Meuseum of Science

Taking a trip to the Museum of science was so fun! Seeing as I have never been, I had a great time browsing around all different areas and taking it all in. When we first arrived I spent a great deal of time in the Gecko section. Most geckos lay two shelled eggs which hatch without help from the mother. Females hide their eggs in plant stems, rock crevicices, and in shallow nests. They hold their eggs internally and regulate temperature by moving in and out of the sun, which eventually leads to the birth of fully formed babies, in order to take control of the incubation.

The Art Gecko’s skin ranges in all different colors and textures. Some of them have an outer covering of a pebble texture scales, and other have scales that feel like shingles on a roof. They have bold, metallic color reflections, and their skins help them vanish on lichen covered tree bark.

Another interesting part I saw was the body of endorphins, and how caffeine can effect and stimulate every part of the body. This interested me because my coffee intake is extremely high, and it was beneficial to me to see how my body reacts with endorphins. I learned that the brain is generated in the pituitary gland and is where your body responds to pain and stress. The nervous system masks bad feelings by dampening painful nerve signals and amplifying pleasurable ones. Caffeine jolts your central nervous system awake, firing your nerves, contracting your muscles, and prepares you for emergencies.

Activities such as running, or any other type of cardiovascular activity, floods your brain with endorphins, which is where the “Runners high” originates from. Caffeine releases adrenaline, your body’s fight or flight signal, causing rapid heartbeat and increased blood pressure within your heart.

Endorphins may curb your appetite in the digestive system. However, the pleasure caused by eating some foods such as chocolate, can cause you to eat more. Consuming caffeine minimizes the blood supply to your stomach and slows digestion. The feeling of hunger can also be caused by the withdrawal of caffeine.

“Feeling the burn” in your muscles from weight training can cause minor, painful muscle tears, triggering endorphin release. Caffeine rerouted from your organs floods your muscles with oxygen and sugar, which prepares them for action.

Cap & Trade

First tried in the United States, Cap and Trade is an economically efficient way of reducing pollutants. The benefit of Cap and Trade is that the total emissions are controlled and the emissions reductions are known in advance. The trading part of it sets a price for emissions and a market for their trade. In a more simple understanding, the ultimate goal of Cap and Trade is to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions economy-wide in a cost effective manner.

The idea of  “cap” is that each large-scale company will be given a limit on how much greenhouse gas it can emit. The company must have an emissions permit for every ton of carbon dioxide it releases into the atmosphere. The reason for the permits is to set an enforceable limit, the “cap”, on how much greenhouse gas pollution that company is allowed to release. As time continues, the limit becomes stricter, allowing less and less pollution until the goal is met.

The “trade” allows companies to be able to sell their extra permits to companies that aren’t able to reduce easily. Some companies can reduce their emissions more easily than others, allowing these more efficient companies to help others. This plan is set so that everyone can guarantee some sort of reductions overall, and that the more efficient companies can ensure the cap is met at the lowest cost possible.

The idea of this system all begun in the 1990’s due to acid rain problems and concerns. Throughout time during the 90’s, SO2 and NOx were both subject to a Cap and Trade system that gave industries the option of taking on a new approach to control these emissions. Although it was a great success, and emissions dropped and the cost of reaching the goal was quite high, Margaret Taylor analyzed the data and explained it wasn’t so great of a success. “The implication is that CTP’s do not inherently provide sustained incentives for private sector R&D investments in clean technologies. And, in contrast t their intended goal, they do not reduce the uncertainty about the future cost of compliance, which would otherwise help industries plan their investments….For now, however, her research suggests that, while cap-and-trade works for lowering emissions, t may not guarantee the sustained market innovation that some of its proponents promise”.

Beyond Smoke and Mirrors – Burton Richter

http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2012/03/new-study-suggests-cap-and-trade-results-in-decreased-innovation.ars

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/01/capandtrade101.html

Indian Point, NY

The major source of electricity to residents in NYC and northern suburbs, all come from the Indian Point Power plant operating since 1962. Since the original reactor back in the day, it’s newly only Entergy has experienced several accidents in the past and is on the federal list of the nation’s worst nuclear power plants.

So question all comes down to whether this power plant’s license should be renewed in the upcoming year, or should it be shut down? The plant produces 2,000 megawatts and proves 25% of the power in NYC, so if we shut it down, a plan must be in tact to take over.

