The next natural disaster to think about by Tony Green

Image of exploding Sun

Before Hurricane struck Katrina five years ago, the possibility of a direct hit from a Category 4 hurricane was overlooked as a doomsday scenario as experts pleaded with government officials to make the proper preparations. Unfortunately, the experts were right. 

Another theory which is not getting much attention is the impact a massive solar flare might cause on the electric grid. From time to time the sun produces flares which are a large energy release of electrons, ions, and atoms through the corona into space. By the way, next year solar activity is expected to reach peak intensity.

I used to belong to the group that paid no attention to this possibility until I received training on power transformers as part of my position as a sales engineer in the utility industry.

In short, a large flare would cause extreme currents to be induced within the transformer.  A flare could case enough internal damage to either ruin mechanically or deteriorate the insulation and or oil causing an immediate failure. The lead time is over a year for many power transformers so if a large number of transformers used to transport our electricity failed at the same time we might be in the dark for a long time.

Think about it, what if the grid was non-existent for four to six months before the power returned? How would people survive? The answer is they would survive in the same fashion as they did before the modern era. We‘d survive but I’m sure the event would involve some major change in all of our lifestyles as a result of the unexpected return to a time before universal access to electricity.

Does this sound impossible? Maybe you should think again on the next bright sunny day.

Women’s World Cup Final 2011 in the family by Tony Green

I had finished watching the drama of the penalty kicks at this year’s World Cup final between Japan and the United States. Prior to the match my daughter mentioned she wanted to view the final so she could see her two favorite countries play against each other.

On the surface this would seem contradictive to idea of pulling for your country in a championship game which is designed to determine a winner and a loser. However, since our children have citizenship in both nations and can speak Japanese and English at a fluent level why shouldn’t she be able to support both teams?

As the family watched the match we all felt the ebb and flow as momentum shifted back and forth from the United States seeming to have the World Cup won on several occasions and fulfilling its dream versus the rejoicing at the final penalty kick after battling back from multiple deficits to give Japan a bit of hope in light of the disaster than occurred last March and the on-going support and prayer which will be needed in spite of the daily updates on the calamity are no longer being in the news.

 

At the end there was a winner, a loser and the supporters of each side. The final was one for the ages, filled with action and drama played by two proud teams representing their countries. The winners and losers showed grace and class on both sides.

Admittedly, my daughter did not chose her nationalities, her mother and I determined that however, after today’s game the dignity of the two teams made both sides wonderful choices of countries to root for.       

Chemical Engineers in California by Tony Green

"Keep Us" logo

               As a result of life circumstances after I completed my Bachelor’s degree in Chemical Engineering I have never worked as a licensed engineer.  Therefore, laws pertaining to professional engineers should not affect my livelihood. Yet after reading one of the American Institute of Chemical Engineer (AICHE) newsletters I was amazed to read Professional Engineers (PE) would be precluded from practicing their craft on the merit on their training.

                More specifically, I discovered Chemical Engineers are not licensed to practice in California without the supervision of a Civil engineer. Based on the current words in the California State Engineers' Act, performing chemical engineer duties unsupervised may be in violation of California State Law.

The inconsistency of this law is made clearer when the Chemical Engineering and Civil Engineering are examined in further detail. Civil Engineers build buildings. On the other hand Chemical Engineers produce materials through chemical and engineering principles in a variety of disciplines, ranging from biotechnology, Petroleum, food & beverage, and alternative energy just to name a few.

               How has this occurred?  In 2001 AB9002, better known as the State Engineers Act, stated only Civil Engineers could practice Civil Engineering. The stipulation which prevents Chemical Engineers from practicing without Civil Engineering supervision problem resulted when the definition of Civil Engineering was defined as including writing reports, managing staffs, mass construction, and doing work on a site which is geographically fixed. Therefore, lawmakers saw fit to include Chemical Engineering under that umbrella. With this definition, wouldn't all the engineers be covered regardless of specialty? We can assume our law makers did not study engineering during their college days.

Realistically, engineering training should not be a prerequisite for public office but shouldn’t someone knowledgeable about the profession been consulting before passing legislation which would prove to have profound effect on the livelihood of such highly trained personnel?

                The bottom line is licensed PE are precluded from practicing in California unless supervised by someone outside their area of expertise.

                The adoption of alternative energies in relation to Chemical Engineer related disciplines cannot be denied. Among the applicable technologies include lithium batteries, composite materials used in wind turbine blades, converting the silicon for use to produce solar power panel, and bio-fuels. The need for trained professional created by the rigorous Chemical Engineer curriculum is clear. What needs to done is to correct this obvious oversight.

