Monthly Archives: March 2015

Chaos Manor View, Monday, March 23, 2015

Remember when The Phone Company was a public utility regulated by the FCC under the 1932 law under which Obama pressured the FCC into applying to the Internet? Today a Time Warner robot called me to tell me my bill was way overdue. The robot wasn’t clear in its messages, but said I could pay by credit card, but every time I poked in a credit card number it said it could tell I was having trouble, did I want to talk to a human for Five Dollars. We went through this dance three times, and I hung up in fury. Of course Time Warner in Los Angeles or at least where I live has no competition I can’t change to a cable provider who employs humans or can afford better robots.

Somehow I don’t think the FCC grab – which will be years in court – is going to help. I pay my bills by Robot or thought I did, and records show that I did pay last month but not this month; not sure why. So I sent two month’s worth—a considerable sum—electronically and I can let the payment system and Time Warner fight it out. The robot said it would have me talk to a bill collector unless I paid, but then didn’t let me, but I could talk to a human but it would cost me five bucks.

I have had the monopoly cable people—three prior to Time Warner—for twenty five years and always paid the outrageous bills, this I think the first time I have been late, but neither robots nor Time Warner cares. I remember The Phone Company having a human bill collector call back when it was a regulated public utility but even he was embarrassed when I pointed out that was the first late payment in twenty years. That was in the 60’s. I doubt things will ever be better now that the Internet is a regulated public utility. Politicians will still find ways to grant “regulated” monopolies, and while the Time Warners can talk to the regulators, we’ll talk to robots.

There was the annual paperback book expo yesterday in LA – well actually in Glendale – and often a bunch of will get together for dinner afterwards. Yesterday began with brunch with Larry—we sign together since there are a lot of collaborations, this time more because Barnes was there with us – but the surprise was that at brunch we were joined by Greg Benford.

I’m now going to post some mail about NASA and the reactionless drive. As it happens I discussed this report with Benford, who is a retired Professor of Physics University of California at Irvine and was aware of it, so after the mail I summarize his views. Understand that I have no real qualifications to examine the technical details. I do know enough to state unequivocally that if this holds up and we do have a reactionless drive, it’s revolutionary, with a particularly large impact on Relativity, both General and Special.

Violates the Laws of Physics?

Jerry,

Making statements such as “Violates the Laws of Physics” alarms me. The statement makes unstated assumptions. The most ridiculous of these is that we know and understand everything about the physical universe. Nothing, of course, could be farther from the truth.

If we are to make progress we must be able to maintain an open mind and not be afraid to abandon theories that no longer adequately explain the phenomena that we are able to observe.

Government Research Grants appear to favor the status quo by favoring theories that have popularity. Grants should be made on the basis of results.

Jerry’s ideas for X Prizes to encourage privately funded development of research yielding specified results would seem to be a more productive use of Government Funds.

Bob Holmes

Cannae or Can’t, and black or white

Dr. Pournelle,
I hadn’t commented on the Dean Drive link because I was waiting for more to come out. Sadly, I’ve seen little that was new. The Wired UK link is from July last year, and almost everyone has published a partial retraction as of August ’14. Seems as if someone re-linked an old, unverified article.
I can’t imagine NASA going without a major press release, from a director-level mouthpiece, on this accomplishment (unless, of course, it somehow fails to reaffirm a Muslim self image, or has a high carbon footprint). Damn shame, ’cause I’d like to have it.
-d

Dean Drive

Dr. Pournelle:
It is interesting to read of the Cannae Drive and the related Chinese device. I recall a G. Harry Stine ‘Alternate View’ column in Analog that postulated something of the sort, thrust produced by a microwave resonant cavity tuned JUST right.
It is tough getting old and not being able to watch the spaceships take off.

Jim Watson

Cannae Drive

Might as well stick my neck out on this one, too. Although I can’t get it quite as far as on climate “science.”
I’m probably not qualified to evaluate properly this even if I had a peer-reviewed paper in front of me (or even an account in one of the reputable space technology media sources). Having a third-hand popular science account gives me really nothing – except to note that a measurement in thousandths of grams is not particularly a good “proof.” (I treat Chinese releases of “science” for popular consumption in just about the same way as I used to treat Soviet releases of such – i.e., with a thirty pound block of pasture salt.)
I think it quite likely that this will end up being a measurement error, “debunked” either by better instrumentation, more carefully calibrated instrumentation, or instrumentation that is measuring a force that they did not consider originally. For one thing, bouncing microwaves back and forth is going to cause heating of your “containment” vessel – and if there is a slight difference between the heating of one end and the opposite end, you will get some amount of net thrust from the “hot” end.
Of course, I would be ecstatic if this proves out on closer examination – but I remember my (brief) excitement over FTL neutrinos all too well…

Richard Skinner

Cannae Drive

I have worked with Johns Hopkins APL who did some testing for NASA on a similar engine design. They confirmed that they were able to achieve positive thrust. The thrust level was less than predicted by the UK inventor. It appears that they didn’t exactly duplicate the design resulting in a lower Q for the resonant cavity, which the inventor’s published theory says is a major performance criteria.
Many years ago in the 90’s I talked with an inventor of a similar engine that was actually patented by the USAF. He worked for the then Air Force Weapons Lab and developed and patented such an engine. It exploits non-linear electromagnetics. I have the patent number but not with me – I can send it later. The thrust achieved was greater than the conservation of photon momentum would predict, but was consistent with the predictions of non-linear EM equations.
Also of interest is the following AF report on DTIC from 1989 (AD-A227 121) Electric Propulsion Study. Physics E (Vol 48 Num 2 – August 1993) has a paper that describes under what conditions energy can be extracted from the quantum vacuum.
Lastly Heisenberg in the late 50’s stated a belief that quantum mechanics should be evolved to a full non-linear version, just as Maxwell’s equations and Relativistic Gravity are. This would potentially resolve the background dependency of QM issue.
Bottom line for me, is that now there are 3 independent tests that successfully demonstrate thrust of this engine design (UK inventor, NASA (via APL) and Chinese researchers). This may be experimental demonstration of a need to reformulate Quantum Field Theory in a manner similar to how Heisenberg envisioned.

John Garnham

That is a fair sample of mail on Cannae. We all want it, and there are now reports of data. Dr. Greg Benford thinks it is a result of differential heating and bad instrumentation. Of course as a Relativist he would not think it possible, but he also points out they did not even do a null experiment – and that is bad experimental design. I’m quite competent to comment on that.

We also speculated on why such a quiet announcement of such revolutionary data. If they were certain of having reactionless drive, as opposed to uneven heating and inadequate instrumentation, they should be shouting from the rooftops. Regarding the supposed Chinese reports of spectacular results, the same is true: Chinese scientists are well aware of the revolutionary nature of such data.

Some years ago I hosted a small conference on reactionless drives. I reported it in

http://www.jerrypournelle.com/sciences/dean.html and I really have nothing worth saying beyond that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_drive gives a reasonable history of the original Dean Drive and summarizes my minor role in that.

