On the subject of nuclear power

March 14, 2011 9:41 am

There is, of course, a lot of media coverage of the Fukushima nuclear power station in Japan which is suffering failures following the earthquake and tsunami there. I'd like to make a couple of points on the matter. First, nuclear power plants don't explode like nuclear weapons. It doesn't happen, it can't happen. While nuclear explosions are simple in principle they're actually quite difficult to make happen (You basically need perfectly symmetric pressure and exact radiation densities or you'll only get partial explosions). So people need to stop tossing around this idea that the "worst case scenario" is a nuclear explosion. It's not.

Second, I've seen media reports claiming that this event shows the "fragility" and "danger" of nuclear power plants and why they need to be avoided. This is a rather disingenuous statement. Let's look at the plant and what happened. (Note that some of the details are still sketchy, so I don't claim to be perfectly accurate in event descriptions. I'm getting most of my information from the Wikipedia article.)

Construction on the facility began in 1966. It's old. The reactor designs are old (installed in the 70's) and designs and safety systems have vastly improved in the intervening 45 years. So any failures at this facility really has no bearing on the safety of modern designs.

From my understanding the power plant in Japan was designed to handle a 7.9 magnitude quake. So the fact that it was still standing after an 8.9 magnitude quake shows the robustness of the design. Japan's advanced earthquake warning system automatically shut down the 3 active reactors. Because the reactors shut down, they weren't producing any electricity and the active cooling-system required outside power to continue operating (modern designs use passive cooling-systems that don't require power to keep the reactor safe). The massive damage to the region's power grid put them in a more vulnerable state and prevented external grid power from being used to power the cooling systems, but on-site backup generators kicked in as designed. Things would have been fine at this point, but then a massive tsunami hit the facility knocking out the backup generators. There was a protective sea wall in place, but the tsunami wiped it out.

At this point the next backup in the design took effect (this is 3rd-level backup) and batteries began supplying the necessary power. They had enough capacity to power the facility for 8 hours, but further supplies took up to 13 hours to arrive due to the extensive damage in the region. The effort was hampered by the fact that the planned location for external backup power generators was flooded by the tsunami.

Yet, despite all this, no major exposure of radiation has occurred. Some radioactive steam was vented from two of the reactors in order to reduce pressure in the cooling systems and prevent further damage. The most recent reported levels of radiation exposure that I've seen have been ~1000 microsieverts. Approximately the amount of exposure you'd receive in one year from normal background radiation. And, of course, this only applies if you are exposed. So while a lot of media is discussing the "dangerous" radiation levels, I've seen nothing showing which people might actually be exposed.

Yes, any exposure to radiation is bad because it will increase your lifetime cancer risk. I've stated this about the TSA back-scatter devices and it's true of exposure from any other source as well. The important thing to consider in this case, though, is the larger context in terms of power sources. We're going to generate our electricity somehow, so let's look at one of the most popular choices: coal.

During the normal operation of a nuclear power plant there is zero radiation release or exposure to employees, the environment, or neighbors. However, coal power plants exhaust radioactive isotopes into the atmosphere as part of their regular operation. According to an article published by Oak Ridge National Laboratory a typical coal power plant releases 5.2 tons of uranium and 12.8 tons of thorium per year! By contrast, the atmospheric release of radioactive particles by the Chernobyl accident (1986) was ~6 tons.

To be clear on the matter, there is almost no risk of a Chernobyl style exposure at the Fukushima power station. And even if there were such a disaster, the release of radioactive particles would still be far below the annual release of a single coal power plant.

I still assert that nuclear power is the answer to the next 100 years of our world's energy needs. The fact that this 40-year-old facility is still under control after the massive beating it has taken is a testament to the safety of nuclear power, not the fragility.

Walking down the street

March 12, 2011 12:42 pm

While Jess was at Cub Scouts on Wednesday I took a walk down the street with our camera seeing what there was to see. The lighting wasn't particularly good, but I got a few decent shots.

