Most of us are familiar with the concept of fossil fuels and the scrutiny they’ve come under over the last few decades in the context of damaging our ozone layer and polluting our resources. While many environmentalists point to carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide emissions in addition to methane (also known as natural gas), other hydrocarbons can also get lopped in with more questionable fuel sources. But is this relationship justified, or are there other hydrocarbon alternatives that can help make our world a cleaner and safer place to live? The answer is yes, and perhaps the most prevalent example of one of these cleaner fuel sources is propane.
Propane, although having trace amounts of carbon, isn’t as rich in harmful carbon-based molecules as other combustible materials. Coal for example, emits 228.6 pounds of CO2 per million BTU (measurement of energy) compared to the 139 pounds that propane emits to create the same amount of energy. Meanwhile gasoline and diesel produce 157.2 and 161.3 pounds respectively. The difference between gasoline (157.2) and propane (139) might not seem like much, but when multiplied over years of use, those additional carbon emissions add up.
Besides being more carbon efficient than these other fuel sources, propane is also non-toxic unlike some of its other hydrocarbon counterparts. If spilled, propane poses no threat to air or water, which means leaks are much more forgiving to the environment than other fuels like gasoline which can kill animals and plants outright. This contributes to propane’s role as a camping and outdoor fuel which can be transported easily and with little risk to environmental factors if released in its natural state. However, this does not mean that propane won’t cause oxygen deprivation when breathed in at a massive rate or enclosed space. Oxygen deprivation is a potential safety hazard for all gasses that aren’t oxygen, but it's important to note that propane can fall into this category as well, so safety guidelines should be followed to avoid such dangers.
Natural gas, one of propane’s primary competitors, actually has a lower carbon footprint when burned at only 117 pounds of CO2 per million BTUs. However, natural gas is methane, and methane, when released openly into the air, can be an exponentially more harmful ecological threat than carbon-dioxide. Over a 20 year period, methane contributes about 84 times the warming effect of carbon dioxide, but subsides over time to about 24 times the potency over a hundred year period. This means that natural gas is indeed better for the environment when burned compared to propane, but is far more harmful to the ozone when a leak occurs. This largely offsets the benefits of natural gas’s low carbon footprint, as utilizing it as an ecological solution can be worse than the problem in the first place. You can weigh these aspects for yourself, but propane is seemingly the safer choice when you want an ecologically friendly option in all cases, and not just during use. It's important to note that methane is also relatively non-toxic, similar to propane, but its intense long-term effect on the ozone should make people think twice before adopting the fuel for general purposes.
Given these factors, it would seem that propane is the most optimal way to limit our ozone footprint. If ecological sustainability is something that you value, but you still require a gas for your daily energy needs like cooking, heating, and electricity, or perhaps you need a gas for your outdoor adventures but don’t want to jeopardize the wildlife around you, consider switching to propane. The ecological advantages might not be immediately apparent, but they will pay off in a massive way for decades to come.