I blogged a while back about a concept called "Pop-Up Organizations," where dynamic, virtual organizations would organize using the Internet in order to deliver a product or service, or otherwise meet a need, and then disband. It was a concept that was predicted in one of the many forecasts that are published each year. Related to that concept is the concept of "cloud labor," where virtual workers come together to address a specific problem or deliver a service via the Internet.
The cloud labor concept was written about in the article, "Innovation: The relentless rise of the digital worker," by Justin Mullins and published January 15, 2010 on the New Scientist Web site. You can read more about it at:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18395-innovation-the-relentless-rise-of-the-digital-worker.html
Needless to say, the pop-up organization is taking form in realtime.
Showing posts with label predictions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label predictions. Show all posts
Monday, January 18, 2010
Saturday, January 2, 2010
IBM's Next Five in Five
It's that time of year again. IBM has published their end of 2009 "Next Five in Five," five innovations that will enter the commercial mainstream in the next five years that will have dramatic impact on all our lives. The five:
- We will be able to access healthcare remotely, from just about anywhere in the world
- Real-time speech translation-once a vision only in science fiction-will become the norm
- There will be a 3-D Internet
- Technologies the size of a few atoms will address areas of environmental importance
-Our mobile phones will come close to reading our minds
Read the full list at:
http://www.ibm.com/ibm/ideasfromibm/us/five_in_five/010807/index1.shtml
What say you?
- We will be able to access healthcare remotely, from just about anywhere in the world
- Real-time speech translation-once a vision only in science fiction-will become the norm
- There will be a 3-D Internet
- Technologies the size of a few atoms will address areas of environmental importance
-Our mobile phones will come close to reading our minds
Read the full list at:
http://www.ibm.com/ibm/ideasfromibm/us/five_in_five/010807/index1.shtml
What say you?
Thursday, February 12, 2009
The Power of the Social Net: Twestival
There is a lot of discussion these days about social networking sites rapidly gaining in popularity and displacing traditional "post and view" sites that have been around for almost a decade. This "social net"--as I refer to the collective social networks, applications, and tools--could be just the next fade or it could be the next revolution of the Internet. Statistics show Facebook growing faster than MySpace and in the process, gaining a significant user base among adults. That counts because adults buy stuff and generally have more disposable income than the typical teen (disposable is a relative term in these down economic times, but I digress). Social sites such as LinkedIn are seeing an explosion of growth because 1) people are unemployed and are looking to network for that next job; 2) people are employed but don't know for how long; or 3) Boy Scout/Girl Scout-types have no idea where the economy is going and want to be prepared.
On the surface, these sites provide an easy method for people to connect; exchange messages, photos, and interests; and generally stay in touch. In this sense, social networks are displacing the telephone, snailmail, and increasingly, email. However, there is a deeper level to social networks.
Humans are social animals. We like to socialize, to talk, and to do things together. Without it, we are isolated and alone. Social networks address this problem--not as well as in-person activities, but better than alternatives such as the phone or email. And this is where the second level of social networks come in--they are attempting to substitute for some in-person activities. For example, many social networks allow the user to identify connections who are online and to initiate an interactive chat with them. They aren't to the level of Skype, but it's only a matter of time.
Second, social networks are starting to integrate collaboration tools that also enable interactive communication in a number of ways beyond simple chatting. For example, LinkedIn has integrated huddle.com's collaboration tools. As such, it acts an an ad hoc collaboration/discussion board. Both LinkedIn and Facebook have their groups a user can join and become associated with people with a similar interest. Taking a slightly different approach, Google Docs allows interactive viewing and editing of documents. It's as if a group were in a room, simultaneously writing on a whiteboard. While Google's more interactive capabilities have not been integrated into more traditional social network sites, it is only a matter of time.
For a population that has migrated far from their home, these social sites provide the next best thing to being there. With the addition of Skype type capabilities and Google Doc capabilities in the near future, it will almost BE the same as being there.
