Journal Entries
An Inconvenient truth
Posted Dec 1, 2007
An Inconvenient Truth
S: You asked for my opinions on the DVD you sent me, An Inconvenient Truth, presented by Al Gore, the sometime US Presidential candidate.
You already know my opinions on global warming and our part in it:
Unconvinced that humanity is the major cause, but keeping an open mind, and
Pretty well convinced that we are affecting the situation, to some degree, for the worse.
That's not, though, what you asked...
This will not be an exhaustive critique, but an overview - all the subject matter has been covered in many other places by many people better qualified than I.
Overall (as you'd expect) the thing is well produced and gets its view over very well.
A few of its good points:
In Scene 28: Find a good balance and the economic benefits will accrue - that seems reasonable.
In scene 29: Car mileage targets - Now that IS thought provoking.
In scene 30: CFC damage contained - Relevant and a very good point.
Less good:
In Scene 9: His illustration of the next 50 years of CO2 concentration gave pause - is that really to the same scale as the previous 650,000 years? He mentioned, but didn't illustrate, the corresponding temperatures on that scale.
Other places, too but I'm not wading through all that again...
Overall:
As he himself asks -Who pays the scientists? Well, who paid his advisors and his production team?
His interludes: some appear a little too self-serving.
Solutions:
The main topic here that I find worrying is “Renewables”, for instance:
Wind energy.
It seems to me that this is unconscionably expensive in terms of manufacturing, construction and in cost to the environment. Improvement will come but doesn't seem imminent.
Will there be a payback within the current installations' life expectancy?
How has the science (not the vested interests) suggested we cope with times of not enough wind over extended areas? (No mention here of schemes such as the 'Electric Mountain' in Wales).
Tidal power.
The one scheme that's been in focus recently is the Severn Estuary scheme in the UK.
That could not fail to have an enormous effect on the environment.
It has also been suggested that, due to silting-up, the actual benefits will be rather less than the media presented.
What about between tides – the greater time. ('Electric Mountain' again?)
Do the proposers expect that the damage will be recoverable in any sensible timescale? More to the point, do the planning authorities expect that?
Solar Power.
Is it really that cost effective in UK with our less useful full sun? It does seems likely that it will become so, with a growing market allowing lower costs. Without subsidies, however, that could take a long time – it already has and there's a long way to go.
Even low-tech solutions are not presently clear-cut, having quite a long payback time (www.bbc.co.uk/nature/animals/features/324feature1.shtml).
Low energy lighting:
In the future yes, but unlikely with current technology.
We are being encouraged to use low energy bulbs, but energy consumption during manufacture, problems of safe disposal and the fact that, like fluorescent light in general, switching on uses so much energy that they're efficient only if left on pretty well permanently, make that suspect.
It seems that they, too, have a rather long payback time. Perhaps LED development will overcome that.
Conclusions
Overall, to this interested layman, technically the thing doesn't have much to commend it. However, as an alarm bell to us ordinary people, I think it has significant value.
In order to reach us (thus indirectly influencing The Powers That Be?), it had to be both dramatic and entertaining. It has achieved just that.
The near future, though? It doesn't seem likely to have much effect. Each developing country will naturally take a parochial approach, not necessarily acknowledging that their contribution is significant and continuing towards what they see as a desirable outcome (will China soon cut down to only one new coal power station a week?).
We in The West must, of course take a lead as we have, arguably, most experience in science and its interpretation.
Finally,
Since starting this assessment, I think my attitudes have changed somewhat:
I feel more strongly that we should cut down CO2 emissions - but in an intelligent manner, not by just looking around for 'green' solutions proposed by existing manufacturers.
I am still not conviced that we are the Major cause of Climate Change.
It would be interesting to see a list of paymasters of the more prominent protagonists.
I wish you good luck with your project.
R.
Discuss this Journal entry [1]
Latest reply: Dec 1, 2007
There's a price for everything...
Posted May 10, 2007
We've been lucky enough to have made three visits to our daughter & hubby in NZ. Great.
However, in March, during the colde spelle here in NE Englande, our central heating went awry. We have good neighbours, who were keeping an eye out for us, and they arranged repairs. Sh1t! I mean, Oh dear. 
A few days after returning, the vacuum cleaner went belly-up. Sh1t!. I mean, Oh Dear 
.
A couple of weeks later, the wall hanging for the cistern in the loo came loose, the (ceramic) cistern dropped onto the back extension of the loo pan, cracked and leaked. Oh dear. I mean Sh1t! 
. (Things aren't ALL bad, however, as Ms Stress was in the house, investigated the sound and came running to the shed for me.
Three things gone wrong... OK, that's it, huh? 
No, actually.
The loo wasn't in such a good state anyway, so we decided to replace the toilet and handbasin with a built-in suite.
In order to do a decent job, most of the tiling had to come off & be replaced.
Local man, 'Plumbing, Tiling, Plastering. "Affordable, "Reliable, Quality".
Price quoted was reasonable (not cheap, by any means, but fair).
That, people, was the start... I'm making a list which will appear here - if I can face it!
Watch this space.
