Session 9: Emerging and Future Technologies

“You see things; and you say, Why? But I dream things that never were; and I say “Why not?” –George Bernard Shaw

Brief Overview of the class:

We were shown plenty of wonderful videos during class today. Among them was claytronics and plastic electronics. Thinking back to the quotes that were shared in class, when presented with these technologies we should ask ‘Why not?’ Claytronics stand to make product presentations completely different. People would be able to shape the product, hold it and even edit on the spot! This form of interaction would have great implications especially in education. Plastic electronics are a potentially disruptive technology that would threaten to displace silicon technology. Flexible computers and cheaper access to the internet would allow greater global connectivity. We could see the global education and economic gaps potentially closed through this technology.

The next thing we went through in class was the drivers of emerging and future technology. The drivers of emerging and future technologies are ones where we begin to see things differently. Is there another way to fix people’s problems? Have new discoveries allowed us to see things in a new light? Do people really know what they want – if not we can step in and help them out. Changing needs through mass media and advertising? (we can help to shape the need for better products through advertising. The smart 4 (people, ideas, money along with alliances and partnerships) also come up with great ideas although like most fantastic combinations, these are rare. From here we can see that for new ideas to emerge, new perspectives and new insights are needed. New knowledge brings about new understanding. Perhaps when we are able to identify some of this would we be probably able to foresee future technologies?

Interesting Observation:

We’ve come to a point in time when innovation is less so about new discoveries but more on the combinations and permutations of technologies. Biotechnologies seek to fuse genetic modification with other technologies such as medicine, energy and even construction. Nanotechnologies seek to create little robots and combinations of atoms for construction purposes as well as for surveillance. GRID computing (Cloud computing), computer-based simulation technologies and knowledge management technologies were the other topics we covered. Sylvester brought up the combo of cloud computing, medicine and computer gaming which allowed gamers to aid in HIV research giving us yet another good example of converging technology.

Key Takeaway Points:

Innovation distinguishes the leader from the follower – Steve Jobs.

When we innovate, we will be able to see and do things differently. Once we start doing things in greater and better ways would people see the value in how we get things done. When this happens, the people would begin following what we’re doing. The sad hero Nikola Tesla was a great innovator but due to circumstances, the fruits of his works were not fully realized. Which goes to show that some innovators do become leaders, but some are more effective than others.

The way forward is through combinations of current technologies. I won’t need to provide anymore examples as I have covered a couple of them above. Just like good art is a combination of styles that work to create something fantastic, great new technologies are the fruits of combining and applying new insights gleaned from other fields of technology. We have come to a point where our technological palettes can give rise to an almost infinite number of new technological possibilities. Fascinating times are to come.

Ratings for the Class:

Today’s class felt quite alive today and I gained quite a number of new insights from this class. With that, I give this class a 9/10.

Session 8: Energy and World Change: Past, Present and Future

Energy and World Change: Past, Present and Future

Human beings have always needed energy. From energy derived from burning wood for fires to the energy that powers the computers we type on, energy has been changing.

  

We are coming to a revolutionary point in our existence. Most of us are no longer ignorant, intentional or otherwise to the dangers that come from our current energy consumption habits. Countries like China are turning towards green energy alternatives and Germany is already blazing a trail in renewable energy for the world to follow. A future where our energy patterns are sustainable is within our grasp! All the world needs to do now work towards it.

However, why are we so slow in the widespread implementation of all of this? Let’s take a look at some of the barriers to renewable energy.

Extra Reading:

Obstacles to Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency:

This article was written for the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies and was written by Richard L. Kauffman, CEO of Good Energies. In this blog post, I’ll be talking about the parts I find most interesting.

“The problem isn’t energy.” In this section, attention is brought to the fact that most US universities actually have the technology to create efficient renewable energy systems. However, most of these technologies are seeing use in places such as Europe. This is because renewable technology is seeing more promotion in Europe than in the US

“We’ve got the innovation deployment cart and horse backwards” Here, Kauffman states that most of us are waiting for than one miraculous breakthrough where the innovation in renewable energy makes it cost about as much or hopefully less than conventional sources of energy. Such a breakthrough truly would be miraculous but like most miracles, this may not happen anytime soon. In Europe, markets and incentives had been established to bring in industrial players, namely Siemens and General Electric to enter their wind energy markets with “good-enough” technology. Eventually these companies were able to innovate and create larger windmills at lower costs. Bring the technology in first and let innovation take its natural costs seems to be the solution here.

The playing field is not level. Among the notable barriers to entry for renewable energy is that it is more expensive than conventional sources. This is reinforced by the fact that some countries subsidise fossil fuels. If the externalities of fossil fuel burning are internalized (such as using carbon taxes) perhaps a fairer playing field would be established?

The last point I’ll cover from his article is “We don’t have the infrastructure”. I would say that this point tangoes with the “we’ve got the innovation and deployment cart and horse backwards” quite well. Without an adequate infrastructure, a country cannot utilize all of its geographical advantages. Areas with high wind speeds can’t channel their energy to those who need it and the same can be said for solar energy. If this isn’t in place than we can’t really implement policies to incentivize using renewable energy.

