I have watched the movie Watchmen at least four times. I have read the novel about three, come on its easier to watch than read. But I do like to stimulate my mind, that is the bonus of reading. I digress, The Watchmen: The Movie, is stellar. Is it the special effects? No. Is it the violence and sinew that is evident in periodical fist contacting extremities and faces? No. It isn't even the power of the obvious longing of the unlikely super heroism of the latest Nite Owl. The power and effect of the movie comes by way of the cinematography and story.
Thank you, Director Zack Snyder, in this non critic opinion, it has been years since an honest graphic novel to movie adaption has worked so well. Have I watched 300? Yes, but even the wonderful graphic representation of Sparta's Last Stand didn't compare to the powerful recreation of the power of print. In the novel form, sounds and subtle nuances of expression are interpreted by the readers personal compass; therefore imprinting their own prejudice or inconsistencies upon the artist's characters. Here we find characters with an individual essence unable to be 'messed with' by the audience's preconceived notions.
Thank you, Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons. With the start of a true blue print for what heroes really are, so many others designed their own 'Watchmen'. There is not much to say about that which is a measure by which all novels of the graphic nature are judged against. It was the story that made the Watchmen popular before the world knew it was.
One aspect of the story and the movie is often overlooked from what I've read; the humanity of one character, Dr. Manhattan. The whole store is centered and orbits not the man but what he represents for all humanity. Sure, the graphics and CGI are awesome; but what is more fundamentally reality shaking is the thought that a human infused with the essence of all of matter contained with the space time continuum would 'choose' to remain human. It gives reason for why we long not to be alone in the universe, existence for that matter; we long to be 'special'. Each and everyone of use relates to some hero or heroine.
Whether it's Peter Parker's loneliness and self denial, Silk Spectre 's (the first) desire for excitement, or Superman's hope for peace. All humanity longs for more to life than just what we have now. The fact that once given the power to do anything is given to a human and he chooses to take the form of a human, live among humans, or even relate with those of a lesser existence is mind boggling.
Given his same 'predicament' would any of us remain sane enough to be grounded to this blue cosmic marble? To believe, that physical attraction or love could hold the attention of a being that walks the space-time multiverse seems beyond my mortal mind. But then, we are given the fact that even gods long for something more. Whether it is to be worshipped by those they create or have dominion over, whether they choose to be scarified to save a species. All gods in our real mythos desires something; Dr. Manhattan desired nothing more than to experience something unexplainable. This, even when his existence after the 'accident' is such a powerful statement of unexplainable occurrences, a statement of Randomist theory. Love is powerful, true, but given his power I would have a moment of pause before saving my new proselytes.
But maybe, because I've experienced love and this movie, I would be noble enough to sacrifice myself for the existance of humanity. One can only hope for such a chance.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Sunday, July 19, 2009
We are 50% Bananas...
Well what does that mean? Realistically we are what we eat. But genealogically, we are 50% similar in genes to the everyday, common place banana. The reason this is such a big deal is what it tells us about everything, the messages of life. In the beginning of life the first DNA contained a message of ATGC and that same message of what life contains and/or can be built from was built from has been passed from that primordial soup to today. Making up a part of the banana you may have eaten in the last month or the zygote of your latest child; no matter it was all the same... in the beginning.
So what does that mean? In the beginning? Well, everything has a start just as death marks the end of everything. It is the only statistic that matters and is 100% accurate for everyone; there is a 1:1 chance you, I, you best friend, your dog, my goldfish will die. But what about where it all began? That doesn't matter really. I don't live in the past. What matters is the future. What does this information, the messages of the DNA tell us about who we are now and where we are going?
The pairs of Cytosine, Guanine, Thymine, and Adenine form strings of base pairs of 3 billion steps for building a human being; the double helix. A small variation gives us a difference of monkeys and humans, lions and tigers, fruit flies and snakes. 99% of all babies are similar to every other human baby! That is one powerful 1% or is it due to the power of the DNA. This fact is why we find the human genome project so fundamentally valuable and important.
Craig Venter, a 58-year-old entrepreneur of genome mapping, lead the way to understanding the way we, humans can manufacture life. As is a character trait for him, he unraveled a lot of his colleagues and assistants in bypassing the scientific method and horrifying some of them with his results. When he began to clash with his peers at the government's Human Genome Project, he simply quit the project, founding a company called Celera and was racing the government to the finish line. They said it would take twenty years; he finished in nine months.
Venter is one of the many leading the way in biotechnology and genome experimentation. With his lab process called, Genome Shotgun Sequencing Technique, he is able to make a genome defining its many parts and properties; with this understanding, Venter wants to remake life, to create new microorganisms that will cure diseases, produce free energy, and make your life better.
