How some environmental regulations increase pollution and carbon emissions.

Environmental regulations that establish the operating parameters for industrial operations are intended to minimize the impact to the environment by the emissions from the facility.  But it doesn't always work that way.  Yes, it may come as a shock that a Government program might actually not achieve its intended goal, but it can happen.

A particular case is regarding the operation of coal fired steam generation plants.  If a steam plant is coal-fired there is likely some verbiage in the air quality permit that the boiler must operate at some very high  temperature to control the NOx emission concentration to a certain ppm level.   That's well and good.  But suppose the plant doesn't need to generate a lot of steam on a particular day and the boiler could support the operation with a lower temperature setting.  That would reduce the amount of coal burned and tons of carbon emitted into the atmosphere.  Good thing right?

No, that would put the plant in violation on the NOx regulation.  To stay legal the plant has to run the boiler hotter than it needs to and make more steam than it needs to and then dump the heat somewhere (as in outside).  And that would be OK I suppose if the object was to minimize the amount of NOx emissions.

But here's the problem.  In order to reduce the concentration of NOx in the boiler exhaust, the plant has to burn more coal than it needs to, so it ends up emitting more mass of NOx.  The slight reduction in concentration that comes from running the boiler hotter does not compensate for the increased amount of coal that was burned to make the boiler run hotter.

It would make common sense if people enforcing these sort of regulations could have some leeway to use common sense and determine the optimal operating point of temperature based on the load to minimize the amount of coal burned and the total amount of NOx emitted.  Maybe Adam Smith's "invisible hand" concept could actually help reduce energy consumption and reduce the environmental impact from factories.

Family Photo Album.. 1943 Alabama Squirrel Hunt

Squirrel.  The other, other white meat

The family tree from my dad's side is based in Baldwin County Alabama, Foley to be exact.  Here is a nice old photo of some of the kinfolk from way back in 1943 after what appears to be a successful day hunting squirrels.  mmm. squirrel meat.  Tastes like chicken I'm sure ..

As for the way they all held their shotguns during the photo, all I can say is the "lay it on the ground with the barrel pointing at your head" method is probably not in the gun safety handbook.

Oh, and ... Roll Tide!

Daniel and the "ghost" from Seul Choix Point Lighthouse..

Click twice to look close up

So back in 2004 we took a trip to the UP to see Cherie and Ted in Gould City and made a few day trips to see Lake Superior at Grand Marais, hike the trails at Tahquamenom Falls, and climb up the lighthouse at Seul Choix Point lighthouse in Gulliver on the Northern shore of Lake Michigan.

The Seul Choix Point lighthouse might just be the last working lighthouse where they let you climb the winding stairway up the tower to get a firsthand view from the tippy top.  (during the day!)

Steven and Daniel reflecting on the light bulb and lens

Part of the tour includes a stroll through the home where the Lightkeepers and their families used to live at the base of the tower.  There are antique pictures, clothes, furniture and appliances all on display in this working historical museum.  A few things for sale in the store, but this is no tourist trap.

Another part of the tour goes into how the Lighthouse is allegedly haunted by the ghost of Mr. James Townshend a Captain of a Great Lakes ship who suffered a mysterious and tragic death in 1910 at Seul Choix while visiting his brother Joseph, the Lightkeeper at the time.  There are all sorts of anecdotes about cigar smoke drifting in from nowhere and silverware moving around and unexplained tapping noises.  It was featured on an episode of Scariest Places on Earth.  Cool side story to go along with an exhilarating trip up the stairs and a spectacular view of the Lake.  Highly recommended for any visitors to the UP.

Now the story about the picture at the top. We didn't think much of the legend of the ghost of Seul Choix until we got home and looked at the pictures. The one of Daniel near the trees below the tower shows an odd purplish blur over his head.   Maybe the ghost knew how much Daniel hated and tried to avoid getting his picture taken back then.  Look at the kid's glare in the photo.   I would just write it off as reflected sunlight, but it was a cloudy day and we were between rows of trees out of the direct sun. One coincidence, it was the 94th anniversary of Townshend's death. hmmm.

Anyway, we liked the place so much we commissioned artist Leo Kuschel to make a painting of the lighthouse using some of our pictures to refresh his memory. He called a couple months later to tell us the painting was done and to come pick it up.  It's hanging in the house next to the Westcott II.  FYI,  Leo is still selling prints of it.  I think it is his finest painting of a lighthouse, and that is saying something. 

To think, it all happened because a ghost photobombed a camera-shy kid.

See the purplish blur in the sky?

 

The Most Un-PC Kid's TV Show Character Ever..

