Civilian Space Flight- At What Price?

The following is a guest post from Rob Myles, member of the Matsunami Board of Education and a contributor at Cracked.com

A long time ago, as these stories often begin, man cut his moorings with the earth and travelled the skies. Some time later, those fortunate few were chosen to pioneer the vastness that lay outside our small world, to plumb the depths of space as only science fiction novelists had done before. Now, the final frontier is opening up to the wider world, and civilian corporations are taking an interest in “space tourism”.

Of these, perhaps the best publicized is Virgin Galactic. To the potential consumer the buzz surrounding this project, the X-Prize and SpaceShipOne leading to the suitably futuristic looking SpaceShipTwo project, has turned a lot of heads, filling them with hope of a childhood dream come true in the process.

This is an easy project to believe in the feasibility of. It’s a combination of mediums, granted, but both are suitably large departures from the ancestral heritage to make them the logical next step in technological development, enabling us to take that one step further.

Click here to read more>>

Stingray Update

“A Florida official said the woman died when she hit her head on the boat deck.”

Dear CNN,

I told you so.

- Science Says

From CNN.com:

The accident happened off the coast of Marathon Key, in the Florida Keys about an hour’s drive south of Miami. The woman, who was with her husband and children, was taken to the Mariner Hospital in Tavernier, where she was pronounced dead.

Pino said he had seen rays leap into the air, but added, “it’s very rare for them to collide with objects.”

The spotted-eagle ray weighed about 75 to 80 pounds and had a six-foot wingspan, said Pino.

The Monroe County Sherriff’s Office has full photos of the boat and ray up online here

EDIT 3/21/08: The medical examiner officially ruled the woman’s death an accident, and the head trauma caused from hitting her head on the boat as the official cause of death. Additionally, one detail left out of the original reports was that the boat was moving at the time of the accident.

“Judy Kay Zagorski was sitting in the front seat of a boat traveling 25 mph on Thursday when she was struck in the face…Authorities say Zagorski was not stung by the ray’s barb.”

I don’t remember too many of those physics calculations, but 75 pounds of ray at 25 miles per hour is a lot of force.

Stingrays Aren’t Out To Get You!

Photo by tornicoqui

Let’s make this abundantly clear:

• Stingrays do not attack people

• Stingrays do not eat people

• Stingrays get their name from the defensive barb on their tail

There are stories on the front-page at Yahoo and CNN.com about a woman being killed by a stingray in Florida today. Why is this “Headline News?” Well, a) because of the Crocodile Hunter’s tragic death, and b) because headlines like “OFFICIALS: Woman killed by stingray! Updated 23 Minutes Ago!” get lots of clicks. It’s already CNN.com’s Most Popular article today.

This is misleading: even the toned-down “Woman killed after stingray strikes her” paints an unfair portrait of what happened here. Open the article, and you’ll find out that this woman was not STUNG by a stingray - a jumping stingray smacked her in the face! More specifically, an eagle ray, likely spooked by their boat, jumped out of the water and happened to collide with the unfortunate woman from Michigan.

However, the unfortunate woman from Michigan didn’t die because she got hit by a stingray - she died because she got hit in the face with a 75 pound fish! It’s not even clear yet whether the woman was killed by the initial impact, the fall onto the boat, or hitting her head on the floor. I’m fairly skeptical, though, about how a stingray flying towards someone could still manage to sting them, as the article implies.

I wish that CNN and Yahoo would be more responsible when they report something like this, because there was no shortage of stories about people wantonly killing random stingrays after Steve Irwin’s death, as if all of a sudden the ocean wasn’t safe. The stingrays have always been there before, and if you haven’t heard about people getting stung before, that’s because it’s usually not a big deal. If you lived on the bottom of the ocean and got stepped on every day, you’d probably want to defend yourself too!

As long as you’re not chasing a stingray close enough to get stabbed in the heart, there’s not a whole lot these animals can do to hurt you. Please don’t overreact, and please don’t blame the animal for its natural reaction. This woman’s death is a tragedy and I feel bad for everyone around her, but I also feel bad that the news coverage isn’t about how sad this freak accident is, but instead about getting page-hits through fear-mongering.

 

The Car That Could Change the World

This, ladies and gentlemen, truly is the future.

If you’re like me, you’ve kept a close eye on alternative-energy cars over the years, chuckling at the advent of “hybrid” SUVs and watching, stunned but pleasantly surprised, as the Prius’ sales and profile spiked through the roof.

