The sun is NOT an “infinite” source of power


Now the sun is the ultimate source of the vast majority of energy that is available to humans and will outlast us. But it is NOT an “infinite” source of power.

And yes, there are technological challenges associated with solar energy (e. g. storage, conversion, etc.). But these are worth taking on.

June 3, 2014 Posted by | energy, science | | Leave a comment

Nature Friday: GMOs, Chernobyl animals, energy, frogs, exercises and fisheries….

Exercise There is some evidence that exercise can clear unnecessary stuff in the short term memory. Tests on mice have shown that treadmill running helps them forget electric shocks. But there is more in this article:

Adult mice that exercised on a running wheel after experiencing an event were more likely than their inactive mates to forget the experience, according to a paper from researchers at the University of Toronto, published in Science today (May 8). The results suggest that the production of new neurons—neurogenesis—prompted by the exercise wiped out the mice’s memories. They might also explain why human infants, whose brains exhibit abundant neurogenesis, do not have long-term memories.

“In general, hippocampal neurogenesis has been thought to be the basis for memory and they’re suggesting that it’s the basis for amnesia,” said Thomas Insel, director of the National Institute of Mental Health. “That’s a very controversial and provocative concept.”

Infantile amnesia is common to all humans. Children typically do not develop long-term memories until age three or four. But why is that? Sheena Josselyn and her husband Paul Frankland, who are both neuroscientists at the University of Toronto, pondered precisely that question after noticing that their two-year-old daughter could easily remember things that happened within a day or two, but not several months in the past.

More specifically, they wondered whether it might have something to do with neurogenesis in the hippocampus—a brain region involved in learning and memory. Hippocampal neurons are produced rapidly during infancy, but neuronal generation in the region slows to a trickle in adulthood. “This inverse relationship between the levels of neurogenesis and the ability to form a long-term memory got us thinking that maybe one is due to the other,” said Josselyn.

Surf to the link to read more.

Energy: this photo was captioned: “How windfarms RUIN landscapes – shocking illustration of the destruction wrought by wind industry fanatics” (via @Jonathan_Leake on Twitter)


Government intervention and fisheries: Via Paul Krugman:

Brad Plumer tells an important, little-known tale. It begins with things going badly:

Back in the 1980s and ’90s, many fisheries in the US were in serious trouble. Fish populations were dropping sharply. Some of New England’s best-known groundfish stocks — including flounder, cod, and haddock — had collapsed, costing the region’s coastal communities hundreds of millions of dollars.

So the government got involved. But we know that government is always the problem, never the solution; so you know what came next.

Or maybe you don’t. In fact, government intervention has been a big success. Many fisheries have rebounded, to the benefit of the fishermen as well as consumers.

Fighting climate change isn’t really all that different from saving fisheries; if we ever get around to doing the obvious, it will be easier and more successful than anyone now expects.

There are types of frogs whose males dance to attract mates (surf to the page to see the video) but, unfortunately, these frogs are endangered. These are small, walnut size frogs.


Animals of Chernobyl
Since background radiation is too high for humans to live there, the exclusion zone around Chernobyl is like a wild habitat. So, scientists are seeing some interesting developments in the animals of the region.

GMO issues Here is a guide to looking at some of the anti-GMO stuff that is out there.

May 9, 2014 Posted by | biology, energy, environment, frogs, nature, science | , , , , | Leave a comment

Intellectual narcissism, woos, whack jobs, protesters and reptilian corporations

These two internet “broadsides” made me chuckle:



Note: the upper picture is about the recent IRS scandal of targeting groups that had “conservative sounding names”. While what the IRS did was wrong, I think that no political group should have tax-exempt status, and that includes groups that I like (such as Priorities USA).

The lower photo lampoons the louder, more scientifically ignorant anti-GMO protesters by playing upon this true incident in which Christine O’Donnell said that US companies were “cross breeding humans and animals” and breeding mice with “fully functional human brains” (in reality, the companies grew a human “progenitor cell” into a mouse where it developed into a fully functional MOUSE BRAIN CELL.)