Finally, there's Twitter, a microblogging service that allows a user to publicly post anything on their mind--as long as it's done in 140 characters or less. Twitter is one of the fastest-growing social networks. While it is technically a micro-blogging service, it is considered a social networks because individuals can subscribe or "follow" people of interest. As a result, the follower groups of an individual tend to form social message interchanges. The network grows because anyone can see the "tweets" or message sent and anyone can follow anyone else. (There are exceptions, but generally this is the way it works.) Twitter has been used to simply let people know what they are doing and to move people to action. For example, a couple of months back an individual was arrested in Egypt and he tweeted for help. The protest was overwhelming and helped to gain the individual's release.
Three recent examples demonstrate the power of Twitter. First, a couple of weeks ago, a passenger plane made an emergency landing in the Hudson River in New York City. A Twitterer on a passenger ferry which immediately diverted to pick up survivors took a picture of the plane and passengers in the water and tweeted it. It was the first on-the-scene photograph from where the plane went down. Over the next several hours, that photo was re-tweeted around the world and picked up by news stations. Even the individual who sent the original tweet photo was interviewed!
Second, Twitter has become so popular that it has its own awards ceremony--The Shorty Awards. Every year, Twitter members vote on who they think are the best tweeters in a variety of categories. The awards ceremony, held this week, played to an overflow crowd and news of the even was again picked up in the popular press.
Third, Twitterers have formed together to raise funds for a worthy cause, clean water worldwide. The gain notice, the cause has taken on a life of its own, now known as Twestival. What started out as a simple fundraising and fun Twitter meetup has grown to organized Twitter meetups in some 175 cities worldwide. Their goal: Raise $1 million for clean water projects in underserved areas of the world. All indications are the Twestival will be a huge success. Even for those not able to attend, people will be tweeting live from the various sites. For the new folks, think of it as a worldwide Rave. For the oldtimers, it's a worldwide happening. Either way, it demonstrates how a social network can mobilize the masses. With that said, I am off to the Dallas Twestival.
What are your thoughts?
On the surface, these sites provide an easy method for people to connect; exchange messages, photos, and interests; and generally stay in touch. In this sense, social networks are displacing the telephone, snailmail, and increasingly, email. However, there is a deeper level to social networks.
Humans are social animals. We like to socialize, to talk, and to do things together. Without it, we are isolated and alone. Social networks address this problem--not as well as in-person activities, but better than alternatives such as the phone or email. And this is where the second level of social networks come in--they are attempting to substitute for some in-person activities. For example, many social networks allow the user to identify connections who are online and to initiate an interactive chat with them. They aren't to the level of Skype, but it's only a matter of time.
Second, social networks are starting to integrate collaboration tools that also enable interactive communication in a number of ways beyond simple chatting. For example, LinkedIn has integrated huddle.com's collaboration tools. As such, it acts an an ad hoc collaboration/discussion board. Both LinkedIn and Facebook have their groups a user can join and become associated with people with a similar interest. Taking a slightly different approach, Google Docs allows interactive viewing and editing of documents. It's as if a group were in a room, simultaneously writing on a whiteboard. While Google's more interactive capabilities have not been integrated into more traditional social network sites, it is only a matter of time.
For a population that has migrated far from their home, these social sites provide the next best thing to being there. With the addition of Skype type capabilities and Google Doc capabilities in the near future, it will almost BE the same as being there.
Finally, there's Twitter, a microblogging service that allows a user to publicly post anything on their mind--as long as it's done in 140 characters or less. Twitter is one of the fastest-growing social networks. While it is technically a micro-blogging service, it is considered a social networks because individuals can subscribe or "follow" people of interest. As a result, the follower groups of an individual tend to form social message interchanges. The network grows because anyone can see the "tweets" or message sent and anyone can follow anyone else. (There are exceptions, but generally this is the way it works.) Twitter has been used to simply let people know what they are doing and to move people to action. For example, a couple of months back an individual was arrested in Egypt and he tweeted for help. The protest was overwhelming and helped to gain the individual's release.
Three recent examples demonstrate the power of Twitter. First, a couple of weeks ago, a passenger plane made an emergency landing in the Hudson River in New York City. A Twitterer on a passenger ferry which immediately diverted to pick up survivors took a picture of the plane and passengers in the water and tweeted it. It was the first on-the-scene photograph from where the plane went down. Over the next several hours, that photo was re-tweeted around the world and picked up by news stations. Even the individual who sent the original tweet photo was interviewed!
