Weakening of Earth's magnetic field and solar cycles, Part 2

To contact us Click HERE
User-agent: Mediapartners-Google
Disallow:



The sun is a huge electromagnetic transmitter that is flooding the planet of the solar system by heat, light, UV radiation and electrically charged particles. The Sun itself has a magnetic field and magnetic field creates an "egg" around the solar system known as heliosphere. Heliosphere is shaped like a droplet, with an elongated, narrow end pointing in the opposite direction in which we move.

Any change that occurs in or on the Sun will eventually affect every living person. Solar activity during this last sunspot cycle was the solar is greater than anything previously seen, spinal studies, written by Dr. Mike
Lockvvood and colleagues at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory in Chilton, UK, 1999. investigate the solar activity over the last 100 years. They reported that since 1901. total solar magnetic field has become stronger by 230 percent. Scientists do not understand what it means for us.

Some of the sunspot activity in this last cycle was stronger than anything ever recorded. But researchers say do not understand what it means for us. Apparently, the sun ie earth's driving force, said Richard Fisher Director of helio physics at NASA. To mitigate possible threats to public safety, it is crucial to better understand the extreme space weather events caused by solar activity.

   Solar cycle 24

According to NASA, the Sun begins another 11-year cycle of activity. The sun reverses its magnetic poles every a year. Given that the Sun is responsible for some adverse climate changes on Earth the next decade could bring more trouble for our planet. The years ahead could be tumultuous. Jimmy Raeder explained:

"We enter the 24th solar cycle 1z reasons not fully understood, CME and the even-numbered solar cycles (such as 24) are usually hit Earth with a leading edge that is magnetized north. CMF This should open a crack and fill the magnetosphere with plasma just before the storm. This is a perfect sequence for a really great event. "




Every 10-11 years the number of sunspots is our closest star rise from zero (as it was in 2008.) To a maximum of over four hundred. While the sunspots affect the Earth, solar flares and other disturbances that are spreading around our sun during increased sunspot activity lead to an increase in the number of particles (electrons and protons) and harmful light radiation (ultraviolet and X-rays), known as solar wind. Yes No
Earth's protective magnetic field and atmosphere, this bombardment of particles would completely burn us. Sunspot Cycle 24, which is expected to peak somewhere in the 2012th, it could be one of the strongest in the last few centuries.

It will be 30-50 percent stronger than last and will start with a delay of a full year, the revolutionary foresight that uses a computer model of solar dynamics developed by scientists who are from the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). Accurate prediction of solar cycles years in advance will help the company to prepare for active gust of solar storms, which can slow satellite orbits, disrupt communications and bring down power systems. Scientists have confidence in the forecasts because of a series of tests recently developed model simulated the strength of the last eight cycles with an accuracy of over 98 percent. Forecasts are generated in part by monitoring the movement of debris below the surface of sunspots from the previous two solar cycles.

 
    Solar cycle 25

"The great conveyor belt" is a huge circulating current of fire (hot plasma) within the Sun. There are two branches, north and south, and each takes about 10 years to pass a full circle. The researchers believe that turning the conveyor belt controls the sunspot cycle and therefore it is important to slow down.


Usually, the conveyor belt moving at a speed of about one meter per second speed walk, NASA said in Solana physicist David Hathaway. "That was the end of the 19th century, "In recent years, however, the belt has decelerated to 0.75 m / s in the north of 0.35 m / s in the south. "We have never seen so low, said Hathaway."

According to the theory and observation, the speed of the belt says it will be the intensity of sunspot activity about 20 years in the future. Slow belt means lower solar activity; fast belt means stronger activity.

"The slowdown that we see now means that Solar Cycle 25, which will be the culmination of about 2022nd year could be one of the weakest in the last century, said Hathaway.

   The solar activity on the Earth

The first instrument for measuring the activity of solar flares have occurred 440 years ago. They showed that the closest star to our Earth is not only the honor of eclipses. Sunspots, solar flares and other phenomena affect everything on earth, from weather events to human behavior. These phenomena are known collectively as the solar activity. This activity, which is expressed by a gust of solar radiation, magnetic storms and fiery flashes, the intensity can vary from very weak to very strong. The greatest threat to civilization are the storms.

On 28 August 1859th polar light shone and sparkled over the entire American continent, when darkness fell. Many people thought that their city is in flames. The hands on the instruments that were used for recording Uh magnetic fluctuations around the world came out of the scale. Telegraph system broke down, hit by strong surges. It was perhaps the worst solar storms in the past, 200 years ago. Its effects on humans were small because civilization had not yet been entered into high-technology development phase. But with the advent of modern electricity grids and satellites is much more in danger.




That something similar happened in our era of space nuclear destruction would be catastrophic. According to scientific data, a storm of this size occur about once in five centuries. But half of low-intensity events occur every 50 years. The last recorded 13th November 1960 .. Disrupted the Earth's magnetic field, disrupting the work stations.

Today is our dependence on radio-electronic devices so huge that increased solar activity could be disabled for life support systems around the world, and not just on the surface. Bad space weather can cause disturbances in any orbital system, light solar storm can ruin navigation systems controlled from space. NASA is now ringing the alarm because the North American continent near the northern magnetic pole, and is most sensitive to solar activity, spinal studies corporation "Metatech" revealed that the attack similar to the one from 1859. disable the entire power grid in North America. Even the relatively weak magnetic storm of 1989. encourage solar activity caused the accident in a Canadian hydroelectric power plant that is six million people in the United States and Canada for nine hours left without electricity.

Study of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, also spoke about the troubling features of the Earth in the worst case scenario of solar storms. Modern power grids are so interconnected that the large space storms -  type such as expected to occur once in a century could trigger a cascade of crashes that could be expanded throughout the United States, left without electricity for 130 million people or more only in that country, the conclusion a new report. Such widespread power cuts although, as expected, a rare ability to hit other vital systems.

"The impact would be felt on the interdependent infrastructures, for example, drinking water supply would be affected for several hours, quickly perishable foods and medicines for about 12-24 hours. and the current or subsequent loss of heating / air conditioning, garbage disposal, telephone service, transportation, fuel supply and clock on, "the report reads.

To fix the system could be taken months, the bank could be close, and trade with other countries could be interrupted.

"Emergency services would be overloaded, and command and control could be lost," say researchers led by Daniel Baker, director of the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics, University of Colorado at Boulder.

   Sun's cycles and human behavior

Could cycles of war and peace could be associated with the solar cycle?

Some researchers claim that geomagnetic storms affect brain waves and hormone levels, causing many different reactions, mainly in men. Although some women may also feel the changes during these storms, it seems that they are generally less affected by the behavior of the Sun. Reacting to changing hormone levels, some men may become increasingly irritable and aggressive, while others may instead become more creative.

It was found that an increase in solar activity increase psychotic episodes in people who already suffer from unstable psychological states. Although we may associate such behavior with a full moon, Dr. Robert Becker and his colleague Dr. Howard Friedman 1963rd demonstrated that changes in the sun and water to a noticeable increase in psychotic activity. Yet, these reactions do not occur only in a few particularly sensitive or unlucky individuals.

 


Evidence suggesting that the wars and international conflicts often break out when sunspots are rapidly forming or rapidly decaying, because in these conditions occur more intense geomagnetic storms. In addition. to an increase in solar activity are correlated with periods when the increased number of accidents and diseases, as well as crimes and murders. The entire biosphere is affected by this electromagnetic pollution, and it seems that human behavior responds accordingly. Not cause any geomagnetic storm disturbances. But over time, extremes of solar activity can also affect the period of earthly conflict. Data on cycles of war and peace extend to at least 2,500 years old.

Another 1915th some scientists have begun to recognize the connection between solar activity and human behavior. This work began with Russian scientist Alevander Chizhevsky who observed a correlation between mass changes in human behavior and the cycle of sunspots.

The thirties of last century, Professor Raymond Wheeler, a historian at the University n Kansas, took this observation one step further. His research numerically ranked severity of individual battles correlating to solar cycles. The information obtained by statistically analyzing Edward Dewey, who confirmed the existence of these cycles of wars. However, he was unable to establish a clear link with the cycle of sunspots, because at that time was insufficient data.
 The 1980s, with a detailed analysis Wheeler's data, is the connection became clear.