This reminded me of two incidents a long time ago.
The first occurred at a mathematics conference. Some mathematics professors asked me if I’d sign a petition protesting a female mathematics professor not geting tenure at the University of California, Berkeley. I declined to sign and gave the following reasons:
1. Her field of research was NOT mine and
2. I am in no way qualified to judge scholarship at such a level. Any objective search committee would throw out my CV well before any “short list” was made for a job opening at that institution.

So, absent some sort of evidence that said “she is qualified but she is getting turned down due to her sex”, I couldn’t sign such a petition. That does NOT mean that the petitioners weren’t right; they might have been!

The second incident occurred at a Unitarian Universalist church camp. Some teenager had a “clipboard” petition asking the government to devote “more money to….” (AIDS research, I think).

So I asked: “what is the current funding level, why would that be optimal, and what do you proposed be cut in its stead, or how would we raise the money?” The person holding the clipboard gave me a look of astonishment…as if “why would these be pertinent questions?” Frankly, I would have settled for an answer of the following type: “this was budgeted by the President but the House cut this and added X instead” or “Senator X proposed this but the GOP filibustered due to pressure from….” or even “I don’t know the details but Scientific American has a good article on why this research is currently underfunded…”. But of course, I got NONE of that.

And so it goes with Monsanto and anti-GMO protesters. I am NOT saying that there aren’t issues with Monsanto’s business practices (I’d like to educate myself on these). I am not saying that there aren’t GMO-crop related issues (such as such crops needing more pesticides due to their sending out stronger pollination signals, or due to the POSSIBLE rushing into new technologies before they’ve been conservatively tested).

But one has to be careful as to how one educates themselves. For one: mainstream outlets are notorious for being fooled (example) Yes, it sometimes happens that a non-renowned scientist/mathematician comes up with a genuine groundbreaking result (example) but in this case, the results were submitted to and verified by the editors and referees at Annals of Mathematics, the top journal in mathematics.

And frankly, much of the “science” that comes from the mouths of the loudest activists is either gibberish, or unfounded opinions or fears. It is almost as if people of this sort think that their confidence in their own opinion constitutes “evidence”.

I’ve seen this “from the other side”, so to speak.

Back in the early 1980’s, I was in the nuclear Navy. We did class room training, and then had training at prototype nuclear reactors. Outside of these reactor complexes, you had protestors (sometimes Catholic nuns) passing out leaflets which were designed to…well…I guess convince us that what we were doing was dangerous, wrong or harmful.

So I was polite and I took them. I read them. And they were hilariously wrong; it was clear that whoever wrote those had no understanding of science or engineering.

This is NOT to say there aren’t legitimate issues concerning nuclear power (storage of waste, mining, possibility of natural disasters (Fukushima), antiquated plants and designs (Fukushima again), industries taking money saving safety shortcuts, regulation (those who know most about nuclear power and are most qualified to oversee it are those who worked in it…huge potential for conflict of interest).

But I have no interest in listening to someone who has no better qualifications than confidence in their own opinions and in their own abilities to digest pop-level science.

This is why I followed the Fukushima incident via Scientific American and via the MIT nuclear science and engineering sites.

The same applies to the GMO stuff. There are science issues, and I don’t trust large corporations to properly balance public safety with the pursuit of maximum profit. I am for educating myself, but listening to some “activist” website or listening to some woo rant, rave and make bad analogies isn’t education. It is an irritating waste of time.

There are times when I grumble about there being “no difference between liberals and conservatives” when it comes to uninformed people trying to obtain a captive audience for their quackery and being offended when they are blown off.

But there is one difference: on the whole, liberals have a bit more freedom to say “ok, in this instance, most conservatives are saying X and they are right on this issue”; conservatives who do the same tend to be labeled as “no longer being conservative” (e. g., think of a conservative who admits that there is human caused or human aggravated climate change; how do other conservatives react to that person?)