Key Takeaway points (from the lesson as well):

From what we can gather from most of the barriers above, every country most understand what is the main priority here. What is important is that countries around the world begin implementing clean technology as soon as they can. Like most industry beginnings, we have to start small. A market must be formed and nurtured. Once players begin serving that market, innovation, including increased efficiency and lower costs, would come naturally! Once the success and the low risk of such an industry is established, many other positive developments would follow.

Comparative studies are vital. In class, Prof showed us an interesting slide which compared the returns of using 1 square (kilometre) of land for biomass, wind farming and solar energy. Based on that study, solar energy trumped the other two in terms of returns for every square (kilometre) of land. Studies like this help to shape people’s perspectives and perceptions towards technology and can even help lay people (like me) truly appreciate the technology for what it can give.

Based on some of my readings, while gaining a sustainable source of energy is absolutely necessary, attention should also be placed on the efficient use of energy in general. Many studies have been conducted to show that energy inefficiency exists in many forms. From the loss of energy from conversion of its raw state to electricity, transmission and heating/ cooling and lighting the buildings, all these contribute to wasted energy. We can’t really complain that some renewable energies can’t provide enough for our consumption, we don’t really take steps to consume energy efficiently.

Ratings for the class:

Another consistent class for this week. Informative and fast paced without a dull moment in sight. 9/10 from me.

Topical Review Paper Draft Submission

Nuclear Bombs and Nuclear Energy

Executive Summary:

Nuclear technology, especially those involving nuclear weaponry and nuclear energy, has always been a highly contentious subject. This paper will look at some of the biggest moments of nuclear technology so far. Historical events will be looked into to comprehend the maintainence of usage of nuclear weapons today. Contemporary developments such as recent disasters and news will be covered to better understand the nature of nuclear energy. Overall, this paper seeks a balanced perspective on the continued use of both nuclear weaponry and nuclear power in today’s society.

Why I chose this topic.

There was recently a lot of ruckus created when North Korea was initially testing its nuclear weapons. The South Koreans were worried and the United States of America was putting pressure on the People’s Republic of China and the people in general were enjoying an international drama unfolding. What makes nuclear weapons so desirable? Are they really that much of a trump card that it allows people to enter some sort of exclusive Nuclear Club? One of the key points of this paper is to look at the global implications of nuclear weapons.

Fukushima and Chernobyl are two grim reminders of the potential disasters waiting to happen should nuclear power plants face problems. Defenders of nuclear power report that health hazards are not really linked to these incidents but can we trust them if they clearly have a stake in this industry? In this paper we are also briefly going to look at the bright and dark sides of nuclear power. The paper will not touch lightly on some of the historical events centered around nuclear developments and seeks to evaluate their effects on the past and what they hold for the future.

Introduction:

For a matter to be considered world-changing it must have been disruptive to a certain industry or a way mankind gets something done. The most notable disruption in history brought about by the discovery of nuclear power would be its application in nuclear warfare. In this section of the paper, the author will be focusing solely on nuclear bombs for past effects and nuclear energy for present day applications.

Historical Perspective:

Nuclear power is derived from the energy released from splitting the atoms of certain elements. Initial research on nuclear power was centered around creating nuclear bombs during World War II before research focused on using nuclear power to provide energy for the country. Nobody would forget the devastation that the two nuclear bombs: Fat Man and Little Boy on Hiroshima and Nagasaki near the end of World War II. Among the notable nuclear-armed political powers today are the United States of America, Russia and China. Submarines and aircraft carriers also run on nuclear power from on board nuclear generators.

Warfare:

Scientists in the 1930’s discovered nuclear fission and learned of the vast amounts of energy released from such a reaction.  Many of the developments causing and caused by nuclear technology was centered around fear. World War II was a desperate time when both the Allies and the Axis forces were trying newer and more creative ways to gain advantages on the battlefield. In an effort to create a bigger explosion and gain an advantage in the war, the United States of America began Project 

Manhattan.

The result of Project Manhattan was the conception of nuclear bombs. Fat Man and Little Boy are the names of the two bombs that would forever be etched in mankind’s history. Little Boy was dropped on Hiroshima and Fat Man on Nagasaki. The effects were devastating. By December 1945, the estimated dead in Hiroshima was 135,000 and in Nagasaki the estimate was 64,000 dead according to the Manhattan Engineer District (1946).

To put things in context, a comparison between the nuclear bombs and another powerful bomb made in the United Kingdom will be made. The United Kingdom had also developed a powerful bomb called the “Grand Slam”/ Tallboy bomb which was capable of driving itself into the ground, detonating to cause a camouflet, or a cavern underground, shifting the ground to undermine the opposition. Germany had been the victim of many such Tallboy bomb attacks but continued resisting the Allies until its eventual demise in 1945 (UK Bomber Command – Campaign Diary, 1945). As for the Japanese, after facing the horrors of the two atomic bombs, lost the will to continue fighting as they would face a “rain of ruin” as warned by President Henry Truman (New York Times, 2010).

The development of new weapons is nothing new in the context of war. The typical reaction of other warring factions that fall victim of these new technologies is to adapt or find new technologies to compete with their enemies. However, few have been so great as to force entire nations into submission as is seen in the aftermath of World War II. The Japanese are shown to be fiercely loyal to their emperor and are even willing to sacrifice themselves literally through Kamikaze Plane crashes. Seeing such a proud nation bow down to the devastation of such a weapon is truly a turning point when it comes to warfare technology.