As quoted in an article in the December 2004 issue of Gentlemen’s Quarterly, he stated: "The ultimate goal is to make organisms with specific functions," he said. "I'll give you an example. We'd like to synthesize an organism that can produce Taxol for breast cancer treatment. Right now, Taxol comes from the yew tree. We'd like to find the gene pathways that lead to synthesis of Taxol and then reproduce them in an artificial cell. Or we could produce cells that make chemicals for carpets and clothing, or cells that produce energy, like methane. We could take the photoreceptor from a bacterium in the Sargasso Sea and make hydrogen for fuel cells. The possibilities are almost limitless."
more about the human genome project:
http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/home.shtml
So what does that mean? In the beginning? Well, everything has a start just as death marks the end of everything. It is the only statistic that matters and is 100% accurate for everyone; there is a 1:1 chance you, I, you best friend, your dog, my goldfish will die. But what about where it all began? That doesn't matter really. I don't live in the past. What matters is the future. What does this information, the messages of the DNA tell us about who we are now and where we are going?
The pairs of Cytosine, Guanine, Thymine, and Adenine form strings of base pairs of 3 billion steps for building a human being; the double helix. A small variation gives us a difference of monkeys and humans, lions and tigers, fruit flies and snakes. 99% of all babies are similar to every other human baby! That is one powerful 1% or is it due to the power of the DNA. This fact is why we find the human genome project so fundamentally valuable and important.
Craig Venter, a 58-year-old entrepreneur of genome mapping, lead the way to understanding the way we, humans can manufacture life. As is a character trait for him, he unraveled a lot of his colleagues and assistants in bypassing the scientific method and horrifying some of them with his results. When he began to clash with his peers at the government's Human Genome Project, he simply quit the project, founding a company called Celera and was racing the government to the finish line. They said it would take twenty years; he finished in nine months.
Venter is one of the many leading the way in biotechnology and genome experimentation. With his lab process called, Genome Shotgun Sequencing Technique, he is able to make a genome defining its many parts and properties; with this understanding, Venter wants to remake life, to create new microorganisms that will cure diseases, produce free energy, and make your life better.
As quoted in an article in the December 2004 issue of Gentlemen’s Quarterly, he stated: "The ultimate goal is to make organisms with specific functions," he said. "I'll give you an example. We'd like to synthesize an organism that can produce Taxol for breast cancer treatment. Right now, Taxol comes from the yew tree. We'd like to find the gene pathways that lead to synthesis of Taxol and then reproduce them in an artificial cell. Or we could produce cells that make chemicals for carpets and clothing, or cells that produce energy, like methane. We could take the photoreceptor from a bacterium in the Sargasso Sea and make hydrogen for fuel cells. The possibilities are almost limitless."
more about the human genome project:
http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/home.shtml
Friday, June 26, 2009
Old papers, Good Environmental Points
Going through some of my old folders (late spring cleaning) I came across one of the last papers I wrote concerning environmental effects and alternative fuels. Gotta love APA formatting, enjoy!
The Environment our primary stakeholder, shares with us the effects of our actions. Whether it is pollution due to waste, pollution by means of chlorofluorocarbons, or simply existing; humankind personifies another biological organism, a virus by definition. Most of the fuels currently in use are carbon based; these fuels often contain base elements which are building blocks for some corrosive and destructive compounds found in nature. These elements bond easily with naturally occurring compounds and degenerate the natural cycles in ecosystems; such as hydrogen or chlorine. Humankind’s primary effects felt by the environment are due to our consistent and constant use of fossil fuels. There are several byproducts of the use of fossil fuels which can have a devastating effect on the environment and adversely humankind itself.
Current fuel sources, which are composed of non-renewable hydrocarbons are proven to be unable to sustain humanity beyond a period between 2060 and 2080 A.D. according to Mike Sneed from Spacefaring (sic) America (2008). These statistics negate any figures of alternative fuel systems or types of non hydrocarbon fuels. However, humanity’s focus can not be just on combustion system fuels but fuels used in heating systems, electricity generation, and other human technological creations. Humankind is concerned as well with comparing biomass to production available through a source of fuel and the sources uses.
Many of the current fuel sources such as petroleum, natural gas, and coal have proven to have an adverse long-term affect on the environment and are costly in their production. Many of the costs involved using the current fuel sources are in the area of healthcare and environmental cleanup. Because the lifespan of living things are getting shorter and shorter, and those who control the world’s energy sources are getting fewer and fewer, political leaders and consumers alike embrace the idea of increased regulation and improved forms of energy.
Human populations are another stakeholder in the division of consumers of the fuels in the end of the system. The planet supplies the fuel, human products (i.e. cars, planes, homes, etc.) use these fuels and humans receive the benefit. These populations are the custodians of the ethical and beliefs to include cultural aspects, economical issues, and ethical items. Aside from focusing on different areas of the spectrum of ecological ethics such as deep ecology with its concern on nonanthropocentric aspects and biocentric ethics with life as the center, humankind concerns itself with capitalistic aspects; in other words, money.
Central to the debate of oil and fuel consumption and capital is OPEC. OPEC is an acronym for the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. The name alone exemplifies the fact that oil and petroleum consumption is not a single city, state, nation or country issue, but a global one. OPEC’s mission is to coordinate & unify the petroleum policies of Member Countries & ensure the stabilization of oil prices in order to secure an efficient, economic & regular supply of petroleum to consumers, a steady income to producers & a fair return on capital to those investing in the petroleum industry. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries is not a homogenous group, but a collection of countries with divergent political and economic interests. As oil prices more than doubled over the last three years, OPEC members found it easy to agree on a common policy that brought them windfall revenue (McNamara, 2006). It is therefore, because so many nations relay on these countries output and/or consumption of these non-renewable sources of fuel, the need for alternative fuel systems are all the more necessary.