Discuss this Journal entry [1]
Latest reply: May 10, 2007
New Zealand, Jan 07
Posted Jan 30, 2007
Sunday 21 Jan, Newcastle -> Heathrow with BA then a few hours then Virgin Atlantic (why 'Atlantic', don't know as we were going Eastabout).
On to Hong Kong. Long, long flight, taking the northern great circle. Not much sleep - nearly all the flight in that hazy, mazy halfworld between sleep and wake. Place names on the flight map changing slowly then quicker then quicker (apparantly) and the character of the names changing, too. Towards the end, Bangladesh seemed almost next door to Hong Kong, the map seemed distorted - or was it me?
Pause for refuel, a couple of hours in the airport then on to Sydney. Four nights in Sydney. Thoroughly enjoyable. Ferry rides around the harbours (Bridge, Opera House, Botanic Gardens, Zoo etc. By the time we left, jetlag was a fading problem. (though we don't think it would have been too much worse by going the extra couple of clock hours).
On to Christchurch with JetStar (Qantas offshoot) and 'home' with daughter & hubby.
Discuss this Journal entry [5]
Latest reply: Jan 30, 2007
An Apology and an Explanation
Posted Jan 21, 2007
I've just posted to two SEx threads: "Cloned meat" and "Wind genarators & Infrasound", with an apology for upsetting some people:
-----------
"On re-reading, it seems that I was prone to Telling rather than Asking, where I have only weak foundations.
I apologise for being over-enthusiastic.
I shall also post to my journal."
----------
In "Cloned meat" I expressed my concerns about cloned plants (post 50) and later (post 54) extended it to side effects of GM foods.
---
Based on what I believe to be true:
-
Cloned plants: My concern here is that, given the large-scale propagation of plants by 'growing from cells', there's a possibility of repeating what happened with Elm trees in UK. That is, reducing diversity by 'swamping' areas with clones.
-
GM: Here, it's introducing alien genes into organisms that have established themselves in their environments over long time periods.
It's Not the resultant food, as I can be fairly sure that it's been thoroughly tested.
It Is the possibility of (even minute) side effects that may not be noticed for some time.
Whole ecosystems are dependant on the relative stability of their constituent members and can be affected by tiny changes.
In the 'natural scheme' of things these tiny changes are coped with and become absorbed into a 'new order'.
GM, however, seems different. This is Not a slow process of one, or perhaps a few, mutations at a time, with generations of adaptation to follow.
It Is a wholesale implantation of a fully developed trait from one organism into another (completely different?) organism, in a single generation, with no settling-in time.
It may be (probably is) that it's all been carefully thought out beforehand - but that still leaves room for unforseen consequences.
Tiny causes can grow into large effects - the butterfly effect?
I'm not asking for GM to be stopped - the benefits are likely to keep increasing.
I was hoping to be told that the expressed concerns are recognised within the science and that these aspects have been taken into account.
--------
Wind generators & Infrasound
Infrasound can cause actual physical problems, if it's very loud (that doesn't cause me conern as design should have removed that danger).
At moderate levels it can cause various discomforting effects.
At low levels - if it continues for long periods - it may do.
Apart from any physical effects on us, it could cause hearing problems in animals, some of whom have hearing ranges extending beyond ours (elephants are one example).
Sea creatures, too may be affected (whales, for instance).
Wind generators are of such a size that, despite careful design, they are likely to 'leak' some low frequency sound waves into the environment.
It may be that the extent and loudness of those leaks are not predictable.
Again, as we don't yet know the effects (& may not for some time), some caution is, surely, in order - ?
Discuss this Journal entry [1]
Latest reply: Jan 21, 2007
Responsibilities
Posted Jan 20, 2007
I've been here for about 14 months now, though it doesn't feel that long. I've made good use of the benefits & privileges.
In the last week or so I've started thinking about the other side of it - my responsibilities as a researcher.
Problem: I'm not good at it / I don't enjoy it / I'm not good at it / I don't enjoy it ...
How to break the loop? Don't know yet, but will work on it - tomorrow I Will Get Organised (well, not tomorrow but in a couple of months' time - off to NZ tomorrow).
What set this off? can't really say, but it came on soon after two conversations, both in the SEx forum:
1) Cloned meat: post 23 + a few. More pertinent: post 50 on.
2) Wind generators & Infrasound: all of it.
So, food for rumination. Am I paranoid, simply neurotic or trying to voice legitimate concerns of others who know perhaps even less than I?
The closest I received to an explanation was to not worry about little things like GM [& cloning], infrasound...
Little things? From this seat, butterflies in the amazon come to mind.
I should, apparantly, be more concerned with more likely things such as road dangers, pollution, electrocution, global warming...
Well, for most of that list there's an agency at work (civilisation) that hosts science, technology, engineering & so on and they're working towards righting those things.
"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing". To Whom?
Me? I'm not competent other than to encourage things - Keep thinking. Pay Your Taxes: Tax is the price of civilisation.
Discuss this Journal entry [1]
Latest reply: Jan 20, 2007
Rod
Researcher U2465093
Write an Entry
"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a wholly remarkable book. It has been compiled and recompiled many times and under many different editorships. It contains contributions from countless numbers of travellers and researchers."