Politics: The Cold War

“I begin to believe in only one civilizing influence, —the discovery one of these days of a destructive agent so terrible that War shall mean annihilation and men's fears will force them to keep the peace" 

-Wilkie Collins, 1870

From a political perspective, the sheer potential carnage that could be caused by the bomb would be enough to make anyone afraid of it being used on them. This much could be seen in the likes of the Cold War.

The Cold War saw the world being split into Eastern and Western blocs, one bloc being aligned to the Communist Soviet bloc and the other to the United States of America. The role that nuclear weapons effectively played in this war was as the catalyst in an international game of chicken. This fear was eventually known as the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) as both sides armed with nuclear weapons would effectively eradicate the other should the need to retaliate ever arise. The Doctrine of MAD was based on the belief that if both sides could destroy each other, it would function as a deterrent from starting a war in the first place. (NuclearFiles.org, n.d)

As if nuclear bombs dropped from planes weren’t bad enough, the development of the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile had the warhead deliver itself to you. Multi-stage rockets would carry the warhead between continents making an already deadly threat deadlier (Atom Central, n.d).

Tensions were highest when it came to the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. Russia was intending to place missiles in Cuba and in exchange gave Cuba economic and military aid. The US laid a naval blockade to stop the delivery of the missiles in response.  The confrontation between the America and the USSR saw the two blocs just a hair’s breadth away from sparking a nuclear conflict. Instead of opening fire, both sides came to an agreement: the US will not invade Cuba and the USSR will remove said missiles. Subsequently, the US removed its missiles from Turkey as well. (May E.R., 2011) We can see here that nuclear weapons played a crucial role in the war. First, its existence was the basis for preparation for retaliation and eventually that same fear would be the factor that prevented the conflict from brewing any further.

Today’s Concerns for Nuclear Weapons:

Nuclear weapons represent power. The power to cause massive harm and damage at the push of a button guarantees a fear and respect that can be used for international power-play. The nukes will be used to threaten and pressure other countries to their will. Another point to consider from all of this is that if any country tries hard enough, they too can be nuclear armed.  These days, as shown in the reaction to North Korea’s recent nuclear tests, the world is trying all it can not have any more nuclear armed countries. Unless the world sees no more need for nuclear bombs will there be an end to their manufacturing.

This same behavior also could be the spark of potentially bloody conflicts. Reactions to the recent North Korean Nuclear tests, were one of expectant retaliation, with South Korea and America performing military exercises close to North Korea following the tests. The world has seen enough war and especially with the current state of the global economy, cannot afford another one.

Possible Future Consideration for Nuclear Weapons:

While we are seeing a gradual reduction in the number of nuclear weaponry around the world, nuclear weapons are likely to be maintained by the countries who own them. Nuclear weapons’ symbolism of power and its proven ability to deter nuclear attack make it a viable option for most nations.  

Signs Pointing Toward it:

Hans M. Kristensen (2011) stated on the Federation of American Scientists Strategic Security Blog that the American government had plans to modernize its nuclear arsenal. This includes a $6.3 billion dollars’ worth of expenditure on the warheads in the stockpile through to fiscal year 2016 (Kristensen, 2011).

Nuclear Reactors Today

Introduction:

Nuclear sabre-rattling will continue so long as there is a country that believes that owning and testing nuclear weapons is a valid method of getting attention. However, the power of nuclear fission can be used for more than just genocidal purposes. Nuclear reactors can harness the energy from the nuclear fission reaction to generate large amounts of power for comparatively long periods of time. Despite the all these facts, nuclear power has gained infamy over the years due to accidents such as Chernobyl and The Three Mile Island incident. The most recent accident at Fukushima is a reminder that nuclear power still has effects on the world. These effects will be discussed in this section of the paper.

These days, 13.5% of the world’s energy is provided by nuclear energy from more than 430 nuclear power reactors across 31 countries (World Nuclear Association, 2012).  Nuclear energy is touted as a clean and efficient source of energy as it does not release greenhouse gases during the production of power as no fossil fuels are burned and uses less land space in comparison to other energy production methods such as wind farms and solar paneling. However, seeing the long term health effects of nuclear bombs, the nuclear waste produced from the power production process would have to be disposed of effectively or else, this method may not be as “clean” as is advocated.

Social impacts:

Nuclear power has been seen as boon to some countries. During the oil price shock of 1973, many countries were left reeling from the sudden price hike. Many of these countries were reliant on the fossil fuels to power their countries and some of them did not have much in the way of local fossil fuel re. To curb their reliance on a commodity that was subject to volatile prices, countries such as France and Japan turned to nuclear power.  Prior to Fukushima, Japan sourced 30% of its power from nuclear reactors and was planning to raise this to 40%.  France generates 75% of its power from nuclear plants thanks to government policy that focused on energy security after the oil price shock of 1974. (World Nuclear Association, 2013)

Some negative social effects of nuclear power are attached to concerns over health and safety. Anti-nuclear movements cite risks of nuclear accidents, especially the current case of the Fukushima Daiichi Power Plant incident, and nuclear waste disposal as some of their reasons for disliking nuclear power.  The Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters all saw thousands of people being evacuated from their homes due to the high levels of radiation found in the areas surrounding the power plants.

