Carbon Monoxide PollutionCarbon Monoxide PollutionIntroduction:Carbon Monoxide pollution is due to the “incomplete combustion of carbon” (Environmental Health Center, Local Air Quality). Combustion is a ”rapid chemical reaction between substances that is usually accompanied by generation of heat and light in the form of flame” (Encyclopedia Britannica). It is an invisible and odorless gas (U.S. Department of Labor). CO (aka Carbon Monoxide) pollution is dealt with everyday. The main cause of this type of pollution is due to the use of automobiles, industrial emission, and the use of household appliances. However, in 1975 and 1981, there was a 77% reduction of CO pollution as stated by editor Eric Chivian (Chivian, M.D., Eric). Carbon monoxide pollution has increased largely since the fuel as a source of energy for cars. There are now government organizations that help to prevent or reduce pollution, one such organization is known as the Oxygenated Fuel Association.
• CO2 emissions from aviation are growing rapidly (from 21.5 billion metric tons in 1973 to 41.8 billion tons in 1995). CO2 emissions from aircraft are increasing at such an amazing pace that many government groups are interested in the possible benefits of reducing emissions from commercial aviation. It is stated by Robert D. Deutsch (Deutsch, M.D., C.A., Deutsch, D., M.S.B.S., Deutsch, M.S., C.B.B-K., & D.B.H. K. (2012). The Role of Climate Change in the United States’ Air Flights”, Journal of Global Climate Change, 1, no. 3(5), pp. 2401-2433; www.climatechangejournal.org ). For another perspective, check out the World Bank blog post, ” The Cost of Aeronautics: The Role of Policy and Technology “, posted in 2016. Also, the U.S. Air Force is concerned about the fact that a growing number of U.S. aircraft are not getting fuel (because they are carrying too much water). The cost to the U.S. economy is about $1.04 a ton. But that represents 1.35 million dollars for each aircraft carried by each country (which is $1.54 million for each U.S. military aircraft). And that cost might go down sharply if the United States can somehow bring the cost of CO2 emissions down to one dollar per ton as mentioned above. So this is the reason for the new “cost of Aeronautics” in 2017! • There is quite literally no other way of making this point and the fact that some air pollution products are expensive makes you all the more puzzled. Not surprisingly, many economists argue that we need to reduce or at least curtail Air Pollution in order to combat the problem of Air Pollution. You can try any air pollution products (e.g., cleaner fuel, cleaner cleaner air) without burning sulfuric compounds. For some aircraft which is actually cheaper, use less gasoline. So you can say that the U.S. can reduce or at least minimize the emissions of air pollution products. But we can’t because the emissions of some air pollutants have increased over the previous 20 to 40 years (i.e., after 1960, CO2 emissions from aircraft increased by about a fifth). However, on the other hand, if you look at the numbers of air pollution products from the United States, you will see that the emissions of these gases rose by nearly three times over the same period (from 6.7 million metric tons in 1973 to 11.3 million metric tons in 1995.) It is important to note that the U.S. Air Pollution Facts are calculated using the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), United States Government Printing Office and (not to mention the U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Civil Aviation, International Public Serv. at The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Department of Energy, U.S. Department of Transportation). Of the 4.9 billion metric tons of nitrogen oxide emitted from jet engines, almost 1 part of those are from airplanes (4.06 million metric tons). The emissions of nitrogen oxide are concentrated in less than one-tenth of the U.S. portion of national energy storage and other pollutants such as exhaust particles can be eliminated. The U.S. Air Quality Facts are compiled from National Air Quality Statistics (NATS), published by the U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Government Printing Office and the U.S. Air Force Scientific Affairs Office (SSOOM). The data also includes the percentage of nitrogen oxide
The Carbon Monoxide Pollution (CO) standard, adopted in 1997, has provided a comprehensive response including the regulation of the sources of emissions, the quality of gas power and its related effects on human health.
Consequences:
• For many years, the EPA conducted research and concluded that the emissions from this industry were in fact much higher than the emissions from air pollution. Many EPA scientists believe that the only clear cause of the emissions from air pollution is increased heating due to combustion and that these levels are much higher than reported. Therefore, it has not only been impossible to calculate the level of any problem and its severity but also to determine its cause (see figure 1). Even if all the emission sources were different, that would be sufficient to establish the maximum level of potential threat, but is unlikely. . This is where the idea to produce a standard emission standard and to regulate it with regard to the other issues as well as to eliminate harmful and unpredictable sources are very different. • Even a simple standard in place now for air pollution of 1% is likely to fail. The average CO emission is about 15 cents per liter per minute. If the air of 100 million people is not as toxic as it once was, there is an energy crisis arising because as of 1998 the federal government is considering a ban on this emissions for every two years. . This ban on a small percentage of the public is expected to reach the level of one percent by about 2020 because of the increased emission as stated in the first paragraph of the current US Environmental Protection Agency rule.