After a more detailed study of the data seems to begin to discover the pattern by which IE most likely to start a war in the key points of the sunspot cycle. These are periods when geomagnetic activity is changing the fastest in the rapid increase in solar activity, or in a downward cycle, when sunspots are rapidly diminishing. In addition, we can see how it negatively affects the psychological mechanisms such as brain rhythms and hormone levels. In other words, wars could be a kind of mass psychosis. When you see the connection with physical mechanisms (such as IE electromagnetic pollution), it gives us some predictions about when it is likely that they could begin intensified aggression. Calculations show that we are facing another increase of intense solar activity in less than two years, roughly around 22 September 2010. NASA predicts that the activity reached a peak in 2012. year.

   Changes in the Solar System

Five planets atmosphere and Earth's moon change. In the upper layers of Earth's atmosphere creates HO gas that did not exist in amounts that exists today. Scientists from the Russian Academy of Sciences say that it is not associated with global warming, CFCs or fluorocarbon emissions. They argue that the atmosphere of Jupiter, Uranus and Neptun also changing.

The Martian atmosphere becomes much thicker. In 1997. probe "Mars Observer" has lost one of its mirrors, which caused her fall. This happened because the atmosphere was about twice as much too dense, but NASA was calculated. Brightness and magnetic fields of planets are also changing. Venus shows a significant increase in its overall brightness, Jupiter's energetic charge has risen so high that there is now a visible tube of ionizing radiation, which is formed between the surface of Jupiter and its moon "Io." At the recently captured images can be seen a great power tube. Uranus and Neptune also are becoming brighter. The magnetic field of Jupiter, Uranus and Neptune are changing.

Jupiter's magnetic field has more than doubled, and Neptune's magnetic field is stronger. The Russians say that all three of these planets become radiant, and their atmospheric qualities are changing, but do not explain what that means. The Russians also report that looks at how Uranus and Neptune has recently been a reversal of the poles. When the space probe "Voyager II" flew by Uranus and Neptune, it seemed that the north and south magnetic poles substantially deviated from the spot where the earlier recordings was a half rotation. In one case, it is 50 degrees, and in another case, the difference was 10-odd degrees.

This new information on changes in the solar system comes at an interesting time for our planet. It is possible that for some time the celestial events play a role in shaping our lives on this planet, and that these changes that we see now in our sun, solar system and Earth's magnetic field could be just what transforms our world as we know it into something new . Only time will tell, but it seems that the future is already knocking at the door.

    Print Page

End of Fossil Fuel Era an 'Exciting Time'

To contact us Click HERE

Author and scientist Amory B. Lovins and the Rocky Mountain Institute see a bright future beyond dirty fuels... and sooner than you think


In an essay in the latest issue of Foreign Affairs and a recent interview with Yale Environment 360, Amory Lovins discusses his latest book, Reinventing Fire, written with his colleagues at the Rocking Mountain Institute, which looks at what a transition away from an economy and energy system based on fossil fuels towards one based on renewable energy would look like.

                              Amory B. Lovins of the Rocky Mountain Institute

"Weaning the United States from fossils fuels would require two big shifts," writes Lovins at Foreign Affairs, naming "oil and electricity" which he says are "distinct." He points out, "In the US, three-fourths of electricity powers building, three-fourths of oil fuels transportation, and the remaining oil and electricity run factories. So saving oil and electricity is chiefly about making buildings, vehicles, and factories far more efficient." This, admits Lovins, is "no small task."

Dwelling on the scale of the challenge, however, is not where Lovins devotes his energy. Instead, he looks at other "epochal energy shifts" that have occurred in history, like the end of the whale oil industry in the mid 19th century, where in just thirty years the whale oil industry went from bringing lighting to nearly every American household in 1850, to being essentially snuffed out by 1879, when Edison's electric lighting hit the scene. "Whales," writes Lovins, "had been accidently saved by technological innovators and profit-maximizing capitalists."

The point, of course, is not that we should look to 'profit-maximizing capitalists' to lead us to a clean energy future (though they will certainly play a role). The point is that we should definitely not expect whaling captains to lead us. And in this era, the whale ship captains are the captains of the big oil, coal, and gas companies and the politicians who do their bidding.


"The chief obstacle is not technology or economics," concludes Lovins, "but slow adoption." He writes:
Helping innovations catch on will take education, leadership, and rapid learning. But it does require reaching concensus on motives. If Americans agree what should be done, then they need not agree why. Whether one cares most about national security, health, the environment, or simply making money, saving and supplanting fossil fuels makes sense."

"Wise energy policy can grow from impeccably conservative roots-- [...]

Moving the United States off oil and coal will require Americans to trust in their own resourcefulness, ingenuity, and courage. These durable virtues can give the country fuel without fear; help set the world on a path beyond war, want, or waste; and turn energy from worrisome to worry-free, from risk to reward, from cost to profit."

   A Clean Energy Plan


In the interview with Yale Environment 360 senior editor Fen Montaigne, Lovins discusses how business and society can pull off this transformation even if the U.S. Congress keeps failing to act, why climate change need not even enter the discussion, and why the oil industry will ultimately forego fossil fuels and jump aboard the green bandwagon. “One system is dying and others are struggling to be born,” says Lovins. “It’s a very exciting time.”



Yale Environment 360: Given that we’re in the midst of what could only be described as a fossil fuel boom, with the discovery of new unconventional sources and new oil sources being found all over the world, how do you speed this transition and get from here to there?

Amory Lovins: Well, I’m not sure what boom you’re talking about. When I read the Wall Street Journal, I see a headline a few weeks ago about coal running out of steam.

e360: China is consuming tremendous amounts of coal.

Lovins: Hang on — I look at the data and I find that in the United States, coal’s share of the electrical services market, which is 95 percent of its market for fuel, has fallen by a quarter from 2005 through 2010, displaced by cheaper gas, efficiency, and renewables. And then when you look in the forward prices and the options market, that spread is going to keep widening. And when I hear how cheap natural gas is, I remember that it’s also very volatile. This has nothing to do with the many uncertainties around fracking, which will take a decade to resolve — if they work out well, we’ll be satisfied with a new option; if they don’t, that’s okay because we won’t need that much gas, so we won’t be very disappointed.

e360: Certainly in China, India, and the developing world there is a fossil fuel boom going on.

Lovins: But in a global context, there is a remarkable boom in efficiency and renewables in China, the world leader in five renewables. Part of the story in China is that the extraordinary vitality of renewables is coming very largely from the vibrant private sector, while all of the nuclear and half the coal business are the old state enterprises. So the story of incumbents and insurgents is partly the story of the reshaping of the Chinese economy from the old and rather bureaucratic command organizations. That is, I think, an encouraging trend.

  We  must use our most effective institutions to end-run our least effective institutions.

Last I looked a couple of years ago, the private sector in China was something like 50 to 70 percent of the profits, the growth, and the new jobs. Of course there is still a lot of momentum in the coal bureaucracy in China and India, which together burned half the world’s coal and account for about three-quarters of the projected increase, but I think those projections are looking quite dubious. In China, for example, they have lately retired over 70 gigawatts of inefficient coal plants, so that their coal plant fleet is now more efficient than ours. In 2010, 59 percent of their net new [electricity] capacity was coal. It used to be much higher.

e360: You feel we’re in a period where fossil fuels over the next decade or two are going to be increasingly like whale oil?

Lovins: Yes.

e360: You’ve got the president of Shell writing a foreward to your book. There are prominent quotes from the president of Texaco in one section of the book. How do you persuade these oil companies that are making billions of dollars now and into the foreseeable future to get on board with this renewable energy revolution? What is going to persuade them to be on what you see as the right side of history?

Lovins: Mainly risk management, and as a member of the National Petroleum Council, having worked in this industry for 38 years, I’ve seen a lot of concern about risk. Oil is like airlines. It’s a great industry and a bad business. Look at its fundamentals. It is extremely capital-intensive, long lead time, based on a wasting asset of which you only own about 6 percent and the rest can be taxed away or confiscated at any time. It is a business overflowing with all kinds of risk — technical, political, financial. It is unpopular politically. Its subsidies are at some political risk in this country. Put all that together and you have a magnificent recipe for headaches. Why would you want to be in a business like that?

e360: You’re making huge profits at this point.