The relocation of the people from their homes is one of the greater negative social impacts brought about by nuclear power. In Chernobyl, more than 330,000 people had to be relocated after the disaster. Some of the people who left their homes behind felt a sense of injustice and also felt that out-of-place in society.  The ones who choose to stay behind ended up faring better psychologically. The migration of the people also caused a distorted demographics curve, having more elderly people and fewer professionals. This raises the death rates of the area while hampering economic recovery.

After the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Power Plant in 2011, which saw 160,000 people evacuating the surrounding area, Japan has seen a rise in anti-nuclear demonstrations. Mari Saito and Sophie Knight (2013) recently reported from Reuters that more than 15,000 people attended a protest urging the government of Japan to reject nuclear power. A recent poll stated that 70% of Japanese intended on eventually phasing out nuclear energy.

From the information gathered, it can be said the social impact of nuclear energy is reliant on the circumstances of the time. People welcomed it for the benefits it brought and rejected it when the detriments were brought to light. Public perception is a fickle thing. Now that the world is facing a grim reminder that nuclear technology is not 100% fool-proof, we can expect there to less public support for nuclear energy in times to come.

Environmental Effects:

Nuclear power has been touted as a clean energy as it does not contribute to carbon dioxide emissions during the generation of power (US Environmental Protection Agency 2013). Especially during a time when the world is aware of the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions into, the has been taken into  account by powerful countries such as China. According to LiveMint (2013), China plans on building 200 more nuclear power plants, reaching a pace of 10 new plants a year. This is to counter the high amounts of pollutants generated by its coal-fire power in its industries.

Nuclear power plants require a lot of water in the production of its electricity. The water is used to both create steam to move the turbines and to act as a coolant to the systems. Apart from the power plant’s use of water, waste water contaminated with heavy metals and salts are the by-product of many types of power plants, including nuclear ones.

Radioactive water from cooling purposes when it comes to containing nuclear power plant accidents are also an environmental hazard. The water pumped into the Fukushima facility to cool down the facility becomes irradiated. Aljazeera (2013) reported that leaks from the power plant have caused the radioactive water to seep into the ground and some of it may even have reached the Pacific Ocean. Nicholas Fisher, a marine biologist at Stony Brook University in Stony Brook, N.Y., told LiveScience that for seafood caught 160 km away from the site would be safe but the same cannot be said for the seafood caught closer than that; this pollution is affecting Japan’s marine life. (Lewis, 2013)  All these developments would lead to the increase of radioactivity of the site, delaying cleanup efforts.

Nuclear power plant accidents such as the Chernobyl disaster release large quantities of radioactive material into the air. This fallout travels and affects areas downwind, spreading its radioactive substances to the neighboring areas. From Chernobyl, “(a)bout 4300 km² are in the no-go zone. Another area of about 7000 km²is considerably contaminated by ¹³⁷Cs. In Belarus, Ukraine and Russia, a further 130.000 km² were less severely contaminated. Similar levels also occurred in 60.000 km² in other parts of Europe.” (Euronuclear, 2006)

Nuclear power plants must change their fuel every 18-24 months. The spent fuel released from these processes form radioactive waste that must be disposed of. Concerns arise as this radioactive waste is dangerous to living beings as it may cause cancer. At the moment, most of the spent fuel is kept on site at the nuclear power plants.  Seeing how these are dangerous, many people adopt the NIMBY (Not In My BackYard) style of thinking.  For instance, in November 2010, an anti-nuclear group “Wiedersetzen” attempted to block a shipment of nuclear waste from France to Germany that was to be placed in a salt deposit in Gorleben. (Public Intelligence, 2010)

Nuclear power is a double-edged sword when it comes to environmental impact. On one hand, it is seen as one of the “cleaner” sources of energy as it releases no carbon dioxide into the atmosphere during energy production. On the other hand, its nuclear waste and waste water pose serious problems to the environment. Unless we are able to develop a fool-proof way of safely disposing of the waste could nuclear power truly be called a clean source of power.

International political effects:

The effects of nuclear power on international politics is once again about fear. One prominent example of this is Iran’s uranium enrichment program. Iran’s nuclear program attracted a lot of international attention during its height in 2002. A clandestine operation by an opposition group exposed that Iran also had uranium enrichment in progress. Uranium used for civilian purposes may be enriched further to supply weapons grade uranium for warheads. Iran’s government has been defending the program and claiming that the program is being used for peaceful purposes. The world however, is not so convinced of Iran’s government’s honesty.  (BBC, 2013)

Iran had hidden the uranium enrichment program for 18 years. The UN stepped in and demanded that unless Iran can convince the Security Council that the enriched uranium would only be used for peaceful purposes, it should shut down its uranium enrichment operations. A report by the International Atomic Energy Association claimed that Iran has been performing acts indicative of building nuclear weaponry including “The acquisition of nuclear weapons development information and documentation from a clandestine nuclear supply network “ and “Work on the development of an indigenous design of a nuclear weapon including the testing of components” .(IAEA, 2011) Iran still continues to enrich uranium under the justification that it is within its rights provided by the NPT (Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons) to do so.  (BBC, 2013)

In this case, Iran may or may not have enriched uranium for the purpose of creating nuclear warheads, but that is not the point. The point here is that the UN is afraid that Iran could be making a bomb and is taking steps, such as economy-crippling sanctions, to stop Iran from carrying out its uranium enrichment program. Once again, we are seeing two sides that refuse to back down, which may bring us to conclude that there is a vicious cycle. Did the UN consider that perhaps their sanctions in retaliation to Iran carrying out their enrichment program is the same thing that is driving Iran to continue it?

