Air Pollution in Mexico City

The papers Quantification of Local and Global Benefits from Air Pollution Control in Mexico City, Improving Air Quality in Megacities: Mexico City Case Study, and Air Quality Management in Mexico all looked into the issue of air pollution in the Mexico City Metropolitan Area, which increased its population 6-fold from 1950 to 2000, and presently is the largest urban agglomeration in the Western Hemisphere with population of more than 20 million While population affects many burgeoning cities in developing cities, it is especially problematic for Mexico City, which consumes more than 40 million liters of fuel daily, due to the surrounding topography, as mountains and frequent thermal inversions help to trap pollutants within the Valley of Mexico, which the capital sits. Since the mid-1980s, the government and citizens have recognized the serious concern of pollution, and regulations implemented in the 90s have helped to reduce the concentrations of various pollutants.

Currently transportation is the major source of pollution in the city, and one of the problems is that high-occupancy modes of transit have been declining as minibuses have gained popularity for their superior service and convenience, while existing formal high-occupancy systems, including the Metro, have not adequately adapted to the growing population trends. Antiquated fleet also contributes significantly to pollution, as the concentration of economic activities bring in much freight traffic. Regulation efforts have been put in to mitigate pollution. Vehicle inspection and maintenance programs, including no-driving days, began to be enforced, limiting the use of cars by one weekday starting in 1989. The policy has been remodeled to assign the ban depending on the vehicle’s emission levels. The country has also issued air quality standards comparable to those in United States. Natural gas began to replace fuel oil, and fuel quality has also been improved to reduce sulfur content and introduce unleaded gasoline. Furthermore, a low-interest loans to substitute old taxis have been implemented to improve fuel efficiency.

Despite the progresses, there are still potential pollution-mitigating projects with promising cost-benefit analysis from the standpoint of capital investment costs versus the decreased cost of health deteriorations. The project includes taxi fleet renovation, Metro expansion, hybrid bus introduction, liquid petroleum gas (LPG) leak prevention, and electricity cogeneration. The study finds that if all were implemented, the measures could save 100 lives, over 500,000 cases of minor restricted activity days (MRAD), and amount to $150 million (US) of local benefits per year. In particular, fuel savings would offset the cost of investment costs of taxi renovation, making this a particularly attractive economic investment. On the other hand, preventing LPG leaks would produce the greatest health benefit, compared to its size of investment costs, making this a high priority.

Sources:

• Instituto Nacional de Ecología: “Quantification of Local and Global Benefits from Air Pollution Control in Mexico City”
• L. Molina and M. Molina: “Improving Air Quality in Megacities: Mexico City Case Study”
• Adrián Fernández-Bremauntz: “Air Quality Management in Mexico”

Internal Combustion Engine

The engine of an automobile burns gasoline. The combustion produces expanding gases, which create the mechanical power used to move the vehicle. Generally speaking, the combustion can take place inside the engine, in the case of an internal combustion engine, or outside for an external combustion engine. Steam engine is an example of the latter. But internal combustion engine is more efficient, and is the type found in most automobiles.

The challenge of the engine is to sustain the transfer the energy from gasoline to kinetic energy of the vehicle. This repetitive mechanism is accomplished through the four-stroke combustion cycle, also known as the Otto cycle. Inside the cylinder of the engine is the piston, and its movement will direct the flow of the cycle. During the first step, known as the intake stroke, air and gasoline enters the engine, as the down movement of the piston opens up the intake valve, in order for the components to enter. Secondly, the upward movement of the piston then compresses this mixture of gasoline and gas. However, a mere compression does not start the reaction. During the third step, as the piston reaches the peak of its stroke, the spark plug gives off a spark that provides the activation energy necessary to finally ignite the gasoline. Finally, as the piston moves downward again, exhaust from the combustion leaves though a different value. While the movement of the piston is linear, it is helps to move the crankshaft, which is connected to the piston via the connecting rod. The rotational movement of the crankshaft is important, since it is then connected by gearing to the wheels of the automobile, which ultimately move in a rotational manner.

Various factors can go wrong in the engine, and tracing the steps of the Otto cycle reveals some of the reasons. To start off, the ingredients can be bad. The gasoline needs to have little impurity, such that it can burn. At the same time, the necessary amount of air is needed to supply enough oxygen for the combustion reaction. Once inside, lack of compression of spark also can be a source of problems. Compression can fail with leaky cylinders or valves not sealing properly, both of which prevents the pressure buildup from occurring. As for the spark, the wiring may be worn out or damaged.

Sources:

• http://auto.howstuffworks.com/engine.htm
• http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/internal-combustion_engine.aspx

Mileage Rates: Overestimation or Underestimation?