Lovins: Well, sometimes yes, and sometimes it gushes red ink. So the smarter leaders in that industry have been trying to get out of the business since at least 1973, and have constructed some pretty intelligent portfolios of both activities and options that are getting rather rapidly diversified. Some companies that were not very foresighted, even though they were operationally excellent, are starting to smell the coffee.

 I think there is a bright future for what we now think of as the oil industry in the new energy era, using its formidable capabilities and assets, but in different ways. A lot of refineries will turn into biorefineries; a lot of drilling will go to geothermal, possibly carbon sequestration and other pursuits. The fuel logistics will diversify into hydrogen — which of course is mainly a business of the oil industry right now and it’s a very big business — and into electricity and biofuels. Shell is already the world’s biggest distributor of biofuels. The average cost of getting our U.S. transport system off oil is about $18 a barrel for the efficiency and electrification part, or if you include the biofuels to run the trucks and airplanes to the extent they’re not on hydrogen, it might be at most about $25 a barrel. So I don’t much care what the world oil price is, this is a better bet and it very much better manages the risks.

e360: In the spheres that you write about — transportation, electricity generation, industry — what pieces of the puzzle need to be put in place in the coming decade or so to do this massive scaling up that’s going to be required to attain your vision of an economy that by 2050 is primarily powered by renewable sources?

Lovins: Broadly we need to pay attention to allow or require full and fair competition, preferably at honest prices. And to use our most effective institutions to end-run our least effective institutions.

e360: For example?

Lovins: Well, we use private enterprise, co-evolving with civil society and sped up by military innovation, to end run Congress. The transition we describe requires no act of Congress. It’s led by business for profit.

e360: So you want the private sector to end-run the dysfunctional political system?

Lovins: At the federal level, yes. There are policies required to unlock or speed the transition we described, but they could all be done administratively or at the state level, where most of the action is.

e360: From a technological point of view, how do you scale up wind and solar to the point where it can be generating the volume of electricity that you envision by 2050?

Lovins: The way we’re scaling it up now. U.S. photovoltaics have doubled each of the last two years. World [photovoltaic] growth last year — a difficult year for many industries — was 70 percent. And 68 percent of Europe’s new capacity last year was solar and wind. Wind, for example, is generally competitive without subsidy, even though the global wind industry will of course shift its projects in a given year to wherever they get the most subsidy, as you would expect. But even without subsidy they have a very strong business case.

e360: So you foresee in the U.S., Europe, and China a steady accretion of this scale and volume for these new sources?

Lovins: Yes, and China is leading the plummeting cost and rocketing volume of most of the renewables. They’re the world leader in five. They aim to be in all. The ones they lead are photovoltaic, wind, small hydro, biogas, and solar thermal for hot water.

So this is actually quite a big business. Clean energy was a $260 billion investment flow in 2011. Europe has now more than one million new renewable jobs. The big winner is Germany. They have more solar workers than America has steel workers. [German Chancellor Angela] Merkel bet that it would be smarter to send their energy money to their own engineers, manufacturers, and installers than to keep paying it to [Russia’s] Gazprom. She’s right, and it was a winning bet.

e360: In your book you are not counting on any sort of miraculous silver bullet technologies.

Lovins: No, no new inventions.

e360:  But do you think there will be within a matter of decades technologies we can’t envision that could even further accelerate this transition?

Lovins: Oh, yes. I think there will be many, and actually although we’re not counting on any new inventions, we do give examples of emerging technologies in the lab about to get to market that are going to be quite powerful. For example, windows whose ability to transmit or block heat is a function of the temperature of the glass, and that’s a passive property.
It doesn’t  require any control system. That sort of thing is so revolutionary we haven’t even figured out how to use it yet. Or as another example, Tsutomu Shimomura, the computer security expert, has invented a way of controlling LED lighting in big buildings that gets rid of almost all of the wire and power supplies and controls, but gives superior control flexibility. And that should ultimately cut by manyfold the installed cost of those LED lighting systems and thus help them take over even faster in both new and old buildings. Fuel cells have already beaten the cost targets that we had expected. The list goes on.

Despite our woeful underinvestment in efficiency R&D, the technical progress here and abroad continues to accelerate with no end in sight and it’s not just in widgets. It’s also progress in new business models, new designs, ways of combining technologies more effectively to get expanding returns, not diminishing returns, new delivery channels that are rapidly maturing, new regulatory models. These things all together I think have put us irreversibly on the path to a new energy era, and a lot of it is an incumbents-versus-insurgents play where the incumbents have many intelligent ways they can respond and some dumb ways, one of which is called ostrich.

e360: Your book, in each of the main chapters, lays out detailed prescriptions — down to diagrams of factory piping — of how to improve efficiency and make advances. What has the reaction been to the book from corporations, from politicians?

Lovins: The reaction I have seen has been uniformly favorable, partly because it’s a trans-ideological approach that focuses on outcomes, not motives. Whether you most care about profits, jobs, and competitive advantage, or about national security or environmental stewardship and climate and public health — regardless of the reason, you’ll still want the outcomes. They’ll still make sense and make money, so let’s just do what we all agree ought to be done for whatever reason, not argue about what reason is most important, and then a lot of the stuff we may not agree about becomes superfluous. The military is very strongly on this track already — with both efficiency and resilient electric supply — for their own good reasons. We are not seeing so far political resistance to these ideas and we’re getting a very warm welcome in the business community.

e360: How big an impediment to your vision of how to go forward is the fact that many of the leaders of the Republican Party not only deny the existence of climate change, but belittle renewable energy. Is the political gridlock on this issue a big impediment to maybe moving forward?

Lovins: I don’t see it as a big impediment because we’re not relying on Congress to do anything. Again, you don’t have to believe climate science to think that the outcomes of Reinventing Fire are desirable. If you care
about  either making money or national security, either of those suffices; you may even care about both together. Then you’re twice as motivated. We are counting in the analysis all externalities — carbon [reduction] and otherwise — as worth zero, a conservatively low estimate. And we still get a $5 trillion surplus from getting the U.S. completely off oil, coal, and nuclear energy and a third off natural gas by 2050, with a 2.6-fold bigger economy. That, I think, is an attractive outcome regardless of your political beliefs.

e360: Let’s say there’s a President Santorum or a President Romney, do you think that they could be persuaded once they’re in office to embrace a vision like this?

Lovins: I don’t know, but I don’t much care. Rocky Mountain Institute is non-partisan, and we observe that most states, including many strongly Republican states, have renewable portfolio standards. The renewable leader in the nation is Texas, which is not noted for being environmentally minded, but does care a lot about making money and is very good at it. That’s fine.

e360: On the issue of climate change, do you believe the climate movement has made a strategic error by focusing so much on the issue of warming and its impacts rather than on the positive economic message you propagate in the book?

Lovins: I think you could make that case. In fact, to go back to the beginning of the modern climate debate, I think that when the bogus studies were issued claiming that climate protection would be very costly, the environmental movement fell into a trap of saying it won’t cost that much and it’s worth it. What they should have said is, “No, you’ve got it wrong. Climate protection is not costly but profitable because it’s cheaper to save fuel than to buy fuel.”

So the whole climate conversation has been distorted by this error of mistaking cost for profits and that has blocked international negotiations, because it’s so much harder to talk about cost burden and sacrifice, what is it worth to save the climate and who should pay for it, than to talk about profits, jobs, and competitive advantage, which should have been the subject all along.
I think you could make that case. In fact, to go back to the beginning of the modern climate debate, I think that when the bogus studies were issued claiming that climate protection would be very costly, the environmental movement fell into a trap of saying it won’t cost that much and it’s worth it. What they should have said is, “No, you’ve got it wrong. Climate protection is not costly but profitable because it’s cheaper to save fuel than to buy fuel.”