Future Considerations for Nuclear Energy:

Nuclear power’s infamy arises from the harmful effects of its radiation. To summarize, Fukushima’s radioactive water leaks pollute the ocean and the area around it, Chernobyl and Fukushima’s disasters caused the people to be evicted from their homes which then caused numerous social effects. These effects have caused some countries such as Spain, Germany, Italy and Japan itself to reconsider nuclear energy (Wikipedia, n.d).

This may not spell the end for nuclear energy as countries such as China and India have considered nuclear energy as a viable alternative source of energy. China’s reason for doing so is to begin reducing its carbon emissions from its coal power dependency (Reuters, 2013). Just like nuclear weapons, as long as people see good reason to apply such technology, that technology will continue seeing use, regardless of public perception.

Conclusion:

Nuclear weapons and nuclear energy will continue being a part of our lives. This strain of technology has seen many momentous moments in history originally in war and later in accidents occurring close to home. Nuclear energy gives people many reasons to fear and despise it, yet may even be one of the better solutions offered in today’s challenges such as global warming. Perhaps nuclear technology will continue to be part of the technology’s family, the black sheep of the family.

Bibliography:

Aljazeera (2013, Oct 04) TEPCO: Leak at Fukushima Nuclear Plant Aljazeera retrieved from: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia-pacific/2013/10/tepco-new-leak-at-fukushima-nuclear-plant-20131042347123714.html

AtomCentral: The Atomic Bomb Website. (n.d.) Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles Retrieved from: http://www.atomcentral.com/icbm-missiles.aspx

BBC (2013, September 23) Q & A: Iran Nuclear Crisis BBC retrieved from:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11709428

Director General, International Atomic Energy Agency (2011) Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement and relevant provisions of Security Council resolutions in the Islamic Republic of Iran 

International Atomic Energy Agency retrieved from: http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2011/gov2011-65.pdf

Euronuclear (2006) Word from the President. Retrieved from:  http://www.euronuclear.org/e-news/e-news-12/presidents-contribution.htm

International Reaction to the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster. (n.d.) Retrieved October 14, 2013 from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reaction_to_the_Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster#Protests_and_politics

Knight, S. and Saito M. (2013, March 10) Thousands in Japan anti-nuclear protest two years after Fukushima. Reuters. Retrieved from: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/10/japan-protest-idUSL1N0C209D20130310

Kristensen, H. M. (2011, February 17) “The Nuclear Weapons Modernisation Budget” [Blog Post] Retrieved from: http://blogs.fas.org/security/2011/02/nuclearbudget/

Lewis, T. (2013, August 21) “Fukushima Radiation Leak: 5 Things You Should Know” livescience Retrieved from:  http://www.livescience.com/39067-fukushima-radiation-5-things-to-know.html

LiveMint & The Wall Street Journal, (2013 Sep 26) China Set to Build 200 nuclear power plants: report LiveMint & The Wall Street Journal retrieved from: http://www.livemint.com/Politics/3s501RtDktWGT48wbF771K/China-set-to-build-200-nuclear-power-plants-report.html

May, E. R. (2011, February 17). John F Kennedy and the Cuban Missile Crisis. BBC. Retrieved from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/coldwar/kennedy_cuban_missile_01.shtml

Nuclear Files.Org: Project of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. (n.d.) Mutually Assured Destruction, retrieved October 14 2013 at: http://www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/key-issues/nuclear-weapons/history/cold-war/strategy/strategy-mutual-assured-destruction.htm

Public Intelligence (2010, November 8) European Anti-Nuclear Protest Photos November 2010 retrieved from: http://publicintelligence.net/european-anti-nuclear-protest-photos-november-2010/

Reuters (2013, September 20) China, India indicate ambitions to expand nuclear ambitions at UN gathering  Firstpost.World available at: http://www.firstpost.com/world/china-india-indicate-ambitions-to-expand-nuclear-power-at-un-gathering-1122805.html

Royal Airforce Bomber Command (1945) Campaign Diary April and May 1945 Retrieved from: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20070706011932/http:/www.raf.mod.uk/bombercommand/apr45.html

Shalett, S. (1945, Aug 6) First Atomic Bomb Dropped on Japan; Missile is Equal to 20,000 Tons of TNT; Truman Warns Foe of a “Rain of Ruin”. The New York Times.  Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/big/0806.html#article

The Manhattan Engineer District (1946, June 29) The Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki .Retrieved from: http://www.atomicarchive.com/Docs/MED/med_chp10.shtml

United States Environmental Protection Agency (2013) Clean Energy Retrieved from: http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-and-you/affect/air-emissions.html

World Nuclear Association: Representing the people and organizations of the global nuclear profession, (2013) Nuclear Power in France. retrieved from: http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-A-F/France/#.UlkTAVBkSSo

Week 7: BioBusiness Revolution: Agribiology, Environmental Life Sciences and Industrial Biotechnology (Past, Present and Future)

Brief Overview:

This week, we’re looking at the other half of biobusiness, namely the businesses focusing on green biotech (plants), white biotech (industrial) and blue biotech (blue).  The technology adoption gap that exists in biotechnology is 8 years long; it takes 8 years for a great innovation to be adopted by the masses, which explains why biotech seems to be lagging behind most other industries.