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) sets the business mileage reimbursement rate, which on its website is stated as the "optional standard mileage rates for employees, self-employed individuals, or other taxpayers to use in computing the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business, charitable, medical, or moving expense purposes." This rate is also often used by employers to compensate employees for operating their own vehicle for the employer's business purposes. The business mile rate in 2012 is 55.5 cents/mile, unchanged from the second half of 2011. At a first glance, this number may be a huge overestimation. After all, even overestimating gasoline at $5/gallon and less-than-stellar fuel economy of 15 mpg, that's only 33.3 cents/mile. However, while gasoline is the main cost factored into the mileage rate, other fixed and variable costs, notably depreciation is factored in. But the mileage rate doesn't make a distinction between the type of cars.

Let's see how much gasoline factors into the mileage for different type of cars. Data from the Department of Energy lists the most and least efficient vehicles. For two-seat cars, Honda CR-Z was listed as one of the most efficient, while Bugatti Veyron was listed as the least efficient. Next, we can use AAA's Fuel Cost Calculator to estimate the cost of gas needed to travel between two cities. For this exercise, we chose New York as the starting city and Cleveland as the destination. For this 452-mile trip, the 2011 Honda CR-Z needed 14.58 gallons of gasoline. For the same route, the 2012 Bugatti Veyron needed a whopping 56.5 gallons. AAA's estimate used a price of around $3.96 / gallon for the trip, which meant that the New York - Cleveland trip gasoline cost for the CR-Z and the Veyron was $57.75 and $223.77, respectively.

The first noteworthy data is the vast contrast. The CR-Z is about 3.87 more fuel efficient than the Veyron, allowing 31 mpg compared to 8 mpg. Now what does the IRS mileage rate compare? For the 452-mile trip, the cost from the mileage comes to $250.86. That number is only 1.12 times the gasoline cost for the Veyron, while it is 4.34 times the gasoline cost for the CR-Z.

Depreciation and other costs of maintenance may be difficult to measure. But here's a quick way to estimate its order of magnitude. Take the Honda CR-Z; its price as listed on its website is around $20,000. Let's give a conservative estimate, in order to overestimate the depreciation value, that its lifespan is only 100,000 miles. In that case, we can divide the numbers and get $0.20 / mile depreciation value. For the 452-mile trip, this calculation will yield $90.4 in depreciation. That's over 30% higher the total gasoline cost for the CR-Z, so the depreciation figure isn't a trivial value that can be dismissed.

While it may be difficult to exactly calculate the true costs of driving, the calculations here reveal that depending on the fuel economy of the car, the IRS mileage rate may overestimate or underestimate the driving costs. In either case, the mileage rate will cover the current gasoline cost, even for least fuel efficient Veyron. But the calculations here have shown that other costs cannot be ignored, even if costs like maintenance and particularly depreciation are always not tangible. In fact in an April 2011 report, AAA compiled all of the costs of driving and operating various types of vehicles. At this time, the business mileage rate was only 51 cents / gallon. The AAA report stated that the total cost ranged from 45.1 cents for a small sedan to 63.3 cents for a minivan. So in the end, the mileage isn't a gross overestimation by any standards; in fact, for many models of vehicles, it doesn't even fully offset the true total costs of driving.

Sources:

• http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=250882,00.html
• http://www.irs.gov/taxpros/article/0,,id=156624,00.html
• http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/best-worst.shtml
• http://automobiles.honda.com/cr-z/
• http://fuelcostcalculator.aaa.com/
• http://accountingportal.com/2011/06/24/irs-increases-mileage-rate-55-5-cents-mile-rates-71-123111/
• http://newsroom.aaa.com/2011/04/cost-of-owning-and-operating-vehicle-in-u-s-increased-3-4-percent-according-to-aaas-2011-your-driving-costs-study/

7 Billion and Counting

The United Nation estimated that human population reached 7 billion on Monday. It was only 12 years ago that the world reached the 6 billion mark. The Chair of NGO Population Matters Roger Martin recently remarked that "every additional person needs food, water and energy, and produces more waste and pollution, so ratchets up our total impact on the planet, and ratchets down everyone else's share." On the other hand, 7 billion may be an enormous but somewhat graspable number. If 7 billion people fitted into Texas, the population density would only be as great as that of New York City.

It is true that population growth has curbed significantly in recent decades. The average number of children per women is currently 2.5, down from figure of 5 observed in the 1950s. The current population growth at 1.1% is half the peak value in the 1960s. The tempered growth rate "enables families and societies to focus on the well-being of their children rather than the quantity."