Something is still bothering me about this shot, but I can't put my finger on it. There is some chromatic aberration towards the edges, but I don't think that's the main thing bothering me. I usually don't notice chromatic aberration very much because my glasses have always had substantial chromatic aberration, so it's basically how I see the world.
IMGP4246a_sThe depth of field was too short on this one, so I applied an oil-painting effect which I think came out pretty well.
IMGP4253a_sThis image had some depth-of-field issues as well. The main line of 4 blossoms is slightly out of focus. You can't really tell scaled down to this small size though. Regardless, I applied the oil painting effect (on the right), but I think scaled down I like them both. The one on the right has a calmer mood though. The one on the left might actually work well enough for a nature category but I think I would enjoy having the one on the right hanging on my wall more.
IMGP4256a_s IMGP4256b_s

The Squeeze

March 7, 2011 10:29 am

I keep hearing on the radio and Internet about how the economy is recovering from the recession. The stock market is back up and high-end retail sales are up and unemployment numbers may, possibly, perhaps, might be starting to turn around. But I haven't seen any evidence that things are actually getting any better. In fact, all the evidence I've seen suggests things will only be getting worse.

For instance, in December 2010 the Secretary of Energy announced that DOE employees and DOE contractors (which I fall into) will have a pay freeze in effect until January 2013. That means my income is not likely to change. However, since December 2010 all of our expenses have gone up not insignificantly.

Gas prices here are nearing $4 a gallon and all expectations suggest that they will continue to rise. In December, they were around the $3 per gallon mark. So we have to absorb a 33% (and possibly higher) increase in gas prices with no possibility of wage increases.

We don't have cable or satellite television, but we do have a Netflix subscription. The price of the same Netflix plan increased from $9 to $11 per month—a 22% increase for the same service.

Our Internet connection increased by $5 per month with no upgrade in service—a 14% increase.

Food prices have been steadily increasing over the last several months. For instance, a head of lettuce used to be about $1.50. This week I decided not to buy it because the lettuce was up to $3 a head and the heads were probably about 2/3 the previous size. I understand there is apparently a nationwide lettuce problem, but in a more general nature we used to get by on about $80 per week in groceries, but the last several weeks have been closer to $100.

Now, this isn't to say that we're struggling. We're still very blessed to be able to put the same amount of money into savings each paycheck and contribute to our retirement account at the same level we have been. But we are having to make some adjustments to maintain the balance. We've been doing a lot better about not eating at Panda Express as often as we used to (within walking distance, so tasty, so hard to resist). And the Social Security payroll tax reduction that went into effect in January has also helped soften the blow of rising prices.

But all the pundits that keep pretending things are getting better don't seem to be living in the same world as us. We're not going to be increasing our spending on non-essentials so long as necessities keep going up in price. Of course, Netflix is a luxury we can live without (and we're paying for it out of our luxury spending), but Internet access is very close to essential these days, and I don't like having to sacrifice fresh produce (I like lettuce on my sandwiches and tacos!).

Book Reports - Non-Fiction

March 6, 2011 3:46 pm

I've been on another non-fiction kick lately. Here are the most recent books I've read:

The Man Who Lied to His Laptop - Clifford Nass:
I really enjoyed this one. Nass has spent his career studying human-computer interactions and then using computers to help him study human-human interactions. Very well written. One area he and his team researched was why everyone hates Clippy so much (that stupid paper clip in Microsoft Office that tries to help you). He also worked on a project to improve Clippy's image. He found the most effective way to get people to like Clippy was to have Clippy insult Microsoft anytime something went wrong. This put Clippy on the same side as the user instead of against the user. Users loved it, but Microsoft didn't end up using that idea. There are many other fascinating insights all backed up with extensive research.

Raving Fans - Ken Blanchard & Sheldon Bowles:
This one I didn't enjoy nearly as much. I was hoping for a similarly data-driven approach but was disappointed. Instead it's written as a matter-of-fact narrative. There are no cited studies to back up their claims. I like the ideas they present, but they simply provided no evidence that they're legit. It's about improving customer service but they never address the fact that all of their suggestions cost money and unless the better customer service brings in enough additional money to cover the costs it's not going to work. I can see it as the kind of book your stereotypical MBA would get excited over.

For Better - Tara Parker-Pope:
This book was recommended on the GeekDad Blog. I found it quite interesting. It follows my preferred model of heavily citing studies that back up the claims being made. It begins with an overview of current trends in marriage success. Namely, marriages are far more successful today than many people believe. People like to kick around "50% of marriages end in divorce," which ostensibly is still mostly true, but not nearly true for all demographics. When broken down by demographics you see that many common groups have a greatly reduced risk of divorce compared to others. The book goes over risk factors and warning signs and provides evidence-backed suggestions on changes that can improve your relationship.

One interesting point is that a lot of the troubles they cover stem from husbands and wives who expect to maintain the same life they had before marriage afterwards and when raising children. They both want to keep working full-time and going out at night and such and for a lot of people things completely fall apart when they have children and realize that they might have to adjust their lifestyles.