Second, Twitter has become so popular that it has its own awards ceremony--The Shorty Awards. Every year, Twitter members vote on who they think are the best tweeters in a variety of categories. The awards ceremony, held this week, played to an overflow crowd and news of the even was again picked up in the popular press.
Third, Twitterers have formed together to raise funds for a worthy cause, clean water worldwide. The gain notice, the cause has taken on a life of its own, now known as Twestival. What started out as a simple fundraising and fun Twitter meetup has grown to organized Twitter meetups in some 175 cities worldwide. Their goal: Raise $1 million for clean water projects in underserved areas of the world. All indications are the Twestival will be a huge success. Even for those not able to attend, people will be tweeting live from the various sites. For the new folks, think of it as a worldwide Rave. For the oldtimers, it's a worldwide happening. Either way, it demonstrates how a social network can mobilize the masses. With that said, I am off to the Dallas Twestival.
What are your thoughts?
Monday, February 2, 2009
Millions of Books, but No Card Catalog
The title of this post is from a tweet (Twitter message) from a source that I follow. However, it succinctly summarizes some of the evolving trends in information management in general, and library sciences in particular. In this case, the title is referring to an article in The New York Times titled, "Some Fear Google’s Power in Digital Books," which describes Google's activities related to digitizing the world's written record. While issues of copyright, fair use, and author protection remain issues, it demonstrates the amount of effort going into the subject and some of the proposed solutions. That the written record will be digitized is not in doubt. The only questions are when it will occur, the technology that will be used, and what it will cost the consumer.
For more on this subject, read the original article at: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/02/technology/internet/02link.html?_r=1
What do you think about this subject?
For more on this subject, read the original article at: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/02/technology/internet/02link.html?_r=1
What do you think about this subject?
Monday, January 26, 2009
Tipping Point 2009: Part 1
Predictions and prognostications are a stable at the beginning of every year. This post is a little different. The developments proposed here are all currently available and represent viable, proven technologies. The subject here is when the technology will reach a critical mass in the mainstream market, thus representing a tipping point for mass acceptance and adoption. I propose the following will have a tipping point in 2009.
A convergrnce of a poor economy; rising cable television costs; redundant pricing for bundled cable TV and Internet; improved Internet bandwidth; improved video compression; and expanded TV content available on the Internet may mean the tipping point for Internet over cable TV (and satellite TV). Add to these developments the expanded use of boxes such as the Apple TV; TVs with direct Internet connectivity, home network appliances that can stream audio and video and the tipping point appears imminant. These are no longer technologies seen at CES. Rather, the increased viewership of Hulu, iTunes downloads, and the ever increasing popularity of YouTube video content all point to a massive shift in media preference. Indeed, the proliferation of mainstream YouTube "channels" by organizations such as the Vatican only underscore the occurring shift.
You will know the tipping point has occurred when content creators begin to sue content aggregators for a piece of the action in much the same way the RIAA has gone after various music aggregators. The impact will be massive. Many local TV stations will be disintermediated. This change may actually be a saving grace for newspapers on their last legs. If the newspaper has developed an Internet presence, it might become the local source.
Another indicator of this tipping point is when local broadcasters begin (or increase) their lobby efforts to place restrictions on content origination outside a geographic area. Local broadcasters have previously been successful in these efforts resulting in limitations on satellite TV providers from providing direct east and west coast network feeds. Presently, satellite providers may only do so if the location is not serviced by a local broadcast station. Otherwise, the provider must offer the local broadcast feed. Expect this fight to move to the Internet.
What is your opinion on this subject?
A convergrnce of a poor economy; rising cable television costs; redundant pricing for bundled cable TV and Internet; improved Internet bandwidth; improved video compression; and expanded TV content available on the Internet may mean the tipping point for Internet over cable TV (and satellite TV). Add to these developments the expanded use of boxes such as the Apple TV; TVs with direct Internet connectivity, home network appliances that can stream audio and video and the tipping point appears imminant. These are no longer technologies seen at CES. Rather, the increased viewership of Hulu, iTunes downloads, and the ever increasing popularity of YouTube video content all point to a massive shift in media preference. Indeed, the proliferation of mainstream YouTube "channels" by organizations such as the Vatican only underscore the occurring shift.
