pneumatic chutes

They have pneumatic chutes on Roosevelt Island, in New York City’s East River. I think this technology has promise, especially in a high-density urban future. A long time ago, we decided we wanted our sewage out of site in tubes underground, but for some reason we are still trucking garbage around on the surface. Theoretically, you could have one tube system to collect all the organic waste (human waste, kitchen waste, yard waste) and take it to a central point for aerobic composting or anaerobic digestion, yielding useful products like energy (electricity, heat, natural gas) and fertilizer. Mixing high-carbon sewage and yard waste with high-nitrogen kitchen waste can also create a more balanced waste stream for digestion. Using suction instead of gravity to transport sewage opens up a new world of no- or low-water transport of waste, which is simply the direction we have to be headed in many warming, drying, and densely populated parts of the world. And sucking stuff through a tube has to be cleaner, safer, and quieter than a fleet of diesel-powered trucks.

Taking this even further, if you generate methane gas you could feed it into a fuel cell, creating electricity and clean water, and potentially sequestering carbon although I don’t fully understand where the technology is at the moment. But this seems to me like a very nice water-energy-waste system that could work at a building, institutional, or neighborhood scale, not exactly a closed loop but much more efficient than the production-use-disposal system we have now.

the Environmental Kuznets Curve

Here’s a journal article with some discussion of the Environmental Kuznets Curve, which is the idea that a developing country’s environment will slowly degrade, then improve again. Having breathed and drank in a variety of countries, it is pretty clear to me that the concept applies to air and water pollution, but not to overall ecological footprint, wildlife habitat, or long-term stability of our atmosphere and oceans. I suspect that this is because air and water pollution are things people can understand – they affect health, safety, and property values in pretty obvious ways. Over time, economic development starts giving people some money, education, and leisure time, and they become more politically active, generating pressure to clean up the immediate human environment. But people don’t understand or don’t care about the long-term ecological issues as much, so the political pressure does not develop.

The main purpose of this paper is to present a theoretical model incorporating the concept of circular economic activities. We construct a circular economy model with two types of economic resources, namely, a polluting input and a recyclable input. Overall, our results indicate that the factors affecting economic growth include the marginal product of the recyclable input, the recycling ratio, the cost of using the environmentally polluting input and the level of pollution arising from the employment of the polluting input. Our analysis also shows that, contrary to the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC), environmental quality cannot be maintained or improved via economic growth. Instead, the improvement in environmental quality, as measured by a reduction in pollution, can only be achieved by an increase in the environmental self-renewal rate or the recycling ratio.

Edible Infrastructures

Just an interesting site I came across in random web surfing. If you really had a clean slate and could turn a computer loose to design an efficient city for you, it might look something like this.

Edible Infrastructures is an investigation into a mode of urbanism which considers food as an integral part of a city’s metabolic infrastructure. Working with algorithms as design tools, we explore the generative potential of such a system to create an urban ecology that: provides for its residents via local, multi-scalar, distributed food production, reconnects the traditional waste-nutrient cycle, and de-couple food costs from fossil fuels by limiting transport from source to table.

Our research is conducted through the building up of a sequence of algorithms, beginning with a Settlement Simulation, which couples consumers to productive surface area within a cellular automata type computational model. Through topological analysis and interpretation of the simulation output, we explore the hierarchical components for a new Productive City, including: the structure and programming of the urban circulatory network, an emergent urban morphology based around productive urban blocks, and opportunities for new architectural typologies.

The resulting prototypical Productive City questions the underlying mechanisms that shape modern urban space and demonstrates the architectural potential of mathematical modelling and simulation in addressing complex urban spatial and programmatic challenges.

 

machines of loving grace

Fresh Air has an interview with John Markoff, author of Machines of Loving Grace.

Markoff, the author of the new book Machines of Loving Grace, points out that artificial intelligence plays a role in many of our lives — sometimes without our even realizing it. “I have a car that I bought this year … that is able to recognize both pedestrians and bicyclists, and if I don’t stop, it will,” he says. “That’s a very inexpensive add-on that you can get for almost any car on the market now.”

Looking ahead, Markoff predicts further advances in driverless-car technology. He also foresees a generation of computer chips that don’t require batteries; instead, they would run on sunlight or vibration or sweat.

“In the next five years … this [computer chip] technology will fan out all around us and create applications we can’t even think about today,” he says. “They’ll be used for robotic sensors. They’ll be made to make robots more mobile. And they’ll be used to do a million other things we can’t even conceive of, and it will continue to transform our society.”

warmest month ever

Eric Holthaus continues his entertaining, slightly sensationalist climate change coverage in Slate:

All this warmth on land is being driven by record-setting heat across large sectionsof the world’s oceans. The NOAA report notes that the warmest 10 months of ocean temperatures on record have occurred in the last 16 months. This is mostly due to a near-record strength El Niño, but the current state of the global oceans has little historical precedent. Since it takes several months for the oceanic warmth of an El Niño to fully reach the atmosphere, 2016 will likely be warmer—perhaps much warmer—than 2015. And that poses grave implications for the world’s ecosystems as well as humans.

We’ve recently entered a new point in the Earth’s climate history. According toreconstructions using tree rings, corals, and ice cores, global temperatures are currently approaching—if not already past—the maximum temperatures commonly observed over the past 11,000 years (i.e., the time period in which humans developed agriculture), and flirting with levels not seen in more than 100,000 years.