Ali Assassin, from "Lancelot Link: Secret Chimp"

Back in the day us kids would sit around the TV on Saturday mornings and watch cartoons and other kid TV shows like "The Hudson Brothers", "H.R. Puffinstuff", "Land of the Lost" and one of my favorites, "Lancelot Link: Secret Chimp".  Talking chimps driving cars and playing in a band.. Yer killin me! Lancelot Link and all the other characters were chimpanzees wearing people clothes who were made to smack their lips (probably with peanut butter) to make it look like they were talking.  Then they would dub in voices and a script to coincide with the smacking lips.  On the show Lance was a secret agent spy who was always bumbling around trying to foil some nefarious plot by the bad guys.  Kind of like "Get Smart" or "Pink Panther" without the SAG pay scale. The particular bad guy character whom I have dubbed "The Most Un-PC Kid's TV Show Character Ever" is from an episode from Season 1 "There's No Business like Snow Business" which first aired on December 31, 1969.  Ali Assassin. I don't know his bird's name.  No, Ali was not a terrorist nor an assassin, just a run-of-the-mill diamond thief. I can't even imagine a kid's show these days featuring either talking chimpanzees wearing clothes, or worse yet, a talking chimp dressed up like a Saudi prince with a fake mustache hanging out in a tent plotting crime with a bird perched on his shoulder.

From the set of "Another Happy Day" aka (insert other names here..)

Molly in her Bridesmaid dress

Molly had a featured extra role in a film that will debut at the Sundance Film Festival this Sunday.  "Another Happy Day" written and directed by Sam Levinson, starring Ellen Barkin, Ezra Miller, Demi Moore, Thomas Haden Church and the one and only George Kennedy.  Molly played Samantha, the younger of two daughters of Demi Moore and Thomas Haden Church.  Not a big part by any stretch, but a nice start for her working the long afternoons and all-nighters while filming on location in Rochester and Oakland Township.

The movie is about a hot mess of a family wedding featuring a variety of flawed characters who don't like each other very much. It looks to be a pretty dark film about family but I think it will be pretty funny as well. Look for the scene where a tipsy Demi Moore in a little black dress bumps and grinds on the dance floor at the wedding reception with some dorky extra. The director actually asked Demi to redo the scene and tone it down a bit. Try not to look like you know what you're doing out there . Or the catfight scene in the ladies room with Demi and Ellen. Try not to look like you know what you're doing there either..

Sam is a likable young man.  Polite and nice to everyone and always, always on the move.  He once came up to me to apologize for all the foul language Molly had been exposed to in the script and during filming.  I was like no worries Sam, nothing she hasn't heard from her mom.  (Sam knew I was joking btw).

Adult language was present, or more correctly soaked through the script.  I saw Sam's adorable 4 year old niece Lilah (who plays the flower girl at the wedding) walk up to Sam during a break and ask him in the sweetest little voice, "Uncle Sam, why is there so much bad words in the movie?"  He got down and put his arm on her shoulder and told her "Unfortunately Lilah, thats how some people really talk to each other."  Fuckin A right they do.  I won't get into the descriptors Sam allegedly used when giving Molly tips on how she should approach a scene flirting with actor Daniel Yelsky, but safe to say, Sam drops more bombs than a B-52.  Not in anger, more just for filler.

Molly came away from the filming with some cool stories about her experience.  Like when Demi Moore first came to the set at the Rochester Chop House and sat next to Molly.  Molly introduced herself and they shook hands.  After a pause, Molly asked "So.. what's your name?" to Demi.  She had heard the name before but didn't know what Demi looked like.  I bet Demi doesn't get that reaction very often on the set.   They were pals.  Chatting it up with girl talk about school and boys and dance and what she wants to be when she grows up and Demi snapping pictures on her iPhone.  I kind of assumed Demi would be a bit distant and aloof, but not at all.  She was a real sweetheart.

And Thomas Haden Church was nice to her as well.  One evening, they practiced improvising some random scenes sitting around the house between filming.  What a cool guy to give a young actor some free impromptu training.  He was a personable guy, a storyteller, and wanted to know about her goals and aspirations.  And he liked to talk about surfing.  He only works to support the surfing habit. 

I had a few conversations around the set with Ellen Barkin, the main character and producer of the film.  She was also very nice, upbeat, and down to earth.  Good people.  Same for Ashton.  He seemed like a really smart cool guy.  He likes talking about the '85 Bears.

Molly's sister in the movie is a young lady from NYC named Lola Kirke.   Stylish, pretty, outgoing, brash, all Big Apple.  One day she got a call on the set from Paul Stanley who invited her and some of the others from the movie to be guests of KISS at their concert at DTE Theatre, an outdoor concert venue in up the road in Clarkston.  I had to ask her, "How do you know Paul Stanley?"  She said Stanley was a friend of her dad.  She went on to tell me her dad is Simon Kirke and he was a drummer in a rock band way back in the '70's called Bad Company and asked if I had heard of them.  Ha.    
 

