Formation and Effects of Acid Rain Essay Example

Formation and Effects of Acid Rain Essay Example Formation and Effects of Acid Rain Essay Formation and Effects of Acid Rain Essay Acid rain is rain that has had an oxide of an element dissolved in it. The most common one is Sulphur dioxide (SO2), which has the highest proportion of 70% of all acid rain. Acid rain is produced when fossil fuels are burnt and they release chemical energy emissions such as Sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxide etc. These emissions stay in the atmosphere until they dissolve into the condensation of water (clouds). Prevailing winds take these clouds offshore (or a few miles away) and when it precipitates the rainwater that comes down is dilute sulphuric acid or dilute nitric acid. The PH Scale of substances. Substance PH Value Oven Spray cleaner 12.5 Alkali : Ammonia Solution 11 Kitchen Surface Cleaner 10 More Alkali Sea water 8.2 Distilled Water 7 Neutral Milk 6.8 Washing up Liquid 5.5 Normal Rain Water 5 More Acidic Acid Rain 4.5 Apple 3.2 Vinegar 1.1 Lemons 2.5 Lowest recorded Acid Rain 2.4 Dilute Nitric Acid 1 Acidic In general acid rain is quite weak, as the graph shows, its weaker then the strength of apples. Although the acid is quite weak there would be enough to change the acidic value of the soil and then, in turn, have catastrophic effects on the plants and wildlife surrounding it. The strongest acid would be highly corrosive it would be the same effect as pouring nitric acid on it. Here is a flow chart to show the effects of acid rain: Fossil fuels burnt with Sulphur and other content When burnt the emissions given off rise into the atmosphere They then become gaseous and dissolve in the rainwater The rain is now acidic and harmful Rain gets into rivers, which are then polluted, fish die. Soil loses magnesium and calcium to aluminum Trees roots and leaves are corrodes and die Some evaporates back into the clouds. Acid rain affects buildings, soil, wildlife, vegetation and humans health. The acid rain affects the vegetation because when the acids have dissolved into the clouds it stays there until it precipitates. When this happens the acid will be soaked up and absorbed into the soil. The vegetations supported by the soil (trees, plants etc) fine roots will get burnt/ dissolved by the acid. This means that the plant will not be able to get water; also any acid that has been absorbed up will continue to burn/dissolve from the inside out. Acid rain that has fallen directly onto the leaves will most probably dissolve them. Acid rain is such a problem because it causes devastation to wildlife, if a lake were to get more acidic then the wildlife can tolerate it will cause a chain reaction to all living things in the lake dying. If the algae died everything else will soon follow because the bottom layer of the food chain would have been killed off. Changes in UK emissions The greatest source of sulphur dioxide emissions in 1981 was from power stations. The greatest source of sulphur dioxide emissions in 1991 was from power stations. The greatest source of nitrogen oxides in 1981 was from other industry. The greatest source of nitrogen oxides in 1991 was from road transport. I think these are the greatest sources because the power stations are continuously pumping out tons of sulphur dioxides and nitrogen oxides. I think the amount of SO2 (sulphur dioxide) and Nox (nitrogen oxide) has decreased because more people are using electricity above gas. The emissions of SO2 and Nox have increased for road transport, not because cars have not got cleaner but due to the fact that there are many more cars in 1991 then there where in 1981 because more people commute to other places and its much more easier and convenient then walking. During the 1980s and the 1990s power stations were used to generate electricity. They used fossil fuels such as coal and oil to do this. Fossil fuels where created millions of years ago when dead plants and animals where put under a lot of pressure and where then chemically changed, hence the name fossil fuels. During this change they accumulated carbon and sulphur. For the energy in these fossil fuels to be gained they must be combusted (burnt) when this takes place the carbon and sulphur is released as a waste product. Because this was the main way to generate electricity a lot of power stations were used thus meaning many thousands of tons of fossil fuels were needed. Nitrogen oxides are generated mostly from cars and since many people had cars to commute a lot was produced. The UK is an Economically Developed Country (MEDc) and therefore has access to a wide range of technologies, which too, added to the formation of acid rain. Cars are used to get around by many people. Because of this we would emit a lot of nitrogen oxides. The amounts of nitrogen oxides and sulphur dioxides have generally been on a decrease with the exception of shipping and road transport. The decrease in most things is probably due to the more efficient energy sources, such as hydroelectric power, tidal power and nuclear power. This is because it has little initial cost and they release near to no waste energy (like carbon dioxide or sulphur dioxide etc). An increase of the emissions from transport and shipping is because, more people can afford to own cars and they use them more and transport across seas has increased because there are massive tankers and Ferries that take people across seas, also massive cargo ships transport goods across countries for trade. Domestic emissions have decreased because more people are using electric heaters rather then burning coal or gas for heat. Commercial and public services use more technological methods such as the Internet or email. More PowerStations are using renewable energy sources. Other transport methods are being taken over by electrical based ones, such as trams and trains. Acid rain is the creation of human activity I agree with this statement. It holds some truth about the creation of acid rain. If humans where not here there wouldnt be acid rain, rain water would always be slightly acid because of volcanoes etc but it would never reach a critical level for it to be a problem. Nature had emitted 1/3 of the total nitrogen and sulphur emissions in 1985; however humans emitted twice the amount. I think that humans will never be 100% environment friendly because its not in our nature. We need energy and the biggest source we obtain it from is fossil fuels, until these sources eventually run out we will