May 25, 2013 Posted by | energy, environment, political humor, politics/social, science, social/political, technology | , , | Leave a comment

I am what is wrong with America!

Not only did I vote for President Obama…


See: I am running up those huge costs in medicine! Oh wait…maybe not. 🙂

And, not only do I drive a Prius:

Virginia’s Governor, Bob McDonnell has an interesting solution to his state’s revenue problem. He plans on dropping the gasoline tax and instead taxing internet shoppers and Prius owners.

McDonnell sees Priuses and other “alternative fuel” automobiles as a threat to the state’s coffers. The state gasoline tax has remained largely unchanged over the last several decades and even with rising gasoline prices, the tax revenue has remained flat, primarily due to more fuel efficient cars.

Gasoline powered cars are one of the largest threats to the environment. Most people would probably feel that lower gasoline consumption would be a good thing for everyone. Not McDonnell. His plan is to reward gas-guzzling drivers by eliminating the state gasoline tax for them and to punish fuel efficient drivers by taxing them. […]

as Slate puts it:

McDonnell thinks it’s high time to shift the burden of paying for the state’s roads from people who buy gas to people who buy, well, everything else. His plan is to replace the gas tax with an increase in sales tax while also shifting money from other state programs. He’d leave in place a state tax on diesel fuel, which everyone knows is un-American anyway. And, perhaps as a scrap of red meat to conservatives inclined to fight the sales tax hike, he wants to throw in a $100 annual fee on drivers of hybrid and alternative-fuel vehicles. The only thing missing from McDonnell’s proposal is a special highway lane exclusively for single-driver SUVs.

Ok, it is even worse than that. I……walk…to….work (it isn’t that far; less than .4 miles)…and take the stairs to my 4’th floor office.

I hang my head in shame…..


February 4, 2013 Posted by | energy, political humor, politics, republicans | , | Leave a comment

National Academy of Science video on Climate Change

It is 26 minutes long but pretty good. It takes on many of the “arguments” offered by the deniers:

July 4, 2012 Posted by | energy, environment, nature, science | Leave a comment

Mitt Romney’s Book: No Apology (Hardcover edition). Worth Reading

I finished Mitt Romney’s book No Apology (hardback edition). I’ll give a brief summary and then follow the summary with some specifics.

Brief Summary

In many ways, Mr. Romney’s book is a decent book; it is well written and it is at its best when it explains things like economic metrics. Note: Mr. Romney wrote this himself; he didn’t use a ghostwriter.

I can recommend this book to anyone who is interested in the 2012 election. I also recommend Barack Obama’s The Audacity of Hope as a counter…a different vision.

Mr. Romney’s book contains one amusing inconsistency: he, at times, correctly points out that anecdotal arguments are weak and not to be trusted…and then he provides data (sometimes appropriate data) to back up his argument. Then at other times…well, Mr. Romney provides anecdotal arguments!

Mr. Romney also takes a “daddy knows best” tone in many places, suggesting that the rest of the world “know its place” (e. g. that it isn’t up with the United States). In domestic matters, at times it appears that Mr. Romney feels that some (the wealthy?) “know best” and that others just be quiet and listen.

He talks about the importance of The American Dream (to raise one’s economic status) all the while talking up policies that, well, retard that dream.

Still, the book contains an adult discussion of ideas in the way that Sarah Palin’s book does not and has gotten me to at least acknowledge some points of view that hadn’t occurred to me before.

And yes, this book is light years ahead of Sarah Palin’s book. There is no comparison at all.

Detailed Reaction
I think that the strongest part of his book is the first 9 chapters where he gives a detailed discussion of policies. He admits early on that his discussion will be brief because the details are inherently complicated. Still, the outline is reasonably well done.

In the last two chapters he does his fatherly finger wagging. Social conservatives will love this part, but this is the most fact-free region of the book; little is backed up by data here. Instead, he attacks strawmen and relies on anecdotes.


Mr. Romney appears to be interested in education. He points out that we are lagging in the mathematical/technical areas and he points out that our slipping standings in the world rankings (e. g., how we do on science tests) isn’t merely due to poor and minority students dragging the scores down.