I completely agree with the late Dr. Forward; until we have a repeatable demonstration of a reactionless drive it is useless to speculate. If NASA actually has data showing a propellantless acceleration of any amount no matter how small – or the possibility of such – it certainly worth the cost of building an unambiguous demonstration. I they do not, NASA can’t afford to tease us. It’s too important.

I still do not understand the low key announcement last August and silence ever since.

I have this, with specific links:

Dear Dr. Pournelle,
The conference papers alluded to in the Wired.uk article concerning the “Dean Drive” are posted on the NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS). The papers identify the drive as either a “Q Drive” or as an “RF Cavity Resonator.”
The first paper on the RF Cavity Resonator, “Anomalous Thrust Production from an RF Test Device Measured on a Low-Thrust Torsion Pendulum”, was published on 24 SEP 2014. The abstract is available here:
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20140006052
and as a PDF document here:
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20140006052.pdf
The full paper (Report ID: JSC-CN-31446) is available at this link (the result of a search of the NTR Server):
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20140009930&qs=Nm%3D4293582119%7CAuthor%7CBrady%2C%2520David%7C%7C4293435800%7CAuthor%7CDavies%2C%2520Frank%2520J.%7C%7C4293259353%7CAuthor%7CLawrence%2C%2520James%2520T.%7C%7C4293902967%7CAuthor%7CMarch%2C%2520Paul%7C%7C4293259354%7CAuthor%7CWhite%2C%2520Harold%2520G.%26N%3D0
The paper was presented at a Propulsion conference sponsored by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, among other organizations, and was held in late July 2014.
With one exception, the authors of both papers are based at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston.
Interestingly, one of the authors (Dr. Harold White) published a second article, “Human Outer Solar System Exploration via Q-Thruster Technology” (Report ID JSC-CN-31446), which discusses mission analyses for spacecraft using what is termed a Q Thruster. The description of the Q Thruster is similar to that of the RF Cavity Resonator: “quantum vacuum plasma thruster.”
You will recognize Dr. Harold White from his involvement with the Alcubierre Drive, mentioned some time ago in “The View from Chaos Manor.” Dr. White’s Wikipedia entry is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_G._White_(NASA)
The abstract of the RF Cavity Resonator paper indicates “Future test plans include independent verification and validation at other test facilities”; however, I was unable to find published results from other organizations attempting to verifying the findings. (Of course, the initial report was published only eight months ago.)
Very respectfully,
Jim Bonang

which makes this a serious publication. I still do not understand the low key announcement.

White Roof, Black Roof

Discussion continues; my point, really, is that if we want to alter the Earth’s solar energy intake, CO2 control is not the cheapest, and certainly not the only, way to do it.

Counter point to your white roof discussion, recently it was announced California could have all the electricity it needs by having essentially black roofs: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/03/17/california-could-power-itself-three-to-five-times-over-with-solar/. From the article, researchers propose covering about 2000 square miles of California roofs and parking lots with photovoltaic panels.
We’ve corresponded in the past on the consequences of predicting output from solar electric panels. A few new features to add to those prior posts: thermal retention (the things retain lots of heat that white roofs would shed), PV manufacture has a carbon footprint that takes about 3 years of electrical production to overcome (and seldom figured into cost estimates), and when kept spotlessly clean, lose about 1% electrical efficiency per year. The article also doesn’t provide the source of the $5 or so installed cost per watt.
-d

White Roofs and heating from SPS

Jerry:

If we assume an eventual global population of 10 billion people and a lavish urban allowance of 100 square meters of roof per person, then the affected roof area is 1eex12 square meters. This is 0.2% of the Earth’s total surface area of about 5eex14 square meters.

We could run around the barn to calculate average insolation of urban areas taking into account latitudes of urban areas, the Earth’s rotation, and cloud cover. However; I would point out that given the fact that given the fact that thermal radiation is proportional to surface temperature raised to the fourth power, it can be estimated that the net decrease in the Earth’s equilibrium temperature resulting from white roofs might be on the order of (0.998)^1/4 or about .0005 or about .14 Kelvin.

This is of course assuming that white roofs would have the same IR emissivity as dark roofs.

James Crawford=

White roofs – again…

I find that I must retract a trifle on earlier comments – blame a consistently tired brain that on occasion has some absorption problems.
Your statement that the “white roofs” concept would almost certainly do more to ameliorate global warming than anything being done now – sigh, that is completely correct. (I say “almost certainly,” because of the Pournelle Iron Law, sir. There would certainly be new parasites hired to enforce the regulations – and I am not sure whether the long-term heating avoidance would, or would not, be more than balanced by the heating produced by their activities.)
Of course, just about anything would be more effective in reducing the net heat gain by Mother Earth than what they are doing now. Every last thing being done now actually increases the gain, thanks to the Universe Iron Law (that pesky one about entropy). Dark photoelectric panels absorbing radiation that would otherwise be reflected back to space, emitting some of that as heat loss during conversion to electricity. Acres and acres of mirrors focusing radiation that would otherwise be reflected back to space onto salt column absorbers, emitting a great deal of that as heat loss during conversion to electricity.
And then there is the use of that electricity (after more heat loss during transmission – can’t neglect that). Except for the tiny bit consumed for outdoor lighting (that which escapes to space rather than being absorbed, that is), every human use is essentially converting radiation that would otherwise be reflected into space into radiation that will be (mostly) trapped by “greenhouse” gases.
So the “white roofs” idea is actually different in SIGN, not just in magnitude, from every scheme (and scam) being promoted by the worshipers of the Church of Global Warming.

Richard Skinner

What we have not done is devote much thought to alternative to giving the government higher taxes. No surprise there. Developing nations like China and India ignore the whole matter.

As Demand for Welders Resurges, Community Colleges Offer Classes

By PATRICIA COHENMARCH 10, 2015    nyt

HOUSTON — Ryan Gassett had already put in a full day, moving heavy boxes and furniture for $15 an hour, when his introductory welding class began at 10 p.m. By the time he arrived at Lone Star College north of Houston, the highway toll collectors at the exit for the school had closed for the night and the campus janitors were mopping bathrooms.

The graveyard-shift course was not his first choice, Mr. Gassett, 19, explained, but “there were no other openings.” So he took what he could get.

In recent decades, welding — like other blue-collar trades that once provided high-school graduates with a reliable route to the middle class — seemed to have about as promising a future as rotary phones. But many of these once-faltering occupations are finding new life in Texas and the Gulf Coast region, where an industrial revival built around the energy boom continues to spawn petrochemical plants and miles of new pipeline despite the plunge in crude oil prices.

The Fcc is supposed to be an “independent” “bi-partisan” regulatory agency

http://www.wsj.com/articles/gordon-crovitz-the-obamanet-crack-up-1427065066

The Obamanet Crack-Up

The FCC has rolled out 400 pages of slapdash regulations, ensuring years of litigation.