The recent figure also shows that there's a high correlation between country's wealth and population growth. Countries like Japan struggle to keep up with a declining population, but many Sub-Saharan African countries, women may be having five or more children on average. The disparity becomes significant when the resource usage is accounted for. Industrial countries, accounting for 20% of the world population, account for 80% of the accumulated carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Furthermore, the average carbon dioxide emission per person is 19.9 tons per year, while in Kenya, the figure is 1.2 tons per year.

As a result, the focus may be two-fold. Quality of life should be addressed in the low-income countries to curb the massive population growth. At the same time, they consume so little compared to high-income countries. While the 7 billion mark may draw much attention to issues of sustainability, the world shouldn't be alarmed. The planet is capable of producing enough food; however, it's not always getting to those in need. 50% of the food Americans buy get thrown away. At the same time, it is difficult to transport and utilize that resource to the 1 billion people who go hungry around the world.

So the rising population is indeed a concern. But trying to curb the growth at the locations with the highest growth rates isn't quite the solution, for those areas consume little resources. As for resources, it's not that the world can't produce enough for the pending population. As the world slowly awaits for the next mark, the true challenge rests in transferring the excess capacity to areas where it becomes the necessity.

Sources:

• http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2097720_2097782,00.html
• http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/oct/24/population-hysteria-damaging?newsfeed=true

Light Bulbs Debate: It's not about the Money

Should the government force citizens to purchase something more expensive in the short-run but more cost-saving in the long run? As the nation seeks methods to lower its energy usage, a 2007 legislation passed to eliminate the manufacturing and sale of traditional incandescent light bulbs, starting with the 100-watt bulb in 2012. Natural Resources Defense Council claims that by 2020, the country would save $12.5 billion annually, translating to consumers saving about $85 on their power bills.

It's noteworthy to note that the legislation was signed into law by former President George W. Bush, and now Texas Republicans are at the forefront of opposition against the measure. This year, Governor Rick Perry signed a law that exempted Texas from the new energy standards. Representative Michael Burgess further claims that “the federal government has no right to tell me or any other citizen what type of light bulb to use at home.” Indeed, the traditional light bulb has become "a pear-shaped symbol of personal freedom" to those against government's federal overreach.

It is about the personal choice. Presently, hybrid cars offer more fuel-efficiency, but at a greater initial cost. Consumers weigh the benefits and costs of the vehicle before making a choice on their own. Opposition claims that consumers should have the same right to decide and buy the cheapest option on the market. It's not about the money saved in the long-run; in Texas alone, efficient bulbs are proposed to save $1.1 billion. Rather, it's about the fear of the precedent this may create. Recently, the House voted to save the 100-watt bulb for another year. The debate is far from over. Few would disagree that the nation needs an effective method to save energy usage. But how that is done becomes and remains an intricate debate.

Sources:

• http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/07/14/2313834/texas-lawmakers-try-to-strike.html
• http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-15/house-votes-to-save-traditional-light-bulbs.html

Economic Growth in North Dakota

Figures like 3.2% unemployment rate and 7.1% economic growth during last year are not numbers that the United States sees very often these days. But up north, they are the exact signs of progress observed in the nation's third least populous state. A variety of fortuitous events have led to development in North Dakota, offering a microcosm of contrast with the rest of the nation.

Oil industry in the western half of the state has helped to generate much of the growth in the region. Production has more than doubled within the past decade, and Ness has multi-billion dollar projects to improve the infrastructure there. This growth can be largely attributed to a 2008 US Geological Survey assessment that reported "an estimated 3.0 to 4.3 billion barrels of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil" in the Bakken Formation, surpassing previous estimates by 25-fold. To put in perspective, the current consumption of oil in the United States is approximately 21 million barrels per day. The growth of the oil industry has helped to spur growth in other sectors of the economy. The demand for a variety of support workers - ranging from truckers to cooks - has all increased. Furthermore, agricultural boom has also led to economic growth. The largest producer in the country of fourteen crops, North Dakota has found enormous growth in exports.

Unique about North Dakota's growth is availability of capital, namely labor. As the nation's third least populous state, it is struggling to find the labor force it needs to fill. Housing shortage has also limited the number of people coming into the region to work. As a result, relatively high wages are rewarded to even low-skilled jobs, while the state seeks to import labor force into the region. The combination of tapping the resources and exporting the goods has allowed North Dakota to thrive. However, it must sustain an available labor force to continue its growth. For the rest of the nation, it may soon realize that despite having harsh winters and population smaller than that of many metropolises, North Dakota may be the economic haven at this time.

Sources:

• http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daniel-gross/north-dakota-spurred-energy-ag-boom-3-2-122815061.html
• http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911