Agriculture amounts for 40% of the world’s jobs but only produces 25% of the world’s GDP. This imbalance might change in the future as more people shift to the cities in the hopes of finding new jobs and better facilities. However, this same change could amount to new problems. These facilities provide for a sedentary lifestyle as consumption patterns, exercise, healthcare and energy usage all change. These new problems could be great opportunities to enterprising people though.

Now to briefly recap on the latest developments of biobusiness. First, we’ll look at the agricultural and food sector. Fish farming accounts for 70% of the world’s fish supply, GM foods (such as vegetables and grain and even fish) are still a highly debatable topic, pre-cut vegetables are made for our convenience but may not be the best development for the environment. Sustainability of the world’s natural resources such as forests also rest on our judicious or reckless placement of farms and infrastructure.

Next, we’ll take a look at industrial biotechnology. One of the best developments in this industry so far is the use of enzymes. These enzymes are used in detergents, cleaners, tanneries, tenderize meat, create medicine and even have uses in the field of mining. Thanks to their properties of being bio-catalysts, there are many advantages to using these (even more so than last time). There is also a change of some farmers to specialized farmers (farmists). These farmers can apply mechanization in large farming to  save costs of production and manpower. Also, these have applications in the production of certain products such as synthetic spider’s silk protein which will be discussed in the key takeaways.

Key takeaways:

GMO’s are a double-edged sword. As with any new development that we come up with, there is a chance that it will deliver great amounts of good as much as it can deliver a whole load of negativity. GMO foods involves swapping or adding genes to manipulate the traits of the organism in question. Higher yields may be gained by inserting such a gene into rice and corn for instance, but what if these genes also create new allergens? There are also some studies conducted that show that animals fed with GM foods for a few generations suffered from enlarged kidneys and livers and some of the animals tested over a few generations (of the animals) showed that they produced fewer offspring compared to their non-GMO fed counterparts. It is fair to say that some of these tests may not have been done correctly but the there is a silent implication it might be true if the GMO companies’ employees themselves refuse to eat the GMO products (click here).

On the other hand, we can also say that without genetic modification of the plants, we wouldn’t even have agriculture. The process of domesticating plants for agriculture has been going on for thousands of years. These processes are also part of the Green Revolution allowing more food to be grown with less land, increasing overall output and providing more food to the masses. Another point worth noting here is that our ancestors performed genetic modification without the use of high-tech gene placement methods, the plants themselves could do this naturally so to speak. If our current methods of gene manipulation for GMO food is wrong, hopefully we will be able to find out before it’s too late.

Enzymes are awesome. The industry has managed to apply enzymes in a variety of uses as discussed above. Enzymes were used mostly for the production of some confectionaries and drinks like cheese, yoghurt and beer. Nowadays, these little guys help to reduce water requirement for some products, remove the need for vast amounts of harsh chemicals being applied to fabrics in fabric production and are even able to help in the mining sector! These are also helping to turn more of our industries into environmentally friendly ones making us one step closer to leaving no negative effect on Mother Nature. This proves that it may be possible for mankind to live in harmony with nature without disturbing the delicate balance.

Class ratings:

Once again, the class was entertaining, comprehensive and overall enjoyable. Well done to all the brave souls who presented today (my turn’s in the next class). I’ll give this class a 9/10.

Week 6: The Biobusiness Revolution Part 1: Healthcare and Biomedical Sciences

What is a biobusiness? Any commercial activity based on an understanding of life science and life science processes is known as a biobusiness. We looked into what constituted the biobusinesses, its surprisingly huge size and the revolutions that currently being undergone. We looked at the environment in which our healthcare and biomedical industries are currently in, such as our changing demographics and gene mapping technology.

Key Takeaways

For an industry to change, the circumstances have to be such as to warrant such a change. Could it be that the industry itself is facing a changing environment? Is there someone within the industry that believes that something can be done better? Based on what was discussed in the class, one of the factors I believe is a main cause for the biobusiness revolution is that the demographics of people these days has changed.

People these days have different needs from last time. Previously, more of us died from communicable diseases such as the cough and flu. Now, more and more people are dying from chronic illnesses such as osteoporosis, diabetes and heart complications. The medical industry has done an amazing job with curbing communicable diseases but now we’ll have to look more at the consequences of our changing lifestyles. There are now more biobusinesses focused on wellness rather than simply treating the symptoms of the disease. In the case of most chronic illnesses, the moment you start seeing dire symptoms, it may be already too late.

Another factor I can see influencing the biobusiness revolution is the mapping of the human genome. The mapping of the human genome has opened up a world of opportunites when it comes to the manufacturing and efficacy of drugs. We can now kiss goodbye suffering from certain side-effects when taking drugs. With our genes mapped, the doctors can now prescribe drugs catered personally to each and every one of us ensuring greater effect and lower-to-no sideeffects (hopefully). Soon we may come to a time when doctors prescribe us medication for diseases that we haven’t even contracted yet!