Future fuel sources are considered any processes or compounds currently in development or theories based in science that are probable but the technology does not currently exist. For these alternative fuel systems to utilize fuel, systems currently do not exist or are not cost effective in capitalistic terms. This can include fuel systems that are efficient but do not supply enough energy to be economically sound or do not produce in a timely – space conserving manner.
When considering the environment and the affects of human behavior in the plight for alternative forms of energy, a vast arrays of theories have been formulated which attempt to explain the various approaches taken to address the benefits and risks of alternative forms of energy. Meanwhile, continued production and use of materials which create convenience and pleasure for most are used. These are ultimately a form of destruction to the environment when used outside of their natural purposes. Continued scientific study produces improved methods of producing energy sources which are not as harmful to the ecosystem and are economically rational as well.
As the Human Population increases so does the dangers of poor health associated with harmful toxins in the environment. Because daily life is not as simple as it was when technology-driven entertainment and elaborate forms of transportation was not a concern, the human race is at greater risk of destroying the natural order of things. In recent years, leaders from around the world have begun collaborating in efforts to strengthen the health of the environment.
The Hummer H2 releases about 40 pounds of smog-causing pollutants for every 15,000 miles driven. Researchers believe the only way to reduce the amount of pollutants is to reduce fuel consumption use as little fuel per mile as possible. The Hummer H2s get 10 to 13 miles per gallon. Researchers believe the H2 helps the American economy, in Detroit the H2 is the hottest selling vehicle on the market. In the years to come the H2 will be a significant part of the market in China.
Engineers decided to make electric cars for some time now, so they decided to build cars with enormous batteries, however the battery has to be recharged, and they are very expensive and heavy. The maximum range for an electric car is about 200 miles. So many auto industries came up with the gas electric hybrid with its battery-powered electric motor; the 1.5 liter gas engine is used for acceleration, driving fast on the highway, or to recharge the battery.
The hybrids which include the Honda Insight, the Toyota Prius, and the Honda Civic like the H2 and the Ford Taurus can go 400 miles on a tank of gas, but the gas tank holds only 10 gallons. The Toyota Prius gets 48-50 miles per gallon with an average driver in the summer; in the winter, about 42-44 miles per gallon; which saves a lot of money, and the number of Hybrids on the road continues to increase (Blanco, 2008).
Detroit is coming out with some partial hybrids which include “Hybrid Sport Utility Vehicle” that get maybe 17 miles per gallon instead of 12, but these hybrids use the electric motor to run the accessories. The auto industries are asking “Where lies the future of the car?” 70 percent of our oil consumption is used for transportation, but auto industries haven’t discovered the political will to bring about the necessary reforms in incentives. The future of America depends upon energy brought from foreign shares to run falling factories. Oil consumption is one of the most serious problems facing the American people; the world consumes nearly 80 million barrels a day, and consumption is still going up. The United States alone consumed 7.191 billion barrels of oil in 2002, compared to 1.935 billion between China and Japan, 985 million for Russia, and949 million for Germany. The United States oil production is declining even as consumption advances; in 2002, the gap was about 5.2 billion barrels, and by 2025 it will be close to 8.4 billion carrels more than the total consumption we have in our present time (Newton, Dillingham, & Choly, 2006).
The ethics and responsibilities behind our energy crisis is a very old problem which seems easy to fix but is very complicated. We know to be responsibly ethical, but with all the parties that get involved, unfortunately ethics plays other rolls depending on the individuals. There are issues fought against it and for it by every group from tree huggers (Of which I am) to our government one gentlemen stated, “Maybe the supreme court can decide the crisis for us?” With all parties involved companies are positively solving the crisis while running into people that demonstrate against them. It’s as if we take steps forward having to climb over walls built by those against alternative energy methods.
The political red tape is wider than ever, stopping the progress that can determine what fuels we can use in place of gas and oil. Since 2001 the government has spent 10 billion dollars developing reliable energy sources very successfully. The administration has taken a number of steps to employ new technologies improving ways to displace our dependence of oil. Our administration continuously resolves ways to help our country with this crisis, like raising the gas mileage requirements in sport utility vehicles and light trucks. The savings alone will be as high as 11 billion gallons of gas over the lifetime of these vehicles and there are tax incentives that have been implemented, also.
The government also passed a bill to create additional tax cuts for alternative fueling stations constructed up to $30,000 per year. In 2007, it was announced that 1.2 billion dollars toward hydrogen fuel initiatives for fuel cells, cars, trucks, homes and businesses that have no pollution emitted or greenhouse gases. The affects of these actions have already been seen to have a positive action in today’s marketplace. For example, hybrid vehicles have exceeded sales of $200,000 for the first time in our history and in part to the tax incentives (Newton, Dillingham, & Choly, 2006).