The Governor of NY, Andrew M. Cuomo wants to see the power plant get shut down. He has been on the ball to get this power plant shut down since 2001. He stated in his blog “the reward doesn’t justify the risk”. The reactors would have to be shut down in 2013 and 2015 if the state department of environmental conservation doesn’t sign off on the federal permit required. The shut down could reduce electric bills if the people in NYC are concerned about the possibility, and rethink their usage of electricity.  If NYC had the ability to switch over to a more energy efficiency generator, such as wind power, it’d be easy to produce up north where wind is more constant and land is cheaper. NYC uses kerosene increasing carbon emissions, but without it NYC could have a stronger passion to upgrade more efficiently. It does not have the best standards for fire safety, possibility of sustainability in case of an earthquake, or terrorist attacks.

Entergy explains that it’ll be nearly impossible to find enough replacement power anytime soon. If we replaced the plant, it could take a minimum of 5 years and would require a long-term energy strategy. The city could end up power hungry, blacked out, and the possibility of severe sweating during the global warming summer heat waves. We all remember the brutal days in July last summer; do we take the chance and wind up with not enough power to generate all of NYC’s air conditioners? The power plant would be very expensive to replace, and would increase the percentage of power failures. Not to mention, this power plant employs 1,100 jobs.

In a nutshell, would the state of New York be able to handle the baggage that comes with shutting down this power plant, allowing enough time to smoothly transition to another source of electricity? Or should we wait until a definite plan is created before we go and take our chances of leaving residents in NYC powerless during the upcoming heat wave season.

Tom Vales

Last week we had a nice switch up in the classroom. Scientist Tom Vales, the lab coordinator for the science department at Suffolk University and a 30 year mechanist introduced the class to 4 different devices regarding heat and thermal dynamics. It was a great way to visualize how electricity is conducted and hear a lecture from such an intelligent guest speaker. Mr. Vales introduced to us 4 different devices; the Tesla Coil, the Peltie Device, the Sterling Engine and the Mendocino Motor.

Mr. Vales brought in a homemade Tesla coil and performed a demonstration to us by holding different glass tubes up to it. The Tesla Coil can transmit radio frequency up to 7,000 volts, and is a wireless transmission energy device. This device is used to produce a high voltage, low current, and high frequency alternating power. It was invented to create wireless charges by Nicola Tesla around 1891. People don’t necessarily use them anymore, although they are seen in science museums and are used as a way to educate students on how creating long sparks can produce electricity.

The Peltie Device is a thermal cooling device by using two types of metal; copper and bismuth to create electricity. We can use this device to cool drinks and other things. The two forms a bond of heat and cooling. According to Mr. Vanes, this device is not very efficient.

The Sterling Engine is the device I found to be the most interesting of them all. Reverend Sterling created this device in 1816 when he invented this to replace what he thought to be the unsafe steam engines. The Sterling Engine is a heat engine operating by cyclic compression and expansion of air and other gases. All heat transfers to and from the working fluid through the engine wall.

I really enjoyed Mr. Vales presentation on the different electricity devices. He taught us a lot in a fun and energetic way that kept me very tuned in. He offered good advise, and to always keep the mind working!

Global Warming Deniers

Back in 2007, the IPCC discovered certainty of 90% that emissions of heat trapping gases from humans caused the most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid 20^th century. This conclusion was discovered after six years of work done by 2,500 scientific expert reviewers from 130 different countries. Now who’s to argue that??

These so called “Global warming Deniers” think that the rising average temperature of earth’s atmosphere and oceans since the late 19^th century, and continually rising, is NOT caused by human activity. What leads them to believe this? A familiar few Global Warming deniers have stated such claims:

“A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I’m not one though who would attribute it to being man-made.” Sarah Palin, the former Governor of Alaska

“Despite it being bitterly cold outside in the northern plains, we hear a lot about global warming. Is there another side to this story? Many scientists would say yes, but most media outlets- the mainstream media – only cover Al Gore’s ‘Earth as a Fever’ perspective. This is the worst winter in some parts of America and around the world and perhaps we should be worried now about global cooling.” Steve Doocy, FOX News Anchor; March 2008

“We are now cooling. We are not warming. The warming you see out there, the supposed warming, and I use my finger quotation marks here, is part of the cooling process.” Michael Steele, Republican Committee Chairman; March 20, 2009

“With the coldest winter ever recorded, with snow setting record levels up and down the coast, the noble committee should take the noble prize back from Al Gore.” In February Donald Trump talked about snow, being a popular argument for climate change critics proving that global warming is a myth. Donald Trump

Climate lobbyists, corporate lobbyists, conservative politicians, front groups and free market anti-government organizations are the ones who try and affect public opinion and policy on global warming.

