January 7th, 2009

Technologies That Will Change the Worldcomment

Sometimes when the criminal antics in Washington and Wall St. are too much to bear, you just have to make a list of optimistic things. Some people may want to list how many ways love changes the world, but I go for bits of technology.

Past Examples

examples of the kind of thing I mean:
Switch from whale oil to petroleum
The rudder
Industrial steel
Aniline dye and the synthetic chemical industry
Packet switched computer networks
Semiconductors
Telegraph and so on…

Past successes look obvious from the future, but it is inherent in the nature of disruptive technologies that the really important ones solve problems that aren’t obvious at all. So by this measure whatever is not on this list could be a real whiz-bang idea. But I’ll plunge forward anyway, heedless of the cost.

Future

With the looming greenhouse gas crisis, and massive over-population, energy ideas top the list. But some think that water and good agricultural dirt may be the scarcest resources in the future.

Energy

Most obvious:
Cheap and efficient solar cells. Solar roofing, thin flexible films, solar paints and printing. Current glass-mounted cells cost roughly $700 for 100W, which is too much to pay back even with $0.15/kwh grid power. Many researchers are working on the problem, and new announcements come weekly. For example catalytic breakup of H2O.

The low-tech route: cheap parabolic solar and MIT group builds a low-cost reflector to generate steam.

infra-red solar power Useful for both daytime, and nighttime, plus waste heat recovery.

Everybody’s favorite, fusion power:
Imagine multi-megawatt generators without pollution. Commercial success is still decades away, though the Europeans and the Brits are spending on research.

One attempt to commercialize fusion.

Small energy harvesting:
Various schemes have been proposed for reclaiming small amounts of waste energy. Just as hybrid vehicles recover some motive energy from braking, we could recover energy from waste heat at air conditioners, auto engines, sun-heated paving. Medical researchers are proposing to generate electricity from body chemistry, and from movement. More radical are the self-powered sensors that harvest enough energy from their environment to forgo batteries.

Using radio signals to power sensors
Parasitic power devices.


Artificial photosynthesis

The grand pattern for harvesting solar energy is photosynthesis. An understanding of how it works could lead to genetic manipulation, and creations of more efficient bio-fuels.

One of many starts

Small scale wind power without tall towers:
Efficient wind turbines need to be well above rooflines and trees. This is a problem for residential generation. Some have proposed tethered kites and blimps. Windbelt. There are pilot projects that use harmonic vibration in wires to make small amounts of power. These do not require complex turbines or towers, and so may be useful in the third world.

Clean, sustainable bio-fuels:
Bio-fuels are already being made from all manner of organic materials, from sewage and manure, to algae, to waste agricultural products, crops, even coal. The problem is that none of these processes are truly carbon-neutral and most have other negative side-effects like disruption in agricultural markets.
Craig Ventner has announced that he will produce carbon-negative fuel from genetically-engineered bacteria that feed on CO2.

Efficient hydrogen storage:
Hydrogen is extremely clean, and good for fuel cells, even internal combustion engines, but it is devilishly difficult to store. Current technologies use extreme pressure, liquification or chemical matrices, none of which are suitable for cars. Some work is being done with ammonia and catalyzed water, as liquid fuels are ideal for transportation.

Efficient hydrogen production:
Hydrogen is extremely common, but bound up in compounds which are expensive to break down. Researchers are working on various biologic methods of producing hydrogen, similar to those for methane and the alcohols. This gets into artificial photosynthesis, where the bio-fuel research is also headed.
Here is a very interesting development.

Cheap powerful batteries:
Today’s Lithium batteries today are expensive, and extremely awkward to make into usable packs for electric cars. Researchers are working on nanotech methods of improving the weight, cost, and maintenance, though the power density may not go up much. And today’s power density isn’t high enough for gasoline-like range at low weights.

Low power lighting
Low power lighting has been with us since the 1980’s, but in the form of compact flourescents that use mercury and have an awkward package. LEDs are reaching the same efficiency, their price is coming down, and they are wondefully small and long-lived. For instance, Toshiba makes white LEDs at about 51 lumens per watt (a 100 w oldfashioned lamp is 17 lumens per watt) and is comparable with CFLs and even with the best gas discharge lights like automotive HID.
Cree may be even better.
More data.

Materials

You can argue that much of the quest for new materials is just the flip side of the quest for cheaper energy. After all, the problem with current materials is that they are too heavy or they require too much energy to mine, process, or machine. But Nanotechnologists may also claim that they are making materials that do things that couldn’t be done at all before. There are two basic patterns for new materials: lighter-stronger-cheaper-less corrosion, and chemically or electrically active.