Ethanol production has increased by 30% with 2 billion gallons currently being developed. Cellulosic Ethanol is another way we are resolving the fuel and petroleum demands. A recent department of energy study suggests that the continuing developments of biofuel could supply 60 million gallons per year without interrupting our food production. Through the private sector, partnerships are being developed to greatly help our energy crisis. For example, using fuel cells in cars by the year 2020 will reduce our greenhouse gas emission issues according to the Consumer Reports organization (2007). We know the problems we face if we don’t continue to work hard, but politically too often our responsibilities fall on deaf ears. What seems to be so simple at times proves to be so hard. There is hope in knowing that justice will prevail and it starts with us.
Alternative fuel system seem to be the only answer to the nagging question of what humanity can do to address the cataclysm humankind has created and stands upon.
This precipice on which humanity stands was created from predatory actions of taking from our environment more than needed and replacing the vacuum with destructive exhaust. As discussed, humanity’s reliance on detrimental fuel systems and OPEC will not prove beneficial in the long run of combustible engines. The utilizing of carbon based fuels has only existed for a blink of the pre-verbal eye, but the effects of this choice are felt currently and will last for the foreseeable future. Discussing the current fuel sources in comparison to likely future sources, understanding of efficiency has a place in our progress in the evolution of technology and the fuels of functioning.
References
Blanco, Sebastian. (2008, February 29). The prius as best green vehicle for 5th straight year. Autobloggreen website. Internet resource. Retrieved January 12, 2009 from,
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/02/29/shocker-consumer-reports-picks-the-prius-as-best-green-vehicle/
Consumer Reports. (2007, March). Fuel-cell cars race to reality: But challenges still obstruct the road to mass production. Consumer reports online article. Internet resource. Retrieve January 9, 2009 from,
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/new-cars/news/2007/03/fuel-cell-cars-race-to-reality-3-07/overview/0703_honda-fcx.htm
McNamara, Melissa. (2006, October 11). Background on OPEC. CBS news resource. Internet resource. Retrieved January 8, 2009 from,
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/11/fyi/main2082660.shtml
Newton, Lisa H., Dillingham, Catherine K., & Choly, Joanne. (2006). Watersheds 4: Genetically modified organisms. Retrieved December 30, 2008 from,
https://ecampus.phoenix.edu/content/eBookLibrary/content/eReader.h.
Sneed, Mike. (2008, May 20). Space solar power and America’s energy future. Part (5) in a series. Internet resource. Retrieved December 30, 2008 from,
http://spacefaringamerica.net/2008/05/20/24--space-solar-power-and-americas-energy-future-part-5.aspx
Carbons, fuels and humanity: Alternative fuels and reality
Just as every creature and organic life form on the face of the earth requires some source of energy, humanity itself and its creations require energy. The largest fuel source users and most consumption of energy resources are the fuels for humanity’s technological creations. Trains, planes, automobiles all require some type of fuel source. Even humanity’s homes are powered by limited fuel types in most societies. Humanity is primarily concerned with maintaining the lifestyle currently experienced, but prevention of dependency on un-renewable fuel sources and sources that, when used, cause harm and/or damage to the environment every organism in the ecological system of the planet have to share is secondary. The ninth Chapter of the Watersheds 4 investigates fuel systems, sources, effects of their uses, alternative fuels, and environmental concerns. Utilizing the documentation and resources related to the topic of fuel systems, we investigate the possibilities of the future.The Environment our primary stakeholder, shares with us the effects of our actions. Whether it is pollution due to waste, pollution by means of chlorofluorocarbons, or simply existing; humankind personifies another biological organism, a virus by definition. Most of the fuels currently in use are carbon based; these fuels often contain base elements which are building blocks for some corrosive and destructive compounds found in nature. These elements bond easily with naturally occurring compounds and degenerate the natural cycles in ecosystems; such as hydrogen or chlorine. Humankind’s primary effects felt by the environment are due to our consistent and constant use of fossil fuels. There are several byproducts of the use of fossil fuels which can have a devastating effect on the environment and adversely humankind itself.
Current fuel sources, which are composed of non-renewable hydrocarbons are proven to be unable to sustain humanity beyond a period between 2060 and 2080 A.D. according to Mike Sneed from Spacefaring (sic) America (2008). These statistics negate any figures of alternative fuel systems or types of non hydrocarbon fuels. However, humanity’s focus can not be just on combustion system fuels but fuels used in heating systems, electricity generation, and other human technological creations. Humankind is concerned as well with comparing biomass to production available through a source of fuel and the sources uses.
Many of the current fuel sources such as petroleum, natural gas, and coal have proven to have an adverse long-term affect on the environment and are costly in their production. Many of the costs involved using the current fuel sources are in the area of healthcare and environmental cleanup. Because the lifespan of living things are getting shorter and shorter, and those who control the world’s energy sources are getting fewer and fewer, political leaders and consumers alike embrace the idea of increased regulation and improved forms of energy.
