DOCSLIB.ORG

Comparing the Sustainability Parameters of Renewable, Nuclear and Fossil Fuel Electricity Generation Technologies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Comparing the sustainability parameters of renewable, nuclear and fossil fuel electricity generation technologies Annette Evans Graduate School of the Environment, Faculty of Science, Macquarie University, NSW, Australia 2109 [email protected] Assoc. Prof. Vladimir Strezov Graduate School of the Environment, Faculty of Science, Macquarie University, NSW, Australia 2109 [email protected] Dr. Tim Evans Graduate School of the Environment, Faculty of Science, Macquarie University, NSW, Australia 2109 [email protected] Abstract —The sustainability parameters of electricity generation have been evaluated by the application of eight key indicators. Photovoltaics, wind, hydro, geothermal, biomass energy crops, biomass residues, natural gas, coal and nuclear power have been assessed according to their price, greenhouse gas emissions, efficiency, land use, water use, availability, limitations and social impacts on a per kilowatt hour basis. The relevance of this information to the Australian context is discussed. Also included are the results of a survey on Australian opinions regarding electricity generation, which found that Australian prefer solar electricity above any other method and also support wind power, with over 90% support, however coal, biomass and nuclear power have low acceptance rates at 30% or less. Most Australians, greater than 90%, believe that the government is not doing enough to support renewable electricity. Keywords -electricity; sustainability; life cycle I. INTRODUCTION The generation of electricity worldwide is heavily dominated by the use of fossil fuels. The combustion of these fuels releases large amounts of carbon dioxide and pollutants to the atmosphere. Fossil resources are also ultimately limited, with finite amounts in existence. While coal reserves are still abundant, the excessive consumption of coal by the electricity sector is responsible for the greatest share of carbon dioxide emissions globally, as well as emitting large amounts of pollutants, such as NO x, SO 2, CO, particulate matter and air toxics to the environment. World electricity production by fuel is shown in Figure 1 indicating coal and peat fuels contribute to over 40% of the world electricity generation, with fossil fuels in total accounting for over 65% of the electricity generated in 2006. Renewable energy sources are rapidly increasing in usage, however current market shares, excluding hydropower, are so low that it will be some time before a significant percentage of world electricity is produced by non-hydro renewable energy sources [1]. For example, in 2008 solar accounted for only 0.02% of the world’s electricity production [2], despite its 33% market growth between 1997 and 2005 [3]. Similarly, wind power has undergone an annual growth rate of nearly 50% between 1971 and 2004, yet only accounted for nearly 0.5% of the total world electricity production in 2004, with over 82 TWh generated globally [4]. Other, 2.3% Hydro, 16% Coal/Peat, 41% Nuclear, 14.8% Oil, 5.8% Gas, 20.1% Figure 1 World electricity production by fuel 2006 [1] Increased electricity demand strengthens the need for reduced impacts from electricity generation per unit produced. Demand for electricity increased at an average of 1.8% per year between 1990 and 2004 [5]. IEA predictions show that, if the current coal dependence is not reduced, coal fired power stations in developing countries alone will produce more greenhouse gas emissions than the entire OECD power sector in the year 2030 [6]. The impacts of developing nations working to achieve better standards of living, compounded by the number of people in these nations will cause electricity consumption rates to keep increasing. In order to meet increasing energy requirements with minimal environmental impact, changes to the current energy generation practices are essential. Changes need to include increased energy efficiency from fossil fuel combustion technologies through introduction of oxyfiring and IGCC technologies, as well as increasing the share of alternative energy generation technologies, including hydropower, wind energy, geothermal, biomass combustion and gasification, solar and tidal power. Renewable energy sources provide freedom from the price fluctuations, trade and transport issues associated with uranium, gas and coal, and can potentially improve energy security to countries deficient in mineral resources. However, traditional coal and gas based technologies offer high reliability and low prices. Careful evaluation of the sustainability of each technology is needed to direct future investment and policy. This paper presents a sustainability assessment of electricity generation according to the sustainability indicators of