You will know the tipping point has occurred when content creators begin to sue content aggregators for a piece of the action in much the same way the RIAA has gone after various music aggregators. The impact will be massive. Many local TV stations will be disintermediated. This change may actually be a saving grace for newspapers on their last legs. If the newspaper has developed an Internet presence, it might become the local source.
Another indicator of this tipping point is when local broadcasters begin (or increase) their lobby efforts to place restrictions on content origination outside a geographic area. Local broadcasters have previously been successful in these efforts resulting in limitations on satellite TV providers from providing direct east and west coast network feeds. Presently, satellite providers may only do so if the location is not serviced by a local broadcast station. Otherwise, the provider must offer the local broadcast feed. Expect this fight to move to the Internet.
What is your opinion on this subject?
Friday, December 12, 2008
IT Trends 2015
I was reading an article in CIO Insight (http://tinyurl.com/5sndqg) titled "The IT Organization, Circa 2015 - Trends." in it, the author discussed how the CIO will become more of a business manager and less of a technical manager; IT personnel will become more business savvy; IT "alignment" will continue; and how the IT organization will tend towards centralization.
In looking at IT trends (and telecommunication trends for that matter) for the past four decades, IT business focus, IT alignment, and centralization have been consistent themes. In that same period, IT personnel have actually become less business savvy, IT alignment continues to be problematic, and the contention between centralization and decentralization is as strong as it ever was.
A new generation of worker is coming into the IT workplace. These individuals are more technology aware than their predecessors, but they still tend to fall on the side of technology (geek) or business. Therefore the divide continues and will continue into 2015. While many IT organizations spent great amounts of time during the 1970s-1980s getting IT personnel to understand the business and the impact of IT on that business, most of that responsibility has been moved to the college classroom. Unfortunately, there is no substitute for on-the-job training. Therefore, the divide between IT and the business side of the house is likely to increase rather than decrease. This will only be more so as baby boomers retire ( or are ushered out the door to cut costs) and college graduates without work experience replace them.
As long as CIOs have a separate IT budget, business alignment with IT will continue to be a problem. Geeks like technology. Having the money to buy it is liked even more. The only constraint in this area is the economy. It will take several years before the IT budgets loosen up. Suffice it to say constrained budgets will result in hiring IT geeks with little real business experience. In turn, these geeks will push for the latest and greatest technology regardless of it's applicibility to the business operation.
The contention between centralization and decentralization has been around since the first group was assigned to operate the company's computer mainframe. IT has always been about centralization, standardization, and control. On the other hand, the line worker in a company's department wants the technology they want, when they want it, with the flexibility to make it do what they want it to do. Hence, IT departments bought mainframes and departments bought mini-computers; IT countered by tying mini-computers into the mainframe as a means of control and departments countered by buying PCs. IT countered by linking PCs to mainframes, this forcing standardization and security and departments countered by moving functionality to edge devices such as smartphones. Today, with cloud computing resources and applications readily available, it is possible for a department to completely bypass the IT organization. It can do so without long-term investment or long-term commitment. It remains to be seen how IT will respond and how the department will counter.
However, with the current economic situation running at least through 2009, it will be difficult for the IT department to do anything unless it reduces cost. The result will be less training on emerging technology, less investment in emerging technology, and less internal development.
What say you?
In looking at IT trends (and telecommunication trends for that matter) for the past four decades, IT business focus, IT alignment, and centralization have been consistent themes. In that same period, IT personnel have actually become less business savvy, IT alignment continues to be problematic, and the contention between centralization and decentralization is as strong as it ever was.
A new generation of worker is coming into the IT workplace. These individuals are more technology aware than their predecessors, but they still tend to fall on the side of technology (geek) or business. Therefore the divide continues and will continue into 2015. While many IT organizations spent great amounts of time during the 1970s-1980s getting IT personnel to understand the business and the impact of IT on that business, most of that responsibility has been moved to the college classroom. Unfortunately, there is no substitute for on-the-job training. Therefore, the divide between IT and the business side of the house is likely to increase rather than decrease. This will only be more so as baby boomers retire ( or are ushered out the door to cut costs) and college graduates without work experience replace them.
