On the heels on my last post on California water politics…KQED QUEST just released a radio segment on the Schwarzenegger proposal to build new dams and a canal. It’s an excellent peek into the complicated issue of water politics, especially within the dynamic of water rich Northern California and people rich Southern California.
By now, you have probably seen the ads. California has a serious water crisis. A conglomerate of 450 local water agencies have sponsored an 8 week, $9 million ad campaign. The agencies claim there is serious impending water crisis looming in California. And scientists…..agree. Shocking that politics and science agree for once.
The crisis argument arises from a few factors: expected population growth, climate change affects, infrastructure susceptibility to earthquakes, and restrictions on the Delta due to endangered species. All are real factors, but best estimates indicate effects will start to manifest by 2030, except for the Delta issue.
I believe many agencies are lobbying for more water access/storage in the wake of the federal ruling on the Delta. Covering their asses if you will. There is an urgency around this issue that indicates the agencies desperation. The governor did recently propose a $9 billion bond measure for more dam construction along with infrastructure improvements. The measure will not make it onto the February ballot, more than likely hitting the November 2008 ballot. So in the end, the decision will be left to the public. In that way, education about the issue is tantamount.
Takeaway:
Hey California, we do have an impending water shortage. The biggest factor is not climate change or earthquakes or delta smelt, but expected population growth. No matter the conservation strategy, we don’t have the water right now. In the end, a bond will be passed diverting more water from california river’s and streams to make up for the needs…..and that’s too bad. This is a mega opportunity for you to get involved with our most precious resource.
A very popular methodology for carbon reduction is forcing more into the ocean. Many scientists support the testing of algal bloom growth in the oceans. Other private companies are researching iron fertilization, a process used to promote plankton growth in the ocean. Yet other groups even look toward direct deep sea carbon injection, a process where CO2 is captured and then pushed (generally via big ass tube) into deep ocean or even ocean floor.
Rather than explore each individual idea in this post, I’ll address the overall movement.
According to estimates, the carbon load in the deep ocean is about 50 times of that in the atmosphere (38,100 vs 750 GigaTons of Carbon). The time it takes for changes in the atmosphere to equilibrate is estimated in the hundreds to thousands of year ranges. Many of the above methodologies use that estimation as a basis for the research.
The rub: ocean chemistry is widely misunderstood. Concerns range from development of toxic algal growths to harming deep sea marine level. In fact, many scientists including Dan Kammen (DtaS speaker on Biofuels) share that concern. Climos, a local San Francisco climate startup, has proposed a set of standards for private entities and researchers when it comes to any ocean fertilization project.
Over the next few days, I’ll be writing on the specifics of many of these issues.
Takeaway:
There is 38,100 gigatons of momentum for carbon sequestration in the ocean. There needs to be some significant oversight on any setup as mistakes could be costly. That being said, the numbers show promise here, with upwards of 50% of anthropogenic carbon being mitigated via these processes.
Joe Eskenazi of SF Weekly sat down with Melissa Capria, our August speaker, a couple weeks back to discuss local global warming issues. The article again mentions the 1 meter sea level rise by 2100 and the subsequent possible infrastructure damage estimated at $48 billion. The main areas of concern, the sewage treatment/drinking water infrastructure. The article also points out how the decrease in city population has contribute greatly to the reduction in GHGs (we’re at 9.2 now vs 9.7 in 2000).
Takeaway
The article is fun and witty, but doesn’t add much to the conversation. I’m mentioning it mainly since lots of people read SF weekly here locally. Just as at the cafe, there is strong concern in meeting the 2012 target. Without STRONG personal buy in, we ain’t getting there.
Monday, November 17th, 2008 7-9 PMWhere:Atlas Cafe What: Physics for Future Presidents: The Nuclear Reaction Who: Richard Muller, UC Berkeley and LBL The Deets:As we head into a new presidency, much of the debate has been centered on one word: Nuclear. Nuclear terrorism, nuclear power, nuclear proliferation, the mispronunciation of the word nuclear...all have been fervently discussed. But When it comes to the nuclear discussion, isn't the science a key component?
We'll discuss the difference between a Uranium bomb, a Plutonium bomb, and a Hydrogen bomb, the real dangers of nuclear waste, and the danger of radiation. Consider it a crash course on nuclear physics that the next president would appreciate.
Here are some nuggets to chew on:
• Of those killed in the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear attacks, less than 2% died of cancer induced by the radiation.
• 1 square mile of sunlight with current solar cells would provide as much peak power as a nuclear power plant.
• Plutonium is a thousand times less poisonous than botulism toxin, the active ingredient in botox.
• Purified uranium is hard to get, but easy to design into a bomb. Plutonium is relatively easy to get, but hard to make into a bomb. So different kinds of nuclear bombs are difficult to make, but for different reasons. Terrorists are unlikely to be able to make one; the bigger danger is that they could buy one.
Richard A. Muller is professor of physics at the University of California, Berkeley (and my former physics teacher!). He is a past winner of the MacArthur Fellowship. He is the author of Physics for Future Presidents, based on his renowned course for non-science students.
Science in Action Events Science in Action is a series of tours, trips, and hikes intended to put you in the middle of active science in the Bay Area.
If you're interested in attending, send me an email.
November 1st & 2nd What:
Wonderfest - The Bay Area Festival of Science Cost: FREE Details:
WonderFest is the the Bay Area festival of Science. On November 1st & 2nd, there will be free science discussions, art, comedy, and trivia events at both UC Berkeley and Stanfurd. The lineup is jam packed with some of the best talent both university have to offer. You can’t beat the price or the quality.
Here are my picks:
• Saturday 11/1 8:00 pm Does Civilization Have a Promising Energy Future?
• Sunday 11/2 1:30 pm Science Laughs (science comedy)
• Sunday 11/2 2:30 pm Are Dreams Psychologically Significant?
• Sunday 11/2 4:00 pm What Science Must Our Leaders Understand?