So the whole climate conversation has been distorted by this error of mistaking cost for profits and that has blocked international negotiations, because it’s so much harder to talk about cost burden and sacrifice, what is it worth to save the climate and who should pay for it, than to talk about profits, jobs, and competitive advantage, which should have been the subject all along.

e360: When you look at your 2050 vision, yet you also look at all the carbon that’s still being burned, how do you reconcile the two?


Lovins: Well, one system is dying and others are struggling to be born. It’s a very exciting time, but I think the transitions that we need in how we design vehicles, buildings, and factories, and how we allow efficiency to compete with supply, are well under way. Most of the key sectors are already at or past their tipping point. And it’s clearest for oil, but will become clearer for coal that the stuff is becoming uncompetitive even at relatively low prices before it becomes unavailable even at high prices. It’s the whale oil story all over again. They ran out of customers before they ran out of whales.

Video



Amory Lovins at the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies





Print Page

Lost in migration: Earth's magnetic field is weakening

To contact us Click HERE


The discovery by NASA rover Curiosity of evidence that water once flowed on Mars - the most Earth-like planet in the solar system - should intensify interest in what the future could hold for mankind.

The only thing stopping Earth having a lifeless environment like Mars is the magnetic field that shields us from deadly solar radiation and helps some animals migrate, and it may be a lot more fragile and febrile than one might think.


Scientists say Earth's magnetic field is weakening and could all but disappear in as little as 500 years as a precursor to flipping upside down.

It has happened before - the geological record suggests the magnetic field has reversed every 250,000 years, meaning that, with the last event 800,000 years ago, another would seem to be overdue.

"Magnetic north has migrated more than 1,500 kilometres over the past century," said Conall Mac Niocaill, an earth scientist at Oxford University. "In the past 150 years, the strength of the magnetic field has lessened by 10 per cent, which could indicate a reversal is in the cards."

While the effects are hard to predict, the consequences may be enormous. The loss of the magnetic field on Mars billions of years ago put an end to life on the planet if there ever was any, scientists say.

Mac Niocaill said Mars probably lost its magnetic field 3.5-4.0 billion years ago, based on observations that rocks in the planet's southern hemisphere have magnetization.


The northern half of Mars looks younger because it has fewer impact craters, and has no magnetic structure to speak of, so the field must have shut down before the rocks there were formed - which would have been about 3.8 billion years ago.

"With the field dying away, the solar wind was then able to strip the atmosphere away, and you would also have an increase in the cosmic radiation making it to the surface," he said.

"Both of these things would be bad news for any life that might have formed on the surface - either wiping it out, or forcing it to migrate into the interior of the planet."


Earth's magnetic field has always restored itself but, as it continues to shift and weaken, it will present challenges - satellites could be more exposed to solar wind and the oil industry uses readings from the field to guide drills.

In nature, animals which use the field could be mightily confused - birds, bees, and some fish all use the field for navigation. So do sea turtles whose long lives, which can easily exceed a hundred years, means a single generation could feel the effects.

Birds may be able to cope because studies have shown they have backup systems that rely on stars and landmarks, including roads and power lines, to find their way around.

The European Space Agency is taking the issue seriously. In November, it plans to launch three satellites to improve our fairly blurry understanding of the magnetosphere.

The project - dubbed Swarm - will send two satellites into a 450 kilometre high polar orbit to measure changes in the magnetic field, while a third satellite 530 kilometres high will look at the influence of the sun.


Scientists, who have known for some time the magnetic field has a tendency to flip, have made advances in recent years in understanding why and how it happens.

The field is generated by convection currents that churn in the molten iron of the planet's outer core. Other factors, such as ocean currents and magnetic rocks in the Earth's crust also contribute.

The Swarm mission will pull all these elements together to improve computer models used to predict how the magnetic field will move and how fast it could weaken.

Ciaran Beggan, a geomagnetic specialist at the British Geological Survey in Edinburgh, said studies have also refined our understanding of how the field reverses.

They have focused on lava flows: When these cool and form crystals the atoms in iron-rich molten rock align under the influence of the magnetic field, providing a geological memory of the Earth's field.

But that memory looks different in various locations around the world, suggesting the reversal could be a chaotic and fairly random process.

"Rather than having strong north and south poles, you get lots of poles around the planet. So, a compass would not do you much good," said Beggan.

While the whole process takes 3,000-5,000 years, latest research suggests the descent into a chaotic state could take as little as 500 years, although there are significant holes in scientific understanding.

"Although electricity grids and GPS systems would be more vulnerable, we are not really sure how all the complex things that are linked together would react," Beggan said.




© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

Original source article: Lost in migration: flip of earth's magnetic field overdue





Print Page

Arctic sea ice melt 'may bring harsh winter to Europe'

To contact us Click HERE


The unprecedented loss of polar sea ice may lead to 'wild extremes' in the UK and northern Europe, say researchers

The record loss of Arctic sea ice this summer may mean a cold winter for the UK and northern Europe. The region has been prone to bad winters after summers with very low sea ice, such as 2011 and 2007, said Jennifer Francis, a researcher at Rutgers University.


"We can't make predictions yet … [but] I wouldn't be surprised to see wild extremes this winter," Francis told the Guardian.



This year's ice melt has broken the 2007 record by an an area larger than the state of Texas.

Polar ice experts "thought that it would be many years until we again saw anything like we saw in 2007", said Mark Serreze, director of the  National Snow and Ice Data Centre in Colorado.

The unprecedented expanse of ice-free Arctic Ocean has been absorbing the 24-hour sun over the short polar summer. The heat in the water must be released into the atmosphere if the ice is to re-form this autumn. "This is like a new energy source for the atmosphere," said Francis.


This heat and water vapour will affect the all-important jet stream – the west-to-east winds that are the boundary between cold Arctic and the warm mid-latitudes. Others researchers have already shown that the jet stream has been shifting northwards in recent years. Francis and colleagues have recently documented that the jet stream is also slowing down.

"The jet stream is clearly weaker," said Francis. That means weather systems, be it rain or dry conditions, are slow to move on and last longer. Ultimately this can result in "blocking" events, such as the conditions that produced the terrible heatwave in western Russia during the summer of 2010, she said.

This year’s record sea-ice melt might foreshadow a harsh winter in parts of Europe and North America. Recent research, although preliminary, suggests a connection between late-summer Arctic sea-ice extent and the location of areas of high and low atmospheric pressure over the northern Atlantic. The highs and lows can remain relatively fixed for weeks, shaping storm tracks and seasonal weather patterns such as extended cold surges.

Ralf Jaiser, a climate scientist at the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research in Potsdam, Germany, found a significant correlation in 1989–2011 meteorological data between late-summer Arctic sea-ice extent and atmospheric-pressure anomalies that favour extreme weather such as prolonged cold snaps in winter. He reasons that in autumn, the open Arctic Ocean sheds heat to the high-latitude atmosphere. The warming tends to reduce the large-scale atmospheric-pressure gradient and weakens the dominant westerly winds in the Northern Hemisphere. Those winds normally sweep warm, moist Atlantic air to western Europe; their weakening leaves the region more prone to persistent cold.


“The impacts will become more apparent in autumn, once the freeze-up is under way and we see how circulation patterns have influenced the geographical distribution of sea ice,” says Judith Curry, a climate researcher at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta. But, she adds, “We can probably expect somewhere in the mid/high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere to have a snowy and cold winter.”


   Ocean organisms are already seeing an impact

Arctic biology is already changing, as the retreat and thinning of sea ice allows more sunlight to penetrate the upper ocean and deprives certain species of habitat, says Jørgen Berge, a marine biologist at the University of Tromsø in Norway. For example, the dominant Arctic zooplankton — the copepods Calanus hyperboreus and C. glacialis — are being replaced by Atlantic C. finmarchicus. Meanwhile, Arctic cod (Arctogadus glacialis) is increasingly being out-competed by its larger Atlantic cousin Gadus morhua.


   There’s an important point that bears repeating: This is happening faster than we expected

Computer models that simulate how the ice will respond to a warming climate project that the Arctic will be seasonally ‘ice free’ (definitions of this vary) some time between 2040 and the end of the century. But the observed downward trend in sea-ice cover suggests that summer sea ice could disappear completely as early as 2030, something that none of the models used for the next report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change comes close to forecasting.



