Nuclear notes

Alternative dares not speak | The Australian

Alan Moran writes about Garnaut's interim report, noting that it doesn't mention the "N" word.

He mentions a bit of history of interest:

Now there's a rich irony. ALP ministers, many of whom have spent their lives demonising nuclear power, may soon have to start promoting it. Actually, that's a U-turn not without precedent, as nuclear power was once strongly advocated by the ALP: in the mid-1970s, the Dunstan government in South Australia even claimed that a nuclear industry in the state would create 500,000 jobs.

That would be one way Kevin Rudd's reputation would soar in my eyes: if he could actually lead his party into accepting nuclear. (Go have a look at Pebble Beds, Kevin.)

Speaking of nuclear, and energy generally, the Mother Jones current issue is all about the topic. In the article about nuclear, it notes:

To be useful as nuclear fuel, uranium ore has to be refined into uranium oxide (the yellowcake of Niger fame) and then enriched—turned into pellets of 4 percent U-235. The sole U.S. plant that enriches uranium for civilian power reactors, located in Paducah, Kentucky, accomplishes this via an energy-hogging process that consumes 15 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity a year. Even so, carbon emissions for the entire nuclear fuel cycle come to no more than 55 grams of CO₂ per kilowatt-hour—roughly even with solar. By 2010, when the U.S. Enrichment Corporation is slated to switch to the more efficient method used in Europe, that number should come down closer to 12 grams per kilowatt-hour—on par with wind.

Naked singularities again

Here's a recent paper from arXiv that proposes how naked singularities may form instead of black holes. (My earlier post about naked singularities possibly being created at the LHC is here.)

The more recent paper does not mention the LHC, but the mechanism it describes still seems relevant (correct me if I am wrong, anyone.)

As this paper says:

Spacetime singularities belong naturally to the realm of quantum gravity. We believe that only a complete quantum gravity theory will be able to describe naked singularities properly, dissecting them conclusively or even restoring the WCCC in a more fundamental level.

So: no one knows exactly what a naked singularity would be like, yet (according to some) they may be created in the LHC. (There's a short note on a CERN publication about naked singularities.)

OK, the argument against worrying about them will be the same as that for mini black holes: the earth and all astronomical bodies are constantly bombarded by higher energy particles, and if that hasn't created a naked singularity danger, then nor will the LHC.

And the reason for questioning this might be same as the argument regarding mini black holes: namely, cosmic naked singularities would presumably shoot off at near relativistic speeds , whereas those at the LHC would sometimes have low speed. Maybe ones that hang around a something more to worry about? Also, I am a little curious about what would happen if two of them meet, as would seem more of a possibility in the LHC than in nature.

Meanwhile, we sit around twiddling our thumbs while CERN takes its sweet time to publish the delayed safety paper.

Local electricity storage

A few posts back, I indicated I would do some Googling about household electrical storage, so that my future solar Stirling engine powered house would still let me watch TV at night.

Seems there's not many choices around. Of course, the truly dedicated can buy a huge number of lead acid batteries already, but they have a pretty short life. One site claims that nanotechnology will let us build superbatteries, but as to how realistic this proposal is, I have no idea:

Today, using lead-acid storage batteries, such a unit for a typical house to store 100 kilowatt hours of electrical energy would take up a small room and cost more than $10,000. Through revolutionary advances in nanotechnology, it may be possible to shrink an equivalent unit to the size of a washing machine and drop the cost to less than $1,000. With these advances the electrical grid can become exceedingly robust, because local storage protects customers from power fluctuations and outages. Most importantly, it permits some or all of the primary electrical power on the grid to come from solar and wind.

Still, there does exist one form of battery which allows a lot of electricity to be stored. Futurepundit talked about them last year: sodium sulphur batteries. He links to a USAToday story about them, which includes a photo.

They are big and expensive and used for a many houses, not just one. They appear to be largely a Japanese idea. The New York Times reported last year that one company in America is looking at using them for storing windpower. (The article also notes that they operate at more than 800 degrees F, which makes it sound like you wouldn't want even a small one in your backyard.)

So, OK, they won't fit in my backyard, but they sound a fairly promising idea if used on neighbourhood scale.

Of course, another Japanese idea may help in any plan to live off the grid: house sized fuel cells, which I have mentioned before. I wonder: can you turn these on and off easily, as required, and not affect their efficiency in the process? And can you get away with using bottled natural gas for them, instead of mains gas?

Funny how many of these energy ideas are coming from Japan, hey?

Houses as art

Dezeen’s top ten: houses

Oddly, I found this link via Posthuman Blues.

In another life, I would have liked to have been an architect. (Must be all that time I spent designing houses with Lego. I don't think they even make the roof blocks any more.)