Human populations are another stakeholder in the division of consumers of the fuels in the end of the system. The planet supplies the fuel, human products (i.e. cars, planes, homes, etc.) use these fuels and humans receive the benefit. These populations are the custodians of the ethical and beliefs to include cultural aspects, economical issues, and ethical items. Aside from focusing on different areas of the spectrum of ecological ethics such as deep ecology with its concern on nonanthropocentric aspects and biocentric ethics with life as the center, humankind concerns itself with capitalistic aspects; in other words, money.
Central to the debate of oil and fuel consumption and capital is OPEC. OPEC is an acronym for the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. The name alone exemplifies the fact that oil and petroleum consumption is not a single city, state, nation or country issue, but a global one. OPEC’s mission is to coordinate & unify the petroleum policies of Member Countries & ensure the stabilization of oil prices in order to secure an efficient, economic & regular supply of petroleum to consumers, a steady income to producers & a fair return on capital to those investing in the petroleum industry. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries is not a homogenous group, but a collection of countries with divergent political and economic interests. As oil prices more than doubled over the last three years, OPEC members found it easy to agree on a common policy that brought them windfall revenue (McNamara, 2006). It is therefore, because so many nations relay on these countries output and/or consumption of these non-renewable sources of fuel, the need for alternative fuel systems are all the more necessary.
Future fuel sources are considered any processes or compounds currently in development or theories based in science that are probable but the technology does not currently exist. For these alternative fuel systems to utilize fuel, systems currently do not exist or are not cost effective in capitalistic terms. This can include fuel systems that are efficient but do not supply enough energy to be economically sound or do not produce in a timely – space conserving manner.
When considering the environment and the affects of human behavior in the plight for alternative forms of energy, a vast arrays of theories have been formulated which attempt to explain the various approaches taken to address the benefits and risks of alternative forms of energy. Meanwhile, continued production and use of materials which create convenience and pleasure for most are used. These are ultimately a form of destruction to the environment when used outside of their natural purposes. Continued scientific study produces improved methods of producing energy sources which are not as harmful to the ecosystem and are economically rational as well.
As the Human Population increases so does the dangers of poor health associated with harmful toxins in the environment. Because daily life is not as simple as it was when technology-driven entertainment and elaborate forms of transportation was not a concern, the human race is at greater risk of destroying the natural order of things. In recent years, leaders from around the world have begun collaborating in efforts to strengthen the health of the environment.
The Hummer H2 releases about 40 pounds of smog-causing pollutants for every 15,000 miles driven. Researchers believe the only way to reduce the amount of pollutants is to reduce fuel consumption use as little fuel per mile as possible. The Hummer H2s get 10 to 13 miles per gallon. Researchers believe the H2 helps the American economy, in Detroit the H2 is the hottest selling vehicle on the market. In the years to come the H2 will be a significant part of the market in China.
Engineers decided to make electric cars for some time now, so they decided to build cars with enormous batteries, however the battery has to be recharged, and they are very expensive and heavy. The maximum range for an electric car is about 200 miles. So many auto industries came up with the gas electric hybrid with its battery-powered electric motor; the 1.5 liter gas engine is used for acceleration, driving fast on the highway, or to recharge the battery.
The hybrids which include the Honda Insight, the Toyota Prius, and the Honda Civic like the H2 and the Ford Taurus can go 400 miles on a tank of gas, but the gas tank holds only 10 gallons. The Toyota Prius gets 48-50 miles per gallon with an average driver in the summer; in the winter, about 42-44 miles per gallon; which saves a lot of money, and the number of Hybrids on the road continues to increase (Blanco, 2008).
Detroit is coming out with some partial hybrids which include “Hybrid Sport Utility Vehicle” that get maybe 17 miles per gallon instead of 12, but these hybrids use the electric motor to run the accessories. The auto industries are asking “Where lies the future of the car?” 70 percent of our oil consumption is used for transportation, but auto industries haven’t discovered the political will to bring about the necessary reforms in incentives. The future of America depends upon energy brought from foreign shares to run falling factories. Oil consumption is one of the most serious problems facing the American people; the world consumes nearly 80 million barrels a day, and consumption is still going up. The United States alone consumed 7.191 billion barrels of oil in 2002, compared to 1.935 billion between China and Japan, 985 million for Russia, and949 million for Germany. The United States oil production is declining even as consumption advances; in 2002, the gap was about 5.2 billion barrels, and by 2025 it will be close to 8.4 billion carrels more than the total consumption we have in our present time (Newton, Dillingham, & Choly, 2006).
The ethics and responsibilities behind our energy crisis is a very old problem which seems easy to fix but is very complicated. We know to be responsibly ethical, but with all the parties that get involved, unfortunately ethics plays other rolls depending on the individuals. There are issues fought against it and for it by every group from tree huggers (Of which I am) to our government one gentlemen stated, “Maybe the supreme court can decide the crisis for us?” With all parties involved companies are positively solving the crisis while running into people that demonstrate against them. It’s as if we take steps forward having to climb over walls built by those against alternative energy methods.