Cheap wiring:
Electrical wiring is almost exclusively copper. It is expensive and environmentally unclean in production, prone to corrosion, heavy, and inelastic. A cheap, elastic, conductive alternative could save money and weight in all kinds of machines.

High temperature superconductors:
(see cheap wiring)
Transmission wires for the electrical grid that have little to no resistance at room temperature.

Smart mulch:
An agricultural mulch that generates electricity from sunlight to power irrigation pumps, and controls moisture loss, rain penetration, insects, and diseases.

Structural composites:
Composites to substitute for aluminum and steel, with less weight, more elasticity, more corrosion resistance, lower manufacturing costs, Carbon fiber and its relatives already hit some of these points, but it is inelastic and very expensive as a material and in the manufacturing process. Amory Lovin’s Rocky Mountain Institute has been developing a carbon-reinforced plastic that can be mass-produced.
Here’s a patent.

Spider silk:
Spider silk is famously the strongest fiber known. It is also bio-degradable. Various genetic engineering and nanotech approaches are being used to copy or duplicate it in industrial form. Tensile strength is one of the most important qualities in hundreds of products, from tires to structural composites to cables and ropes, so success here will make all manner of light, strong products available.

Resources

Water purification and desalinization:
The third world especially will need small, cheap, low-energy ways to clean water for drinking and irrigation. Global warming changes are accelerating damage done by over-pumping and polluting.
Deka generator/purifier

Farming without soil degradation:
The Romans knew how to do it, but failed to execute. So too the Mayans and virtually every other agricultural civilization. Soil is produced naturally from rock, but the process is much slower than the erosion cuased by bad tillage, and the ecologic depletion caused by hyper-cultivating monocultures.

Robots

The harder problems in robotics - machine vision, autonomy, voice recognition and speech synthesis are finally yielding to sustained research. ( see jawfish ) The first widespread use of mobile robots is in the military, where the cost equation is very favorable. Surely just as cheap IEDs defeat expensive Humvees in Iraq, there will be a tidal wave of cheap, disposable, attack robots used against expensive complex and human targets. I can’t see any good coming out of this prospect, but I can see disruptive change.

But civilian robotics could restore some manufacturing to first-world countries, making supply-chains shorter, and re-invigorating the economy. But don’t expect a good house-cleaning bot any time soon.

Medicine

There may be more innovation coming in health and medicine than all the other fields listed combined, and so I’ll just focus an a couple that might have very-wide reaching effects.

Brain science:
Suddenly, teams of biologists, physicists, doctors, and engineers are building an empirical science of the how the brain works. While the anecdotal guesses of Freud are long behind us, understanding of even the most basic brain traits is a long way ahead. At least we know and agree that we still don’t understand very much, but we do know some things about brain performance. It’s not unreasonable to think that great advances in brain-drugs and brain-training are possible, leading to greater happiness and intelligence, however unmeasurable. Simply learning to control our metabolism to keep neurons strong and fat low would be a huge boon in the developed world. The dark side is also always there, though, development of these drugs will also target addiction pathways and abuse.

Long range birth control:
Pure Speculation Department- if the political will existed, use of cheap, long lasting implantable birth control would be a huge boon. We seem so close to this, and yet we still can’t have programs that pay girls to avoid pregnancy.

Who’s holding up the train?

What’s stopping all this innovation? In some cases nothing, for instance, the cost of petroleum is now high enough to create a bio-fuel industry. Lack of capital and researchers may hinder many projects, though venture capital is finding its way into many of these ideas because the commercial prospects are huge.

But there are many technical solutions that require infrastructure changes, or market regulation, or temporary subsidy. There are many powerful entrenched Luddites who deny the science of global warming out of ignorance or for political ends. American governmental capital has been re-routed into war in the oil-fields for more than five years, and now into the Wall St. bail-out. Many solutions require global cooperation, which is increasingly difficult across the developed vs developing vs undeveloped divides. In short, while our mechanical and chemical and computing skills increase every year, our human skills and institutions barely change. And the very worst of all the human problems, over-population, is not up for discussion in the fastest-growing parts of the world.

Over-population is like a rising flood that will eventually negate the ability of third-world countries to develop, and will continue to plague first-world countries with intractable immigration issues.

So the technology that is going nowhere is human-management. We don’t seem to be much better at making group decisions based on rationality than we were as cavemen or even chimps. And our innate aggression has been outrun by our technical ability to make weapons. The coming robot revolution in the military may make that dilemma even worse.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

The Spawning Ground of the New Know-Nothings

Beware the apprenticeship of your politicians: its lessons will follow them to Washington.