price, greenhouse gas emissions, efficiency, land use, water use, availability, limitations and social impacts. Technologies are then compared and implications for electricity generation in Australia are discussed. Following this are the results of a survey of Australian public attitudes towards different methods of electricity generation. A. The Sustainability Indicators To assess the impacts of electricity generation, eight key sustainability indicators were selected that together highlight the financial, environmental, engineering and social sustainability of each technology. The cost is the first consideration in this study. Securing financial benefits is one of the key important figures that allow sustainable development. Efficiency of energy transformation is considered because it has a direct impact on cost and provides an indication of the maturity of the process with greater efficiencies achieved as the process is further developed. Greenhouse gas emissions, including carbon dioxide (CO 2) and methane (CH 4) determine the global warming potential of the technology. Carbon accounting is now becoming the single key emission parameter that determines sustainability. Emissions from criteria pollutants (SO 2, NOx, CO, Pb, PM 10 and O 3) are not considered here because there is a system in place controlling these emissions through policy and environmental compliance, which is already resulting in declining emissions of criteria pollutants, while the greenhouse gas emissions are showing an increasing global trend. Water use, as an indicator of sustainability, is particularly important in arid climates, such as Australia. Availability and limitations account for the ability of each technology to provide baseload electricity. Land use or the footprint is of most importance when technologies compete for space with housing, agriculture or culturally significant sites. Social impacts are the consideration of the direct and indirect affects on human health and quality of life, often not covered adequately or at all in other categories. B. Assessment Methods An extensive literature review was performed to collect the data necessary to perform the sustainability assessment. All assessments are performed over the life cycle of each unit, on a per kilowatt hour basis where applicable. A survey was conducted anonymously online, inviting members of the Australian community to share their opinions on different methods of electricity generation. Participants were asked about their preferred methods of electricity generation, nationally and locally, whether they support the idea of wind farms, solar farms, hydropower, biomass, coal and nuclear power stations and whether they think the government is doing enough to promote renewable technologies. II. SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT A. Price The average electricity price for all technologies is shown in USA dollars per kilowatt hour, averaged over the life cycle of the technology, as shown in Figure 2 [4][6-61]. Biomass dedicated energy crops are represented as Biomass DEC and biomass residues as Biomass RES. 10 1 0.1 Price $/kWh Price 0.01 0.001 l . l c o a C s a ind dr E a o ltai G C vo W Hy o s D ss Res s a Nuclear hot P Geotherm iom Bioma B Figure 2 Prices of electricity generation Nuclear, coal and gas are the cheapest methods of electricity generation costing on average 4.3, 4.8 and 4.8 c/kWh, respectively. Hydro, biomass residues, wind, geothermal and biomass energy crops are slightly more expensive, at 5.1, 5.4, 6.6, 6.8 and 8 c/kWh on average. The average cost of photovoltaics is quite prohibitive under normal circumstances, at 24c/kWh. It is nearly 6 times more expensive than the average nuclear price. There is significant variability within the results, particularly for the renewable energy sources. Hydroelectricity has the largest data range and also the lowest possible cost at only 0.7c/kWh [29] and all renewable energy sources, even photovoltaics have the potential to be cheaper than coal and gas. Electricity produced from hydro, geothermal, biomass residues and wind can also be cheaper than nuclear at their lowest prices, while the lowest costs for photovoltaics and biomass energy crops are slightly higher than for nuclear. This highlights the importance of careful site selection and planning. Electricity produced from coal and gas show more stable price ranges, compared to renewable energy sources. This is primarily due to the maturity of these technologies and the consistency of fuel products across the world. B. Efficiency The efficiency of conversion from the energy in the fuel source into electricity is an important parameter which needs to be considered when assessing electricity production technologies. Efficiencies strongly influence prices as well as sustainability, since the high
Recommended publications
  • Sustainability Guidelines for Geothermal Development

