 |
 |
Thanks Charlotte, a good post. I want to follow you and shift the focus of the discussion towards some controversial issues related to the current concerns and proposals. Global warming. We are not sure yet. Most of the predictions are on the basis of meteorology, while the actual factors are accounted for by astrophysics. It is about the tilt of the axes of the globe. In the history of the world, we have had periods of warming and cooling. The Earth is still alive, with the exception of the dinosaurs.(Was it global cooling? (my new word). The big problem is not that the ice is melting. It is melting in summer and recovers in winter. If you ask the Russians, they have global cooling. The big fires in Russia this past summer have nothing to do with global warming. They are a result of a shift of high altitude currents because of the eruption of one volcano (only one). While the global warming postulate is widely accepted in the West, in Russia and in East Europe, there is a very cautious approach. While in the West scholars use meteorology for predictions, the Russians believe that the most important factors are in the realm of astrophysics. Then comes deforestation. Something that the Westerners don't care about. They are focused on CO2 and other gases. In the history of the Earth, there have been periods with more gasses and dust in the atmosphere due to volcanic activity. But the forests were acting as natural air purifiers. The worst thing is not CO2, but deforestation. This will kill us. Not the gases. There have been gasses for millenniums. Forests can be grown, but very slowly, for decades. And growing forests is too expensive to do. We have to consider that the humankind might be overgrazing the world. But that is a different issue. We have to find short term solutions and long term solutions. The oil resources might be finite. We need oil for plastics, not for fuel. We have to develop new types of engines/power sources and respectively, new fuels. In the history of the humankind, every time people overgraze, they find a new way to survive. Consider that when the hunter/gathers become too many and have eradicated their food sources in their regions, they converted into farmers and started growing food. The humankind survived the temporal overgrazing of the planet with the help of technologies (the agricultural revolution). When the British cut all the woods in their country, they found that they can burn coal. And oil. They even become stronger as a nation, and more affluent as well. The problem was that there were several very painful decades of transition. There are more examples in history of technology. Regarding the energy crises, the problem is not that there will not be any energy. The problem is with the painful transition from one energy type to another. This is a period of wars and devastation. The quality of life plunges down. The humankind needs to think about this period of devastation, pain, and suffering and try to mitigate the unwanted problems and experiences. Pollution is also a problem in many regions. I don't hear much talk about pollution. Maybe because America is still as clean as when it was a pristine continent. But in China and some parts of Russia and India, pollution is a problem bigger than warming or energy crisis. Pollution is a well-being problem and a major health hazard. It is also a quality of life problem. This makes it a more urgent concern than energy and global warming. I will stop here. Thank you for attention, Lubomir Global warming, equilibriums, and human resilience -----Original Message----- From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Charlotte Magnusson Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 8:43 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Status of "design" re Japanese nuclear crisis? Reply to Norman The perceived danger of different alternatives is vastly influenced by the media reporting. It is not necessarily the same as the actual danger. I must admit that I am currently really worried about what happens if global warming really kicks in. Most equilibrium systems have mechanisms that strive to restore the equilibrium, but once you get outside the stable region things go bad in a very non-linear way (and also very quickly). Just hoping there is some more restoring mechanisms (not yet identified) that will kick in......would say that this is a true design challenge which seems to be too difficult for us - the local benefits (driving cars etc etc) go in the opposite of what is good for the global system.... Best wishes! /Charlotte Ps. Cynical observation: there was yet another coal mine disaster just now. No discussion on the dangers of coal has followed.... Charlotte Magnusson Associate Professor Certec, Division of Rehabilitation Engineering Research Department of Design Sciences Lund University Lund Sweden tel +46 46 222 4097 fax +46 46 222 4431