By

L. Gordon Crovitz

March 22, 2015 6:57 p.m. ET

President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet went on tour in Washington last week. If politics worked like Broadway, the show would have closed on opening night.

Congress held three hearings—two more are planned this week—to surface new information on how the White House political machine bullied Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler. Mr. Wheeler had long opposed the reactionary step of regulating the Internet as a utility.

ENLARGE

Photo: Getty Images

Nov. 10 was the turning point. The day began with Mr. Obama issuing a surprise video insisting on the most extreme regulation for the Internet, submitting it to laws written in the 1930s for Ma Bell. The same morning, a group of protesters swarmed Mr. Wheeler’s house, blocked access to his car, and demanded that he obey the president.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee obtained Mr. Wheeler’s email later that day complaining to his senior staff about being bludgeoned. With the subject line “FW: The President wants you to see this,” forwarding Mr. Obama’s demands, Mr. Wheeler emailed:

“FYI. Isn’t it interesting: 1. The day of the [net neutrality] demonstration just happens to be the day folks take action at my house. 2. The video of POTUS just happens to end up on the same message as the video from POTUS. 3. The White House sends this email to their supporter list asking ‘pass this on to anyone who cares about saving the Internet.’ Hmmm.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/wp/2015/03/23/apple-isnt-just-satisfied-reinventing-health-care-its-targeting-clinical-trials-as-well%E2%80%8B/

Apple isn’t just satisfied reinventing health care, it’s targeting clinical trials as well (WP)

By Vivek Wadhwa March 23 at 7:00 AM

When Apple announced, last year, that it was developing a watch that had the functions of a medical device, it became clear that the company was eyeing the $3 trillion health care industry; that the tech industry sees medicine as the next frontier for exponential growth. Apple’s recent announcement of ResearchKit shows that it has an even greater ambition: It wants to also transform the pharmaceutical industry by changing the way clinical trials are done.

Apple isn’t alone. Companies such as Google, Microsoft, and Samsung and hundreds of start-ups also see the market potential — and have big plans.  They are about to disrupt health care in the same way in which Netflix decimated the video-rental industry and Uber is changing transportation.

The upshot? We will receive better health care for a fraction of the cost.

This is happening because several technologies such as computers, sensors, robotics and artificial intelligence are advancing at exponential rates.  Their power and performance are increasing dramatically as their prices fall and footprints shrink.

We will soon have sensors that monitor almost every aspect of our body’s functioning, inside and out. They will be packaged in watches, Band-Aids, clothing, and contact lenses. They will be in our toothbrushes, toilets and showers.  They will be embedded in smart pills that we swallow. The data from these will be uploaded into cloud-based platforms such as Apple’s HealthKit.

Artificial intelligence–based apps will constantly monitor our health data, predict disease and warn us when we are about to get sick. They will advise us on what medications we should take and how we should improve our lifestyle and habits. Watson, for example, the technology that IBM developed to defeat human players on the TV show Jeopardy, has already become capable of diagnosing cancer more accurately than human physicians can. Soon it will be better than humans are in making any medical diagnosis.

The key innovation that Apple just announced is ResearchKit, a platform for app builders to capture and upload data from patients who have a particular disease. Our smartphones already monitor our activity levels, lifestyles and habits. They know where we go, how fast we move, and when we sleep. Some smartphone apps already try to judge our emotions and health based on this information; to be sure, they can ask us questions.

ResearchKit apps will enable constant monitoring of symptoms and of reactions to medications. Today, clinical trials are done on a relatively small number of patients, and pharmaceutical companies sometimes choose to ignore information that does not suit them. Data that our devices gather will be used to accurately analyze what medications patients have taken, in order to determine which of them truly had a positive effect; which simply created adverse reactions and new ailments; and which did both.

The best part is that the clinical trials will be continuing — they won’t stop once the medicines are approved by the FDA.

Apple has already developed five apps that target the most prevalent health concerns: diabetes, asthma, Parkinson’s disease, cardiovascular disease, and breast cancer. The Parkinson’s app can, for example, measure hand tremors, through an iPhone touchscreen; vocal trembling, using the microphone; and gait, as you walk with the device.

Combined with genomics data that are becoming available as plunging DNA-sequencing costs approach the costs of regular medical tests, a health-care revolution is in the works. By understanding the correlations between genome, habits, and disease — as the new devices will facilitate — we will get closer and closer to an era of Precision Medicine — in which disease prevention and treatment is done on the basis of people’s genes, environments, and lifestyles.

Google and Amazon are one step ahead of Apple in the data they capture — they offer a repository for DNA information. Google also announced last year that it is developing a contact lens that can measure glucose levels in a person’s tears and transmit these data via an antenna thinner than a human hair. It is developing nanoparticles that combine a magnetic material with antibodies or proteins that can attach to and detect cancers and other molecules inside the body and notify a wearable computer on the wrist. And it wants to control aging. In 2013, Google made a significant investment in a company called Calico, to research diseases that afflict the elderly, such as neurodegeneration and cancer. Its goal is to understand aging and, ultimately, extend life. It is also learning how the human brain works. One of its chief scientists, who is a mentor to me, Ray Kurzweil, is bringing to life the theory of intelligence expounded in his book How to Create a Mind. He wants to enhance our intelligence with technology and allow us to back up our brains onto the cloud.

We may have been disappointed with the advances in medicine in the past because things have moved slowly because of the nature of the health care system itself. It hasn’t been focused on delivering health care — it has been about sick care. That’s because doctors, hospitals, and pharmaceutical companies only make money when we are in bad health; they don’t get rewarded for keeping us healthy. The good news is that the technology industry is about to change all this.

I have little doubt that the next 20 years will be nothing less than amazing — as the technology industry “eats medicine.” But I’ll admit that I am not quite ready for Kurzweil to beam my intelligence up into the cloud. I’d rather keep this in my limited local storage.

A book review that gives some interesting discussion of big data:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/you-can-run-from-big-data-but-can-you-hide/2015/03/20/082ea46c-c805-11e4-a199-6cb5e63819d2_story.html

In ‘Data-ism’ Steve Lohr gives his take on how Big Data will shape our future.

A server room at the new Facebook Data Center in Lulea, Sweden. (Jonathan Nackstrand/AFP/Getty Images)

By Sarah E. Igo March 20

Sarah E. Igo is a professor of history at Vanderbilt University and the author of “The Averaged American: Surveys, Citizens, and the Making of a Mass Public” (2007).

DATA-ISM

The Revolution Transforming Decision Making, Consumer Behavior, and Almost Everything Else

By Steve Lohr

HarperBusiness. 239 pp. $29.99

Freedom is not free. Free men are not equal. Equal men are not free.

