Recently the magazine Popular Science ran a major story on individuals who believe they have electrosensitivity or electrohypersensitivity.   I’m sorry to say that it was an example of horrible reporting that really only talked about the issue as if it were proven real.   It stated the claims of the various individuals who claimed to have the condition without once considering that it might be “all in their head” and not real at all.   (I’m working on a post with a more definitive and full report on all the problems with the PopSci article.)

While it did contain some language about how long term harm, such as cancer, is not proven to be related to RF radiation, it reported about being “Allergic to radio Waves” is if it were conclusively proven as fact. Not surprisingly, the story has generated a lot of hype and has been championed by those who insist that the condition exists.

Well then, I’m going to make an offer.   I contend that electrohypersensitivity is not real.   The condition is psychosomatic.  RF fields do not produce nausea, headache, fainting, skin rashes or any other acute effect on the human body.   No person can, under controlled conditions, show that they manifest these symptoms more often around a low power rf transmitter than when away from radio sources.

Do you think I’m wrong?    Then prove it.   I’m willing to put up one grand of my own money to be proven wrong.   Honestly, I’m so confident about this, I’d put up more than that, but I want this to be a credible challenge and so I’ll put up an amount I know I can provide if I need to. I’m very serious and I’m willing to make the effort of setting up a test to conclusively and fairly settle the issue. And I will eat my words and fork over the money if you can prove me wrong!

The Challenge:

To prove that you manifest symptoms of electrohypersensitivity and that these symptoms are reliably linked to RF radiation by demonstrating the ability to detect the state of RF transmissions in a controlled enviornment.

The Reward:

1.   One thousand US Dollars, provided in the form of a certified check, money order or other mutually acceptable monetary instrument.

2.   I will admit I was wrong about electrosenstivity / electrohypersensitivity not existing.

3.  Your case will be brought to the attention of researchers, with whom I am in communication, and efforts will be made to report your condition and the verification in peer reviewed journals.

The Test Setup:

(more…)

Many countries in Europe like to talk about how “Green” they are and indeed in many of these countries the Green Party has become one of the most powerful political parties and has gained control of the government, either directly or as part of a coalition in the past decade.   But for all the talk of programs for renewable energy, reduced greenhouse emissions and better enviornmental policy, how have these countries actually been doing and how do they compare to the less “green” countries?

For the purposes of this comparison, a “green” energy policy is defined by the following:

• Rejects nuclear power, in the most extreme examples, calling for its complete phaseout or banning it outright.
• Strong focus on wind and/or solar power
• Favors enormous subsidies to wind and solar power
• Generally has a fairly favorable stand on natural gas, even if it is rarely (if ever) mentioned
• Attempts to reduce energy consumption through effeciency
• Believes it is acceptable to heavily tax or penalize energy usage as a means of encouraging reduced consumption
• Is supported by Greenpeace, the Green Party, Friends of the Earth, Earth First and other groups with similar agendas

The following numbers are from the US Energy Information Administration. Some of the data is a couple of years old, but if anyone knows of any other source of information that provides better country profiles with comprehensive data of this type, let me know.

Lets take a look..

(more…)

From a more hopeful time when most saw nuclear energy and nuclear technology as the amazing and hopeful field that it is, these ads ran in magazines in the 1950’s and early 1960’s.   They have a great positive and optimistic message combined with some inspiring symbolism and artwork.   My favorite are the Union Carbide ads, but others here include ads from Honeywell, General Dynamics, General Atomics, The Railroad Association of America, Inco Nickle, Lockheed, General Electric and others.   A few of these ads are not even for companies whose main activity was nuclear related, but noted that they were at least somewhat involved in the nuclear technology world.

I collected these classics from a number of sources.  A few came from the excellent Modern Mechanix blog, while others  came from Wikimedia, Erik Nitsche’s Flickr account and other websites.   Since these images were scanned from original material and posted to begin with, I’m assuming that there’s probably no copyright issue here, either because the original ad owner doesn’t mind them being distributed or because they’re no longer under copyright.   In any case, their use for documentary purposes should constitute fair use.

I really love these classics.