He makes the point that the United States tends to NOT pay its teachers well and that we draw them from the bottom 1/3’rd of the college graduating classes, whereas other countries take their teachers from much higher up.

He talks about his experiences as governor and he makes some interesting claims:
First, he says that the quality of the teachers has the biggest impact on how well the students learn. I don’t know how to evaluate this metric, though I think that teacher excellence is a key factor.

Next, he says that there is no correlation between student achievement and class size, and he presents data that charts student achievement versus class size. Wow, that is impressive…until you realize that the class size charts list class sizes from 10 students to 18 students!


Professionally done studies often use a class size of 17 for the cut-off point for a “small class” and use a mid-20’s size for the larger class sizes. And yes, some schools are dealing with class sizes in the 40’s.

Mr. Romney also presents a chart on “spending per pupil”. What I’d like to know: what is this spending for? Is it spending on things like free lunches, breakfast, after school programs and the like? Then sure, you could make a case that spending (by the school system) and student achievement don’t correlate.

He talks about how “teaching to the test” isn’t a bad thing and that there is a need for teacher accountability for how well the students do. Ironically, he touts Finland as a country that has had success in educational outcomes:

In the United States, which has muddled along in the middle for the past decade, government officials have attempted to introduce marketplace competition into public schools. In recent years, a group of Wall Street financiers and philanthropists such as Bill Gates have put money behind private-sector ideas, such as vouchers, data-driven curriculum and charter schools, which have doubled in number in the past decade. President Obama, too, has apparently bet on compe­tition. His Race to the Top initiative invites states to compete for federal dollars using tests and other methods to measure teachers, a philosophy that would not fly in Finland. “I think, in fact, teachers would tear off their shirts,” said Timo Heikkinen, a Helsinki principal with 24 years of teaching experience. “If you only measure the statistics, you miss the human aspect.”

There are no mandated standardized tests in Finland, apart from one exam at the end of students’ senior year in high school. There are no rankings, no comparisons or competition between students, schools or regions. Finland’s schools are publicly funded. The people in the government agencies running them, from national officials to local authorities, are educators, not business people, military leaders or career politicians. Every school has the same national goals and draws from the same pool of university-trained educators. The result is that a Finnish child has a good shot at getting the same quality education no matter whether he or she lives in a rural village or a university town. The differences between weakest and strongest students are the smallest in the world, according to the most recent survey by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). “Equality is the most important word in Finnish education. All political parties on the right and left agree on this,” said Olli Luukkainen, president of Finland’s powerful teachers union.

Emphasis mine. Yes, this bolsters Mr. Romney’s claim that excellent teachers make a huge difference. But it counters him on some of his other most important points: Finland does NOT measure teachers by the their student’s test scores and…yes, they have a strong teacher’s union.

Mr. Romney spends a few pages attacking teacher’s unions. He doesn’t say that they shouldn’t exist or that they shouldn’t bargain hard. He says that politicians (especially, surprise, Democratic politicians) are afraid of them (really?) and that the teacher’s unions strength undermines academic achievement. Of course he provides no data, only anecdotes.

The actual data, even within the United States, at least suggests otherwise:

Average 2009 NAEP Score By State Teacher Contract Laws

States with binding teacher contracts
4th grade: Math 240.0 Reading 220.7
8th grade: Math 282.1 Reading 263.7

States without binding teacher contracts
4th grade: Math 237.7 Reading 217.5
8th grade: Math 281.2 Reading 259.5

As the table shows, the states in which there are no teachers covered under binding agreements score lower than the states that have them. Moreover, even though they appear small, all but one of these (8th grade math) are rather large differences.

To give an idea of the size, I ranked each state (plus Washington D.C.) by order of its performance —its average score on each of the four NAEP exams – and then averaged the four ranks. The table below presents the average rank for the non-contract states.