Chaos Manor View, Friday, March 20, 2015

Happy Springtime

No one seems to have commented to me about:

NASA Quietly Tests Engine That Uses No Fuel And Violates The Laws Of Physics

http://higherperspective.com/2015/03/nasa-engine.html

• NASA has successfully tested a new space drive that doesn’t use a propellant and shouldn’t work, at least according to the laws of physics, according to a story that broke in Wired.UK. The drive, called the Cannae Drive, worked in the NASA directed test, defying physics.

I don’t blame them. It’s hard to believe. But if there is an aether, just perhaps — but of course there goes relativity both special and general. Just right for old fashioned science fiction, a bit awkward for modern…

West Bank – Total fertility rate – Historical Data Graphs per Year

Jerry,

Netanyahu’s rejection of a two State solution is being driven as much by demographic realities as politics.

http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=we&v=31

James Crawford=

More data on demographic realities influencing the rejection of the two state solution.

http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?v=31&c=gz&c=is&c=we&l=en

Given the anticipated influx of refugees from Europe, Israel can retain Gaza and the West Bank while remaining majority Jewish. This trend could be reinforced by emigration from Gaza and the West Bank

James Crawford=

Even more data.

http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?v=27&v=31&c=gz&c=is&c=we&l=en

James Crawford

The numbers appear to be correct. The interpretation is debatable.

You say

They will have a bomb no more than two years from when they decide to get one. What they do with it is unpredictable, although Obama predicts that they will do no worse than North Korea

—————–

Two years from now Obama will not be in office.

Limp Dong Ugh is not suicidal.  He has a big mouth and talks a good story, but he knows if he sends a nuke South the retaliation will be merciless and his buddy Red China will look the other way.

In Iran’s part of the world ‘Suicide Bombing’ is part of the culture, a nuke in Israel might provoke retaliation, but they just might not care.

B

It would certainly worry me if I lived in Israel.

America, Iran, Israel and Nukes.

As I see it, if Iran nukes an American city, we’ll lose a couple hundred thousand people, take a big economic hit, and then we’ll come back and wipe Iran from the face of the Earth. A lot of people around the world don’t quite understand just how big and resilient the United States of America is; or just how much redundancy and spare resources we have. Barack Obama’s major blindspot is that he still acts like all Muslims are rational people, including fundamentalists, and would never do anything so self-destructive.
If Iran nukes Tel Aviv, that’s a devastating blow to Israel. Their country is too small to take more than a couple of nuclear hits and keep going. Of course I wouldn’t put it past an Islamic Fundamentalist group to nuke Jerusalem and then pin the blame of the Israelis saying they did it themselves as part of a conspiracy to attack Muslims. Netanyahu is fully cognizant of what the threat is, and how damaging it would be. Israel can’t afford to take the, “let the other guy throw the first punch” option. They absolutely must strike before a nuke is delivered.

M

Many share your view. At my age I am not digging shelters, and my old survival company is long dispersed.

Regarding white roofs and Earth’s heat balance

Another approach to the Global Warming problem, assuming it exists, that is just as easy as white roofs to undo (probably more so, in fact) is dumping a couple of hundred tons of fine iron filings into the tropical ocean in an appropriate place. Why? Well, it turns out that iron is the limiting factor for phytoplankton growth in quite large areas of the ocean. More iron, more phytoplankton; and of course the plankton is a CO2 sink.
As a side benefit, this would also improve the productivity of that patch of ocean too – which means more food, at least potentially.
Regards
Ian Campbell

SSPS, White Roofs & Dinner For Six

Jerry,
I am so willing to venture that white roofs would be a big help that I will forego the bet and offer to take your six to dinner. I don’t know when I will be in California (I live in Georgia), but I will pay up should I get there.
That is the kind of thinking we need. We have had an affect on the albedo of the planet, probably a net negative one. Painting roofs white, especially with titanium dioxide which has been shown to breakdown airborne pollutants, could go a long way towards
increasing the planet’s albedo. Mix it in with all of the concrete that goes into side walks and highways, too.
SSPS would be a huge step in the right direction for the environment as all we would need to control would be excess heat pollution.

Kevin L Keegan

SSPS net heat

Dear Jerry –

A couple of days ago you responded to a letter which suggested that an SSPS would produce significant heat by remarking

“SSPS can intercept heat that would come to the Earth anyway; no additional heat regardless of the efficiency of the operation. It can also gather energy from sunlight that would otherwise not come to Earth, if the concern is cooling.”

You might want to rethink this. At an altitude of 22,000 miles, an SSPS in geosync orbit will block the sun’s energy from reaching the earth about 6% of the time (8000 / 2 x pi x 22000) . Assuming the SSPS has a system power conversion efficiency of 25%, it will produce net heating of the earth as long as it operates for more than about 25% of its orbit.

Disabling an SSPS for 75% of its orbit seems an unlikely option, if the goal is “no additional heat”.

Regards,

Jim Martin

You got me. I came up with that argument years ago, and you’re the first to challenge it. I haven’t done the maths, and you’re probably right. It isn’t a necessary argument anyway.

“We know that some of these bones belong to Cervantes.”

<http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/mar/17/don-quixote-author-cervantes-remains-identified>

Roland Dobbins

Freedom is not free. Free men are not equal. Equal men are not free.

Chaos Manor View, Thursday, March 19, 2015

Despite all the US experts with their predictions of the end of Netanyahu, he won and will form a new government with even more personal power; and he did so by rejecting the two-state solutions, land for peace, that the West, and particularly President Obama has always counted on.

Netanyahu has no reason to consult the US about Iran policy now: whether it know it or not, the Obama regime is depending on good relations with Iran, trust and good will, and it seems unlikely that this will put any hamper on Iranian acquisition of nuclear capability. They will have a bomb no more than two years from when they decide to get one. What they do with it is unpredictable, although Obama predicts that they will do no worse than North Korea, see that they are impoverishing themselves, and turn into nice guys over a long period of time.

What Netanyahu predicts they will do is another story. The stakes are much higher for him. The men making the decisions in Iran are not reasonable in what they say. Some say that End Times are coming, when Jews will hide and the very rocks will cry out, ‘O Muslim there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.’ After all, the Koran says that will happen, and the Supreme Leadership of Iran – and the Commander in Chief of the Praetorian Republican Guard – are Ayatollahs who have won their positions through scholarship of the Koran and their strict monotheism. They say they believe in the Koran. Obama says ‘not really.’ What Netanyahu, who controls the IDF Air Power believes they believe, and how much he is willing to risk Tel Aviv on the strength of his convictions; we also do not know is the IDF thinks it can end Iranian nuclear capability, and whether, absent US deep penetrators, it can be done without Israeli nuclear weapons I do not know. Nor, really, does Netanyahu. What he is sure of is that he does not have the 99% backing of the US that he once could count on.

The Internet – Time Warner Cable – slows or stops each afternoon around 4 lately.  DNS errors even trying to reach Google. Probably net neutrality as about then some downloads his night’s worth of porn.

I have LASFS tonight. I may have more at 1100.