These changes are happening much earlier than scientists thought, said James Overland, an oceanographer and researcher at the University of Washington.

"We've only had a little bit of global warming so far," Overland said.

As the sea ice continues to decline, the jet stream will likely continue to slow more, and shift further north "bringing wild temperature swings and greater numbers of extreme events" in the future he said. "We're in uncharted territory."








Print Page

Don't be snookered by Mayan calendar prophecy

To contact us Click HERE



The world will end in 11 days, we've been told. That's when the Mayan calendar "runs out," causing us all to cease to exist, the story goes.

It's hoopla, of course. I guarantee we will still be here on December 22nd, and if I'm wrong and the universe really does come to an end, then, well, you can shoot me or something.


Sure, there may be some strange things happening on or around December 21st. Many people are using the Mayan calendar transition to engage in meditation marathons in order to focus on universal peace and similar vibrations. That's all fine and good. No harm in some healthy meditation...

Other people suspect that governments might actually use the day to stage something nefarious, thereby preying on the uncertainty and fear that already exists as the day approaches. This is a legitimate possibility, so if anything does happen on December 21st or 22nd, the first question to ask is: "Did the government stage this?"

   The danger of investing your intention in false prophecy

There's always some prophecy, it seems, warning that the end of the world is arriving on a specific date. Last year I remember a few people posting on Facebook, frantically begging me to write about an approaching comet (or secret planet, I don't remember which) that was going to collide with the Earth and destroy us all.

I never covered the topic, of course. And here we still are, amazingly.

But some people really, seriously believe in the latest prophecy fad and as a result they plan their lives around the belief that nothing will exist beyond December 21st. This does not resonate well with life tasks such as financial planning. Some people are spending away all their credit cards right now under the assumption that they won't have to pay anything back since we will all be destroyed on the magical Mayan calendar day.

The Mayan Tzolkin calendar, no end because it constantly rotates, to be much better than our linear calendar


That approach to debt spending is really going to suck on December 23rd or whenever the bill comes due. In fact, it may feel a lot like the end of the world when you realize you prematurely quit your job and spent away a whole lot of money you didn't even have (and now have to pay it back without the benefit of a trillion-dollar government bailout).

   There are legitimate threats to our world, but the Mayan calendar isn't one of them

Doomsday is actually approaching, by the way, and there are lots of ways in which our current human civilization is utterly unsustainable.

There are legitimate threats to our civilization from GMOs (genetic pollution), the pillaging of natural resources, loss of top soils, the polluting of the oceans, rampant infertility caused by synthetic chemicals, and even threats from hare-brained scientific experiments that could theoretically create black holes which consume the entire planet.

None of those are fiction; they're very real. And on top of that, there's also the coming debt collapse which won't actually destroy the world but will make you wish it had been destroyed due to the rampant poverty and starvation it will likely unleash.


 The monument nr. VI in Tortuguero, is blamed for the frenzy about the end of the world in December 2012. although it is not written any prediction of the Apocalypse on that date


But even with these real, legitimate threats, that's no reason to live your life as if it's all coming to an end, because in truth nobody knows the timetables on these things. The economic collapse, for example, could happen tonight or maybe in ten years. It's hard to tell exactly when things will reach a point of collapse. So while it's smart to be prepared for the unexpected, it's not prudent to allow your entire existence to be dominated by the thought that it's all coming to an end on a specific calendar date.

Unless God himself broadcasts a multilingual message from the heavens that announces a specific time and date that he's going to "end the simulation" and close the cosmos, you would be wise to stay on course with your life and not bet all your cards on a prophecy dreamed up by ancient humans who hadn't even developed an alphabet yet.











Print Page

Weakening of Earth's magnetic field and solar cycles, Part 2

To contact us Click HERE
User-agent: Mediapartners-Google
Disallow:



The sun is a huge electromagnetic transmitter that is flooding the planet of the solar system by heat, light, UV radiation and electrically charged particles. The Sun itself has a magnetic field and magnetic field creates an "egg" around the solar system known as heliosphere. Heliosphere is shaped like a droplet, with an elongated, narrow end pointing in the opposite direction in which we move.

Any change that occurs in or on the Sun will eventually affect every living person. Solar activity during this last sunspot cycle was the solar is greater than anything previously seen, spinal studies, written by Dr. Mike
Lockvvood and colleagues at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory in Chilton, UK, 1999. investigate the solar activity over the last 100 years. They reported that since 1901. total solar magnetic field has become stronger by 230 percent. Scientists do not understand what it means for us.

Some of the sunspot activity in this last cycle was stronger than anything ever recorded. But researchers say do not understand what it means for us. Apparently, the sun ie earth's driving force, said Richard Fisher Director of helio physics at NASA. To mitigate possible threats to public safety, it is crucial to better understand the extreme space weather events caused by solar activity.

   Solar cycle 24

According to NASA, the Sun begins another 11-year cycle of activity. The sun reverses its magnetic poles every a year. Given that the Sun is responsible for some adverse climate changes on Earth the next decade could bring more trouble for our planet. The years ahead could be tumultuous. Jimmy Raeder explained:

"We enter the 24th solar cycle 1z reasons not fully understood, CME and the even-numbered solar cycles (such as 24) are usually hit Earth with a leading edge that is magnetized north. CMF This should open a crack and fill the magnetosphere with plasma just before the storm. This is a perfect sequence for a really great event. "




Every 10-11 years the number of sunspots is our closest star rise from zero (as it was in 2008.) To a maximum of over four hundred. While the sunspots affect the Earth, solar flares and other disturbances that are spreading around our sun during increased sunspot activity lead to an increase in the number of particles (electrons and protons) and harmful light radiation (ultraviolet and X-rays), known as solar wind. Yes No
Earth's protective magnetic field and atmosphere, this bombardment of particles would completely burn us. Sunspot Cycle 24, which is expected to peak somewhere in the 2012th, it could be one of the strongest in the last few centuries.

It will be 30-50 percent stronger than last and will start with a delay of a full year, the revolutionary foresight that uses a computer model of solar dynamics developed by scientists who are from the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). Accurate prediction of solar cycles years in advance will help the company to prepare for active gust of solar storms, which can slow satellite orbits, disrupt communications and bring down power systems. Scientists have confidence in the forecasts because of a series of tests recently developed model simulated the strength of the last eight cycles with an accuracy of over 98 percent. Forecasts are generated in part by monitoring the movement of debris below the surface of sunspots from the previous two solar cycles.

 
    Solar cycle 25

"The great conveyor belt" is a huge circulating current of fire (hot plasma) within the Sun. There are two branches, north and south, and each takes about 10 years to pass a full circle. The researchers believe that turning the conveyor belt controls the sunspot cycle and therefore it is important to slow down.


Usually, the conveyor belt moving at a speed of about one meter per second speed walk, NASA said in Solana physicist David Hathaway. "That was the end of the 19th century, "In recent years, however, the belt has decelerated to 0.75 m / s in the north of 0.35 m / s in the south. "We have never seen so low, said Hathaway."

According to the theory and observation, the speed of the belt says it will be the intensity of sunspot activity about 20 years in the future. Slow belt means lower solar activity; fast belt means stronger activity.

"The slowdown that we see now means that Solar Cycle 25, which will be the culmination of about 2022nd year could be one of the weakest in the last century, said Hathaway.

   The solar activity on the Earth

The first instrument for measuring the activity of solar flares have occurred 440 years ago. They showed that the closest star to our Earth is not only the honor of eclipses. Sunspots, solar flares and other phenomena affect everything on earth, from weather events to human behavior. These phenomena are known collectively as the solar activity. This activity, which is expressed by a gust of solar radiation, magnetic storms and fiery flashes, the intensity can vary from very weak to very strong. The greatest threat to civilization are the storms.

On 28 August 1859th polar light shone and sparkled over the entire American continent, when darkness fell. Many people thought that their city is in flames. The hands on the instruments that were used for recording Uh magnetic fluctuations around the world came out of the scale. Telegraph system broke down, hit by strong surges. It was perhaps the worst solar storms in the past, 200 years ago. Its effects on humans were small because civilization had not yet been entered into high-technology development phase. But with the advent of modern electricity grids and satellites is much more in danger.