The political red tape is wider than ever, stopping the progress that can determine what fuels we can use in place of gas and oil. Since 2001 the government has spent 10 billion dollars developing reliable energy sources very successfully. The administration has taken a number of steps to employ new technologies improving ways to displace our dependence of oil. Our administration continuously resolves ways to help our country with this crisis, like raising the gas mileage requirements in sport utility vehicles and light trucks. The savings alone will be as high as 11 billion gallons of gas over the lifetime of these vehicles and there are tax incentives that have been implemented, also.
The government also passed a bill to create additional tax cuts for alternative fueling stations constructed up to $30,000 per year. In 2007, it was announced that 1.2 billion dollars toward hydrogen fuel initiatives for fuel cells, cars, trucks, homes and businesses that have no pollution emitted or greenhouse gases. The affects of these actions have already been seen to have a positive action in today’s marketplace. For example, hybrid vehicles have exceeded sales of $200,000 for the first time in our history and in part to the tax incentives (Newton, Dillingham, & Choly, 2006).
Ethanol production has increased by 30% with 2 billion gallons currently being developed. Cellulosic Ethanol is another way we are resolving the fuel and petroleum demands. A recent department of energy study suggests that the continuing developments of biofuel could supply 60 million gallons per year without interrupting our food production. Through the private sector, partnerships are being developed to greatly help our energy crisis. For example, using fuel cells in cars by the year 2020 will reduce our greenhouse gas emission issues according to the Consumer Reports organization (2007). We know the problems we face if we don’t continue to work hard, but politically too often our responsibilities fall on deaf ears. What seems to be so simple at times proves to be so hard. There is hope in knowing that justice will prevail and it starts with us.
Alternative fuel system seem to be the only answer to the nagging question of what humanity can do to address the cataclysm humankind has created and stands upon.
This precipice on which humanity stands was created from predatory actions of taking from our environment more than needed and replacing the vacuum with destructive exhaust. As discussed, humanity’s reliance on detrimental fuel systems and OPEC will not prove beneficial in the long run of combustible engines. The utilizing of carbon based fuels has only existed for a blink of the pre-verbal eye, but the effects of this choice are felt currently and will last for the foreseeable future. Discussing the current fuel sources in comparison to likely future sources, understanding of efficiency has a place in our progress in the evolution of technology and the fuels of functioning.
References
Blanco, Sebastian. (2008, February 29). The prius as best green vehicle for 5th straight year. Autobloggreen website. Internet resource. Retrieved January 12, 2009 from,
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/02/29/shocker-consumer-reports-picks-the-prius-as-best-green-vehicle/
Consumer Reports. (2007, March). Fuel-cell cars race to reality: But challenges still obstruct the road to mass production. Consumer reports online article. Internet resource. Retrieve January 9, 2009 from,
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/new-cars/news/2007/03/fuel-cell-cars-race-to-reality-3-07/overview/0703_honda-fcx.htm
McNamara, Melissa. (2006, October 11). Background on OPEC. CBS news resource. Internet resource. Retrieved January 8, 2009 from,
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/11/fyi/main2082660.shtml
Newton, Lisa H., Dillingham, Catherine K., & Choly, Joanne. (2006). Watersheds 4: Genetically modified organisms. Retrieved December 30, 2008 from,
https://ecampus.phoenix.edu/content/eBookLibrary/content/eReader.h.
Sneed, Mike. (2008, May 20). Space solar power and America’s energy future. Part (5) in a series. Internet resource. Retrieved December 30, 2008 from,
http://spacefaringamerica.net/2008/05/20/24--space-solar-power-and-americas-energy-future-part-5.aspx
Friday, May 1, 2009
Genetically Modified Organisms: A Case Study
Discussing some of the environmental aspects of my job and the climate of the city of Philadelphia, I looked into some of that latest trends of urban organic food growth. Along with that, I wanted to look into what the rest of the world is doing to improve the climate of starvation and hunger. While it rain here, in Australia, they are trying to conserve water and rebuild after the massive brush fire. So many problems, what are the solutions? One step at a time I say.
Ethically, GMO’s may offer an opportunity to feed a global society suffering from hunger. The reason this is a common belief is due to the idea that these genetically modified organisms and produce can be adapted for the arid, inhospitable, or unnaturally useful conditions available for planting. Is it correct to alter the genetic structure of an organism to suit the needs of another? This question’s answer will change depending on the individual asking and the individual or group answering; nevertheless there is always a need for investigating the rational for altering nature and what effects these actions will have on multiple populations of an ecosystem.
In an overview of the facts of GMO, one must evaluate the positives of a solution in the short and long term just as one evaluates the negatives in the same matter. First, it is possible that many humans, such as Europeans whom have been perceived to have what is known as the “precautionary principle”, may see the controlled mutation of these organisms as an abomination or simply unacceptable due to a lack of research. The case study defines precautionary principle as: the conservative principle according to which no new thing is to be accepted until it has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt to be safe and better than what is currently available.
Open societies, or those more apt to changes such as Americans of the United States, being a collage of multiple cultures are more apt to embracing the bizarre, abstract, and are often more trusting of novelty. In the United States popular cultures there is often a saying heard, “it is better to ask forgiveness than permission.” North Americans often endeavor to accomplish a resolution or complete a task before knowing the consequences to his or her actions. From scientific understandings and accepted theories, there are several instances in history in which a species has been the maker of its own evolution, destruction or alteration. Will we be one of the species to do this? Will our GMOs lead to cures, pestilence, evolution or ultimate destruction?