As long as CIOs have a separate IT budget, business alignment with IT will continue to be a problem. Geeks like technology. Having the money to buy it is liked even more. The only constraint in this area is the economy. It will take several years before the IT budgets loosen up. Suffice it to say constrained budgets will result in hiring IT geeks with little real business experience. In turn, these geeks will push for the latest and greatest technology regardless of it's applicibility to the business operation.
The contention between centralization and decentralization has been around since the first group was assigned to operate the company's computer mainframe. IT has always been about centralization, standardization, and control. On the other hand, the line worker in a company's department wants the technology they want, when they want it, with the flexibility to make it do what they want it to do. Hence, IT departments bought mainframes and departments bought mini-computers; IT countered by tying mini-computers into the mainframe as a means of control and departments countered by buying PCs. IT countered by linking PCs to mainframes, this forcing standardization and security and departments countered by moving functionality to edge devices such as smartphones. Today, with cloud computing resources and applications readily available, it is possible for a department to completely bypass the IT organization. It can do so without long-term investment or long-term commitment. It remains to be seen how IT will respond and how the department will counter.
However, with the current economic situation running at least through 2009, it will be difficult for the IT department to do anything unless it reduces cost. The result will be less training on emerging technology, less investment in emerging technology, and less internal development.
What say you?
Monday, December 1, 2008
IBM's "The Next Five in Five"
For the second year, IBM has released their "The Next Five in Five," their prognostication of technology to expect within the next five years. While some of these forecasts might actually see the light of day, don't expect all of them to be in wide adoption by the end of 2013. That is, they will be seen--some commercially--but they won't be used by the everyday person. The forecasts are:
1. Solar cells will be cheap and built into everything from glass windows to paint to asphalt. In turn this will usher in an energy revolution. Realistically, this is at least a decade away from widespread use.
2. You will be able to forecast your health through a diagnostic "crystal ball." Currently in limited use today, this forecast builds on increasingly sophisticated DNA analysis coupled with increasingly sophisticated clinical-labs-on-a-chip. Screens for certain cancers and other diseases are a real possibility in the next five years. Some are available today.
3. You will be using the "spoken Web." As IBM states, more of the world is spoken language literate than it is written word literate. Therefore, in order to reach a wider audience, the Web must go "verbal." This is already happening on a number of fronts. First, most PCs and Macs today can convert written words to voice. A number of services will allow you to access your email verbally using a phone. Second, with technologies introduced by Google, search requests can be made using the spoken word. The reverse is also true. Services such as Jott and Evernote will take spoken words and convert them to text. This trend is sure to increase over the next five years.
4. You will increasingly have access to and use "digital shopping assistants." Many are here today. For example, Ikea has terminals throughout their stores for customer use to look-up and find merchandise. A number of Web applications will allow you to comparison shop. Phone-based applications allow you to do the same thing right in the store. Finally, with location-aware phones, it is possible for an application to make shopping suggestions based on your current location. These capabilities will only get more sophisticated in the next five years.
5. You will never forget anything. A strong statement to be sure. IBM is referring to the huge number of technologies that are currently available or will be available in the next five years that will allow a person to record and recall information using spoken word, digital images, or captured screen shots. The technology will enable tagging, indexing, scheduling, and recall of virtually anything. Again, a variety of "To Do" list applications do this today on cell phones and synchronize that information so it can be accessed on the Web or many other devices. These capabilities--such as "Remember the Milk," "Jott," and "Evernote"--will become more sophisticated, accurate, and feature-rich over the next five years.
A complete description of "The Next Five in Five" can be found at:
http://www-03.IBM.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/26170.wss
What say you?
1. Solar cells will be cheap and built into everything from glass windows to paint to asphalt. In turn this will usher in an energy revolution. Realistically, this is at least a decade away from widespread use.
2. You will be able to forecast your health through a diagnostic "crystal ball." Currently in limited use today, this forecast builds on increasingly sophisticated DNA analysis coupled with increasingly sophisticated clinical-labs-on-a-chip. Screens for certain cancers and other diseases are a real possibility in the next five years. Some are available today.