    Sustainability Guidelines for Geothermal Development

    REPORT DECEMBER Sustainability Guidelines for 2013 Geothermal Development Sustainability Guidelines for Geothermal Development WWF Indonesia 2013 Sustainability Guidelines for Geothermal Development ISBN 978-979-1461-35-1 @2013 Published by WWF-Indonesia Supported by British Embassy Jakarta Coordinator Program Indra Sari Wardhani Writer : Robi Royana Technical Editor : Indra Sari Wardhani Technical Contributor : Hadi Alikodra, WWF-Indonesia Budi Wardhana, WWF-Indonesia Nyoman Iswarayoga, WWF-Indonesia Anwar Purwoto, WWF-Indonesia Indra Sari Wardhani, WWF-Indonesia Retno Setiyaningrum, WWF-Indonesia Arif Budiman, WWF-Indonesia Thomas Barano, WWF-Indonesia Zulra Warta, WWF-Indonesia Layout and Design Arief Darmawan WWF Indonesia Graha Simatupang Tower 2 Unit C LetJen TB Simatupang Kav 38 , South Jakarta, 12540 Indonesia Phone: +62-21-782 9461 Fax : +62-21-782 9462 Foreword Energy has become one of the benchmarks of the development of a country and even become a political economic power including Indonesia. Along with the growth of population and economy, it is undeniable that the energy needs of Indonesia also continues to increase rapidly. Most of the source of this energy needs are from non-renewable/ fossil energy such as petroleum, natural gas and coal, and the utilization of it will produce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) that contribute to global warming and climate change. To improve national energy security in the long term and contribute to global efforts to put a half to climate change, energy conservation and energy diversication through the development of sustainable renewable energy is a necessity. WWF's vision in the energy sector is to encourage the achievement of 100% Renewable Energy in 2050 globally.
  • Abandoned Mines Can Be Used As Geothermal Energy Source

    Abandoned Mines Can Be Used As Geothermal Energy Source

    17 February 2011 Abandoned mines can be used as geothermal energy source Scientists have reviewed the potential for worldwide development of geothermal energy systems in old, unused mines. The technology is proven in many sites and could therefore help increase the share of renewable energy sources in the energy mix, offering sustainability and job creation, which may make mining operations more appealing to investors, communities and policymakers. The mineral industry is energy intensive and is therefore focusing on developing energy efficiency and cleaner production technologies. It is also expensive to open, operate and close mines, but few are ever considered as being useful once they have been closed. They are often located on marginal, unproductive land in remote, harsh environments and nearby communities may only live in the area as a direct result of the mine. Being often highly dependent on the mine and on imports of (fossil) fuel, such communities are highly unsustainable. The researchers argue that mines could be used post-closure for energy generation (heating and cooling) using the natural heat contained in the mine water. Geothermal energy systems could be implemented to extract this heat using heat pumps, from both closed and potentially working mines. This would offer local employment and energy resilience to the surrounding communities. Other uses of the energy may include melting snow on icy roads (instead of using salt) or supplying heat for fish farms and greenhouses. Several other technologies can extract energy from abandoned mines, including compressed air storage or the direct use of warm mine water to regulate the temperature of microalgae raceway ponds, allowing a longer growing season for cultivation; key products that can be obtained from the microalgae include nutraceuticals and biofuels.
  • Phase-Out 2020: Monitoring Europe's Fossil Fuel Subsidies