The Huffington Post conducted a survey of Americans who thought that climate change is related to pollution caused by humans. It’s at it’s lowest point in the past three years with only 57% of Americans believing that global warming is caused by humans, since Al Gore’s film was released in 2006 with a 77% belief.

Anthropogenic climate change is another way to refer to human-caused global warming. Industrializing, deforesting, and polluting are all things we do to our atmosphere, increasing all greenhouse gases that trap heat near earth’s surface. We’re pouring CO2 into the atmosphere WAY too quickly before the plants and oceans can even absorb it. Even if we stopped this problem right now, it would still linger on for years after. I personally believe that we are the cause of global warming, and must start taking action against it now before we leave a mess for our grand children, and destroy our planet more and more every day. What do you think? Do you believe we are the main cause to global warming, or do you object like the above deniers? Post your comments! I want to know what you guys are thinking too 🙂

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/22/most-dangerous-global-war_n_330614.html?slidenumber=4#slide_image

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/climate-weather/photos/7-surprising-global-warming-deniers/architects

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/12/1206_041206_global_warming_2.html

http://www.exxposeexxon.com/facts/gwdeniers.html

Electricity Lab

In order to gain understanding of the relationship between light intensity and the voltage output of the solar cell, in addition to the relationship between wavelength of light and the voltage output of the solar cell, Ash and I conducted an experiment to test it out using:

• One solar cell
• One voltage probe
• One NXT adaptor
• NXT with light sensor
• A flashlight
• Ruler to measure the distance
• One orange, blue, and pink film filters

The orange, blue and pink film filters affected the voltage output. As you can see from our bar graph, the blue colored film produced the highest voltage output of .398, not too far behind was the orange sheet producing .397, and the pink produced a significantly lower voltage of .377. All of the colored films were measured by a distance of 5 CM from the light.

When we experimented the voltage versus the distance we received a more complex conclusion then we expected. When we measured the distance form the light at 1 CM, the photovoltaic voltage was .458, and when we increased the distance to 5 CM the photovoltaic voltage increased to .470. On our last trial we measured the distance from the light at 30 CM, and our photovoltaic voltage dropped to .320. It could have just been in an error somewhere along our experiment that could have given us a false result when we measured the distance from 5 CM, because I would have expected the photovoltaic voltage to keep dropping as we kept distancing the light.

SOlyndra-Scandulous

Last summer in August 2011, the California-based solar panel company Solyndra claimed bankruptcy, and **** really hit the fan. How does a $535 million granted loan from the government hit rock bottom like that and who’s to blame? Some critics have noted that this loan guarantee process was a multi-year processthat originated during the Bush administration, but when Obama took office he sealed the deal. Out of 143 companies expressing interest in receiving a loan guarantee, Solyndra was the first to get approved.

Originally, this loan was to guarantee Solyndra to create 4,000 new jobs for Americans; referred to as the “green jobs”, which was supposed to be the key to future economic growth. Whelp…that went over well huh? Instead 1,100 employees lost their jobs and an estimated 90% remain unemployed.

The company’s innovative solar panels are high priced to begin with so they quickly became uncompetitive in the marketplace. They didn’t have enough customers to keep up with the supply and demand scale. Even if Harrison and Stover (the two executive owners) remained optimistic that everything was going to be okay 6 weeks before bankruptcy, it’s their own stupidity. Even with the additional $75 million coming from one of the billionaire investors to keep them in business they STILL failed. How could no one see what was going on during this time and do something about it?

