Tag: Science

With the near release of the Nissan Leaf and the Chevrolet Volt, both 100% electric driven automobiles, I thought that it would be appropriate to reflect on the history and technology of the automobile.  Actually, the Volt also has an internal combustion engine on board, but that engine runs a generator, so both of these cars are exclusively driven by electric motors.

The engine to generator concept is not at all new, as practically all big Diesel locomotives are driven that way.  There are significant advantages in using electric motors to propel vehicles, even if they are powered by on board generators.  We shall get to that in future.

The oil has gone? Tell that to Gulf coast residents

By Rupert Cornwell, independent.co.uk — 6 August 2010

And though only a quarter of the 4.9m barrels reckoned to have leaked is still unaccounted, that represents the equivalent of five Exxon Valdez, the tanker whose spill caused an environmental catastrophe in Alaska in 1989.

“There are still boats out there every day working, finding turtles with oil on them and seeing grass lines with oil in it,” charter boat captain Randy Boggs, of Orange Beach in Alabama, told the Associated Press. “All the oil isn’t accounted for. There are millions of pounds of tar balls and oil on the bottom.”

Turns out, This — TIMES 5 —

IS mostly STILL There! … lurking somewhere, just below the surface …

Technology is a double-edged sword.

It can spark the furnace, that keeps you alive in the winter.

It can spark a wild fire, that consumes all its path.

But then again, Lightning can cause the same damage —

WITHOUT the assist of human innovation.

Technology is a double-edged sword.

It can lead to increased crop production, to feed the masses;

which in turn, can lead to increased masses,

that taxes that same crop production.

Technology is a double-edged sword.

Sometimes the simplest of inventions —

can change the world;

often in ways, never imagined by the inventors.

Such innovations have been call “Disruptive Technology” —

because their impact, is SO unexpected,

and yet SO useful — that they spin off other innovations,

and industries, and businesses, and even

entirely new ‘ways of life’ …

Now for a little exercise in News Spin Cycles, vs the Scientific Process …

When the Facts, finally come in, IS Anyone even still Paying Attention?

“What we have learned completely changes the idea of what an oil spill is,” said chemical oceanographer David Hollander, one of three USF researchers credited with the matching samples of oil taken from the water with samples from the BP well. “It has gone from a two-dimensional disaster to a three-dimensional catastrophe.”

[…]

Together, the two studies confirm what in the early days of the spill was denied by BP and viewed skeptically by NOAA’s chief – that much of the crude that gushed from the Deepwater Horizon well stayed beneath the surface of the water.

[link to follow]

ClimateGate Advocates — just got their work cut out for them …

Emissions, Concentrations, and Impacts Over Decades to Millennia

July 16, 2010  

Choices made now about carbon dioxide emissions reductions will affect climate change impacts experienced not just over the next few decades but also in coming centuries and millennia, says a new report from the National Research Council. Because CO2 in the atmosphere is long lived, it can effectively lock the Earth and future generations into a range of impacts, some of which could become very severe.

Who is the National Academies?

ABOUT:

The National Academies perform an unparalleled public service by bringing together committees of experts in all areas of scientific and technological endeavor. These experts serve pro bono to address critical national issues and give advice to the federal government and the public.

Four organizations comprise the Academies: the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council.

BP buys up Gulf scientists for legal defense, roiling academic community

Ben Raines, Press-Register — July 16, 2010

More than one scientist interviewed by the Press-Register described being offered $250 an hour through BP lawyers. At eight hours a week, that amounts to $104,000 a year.

[…]

The contract makes it clear that BP is seeking to add scientists to the legal team that will fight the Natural Resources Damage Assessment lawsuit that the federal government will bring as a result of the Gulf oil spill.

Is it their Scientific Expertise, that they want —

Or their Scientific Silence?

One of my techie hopes is that Science will one day figure out how to Split our excess CO2 production, back into its component parts:  C and O  (harmless Carbon and Oxygen).

One small problem though — Carbon Chemical Bonds are among the strongest bonds out there.  These chemical bonds are the reason HydroCarbons (long chains of Carbon atoms tied to each other, and padded by Hydrogen Atoms), can power our homes, our vehicles, and our Electric power plants.

Burning a HydroCarbon molecule releases all that condensed Energy, previously stored in those Carbon Chain bonds, by millions of years of Geologic heat and pressure.

methane

propane

butane

pentane

hexane

octane

and you may get an idea WHAT “fueled” our Industrial Age — the quick and easy release of all that Chemical Energy, stored in all those Organic Carbon bonds.

Anyone got a Match?

Transportation Without Petroleum or Biofuels

copyright © 2010 Betsy L. Angert.  BeThink.org

At present, oil saturates the Gulf Stream.  An official six-month cessation of permits for new drilling did not actually affect the industry or government decisions.  Despite Moratorium, Drilling Projects Move Ahead.  To explain such an authorization and waiver, the Department of the Interior and the Minerals Management Services Division which regulates drilling, pointed to public statements by Interior Secretary, Ken Salazar.  He did not intend to forbid all first cuts in the Earth’s crust.  Absolutely not.  The Federal Government approved wells off the coast of Louisiana in June. Regardless of the day, or realities that are anathema to our citizenry, little has truly changed.  Today, just as in yesteryear, we, the people of the United States of America, in order to form a more perfect Union, polish policies to appear as though our civilization would wish to protect and defend all beings, equally.  

Contrary to some popular opinion, salt is an essential part of the diet.  Unfortunately, it is possible to get too much of a good thing, and that is true in the case of salt.

On the other hand, it is possible to become deficient in salt, although that is quite rare with a modern western diet.  However, vegans and other vegetarians can become deficient, especially when performing strenuous work in hot weather, since sweat is about 0.9% salt.

Hot off the Presses …

Scoop: Gulf well may be gushing 25,000 to 30,000 barrels

By Joel Achenbach, washingtonpost.com — June 10, 2010; 4:00 PM ET

Just filed to the web some new figures we obtained this afternoon from the federal government that suggest the Deepwater Horizon well is gushing more oil than previously estimated.

The Flow Rate Technical Group has about five subgroups, and the one that is looking at the video of the leak, the so-called plume team,

has come up with an estimate of 20,000 to 40,000 barrels a day,

with the most likely range being 25,000 to 30,000 barrels.

The team had earlier estimated the flow at 12,000 to 25,000 barrels.

BP has reported today yesterday (-Sunday- Monday) that they collected 6100 10,000 barrels of oil in the past 24 hours.  This is stupendous!  (Note:  the volume changes.  It was over 10,000 in 24 hours now, but that just reinforces my point).

If this is correct, and it seems to be, if they can tune their collection device a bit more, they can collect more, perhaps much more.  You do not understand the ramifications of this development.  If correct, BP will go down in history as the most important cog in the wheel of energy independence ever for the United States.  Please allow me to elaborate.

This topic was suggested a couple of months ago by a reader who was thoughtful enough to comment and recommend it.  I appreciate reader feedback very much, and actually likely would not write this series if not for it.

There are many terms that are used incorrectly, sometimes by people who should know better.  I am not taking about casual conversation, where the rules for precision are looser, but rather in more technical communications.  News readers are particularly prone to do this, and unfortunately that is associated with an air of authority.