3. You will be using the "spoken Web." As IBM states, more of the world is spoken language literate than it is written word literate. Therefore, in order to reach a wider audience, the Web must go "verbal." This is already happening on a number of fronts. First, most PCs and Macs today can convert written words to voice. A number of services will allow you to access your email verbally using a phone. Second, with technologies introduced by Google, search requests can be made using the spoken word. The reverse is also true. Services such as Jott and Evernote will take spoken words and convert them to text. This trend is sure to increase over the next five years.
4. You will increasingly have access to and use "digital shopping assistants." Many are here today. For example, Ikea has terminals throughout their stores for customer use to look-up and find merchandise. A number of Web applications will allow you to comparison shop. Phone-based applications allow you to do the same thing right in the store. Finally, with location-aware phones, it is possible for an application to make shopping suggestions based on your current location. These capabilities will only get more sophisticated in the next five years.
5. You will never forget anything. A strong statement to be sure. IBM is referring to the huge number of technologies that are currently available or will be available in the next five years that will allow a person to record and recall information using spoken word, digital images, or captured screen shots. The technology will enable tagging, indexing, scheduling, and recall of virtually anything. Again, a variety of "To Do" list applications do this today on cell phones and synchronize that information so it can be accessed on the Web or many other devices. These capabilities--such as "Remember the Milk," "Jott," and "Evernote"--will become more sophisticated, accurate, and feature-rich over the next five years.
A complete description of "The Next Five in Five" can be found at:
http://www-03.IBM.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/26170.wss
What say you?
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
What's Next? Take One
The end of every year brings 1) a retrospective of accomplishments and failures in the current year; and 2) a look ahead to expected developments in the coming year and the longer-term future. Herewith is my review of the past year and prognostication for the coming year.
The movement against global warming reached critical mass:
Going back to the early 1970s, issues of ecology have been discussed, debated, and slowly evolving. Anyone remember Silent Spring by Rachel Carson (1962)? How about The Population Bomb by Paul Ehrlich (1968)? These books had a profound impact on me, but concern about the environment has been slow to develop. Indeed, the current administration discounts much of the concern even today. However, over the last year, it would appear that a critical mass has been reached where individuals, institutions, and governments now understand the dire consequences and have taken steps to remediate the damage already done. Whether it will be too little, too late remains to be seen. However, from Al Gore's Nobel Peace Prize to the accords signed in Bali, action appears to be gaining strength.
Central to the environmental discussion is carbon emissions. Combustion, whether coal in a power plant, gasoline in an automobile engine, or propane gas in our bar-b-que grills, they all generate carbon emissions into the atmosphere. When released, they combine with the free oxygen in the atmosphere to form carbon dioxide (CO2). It's great for dry ice, but bad for global warming. The reason is that increased CO2 in the atmosphere creates a barrier much like the glass in a greenhouse. The result is the same as a greenhouse, increased warming. Therefore, global warming is all about CO2.
Today, the passions around reducing carbon emissions take many forms. First is a movement to make it no worse than it is today. These are the people pushing "carbon credits." Since countries are in the process of committing to limiting carbon emissions, their approach is to continue doing what they have always done, but trade their "excess" carbon emissions to a country that emits carbon at a rate less than they are allowed by treaty. These are usually underdeveloped nations where there are high levels of agriculture and free forests. The deal is that developed, carbon spewing countries will pay money to underdeveloped countries in exchange for their excess carbon credits. The approach is doomed over the long-term as underdeveloped countries become developed and need their carbon credits for themselves. The rich countries keep spewing carbon, only the they feel better about it because they can point to the offsets they have bought at the expense of some underdeveloped country. Unfortunately, this seems to be the U.S.'s approach.
A second approach is to recapture the CO2--remove it from the atmosphere. On paper, this sounds good. The problems are 1) how do you recapture it; and 2) what do you do with it? Recapturing CO2 takes energy. Most likely, that energy consumption emits carbon. Recapturing CO2 is like creating an infinite block of dry ice. It takes up room. Therefore, one solution is to bury it. Evidently, there is plenty of room for excess CO2 dry ice blocks underneath the numerous trash landfills, but above the buried spent nuclear fuel that is also being buried. Does anyone else see a problem with this?