That said, you do have to laugh at the impracticality of some architect ideas for residences. Those that irritate me in particular are the ones that have enormous slabs of glass for walls, as if there is no human desire for privacy. (They also make no sense as far as energy efficiency is concerned.)

However, regular readers would recall my fondness for canvas, in the form of tents and upmarket yurts. Well, I learn from the story above that some architects from Chile have come up with a house which is sort of part normal wall and part tent, and you can readily buy plans off them.

Yes, it's probably got problems in terms of how long you could expect it to last, but the photographs make it look very appealing.

That Austrian case...

Dungeons & Austrians - New York Times

See the link for an opinion piece that points out that the basement incest case is not the first horror basement story from Austria.

Actually, when I saw what the article was about, I thought it might delve into the whole question of whether European horror fairy tales actually do spring from something twisted in the collective unconscious of the area. It doesn't go there, but there'll be an academic somewhere who does.

Meanwhile, it's curious that in Australia, the city that has the general reputation for the most vile and twisted murders is Adelaide, which is seen as having both strong English and (in the hills at least) German influence.

Boris wins; exile threatened

Mayoral election results: Live | Politics | Guardian Unlimited

Of course, with Boris Johnson winning the London mayoral race, over at The Guardian there's an amusing outpouring of name calling of Boris voters (who are obviously just too stupid to vote for Ken), and empty threats of self exile from the city/country.

What is it about lefties and this precious "if the majority don't vote like I do, I cannot live here" attitude? People used to say that conservatives had a "born to rule" attitude, but it's clear that such a belief in entitlement (based on their superior intellect and morality, of course) has long since passed over to the followers of the other side of politics.

PS: Surely even those who hate him would have to agree that Boris made a very gracious acceptance speech. Maybe he will end up like Schwarzenegger: a somewhat unexpected great success when put in the right position.

PPS: Tigerhawk has a good post about the adolescent nature of this "if my candidate loses I will leave politics/the country" attitude.

PPPS: Or, to put it as Nige does at Bryan Appleyard's blog:

What has struck me in all the interviews with those on the losing side - Ken of course included - is the unspoken assumption that a Tory advance represents a reft in the very fabric of space-time, a fundamental anomaly, that can only be the result of 'mistakes', of 'not listening', of a failure to get the message across. I've often noticed this mindset in leftists, the assumption that their project is not only right but self-evidently right, and those who don't buy into it either haven't understood it or are outside the pale of rational discourse, irredeemable and best ignored or sneered at .....

Ocean issues again

Growing ocean dead zones leave fish gasping - earth - 01 May 2008 - New Scientist Environment

It's all inconclusive as to what will happen in future, but it's consistent with my position that the effect of CO2 and possible warming on the oceans is the clearest reason to do something about greenhouse gases.

Well deserved snark

By far the most annoying, bitter, nasty, know-it-all blogger on the left in the last few years is Ken Lovell at Road to Surfdom. His post this week about Iran and most of the world's (not just America's) concern about its nuclear program is his typical schtick: informed by his reflexive anti-Americanism and his apparent confidence that he can tell more about the true state of the world from Adelaide [correction: Tweed Coast?] and his selective reading on the 'net than the governments of the Northern Hemisphere. (Anyone who thinks he has a good point on Iran should read this Economist article first.)

No one bothers any more trying to engage him in debate; he was always snide and insulting in response, and presumably just enjoys the company of the regular sycophantic, and even crazier, commenters. Yet other blogs of the more moderate left refer to some of his posts every now and again with approval. I guess the left loves company, no matter how unpleasant.

I simply can't stand him.

Ah, that feels better.

UPDATE: I see that Ken has psychoanalysed my intense dislike of his blogging style as being due to my not having a regular half dozen commenters who chime in after nearly every post with stuff along the lines of "oh, that's so right, but it's even worse than that."

I don't intend making snark attacks a regular feature here. The post was inspired by the fact that I have noticed more moderate lefties linking to him lately, and my knowledge from past experience that there is absolutely no point in challenging his views at his own blog.

UPDATE 2: Good grief. Someone at Club Troppo's Missing Link today has compared me to JF Beck . It would seem they just believed Ken's characterisation of this blog, rather than actually read it. (Nothing against JF, but somehow I don't think I count as a right wing death beast.)

Also, I don't think Ken realised how few hits there normally are here. His pointing out to the world that I had a snark attack against him has probably trebled my normal weekend hit rate.

A stirling engine for the backyard

I mentioned the Infinia Corporation a year ago, and with all this talk of solar power, I thought it would checking if this alternative idea (of small scale solar thermal using stirling engines) is still around.

It is, and it seems as if they have recent significant funding and (presumably) may be selling the product soon. Their main product of interest should look something like this:

It is, apparently, a 3kW stirling engine that provides electicity, and the website claims that it has a 24 % energy conversion efficiency, low maintenance, and will be(I think they say somewhere) cheaper than solar cells.