Average Rank Across 4 NAEP Tests
Next to each state is its average rank

Virginia……. 16.6
Texas……… 27.3
N. Carolina.. 27.5
S. Carolina…38.9

Out of these 10 states, only one (Virginia) has an average rank above the median, while four are in the bottom 10, and seven are in the bottom 15. These data make it very clear that states without binding teacher contracts are not doing better, and the majority are actually among the lowest performers in the nation.

In contrast, nine of the 10 states with the highest average ranks are high coverage states, including Massachusetts, which has the highest average score on all four tests.

If anything, it seems that the presence of teacher contracts in a state has a positive effect on achievement.

Now, some may object to this conclusion. They might argue that I can’t possibly say that teacher contracts alone caused the higher scores in these states. They might say that there are dozens of other observed and unobserved factors that influence achievement, such as state laws, lack of resources, income, parents’ education, and curriculum, and that these factors are responsible for the lower scores in the 10 non-contract states.

My response: Exactly.

Big Business and the economy
Mr. Romney has some interesting things to say here. Much to my surprise (and delight) he admits that regulations ARE necessary, if for no other reason, to level the playing field for honest companies. He also chides some businesses for being too short sighted and he admits that there is a role for government to play furthering basic research, much of which is unlikely to be economically profitable in the short term.

But, true to form, he goes with the “taxes prevent businesses from reinvesting”. He never mentions where customer demand is going to come from; supply side economists rarely do.

He makes one interesting swipe at President Obama: he chides the President for talking about how big businesses can afford to have their meetings in very expensive, very lavish resorts. Of course, the President’s point is that the problem is NOT that big businesses don’t have enough cash; they have plenty. They don’t have enough demand to warrant hiring more people.

In his “finger wagging” section, Mr. Romney talks about our society being one in which people have the freedom to take risks and fail; but the successes are what make our country great. What Mr. Romney fails to mention is that our society has less social mobility than other societies; that is, the rules Mr. Romney wants to impose would make the American Dream even harder to attain. Witness his recent remarks about higher education; “get all you can afford.” Hmmm, and he doesn’t think it relevant that he came from a wealthy family?

Mr. Romney talks a bit about the economically disadvantaged families (and the usual finger wagging at single parent families) and he points out (correctly) that some safety net rules DISCOURAGE poor couples with kids from marrying. I agree that should be fixed. However his fix is the usual Republican one: get more stingy rather than to get more generous.

He has this idea that rewarding the rich even more will make them work harder and that making the poor work harder for less is good. (???)

Economic Issues
Perhaps the best feature of the book is how he explains things like the housing bubble (excellent graph showing what happened) and how one measures claims such as “China spends X on defense”. Of course, on the housing bubble, I wish he had hit the greedy lenders a bit harder(the ones who issued the sub-prime loans and didn’t worry about default because “housing prices always go up”). But he took some appropriate shots at the financial speculators and the problems with the rare events and how the models didn’t account for those.

He talks a bit about TARP; here the Bush version is good, the Obama version is bad, but hey, this is a political book. 🙂

This part is the best the book has to offer; I can recommend it.

Energy Policy
When you read his take on energy, you will be reminded that this was written prior to the BP spill and prior to the Fukushima nuclear disaster. Still, the energy mix he talks about makes sense. Yes, he talks about nuclear and yes, he doesn’t seem to mention the problem with uranium mining and the disposal of nuclear waste. As far as Fukushima: remember that those plants started construction in 1967 and went online in 1971; they were literally 40 years old and the design was over 50 years old. We can do much better now.

As far as domestic energy development: he admits that more drilling won’t bring down prices and that over production would be a mistake. He is in favor of exploration and developing the capacity for production as a type of “energy reserve”.
He is in favor of conservation measures (e. g., giving tax credits or breaks for energy efficient vehicles) which he thinks will encourage better fuel efficiency standards. He also seems to be in favor of encouraging more efficiency by a gradual program to make energy more expensive; he is in favor of things like tax swaps (raise energy taxes while lowering another tax in return).