A third approach is being investigated at Sandia National Laboratories. This one is to break down CO2 into carbon monoxide (CO) and oxygen. In turn, the CO could be reprocessed into burnable fuels, thus emitting the CO2 back into the atmosphere. Nowhere in the discussion is it mentioned how much energy will be needed to break down the CO2, but something tells me that it will involve more CO2 than will be reprocessed.
The fourth approach is evidently the least attractive--decrease CO2 emissions. This one does not require more energy. This one does not require reprocessing CO2. This one does not take the lazy path of buying off poor countries in exchange for their carbon credits. All that is required is simply don't emit CO2 in the first place. So committed are we to petroleum, internal combustion engines, coal-fired power plants, and industrial-age manufacturing processes, the U.S. evidently sees this as the least attractive option. Who knows, if we play our cards right, all our manufacturing will move overseas and we will once again become an agrarian economy. The only problem is no one will need our excess carbon credits.
The movement against global warming reached critical mass:
Going back to the early 1970s, issues of ecology have been discussed, debated, and slowly evolving. Anyone remember Silent Spring by Rachel Carson (1962)? How about The Population Bomb by Paul Ehrlich (1968)? These books had a profound impact on me, but concern about the environment has been slow to develop. Indeed, the current administration discounts much of the concern even today. However, over the last year, it would appear that a critical mass has been reached where individuals, institutions, and governments now understand the dire consequences and have taken steps to remediate the damage already done. Whether it will be too little, too late remains to be seen. However, from Al Gore's Nobel Peace Prize to the accords signed in Bali, action appears to be gaining strength.
Central to the environmental discussion is carbon emissions. Combustion, whether coal in a power plant, gasoline in an automobile engine, or propane gas in our bar-b-que grills, they all generate carbon emissions into the atmosphere. When released, they combine with the free oxygen in the atmosphere to form carbon dioxide (CO2). It's great for dry ice, but bad for global warming. The reason is that increased CO2 in the atmosphere creates a barrier much like the glass in a greenhouse. The result is the same as a greenhouse, increased warming. Therefore, global warming is all about CO2.
Today, the passions around reducing carbon emissions take many forms. First is a movement to make it no worse than it is today. These are the people pushing "carbon credits." Since countries are in the process of committing to limiting carbon emissions, their approach is to continue doing what they have always done, but trade their "excess" carbon emissions to a country that emits carbon at a rate less than they are allowed by treaty. These are usually underdeveloped nations where there are high levels of agriculture and free forests. The deal is that developed, carbon spewing countries will pay money to underdeveloped countries in exchange for their excess carbon credits. The approach is doomed over the long-term as underdeveloped countries become developed and need their carbon credits for themselves. The rich countries keep spewing carbon, only the they feel better about it because they can point to the offsets they have bought at the expense of some underdeveloped country. Unfortunately, this seems to be the U.S.'s approach.
A second approach is to recapture the CO2--remove it from the atmosphere. On paper, this sounds good. The problems are 1) how do you recapture it; and 2) what do you do with it? Recapturing CO2 takes energy. Most likely, that energy consumption emits carbon. Recapturing CO2 is like creating an infinite block of dry ice. It takes up room. Therefore, one solution is to bury it. Evidently, there is plenty of room for excess CO2 dry ice blocks underneath the numerous trash landfills, but above the buried spent nuclear fuel that is also being buried. Does anyone else see a problem with this?
A third approach is being investigated at Sandia National Laboratories. This one is to break down CO2 into carbon monoxide (CO) and oxygen. In turn, the CO could be reprocessed into burnable fuels, thus emitting the CO2 back into the atmosphere. Nowhere in the discussion is it mentioned how much energy will be needed to break down the CO2, but something tells me that it will involve more CO2 than will be reprocessed.
The fourth approach is evidently the least attractive--decrease CO2 emissions. This one does not require more energy. This one does not require reprocessing CO2. This one does not take the lazy path of buying off poor countries in exchange for their carbon credits. All that is required is simply don't emit CO2 in the first place. So committed are we to petroleum, internal combustion engines, coal-fired power plants, and industrial-age manufacturing processes, the U.S. evidently sees this as the least attractive option. Who knows, if we play our cards right, all our manufacturing will move overseas and we will once again become an agrarian economy. The only problem is no one will need our excess carbon credits.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