: March 17th View

Belated Happy St. Pat’s day – hope you were able to celebrate with the appropriate beverage…
I have the feeling that I may be sticking something into a meat grinder, here – but I have a bit of a problem with “A law requiring white roofs everywhere in the US would make significant climate changes…”
A bit of Google-fu and a touch of key-punching to get a feel of what the difference just might be – and I come up with, at the very highest possible value, a 0.05% change in reflectivity. That is just taking the median size of single-family detached homes (2005 HUD), times the total number of housing units (total, not just SFDH), divided by total US acreage.
Obviously, missing the following:
1) Number of housing units that have nowhere near the 1,764 ft^2 “roofprint.” Live in a three story apartment building, and you probably don’t have that much footage – and only a third of the roofprint is yours.
2) Non-residential roofs. Some places that is significant, others it is not; I am making an assumption that the way over-stated figure for residential more than accounts for this.
3) Roofs that are already white – look at an aerial view of my city (Tucson) and dark roofs are few and far between. Eyeballing, I would say less than 1% of all roofs here are something other than white (or at least a light tan, depending on the recency of significant rain). Most other cities in the Southwest look much the same, except those that went crazy with tiles…
4) Roofs that are seasonally white, when they have just about the same reflectivity as anywhere else in their area.
5) The fact that the difference is not between 100% reflectivity for a (clean) white roof and 100% absorption for a “dark” roof (which vary widely from asphalt black to a very light color like many Spanish tile roofs). I really wouldn’t even know where to start with determining this factor; claims of the companies selling the coatings are, of course, the most optimistic possible.
6) And, of course, that a chunk of US total acreage is water (although much of that is seasonally white also).
The upshot is that I just do not see where the difference would be noticeable on a macro scale. Yes, it could be significant in a UHI where the change in reflectivity would be much greater – but get ten or twenty miles away from urbania and I think there would be essentially zero change in the climate.

Richard Skinner

I have not done the math myself but I have seen enough to offer a wager, that painting all the roofs white in the US would affect the temperature more than all our anti CO2 measures.

Jerry,
Your reply to my post concerning the heating of the environment misses something very important: even roof-top solar increases heat in the environment. Much of the solar energy that reaches the Earth’s surface is reflected back to space as visible light. It is the portion of that energy that is absorbed by the surface of the Earth that heats the environment, because much of that energy is released as infrared radiation, not visible radiation. Our atmosphere is largely transparent to visible radiation, so the reflected portion leaves the environment without a net increase in temperature. The absorbed portion, re-emitted as infrared, finds the atmosphere largely opaque and is reflected back to the surface, leading to a net heating of the environment.
Any solar radiation employed in energy production, weather collected on the ground using roof-top solar or in space by an SSPS would be dissipated into the atmosphere as infrared radiation and would therefore contribute to a net heating of the environment. All energy consumption ends with heat dissipation. Even intercepting a portion of the solar radiation that would ordinarily hit the Earth anyway would not alter this, but it would reduce the amount of visible light reaching the Earth. Do this on a significant scale and it would reduce crop yields, oxygen production, and CO2 cycling, which would not be good.
There is no “free lunch.” There is no way to make ANY energy production system have zero environmental impact. The system that comes closest is geothermal that taps into heat already being released into the environment, such as is used in Iceland. Second closest is mined geothermal, where wells are bored to heat water. All of the heat recovered would have entered the environment anyway, but not at the rate caused by the mining, thus leading to a net increase in environmental heating.
When I say we are smarter than that, I am saying that we can foresee such impacts and be honest about them. We can calculate their magnitude and possible impacts on the environment. We can then attempt to mitigate them before they are a problem, not wring our hands and shout at each other ineffectually as is happening now.

Kevin L Keegan

And perhaps this, but I am still willing to wager a good dinner for 6 that painting the roofs white will have more effect on the temperature than our current efforts.  It is also easier to undo.

Drone pilot exodus 

Jerry,

With respects to Col Couv, the AF leadership is “at a loss to explain” the RPA pilot exodus because they’re the ones causing it, and it has nothing at all to do with “real pilots” being disgruntled at driving a drone around. Rather, it has to do with a loss of trust and respect bottom to top in the USAF pilot force. The AF leadership sends drone pilots to be “deployed in place” flying continuous combat ops 6 days a week (12 hr shifts around the clock) for 3-5 years straight, then the leadership refuses to adjust the promotion system to account for the fact that almost every one of these officer and enlisted crew members has little to put on their promotion recommendation forms beyond “flew classified combat ops”. It took 15 years after the start of RPA ops before we had a “drone pilot” come back to be a squadron or wing commander out at Creech AFB, not for lack of good officers, but because for 15 years those good officers were passed over for promotion and command in favor of officers who had down time to pad their promotion recommendation forms and do something, anything, other than continuous combat ops.

We had a guy who was a squadron commander as a Major get passed over for Lt Col. That NEVER happens, but it did to a drone pilot. Any wonder why he quit? It wasn’t because he couldn’t fly real airplanes anymore.

To hammer home the point that USAF leadership is completely out of touch with what is going on in the trenches among RPA crews, they took a long look at the high suicide and mental illness rate among RPA crews and decided that the way to fix it was through a “resiliency training” program. Sounds great, but in practice what it means is that on what should otherwise be a weekend day off with family and away from our job of hunting and killing people every single duty day for 5 years (what do people think armed ISR means?), we have to spend that day doing a social activity with others from our squadron. Taking away my family time is supposed to somehow make me more resilient? What they need to do is acknowledge that these are no kidding deployed combat billets and relieve the crews from the garrison nonsense additional duties and training requirements, and let us get on with the job without pestering us with nonsense. And come up with a scheduled training, garrison, or leave rotation, to give people some real down-time like every other combat unit in the history of forever. We are finally starting to see signs of improvement in the performance reports and promotion rates now that we have a couple of commanders who have flown RPAs before assuming command, but for crying out loud show us a little support and take some of the garrison admin nonsense off our backs while we’re flying combat ops. Bagram air base in Afghanistan has better support facilities than the bare-base facilities at Creech AFB. Questions about support functions are universally answered with “there are no further services facility upgrades planned for Creech AFB”.

We just got word a month ago that almost everyone at Creech is getting their tours of duty extended from the usual 3 years to 5 or more years, with nowhere to go after an RPA instructor or non-flying staff job except back into the grinder doing the same thing. That is a dead end career path no matter how you look at it or where the pilot came from.