I want one for my backyard, simply because they look cool and you can (presumably) also roast a chicken in the focal point of that dish. (Any passing crow that wants a rest on that engine part might be in for a shock, too.)

Now, if only there were economical and small electricity storage systems big enough to get your average house through the night. This calls for another round of Googling!

Fear and loathing in London

Be very afraid: Zoe Williams on the possibility of Boris Johnson as mayor of London

Zoe Williams and a bunch of artistes are all in a frenzy over the distinct possibility that Boris Johnson will be mayor of London.

I haven't heard such hyperbole about a politician since, well since the headier days of Webdiary while John Howard was at his peak. Zoe says of Boris:

He despises gays and he despises provincials (you are all right with Boris if you come from Liverpool but don't sound like a Liverpudlian. Once you've been to public school, then you are from postcode POSH), and he despises Africans. He despises them, and he despises those of us who would hold such judgments to be bigoted and inhuman.

One of the funniest comments that follows is by fashion designer Vivienne Westwood:

"Boris as mayor? Unthinkable. It just exposes democracy as a sham, especially if people don't vote for Ken - he's the best thing in politics. Unthinkable."

Yes, democracy is right and proper only if your candidate wins, hey, Vivien?

About boating accidents

Harbour death crash witness: 'They wanted to party' - National - theage.com.au

The thing that always seems kind of surprising to me about boating accidents is how easily they seem to kill people.

It's probably because the most common form of transport accidents (in cars) often occur at high speed; therefore it is easy to imagine that the crush of metal will kill. Boats, on the other hand, unless they are racing, don't give the impression of travelling fast enough to cause that much mayhem if they collide. But of course, the passengers are unrestrained, and always have water handy in which to drown.

The other thing is that boating crashes are more unusual; it's often hard to imagine how people fail to see other boats in their path or near them. It's probably the more unexpected nature of boating fatalities that make them seem more tragic.

Not sure it's a good idea...

Tom Cruise set to make M:I4

The Mission Impossible series has gone like this:

M:I1 - Cheesily very enjoyable; that De Palma can really direct well when motivated (8/10)

M:I2 - seems to have killed John Woo's career, and none too soon. Awful (2/10, just for curiosity value of the Australian locations.)

M:I3 - better than M:I2 (well, that was no challenge), but directed by some hack who can't compose shots for the big screen, can't move a camera well, and seems to enjoy sadistic scenes a little too much. 4/10.

Can't de Palma, who admittedly is getting on a bit, make a come back? Or even Tom's pal Spielberg? Otherwise, there's not much hope.

Apostasy

A question of belief | Comment is free

Here's an interesting article on the very real problems that apostates from Islam (threat of death in some countries being the big one, but there are many other consequences in other countries.)

It was surprising to read this:

In Sudan and in some states in Malaysia, capital punishment is permitted. In Saudi Arabia, Mauritania and Iran, death remains a real possibility for the convert as although it is not specified in law, the countries can invoke this penalty through their application of sharia.

Malaysia? I wouldn't have thought it could happen there.

On going solar

The very sensible Robert Merkel has a very useful post at LP about why government subsidies for solar cell power don't really make much sense overall.

Despite the arguments he convincingly explains, individuals who install the systems and take the benefit of the government subsidies will feel as if they are doing good. It's easy to understand why, when they can look at their roof on a sunny day and think "I am making my contribution". It's a pity the world is more complicated.

Itchy "art"

BBC NEWS | Entertainment | Artists catch head lice for show

Clearly, after 100 years or so, it's getting harder and harder to be an avant garde artist.

Who knew primary school children and the homeless were walking art installations?

How to win friends and influence people

Beer and wine tax rise proposed | The Courier-Mail:

A 300 PER CENT increase in beer and wine taxes is being proposed by the Rudd Government's new preventive health taskforce as families battle rising petrol, grocery and mortgage prices.

A stupid dream, then away

Work (and tax!) pressure is likely to keep me from posting/reading the internet much for a few days.

In the meantime, on Saturday night I was woken mid-morning by a child, causing me to remember this stupid dream. Some sort of alien invasion of earth had resulted, not in death or destruction, but just in all men being treated very unfairly. Wages were docked (I forget what for), and we were forced to sleep in some tiny, claustrophobic dormitory type arrangement. At work, a woman co-worker, when shown my pay slip, just found it amusing. I was very disappointed with her inability to see the injustice.

Then a different woman and I were outside an office window, a few stories up, in some window cleaning gantry set-up. It was early morning, and a robot guard was walking down the silent street. We froze, and he didn't see us, so we continued our break in into the alien controlled building. Inside the office, there were jewels, from which voices came, and then 2 of the aliens themselves made an appearance. They just looked like men in silly colourful pantomine alien costumes. They were very easy to kill. I think I stabbed them with something.