Yes, Mr. Romney discusses climate change and thinks that human activity probably contributed to it. He expresses concern at the possibility that if the United States takes large, expensive measures to cut emissions that the other developing countries (India, China) won’t. He recommends following a “no regrets” policy: taking measures that we will be glad that we took even if it turns out that the climate change skeptics were right. He also says we should work with the global community.

Health Care
In chapter 7, he gives an excellent defense of Obamacare, though he is talking about Romneycare. 🙂

Foreign Policy
This is the weakest part of the “policy section.” Of course, he blasts the Obama “apology tour”; this is one of the Zombie Lies that Mr. Romney insists on running with. Reading this: I get the feeling that Mr. Romney desperately wants a contest of the United States vs. Everyone Else, though he is eager to set up some bogeymen. Sure, the terrorists are awful (and probably don’t approve of President Obama either 🙂 ) and yes, this stuff was written prior to the killing of Bin Laden.

Mr. Romney quotes some interesting works. He mentions Jared Diamond’s book Guns, Germs and Steel and seems to have only partially read it (crib notes version?) Diamond does claim that a region’s geography can heavily influence how the society develops, but then Mr. Romney accuses him of underplaying the value of “culture”. That sort of misses the point: a region’s geography heavily determines HOW a culture can develop (e. g., the society first needs to become efficient enough to have a class of people who don’t have to be concerned with food gathering, /hunting/growing on a full time basis to allow for a culture to develop in the first place).

Mr. Romney also mentions Fareed Zakaria’s book The Post-American World. What Mr. Romney doesn’t seem to understand is that the decline that Mr. Zakaria talks about is a relative one: other countries are rapidly catching up.

Mr. Romney attacks President Obama over reduced military spending not seeming to care that much of the reduction comes from admitting that the cold war is really over and that there new challenges. After all, drones are cheaper than bombers or “boots on the ground.”

Mr. Romney says that he wants a commitment to defense spending to be at least 4 percent of GDP.

The Finger Wagging
The last two chapters are the weakest part; reading them I get the feeling that he was growing tired of the book and just wanted to finish the writing. I’ve mentioned some of the finger wagging already.

I’ll give you an example. On page 261 he dismisses those who want to legalize marijuana:

Some of the battles of the sixties still linger, however, as with the current push to legalize marijuana, which reflects the passion and zeal of those members of the pleasure-seeking generation that never grew up. Their arguments are elaborate but empty-a great nation has never been built on hedonism.

Such nonsense! I favor legalization of marijuana (and other drugs) and I have never used it (or them) and never plan to. I just think that our war on drugs has been costly and has fueled the rise in prison population and the rise in drug related crime.

Mr. Romney spends a lot of time lecturing the poor on their lack of morals without considering that perhaps the economic situation (the dearth of good paying blue collar jobs) lead to the morality situation rather than the other way around.

He did have some interesting things to say though. While he was governor, he sometimes spent the day doing different jobs (e. g. working as a garbage collector). And he described the “feeling of being invisible” to the public! That was a good thing to talk about; kudos to him on that.

But, on the whole, the last chapters seemed to be aimed at the “1 percent”; people who do things like this.

Mr. Romney mentions his religion in passing (e. g., “when I was doing this as a church leader, I saw that”) and mostly doesn’t make a big deal out of it. He even throws a small bone to atheists.

Ok, onk, the passage on page 5, chapter 1 invites ridicule:

My father knew what it meant to pursue the difficult. He was born in Mexico, where his Mormon grandparents had move to escape religious persecution.

That is, his grandfather wanted to practice polygamy; this makes me smirk when I read Mr. Romney’s lectures about “one man, one woman” stuff:

COLONIA JUAREZ, Mexico — Three dozen of Mitt Romney’s relatives live here in a narrow river valley at the foot of the western Sierra Madre mountains, surrounded by peach groves, apple orchards and some of the baddest, most fearsome drug gangsters and kidnappers in all of northern Mexico.

