pesticides, storage of chemicals and repackaging of chemicals from railcars and drums. The waste generated in the process was disposed in discharge ponds.

On 3 December 1984, one of the storage containers leaked letting out a thick cloud containing a mixture of methyl isocyanate (MIC) (toxic gas, lethal, highly irritant), chloroform, volatile organic carbon (VOC) and hydrochloric acid (HCl). The MIC, an intermediate product used to make carbaryl, wafted through the atmosphere and killed 8000 people, affecting hundred thousand more – mostly through inhalation & skin contact. Due to this, the plant was shut down and the site was placed under national priority list (NPL) – a published list of hazardous waste sites.

A Government agency was interested in determining the level of contamination and needed an investigation plan to be done to determine the level of contamination at the site. The activity of formulating an investigation plan was given to a private contract.

The purpose of the contract was to provide level of impact caused by the leakage of gases on the environment (air, water and soil), the impact caused by the disposal of chemical to the lagoons (ground water contamination) and measures to be taken to avoid the potential harm to surrounding environment.

The work of this contract includes labor and equipment requirement for conducting the required air monitoring, ground water sampling, well monitoring, and soil sampling.

Download Full PDF »

Original post by Moderator

Case Study: Health & Safety Plan Development

Wednesday, April 5th, 2006

Author discusses the development of a health and safety plan for a industry handling hazardous material. Review by Archana Durai.

The proposed site for investigation is a pesticide plant belonging to a multinational organization founded in 1980. The plant spans in 50 acres in area, situated in an industrial site 25 miles from urban environment. The plant was used to manufacture pesticides and also served as a distribution hub. Operations at site included manufacture of pesticides, storage of chemicals and repackaging of chemicals from railcars and drums. The waste generated in the process was disposed in discharge ponds.

On 3 December 1984, one of the storage containers leaked letting out a thick cloud containing a mixture of methyl isocyanate (MIC) (toxic gas, lethal, highly irritant), chloroform, volatile organic carbon (VOC) and hydrochloric acid (HCl). The MIC, an intermediate product used to make carbaryl, wafted through the atmosphere and killed 8000 people, affecting hundred thousand more – mostly through inhalation & skin contact. Due to this, the plant was shut down and the site was placed under national priority list (NPL) – a published list of hazardous waste sites.

A Government agency was interested in determining the level of contamination and needed an investigation plan to be done to determine the level of contamination at the site. The activity of formulating an investigation plan was given to a private contract.

The purpose of the contract was to provide level of impact caused by the leakage of gases on the environment (air, water and soil), the impact caused by the disposal of chemical to the lagoons (ground water contamination) and measures to be taken to avoid the potential harm to surrounding environment.

The work of this contract includes labor and equipment requirement for conducting the required air monitoring, ground water sampling, well monitoring, and soil sampling.

Download Full PDF »

Original post by Moderator