Then again, you’ve also been wondering when this sort of car would find itself some sort of mainstream appeal - as much as I love the Prius (you know it’s cute) and what its success has meant for the alternative engineering industry, let’s face it - it looks a little bit like a bug.

That’s the only problem I see with the Prius: what’s cute and funky to me is not everyone’s idea of a cool car. In fact, it seems like the public perception of green cars, whether this is a fair representation or not, is of a funny little car that must have been plucked right off the Autobahn or out of a Mr. Bean skit.

The Prius has certainly carved out a niche for itself, but if we’re serious about making green cars a fixture of American family life (and I think that’s an essential step for any realistic environmental planner) we need to make it a car that people want to drive - I always swore we wouldn’t really be entering the future until we had electric pick-up trucks and roaring muscle-cars.

I’m beginning to think we’re halfway there:

Courtesy of AutoBlogGreen

 

According to an article on Yahoo, production begins today on the Tesla Roadster, the future of high-end automobiles. Produced by the cleverly-named Tesla Motors (after electrical pioneer Nikola Tesla, humorously played by David Bowie in The Prestige) the Tesla Roadster is the first of a new breed of commercial car: not only is it entirely electric, but it sneers past your Prius at an astounding top speed of 125 miles per hour.

 

That might not set any land-speed records, but unless your name is Andretti, there’s no reason left to say you can’t see yourself behind the wheel of an eco-friendly automobile.

 

Courtesy of AutoBlogGreen

 

Exciting news indeed, especially for the cultural potential - with a price tag of $100,000 dollars and a manufacturer that produces “maybe” 2 cars a week, this won’t be fake-rare like the ubiquitous iPhone. However, the real value of the Tesla Roadster is just how much it can do to change people’s perceptions about what it means to drive a clean-energy car. I don’t think anyone can take a look at a car like this:

 

Courtesy of AutoBlogGreen

 

and still dismissively suggest that it’s “quirky” or a “conscience item” - there’s plenty to lust after outside the engine compartment, and I don’t think the average American would even know the difference at first-sight. The Tesla Roadster is the definition of a luxury item, and that’s why this is the car that could change the world. Green may finally be the “new black.”

Site Update

Sorry that thing have been quiet around here lately - I’ve been embroiled in an epic battle with the final research paper of my college career, and needless to say, it’s a doozy. Many sleepless nights (I try not to sleep too much during the day either) later, I’m getting pretty darn  close to finishing this thing off.

This means you’ll be seeing a lot  more content on this page in the coming weeks. It also means I’ll be able to take the time to expand into some broader topics, in keeping, of course, with the general theme. Thanks for keeping an eye on Science Says and rest assured that there’ll be much more going on in the near future, plus some fairly exciting site news *fingers crossed* in the next week.

How Green is Your St. Patty’s Day Beer?

 

 

Photo by Disturbedd

Brendan Koerner from Slate.com has got a great article up about the environmental economics of beer, in light of the upcoming St. Patrick’s Day, commonly associated with the drink. (and green-colored beer at that) The irony of that is that many common beers have enormous carbon footprints, based mainly on the containers that they’re served in and the how far those containers travel. Here’s the skinny on it:

Materials:

Aluminum or Glass? (Cans or Bottles?)

• Aluminum harvesting requires an immense amount of damage because of the mining needed for the minerals that go into it
• Glass is made from the much more common, much more cleanly-harvested silica

Advantage: Glass - it’s more common, meaning that it’s found and produced closer to home, and easier to gather, meaning there’s less damaged to the Earth in the process

Transport:

Does it matter where is it from?

• A lot:

• materials that are harvested close to home, and bottles and cans that are manufactured close to home, make much less of a carbon footprint than the alternative (the carbon footprint is the amount of oil, coal or other fossil fuels that is required to make an item and transport it from Point A to Point B)

• Aluminum has to be harvested from far-off places, especially if you live in the United States - in fact, if you live in the US or Europe, the grand majority of the metals and minerals you use come from Australia, the rest from Africa and Asia. That’s a long way to carry rocks to make a beer can.

• Glass can be harvested close to home, but what happens if it’s not? Glass can be made and manufactured close to home, and your beer can be bottled there, but what happens if it’s not? Carrying heavy glass bottles across any distance, with or without beer, uses a lot more energy than a can of beer, no matter how far away the minerals came from.