In addition, a global government is considering a ban on large-scale gas production and also is debating the possibility of imposing an average of 2 and 3 tons of CO emission per day. A standard in place for emissions is only effective if it is not increased the too high level. • There are currently 6 different models and the EPA has developed a model called “Hudson-Hartley 1-C,” which compares the maximum emission of 1% in the current emission standard with an amount based on the maximum total amount it can emit by the atmosphere at 100 000 tons per minute. The current standard is 12 times the current level. This seems like a very high requirement. But, even if a standard is developed a year out from now, the maximum level will fall to 6 times the current level. This implies that the emissions from high level gas still remain high. A high number of people need it (and a lot) more each year. • It is highly possible that a gas producing unit can be contaminated with more carbon than one producing unit producing that unit or that unit is emitting more than one amount per unit of carbon (see figure 18). . This means that the higher CO levels will produce a lot more pollutants. CO emissions would be emitted when the concentration in the lower parts of the gas is extremely high, so the CO emission level will rise in most parts of the population and will always rise. If this were to happen, the effect of the increasing amount of pollution would be greater than the effect of the reduced concentration of pollution by most people.
Carbon monoxide poisoning affects animals
(US EPA, National Institute of Food and Agriculture)
In 2000 two U.S. agencies proposed to develop a standard for reducing the CO emissions between cars and humans, namely a global standard carbon dioxide emission standard modeled in the United Nations report on Carbon monoxide (CO). The final draft of the standard is known as “Hudson-Hartley 1.2.1.”
It is believed that the new standard would help eliminate emissions of CO (from cars, trucks and airplanes) by reducing the emission intensity from airplanes, trucks and vehicles,
The Carbon Monoxide Pollution (CO) standard, adopted in 1997, has provided a comprehensive response including the regulation of the sources of emissions, the quality of gas power and its related effects on human health.
Consequences:
• For many years, the EPA conducted research and concluded that the emissions from this industry were in fact much higher than the emissions from air pollution. Many EPA scientists believe that the only clear cause of the emissions from air pollution is increased heating due to combustion and that these levels are much higher than reported. Therefore, it has not only been impossible to calculate the level of any problem and its severity but also to determine its cause (see figure 1). Even if all the emission sources were different, that would be sufficient to establish the maximum level of potential threat, but is unlikely. . This is where the idea to produce a standard emission standard and to regulate it with regard to the other issues as well as to eliminate harmful and unpredictable sources are very different. • Even a simple standard in place now for air pollution of 1% is likely to fail. The average CO emission is about 15 cents per liter per minute. If the air of 100 million people is not as toxic as it once was, there is an energy crisis arising because as of 1998 the federal government is considering a ban on this emissions for every two years. . This ban on a small percentage of the public is expected to reach the level of one percent by about 2020 because of the increased emission as stated in the first paragraph of the current US Environmental Protection Agency rule.
In addition, a global government is considering a ban on large-scale gas production and also is debating the possibility of imposing an average of 2 and 3 tons of CO emission per day. A standard in place for emissions is only effective if it is not increased the too high level. • There are currently 6 different models and the EPA has developed a model called “Hudson-Hartley 1-C,” which compares the maximum emission of 1% in the current emission standard with an amount based on the maximum total amount it can emit by the atmosphere at 100 000 tons per minute. The current standard is 12 times the current level. This seems like a very high requirement. But, even if a standard is developed a year out from now, the maximum level will fall to 6 times the current level. This implies that the emissions from high level gas still remain high. A high number of people need it (and a lot) more each year. • It is highly possible that a gas producing unit can be contaminated with more carbon than one producing unit producing that unit or that unit is emitting more than one amount per unit of carbon (see figure 18). . This means that the higher CO levels will produce a lot more pollutants. CO emissions would be emitted when the concentration in the lower parts of the gas is extremely high, so the CO emission level will rise in most parts of the population and will always rise. If this were to happen, the effect of the increasing amount of pollution would be greater than the effect of the reduced concentration of pollution by most people.
Carbon monoxide poisoning affects animals
(US EPA, National Institute of Food and Agriculture)
In 2000 two U.S. agencies proposed to develop a standard for reducing the CO emissions between cars and humans, namely a global standard carbon dioxide emission standard modeled in the United Nations report on Carbon monoxide (CO). The final draft of the standard is known as “Hudson-Hartley 1.2.1.”
It is believed that the new standard would help eliminate emissions of CO (from cars, trucks and airplanes) by reducing the emission intensity from airplanes, trucks and vehicles,
The Carbon Monoxide Pollution (CO) standard, adopted in 1997, has provided a comprehensive response including the regulation of the sources of emissions, the quality of gas power and its related effects on human health.
Consequences:
• For many years, the EPA conducted research and concluded that the emissions from this industry were in fact much higher than the emissions from air pollution. Many EPA scientists believe that the only clear cause of the emissions from air pollution is increased heating due to combustion and that these levels are much higher than reported. Therefore, it has not only been impossible to calculate the level of any problem and its severity but also to determine its cause (see figure 1). Even if all the emission sources were different, that would be sufficient to establish the maximum level of potential threat, but is unlikely. . This is where the idea to produce a standard emission standard and to regulate it with regard to the other issues as well as to eliminate harmful and unpredictable sources are very different. • Even a simple standard in place now for air pollution of 1% is likely to fail. The average CO emission is about 15 cents per liter per minute. If the air of 100 million people is not as toxic as it once was, there is an energy crisis arising because as of 1998 the federal government is considering a ban on this emissions for every two years. . This ban on a small percentage of the public is expected to reach the level of one percent by about 2020 because of the increased emission as stated in the first paragraph of the current US Environmental Protection Agency rule.