No matter which side one takes in the debate, both proponents (GMO manufactures and naturalists) have concerns of the long term implications of consumption of genetic variations to naturally occurring foods. There is no way to evaluate the outcome of years of individuals of a population consuming genetically altered produce. But one thing is sure, someone must be held responsible for hunger now, just as someone will be held responsible for the outcome GMOs will cause in the future; be it curing hunger or extraordinary environmental mutation.
Newton, Lisa H., Dillingham, Catherine K., & Choly, Joanne. (2006). Watersheds 4: Genetically modified organisms.
Ethically, GMO’s may offer an opportunity to feed a global society suffering from hunger. The reason this is a common belief is due to the idea that these genetically modified organisms and produce can be adapted for the arid, inhospitable, or unnaturally useful conditions available for planting. Is it correct to alter the genetic structure of an organism to suit the needs of another? This question’s answer will change depending on the individual asking and the individual or group answering; nevertheless there is always a need for investigating the rational for altering nature and what effects these actions will have on multiple populations of an ecosystem.
In an overview of the facts of GMO, one must evaluate the positives of a solution in the short and long term just as one evaluates the negatives in the same matter. First, it is possible that many humans, such as Europeans whom have been perceived to have what is known as the “precautionary principle”, may see the controlled mutation of these organisms as an abomination or simply unacceptable due to a lack of research. The case study defines precautionary principle as: the conservative principle according to which no new thing is to be accepted until it has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt to be safe and better than what is currently available.
Open societies, or those more apt to changes such as Americans of the United States, being a collage of multiple cultures are more apt to embracing the bizarre, abstract, and are often more trusting of novelty. In the United States popular cultures there is often a saying heard, “it is better to ask forgiveness than permission.” North Americans often endeavor to accomplish a resolution or complete a task before knowing the consequences to his or her actions. From scientific understandings and accepted theories, there are several instances in history in which a species has been the maker of its own evolution, destruction or alteration. Will we be one of the species to do this? Will our GMOs lead to cures, pestilence, evolution or ultimate destruction?
No matter which side one takes in the debate, both proponents (GMO manufactures and naturalists) have concerns of the long term implications of consumption of genetic variations to naturally occurring foods. There is no way to evaluate the outcome of years of individuals of a population consuming genetically altered produce. But one thing is sure, someone must be held responsible for hunger now, just as someone will be held responsible for the outcome GMOs will cause in the future; be it curing hunger or extraordinary environmental mutation.
Newton, Lisa H., Dillingham, Catherine K., & Choly, Joanne. (2006). Watersheds 4: Genetically modified organisms.
Great video about hydroponics in the city. (New York)
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Return to my Passion
Traveling is getting out of hand. Just got back from meeting in Florida. I heard that soon the airlines will be charging 'larger than normal' passengers for 2 tickets. Money, Money, Money. Anyway, aside from the view from my hotel room, it was dreadful. I don't think I am a people person. We did discuss some very interesting concepts of genetic mutation, hereditary trait markers and the old favorite the human genome project. Of course I did an open discussion of my book (still in work) and finally decided that I would just post parts of my book in my blog. Feel free to comment about my book, give me your insight, or even debate me. I love a good debate.
http://theoriesofbiomechanicalevolution.blogspot.com/
Even if I don't like people, it was worth the view. Earth, such a nice place to be...
http://theoriesofbiomechanicalevolution.blogspot.com/
Even if I don't like people, it was worth the view. Earth, such a nice place to be...
Monday, March 30, 2009
Latest Did You Know Video
I thought this might be interesting to post as well. Many of us late night vampires might have already seen this series but it is always worth a gander... is that a word?
I was in a discussion with a colleague today concerning President Obama, society's beliefs of success and power and what politics has to do with anything. I thought it might be good to take a diversion from physics and theories of science to talk about power or influence as my colleague calls it.
There are very stark differences between power and politics. If there wasn't we wouldn't have coined terms like "political power." These differences are represented in the area of authority and social aspects. Having power, really involves being a respected or authoritative figure in a culture or organization. Just as we are under the command of the President, personally I am under the rule of my wife or even my Grandmother. This type of power isn't by law or enforced but is a moral power. Politics is more about propaganda and miss direction to influence the outcome of a process. This is not always an election or government race, these political processes occur in business as one may try to climb the corporate ladder.
Even so, there are a few similiarities if not parallels in power and politics. Both involve gaining support or the authority by way of groups of persons. Powerful individuals are only as powerful as the people following them, ditto for politics and those that practice it, in business and groups.
Although often associated with each other, they should - in the rudimentary form - be seen as mutually exclusive. This is due to the aforementioned differences and the fact that power is independent of politics and visa versa. Some may argue that they are always exclusive because it is a political process to acquire power and political prowess only comes through power. However, this is a misconception created by our culture. In many world societies, rulers, leaders and guides are not elected or come into authority by political processes by by simple life span, experience or circumstance. It is only in a democratic society that emphasis is placed upon the governed persons electing a representive or a business person playing with information to gain leverage.