A recent survey of RPA pilot experience asked a series of questions regarding various topics including things like “how many combat actions have you actively participated in that directly resulted in the death of enemy combatants”, and “how many engagements have you witnessed or participated in that resulted in the death of enemy combatants”. I had to laugh when the top answer was only “50+”. I witnessed, enabled, directly supported, or directly participated in more than that in less than 6 months, watching the carnage up close through the best zoom lenses money can buy. 5 years of that plus actually deploying overseas for 4-6 months every 2 years in addition to the combat ops shift work without any down time, and we’re demeaned by the likes of Col Couv for being selfish and quitting because we throw tantrums due to not being in the cockpit? Flag officers get compensated in many different ways for accepting that sort of duty tempo and responsibilities, but we’re talking about E3-E7 and O1-O5 here. The ops tempo situation hasn’t changed but the AF has halted the “use or lose” leave extension program. That means we have a lot of people, myself included, who will lose leave at the end of this fiscal year due to carrying too many days of leave built up since we can’t actually take it due to ops tempo. Thanks again AF leadership.

That’s why there is an exodus. There is one more thing, regarding it being unnecessary to be a “pilot” to operate RPAs…

The Army has been experimenting for a couple of years now with non-pilots flying their drones around, through the use of improved automation. The last time I was watching they were still routinely crashing quite a few due to errors in simple pilot skills (like flying a perfectly good drone into a mountaintop). There is no way the USAF will accept that sort of casual loss due to lack of training. The RPA business is far too important (and the current crop of unmanned aircraft too difficult to fly) to leave it to those without the proper rigorous training. The Army seems to be ok with letting kids drive around expensive M-1 Abrams tanks knowing that they’ll occasionally flip one upside down into a ditch, so maybe its no wonder there is a huge service-specific cultural divide in opinion on how to approach such things.

Come on out for a tour of the simulators and see how hard it is to fly these things. Then you’ll be able to imagine a 2Lt with less than 200 hours experience being asked to perform the on-scene commander role for combat search and rescue without the benefit of the normal recurring 6-12 month home-station training periods a “real aircraft” squadron tasked for CSAR support (such as the A-10) gets. The MQ-9 does ISR, CAS, SCAR, CSAR support, direct fire support to anyone with a high enough tasking priority, and air interdiction, with no training cycle built into the program. Except for a select few instructors and crews, its just continuous combat ops after initial mission qualification training with any advanced skills and upgrades picked up on the job. Nobody has to do that but us and we’ve been doing it for more than a decade now with no change even remotely considered in the long term planning process. Last year we had enough enlisted sensor operators that we could have initiated a plan to rotate crews out for advanced training, to improve the long term quality and health of our enlisted RPA crew members. Instead, the USAF involuntarily separated the “extra” airmen who had the bad luck of having nothing but combat ops on their performance reports. Hence exodus.

There is no mystery here, just what feels like either callous neglect or malicious mis-management of the personal welfare and careers of the crews who fly the USAF’s most in-demand platform. Anyone who quits has a far better future ahead of them regardless of what they did before they started flying RPAs, and the sooner they quit the better their opportunities and family situation especially if they want to transfer to the USAF Reserves to continue serving.

Serving fighter pilot turned drone pilot

Freedom is not free. Free men are not equal. Equal men are not free.

Chaos Manor View, Tuesday, March 17, 2015

St. Patrick’s Day

Netanyahu is claiming victory in the Israeli election. At the last moment he rejected the two-state policy favored by the US State Dept., and this promises interesting times. Many years ago I advised the Israelis to claim what they wanted, build a wall around it, and give the rest to the Palestinians. They did that, with their Security walls, and abandoned Gaza, taking with them reluctant settlers. The result was rockets and tunnels, and an Israeli incursion into what would have been Palestinian sovereign territory, with many Arab casualties. Since then I have had no advice to offer. I wish them well, but the situation is grave. I use the word advisedly.

FCC Open Internet Ruling: A First Reaction

By Alex Pournelle

 

The FCC finally released its “Net Neutrality” rules, a good three weeks after the vote. The ruling is over 300 pages, including commentaries and dissenting opinions (About which more later). There will be longer, more knowledgeable and in-depth commentary on the entire ruling; consider this my first take.

Officially titled “In the Matter of Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet, GN Docket No. 14-28”, the online version is here, download here. Unfortunately, a first read suggests it’s the full employment act for communications lawyers, a great opportunity for lobbying, lawfare and rent-seeking by large corporations, looking to gain unfair advantage—the very groups to be regulated.

In general, the FCC regulates best when it regulates least, and when a thousand ideas can elbow their way into the marketplace, then succeed or fail on their own merits. Let’s illustrate how.

AWS-3 and CMRS: (Mostly) Good Examples of Federal Regulation

The run-up to the FCC’s “Net Neutrality” ruling completely overshadowed Auction 97. Better known as the Advanced Wireless Spectrum 3 (AWS-3) auction, this was the biggest offering of radio spectrum in over a decade, with 31 bidders obtaining 1,611 licenses. AWS-3 was a big deal, and a good example of how government can work well, and not so well.

The Commercial Spectrum Enhancement Act (CSEA) mandated the study and (seven years later) reuse/shared use of various radio bands, particularly for cellular-type services. Marketwatchers thought final proceeds from AWS-3 would be in the low billions, but final receipts hit almost $45 billion, for radio frequencies around 1700 MHz, formerly the sole domain of Federal agencies. Timing was good; wireless data usage was already exploding and projected to rise quickly.

The friction, regulatory burden and overhead of government compliance for AWS-3 has been quite low, by design. And it looks like these licenses will be put into use just as fast as the legal difficulties and spectrum-sharing (Some Feds will continue to be co-users) can be worked out. Cell sites will have more capacity to connect calls, surfers, texters and video uploaders.

Commercial Mobile Radio Service (“CMRS”) is the regulatory classification for mobile telephone services, consolidating PCS, cellular and most of SMR. This light touch also let innovation fly: CMRS licensees can (and have) implemented CDMA, straight GSM, WiMAX and LTE, as technologies improved and the market responded. It would have been very difficult or impossible for the FCC to respond to each signaling standard in depth, but fortunately it didn’t have to.

Not every product succeeded: Qualcomm thought they could broadcast television to handsets as a separate product (MediaFLO), discovered they could not, then sold the spectrum to AT&T, who now uses it as straight cellular spectrum. Qualcomm didn’t give up; it’s pushing LTE-Broadcast to, well, broadcast video to dozens or hundreds of simultaneous viewers, this time within the LTE standard, with help, and with live demos.

Market Forces, Market Innovation

None of these innovations could have happened (or not as quickly) with a much stricter, permissions-based governmental approval cycle, instead of the lassez faire regime for CMRS. Adam Smith’s invisible hand works on the Internet, and it works in RF re-use. (Arguably, it hasn’t worked in terrestrial radio, a discussion for another day.)

LTE-Broadcast did need approval, not by the FCC but the 3GPP. The 3GPP sets standards for LTE communications (currently in Release 13). But the 3GPP isn’t a governmental group; it “unites seven telecommunications standard development organizations”, developing worldwide standards without direct governmental involvement. Approval is less political and certainly more market-savvy than the bad, old, per-market RF technology approvals of the PTT era, or pre-Judge Greene AT&T. The sort-of open-market, engineering-centric approach of the various 3GPP working groups have served the public—both US and global—well.