Like Mitt, the Mexican Romneys are descendants of Miles Park Romney, who came to the Chihuahua desert in 1885 seeking refuge from U.S. anti-polygamy laws. He had four wives and 30 children, and on the rocky banks of the Piedras Verdes River, he and his fellow Mormon pioneers carved out a prosperous settlement beyond the reach of U.S. federal marshals. He was Mitt’s great-grandfather.

THIS is the “religious persecution” that Mr. Romney speaks of…and he wants to lecture the rest of us on social norms? Really???

July 1, 2012 Posted by | 2012 election, books, economy, education, energy, Mitt Romney, politics, world events | 5 Comments

Climate Change, Energy, Fairness and Fatigue

I admit that I woke up a bit tired today. Part of it is my 4 mile race (running) on Saturday, and 13.1 mile walk (half marathon) on Sunday; both were high intensity efforts for me.

But part of it is that the Boston Celtic vs. Miami Heat series is too interesting to fall asleep on; I watch the first part intending to go to sleep later but it never works that way. The series is tied 2-2; last night the Celtics won the first half, the Heat won the second half and it went into overtime and the Celtics overcame Paul Piece fouling out easier than the Heat overcame LeBron James fouling out. Hence the 2 point overtime win for the Celtics.

Workout notes Weights only.
rotator cuff (pulley, dumbbell)
pull ups (4 sets of 10)
rows: 15 x 180, 15 x 200, 10 x 220
bench press: 10 x 135, 8 x 165, 4 x 175, 1 x 190 (bodyweight: 188.5 so I got my body weight)
190 was easy…sort of. I used a spotter.
incline press: 10 x 135, 9 x 135
pull downs: 3 sets of 10 x 160
curls: 3 sets of 10 x 70 (machine)
military: 2 sets of 10 x 80, 1 set of 10 x 90 (machine; saving my forearms)
sit ups: 5 sets of 20
push backs: 3 sets of 10 x 130
abductor: 3 sets of 10 x 170
hip hikes
about 10-15 minutes of yoga (including head stand)

That was it; it took me some time to get warmed up but by the 3’rd set of pull ups, I started to sweat.

Perspectives and projections
The perils of drawing conclusions from incomplete data:

We are in a liquidity trap; companies have money but no reason to invest in more jobs as consumer demand is not there. Recovery has to start at the bottom and not the top, as Robert Reich explains.

Climate change is affecting our energy producing systems. One reason: when one generates something by boiling water and using the steam to turn a turbine, the steam has to condense before it is put back into the system. Cold water is usually used to condense the steam, and the warmer the water, the harder it is to condense and the harder it is to keep a good vacuum in the condenser. This lowers the efficiency; the Navy knows this as the steam plants for ships are less efficient when the Navy sails in warm waters.

Biofuels: when talking about biofuels, one has to consider the energy that goes into producing the fuels to begin with AND the impact of, say, cutting down trees to make the wood. Peter Fairley explains:

New science confirms that burning trees to produce power instead of coal may be a losing strategy for combatting climate change.

In my April 2012 Spectrum news article on the questionable carbon benefits of largescale biomass power generation, I identified a boom in exports of wood pellets from the U.S. Southeast to Europe, where they are fast becoming a crucial energy supply for power firms seeking to meet the European Union’s renewable energy and carbon reduction mandates.

Forbes Magazine greentech columnist (and friend) Erica Gies noted my analysis in a May 22 blog post, Massachusetts Addresses “Biomass Loophole” and Limits Subsidies, about recently-issued regulations that set higher standards for biomass power plants seeking state-issued renewable energy certificates. The regulations eliminate the presumption that biomass power is carbon-neutral and, instead, require some proof from power generators that their operations—including fuel harvesting—deliver environmental benefits. Gies describes the state move as “an important course correction to the ‘biomass loophole’ that wood from forests has enjoyed in many policy frameworks around the world.”

The caveat: all too often, energy research is influenced by money from companies that, well, want to keep selling their products. I am NOT saying that is the case with this article, but I think this is why some on “my side” might be reluctant to accept such conclusions, even if they, well, turn out to be correct.