That something similar happened in our era of space nuclear destruction would be catastrophic. According to scientific data, a storm of this size occur about once in five centuries. But half of low-intensity events occur every 50 years. The last recorded 13th November 1960 .. Disrupted the Earth's magnetic field, disrupting the work stations.

Today is our dependence on radio-electronic devices so huge that increased solar activity could be disabled for life support systems around the world, and not just on the surface. Bad space weather can cause disturbances in any orbital system, light solar storm can ruin navigation systems controlled from space. NASA is now ringing the alarm because the North American continent near the northern magnetic pole, and is most sensitive to solar activity, spinal studies corporation "Metatech" revealed that the attack similar to the one from 1859. disable the entire power grid in North America. Even the relatively weak magnetic storm of 1989. encourage solar activity caused the accident in a Canadian hydroelectric power plant that is six million people in the United States and Canada for nine hours left without electricity.

Study of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, also spoke about the troubling features of the Earth in the worst case scenario of solar storms. Modern power grids are so interconnected that the large space storms -  type such as expected to occur once in a century could trigger a cascade of crashes that could be expanded throughout the United States, left without electricity for 130 million people or more only in that country, the conclusion a new report. Such widespread power cuts although, as expected, a rare ability to hit other vital systems.

"The impact would be felt on the interdependent infrastructures, for example, drinking water supply would be affected for several hours, quickly perishable foods and medicines for about 12-24 hours. and the current or subsequent loss of heating / air conditioning, garbage disposal, telephone service, transportation, fuel supply and clock on, "the report reads.

To fix the system could be taken months, the bank could be close, and trade with other countries could be interrupted.

"Emergency services would be overloaded, and command and control could be lost," say researchers led by Daniel Baker, director of the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics, University of Colorado at Boulder.

   Sun's cycles and human behavior

Could cycles of war and peace could be associated with the solar cycle?

Some researchers claim that geomagnetic storms affect brain waves and hormone levels, causing many different reactions, mainly in men. Although some women may also feel the changes during these storms, it seems that they are generally less affected by the behavior of the Sun. Reacting to changing hormone levels, some men may become increasingly irritable and aggressive, while others may instead become more creative.

It was found that an increase in solar activity increase psychotic episodes in people who already suffer from unstable psychological states. Although we may associate such behavior with a full moon, Dr. Robert Becker and his colleague Dr. Howard Friedman 1963rd demonstrated that changes in the sun and water to a noticeable increase in psychotic activity. Yet, these reactions do not occur only in a few particularly sensitive or unlucky individuals.

 


Evidence suggesting that the wars and international conflicts often break out when sunspots are rapidly forming or rapidly decaying, because in these conditions occur more intense geomagnetic storms. In addition. to an increase in solar activity are correlated with periods when the increased number of accidents and diseases, as well as crimes and murders. The entire biosphere is affected by this electromagnetic pollution, and it seems that human behavior responds accordingly. Not cause any geomagnetic storm disturbances. But over time, extremes of solar activity can also affect the period of earthly conflict. Data on cycles of war and peace extend to at least 2,500 years old.

Another 1915th some scientists have begun to recognize the connection between solar activity and human behavior. This work began with Russian scientist Alevander Chizhevsky who observed a correlation between mass changes in human behavior and the cycle of sunspots.

The thirties of last century, Professor Raymond Wheeler, a historian at the University n Kansas, took this observation one step further. His research numerically ranked severity of individual battles correlating to solar cycles. The information obtained by statistically analyzing Edward Dewey, who confirmed the existence of these cycles of wars. However, he was unable to establish a clear link with the cycle of sunspots, because at that time was insufficient data.
 The 1980s, with a detailed analysis Wheeler's data, is the connection became clear.

After a more detailed study of the data seems to begin to discover the pattern by which IE most likely to start a war in the key points of the sunspot cycle. These are periods when geomagnetic activity is changing the fastest in the rapid increase in solar activity, or in a downward cycle, when sunspots are rapidly diminishing. In addition, we can see how it negatively affects the psychological mechanisms such as brain rhythms and hormone levels. In other words, wars could be a kind of mass psychosis. When you see the connection with physical mechanisms (such as IE electromagnetic pollution), it gives us some predictions about when it is likely that they could begin intensified aggression. Calculations show that we are facing another increase of intense solar activity in less than two years, roughly around 22 September 2010. NASA predicts that the activity reached a peak in 2012. year.

   Changes in the Solar System

Five planets atmosphere and Earth's moon change. In the upper layers of Earth's atmosphere creates HO gas that did not exist in amounts that exists today. Scientists from the Russian Academy of Sciences say that it is not associated with global warming, CFCs or fluorocarbon emissions. They argue that the atmosphere of Jupiter, Uranus and Neptun also changing.

The Martian atmosphere becomes much thicker. In 1997. probe "Mars Observer" has lost one of its mirrors, which caused her fall. This happened because the atmosphere was about twice as much too dense, but NASA was calculated. Brightness and magnetic fields of planets are also changing. Venus shows a significant increase in its overall brightness, Jupiter's energetic charge has risen so high that there is now a visible tube of ionizing radiation, which is formed between the surface of Jupiter and its moon "Io." At the recently captured images can be seen a great power tube. Uranus and Neptune also are becoming brighter. The magnetic field of Jupiter, Uranus and Neptune are changing.

Jupiter's magnetic field has more than doubled, and Neptune's magnetic field is stronger. The Russians say that all three of these planets become radiant, and their atmospheric qualities are changing, but do not explain what that means. The Russians also report that looks at how Uranus and Neptune has recently been a reversal of the poles. When the space probe "Voyager II" flew by Uranus and Neptune, it seemed that the north and south magnetic poles substantially deviated from the spot where the earlier recordings was a half rotation. In one case, it is 50 degrees, and in another case, the difference was 10-odd degrees.

This new information on changes in the solar system comes at an interesting time for our planet. It is possible that for some time the celestial events play a role in shaping our lives on this planet, and that these changes that we see now in our sun, solar system and Earth's magnetic field could be just what transforms our world as we know it into something new . Only time will tell, but it seems that the future is already knocking at the door.

    Print Page

End of Fossil Fuel Era an 'Exciting Time'

To contact us Click HERE

Author and scientist Amory B. Lovins and the Rocky Mountain Institute see a bright future beyond dirty fuels... and sooner than you think


In an essay in the latest issue of Foreign Affairs and a recent interview with Yale Environment 360, Amory Lovins discusses his latest book, Reinventing Fire, written with his colleagues at the Rocking Mountain Institute, which looks at what a transition away from an economy and energy system based on fossil fuels towards one based on renewable energy would look like.

                              Amory B. Lovins of the Rocky Mountain Institute

"Weaning the United States from fossils fuels would require two big shifts," writes Lovins at Foreign Affairs, naming "oil and electricity" which he says are "distinct." He points out, "In the US, three-fourths of electricity powers building, three-fourths of oil fuels transportation, and the remaining oil and electricity run factories. So saving oil and electricity is chiefly about making buildings, vehicles, and factories far more efficient." This, admits Lovins, is "no small task."

Dwelling on the scale of the challenge, however, is not where Lovins devotes his energy. Instead, he looks at other "epochal energy shifts" that have occurred in history, like the end of the whale oil industry in the mid 19th century, where in just thirty years the whale oil industry went from bringing lighting to nearly every American household in 1850, to being essentially snuffed out by 1879, when Edison's electric lighting hit the scene. "Whales," writes Lovins, "had been accidently saved by technological innovators and profit-maximizing capitalists."

The point, of course, is not that we should look to 'profit-maximizing capitalists' to lead us to a clean energy future (though they will certainly play a role). The point is that we should definitely not expect whaling captains to lead us. And in this era, the whale ship captains are the captains of the big oil, coal, and gas companies and the politicians who do their bidding.


"The chief obstacle is not technology or economics," concludes Lovins, "but slow adoption." He writes:
Helping innovations catch on will take education, leadership, and rapid learning. But it does require reaching concensus on motives. If Americans agree what should be done, then they need not agree why. Whether one cares most about national security, health, the environment, or simply making money, saving and supplanting fossil fuels makes sense."