Politicians who grew up in the sterile suburbs are bringing their slash-and-burn practice to Washington. It’s no wonder they treat the public weal as if it were an ATM with their name on it.

It’s been obvious for quite a while that the Gingrich and Reagan revolutions brought with them a host of Republicans who weren’t just small-government free-market libertarians like the old school, but who doubt that government does anything worth managing. These are not the tuxedoed club members of the Yale aristocracy, these are exterminators, beauty queens, and Jaycees. They are quoting Limbaugh not Adam Smith, and wearing JC Penney, not Brooks Brothers.

see this article in Harper’s by Tom Frank for a reference…

Their attitude can be seen in numerous examples of hackery and inefficiency in the Bush administration, from overtly political appointments at Justice to hack-placement at FEMA, to re-writing science at EPA. The Katrina relief disaster was directly related to the assumption that everything FEMA did was just window-dressing. So too with the management of the economy, where banking regulation was seen during the Reagan administration and again during the Bush administration as a feeble and ridiculous governmental gesture which shouldn’t be allowed to interfere with the mighty hand of the market. Of course the mighty hand of huge contributions, to both parties, also had a lot to do with the non-existent oversight.

groverboy..Grover Norquist

Grover Norquist, owner of “…I’ll drown government in the bathtub,” is the titular leader of this gang. Grover’s gang seems to look at the gigantic federal budget, and the enormous federal workforce and see only opportunities for looting, and expendable clutter. Never mind that whole industries like defense and aerospace depend on federal spending, and whole states like Alaska and Wyoming would collapse without federal subsidies. Few sitting governors or mayors or county supervisors are included in this mass useless-government delusion. Real governmental executives, as opposed to legislators, spend their time making sure trash gets picked up, sewers run, and policemen get paid. Yet another hurricane has hit the Gulf Coast, and I am guessing there are no anti-government-spending politicians in Galveston right now.

Like creationists, who think they can brush off the science behind biology but still live in the luxury created by science, these modern barbarians think that ships will dock, planes will fly them home, and trucks will deliver bananas for their morning Froot-Loops, without government planning and funding. It’s a risible world-view, but then why is it so common and where does it come from?

ikey fema
Flooding after Hurricane Ike Unusable formaldehyde-laden Fema Trailers - AP

So whence cometh the notion that government is not only wasteful, it can be wasted? I’ve an idea I’d like to try out on you.

Assertions:
In recent years the vast majority of US residential growth has happened in new suburbs and ex-urbs.

Guess which picture is in which state: Is it Texas, Kansas, California, or New York?
ny nowhere
kan cali

These ex-urban bedroom communities are built by large developers of residential tracts and shopping malls. Streets, stop signals, sidewalks, storm drains and the like are built by the developers as part of their project. Local political campaigns are almost entirely funded by developers, and builders, and sometimes retailers like Walmart that want to build and get tax deals. Often fire and police services are provided by the county, schools by a non-contiguous school district, and others services are minimal and frequently funded by federal drug or terror grants.

The overwhelming political culture of these no-there-there places is developer dollars buying the local pols.

Pattern:
So a young wannabe politician in one of these interchangeable non-communities sees very little buck-stoppage, a lot of public and private money changing hands and some slapdash wealth generated. There is hardly any adult supervision as the suburb grows into an incorporated city, the years tick over and tawdry strip malls decay as newer ones are built, and everybody puts off the day when streets and infrastructure have to be rebuilt.

No wonder they think government is useless. These non-cities contribute nothing but consumption to the economy, they are built on un-planned growth, with no plan to fund police and schools and parks for the future, and they will wither and dry up when commuting costs get too high. Getting elected in these suburbs is a matter of taking the right money, and not rocking the boat. There is no incentive to call for beautification, or planning, or conservation for the future - that sounds like taxes to the voters who moved there to get away from all that. There are no universities there, no orchestras, no headquarters, no museums, often no agriculture. Local jobs are largely minimum wage retail for immigrants and teenagers. Medical care and new construction may well be the biggest businesses.

So is it really surprising that politicians who cut their milk teeth on the school boards and city councils of big-box mall America, think infrastructure, economic management, diplomacy, and even compassion are vestigial gestures?

I’d like to see somebody test this theory. I can name three pols who fit: Sarah Palin, Elton Galleghy of Ventura CA, Dana Rohrbacher of Orange County CA.

I wonder how many other scorched-earth Republicans come from the empty suburbs?


[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]
Powered by WebRing.

Xphactinus based on theme by Chris Lin. powered by Wordpress.
XHTML | CSS | RSS feed | Comments RSS