What is Environmental

Thermodynamics?
R. F. Mueller

Aluminum cans are collected from roadsides and transported to a

recycling center. A helicopter is used to fly junk out of a wilderness
area. Does nature come out ahead in these "cleanup" activities?

Hydrogen is frequently proposed as the clean fuel of the future.

Does this make sense?

A tractorcade is formed to protest the demise of the family farm.

How does this rank as appropriate symbolism?

A newly hired pollution control engineer for an industrial firm

makes $200,000 a year, buys a large house in the suburbs and
drives to work. How is this person's life style related to the firm's
pollution control efforts?

Increasingly environmentalists feel a need to reevaluate a variety

of proposals and actions once thought to be non- controversial or
beneficial to the environment. In this deeper analysis they
inevitably confront concepts of thermodynamics, a science whose
very name my strike fear into those not technically oriented. Yet,
the assimilation of the central ideas of thermodynamics is not only
crucial but fairly easy for anyone smart enough to be an
environmentalist in the first place.

Before we discuss environmental thermodynamics we need to

define what thermodynamics as such is. We find first of all that its
subject matter is energy conversion. A thermodynamic process
occurs each time one form of energy is converted into another,
which includes every material process, including mental activity. A
common industrial thermodynamic process, for example, is the
conversion of the chemical energy of fuels into heat energy of
combustion, and this heat is in turn converted to mechanical or
electrical work. All natural processes also have a thermodynamic
aspect and the behavior of such diverse objects as minerals, stars
and life itself cannot be understood without it.

The most important contribution of thermodynamics is in

determining whether a given conceivable process is possible or
not.. Thermodynamics answers this question by making use of its
famous first and second laws. The first is the law of the
conservation of energy, while the second implies the impossibility
of constructing a perpetual motion machine or the spontaneous
transfer of heat from a low to a high temperature reservoir by a
cyclic process. The latter also involves the concept of entropy.
Although energy is a quite well understood concept, that of entropy
is less so. A simple way to understand entropy is to consider it as
an index of disorder or the absence of order. Disordered or high
entropy states occur with the highest probability because there are
relatively more ways to achieve them. Thus, there are many more
ways to disorder (shuffle) a deck of cards than to place it in an
ordered array.

A fundamental concept of thermodynamics is that of "system" vs.

"surroundings". We may, for example, be interested in a particular
system consisting of a chemical fuel, oxygen to burn it, and the
combustion products, carbon dioxide and water. But the total
behavior of this system cannot be understood without reference to
the surroundings, with which it may exchange both energy and
matter. This concept is particularly important to us because
"surroundings" is here synonymous with "environment."

The first law of thermodynamics is simply one of bookkeeping and

expresses the fact that energy is always conserved or that any
process must yield as much energy, albeit in different form, as was
put into it in the first place. Thus, the total number of calories in
the heat, sound waves, air pollution, etc. produced by a machine
must equal the chemical energy-also in calories-placed in the fuel
tank. Strangely, this simple relation is widely ignored, particularly
by pollution control experts, who almost invariably fail to take into
account all significant energy inputs into their particular
technology, and by certain industry propagandists who are
promoting some wasteful technology.

By contrast, the second law is the very antithesis of conservation,

since it expresses the spontaneous creation of entropy or disorder
that drives the process. Here the key word is spontaneous, since
any independent process that is possible must be
thermodynamically spontaneous, which, in this sense, means any
process that does not require help from an outside energy source.
The second law states that in such a process the total entropy (of
system plus surroundings) always increases. If the total entropy
change for any conceivable process is negative, we can be sure
that it is impossible in practice unless outside energy is brought to
bear.
There is another concept of thermodynamics known as "free
energy". It is actually energy only in a formal sense, since it
simultaneously incorporates both the energy and entropy of the
system. It is directly and simply related to the total entropy and like
it is an index of the possibility or impossibility of any process we
might conceive of. Unlike total entropy, however,
it decreases during a spontaneous process. Free energy turns out
to be a convenient way to characterize pollutants of all kinds, since
these always have more of it than their degradation products. For
example, under Earth surface conditions there is a marked
decrease in free energy when the pollutant carbon monoxide is
converted to carbon dioxide and subsequently, by reaction with
calcium oxide, to harmless carbonate minerals (limestone). It is a
fact that virtually all materials useful to modern society carry a
heavy burden of free energy-and ordinary energy as well-which
they acquire as a necessary part of the manufacturing process, or
which they possess in nature, as is the case with fuels. It is this
"excess" free energy that gives all our favorite gadgets and trinkets
such great potential as pollutants. It also forges a link of
inevitability between energy in all its technological forms and the
resulting pollution.

It should be obvious at this point that thermodynamics must have

important practical as well as philosophical implications for
environmentalists. It is sometimes implied that entropy and free
energy are mysterious and vague concepts of no use in practical
affairs. Some readers may be surprised to learn that numerical
values of both quantities are regularly tabulated and used in
everyday calculations vital to industry and every branch of science.
The philosophical side of thermodynamics stands out in the
characteristic of spontaneity of all independent energy
transformations, since, if the process is truly spontaneous, it must
contain uncontrollable elements. We should then ask ourselves to
what extent technologists really control any of the energetic
processes they set in motion.

