Help

CHE111 Scientific literacy assignment, 2018

Carefully read the article “Capturing atmospheric carbon: biological and nonbiological methods”, found at the link below:

https://academic.oup.com/ijlct/article/11/2/266/2198361

You will likely need to read it more than once to gain a thorough understanding. This is normal for reading scientific literature. Seek out help from peers, tutors, or your instructor to understand parts that are giving you trouble. Use the information contained in the article, as well as reliable secondary sources you may find on your own, knowledge learned from this class, and your own scientific reasoning skills to answer the following questions on a separate page:

1. The continuous use of fossil fuels, which currently fulfill approximately 80% of the world’s energy requirements,1 results in greenhouse gas emission. Greenhouse gases, mainly CO2, are the major drivers of global climate change.2 Use enthalpy of formation data to calculate the number of moles of carbon dioxide produced per kilowatt-hour of energy released from the combustion of each fuel under standard conditions (1 atm and 25 ⁰C):

a) Butane, C4H10 (l)

b) Heptane, C7H16 (l); ΔH⁰f = -223.91 kJ/mol

2. Define the term “carbon sink” and offer at least three examples.

3. In the paragraph entitled “Direct Injection of CO2 into the Ocean”, there is a statement that is scientifically incorrect. Identify this statement. Pretend you are speaking to a friend who is attending high school. Think of how you would explain to them what the authors meant to say by this statement. Re-write the statement for them in a scientifically sound way.

4. Identify two drawbacks of the method presented for chemical sequestration of CO2.

5. Use equation (2) in section 2.1.3 to calculate the mass (in kg) of Mg2SiO4 rock required to sequester 1000.0 liters of CO2 under the following conditions:

a) 1 atm and 25 ⁰C

b) 150 atm and 25 ⁰C

c) 1 atm and 650 ⁰C

Write a short paragraph comparing the three results. Explain the relationship between the variables of pressure, temperature and the amount of Mg2SiO4 rock required to store a given amount of CO2.

6. Activism is a theme being studied across many courses you may be taking at Barry this semester. Activism consists of efforts to effect social change, whether through political or social action, with the desire to make improvements in the world. One can find many examples of science-related activist groups, from the March for Science, to the Union of Concerned Scientists, to 314 Action.3 All are concerned with promoting scientific knowledge to the public and to politicians, so that scientifically-sound policy-making decisions can be made. Even while it is based on scientific understanding and reasoning, such activism is often controversial.

In the short video you can find here https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/13/activists-singing-god-bless-the-u-s-a-interrupt-u-s-coal-focused-event-at-climate-conference/?utm_term=.1fc7948367b1 , demonstrators at a UN Climate conference in 2017 interrupt a presentation by the White House energy policy advisor on ways to make fossil fuel energy cleaner, including carbon sequestration. The demonstrators believe that fossil fuel is never clean, and promoting strategies like carbon sequestration gives a false impression that the environmental harm done by burning fossil fuels can be mitigated. Former NY mayor Michael Bloomberg agreed with the demonstrators, tweeting “promoting coal at a climate summit is like promoting tobacco at a cancer summit.”4 The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change sees Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) as necessary to slow the steady march of climate change. Eighty-seven percent of IPCC models require carbon dioxide removal to join a litany of other climate mitigation activities to keep the world’s average temperature increase below 2 degrees.5 Considering all this, do you agree with mayor Bloomberg and the demonstrators, or with the panelists who say that coal will be with us for some time, and should be made as clean as possible? As always, use a scientific basis for your arguments. Answer in 150-200 words.

References:

1. Trading Economics. World - Fossil fuel energy consumption (% of total). https://tradingeconomics.com/world/fossil-fuel-energy-consumption-percent-of-total-wb-data.html

2. IPCC, 2013: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf

3. If interested, you can find out more about these organizations at their websites:

https://www.marchforscience.com/our-mission

https://www.ucsusa.org/about/history-of-accomplishments.html

http://www.314action.org/mission-1/

4. Twitter. @MikeBloomberg. https://twitter.com/MikeBloomberg/status/930121983492280320

5. IPCC, 2014: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg3/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-for-policymakers.pdf

In your answers, follow the ACS Style Guide rules for formatting citations:

Source type	Example
Book	Chang, R. General Chemistry: The Essential Concepts, 3rd ed.; McGraw-Hill: Boston, 2003.
Article in a scientific journal	Evans, D. A.; Fitch, D. M.; Smith, T. E.; Cee, V. J. Application of Complex Aldol Reactions to the Total Synthesis of Phorboxazole B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2000, 122, 10033-10046.
Article from an online journal	Peacock-Lopez, E. Exact Solutions of the Quantum Double Square-Well Potential. Chem. Ed. [Online] 2007, 11, 383-393 http://chemeducator.org/bibs/0011006/11060380lb.htm (accessed Aug 23, 2007).
Article in a popular/non-scientific magazine	Manning, R. Super Organics. Wired, May 2004, pp 176-181.
Web page	National Library of Medicine. Environmental Health and Toxicology: Specialized Information Services. http://sis.nlm.nih.gov/enviro.html (accessed Aug 23, 2004).

Distribution and General Education Scoring Rubric:

Trait	5	4	3	2	1
Perform unit conversions within the metric system Q1, Q5	Convert g to kg, and kWh to kJ successfully	Did all the conversions but with one mistake	Attempted both conversions but made more than one mistake	Realizes a factor of 1000, or 3600 is involved	Did not any conversions
Analytical Thinking Q1, Q5	Wrote balanced combustion equations, performed Heat of combustion and gas law calculations correctly.	Wrote equations and performed most calculations correctly, with one or two minor errors	Performed two of balanced equations, heats of combustion, and gas law calculations correctly	Performed one of balanced equations, heats of combustion, and gas law calculations correctly	Realized balanced equations were needed, or other partial attempt at calculations
Solve mole/stoichiometric problems successfully Q1, Q5	Performed both sets of stoichiometry calculations correctly	Performed calculations correctly except for minor errors	Overall logical procedure but with one section incorrect	Overall logical procedure but with more than one section incorrect, or one entire problem correct while the other is not.	Applied stoichiometric ratios, but in the wrong place, or inverted
Understanding scientific concepts from the text Q 2,4	Correct definition of carbon sink with three examples, and two drawbacks correctly identified	Partial identification of carbon sink or drawbacks, or incomplete/incorrect definition	One of two questions completely unacceptable	Partial effort on both questions	Some indication of understanding, but no clarity
Scientific Observation and Methods Q5	Explains relationship between variables completely, as borne out by the calculations	Explains relationship between some variables	Explains an inverse relationship to the true one for at least one variable	Explains incorrect relationships for two variables	No attempt at explaining relationship
Scientific literacy and communication of scientific concepts Q3, 6	All answers are in full, clearly written sentences, no or minor word-for-word copying, misstatement is identified and reworded, and explanations are understandable, having a scientific basis	Answers are in full sentences, understandable, with scientific basis but explanation of misstatement is unclear or not identified correctly	One of the answers is poorly-written, hard to understand, or lacks scientific basis	Both answers are poorly written, hard to understand, or lacks scientific basis.	One answer missing or answers have more than one problem.