never be environment friendly. Basically acid rain is the creation of human activity but in the past our ancestors would have produced near to nothing in terms of how much sulphur and nitrogen emissions they produced. People living in the Amazon rainforest do not produce any emissions. In a way acid rain didnt have to be the creation of human activity, it just is now. Acid Rain between Countries The graph that shows estimations of emissions and depositions of sulphur tells us what countries received the highest and lowest values for depositions and emissions. The four countries with the highest emissions are: Germany, United Kingdom, Poland and Italy. The countries with the lowest emissions are: Sweden, Austria/ Switzerland and Norway. The four countries with the highest deposition are: Germany, Poland, United Kingdom and France. The four countries with the lowest deposition are: Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark and Switzerland. The results show that the countries have a similar proportion of sulphur released in both emissions and depositions. The highest amounts of emissions and depositions were expected to be in the more urban areas and were. The urban areas have higher amounts because there are many more cars and factories which give out mass amounts of pollution, also there are more technologies in urban area which add to pollution. Rural areas have far less then these so in turn they produce a lot less sulphur. In the graph to show the percentage of sulphur received by other countries there is some more useful information telling us what countries receive the most and least amount of sulphur. Austria, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland receive the most sulphur from other countries, whereas the Czech Republic, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom receive the smallest amounts. There is a distinct connection between the information here. The pollution that comes from the urban areas moves (the wind takes it over seas) to the rural areas. Global Problems of Acid Rain Is acid rain a global problem? Acid rain is defiantly a global problem. This is because the wind takes away the clouds that contain the acid and send them to another country/nation. This means that the country that produces the acid rain is causing damage to another country. Countries in Europe such as the UK and Germany produce vast amounts of sulphur; however, Norway and Austria produce very little but are affected by acid rain and have more of a problem of it then UK and Germany. Germany and the United Kingdom receive their prevailing winds from the Atlantic Ocean; these same winds go on to other Countries in Europe such as Norway. When sulphur is released into the atmosphere it doesnt dissolve into the precipitation straight away. It takes some time for it to dissolve, whilst this is happening the clouds that contain the sulphur are moving out of one country and into the next by this time the sulphur has dissolved and when it rains the water is acidic. This matter is very difficult so solve because the richer nations want to continue to stay wealthy by using cheaper, more reliable energy sources. Political leaders of countries want to stay in power but to do so they must remain in public favor. They cannot create an environmental tax to pay to clean other countries because the people wouldnt want to pay. This means they will not vote for the politician that wants to bring this idea in action. This is why it is a complex situation; the countries on the receiving end do not want to pay to clear up another countries mess and the countries creating the mess cant generate the money to clear up their own mess. LEDCs would also generate a lot of sulphur because they do not have access and cant afford to use more re-usable/natural energy resources. These LEDCs need their energy as well but the result of this would affect other countries. LEDCs such as Kenya, Africa and Asia cant afford to clean up the mess they have given to other countries and the countries on the receiving end believe that its not themselves who should clean it up, but the country that produced it. This is where debates happen on how they should be sorted. Areas that have a high concentration of emissions or depositions are Britain, USA, Scandinavia, Africa and Asia. If all these countries had a system that would clean out the emissions three would be a lot less and because these countries have them they would pass it on to other countries. Both less and more economically developed countries both use high amounts of fossil fuels. The difference is that an MEDC can afford to clean it out, but they do not because the cost would be high and the people with the authority do not wish to implement it due to the cost factor. If they do implement it they would probably lose their position and power. LEDCs cannot afford the change. If a country was to clean its own atmosphere it would need large sums of money to do so continuously. To fulfill these requirements the government would also therefore, have to raise necessary taxes throughout the country If LEDCs in the future were to develop into more industrial towns they would require much more energy, thus meaning more pollution would be created and then needed to be cleaned up. The MEDCs would react quite badly if this were to happen. The MEDCs themselves would try and stop this happening or force them to change to renewable sources for their energy. The MEDCs would have many problems trying to implement these ideas upon the growing LEDCs though. Looking at countries pasts we know that all cities have grown and will grow a lot more in the future. Cities such as London and New York will continue to grow and when this happens they will need more land area. More technologies will be introduced in the cities and a lot more energy will be used, with all this comes a greater source of pollution. If countries were to implement renewable sources of energy they would have many problems. If wind farms were to be used they would take up a lot of land. Most land in England is either being used up by cities/towns and for farmland. Also the roads and motorways take up a lot of space. So soon there will not be enough land for wind farms. Hydro-electric power is also another for of renewable energy that could be introduced into an MEDC. Hydro-electric power has its advantages. It can produce a lot of energy and protect certain areas from flooding (due to the dam that has to be built). In order of hydro-electric power to be