And that’s the lesson: More freedom, particularly fewer governmental regulations, have allowed a rapid advance in communications standards, capital investment in cellular infrastructure, and the battle between Android and iPhone. This let-the-nerds-loose approach set the stage for such astounding improvements as Artemis’s claimed 35X more efficient pCell cellular demonstration, Alcatel’s lightRadio, and SpiderCloud Wireless, just to name three.

Government Rules, Corporate Shenanigans

On the other side: Government regulation. During AWS-3, bidder DISH Network used tiny subsidiaries to obtain small business discounts for their bids, a clever bit of regulatory jujitsu that did not go unnoticed by their competitors.

That bit of rent-seeking illustrates the bigger problem: Corporations, especially in markets with large sums of money at stake, will use every tool they have to gain unfair advantage. They’d much prefer spending a few million on lobbying to a few billion on competition, which is not good for consumers. The more opportunities in the law, the more they will. There are many in this ruling, especially compared to the truly light regulation under CMRS.

That’s the key issue with the FCC “Open Internet” ruling: If a camel is a horse designed by committee, the FCC Trojan Camelid clearly is nosing open the tent flap. The FCC forbore certain regulations on the Internet, but claims the power to regulate as they see fit under Title II. Many commentators have, incorrectly, said “over 700 rules [under Title II] aren’t going to be applied.” That’s incomplete and inaccurate. The current commissioners cannot bind future ones; what’s to say future commissioners—or the bureaucracy—will stop forebearing?

I’m not the only one to say this—there have been many and many a counter-argument made. FCC Commissioners Ajit Pai and Michael O’Rielly voted against the proposal for good reasons. Pai’s legal objections are summarized here; his policy objections here. Verizon released a “Throwback Thursday” response in Morse code, and another one from a vintage 1930s typewriter, in protest to using old law in this brave new world. There has even been buyer’s remorse (Sort of) from Netflix. Frontier Communications (Who’s buying Verizon’s wireline services in three states) says it’s happy with the reclassification, but that was before the regulations were published. It’s also unsurprising, coming from a company used to (Or maybe counting on) Title II regulation for wireline services. Remember, AT&T was perfectly happy with the regulatory climate before divestiture; it took a big sledgehammer to crack open actual telecom competition.

The Big Show Continues

This is just the first inning. There will be lawsuits, stays, further arguments and court cases. In a future article, I’ll dig deeper into what I see as the fundamental flaws in this ruling (including some I don’t see others discussing). I’ll discuss the “Bright line” rules against blocking, throttling and paid prioritization. I’ll suggest better remedies (Spoiler: Competition) and two Modest Proposals for improving the current Internet. I also welcome your thoughts.

Alex Pournelle works daily to arrange Internet access and utility to major shows, sporting events, etc.

We will continue the discussion, and Alex will continue his essay.

: Is our Climate Self Regulating?

Jerry,

I can think of a valid reason for being worried about what might happen if the Earth gets too warm and it has nothing to do with rising Oceans, melting Polar Ice or other Warmest visions of catastrophe.

What if the Earth’s Climate is self regulating, but with a primitive thermostat that can only control temperature within a band of plus or minus 50 degrees F.

When average temperatures rise above a certain point there is more evaporation from the Oceans creating more cloud cover. This in turn creates more precipitation. Some of this precipitation falls as snow. Snow cover, being white, reflects more solar energy reducing temperatures creating larger areas of snow cover. If this happens to coincide with a Solar Minimum, After a few years, we have the start of the next Ice Age.

Since this has been going on for several million years it might be prudent to look at sources of warming that are not connected to Human activities. We do know that Solar output is variable and that there are many outlets for the heat if the Earth’s molten core both above and below sea level.

What to do? If Earth’s Climate is set up to stop warming by starting an Ice Age and the mechanisms of the warming are beyond our control, perhaps we should be looking at ways to stop an Ice Age. For starters, how about spreading Carbon Black on the snow fields to allow the absorption of Solar Energy rather than reflecting it.

Bob Holmes

Since we are here, it is clear that Earth’s climate is to some extent self-regulating: human activities cannot have had much to do with it until recently. Slash and burn peoples don’t have that much effect on forest fires. It is also evident that at least for the past half million years or so, the trend has been to the cold side, with the present period being Interglacial. It’s a long Interglacial Period, but it seems that the “Normal” state of the Earth is ice well into what we call the Temperate Zones, at least in the Northern Hemisphere where much of the land is.

Obviously we have the technology to affect this greatly. A law requiring white roofs everywhere in the US would make significant climate changes – with unpredictable results, of course. The models aren’t that good, and must satisfy a number of political restraints if they are to retain their funding.

SSPS And No Pollution

Jerry,
There is always pollution. For the SSPS the pollution is heat. The heat comes from the transmitted power lost to the atmosphere, that which is lost in distribution, and from the dissipation of the remaining energy upon its use. In the end, every single extra watt of power collected and transmitted to the Earth will end up as heat in the environment.
I will admit that this is a far cleaner pollutant than CO2, mercury, uranium, sulphur, nitrous oxide, etc. that we currently pump into the environment in pursuit of energy, but it is a pollutant none-the-less.
Looking at 2013, the U.S. alone consumed 35.9 quadrillion BTU of energy. Per capita, that comes to 143.6 million BTU. Spread that over 7.5 billion people and we get 1.074 quintillion BTU. Those 7.5 billion people actually used 550 quadrillion BTU in 2013, so having them all use as much energy as the average American raises world consumption by a factor of 1.958, which is spitting distance to a doubling. So that is twice as much heat trapped in the environment every year, which is, by definition, global warming.
The question is, how much global warming? It may well be negligible and most likely is right now. SSPS would be a huge step in the right direction for world energy production. I bring up the pollution issue because, ultimately, there will be a limit to how much heat we can add to the planet without fundamentally changing the environment. If we do not think about this, then we will be as remiss as every prior generation who gave no thought to the impact of the wastes they produced. We will be as myopic as all prior generations who looked at the world as being infinite in extent and therefor infinitely capable of dissipating our wastes.
We are smarter than that.

: Kevin L Keegan

SSPS can intercept heat that would come to the Earth anyway; no additional heat regardless of the efficiency of the operation. It can also gather energy from sunlight that would otherwise not come to Earth, if the concern is cooling. Yes; this takes time and planning. So does carbon tax.

Energy and Environment

California could power itself three to five times over with solar

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/03/17/california-could-power-itself-three-to-five-times-over-with-solar/

By Puneet Kollipara March 17 at 9:00 AM

Workers install solar panels on a rooftop at a home in Palmetto Bay, Fla. California could supply enough solar power on or near developed infrastructure to meet the state’s power needs up to five times over, new research suggests. (Kerry Sheridan/AFP/Getty Images)

Deserts and remote fields are popular spots for building vast arrays of solar panels, which generate dramatically more energy than individual homeowner rooftop installations. These areas are rich in sunlight while offering plenty of clear, flat land to work with. But what if we didn’t always have to go all the way out to these remote and potentially ecologically fragile areas? What if we could simply drive down the street and make use of the buildings and lands in areas we’ve already developed?