                Granted California’s budget deficit and other woes should take are higher priority with our lawmakers than this issue which affects a small percentage of its citizens. What if it was your livelihood which was being jeopardized due to the antiquated law? California is a great to live but there are some common sense things which can be done to make lives better for everyone...

The loss of a submariner by Tony Green

Image of a Royal Navy submarine

By habit when I turn on my computer the first thing in the morning and access the Internet I check the news. By and large the stories are pretty ordinary. On this day, I was shocked to read the story of a shooting on the British nuclear submarine, the H.M.S. Astute, by one of its crew members.  

From my time aboard a nuclear submarine I learned, even though, submariners represent the navies of various countries each of us are bonded by the fact we chose to serve our countries in a fashion others are not either willing or able to. 

A few years back when I heard about the Russian submarine Kursk getting stranded at the bottom of the North Sea many prayers went out to our Russian comrades. Most of us would have gladly left port to participate in a rescue mission if it offered an opportunity to increase the chances of bringing the Russian sailors home.

While meeting other submariners in port typically an exchange of submarine qualification pins referred as dolphins occurs as a show of brotherhood. Even though we may not all be countrymen every submariner is part of a larger community.  

In my view, a brother has been lost who will never return to serve his country or come back to his family.  The tragedy on the incident is losing a sailor in senseless fashion.  Submarines are inherently dangerous due to the nature of the job but when the boat is on port the crew should be safe.

I am sure an investigation will take place and determine the root cause for this tragedy, however, upon initial glance I cannot think of any reason for submariners to want to shoot a shipmate on their boat. Like your siblings growing up on occasions you may not see eye to eye but in the end you are still family.

The submariner community is special. Many do not choose to silently serve their country under the planet oceans, seas, and lakes. The life of submariner is not easy, exciting nor glamorous all the time. Long stretches can go by with minimum activity while in critical situations periods of little and high stress can stretch men to the breaking point. Which leads me to wonder what kind of circumstances could drive a submariner to bring a gun aboard a submarine with ill intentions?   

Nuclear Power – alternative energy solution under fire by Tony Green

Nuclear power plant

Prior to the problems with the Fukushima nuclear reactor in the aftermath of the earthquake and tsunami nuclear power had gained traction as a whole. The expansion of nuclear power as a renewable source of power has been included in the Obama administration’s energy plan. Recently inroads had been made in commissioning nuclear power plants of come on line by the middle of the next decade.

According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA) 104 commercial nuclear power reactors (65 nuclear power plants) in 31 states are currently in operation. These plants supply more nuclear capacity than any nation on earth accounting for 20% of our country’s total power output.

Yet in light of the negative publicity which has been generated calling to curtail our nations plans to expand the use of nuclear power due to concerns about radiation exposure there are some points I feel Americans as a whole are overlooking.

Case in point, with the recent tsunami in Japan the near meltdown has galvanized the anti-nuclear community. I was hoping people had forgiven the nuclear industry in the 30 years since Three Mile Island and Chernobyl accidents.   Bear in mind, the reason for the leak at the Fukashima plant was not a procedure violation or a mechanical failure following by operator confusion of his plants indications which lead to less than optimal response. In short, the reactor breach resulted from an earth quake of unprecedented magnitude, i.e. an act of nature or Force de Majore.

Here’s a thought, when the Chilean miners got stuck in a mine shaft while procuring coal did the masses request all Americans not to use coal to meet our power needs? Coal, interestingly enough, accounts for nearly half of our generating capacity.

Last September a faulty gas line ruptured in San Mateo, California killing four people and destroying an entire neighborhood.  The root cause was likely a pressurized valve which was not maintained properly and over time failed. Was there a public outcry to not use natural gas as a source of power? In the event you were wondering natural gas counts another 20% of our power that is generated in the United States. Why is when these accidents occur no one questions our use of coal and natural gas? Yet, when the same sorts of mishaps occurs in nuclear plants people cite this occurrences as evidence for shutting down our current nuclear plants and scuttling our plans to build new plants.

I was hopeful nuclear power, which is renewable energy source since splitting atoms emits no carbon dioxide, could be part of long term plan to wean our country off of foreign oil and contribute to reduce the green house gas emission.

At this point, I am convinced people in general will never view nuclear power as a viable option in spite of its proven safety record. I might as well get use to this fact although I still do not understand why…