    Phase-Out 2020: Monitoring Europe's Fossil Fuel Subsidies

    Phase-out 2020 Monitoring Europe’s fossil fuel subsidies Ipek Gençsü, Maeve McLynn, Matthias Runkel, Markus Trilling, Laurie van der Burg, Leah Worrall, Shelagh Whitley, and Florian Zerzawy September 2017 Report partners ODI is the UK’s leading independent think tank on international development and humanitarian issues. Climate Action Network (CAN) Europe is Europe’s largest coalition working on climate and energy issues. Readers are encouraged to reproduce material for their own publications, as long as they are not being sold commercially. As copyright holders, ODI and Overseas Development Institute CAN Europe request due acknowledgement and a copy of the publication. For 203 Blackfriars Road CAN Europe online use, we ask readers to link to the original resource on the ODI website. London SE1 8NJ Rue d’Edimbourg 26 The views presented in this paper are those of the author(s) and do not Tel +44 (0)20 7922 0300 1050 Brussels, Belgium necessarily represent the views of ODI or our partners. Fax +44 (0)20 7922 0399 Tel: +32 (0) 28944670 www.odi.org www.caneurope.org © Overseas Development Institute and CAN Europe 2017. This work is licensed [email protected] [email protected] under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial Licence (CC BY-NC 4.0). Cover photo: Oil refinery in Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany – Ralf Vetterle (CC0 creative commons license). 2 Report Acknowledgements The authors are grateful for support and advice on the report from: Dave Jones of Sandbag UK, Colin Roche of Friends of the Earth Europe, Andrew Scott and Sejal Patel of the Overseas Development Institute, Helena Wright of E3G, and Andrew Murphy of Transport & Environment, and Alex Doukas of Oil Change International.
  • A New Era for Wind Power in the United States

    A New Era for Wind Power in the United States

    Chapter 3 Wind Vision: A New Era for Wind Power in the United States 1 Photo from iStock 7943575 1 This page is intentionally left blank 3 Impacts of the Wind Vision Summary Chapter 3 of the Wind Vision identifies and quantifies an array of impacts associated with continued deployment of wind energy. This 3 | Summary Chapter chapter provides a detailed accounting of the methods applied and results from this work. Costs, benefits, and other impacts are assessed for a future scenario that is consistent with economic modeling outcomes detailed in Chapter 1 of the Wind Vision, as well as exist- ing industry construction and manufacturing capacity, and past research. Impacts reported here are intended to facilitate informed discus- sions of the broad-based value of wind energy as part of the nation’s electricity future. The primary tool used to evaluate impacts is the National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s (NREL’s) Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) model. ReEDS is a capacity expan- sion model that simulates the construction and operation of generation and transmission capacity to meet electricity demand. In addition to the ReEDS model, other methods are applied to analyze and quantify additional impacts. Modeling analysis is focused on the Wind Vision Study Scenario (referred to as the Study Scenario) and the Baseline Scenario. The Study Scenario is defined as wind penetration, as a share of annual end-use electricity demand, of 10% by 2020, 20% by 2030, and 35% by 2050. In contrast, the Baseline Scenario holds the installed capacity of wind constant at levels observed through year-end 2013.
  • Hydroelectric Power -- What Is It? It=S a Form of Energy … a Renewable Resource

    Hydroelectric Power -- What Is It? It=S a Form of Energy … a Renewable Resource

    INTRODUCTION Hydroelectric Power -- what is it? It=s a form of energy … a renewable resource. Hydropower provides about 96 percent of the renewable energy in the United States. Other renewable resources include geothermal, wave power, tidal power, wind power, and solar power. Hydroelectric powerplants do not use up resources to create electricity nor do they pollute the air, land, or water, as other powerplants may. Hydroelectric power has played an important part in the development of this Nation's electric power industry. Both small and large hydroelectric power developments were instrumental in the early expansion of the electric power industry. Hydroelectric power comes from flowing water … winter and spring runoff from mountain streams and clear lakes. Water, when it is falling by the force of gravity, can be used to turn turbines and generators that produce electricity. Hydroelectric power is important to our Nation. Growing populations and modern technologies require vast amounts of electricity for creating, building, and expanding. In the 1920's, hydroelectric plants supplied as much as 40 percent of the electric energy produced. Although the amount of energy produced by this means has steadily increased, the amount produced by other types of powerplants has increased at a faster rate and hydroelectric power presently supplies about 10 percent of the electrical generating capacity of the United States. Hydropower is an essential contributor in the national power grid because of its ability to respond quickly to rapidly varying loads or system disturbances, which base load plants with steam systems powered by combustion or nuclear processes cannot accommodate. Reclamation=s 58 powerplants throughout the Western United States produce an average of 42 billion kWh (kilowatt-hours) per year, enough to meet the residential needs of more than 14 million people.
  • Are Biofuels an Effective and Viable Energy Strategy for Industrialized Societies? a Reasoned Overview of Potentials and Limits