As powerful as thermodynamics is, it shares with other successful

theories the characteristic of strict limitations. Since it depends for
its success on the statistics of large numbers, it cannot be used to
predict the behavior of individual or small numbers of atoms or
molecules. Nor does it explicitly contain time as part of its
structure, so that it cannot predict when or how rapidly a process
will occur.

Environmental thermodynamics, like its familiar counterparts, is

concerned with energy conversions and flows. Rather than being
confined to individual machines or wholly natural processes,
however, it is concerned with the interactions of technology and
the natural world. As such it is very much concerned with human
behavior and life styles. Thus, technological energy flows are
involved in their entirety, from initial production, through
consumption, and to eventual radiation into space. Unlike industrial
thermodynamics, it does not stop with the evaluation of inputs and
outputs of useful work energy and products, but follows these
products and accompanying waste through all the devious paths
and interactions in the biosphere, its organisms and humankind
itself. Consequently, it is the science peculiarly suited to casting
light on questions such as those posed earlier as well as
generalizations such as "clean" or "soft" technological energy.
Most significant, perhaps, is that it enables us to raise and answer
important questions.

Now let us return to our examples stated at the beginning of this

piece. We note first that rejecting something (cans, bottles, refuse)
into the environment is a relatively spontaneous process (by any
definition of the word!) because the rejected material represents a
highly disordered and hence probable state. As in the case of a
deck of cards, there are many more ways to throw things away
than to reclaim them in an ordered array. Also, reclaiming them
requires a substantial input of energy. When aluminum companies
speak of the energy advantage of reclaimed aluminum cans over
new cans made from ore, they do not consider the "throw away
entropy" involved, since many of these cans are picked up from
roadsides. The energy cost of overcoming this entropy could be
greatly reduced by mandatory recycling for metal content of the
cans. It might be further reduced by retaining and cleaning the
cans, thus saving their "form energy" as well. However, in this
alternative the energy cost of cleaning would have to be balanced
against the cost of re-melting and re-forming. For similar reasons a
heavy penalty is paid for a relatively small return in cleaning up a
wilderness area by machine. The only good solution is not to
pollute in the first place.

The same reasoning also applies to toxic chemical dumps. The

greatest benefit of such legislation as "superfund" may be not in
cleaning up existing dumps, which simply leads to more pollution,
but in suppressing the type of industrial development which
inevitably results in some form of pollution despite best efforts to
control it.

The question regarding presumed benefits of hydrogen as a fuel

can be answered by reference to ordinary thermodynamic tables.
Sources of hydrogen are natural hydrocarbons and water.
Exploitation of the former is through thermochemical technologies
by which heat is used to drive chemical reactions that yield
hydrogen. In the case of a water source, electrolytic or photolytic
processes separate the hydrogen from the oxygen in the water
molecule. In all cases a huge expenditure of energy is required to
separate hydrogen from the other constituents. This energy would
likely come from a large, readily available source such as the
highly polluting fossil or nuclear power plants. However, even if
solar power were used for this purpose, it can be shown that this
energy form would also require a highly polluting infrastructure and
would degrade to pollution-prone forms on use.

Similarly, the favorite tactic of the American Agricultural movement

should not impress environmentalists who demand consistency in
their symbolism. It has been convincingly argued (1) that a major
source of difficulties experienced by today's farmers is
overproduction, which depends upon over-mechanization ( well
symbolized by large tractors!), resulting in debt, soil degradation,
etc. A technology that can't work with heavy inputs of fossil
fuels and solar energy can scarcely claim thermodynamic
efficiency, or indeed, any kind of efficiency.

Our last example, that of the pollution control engineer, is of

greatest interest here, since it represents the officially sanctioned
and endorsed solution to industrial pollution. Also, many
environmentalists would consider the creation of this job as not
only a desirable response on the part of industry, but as a positive
economic spin-off of pollution control. Yet, the total cultural
ramifications of technology-based, energy intensive pollution
control strategies are seldom given a thought by industry,
government or their critics. Some light is cast on the underlying
factors here by an important study of energy analysts B. Hannon
and R. A. Herendeen (2) , who showed how total family energy use
by consumers rises directly with income in an almost straight line
relation. Given the correspondence between technological energy
and pollution previously identified here, it is clear that our affluent
pollution control engineer must contribute a significant increment
of pollution and that this is multiplied by other newly created jobs,
not only in industry, but in the state and federal agencies as well.
Add this culturally-derived pollution to that produced by the primary
production and the pollution control technology itself, and we see
at least the potential of a serious circularity. Finally, it must also be
remembered that by the first law the original pollution energy is
usually not eliminated by control devices, but is only transformed
or diverted elsewhere. It is unfortunate that neither industry nor
 government has so far been inspired enough by thermodynamic
reasoning to seriously consider these problems.