The Problem:

It’s complicated

Like many other environmental issues in 2008. Our society isn’t hasn’t reached the place yet where it’s easy to make environmentally-healthy decisions - in fact, capitalism and globalization often make it harder and more expensive to do or buy what you might think is right.

• If your beer is made close to home: Glass is better for the environment

• If you’re drinking imported beer? Brewed, bottled or canned overseas? The cans cost the planet a lot less to get to your cup.

The Verdict:

Drink a pint from the tap!

You shouldn’t be drinking alone anyways. A beer from the tap, transported in a reusable container, poured into a reusable glass, is absolutely the best way to go. The products are manufactured once, transported in bulk, and poured straight from there straight into your glass. Quick and easy.So this St. Patrick’s Day, if you’re feeling the Luck of the Irish and want to celebrate, but are worried about hurting the planet in the process, take a few of your best mates to the local Irish pub (the Irish build one in every neighborhood) and kick back a pint with a clear conscience.

Brendan Koerner really hit the nail on the head, especially with his substantial histories of the making of glass bottles and aluminum cans. He’s got a lot more fun facts in this article, especially about the fate of all those Heineken bottles. (yes, you!) It’s a great article and it’s worth a look, so take my word for it and check it out! The link is at the bottom of this page.

The funny thing, when I stop and take a look at it, is that most of the common beers we drink in the states are made far, far away and bottled nearby, but many not locally enough, and certainly not all.

For instance, a quick survey of the nearest college dorm recycling bin, shows the grand majority of the bottled beer here in Los Angeles has been brewed and bottled in Germany, then imported through Chicago - glass bottles, full of beer, shipped across Europe, the Atlantic Ocean, the St. Lawrence passage, the Great Lakes, then trucked across the continental US. That’s a long way, and a lot of carbon fuel!

The best in the bunch, from Anheiser-Busch, was still brewed and bottled in the middle of the country, and trucked thousands of miles to get out here. California brews a lot of local beers, but a lot of them are boutique items, and college kids are on a tight budget. Yet again, environmentally responsible consumption is a priviledge, and not always an easy choice.

Source: http://www.slate.com/id/2186219/

Subscribe to Science Says

How Preservation Kills the Baby Seals

Photo by Observe the Banana

Yahoo has got a new Buzz article up about all the baby seals that will die this season as a result of global warming. The World Wildlife Fund is reporting out of Germany that the loss of arctic ice will severely hamper the babies’ development, but the fight over the Arctic circle is just as much to blame.

It’s true that arctic ice is vitally important in the first few months of life, but that’s true for many mammals living there - not just the cuddly and cute ones. Polar bears, seals, and arctic foxes all use ice-dens and their mother’s heat for shelter while they wait for warmer weather and develop the layers of fat and fur needed to survive in that climate. This is especially important for the seals, whose blubber is the only thing insulating them against the icy waters.

6 Reasons Not to Kill Big Hammerheads

 

Sharks make hot news, and CNN is there: a 14 foot Great Hammerhead was killed today off of Florida.

So why not be excited ? For one, I don’t get so hyped up about “Look what big animal we can kill!” in 2008, but killing a shark is sensitive  in particular.

There are a number of factors that make shark species so delicate (many species have lost 50% of their population in the last 10 years).

Here are a couple of the big ones:

Read the rest of this entry »

In Defense of Shark Diving

Photo by Mark Gustin

EDITOR’S NOTE: It is my honor to present a guest post from Andy Murch of ElasmoDiver.com, in response to my post on Safe Shark Diving

 

I would like to weigh in on the criticism being directed at Jim Abernathy.

 

Before I became a shark photographer I went mountaineering quite a bit. It is a very different discipline but it makes an interesting analogy for the types of shark encounters that one can have.

Read the rest of this entry »

Safe Shark Diving

CNN has a video piece up right now examining the safety and legality of shark dives outside of shark cages. An Austrian tourist bled to death in the Bahamas after being bitten in the thigh by a bull shark during a scuba dive, surrounded by bloody bait.

CNN wants to know who would go in the water without a cage in the first place - well, lots of people, actually, this author included. The questions that have arisen about shark diving are valid, but are not about whether we should go in the water with sharks, but how we should go about it. Cage-free diving is not inherently dangerous - even the diving authority interviewed in the piece acknowledged that he runs cage-free dives himself, albeit with less aggressive species.

Here are a couple of points to consider:

Read the rest of this entry »