    Are Biofuels an Effective and Viable Energy Strategy for Industrialized Societies? a Reasoned Overview of Potentials and Limits

    Sustainability 2015, 7, 8491-8521; doi:10.3390/su7078491 OPEN ACCESS sustainability ISSN 2071-1050 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability Article Are Biofuels an Effective and Viable Energy Strategy for Industrialized Societies? A Reasoned Overview of Potentials and Limits Tiziano Gomiero Independent Consultant and Researcher on Multi-Criteria Farming and Food System Analysis, Agro-Energies, Environmental Issues, Treviso 30121, Italy; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +39-32-0464-3496 Academic Editor: Andrew Kusiak Received: 7 April 2015 / Accepted: 26 June 2015 / Published: 30 June 2015 Abstract: In this paper, I analyze the constraints that limit biomass from becoming an alternative, sustainable and efficient energy source, at least in relation to the current metabolism of developed countries. In order to be termed sustainable, the use of an energy source should be technically feasible, economically affordable and environmentally and socially viable, considering society as a whole. Above all, it should meet society’s “metabolic needs,” a fundamental issue that is overlooked in the mainstream biofuels narrative. The EROI (Energy Return on Investment) of biofuels reaches a few units, while the EROI of fossil fuels is 20–30 or higher and has a power density (W/m2) thousands of times higher than the best biofuels, such as sugarcane in Brazil. When metabolic approaches are used it becomes clear that biomass cannot represent an energy carrier able to meet the metabolism of industrialized societies. For our industrial society to rely on “sustainable biofuels” for an important fraction of its energy, most of the agricultural and non-agricultural land would need to be used for crops, and at the same time a radical cut to our pattern of energy consumption would need to be implemented, whilst also achieving a significant population reduction.
  • Update on Recent Progress in Reform of Inefficient Fossil-Fuel Subsidies That Encourage Wasteful Consumption

    Update on Recent Progress in Reform of Inefficient Fossil-Fuel Subsidies That Encourage Wasteful Consumption

    UPDATE ON RECENT PROGRESS IN REFORM OF INEFFICIENT FOSSIL-FUEL SUBSIDIES THAT ENCOURAGE WASTEFUL CONSUMPTION Contribution by the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to the G20 Energy Transitions Working Group in consultation with: International Energy Forum (IEF), Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and the World Bank 2nd Energy Transitions Working Group Meeting Toyama, 18-19 April 2019 Update on Recent Progress in Reform of Inefficient Fossil-Fuel Subsidies that Encourage Wasteful Consumption This document, as well as any data and any map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. This update does not necessarily express the views of the G20 countries or of the IEA, IEF, OECD, OPEC and the World Bank or their member countries. The G20 countries, IEA, IEF, OECD, OPEC and the World Bank assume no liability or responsibility whatsoever for the use of data or analyses contained in this document, and nothing herein shall be construed as interpreting or modifying any legal obligations under any intergovernmental agreement, treaty, law or other text, or as expressing any legal opinion or as having probative legal value in any proceeding. Please cite this publication as: OECD/IEA (2019), "Update on recent progress in reform of inefficient fossil-fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption", https://oecd.org/fossil-fuels/publication/OECD-IEA-G20-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies-Reform-Update-2019.pdf │ 3 Summary This report discusses recent trends and developments in the reform of inefficient fossil- fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption, within the G20 and beyond.
  • On Alternative Energy Hydroelectric Power

