By Andrew Williams •
November 2, 2009
California-based company Cereplast has revealed that it is developing breakthrough technology to transform algae into bioplastics, and predicts that it could replace 50% or more of the petroleum content used in traditional plastic resins.
Cereplast already makes plastic from renewable material such as corn starch, tapioca, wheat and potatoes, but is keen to trumpet the advantages of the new approach.
According to Frederic Scheer, Founder, Chairman and CEO of Cereplast, “Algae-based resins represent an outstanding opportunity for companies across the plastic supply chain to become more environmentally sustainable and reduce the industry’s reliance on oil.”
By Steve Savage •
October 31, 2009
In the comment streams on my blog posts there is a recurrent theme from one segment of the respondents - they have a deep distrust in the large companies that are involved in modern agricultural technology. They don’t believe these companies will behave ethically because they are for profit entities “only answerable to their shareholders.”
I’d like to speak directly to this as a long-time Ag industry insider whose experience does not support these suspicions. I know that some will dismiss this perspective assuming I am biased, but one has to balance potential for bias with actually having first-hand experience from which to speak. Over the last 32 years I’ve work for or with most of the companies, large and small, that provide agricultural technologies. Fourteen of those years have been as an independent consultant so I get to know what is going on inside of many companies in a given year. I have still only had direct knowledge of a subset of what happens, but in all of that exposure I’ve never witnessed an unethical decision or action - not even the consideration of one. I’ve seen certain decisions that were short-sighted. I’ve sometimes seen decision-making processes that are more driven by fear than by opportunity. I’ve seen missed opportunities because vision was lacking. I’ve occasionally seen failures to take advantage of synergies that could have been realized between divisions of large organizations. I’ve seen problems, but I believe that some level of dysfunction is inevitable in any organization involving people. Still, unethical behavior isn’t something I’ve seen so I disagree that it is automatically likely just because of the characteristics of the company.
On balance I’ve also seen these organizations, large and small, frequently make important contributions to society in terms of the productivity and safety of our food supply. I’ve seen these companies continue to do that in an environment of constant activist attack and very limited public understanding because so few people farm.
By Zachary Shahan •
October 31, 2009
SOLARIG, a company based in Spain that incorporated about four years ago, just began construction of eight photovoltaic parks in Italy this month. The parks will provide 8 MW of energy in total. Over the next few months, it plans to construct photovoltaic projects producing 30 MW throughout different regions of Italy.
But this is just the beginning. SOLARIG has a more global vision.
By Daniel Hohler •
October 30, 2009
When I first read the news that NASA was going to start experimenting on monkeys with radiation to study the effects of deep space travel, my heart sunk. As an anthropologist who has studied non-human primates I have seen up close the emotions, the feelings, and the physical qualities we share with our evolutionary cousins. My mind went back to shooting chimps into space, not caring if they lived or died. To cruel (and now illegal) experiments of all kinds performed on our closest living relative.
Now NASA is planing to irradiate squirrel monkeys. Scientists are particularly interested in studying how the radiation impacts the monkeys’ central nervous systems and behaviors over time. Messing with the monkeys brains. Oh great!
By Steve Savage •
October 30, 2009
The discussions following my two last posts about climate change opinion shifts and about an anti-science coalition have made it clear that one of the reasons people distrust science is that “Science” fails to speak with one voice. There are definitely forces from the outside of Science that erode trust, but there are also internal issues.
The problem is that Science will not ever “speak with one voice.” Scientists often have different opinions about a given topic. Often that simply represents a healthy part of the scientific process. When I hear someone say, “scientists don’t even agree about this!” I want to say, “you don’t know many scientists, do you!” We are trained to questions assumptions and scrutinize analytical methods. We are taught how to spot artifacts and how to come up with alternate hypotheses. Some scientists get a little aggressive about this (there is usually at least one curmudgeon in every department).
There are definitely some topics that are so complex that it is impossible to be 100% sure about conclusions. There are questions that are not amenable to running a controlled experiment. These are all factors that make a topic like climate change so controversial. These are legitimate reasons for the lack of a single “answer from science.”