We often refute or are ignorant to such cases of power and authority because these 'powerful' individuals have become powerful by means of survival and wisdom, not clever thinking or shady methods. They don't make the evening news. As the adage, by John Emerich Edward Dalberg says, "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts, absolutely." When power is gained without an ethical or moral process of experience, there is often not enough wisdom attach for it to be of any benefit to those it is meant to help or support.
There are very stark differences between power and politics. If there wasn't we wouldn't have coined terms like "political power." These differences are represented in the area of authority and social aspects. Having power, really involves being a respected or authoritative figure in a culture or organization. Just as we are under the command of the President, personally I am under the rule of my wife or even my Grandmother. This type of power isn't by law or enforced but is a moral power. Politics is more about propaganda and miss direction to influence the outcome of a process. This is not always an election or government race, these political processes occur in business as one may try to climb the corporate ladder.
Even so, there are a few similiarities if not parallels in power and politics. Both involve gaining support or the authority by way of groups of persons. Powerful individuals are only as powerful as the people following them, ditto for politics and those that practice it, in business and groups.
Although often associated with each other, they should - in the rudimentary form - be seen as mutually exclusive. This is due to the aforementioned differences and the fact that power is independent of politics and visa versa. Some may argue that they are always exclusive because it is a political process to acquire power and political prowess only comes through power. However, this is a misconception created by our culture. In many world societies, rulers, leaders and guides are not elected or come into authority by political processes by by simple life span, experience or circumstance. It is only in a democratic society that emphasis is placed upon the governed persons electing a representive or a business person playing with information to gain leverage.
We often refute or are ignorant to such cases of power and authority because these 'powerful' individuals have become powerful by means of survival and wisdom, not clever thinking or shady methods. They don't make the evening news. As the adage, by John Emerich Edward Dalberg says, "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts, absolutely." When power is gained without an ethical or moral process of experience, there is often not enough wisdom attach for it to be of any benefit to those it is meant to help or support.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Influenza Immune to Humans
Influenza A(H1N1) virus resistance to oseltamivir.
What does that mean for the common man (or woman)? Well there is this little virus called H5N1 that is commonly called Bird Flu. These viruses are poised to present the world with the largest pandemic since the virus or viruses that introduced humankind to internal justation (more about that later). What could easily happen in yet another example of end time proficy is that the "standard" flu virus may combine with the "standard" bird flu creating an incurable, non-vacined flu strain that would become vastly more superior to any known flu strain. This Super Strain would cover the world in a short period of time due to our very communiable mentalities and globalized society.But here is the kicker, maybe it's necessary. Maybe it serves humankind right for viewing ourselves as gods upon a little piece of the galaxy. But I don't believe that. I try to see things in positive lights, even if they are black holes. Humanity has experienced its share of viral contamination, and we are still here somehow. Whether we incorporated the virus or bacterium into our own DNA structure, built up resistance, or simply allowed the viruses to eliminate the succeptable segment of our populations. The reason any of this could be seen as positive, is the fact that it allows for our preditory, dominant species to evolve just that much further. Just as AIDS is conquering populations across the world, a Super Flu Strain would not be limited by proximity, homosexual, or cotus.
So, in understanding simply that we are flawed, we can either except that as time goes on we either get worse in most aspects of biology, socieology, and ecology; or we will continue to evolve. But with any growth equalibrium must be contained. Meaning that some will loose in the ultimate game of chance paying with their lives, while others will propegate and bring about new generations, just alittle better than we are currently. We all must die, but its what we do with life and the impact we leave that makes a difference in an ultruistic belief.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Changing the World in 2009
So, it is another new year for us all that survived 2008. With all the wars, tragedies, and economic crisis. Many of us are asking ourselves, "what can I do to change the world" or "what can I do just to make it to next week!" Well, believe you me, most people are in either category. We, as an American society have made a great stride in the right direction by electing Barrack Obama. I don't vote (I believe in Democracy in the purest form, but not electoral colleges) but would consider myself an Independent leaning towards Republican.
Aside from the "Change" propaganda, I believe that as time goes forward, the world needs to be united under a common belief that anyone can succeed to provide an opportunity for the majority to try instead of the minority. But like President Elect Obama mentioned, "things are going to get worse before they get better." I agree. It's economics, human nature, and simple science. But in survival of the fittest, these crisis will weed out the economically weak, the idiotics of humanity (those people that cut you off to make it to a red light first, I hate that), and those seeking prominent positions through shiesty tactics. Hang in there world, don't loose your hair like me.
Aside from the "Change" propaganda, I believe that as time goes forward, the world needs to be united under a common belief that anyone can succeed to provide an opportunity for the majority to try instead of the minority. But like President Elect Obama mentioned, "things are going to get worse before they get better." I agree. It's economics, human nature, and simple science. But in survival of the fittest, these crisis will weed out the economically weak, the idiotics of humanity (those people that cut you off to make it to a red light first, I hate that), and those seeking prominent positions through shiesty tactics. Hang in there world, don't loose your hair like me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