    On Alternative Energy Hydroelectric Power

    Focus On Alternative Energy Hydroelectric Power What is Hydroelectric Power (Hydropower)? Hydroelectric power comes from the natural flow of water. The energy is produced by the fall of water turning the blades of a turbine. The turbine is connected to a generator that converts the energy into electricity. The amount of electricity a system can produce depends on the quantity of water passing through a turbine (the volume of water flow) and the height from which the water ‘falls’ (head). The greater the flow and the head, the more electricity produced. Why Wind? Hydropower is a clean, domestic, and renewable source of energy. It provides inexpensive electricity and produces no pollution. Unlike fossil fuels, hydropower does not destroy water during the production of electricity. Hydropower is the only renewable source of energy that can replace fossil fuels’ electricity production while satisfying growing energy needs. Hydroelectric systems vary in size and application. Micro-hydroelectric plants are the smallest types of hydroelectric systems. They can generate between 1 kW and 1 MW of power and are ideal for powering smaller services such as processing machines, small farms, and communities. Large hydroelectric systems can produce large amounts of electricity. These systems can be used to power large communities and cities. Why Hydropower? Technical Feasibility Hydropower is the most energy efficient power generator. Currently, hydropower is capable of converting 90% of the available energy into electricity. This can be compared to the most efficient fossil fuel plants, which are only 60% efficient. The principal advantages of using hydropower are its large renewable domestic resource base, the absence of polluting emissions during operation, its capability in some cases to respond quickly to utility load demands, and its very low operating costs.
  • Power from Geothermal Energy History Pros and Cons Pros

    Power from Geothermal Energy History Pros and Cons Pros

    Power from Geothermal Energy History The word geothermal comes from Greek “geo” meaning “Earth” and “therme” meaning “Heat”. Since [Ancient Times] people have used geothermal hot springs for bathing, cooking and even healing purposes. Geothermal energy is derived from superheated water inside the earth. The earth’s core can reach temperatures of over 9,000 degrees Fahrenheit and the heat from the earth’s core is constantly moving toward the earth’s surface. The rock surrounding the core sometimes heats up enough to melt creating magma which then floats closer to the surface and carries the heat from below. Sometimes this molten rock pushes to the surface as lava, but typically it stays beneath the surface and heats ground water that has seeped underground from rainfall. Eventually some of this heated water makes its way back to the surface as hot springs or geysers. Throughout the years, engineers have been perfecting ways of harvesting geothermal water to use it to power homes and businesses. In Larderello, Italy in 1904, Prince Piero Ginori Conti tested the first geothermal power generator and lit 4 light bulbs. Seven years later, in 1911, the world’s first geothermal power plant was built in Larderello. Eventually, in 1958, New Zealand become the second producer of geothermal energy in the world and now these power plants exist worldwide. Pros and Cons Pros: If the geothermal water is drilled correctly, there are no harmful emissions put into the air. There are no fossil fuels being used up and sending harmful byproducts into the air. A geothermal power plant takes up a relatively small area of land and can be integrated as a functional addition to a landscape such as the Svartsengi plant in Iceland which provides heated, mineral-rich water for a nearby man-made lagoon.
  • Fossil Fuels and Water Quality 75