The last impression I have is of sitting in a chair with my feet up on a desk, satisfied that I could kill as many of these aliens as I want.

Now I can usually work out pretty quickly what quirky combination of day time stuff has lead to a particular dream. In this case there was certainly an element of Dr Who, which I had been watching on Friday, but the injustice to males took a while. But then I remembered seeing the heading for an article about child support somewhere recently, and that must be it.

Either that or I just have a generic fear of aliens as feminists (or feminists as aliens?), even though they are easy to defeat.

An anecdote too far...

I Peed On Fellini - Book Reviews - smh.com.au

Bruce Elder provides a short review of David Stratton's autobiographical "I Peed on Fellini". (I have read somewhere that Stratton was not sure that the title was a good idea, but presumably someone in publishing convinced him. Let's hope it's not the same editor advising Peter Costello.)

Anyway, the review notes that the book has:

... some very amusing and extraordinary anecdotes (the story of Bob Ellis and the used condom is as fascinating as it is grotesque).

There's no way I'm going to buy the book just to find out what that is about, but it's impossible not to be curious.

That renewable target

This is another post where I try to get my head around energy issues from some Web sources. Anyone who has more accurate figures readily at hand is welcome to correct me.

I just saw some of Skynews Eco Report, in which the Rudd government's 2020 target of 20% energy from renewable sources was being discussed. (Can't find it on the Web yet.)

I think the female guest said that by 2010, Australia will have 2% of its electricity generated from renewables, and the 20% target by 2020 is made even worse by expected growth in demand for electricity (via population growth, presumably) in the same period.

However, this 2 % figure isn't right (or maybe I misheard her); a parliamentary paper from 2000, which I have referred to before, said we were already at something like 10% for electricity from renewables, but it was supposed to increase (by mandated government target) by 2% by 2010. Maybe that is the source of the 2% figure?

This 2004 fact sheet, from the Renewable Energy Generators Association, gives a better idea of the problem. It appears that, as of 2004, it didn't look likely that the mandated increase would be met. The problem has been that, after the enormous boost the Snowy Hydro scheme gave to renewable energy, the total proportion of renewable energy for the nation subsequently went into a pretty steady decline, as growth in demand was met by fossil fuels.

If I can follow the second table on that fact sheet correctly, it seems to be saying that:

a. total 1997 renewables was 16,000 GWh;

b. even to keep at 10.5% of total electricity by 2010, it would require an additional 9,500 Gwh from renewables;

c. to get to 12.5% by 2020 would take an additional 21,000 GWh;

d. to get to Labor's 20% target will take close to 45,000 GWh.

But: that government paper I linked to above said that close to 90% of the renewable electricity in 2000 was from hydro electric; a source which is presumably incapable of any significant further growth.

Actually, looking at the government's 2004 MRET (Mandated Renewable Energy Target) Review, it seems that they are now counting solar hot water as a renewable energy source, and in a table in that paper, they have hydroelectric down to 36% of renewables, and "deemed solar hot water" at 26%. (That figure for solar hot water seems kind of high, and almost a bit of a fudge to me.)

The MRET report does seem to confirm that an extra 20,000 GWh is needed by 2020 just to get to 12.5% renewables target. I assume that the REGA paper is therefore correct in its figure of 45,000 GWh to get to 20%.

The issue of how to treat hot water systems confuses the issue. If it were not for them, I would have said the following seems to be the case: we currently seem to get only about 2,000 KWh from renewables other than hydroelectric (that's 10% of 16,000 GWh, plus some extra to allow for changes since the 2000 paper). To get to 20% renewables by 2020 (an additional 45,000 GWh,) would therefore require the amount of current non-hydroelectric renewable electricity to be increased by a factor of (roughly) 23!

So, whatever windfarms, solar and other (non hydroelectric) electricity we have now, it has to increase about 23 times in 12 years.

(As I say, maybe intensive increase in solar hot water changes the figures somewhat, but as that seems not to be discussed much as a strategy, I am guessing that it won't be what rescues us.)

No wonder there is scepticism as to the target, and the Liberals are starting to argue that it will divert resources from the more important task of developing clean coal, which is actually much more important on a global scale. Greg Hunt may well have a good point here.

Anyway, it still seems pretty clear to me that the general public has no idea of the scale of the problem.

Newt and climate change

Here's a video that I didn't see coming:



The We Can Solve It Project, which the Pelosi/Gingrich ad promotes, has close connections to Al Gore. Although it seems Gingrich has been promoting Green conservatism for some time, it is surprising that he should promote a Gore project, given other comments he has made about him and environmentalism generally in the recent past.