introduced I dam must be made on a river and the side the water is traveling from must be flooded and turned into a lake. This builds up the pressure and so makes the turbines in the damn turn faster. The problem of this is that a very large area of land must be flooded. Most major cities are built very close to water because when the people first built the foundations of a village it would have been near a fresh flowing water supply, a river. If the surroundings of the river got flooded it would be most likely that the city will be in the area that would be flooded. Because of the fresh water lots of trees and vegetation would be growing next to it, these would have to be burned before the land was flooded because they would poison the water. This would also destroy the wild life around the area. Acid rain has proven itself to be one of the biggest global problems. Countries that produce it cannot afford to clean it because they cant afford it. The countries that receive the effects of the acid rain shouldnt have to clean it up because they did not cause the problem. Acid rain is a global problem due to the fact that it affects many different people in different ways makes it a more complex problem. It affects things such as buildings. The acid will get onto the buildings and slowly weaken/corrode the material it is made out of, bricks etc. Older buildings such as cathedrals are being damaged by the acid because they are made out of limestone and acid dissolves the limestone. Lakes in areas that are effected by the acid rain will become more acidic then usual. This would then kill of all life in the lake because the fish and plants cannot cope with the acidity. The problem of acid rain should be acted upon quickly as more and more places of interest and tourist attractions are being ruined by the acid rain. Also lakes are being purged of all living things. Solutions to the acid rain problem There are many ways in which acid rain can be reduced or stopped altogether. The first thing that needs to be done is to make sure that all countries recognize and understand the problem of acid rain, whether it affects their country or not. The United Kingdom may not recognize that acid rain is as big a problem then people say it is because the United Kingdom doesnt receive many of the effects of acid rain. There are no straight forward ways of dealing with acid rain; each thing that can help has its draw backs. One way of solving the problem is to not use energy sources that create sulphur dioxides or nitrogen oxides. Countries that do not burn a lot of fossil fuels such as Norway wouldnt have a problem with this because they can easily revert to renewable energy. Countries such as North American would have the biggest problems. They burn up a lot of fossil fuels for their energy. If they were to stop using fossil fuels all of a sudden they would face economical disaster. They woul dnt have enough energy to power the country. Renewable energy doesnt offer as much as energy as fossil fuels. Another good idea is to place filters on the outgoing waste gasses in factories. This would clean a great deal of the waste gases out but will never make it 100% environmentally friendly. A big drawback of this is the fact that people would have to clean them or buy new filters. This would in turn cost a lot of money. Another solution for cleaning up acid rain is to spread limestone over the affected area that has been acidified. The limestone is an alkali and the sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides are acids. When acids and alkalis react together they counteract each other. Basically the acidity is neutralised by the limestone. This process would take along time so the limestone would be chemically altered by adding heat and then water; this would then turn it into slaked lime and is a much stronger alkali. This would cost a lot of money to do though and it would be difficult to establish how much lime would be needed because if they put too much lime the soil/lake would become alkali. Many countries are trying to work together to find a solution that in a way is beneficial to everyone. This can be very difficult because to clear up any problems a country would need to generate money for it. If the prime minister or president suggested an economical tax he would most probably be de-elected because this would mean the taxes would go up and its not in the publics interest to pay more money to clean up other peoples countries. All countries should decide on a maximum amount of emissions they can produce in each month, if all countries followed this then it would in turn reduce global emissions slightly. If countries were to negotiate terms of what they should do all opinions will be biased towards their own country. They would be biased because they want a decision to be made that is in favor of their own country and so they have to pay the minimum amount they can get away with. My opinion on acid rain is that lots of filters should be attached to the outputs of waste gases. This would lower the amount of acidic emissions produced. Also on top of that the country that wants to clean up its environment should do it itself. They should raise money by hosting events and through some taxes, this way people would approve more because the money will be going to their own country. Also by cleaning up their own environment they can have something done about it in the not so distant future instead of waiting for politicians to make decisions which can take years. Also if more countries switched to renewable sources and dedicated a lot of money and land for this to take place it would reduce a lot of emissions. In the future humans at the global scale will have to convert to renewable energy sources, it is unavoidable. Soon (approx 300 years) the worlds fossil fuels will run out and humans will relay solely upon these renewable energy sources to feed the ever increasing demand for energy. As time passes the technology of humans advances and soon a new renewable power source will be the main source of our energy. The renewable energy sources we have at the moment normally have a high initial cost of energy which takes a long time to break even with the amount of money that it needed to set up and the amount of money/electricity it has produced. In time the amount of sulphur dioxides and nitrogen oxides in the atmosphere will fall, hopefully they will fall before too much of the earth has been damaged, such as the polar ice caps melting as a result of global warming.