    Fossil Fuels and Water Quality 75

    Chapter 4 Lucy Allen, Michael J. Cohen, David Abelson, and Bart Miller Fossil fuels are essential to the global economy—for electricity production, transporta- tion, plastics and chemicals manufacturing, heating, and many other purposes. How- ever,Fossil the extraction Fuels and processing and of fossil Water fuels, in addition Quality to their use, have profound impacts on the environment and natural resources, including water. Large oil spills— such as the recent Deepwater Horizon drilling rig spill, which leaked over 4.9 million barrels (780,000 cubic meters) of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico—have focused atten- tion on the potential for disasters associated with oil drilling to cause contamination of the natural environment (Lubchenco et al. 2010). The growing recognition of the seri- ous risks to surface-water and groundwater quality from natural gas fracking operations also raises new questions. And even normal fossil-fuel extraction and refining processes pollute the environment. The connections between water and energy have been studied in recent years, with growing recognition of how closely the two are linked. Water is used, in varying quanti- ties and ways, in every step of fossil-fuel extraction and processing (Ptacek et al. 2004). For example, the amount of coal produced worldwide in 2009 required an estimated 1.3 to 4.5 billion cubic meters (m3) of water for extraction and processing.1 Oil refining requires approximately 4 to 8 million m3 of water daily in the United States alone (the amount of water that two to three million U.S. households use daily) (US DOE 2006).
  • Fossil Fuel Hunt Adapted from “Fossil Fuels and the Ticking Clock” At

    Fossil Fuel Hunt Adapted from “Fossil Fuels and the Ticking Clock” At

    Issue 7: Energy and the Polar Environment http://beyondpenguins.nsdl.org/ Fossil Fuel Hunt adapted from “Fossil Fuels and the Ticking Clock” at www.powerhousekids.com You’ve been hired by an energy company to find coal deposits. The coal you find will be burned to produce electricity for homes and businesses. Coal and natural gas are known as fossil fuels. They are formed from the remains of ancient plants and animals. When the plants and animals died and became buried deep in the earth, the heat and pressure of the earth’s layers slowly transformed them into coal, natural gas, and oil. In this activity, you will search for pennies four times. You only have 30 seconds to search each time! After each search, you will count the pennies, record the total, and deposit them in the correctly numbered cup. After the fourth search, you will recount each cup of pennies one at a time, and make a bar graph to show the number of pennies you found in each search. First search: __________ Second search: ____________ Third search: ___________ Fourth search: __________ Copyright 2008: Ohio State University. Funded by the National Science Foundation. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License. Issue 7: Energy and the Polar Environment http://beyondpenguins.nsdl.org/ 45 35 Number of pennies found 25 15 5 1st 2nd 3rd 4th search search search search Questions: 1. In which search did you find the most pennies? 2. In which search did you find the least pennies? 3. Why do you think it became increasingly harder to find pennies? 4.
  • Fossil Fuels? Beside Each Sentence Below, Write Down Whether It Is Talking About Coal, Oil, Or Natural Gas

    Fossil Fuels? Beside Each Sentence Below, Write Down Whether It Is Talking About Coal, Oil, Or Natural Gas

    Puzzles & Word Games Coal, Oil or Natural Gas? How well do you know your fossil fuels? Beside each sentence below, write down whether it is talking about coal, oil, or natural gas. Watch out! Some may have more than one answer. Name the Fossil Fuel 1. There is probably enough of this fossil fuel to last another 200 years. 2. Started out as plankton (tiny plants and animals) millions of years ago. 3. This fossil fuel provides about 40% of the world’s energy. 4. In its early stages this fossil fuel is a spongy brown material called peat. 5. This fossil fuel provides about 40% of the world's electricity. 6. This fossil fuel produces more carbon dioxide than any other fossil fuel. 7. Before people can use this fossil fuel it is cleaned and separated at a special factory called a refinery. 8. Using this fossil fuel contributes to global warming. 9. More than half of this fossil fuel comes from the Middle East. 10. This fossil fuel burns the hottest, which makes it the most efficient for making electricity. ecokids.ca Puzzles & Word Games Coal, Oil or Natural Gas? How well do you know your fossil fuels? Beside each sentence below, write down whether it is talking about coal, oil, or natural gas. Watch out! Some may have more than one answer. Name the Fossil Fuel Coal 1. There is probably enough of this fossil fuel to last another 200 years. Oil & Natural gas 2. Started out as plankton (tiny plants and animals) millions of years ago.