"Wise energy policy can grow from impeccably conservative roots-- [...]

Moving the United States off oil and coal will require Americans to trust in their own resourcefulness, ingenuity, and courage. These durable virtues can give the country fuel without fear; help set the world on a path beyond war, want, or waste; and turn energy from worrisome to worry-free, from risk to reward, from cost to profit."

   A Clean Energy Plan


In the interview with Yale Environment 360 senior editor Fen Montaigne, Lovins discusses how business and society can pull off this transformation even if the U.S. Congress keeps failing to act, why climate change need not even enter the discussion, and why the oil industry will ultimately forego fossil fuels and jump aboard the green bandwagon. “One system is dying and others are struggling to be born,” says Lovins. “It’s a very exciting time.”



Yale Environment 360: Given that we’re in the midst of what could only be described as a fossil fuel boom, with the discovery of new unconventional sources and new oil sources being found all over the world, how do you speed this transition and get from here to there?

Amory Lovins: Well, I’m not sure what boom you’re talking about. When I read the Wall Street Journal, I see a headline a few weeks ago about coal running out of steam.

e360: China is consuming tremendous amounts of coal.

Lovins: Hang on — I look at the data and I find that in the United States, coal’s share of the electrical services market, which is 95 percent of its market for fuel, has fallen by a quarter from 2005 through 2010, displaced by cheaper gas, efficiency, and renewables. And then when you look in the forward prices and the options market, that spread is going to keep widening. And when I hear how cheap natural gas is, I remember that it’s also very volatile. This has nothing to do with the many uncertainties around fracking, which will take a decade to resolve — if they work out well, we’ll be satisfied with a new option; if they don’t, that’s okay because we won’t need that much gas, so we won’t be very disappointed.

e360: Certainly in China, India, and the developing world there is a fossil fuel boom going on.

Lovins: But in a global context, there is a remarkable boom in efficiency and renewables in China, the world leader in five renewables. Part of the story in China is that the extraordinary vitality of renewables is coming very largely from the vibrant private sector, while all of the nuclear and half the coal business are the old state enterprises. So the story of incumbents and insurgents is partly the story of the reshaping of the Chinese economy from the old and rather bureaucratic command organizations. That is, I think, an encouraging trend.

  We  must use our most effective institutions to end-run our least effective institutions.

Last I looked a couple of years ago, the private sector in China was something like 50 to 70 percent of the profits, the growth, and the new jobs. Of course there is still a lot of momentum in the coal bureaucracy in China and India, which together burned half the world’s coal and account for about three-quarters of the projected increase, but I think those projections are looking quite dubious. In China, for example, they have lately retired over 70 gigawatts of inefficient coal plants, so that their coal plant fleet is now more efficient than ours. In 2010, 59 percent of their net new [electricity] capacity was coal. It used to be much higher.

e360: You feel we’re in a period where fossil fuels over the next decade or two are going to be increasingly like whale oil?

Lovins: Yes.

e360: You’ve got the president of Shell writing a foreward to your book. There are prominent quotes from the president of Texaco in one section of the book. How do you persuade these oil companies that are making billions of dollars now and into the foreseeable future to get on board with this renewable energy revolution? What is going to persuade them to be on what you see as the right side of history?

Lovins: Mainly risk management, and as a member of the National Petroleum Council, having worked in this industry for 38 years, I’ve seen a lot of concern about risk. Oil is like airlines. It’s a great industry and a bad business. Look at its fundamentals. It is extremely capital-intensive, long lead time, based on a wasting asset of which you only own about 6 percent and the rest can be taxed away or confiscated at any time. It is a business overflowing with all kinds of risk — technical, political, financial. It is unpopular politically. Its subsidies are at some political risk in this country. Put all that together and you have a magnificent recipe for headaches. Why would you want to be in a business like that?

e360: You’re making huge profits at this point.

Lovins: Well, sometimes yes, and sometimes it gushes red ink. So the smarter leaders in that industry have been trying to get out of the business since at least 1973, and have constructed some pretty intelligent portfolios of both activities and options that are getting rather rapidly diversified. Some companies that were not very foresighted, even though they were operationally excellent, are starting to smell the coffee.

 I think there is a bright future for what we now think of as the oil industry in the new energy era, using its formidable capabilities and assets, but in different ways. A lot of refineries will turn into biorefineries; a lot of drilling will go to geothermal, possibly carbon sequestration and other pursuits. The fuel logistics will diversify into hydrogen — which of course is mainly a business of the oil industry right now and it’s a very big business — and into electricity and biofuels. Shell is already the world’s biggest distributor of biofuels. The average cost of getting our U.S. transport system off oil is about $18 a barrel for the efficiency and electrification part, or if you include the biofuels to run the trucks and airplanes to the extent they’re not on hydrogen, it might be at most about $25 a barrel. So I don’t much care what the world oil price is, this is a better bet and it very much better manages the risks.

e360: In the spheres that you write about — transportation, electricity generation, industry — what pieces of the puzzle need to be put in place in the coming decade or so to do this massive scaling up that’s going to be required to attain your vision of an economy that by 2050 is primarily powered by renewable sources?

Lovins: Broadly we need to pay attention to allow or require full and fair competition, preferably at honest prices. And to use our most effective institutions to end-run our least effective institutions.

e360: For example?

Lovins: Well, we use private enterprise, co-evolving with civil society and sped up by military innovation, to end run Congress. The transition we describe requires no act of Congress. It’s led by business for profit.

e360: So you want the private sector to end-run the dysfunctional political system?

Lovins: At the federal level, yes. There are policies required to unlock or speed the transition we described, but they could all be done administratively or at the state level, where most of the action is.

e360: From a technological point of view, how do you scale up wind and solar to the point where it can be generating the volume of electricity that you envision by 2050?

Lovins: The way we’re scaling it up now. U.S. photovoltaics have doubled each of the last two years. World [photovoltaic] growth last year — a difficult year for many industries — was 70 percent. And 68 percent of Europe’s new capacity last year was solar and wind. Wind, for example, is generally competitive without subsidy, even though the global wind industry will of course shift its projects in a given year to wherever they get the most subsidy, as you would expect. But even without subsidy they have a very strong business case.

e360: So you foresee in the U.S., Europe, and China a steady accretion of this scale and volume for these new sources?

Lovins: Yes, and China is leading the plummeting cost and rocketing volume of most of the renewables. They’re the world leader in five. They aim to be in all. The ones they lead are photovoltaic, wind, small hydro, biogas, and solar thermal for hot water.

So this is actually quite a big business. Clean energy was a $260 billion investment flow in 2011. Europe has now more than one million new renewable jobs. The big winner is Germany. They have more solar workers than America has steel workers. [German Chancellor Angela] Merkel bet that it would be smarter to send their energy money to their own engineers, manufacturers, and installers than to keep paying it to [Russia’s] Gazprom. She’s right, and it was a winning bet.

e360: In your book you are not counting on any sort of miraculous silver bullet technologies.

Lovins: No, no new inventions.

e360:  But do you think there will be within a matter of decades technologies we can’t envision that could even further accelerate this transition?

Lovins: Oh, yes. I think there will be many, and actually although we’re not counting on any new inventions, we do give examples of emerging technologies in the lab about to get to market that are going to be quite powerful. For example, windows whose ability to transmit or block heat is a function of the temperature of the glass, and that’s a passive property.
It doesn’t  require any control system. That sort of thing is so revolutionary we haven’t even figured out how to use it yet. Or as another example, Tsutomu Shimomura, the computer security expert, has invented a way of controlling LED lighting in big buildings that gets rid of almost all of the wire and power supplies and controls, but gives superior control flexibility. And that should ultimately cut by manyfold the installed cost of those LED lighting systems and thus help them take over even faster in both new and old buildings. Fuel cells have already beaten the cost targets that we had expected. The list goes on.