But this is the scary part: The current level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is higher than at any point since humans first evolved millions of years ago. Since carbon dioxide emissions lead to warming, the fact that emissions are increasing means there’s much more warming yet to come. What’s more, carbon dioxide levels are increasing really quickly. The rate of change is faster than at any point in Earth’s entire 4.5 billion year history, likely 10 times faster than during Earth’s worst mass extinction—the “Great Dying”—in which more than 90 percent of ocean species perished. Our planet has simply never undergone the kind of stress we’re currently putting on it. That stunning rate of change is one reason why surprising studies like the recent worse-than-the-worst-case-scenario study on sea level rise don’t seem so far fetched.

Drive – Daniel H. Pink

From Amazon:

the secret to high performance and satisfaction in today’s world is the deeply human need to direct our own lives, to learn and create new things, and to do better by ourselves and our world.

Drawing on four decades of scientific research on human motivation, Pink exposes the mismatch between what science knows and what business does—and how that affects every aspect of our lives. He demonstrates that while the old-fashioned carrot-and-stick approach worked successfully in the 20th century, it’s precisely the wrong way to motivate people for today’s challenges. In Drive, he reveals the three elements of true motivation:

*Autonomy—the desire to direct our own lives
*Mastery—the urge to get better and better at something that matters
*Purpose—the yearning to do what we do in the service of something larger than ourselves

This strikes me as almost exactly right. To enjoy my job, I need to be intellectually challenged and improving my skills every day (although those are two slightly different things, both important but for me the first is more important), and I need to feel that my job has some larger social and environmental mission. And even when I have those two things, there are days when I resent the feeling that my time does not belong to me. I think there is one more thing that matters, which is generally positive interaction with other human beings. The wrong people can make an otherwise good job bad. And forming bonds with other people can help people perform terrible jobs, just ask any soldier in the trenches.

fear the walking dead

AMC is producing a (predictably pro-weapon) prequel show called Fear the Walking Dead. An excerpt is provided by Fresh Air:

KIM DICKENS: (As Madison) So why the knife? Hey – I could expel you just for crossing the threshold with that thing.

LINCOLN A. CASTELLANOS: (As Tobias) No. Please. We’re safer in numbers.

DICKENS: (As Madison) Safer from what? Tobias, please, don’t screw yourself like this. You’ve been working your ass off. You’re on track to go to college.

CASTELLANOS: (As Tobias) Yeah. No one’s going to college. No one’s doing anything they think they are.

DICKENS: (As Madison) What? What are you talking about?

CASTELLANOS: (As Tobias) Can I get my knife back, please?

DICKENS: (As Madison) No, you can’t get your knife back.

CASTELLANOS: (As Tobias) They say it’s not connected. They say that, but I don’t believe them. It is – from reports in five states. They don’t know if it’s a virus or a microbe. They don’t know, but it’s spreading.

Ah, fun stuff.

 

zero waste

How could you have a zero solid waste (aka garbage) lifestyle?

Now, take a look into your trash can. If you mostly see food packaging and food scraps…not good.

There’s an easy fix to this, and it’s called a zero waste lifestyle. Today, I’ll share my tips on how to avoid this kind of garbage – and hence – reduce the amount of your trash that ends up in the landfill.

THE ZERO WASTE SHOPPING ESSENTIALS

Zero Waste shopping requires some preparation and a little investment. You’ll need:

  • Reusable grocery bag. It’s no surprise that plastic bags are enormous harm to our environment. It’s easy to make the switch to reusable bags. Just be sure to stash a few where you’ll remember to take them before shopping.
  • Cotton/Hemp Muslin Bags. These are great for produce, nuts, beans, grains, etc. You can find them on Amazon.com or DIY.
  • Glass/Stainless Steel containers. They work best for meat, seafood and poultry by keeping food fresh.

I love the idea. I have trouble seeing myself washing glass containers (how many fit in my dishwasher?), lugging them back to the store, and convincing someone to refill them. That sounds heavy for one thing, and I go to the store on foot. I tend to think my not driving to the store negates the environmental harm of a few plastic bags. Still, I like the idea. As we travel to stores less and have more stuff delivered, it could start to make sense. You have a standardized container for everything. At the same time the delivery company delivers your new containers full of stuff, it is willing to pick up your dirty used containers and take them away to be washed, sterilized, and reused. We used to all do this with glass bottles, of course, but the economics of plastic packaging seems to be more advantageous. Of course the economics work, in part, because the consumer rather than the manufacturer is paying the disposal cost, and we are all collectively paying the environmental cost. If we had the political will, we could regulate or tax these external costs and see if that tipped the system back towards reuse. Or we can wait and see if automation and the increasing popularity of home delivery tips the economics again.

making carbon fiber from atmospheric CO2

Here is some research on making carbon nanofibers directly from atmospheric CO2. Sounds like a good idea both because you are absorbing CO2 from the atmosphere and because you can make all kinds of light, strong materials from nanofibers, which would allow lighter, safer, more energy efficient vehicles among other things.

Licht estimates electrical energy costs of this “solar thermal electrochemical process” to be around $1,000 per ton of carbon nanofiber product, which means the cost of running the system is hundreds of times less than the value of product output.

“We calculate that with a physical area less than 10 percent the size of the Sahara Desert, our process could remove enough CO2 to decrease atmospheric levels to those of the pre-industrial revolution within 10 years,” he says.