June 4, 2012 Posted by | economy, energy, NBA, technology, time trial/ race, weight training | Leave a comment

Cosmos, Corn and Climate Change

Personal I am a bit tired and sore this morning; today will be an easy, somewhat short swim with lots of drills and different strokes. It seems to me that I have a “tipping point”; a point at which the longish walk moves from “routine” to “hard”. That appears to be right about 17 miles (around 4 hours).


As usual, the astronomy photo of the day is awesome:

Click on the smaller photo to see the larger one at the site, which also provides explanation.

Climate Change and Corn
The Illinois Climatologist Jim Angel gave a warning about the early warm temperatures we were experiencing; he mentioned that April frosts might be a problem for crops. He also pointed out that a warm March has been historically followed by a cool April, though he gave the usual disclaimers.

Well, according to the New York Times, we are seeing these effects AND might continue to see them in the future. Keep in mind that “corn is king” in states like Illinois; but if our weather gets more volatile, we might see corn production move to Canada.

April 23, 2012 Posted by | astronomy, climate change, energy, environment, Illinois, north america, Peoria/local, science, walking | Leave a comment

Wind, wind everywhere…….

Yoga: I went through the motions but at least got a little bit stretched. I am stronger and my abs are also.
I was able to raise myself on blocks and then extend my legs forward.

Run: very windy but I stayed out there for 1:08 (running); it is getting easier. I got hissed at by geese. 🙂

About wind this Scientific American article is behind a paywall and has some problems. Nevertheless, it is an interesting survey of what to do with all of this wind turbine power when, well, there isn’t demand while the electricity is being generated.

Possible solutions: store it as potential energy (gravity) by pumping water to higher elevation or to pump water into an underground water tank with a heavy “piston top”…then when the power is desired, open doors in the bottom of the massive well to let water rush out. The idea: let rushing water turn turbines.

Other ideas: compress air, heat salt…or use a hydrogen cell….or store it in batteries.

April 5, 2012 Posted by | energy, Illinois, Peoria/local, running, workouts, yoga | Leave a comment

In the paper, reactors and ads…

Workout notes Yoga, then a somewhat sluggish 6+ miles (1:06); I ran 21 minutes to the Goose Loop (about 2 miles), did 9 laps (3.24 miles) than ran about 1.1 miles back to the car. I was uneven and didn’t concentrate that much.

I saw a woman who “remembered me” (political rally? Building Steam?) while out on the trail (paved bike path really).

Yes, I was in yesterday’s paper:

Obama man shakes Romney’s hand

Ollie Nanyes, a Bradley University professor and blogger, missed out on Election Day.

He voted early.

“I guess I kind of miss not going on the same day as everybody else,” he said. “But it’s worth it not to risk something coming up and not being able to vote on Election Day.”

Instead, the Barack Obama supporter went to two area rallies Monday for GOP contenders for the presidential nomination – Rick Santorum’s in East Peoria and Mitt Romney’s at Bradley University.

At Bradley, he got to shake Romney’s hand.

“It’s not everyday you get to shake the hand of a man who’s going to finish second in the presidential election,” he told his wife afterward.

Someone in the crowd overheard him, he said, and responded, “You want four more years of this?”

“I yelled back, ‘I like getting 200,000 jobs a month!’ “

The DNC is jumping all over Willard “Mitt” Romney’s campaign “Etch-a-Sketch” remark:


Can “fast fission” reactors burn off the current excess plutonium? Check out the Scientific American article.
Note: “fast fission” neutrons are those what have high energy; usually these do NOT cause the fission chain reaction. This is what “moderator” is for (usually: regular water; in the early days: graphite). This takes some of the energy away from neutrons thus making them more likely to be absorbed by a uranium nucleus, thereby causing it to get unstable and split.

March 22, 2012 Posted by | 2012 election, Barack Obama, energy, Mitt Romney, Peoria/local, physics, politics, politics/social, rick santorum, science, technology | Leave a comment