The last factor that I’ll be writing about here is the advancements of technology. Virtual reality gaming can be used to train surgeons now. Boosts in confidence with no risk of killing someone? Check. Advancements in prosthetics making the once disabled whole again? Check. Powered Exo-skeletons enhancing the physical capabilities of human beings? Check. I think it’s quite fitting to place John Naisbitts quote here:

“The most exciting breakthroughs of the 21st century will not occur because of technology but because of an expanding concept of what it means to be human”

Now that technology has evolved so much, a lot of these breakthroughs in biotechnology are really just the tip of the iceberg. I can’t predict what will be coming out next in the medical arena but rest assured, more and more exciting things are coming our way!

Ratings for the class:

In my first post, I stated that class times seem to zip by really quickly. That would be an understatement compared to how fast time flied in this class. Captivating information (and worrying about what to say next for class-participation) along with the growing interactivity found within the class make for a fast-paced and pleasant experience. I give this class a 9/10.

Week 5: ICT Past, Present and Future

Brief Overview:

This week’s class focused on Information, Communication and Technology: Past, Present and Future. It’s always good to start from the beginning. Communication’s most basic form was word of mouth. Then came longer range communication such as smoke signals, books, radio and soon television. There was one problem though, all these forms of communication made the ones receiving the info passive recipients. The first form of the internet began that way too, until we reached Web 2.0. Today’s internet depends a lot on user created content: Facebook, Youtube and Twitter all would be ghost towns with nothing to offer if no users posted anything there. Web 2.0 is the era of 2-way communication where users not only receive information and content but create it as well. Our lesson also touched on the various aspects of ICT today such as: social networking, crowdsourcing, gaming, wireless technology, information systems, cloud computing and knowledge management.

Interesting Observations:

The Present:

The Millenium Development Goals were established in the year 2000 at the Millenium Summit of the United Nations. That meeting saw the participants of UN agreeing to meet the MDGs by the year 2015. How has ICT helped reach the MDGs? One of the MDGs is alleviating poverty and the rise in telephone usage around the world has linked the poor farmer with access to info he never dreamt could have! With mobile phones, poor farmers can find out the market price of his goods, gain access to weather reports and also communicate easier with other farmers or contacts downstream. Our man can now find better ways of farming from his peers and never be shortchanged by middlemen again!

Advancements of ICT has altered the way think about development. The same example of mobile telephony applies. Bangladesh overcame the obstacles of expensive fixed-line telecommunications infrastructure by expanding its mobile phone networks industry. We can kiss the long-winded processes of building towers for telephone cables goodbye. (Their fixed-line teledensity was only at 1%)

Bangladesh’s mobile market passed 100 million subscribers in early 2013 as penetration reached 67% - Source here

                

The Future:

During the session, we were discussing the integration of all the devices we currently have. Web 3.0 would be an era not only of vast amounts of human-to-human interaction but one with just as much device-to-device communication. Companies’ services would actively collect data on the consumers’ preferences and likes based on the information posted on social networks and plot out the people’s itineraries. If person A likes laksa, the next time person A is on the road, his device would “recommend”  a popular laksa joint to him. We can just imagine the possibilities where the devices help us to keep track of almost everything we do and all we need to do sit back and enjoy.

This is not without its drawbacks though. By allowing our devices to have this much interactivity and become almost interdependent on each other, we are putting all of our eggs in one basket. There will always be hackers lurking around the corner. Almost all of our devices: from our phones, cars, washing machines and refrigerators would contain data about us at that time. Should any of our devices get compromised, the hacker would have access to all our personal data and identities. The hacker now has a greater choice of targets to choose from. Unless all the hackers suddenly decide to turn over a new leaf, all of us, companies included, would have to ramp up security and hope for the best.

              

Key Takeaways

              ICT has come a long way. From being tools simply to help mankind and get his message across, one of ICT’s greatest achievements is creating a platform for the greatest amount of information sharing and social interaction. The world is shrinking as there are now fewer strangers in the world. Social networking allows us to meet friends through friends almost seamlessly. Need a question answered? With crowdsourcing anyone around the world can help you. The world is moving to one with no boundaries where potentially, anyone can connect with everyone no matter where he or she is.

               ICT is growing so fast, services that we never thought we need have surfaced. Dropbox, a form of cloud computing, allows users to access their files and folders from any device they have sol long as they saved in Dropbox’s cloud folder. Knowledge management services exist because the amount of data on the internet is so vast that it would be impossible to sift through it all to find exactly what you’re looking for without some difficulty. As with everything, ever changing circumstances bring ever new challenges. New challenges always mean new opportunities.

Ratings for the class:

The content of the class was engaging and interesting (this might a bit biased). Time was managed quite well and the presentations from the other students were pretty good. This class gets 8/10.

Week 4: Drivers of World Change and Change Leadership and Management

TWC Group 22 Session 4 Blogpost

Brief Overview:

First half: Drivers of World Change

The prof began the class with a statement that if everyone in the world consumed energy like the average Singaporean and American, the world’s energy reserves would be depleted in 9 years. The point was proven that the finger-pointing blame game when it comes to cleaning up our acts has to end. We then moved into the various drivers of world change including globalization, technology, innovations, environmental drivers, changing tastes and competition. Drivers of change exist if the conditions in which we carry out our activities are changed. We also spoke revolutionary and evolutionary change, one being radical while the other one gradual.