Despite our woeful underinvestment in efficiency R&D, the technical progress here and abroad continues to accelerate with no end in sight and it’s not just in widgets. It’s also progress in new business models, new designs, ways of combining technologies more effectively to get expanding returns, not diminishing returns, new delivery channels that are rapidly maturing, new regulatory models. These things all together I think have put us irreversibly on the path to a new energy era, and a lot of it is an incumbents-versus-insurgents play where the incumbents have many intelligent ways they can respond and some dumb ways, one of which is called ostrich.

e360: Your book, in each of the main chapters, lays out detailed prescriptions — down to diagrams of factory piping — of how to improve efficiency and make advances. What has the reaction been to the book from corporations, from politicians?

Lovins: The reaction I have seen has been uniformly favorable, partly because it’s a trans-ideological approach that focuses on outcomes, not motives. Whether you most care about profits, jobs, and competitive advantage, or about national security or environmental stewardship and climate and public health — regardless of the reason, you’ll still want the outcomes. They’ll still make sense and make money, so let’s just do what we all agree ought to be done for whatever reason, not argue about what reason is most important, and then a lot of the stuff we may not agree about becomes superfluous. The military is very strongly on this track already — with both efficiency and resilient electric supply — for their own good reasons. We are not seeing so far political resistance to these ideas and we’re getting a very warm welcome in the business community.

e360: How big an impediment to your vision of how to go forward is the fact that many of the leaders of the Republican Party not only deny the existence of climate change, but belittle renewable energy. Is the political gridlock on this issue a big impediment to maybe moving forward?

Lovins: I don’t see it as a big impediment because we’re not relying on Congress to do anything. Again, you don’t have to believe climate science to think that the outcomes of Reinventing Fire are desirable. If you care
about  either making money or national security, either of those suffices; you may even care about both together. Then you’re twice as motivated. We are counting in the analysis all externalities — carbon [reduction] and otherwise — as worth zero, a conservatively low estimate. And we still get a $5 trillion surplus from getting the U.S. completely off oil, coal, and nuclear energy and a third off natural gas by 2050, with a 2.6-fold bigger economy. That, I think, is an attractive outcome regardless of your political beliefs.

e360: Let’s say there’s a President Santorum or a President Romney, do you think that they could be persuaded once they’re in office to embrace a vision like this?

Lovins: I don’t know, but I don’t much care. Rocky Mountain Institute is non-partisan, and we observe that most states, including many strongly Republican states, have renewable portfolio standards. The renewable leader in the nation is Texas, which is not noted for being environmentally minded, but does care a lot about making money and is very good at it. That’s fine.

e360: On the issue of climate change, do you believe the climate movement has made a strategic error by focusing so much on the issue of warming and its impacts rather than on the positive economic message you propagate in the book?

Lovins: I think you could make that case. In fact, to go back to the beginning of the modern climate debate, I think that when the bogus studies were issued claiming that climate protection would be very costly, the environmental movement fell into a trap of saying it won’t cost that much and it’s worth it. What they should have said is, “No, you’ve got it wrong. Climate protection is not costly but profitable because it’s cheaper to save fuel than to buy fuel.”

So the whole climate conversation has been distorted by this error of mistaking cost for profits and that has blocked international negotiations, because it’s so much harder to talk about cost burden and sacrifice, what is it worth to save the climate and who should pay for it, than to talk about profits, jobs, and competitive advantage, which should have been the subject all along.
I think you could make that case. In fact, to go back to the beginning of the modern climate debate, I think that when the bogus studies were issued claiming that climate protection would be very costly, the environmental movement fell into a trap of saying it won’t cost that much and it’s worth it. What they should have said is, “No, you’ve got it wrong. Climate protection is not costly but profitable because it’s cheaper to save fuel than to buy fuel.”

So the whole climate conversation has been distorted by this error of mistaking cost for profits and that has blocked international negotiations, because it’s so much harder to talk about cost burden and sacrifice, what is it worth to save the climate and who should pay for it, than to talk about profits, jobs, and competitive advantage, which should have been the subject all along.

e360: When you look at your 2050 vision, yet you also look at all the carbon that’s still being burned, how do you reconcile the two?


Lovins: Well, one system is dying and others are struggling to be born. It’s a very exciting time, but I think the transitions that we need in how we design vehicles, buildings, and factories, and how we allow efficiency to compete with supply, are well under way. Most of the key sectors are already at or past their tipping point. And it’s clearest for oil, but will become clearer for coal that the stuff is becoming uncompetitive even at relatively low prices before it becomes unavailable even at high prices. It’s the whale oil story all over again. They ran out of customers before they ran out of whales.

Video



Amory Lovins at the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies





Print Page

Lost in migration: Earth's magnetic field is weakening

To contact us Click HERE


The discovery by NASA rover Curiosity of evidence that water once flowed on Mars - the most Earth-like planet in the solar system - should intensify interest in what the future could hold for mankind.

The only thing stopping Earth having a lifeless environment like Mars is the magnetic field that shields us from deadly solar radiation and helps some animals migrate, and it may be a lot more fragile and febrile than one might think.


Scientists say Earth's magnetic field is weakening and could all but disappear in as little as 500 years as a precursor to flipping upside down.

It has happened before - the geological record suggests the magnetic field has reversed every 250,000 years, meaning that, with the last event 800,000 years ago, another would seem to be overdue.

"Magnetic north has migrated more than 1,500 kilometres over the past century," said Conall Mac Niocaill, an earth scientist at Oxford University. "In the past 150 years, the strength of the magnetic field has lessened by 10 per cent, which could indicate a reversal is in the cards."

While the effects are hard to predict, the consequences may be enormous. The loss of the magnetic field on Mars billions of years ago put an end to life on the planet if there ever was any, scientists say.

Mac Niocaill said Mars probably lost its magnetic field 3.5-4.0 billion years ago, based on observations that rocks in the planet's southern hemisphere have magnetization.


The northern half of Mars looks younger because it has fewer impact craters, and has no magnetic structure to speak of, so the field must have shut down before the rocks there were formed - which would have been about 3.8 billion years ago.

"With the field dying away, the solar wind was then able to strip the atmosphere away, and you would also have an increase in the cosmic radiation making it to the surface," he said.

"Both of these things would be bad news for any life that might have formed on the surface - either wiping it out, or forcing it to migrate into the interior of the planet."


Earth's magnetic field has always restored itself but, as it continues to shift and weaken, it will present challenges - satellites could be more exposed to solar wind and the oil industry uses readings from the field to guide drills.

In nature, animals which use the field could be mightily confused - birds, bees, and some fish all use the field for navigation. So do sea turtles whose long lives, which can easily exceed a hundred years, means a single generation could feel the effects.

Birds may be able to cope because studies have shown they have backup systems that rely on stars and landmarks, including roads and power lines, to find their way around.

The European Space Agency is taking the issue seriously. In November, it plans to launch three satellites to improve our fairly blurry understanding of the magnetosphere.

The project - dubbed Swarm - will send two satellites into a 450 kilometre high polar orbit to measure changes in the magnetic field, while a third satellite 530 kilometres high will look at the influence of the sun.


Scientists, who have known for some time the magnetic field has a tendency to flip, have made advances in recent years in understanding why and how it happens.

The field is generated by convection currents that churn in the molten iron of the planet's outer core. Other factors, such as ocean currents and magnetic rocks in the Earth's crust also contribute.

The Swarm mission will pull all these elements together to improve computer models used to predict how the magnetic field will move and how fast it could weaken.

Ciaran Beggan, a geomagnetic specialist at the British Geological Survey in Edinburgh, said studies have also refined our understanding of how the field reverses.

They have focused on lava flows: When these cool and form crystals the atoms in iron-rich molten rock align under the influence of the magnetic field, providing a geological memory of the Earth's field.

But that memory looks different in various locations around the world, suggesting the reversal could be a chaotic and fairly random process.

"Rather than having strong north and south poles, you get lots of poles around the planet. So, a compass would not do you much good," said Beggan.

While the whole process takes 3,000-5,000 years, latest research suggests the descent into a chaotic state could take as little as 500 years, although there are significant holes in scientific understanding.

"Although electricity grids and GPS systems would be more vulnerable, we are not really sure how all the complex things that are linked together would react," Beggan said.




© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

Original source article: Lost in migration: flip of earth's magnetic field overdue





Print Page