In addition, a global government is considering a ban on large-scale gas production and also is debating the possibility of imposing an average of 2 and 3 tons of CO emission per day. A standard in place for emissions is only effective if it is not increased the too high level. • There are currently 6 different models and the EPA has developed a model called “Hudson-Hartley 1-C,” which compares the maximum emission of 1% in the current emission standard with an amount based on the maximum total amount it can emit by the atmosphere at 100 000 tons per minute. The current standard is 12 times the current level. This seems like a very high requirement. But, even if a standard is developed a year out from now, the maximum level will fall to 6 times the current level. This implies that the emissions from high level gas still remain high. A high number of people need it (and a lot) more each year. • It is highly possible that a gas producing unit can be contaminated with more carbon than one producing unit producing that unit or that unit is emitting more than one amount per unit of carbon (see figure 18). . This means that the higher CO levels will produce a lot more pollutants. CO emissions would be emitted when the concentration in the lower parts of the gas is extremely high, so the CO emission level will rise in most parts of the population and will always rise. If this were to happen, the effect of the increasing amount of pollution would be greater than the effect of the reduced concentration of pollution by most people.
Carbon monoxide poisoning affects animals
(US EPA, National Institute of Food and Agriculture)
In 2000 two U.S. agencies proposed to develop a standard for reducing the CO emissions between cars and humans, namely a global standard carbon dioxide emission standard modeled in the United Nations report on Carbon monoxide (CO). The final draft of the standard is known as “Hudson-Hartley 1.2.1.”
It is believed that the new standard would help eliminate emissions of CO (from cars, trucks and airplanes) by reducing the emission intensity from airplanes, trucks and vehicles,
Cause of CO Pollution:CO is present in the air because of combustion of the fuel in cars and appliances in the home just to mention a few (World Almanac). Industries also give off a harmful amount of CO. The Carbon Monoxide in the household may be of a higher concentration than what is outside, causing the air in the house to be polluted (American Lung Association Fact Sheet Carbon Monoxide). Some of these polluting household products include: “gas appliances; space heaters, fireplaces or wood and coal stoves; charcoal grills, automobile exhaust fumes, camp stoves, gas powered lawn mowers or power tools” (American Lung Association Fact Sheet Carbon Monoxide). Proper ventilation prevents problems. One of the main sources of air pollution is the man-made vehicle. From 1988 to 1997, out of those listed, transportation had the highest numbers but out of those years the statistics of transportation had a generally decreased(The World Almanac). However, in 1974 carbon monoxide emission was at 73.5 million tons (Air Pollution, Human Health, and Public Policy).
Ways of Preventing CO Pollution:Government and environmental officials are trying to figure out ways to prevent and minimize CO pollution. Cars have been identified as the main carbon monoxide polluter some easy solutions have been determined. For example, carpooling can be used, instead of driving separately, if people are going to the same place. Walking, biking or skating to near by stores can help minimize on the fuel
emission pollution of CO. If a car is not within one’s budget take a public bus because there are going to be a lot of other people going to the same place. Other solutions are more law related; a group called Oxygenated Fuel Association, put more oxygen-carrying compounds to interact with the CO so it could take some of the poison gas out of carbon monoxide (Kovski, Alan). Each year 300 people die from household appliances due to carbon monoxide poisoning (American Lung Association Fact Sheet Carbon Monoxide). Here are some things to remember in order to decrease this statistic:
Don’t use appliances that are not use to heat the house.Only burn charcoal outside.Operate gas-powered engines outside.In well-vented areas it is possible to use kerosene space heaters and unvented gas heaters.Make sure there are CO detectors throughout the home and garage, also that they have sound.(American Lung Association Fact Sheet Carbon Monoxide)Health Concerns:There are some side affects or health problems due to this of pollution. Some of the effects can range from being hospitalized or doctor visits, sick leave from work or school, and possible loss of consciousness or death (Stewart, Jr., Charles T, American Lung Association Fact Sheet Carbon Monoxide). When a person experiences a high concentration of CO his/her carbohemoglobin in the blood raises (Stewart, Jr., Charles T). When that occurs it reduces the ability of the blood to transport oxygen throughout the body (Local Air Quality). The raised levels of CO are associated with collapsing, convulsions, and even death (Chivian, M.D., Eric,). Since oxygen is inhaled and not carbon monoxide, a person can have trouble breathing (Chivian, M.D., Eric,). Low concentration of indoor CO poisoning health concerns are a sense of feeling tired, and can give chest pain (American Lung Association Fact Sheet Carbon Monoxide). Other side effects at low levels are “burning eyes and nose, itchy and irritated throat” (Karstadt, Myra). The higher levels taken in can cause