Another major trouble for many people is financial arguments. But the authors point out that financial arguments are rarely about finances and almost always about overall values and the financial arguments are just a symptom. You probably wouldn't be arguing about how money is spent if you both had the same goals in life.

How Risky is it, Really? - David Ropeik
I enjoyed this one too. Ropeik does a great job covering the neuroscience behind threat response. I found the discussion fascinating, though frustrating. He talks about the things that contribute to threat responses, but mainly admits defeat when people over/under-react. Ropeik suggests that once it comes down to it, someone who has over/under-reacted to a threat won't change their opinion unless they are honestly interested in adjusting their attitude to more closely match reality. Regardless, it still provided interesting insight into why Americans are still afraid of nuclear power despite the long safety history and other improvements compared to other fuel sources (and many other society-wide issues). He also provides some guidelines of steps you can take to better understand a threat to prevent yourself from over/under-reacting.

NurtureShock - Po Bronson & Ashely Merryman
This is probably my favorite out of this bunch of books. I also found it via the GeekDad Blog. It discusses a whole slew of aspects of the current understanding of child development. With 62 pages of citations at the end of the book, it's well documented and based on empirical studies. I definitely recommend it for anyone interested in the subject matter. I'll just go over a couple of the most interesting things.

One of the most interesting things was the studies of the effect of praise on children's motivation. It basically boils down to the idea that children who are unconditionally praised for being smart (or other inherent qualities) have their internal motivation destroyed. Because when they fail at a task it must be because they weren't smart enough (or other inherent quality). However, children who are praised on their effort and work ethic are far more likely to continue working on difficult (even impossible) tasks. They believe that their lack of success is due to a lack of effort rather than inherent failings which they can't control. This discussion all occurs in the context of the self-esteem society that was so popular in the 90's. An entire generation of children being told unconditionally how special and great they were, basically resulting in an entire generation of adults who don't like working on things that are hard. I guess growing up with a bunch of siblings who made sure you never thought too much of yourself has some benefits.

Another chapter that I found really interesting was about teenage sleep patterns. So, melatonin buildup is a big factor in what makes us feel sleepy. When it gets dark outside melatonin begins building up in our brains and we get sleepy. However, for teenagers, the melatonin buildup doesn't start until 90 minutes after it begins for adults and children. Meaning, chemically speaking, teenagers aren't tired until 90 minutes after adults. This is a major factor in why teenagers stay up later at night. The flip side is that the melatonin production continues later in the morning and is a factor in teenagers feeling sleepy in the mornings more than adults.

Here's where it gets more interesting. Several school districts in the country have used this information to guide their school start times. They've pushed back the high school start times by 90 minutes and the results were incredible. Truancy rates dropped, grades went up, SAT scores went up, the number of fights dropped, and aggressive behavior dropped. Basically, everything got better and has remained at those elevated rates ever since the start time change. Yet, most school districts still haven't adopted these changes.

I definitely recommend this book to anyone interested.

The Smart Swarm - Peter Miller
I didn't enjoy this one quite as much as I could have, but it still had a bunch of interesting things in it. The author makes a couple of dubious conclusions in some places, but overall it's a great discussion. I learned about how ants cooperate, how bees find new hives, how termites build their complicated mounds, why starling flocks and schools of fish move the ways they do. Those were all really interesting. The other aspect of the book is applying those studies to human behavior, computer/robot designs, and other places where large complex systems interact. It's interesting to read about how scientists and engineers have used these studies to improve telephone networks, industrial chemical production systems, delivery systems, traffic flow, and other complex problems.

Grails war error: codecOut.print(())

February 28, 2011 12:44 pm

Just stumbled upon this after upgrading to Grails 1.3.7. One of our gsp pages had an empty code block in it "${}" which was causing this error when trying to build the war. Running the app locally had no problems and Grails 1.3.4 had no errors when building a war with this empty code block, but Grails 1.3.7 did. Since there's nothing on the Internet about this little annoyance I'm putting it here so someone else seeing that error in their console knows what to look for.

Just to put the information in one clean place:

When trying to build a war, I got an error pointing to "codecOut.print(())" as failing. The culprit was an empty code block in one of the gsp files. That is, in one of the gsp files this occured: "${}". Clearly, someone forgot to fill in a value. I filled in the correct value and the war built without issue.