Second half: Change Management and Change Leadership

Now that we know that these types of changes exist, how do manage it? Can we lead change? These two concepts were discussed in the second half of class. We first defined what the difference between management and leadership is. Leaders lead the people, managers organize and execute. How would people respond to changing realities? Prof introduced us to the traditional freeze-unfreeze-refreeze model of change and its modern counterpart, the continuous monitoring and renewal model. The old model worked better before changes took place at the pace we are so used to today. Now that change has accelerated, everyone’s got to be ready to change at the drop of a hat, thus the continuous change model.

Interesting Observations/ Key Takeaway points:

What I’ve noticed when reviewing our materials for this session is that drivers for world change rarely ever work alone. Just as with everything else, the drivers are all simply different factors that affect the direction we are going to take with change. When we were discussing the various types of drivers in class such as competition and technological advancements, it is safe to say that these two function in a vicious cycle. Companies and countries all need to stay ahead of the competition. One of the ways is through technological advancement. As one entity blazes ahead in the tech race, the other companies strive to keep up. The drivers of world change are practically interlinked in this example.

Managing change and leading change. The key to understanding these separate concepts is first to understand what management and leadership means. To put in analogical terms, the leader is the commander of the army. He oversees the long terms strategies involved to ultimately win the war. He is the man in charge of making all the big decisions and shapes the direction his army will follow. Managers are quite like the platoon and squad leaders found within the army. They will receive orders from higher up and would take steps to organize the troops, train them and carry out the objectives laid down by the generals to ensure that the commander’s strategy ultimately succeeds. To lead is to determine the direction and choices the organization is going to take. To manage is to take steps to achieve the goals set out by the leaders.

From what I gained through the readings and the videos that the professor showed in class, the key to leadership in any matter is to inspire people to join you. How do we inspire people to work? If the people are expected to simply follow orders, they end up feeling like cogs in a machine, unappreciated. Once you make them feel part of the decision making process, they feel a sense of responsibility to get the work done (once incentives are thrown in along with the responsibility, trust me on this one) and they work with the management to get the work done. Communication between the leaders or managers and the staff is also vital when it comes to getting anything, including change, done. In the Lone Nut Dancing video, it is safe to conclude that the first follower of the (formerly) lone dancer would not have stayed had the dancer not appreciated him and treated him as an equal. That’s a lesson right there. Look down on others and others won’t look at you again. As for the video about the little Indian boy leading the push to get the tree off the road, he led by example. Through his actions, he gave out the message along the lines of “I’m going to make the change.” He didn’t really bother whether he received help or not, his sheer determination to make a change made others in the video realize that while they were all just sitting around complaining all of them who were in a better position to help refused to do anything. I call this leadership by shame.

Discussion topics:

This response that I am posting here will be posted on Facebook as well.

In Eric Sim’s presentation, he posed the question: “How have the values of people changed from one generation to another with advent of greater connectivity? (ie, our parents and us.)

My response to this would be that the values of people in our generation have changed greatly from the values practiced during our parent’s generation. Please let me know if I missed anything out as most of my examples would be from personal observation.

The lives of our generation can be considered a lot less personal compared to our parents’ generation. If we find anything, no matter how minute such as “look what I am having for lunch” we would not hesitate to take a picture of it, edit it on Instagram if need be, and post it on social networking sites such as Facebook.  Our parents’ generation can be considered more reserved in that aspect that they don’t go about telling their entire circle of friends about most of the things we post of Facebook.

Trolls are people who like to stir up trouble by using shock value in their comments. I’m quite certain that some of these black sheep exist during our parent’s generation but back then there was no social media. Now that platforms such as Facebook and Twitter exist, these people can hide behind pseudonyms and safety of anonymity and carry out the hatemongering on even greater scales. One example in this link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kFNYuteAjA) posts comments such as “rot in piss” on people’s memorial pages on Facebook. When he’s confronted during the video, he justifies his comments by saying that he’s within his rights and that Facebook is an open platform for people to voice their opinions. The availability of anonymity sometimes brings out the worst in some of us. The same applies to the rest of us. As we sit behind the safety of our computers, we don’t receive the body language and tone cues from the people we converse with online. With this we become more vocal and say things we tend not to say in real life.

Finally, our generation is far more reactive to scandals. We human beings tend to react with emotion to certain events and won’t hesitate to comment and share things we deem should be public knowledge. Social media gives its users access to sources of information that people deem important and can spread viral information like wildfire. http://www.tealeafnation.com/2013/05/yet-another-food-safety-scandal-in-china-now-rat-meat-masquerades-as-lamb/ This link is regarding fox, mink and rat meat being sold as lamb meat in Shanghai. Most users reacted in disgust and outrage while others have posted methods they believe can help them identify the real meat. During our parents’ generation when no social media existed, these events could only travel via the news or by word of mouth/ telephone. Clearly there is a marked difference in the reaction time of the 2 generations.

Our generation shows a little less restraint in comments, share a lot more personal infor than our parents will ever do and receive and react to scandalous news a lot faster than our parents’ generation.