Molly and Lola take a break with Sean Rogers looking on.

My impressions from watching the whole operation.. Its chaotic and tedious but it all gets done.  They like to keep a well stocked snack cart round the clock and the first meal of the day is always breakfast even at 3:00PM.   Just about everyone smokes when they get a chance and the prop lady even gives them away.  The extras get herded around and fed like cattle and they like it.  Movie stars are just regular people with really cool jobs.  And you damn sure better be quiet on the set when they yell "Rolling sound!"     

Best wishes to the cast and crew from "Another Happy Day".  I can't wait to see it.

Molly and Demi right after their picture wrap.

Traffic Congestion.. Like a speed governor on the economic recovery

A report was issued from the Texas Transportation Institute that analyzes and trends traffic congestion data and its impact on commuters.  Here's one story on the report from wired.com.. You Wasted 34 Hours in Traffic in 2009

No, it wasn’t your imagination. Traffic hasn’t been quite so hellish since the economy imploded, but now that things are picking up, you can expect congestion to increase as well. It’s already gotten so bad that the average American spent 34 hours sitting in traffic last year and paid $808 for the privilege.

So say the brains at the Texas Transportation Institute in their annual Urban Mobility Report (.pdf). The study found traffic in 2008 was better than it had been in at least a decade, but the stop-and-go grind returned in 2009 as the economy improved.

I've pointed out in an earlier post here how traffic congestion caused by poorly timed stoplights is an enormous waste of fuel in the USA.  If we could only get the road crews around the country to time the stoplights at major intersections to keep traffic flowing, it would benefit all drivers by reducing their fuel consumption which would also reduce the demand on gasoline, which would help drive costs lower.  And that would put money in consumers' pockets which would help feed the economic recovery.

As this report also points out, as the economic recovery builds momentum, it will lead to more drivers on the road which will increase traffic congestion.  This will have the effect of increasing fuel consumption which will drive gasoline prices higher.  So it acts essentially like a speed governor on the economic recovery.  The more the economy heats up, the more people will drive, and the more time and gasoline and time we will waste in traffic, thereby reducing the average consumer's disposable income and increase distribution costs that will negatively affect the recovery.  Money spent at the gas pump can't be spent elsewhere.

To avoid this, we need to do all we can to reduce our collective fuel consumption and a big part of that has to involve alleviating systemic traffic congestion problems.  That is not an impossible task.  Timing the stoplights and eliminating the predictable logjams at the lane merge points near road construction projects would be a great start.

Random and evolution...

I'm somewhat of a math geek.  OK, more like a wannabe, but I try to represent.  And I have a small bone to pick with the use of the term "random" in evolutionary science.  Here's my case..

Swiping some excerpts from Wikipedia... (My emphahsis added)

The modern evolutionary synthesis ascribes the observed diversity of life to natural selection, in which some random genetic mutations are retained in the gene pool due to the non-random improved chance for survival and reproduction that those mutated genes confer on individuals who possess them.

Why do bioligists drop the word random so easily into that definition?  I don't think they can say the genetic mutations driving evolution are random unless they intend to twist the definition of random to include things they haven't figured out yet.  I don't see anything like that in this explanation of random..

randomness implies a lack of predictability. Randomness is a concept of non-order or non-coherence in a sequence of symbols or steps, such that there is no intelligible pattern or combination. 

We do know genes can mutate for a reason ...

In molecular biology and genetics, mutations are changes in a genomic sequence:  the DNA sequence of a cell's genome or the DNA or RNA sequence of a virus. Mutations are caused by radiation, viruses, transposons and mutagenic chemicals, as well as errors that occur during meiosis or DNA replication. They can also be induced by the organism itself, by cellular processes such as hyperpermutation.

So why refer to the the beneficial gene mutations responsible for evolution as random and overlook potential patterns between environmental effects and  gene mutations? Why is that slight distinction even important?  Here's my thinking.. Genes mutating similarly among many individuals within a species due to a common environmental cause are more responsible for evolution than genes that just mutated randomly among individual members of a species.  

It accelerates the speed we might otherwise predict for the evolutionary processes.  If a beneficial genetic mutation happens only randomly it will be less likely to propagate its entire species than if a large number of a species experience the same beneficial genetic mutation after exposure to the same environmental cause.  Granted the same exposure will create unpredictable mutations from one organism to another, but in a large population patterns will result.
There is some recent evidence to support the case against random..  Lizards Evolve Rapidly Once Introduced on Different Island    Its not even plausible that such useful mutations occured randomly so soon. There must have been some environmental cause that resulted in the genetic mutation and the resulting leap forward in the evolutionary processes.  And in my book, if it happens for a reason, its not random.