All the above said, there are plenty of examples of scientific disagreements that arise from what can only, honestly be called bad science. Doing science well is non-trivial. It requires a good deal of mental rigor and comprehensive information acquisition. If we scientists are honest we all have to admit that we can fall short of the ideal “scientific method” at times. Trust in “Science” ultimately means trusting “Scientists” and thats sometimes where the trouble starts. There are 5 main ways that I can think of that scientsts can “behave badly.” Maybe you can add some more.
By Steve Savage •
October 28, 2009
A wise Nebraska farmer I know taught me this saying: “It’s what you know for certain that keeps you from learning.” This principle is at the core of why certain groups and entities are rejecting good science.
As a scientist, and particularly as a scientist involved in agricultural and environmental issues, I’m increasingly aware of this trend. In some cases this involves open hostility to science, in others it is just a matter of ignoring the scientific input. What is disturbing is how many different “voices” are in this unlikely “coalition” and the extent to which they are coloring the views of the broader society (as seen in the recent Pew survey of American attitudes about climate change).
At acknowledged risk of offending people, I will try to describe factions in the groups that tend to reject things that science would tell them. I know that what I am talking about does not apply to everyone, or even most people in these groups, but it is still a potent force in our society.
By Tina Casey •
October 27, 2009
San Diego Gas & Electric has embarked on a demonstration project to test the commercial viability of a new concentrated solar power system that uses shallow pools of water as a passive cooling system for high-efficiency solar cells. The unique proprietary technology was developed by Pyron Solar of Sorrento Valley, California.
The new technology could be attractive in land-rich areas, and it may also have some application for introducing sustainable energy to more densely developed areas, since its use of high efficiency solar cells enables it to pack more generating capacity into less space. It also may prompt some new exploration of the opportunity to double up solar energy generation with other operations, such as fish farming.
By Zachary Shahan •
October 27, 2009
Obama discussed a big project long overdo and sorely needed today — modernizing the US electric grid. But it is more than discussion. $3.4 billion in Recovery Act funding is going towards this new project.
This is the most money ever awarded for clean energy in a single day from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act!
Obama spoke at the opening of the Florida Power and Light’s (FPL) DeSoto Next Generation Solar Energy Center (the nation’s largest PV electricity center) to announce and discuss the various benefits of this project.
By Steve Savage •
October 25, 2009
The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press released results of a major survey tracking what people believe about “Global Warming.” It is not encouraging! Across age, gender, race, political affiliation, and religion there have been declines in the number of people who believe that human activity is involved and increases in the number of people who don’t think it is happening. My own demographic (white, male, 54 years old, political Independent, Evangelical Christian) is among the most skeptical, though the Baby Boom slightly bucks the trend for age. Some friends and I are working on a strategy to challenge the Church on this issue.
By Tina Casey •
October 25, 2009
Sharp Corporation has just announced that it has achieved the world’s highest solar cell conversion efficiency using a compound layered design based on the technology used in the solar cells that power space satellites. Mindful of the link between sustainable energy and the future market for consumer electronics, Sharp has been aggressively pursuing solar efficiency improvements that lend themselves to commercial application.
Instead of silicon, compound solar cells use two or more photo-absorption layers composed of different elements. The trick is to find materials that generate the most current with the least waste. Sharp’s innovation is a proprietary technology that enables it to produce a high-efficiency crystalline compound, InGaAs (indium-gallium-arsenide), which boosted the efficiency of Sharp’s previous cells from 31.5% to 35.8%.
By Govind Singh •
October 25, 2009
In a recent international conference on ‘Climate Change: Technology Development & Transfer’ held in Delhi, the Prime Minister of India Dr. Manmohan Singh began his speech by stating that climate friendly and environmentally sound technologies should be viewed as global public goods.
The panel, also chaired by the Maldives President after his country’s recent underwater stunt, called for the Northern countries to do (much) more than just emissions reduction. The statement also comes shortly after media reports suggest India could change its national position on climate change to drop the ‘deal-breaker’ tag put on it by the West.
The BIG question: Will India change its official position ahead of Copenhagen?