“It is here that companies like Solyndra are leading the way toward a brighter, more prosperous future. We can see the positive impacts right here at Solyndra”, President Obama cluelessly preaching about his visit to the company in May 2010. What we didn’t see was that the company had accumulated losses of $558 million in its five years of existence, which was discovered by an audit perform by Price Waterhouse Coopers two months before the visit. “Solyndra has suffered recurring losses from operations, negative cash flows since inception and has a not stockholder’s deficit that, among other factors, raises substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern” (Michael Barone, AEI Washington Examiner). The two executives pleaded the fifth amendment at court and chose to speak nothing about it, no one can prove whether they had good intentions or not.

The fact that the government is handing out hundreds of millions of dollars to unproven and tentative business for the so-called “green jobs” loan guarantee program is unacceptable and has no excuse. If the company’s business plan worked out smoothly, the loan costs the government basically nothing because it doesn’t require federal government to give out money unless scenarios like this happen.  Unfortunately, American taxpayers have the deal with the consequence, as well as the job loss of Solyndra employees.

So what does this all mean in the sense of Solar panel manufacturing in the U.S.? If we look back in the past China was making 6% of the worlds solar panels, and now makes 54%, taking the world lead in solar panel manufacturing. America now needs to think of a new way to create innovative technologies that China won’t be able to reproduce to get us back up on the market. By thinking of some new technology it’ll help us get away from our main use of coal, which won’t be an easy task because the cost advantages have built up tremendously over time.

Sources:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/24/opinion/the-phony-solyndra-scandal.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solyndra_loan_controversy

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/five-myths-about-the-solyndra-collapse/2011/09/14/gIQAfkyvRK_blog.html

Generator Lab

According to Faraday’s Law, changing magnetic fluxes through coiled wires generate electricity (currents and voltage). To demonstrate Faraday’s law, we shook a tube that had a magnet inside which traveled back and forth through the coral of wires.

Our equipment included one generator, one voltage probe, one NXT adaptor, and we used Labview and Excel software to conduct our experiment. Our hypothesis was that the faster you shake the tube, the greater will be the generated voltage.

My partner and I conducted 4 trials: we received the sum of the square of the voltages by shaking the tube zero times, 22 times, 40 times, and 60 times.

We were hoping that the voltage would increase when we increased the number of shakes , but as you can tell by our graph, we had one error when we shook the tube 40 times it decreased, but the other 3 were correct.

Hydrof**cking

What on earth is hydrofracking? (No pun intended). Hydrofracking is a quick and easy way to refer to Hydraulic Fracturing, which is by definition a formation stimulation practice used to create additional permeability in a producing formation to allow gas to flow more easily toward the wellbore for purposes of production. It’s used increase the necessary production to support the increasing demand for energy. Now what the frack does that all mean? Let me break it down into simpler terms for you.

Hydrofracking’s key role is to extract natural gas for the purpose of creating cleaner energy in our atmosphere. We capture the gas by using a wellbore to drill horizontally (in order to reach the fractures in the shale) to release the natural gas. It uses water pressure to create fissures in deep underground shale formations that allow oil and natural gas to flow. (API)

This technology was first used in the United States in 1947, and since then has continuously improved. For the past 60 years it has been used more safely in over a million wells. Without the use of this technology, we would lose 45% of domestic natural gas production and 17% of our oil production within 5 years. The benefits are obvious, on top of the new jobs and higher incomes we receive by transforming our energy use.

The API gave an easy to understand diagram of the benefits we gain from hydrofracking. Basically, it’ll take 70-100 days to prepare with the drilling and fracking, and 20-40 years of production we gain. People have their controversies as to whether this use of technology is hurting or helping our environment and it’s affects on our water supply. The API explains that although we have land disturbance, dust, noise, diesel exhaust, and water management disposal for a short period of time, our long-term benefits outweigh significantly. With 20-40 years of production, we benefit by reducing air pollution, reducing GHG emission, water manage and disposal, and site restoration.

“Methane concentrations in drinking water were much higher if the home was near an active gas well. We wanted to try ad separate fact from emotion”, explains scientist Robert Jackson of Duke University. People who live near homes that have been effected by the fracters complain about the quantity and quality supply of their water. Although I understand their point of view of opposing this technology, I on the other hand think it’s a great way to use our energy, since it’s so successful in the majority of our country.

Clean Planet = Happy People!

http://www.api.org/~/media/Files/Policy/Exploration/HYDRAULIC_FRACTURING_PRIMER.ashx

http://www.earthworksaction.org/issues/detail/hydraulic_fracturing

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=fracking-for-natural-gas-pollutes-water-wells

http://www.earthworksaction.org/issues/detail/hydraulic_fracturing

Make every penny count!