At this point I wouldn't blame the reader for being discouraged at

the apparent proclivity of thermodynamics to dash water on
everyone's fondest hopes. But if thermodynamic considerations are
hard on naive pollution control efforts, they will probably turn out to
be lethal to many of our most environmentally destructive
technologies, old and new, particularly if free energy outflows from
them into the environment are taken into account. This goes
particularly for such examples as the automobile-centered
transportation system, stream modification projects, nuclear power,
and lately, the synfuels industry. Although none of these
monstrosities has ever been subject to full analysis, their
thermodynamic weaknesses are beginning to be revealed in
economic terms. As Georgescu-Roegen (3) has suggested,
accounting properly for all the energy and material flows in such
technologies would require a drastic revision in our economic
system. Thus thermodynamics becomes a powerful and even
necessary instrument of social change that we should welcome.

REFERENCES
The New Farm 3,12, 1981.

Science 168, 95, 1975.

Southern Economic Journal 41, 347, 1975.

Back to the Energy Home | Back to the VFW Home | Feedback

Second Law of Thermodynamics

Second Law of Thermodynamics - The Laws of Heat Power
The Second Law of Thermodynamics is one of three Laws of Thermodynamics. The
term "thermodynamics" comes from two root words: "thermo," meaning heat, and
"dynamic," meaning power. Thus, the Laws of Thermodynamics are the Laws of
"Heat Power." As far as we can tell, these Laws are absolute. All things in the
observable universe are affected by and obey the Laws of Thermodynamics.

The First Law of Thermodynamics, commonly known as the Law of Conservation of

Matter, states that matter/energy cannot be created nor can it be destroyed. The
quantity of matter/energy remains the same. It can change from solid to liquid to
gas to plasma and back again, but the total amount of matter/energy in the
universe remains constant.
Second Law of Thermodynamics - Increased Entropy
The Second Law of Thermodynamics is commonly known as the Law of Increased
Entropy. While quantity remains the same (First Law), the quality of matter/energy
deteriorates gradually over time. How so? Usable energy is inevitably used for
productivity, growth and repair. In the process, usable energy is converted into
unusable energy. Thus, usable energy is irretrievably lost in the form of unusable
energy.

"Entropy" is defined as a measure of unusable energy within a closed or isolated

system (the universe for example). As usable energy decreases and unusable
energy increases, "entropy" increases. Entropy is also a gauge of randomness or
chaos within a closed system. As usable energy is irretrievably lost, disorganization,
randomness and chaos increase.
Second Law of Thermodynamics - In the Beginning...
The implications of the Second Law of Thermodynamics are considerable. The
universe is constantly losing usable energy and never gaining. We logically conclude
the universe is not eternal. The universe had a finite beginning -- the moment at
which it was at "zero entropy" (its most ordered possible state). Like a wind-up
clock, the universe is winding down, as if at one point it was fully wound up and has
been winding down ever since. The question is who wound up the clock?

The theological implications are obvious. NASA Astronomer Robert Jastrow

commented on these implications when he said, "Theologians generally are
delighted with the proof that the universe had a beginning, but astronomers are
curiously upset. It turns out that the scientist behaves the way the rest of us do
when our beliefs are in conflict with the evidence." (Robert Jastrow, God and the
Astronomers, 1978, p. 16.)

Jastrow went on to say, "For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of
reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance;
he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is
greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries." (God
and the Astronomers, p. 116.) It seems the Cosmic Egg that was the birth of our
universe logically requires a Cosmic Chicken..

thermodynamics
The Thermodynamic System and Its Environment

In thermodynamics, one usually considers both the thermodynamic system and its environment. The
environment often contains one or more idealized heat reservoirsheat sources with infinite heat
capacity enabling them to give up or absorb heat without changing their temperature. (An ocean or other
large body of water approximates a heat reservoir.) A typical thermodynamic system is a definite quantity
of gas enclosed in a cylinder with a sliding piston that allows the volume to vary. In general, a
thermodynamic system is defined by its temperature, volume, pressure, and chemical composition. A
system is in equilibrium when these variables have the same value at all points.
A mathematical statement that links the variables to show their interdependence is called an equation of
state; the gas laws are simple examples of such equations. Equations of state take on their simplest form
when the Kelvin temperature scale is used; on this scale 0 corresponds to the lowest temperature
theoretically possible.
When the external conditions are altered, a thermodynamic system will respond by changing its state; the
temperature, volume, pressure, and chemical composition will adjust to a new equilibrium. The most
important kinds of changes are adiabatic and isothermal changes. An adiabatic change is one that occurs
without any flow of heat. The system is thermally insulated from the environment, and the first law of
thermodynamics requires that the work done by or on the system be equal to the loss or gain of the
system's internal energy. An isothermal change occurs when the system is in contact with a heat
reservoir, so that the system remains at the temperature of the reservoir. In the isothermal process, heat
flows from the reservoir if the system is expanding and into the reservoir if the system is being
compressed. For an ideal gas the internal energy depends only on the temperature; hence the internal
energy remains constant during an isothermal change, and the heat absorbed from or by the reservoir is
equal to the work done on or by the environment.