A new study suggests that such a strategy could work in a state like California, which is working aggressively to boost its renewable energy use. And it could provide a lot of power. There’s enough space suitable for solar power on or near land that humans occupy in the state to power three to five of today’s Californias, researchers report in Nature Climate Change today.

California is a clean energy trailblazer on a number of fronts. It’s a part of a carbon emissions trading program with other Pacific states, and has also set a goal of supplying one-third of its electricity from renewable sources such as solar and wind by 2020, and cutting its carbon dioxide emissions 80 percent by 2050.

Of course, no energy source is perfect, and solar is no exception. Not only does it work only at certain times of the day, but it also requires a lot of open, flat land to generate solar power at the scale of power plants. As a result, a lot of solar power projects are undertaken in deserts and other remote areas where open land is plentiful.

But some of these lands could host delicate ecosystems that might become more difficult for creatures to live in if they’re covered with solar panels. Also, these sites can be far from where power is actually needed; in these cases, miles of transmission lines have to be built to deliver that electricity to consumers.

So to reduce these problems, it might behoove us to take as much advantage of open spaces in developed areas as we can, whether on roofs or on the ground. Rebecca Hernandez and Christopher Field at Stanford University and the Carnegie Institution for Science decided to see how feasible that would be in California, given the state’s aggressive push for clean energy.

[The best idea in a long time: Covering parking lots with solar panels]

They focused their attention on the two main forms of solar power generation: photovoltaic cells, which generate electricity by absorbing sunlight directly, and concentrating solar power (CSP), which involves using arrays of mirrors to focus sunlight into one area where it can be converted into electricity (though these projects require more area to operate than the smallest photovoltaic projects do).

The researchers assessed California’s land to see how suitable it would be for solar power projects of either type, whether on scales suitable for powering individual homes and businesses or for powering entire communities. The most “compatible” places, they said, found in just around 8.1 percent of the state’s land, would be in areas that humans have modified or developed in some way, and it would have enough open and mostly-flat space to work with. These places might include not just the rooftops of homes, businesses, warehouses and other buildings, but also parking lots, farmland, grassy fields and golf courses.

California has 10,535 square miles (roughly the size of Massachusetts) and 2,422 square miles (roughly the size of Delaware) of this “compatible” land for photovoltaics and CSP systems, respectively, the researchers found. On these compatible lands, photovoltaics could provide about 14,600 terawatt-hours (or 1 billion kilowatt-hours) a year in power, and CSP systems could provide about 6,000 terawatt-hours a year. Compare that with California’s total energy use across all sectors, from residential to commercial to transportation and industrial, in 2011: 2,231 terawatt-hours.

All in all, depending on what combination of photovoltaics and CSP systems you choose to use on these lands, the resulting amount of energy would fall somewhere roughly between three and five times what California used in 2011. And that’s all before we’ve even discussed other places that aren’t ideally compatible but could still potentially host solar projects, such as federally protected lands.

That’s not to say that we can go all-in on solar power or abandon desert projects outright. People won’t want to cover every last parking lot or rooftop with a CSP system or solar panel, and other factors such as the availability of transmission lines serve as another limiting factor.

But the findings do drive home one point that’s often lost in the discussion over solar power: To get it, you don’t have to go to the desert or to that far-away, fragile ecosystem. You may just have to drive down the street.

For places like Southern and Mid California, where the sun shines most of the time and much of the power is used for daytime cooling, direct solar is a reasonable way to get power. It doesn’t kill birds, we have experience with its operation, and it’s fairly low maintenance—indeed much of the maintenance can be put off on residents and not State employees. Of course the Sun doesn’t shine at night, and is low in the sky for hours, but power demand is lower at those times. You need power storage and generation to get through winter, and rainy seasons, but that’s doable most places. Of course California unions have a say in all this.

For New England and the rest of the nation it’s not so clear. Much better storage is needed than we have at present; but there are signs that this is happening so that we may yet see Manhattan covered with solar cells…

Wonder battery announcement

Dr. Pournelle,
Being something of a skeptic [perhaps bordering on a cynic] it was with a jaundiced eye that I read the full article — In Battery Revolution, a Clean Leap Forward — in your 3.16.15 View.
The article in the WSJ was remarkably free of detail. I suspect the author, Christopher Mims, was regurgitating a press release, judging from the breathless style of writing. Readers might best refer to the comments after the article in the WSJ, for a better appreciation of the battery claims.
I would welcome battery technology that could drive a five-passenger car 300 miles, pulling a boat at 70 mph, and recharge in five minutes, but I won’t see it in my lifetime. The energy density of the Dyson investment would give me pause. We’ve already got Li-ion batteries spontaneously combusting.
Pete Nofel

Yes; but we also have evidence that Dyson is more than a dreamer. We watch, some with more confidence than others. I agree, energy densities matter, and safety is a great concern.

New Li-On Battery Lasts Twice as Long—and, Backed By Dyson, Could Sell

Rarely a week passes without the report of a new battery technology, but most appear destined to remain within the lab for years. Now, though, a start-up called Sakti3 has a li-on battery that lasts twice as long as most—and $15 million of support from Dyson to make it a reality.

Sakti3’s new batteries make use of a variety of new materials and processing techniques to increase their capacity, Technology Review reports. Perhaps chief amongst them is the fact that it embraces solid-state battery technology—meaning that the flammable liquid electrolyte that causes battery fires is swapped out for a solid material. In turn, that allows the company to use new high-energy storage materials that only work in a solid-state set-up. Those changes provides twice the energy density compared to normal li-on batteries.

The technology—the exact details of which remain under wraps—is compelling enough to have drawn the interest of James Dyson, who has now invested $15 million into Sakti3 to give its final push from prototype to market. Perhaps it’s the design philosophy of the company that appealed to the engineer: Sakti3 prepares its prototypes on standard manufacturing equipment instead of custom lab kit, in order to make it as easy as possible to make them commercializable in the future. Whatever the reason, Dyson claims said that “Sakti3 has achieved leaps in performance which current battery technology simply can’t.”

Of course, taking the technology from its existing prototype to market won’t necessarily be easy, even with Dyson’s support—but the partnership makes it far more likely. Perhaps your next vacuum cleaner will be powered by Sakti3. [Technology Review]

‘The only explanation they can conjure for the policy’s continued existence is bureaucratic: Maintaining the one-child regime now employs so many officials – in the hundreds of thousands, perhaps more – that China hasn’t been willing to put them out of work.’

<http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/the-ghost-children-in-the-wake-of-chinas-one-child-policy-a-generation-is-lost/article23454402/?fb_ref=Default>

Roland Dobbins

Das Buros steht immer.

Freedom is not free. Free men are not equal. Equal men are not free.