Let’s all be real here for a second…

This:

Or this:

The type of car you drive reflects your personality, makes you feel superior, or embarrasses you. Don’t tell me that if you had the opportunity to trade in your run down, beat up, dirty old 1990 Honda Civic for a new free 2012 Range Rover you wouldn’t do it? Being behind the wheel of a high class, high priced automobile makes you feel superior when your driving, and that’s the problem with our country right now. We go for the glitz and glam, not for the “most fuel efficient” compact car.

Take for example a Honda CR-Z two seater, a Scion iQ 37 mini compact, and a Mitsubishi i-MiEV 112 subcompact. These three cars total fuel economy range is around 37-112. These three cars are cute, sporty, stylish and fuel efficient! What’s there not to love? With all the different varieties of style, color, and size, your destined to find a match. Now on the other hand, we have those flashy, materialistic lovers (and props to you if you can offered these) your Bentley Continental GTC, Mercedes Benz CL600, and the ultimate Rolls-Royce Phanton Coupe. The three of these vehicles are all carrying a fuel economy combination of around 10…get the picture people? GET MORE FOR YOUR MONEY!

Although, I must say things are turning around, and the automobile industry has been raising the bar with promoting hybrids, plug in hybrids, diesel, flex fuel, CNG, and all other alternative fuel efficient vehicles to gain more gas mileage.  Since 2011, more then 265 models that can have 30 MPG or greater on the highway have been produced according to the www.fueleconomy.gov. By getting the most efficient vehicle, you can save up to $1400 in fuel costs each year.

“EcoDriving” is something that Auto Alliance has recently come out with to help show Americans how to reduce fuel consumption and cut carbon dioxide emissions bychanging driving habits. Amy Corsinita who is a spokeswoman for this company told HybridCars.com that, “The program helps drivers achieve the highest has mileage available from every single vehicle on the road, regardless of size and age.” This program is supposed to increase fuel economy by about 15% to car owners by educating the consumers on how to better operate and drive your vehicle.

Now…. What can YOU do to increase your gas mileage if a new hybrid purchase isn’t in your budget at the moment? There are so many little tricks and facts you can pick up on and save yourself more money than you expected, as well as helping out our atmosphere.

I hate when people say, “…I told ya so!” But I have to give my dad credit on this one: Slow down when you drive! The faster you go, the faster you’re burning your gas away. If you’re aware of the speed limit, you’ll save yourself from both a ticket as well as preserving your gas. Gas mileage tends to decrease quick at 60 mph and above, so think of it as every 5 mph you drive over 60 is basically paying an additional $.27 per gallon for gas.

Another thing; when you’re car is parked, shut off your engine! Idling can use a quarter to a half-gallon of fuel per hour varying on the engine size. When you’re driving a long distance, use a GPS to find the quickest route without getting lost and taking those extra detours, as well as using the cruise control option to maintain your speed limit. Remove any access weight you may have in your car. An extra 100 pounds can reduce your MPG by up to 2%, but is mostly affected by smaller vehicles.

Take advantage of Iphone Apps, and websites such as Gasbuddy.com to help find the nearest gas station with the lowest prices around you. Getting gas from wholesale clubs such as Bj’s, Sam’s, and even some Stop & Shop’s offer membership discounts of up to 10cents per gallon. Make every penny count!

Besides the main point of getting more gas mileage for your dollar, you’re also helping to reduce climate change. The carbon dioxide from burning gasoline is a major issue we’re dealing with in regards to global climate change. It also increases energy sustainability. Since oil is a nonrenewable resource, we need to do what we can to sustain our current rate. If we minimize our usage now, it’ll help us buy time in the future to find more sustainable alternatives.

I suggest you all watch this quick 2 minute video on tips to save money and increase your gas mileage! He’s quite comical but straight to the point 😉 http://www.5min.com/Video/What-Should-You-Know-15-Save-Money-on-Gas-34065505

Sources

http://www.hybridcars.com/gas-mileage-factors/ecodriving-real-solution0819.html

http://www.autoalliance.org/index.cfm?objectid=97D920F0-637F-11DF-BA61000C296BA163

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/driveHabits.shtml