In the past few days, a great deal of information has been coming out regarding the explosion that occurred at the Kleen Energy power plant in Middletown CT.    Another worker has died from his injuries sustained during the blast, bringing the death toll to six.  The Chemical Safety Review Board has released information from their initial probe into the incident which contained some shocking revelations about the nature of the natural gas “purge” which was being conducted at the time of the explosion.

The “purge” is a fairly common procedure which has been long known to come with some significant dangers.  Simply put, the purge refers to part of the gas system being opened to the outside and gas released into the system to blow out the opening.   This is done when work has been done on the system, such as new pipes fitted or valves replaced.  In these cases, debris such as metal fragments may be left behind in the system.   These fragments could damage the turbines if they were not purged from the system.   Purging can be done with the natural gas supply or by using a blast of nitrogen, argon or compressed air.   In the case of compressed air, however, it may be required that another purge is conducted with gas or nitrogen before the final power-up, in order to assure there is no oxygen in the gas lines.    It is also possible to conduct such purges with the gas piped to a flare tower, rather than simply vented.   This burns off the excess gas, reducing the danger of an explosion.

There are safety regulations, but most of them are volentary and in the case of the Kleen Energy plant, there does not appear to be any specific violation of the law.   It had been previously recommended that purges be conducted with as few workers on site as possible and with the gas piped far away from the structure, but this was a recommendation and not binding.   In light of this accident, the Chemical Safety Review Board has urged a moratorium on purges using natural gas.

Natural gas is, of course, a potentially explosive substance.   When gas is isolated in a pipeline, it can’t explode, because there is no oxygen to allow combustion.   However, once released, the gas mixes with air, creating a potentially dangerous fuel-air explosive.  Natural gas can ignite at concentrations as low as 4%.   When it is vented, it is critical that the area be thoroughly ventilated to assure that the gas is completely dispersed.  Natural gas is primarily methane and therefore is lighter than air, although not as much so as hydrogen or helium.    In general, methane will tend to disperse upward, but this property can also be problematic if there is a roof or overhang, which the gas may become trapped under.

The rate of dispersal of methane depends on a number of factors.   Gas will disperse much faster in open spaces, and wind will help accelerate the dispersal.  Sheltered areas may contain the gas for some time, and while natural gas does tend to disperse upward, if compressed gas is discharged, the drop in temperature will cause an increase in the density of the gas.   Cold natural gas may linger near the ground until it warms up enough to be lighter than air.

A photo has come out of a purge conducted at the Kleen Energy plant only a few hours before the deadly explosion.   This purge was uneventful, but reportedly the purge which was conducted at the time of the explosion used the same setup.   The photo is quite telling, even shocking.

(more…)

Via the Edmonton Journal

Lancaster Wind Systems says by turning wind energy into hydraulic power, inert nitrogen gas can be compressed in thousands of kilometres of unused pipelines across North America — creating a sort of giant pressure tank.

Wind turbines would add pressure to the network, and small electricity-creating turbines tied into the system would draw off that pressure, producing power in a closed-loop system right where the electricity is needed.

“You might have 200 generators in a major city, each in the 1.5-megawatt to four-megawatt range. And since the nitrogen is returned to the pipeline, there are no emissions,” said Dave McConnell, president and CEO of Lancaster.

He thinks electricity transmission lines will one day be a memory, with the continent’s energy moving around as pressurized gas. The project has attracted funding from the Sustainable Development Technology Canada fund, and also raised millions from private investors.

With 18 patents already filed and more on the way, Lancaster has a working one-megawatt wind turbine producing hydraulic power, and plans to open a pilot project this summer in which 42 minutes of energy will be stored in a short pipeline section. A major pipeline company is supplying the material.

A wind turbine today is basically blades turning a shaft in a generator unit that creates electricity, with all the heavy equipment at the top of a strong mast.

Lancaster has turned that around. Its unit acts more like a windmill, with a lighter mast supporting the blades and hydraulic tubing, and the heavy equipment on the ground.

Currently the research focus is on details of transferring the energy to storage.

“That is where we are at, the mechanism of transferring this energy into a vessel. We can’t talk about it, except that when the fluid comes down it is under pressure,” said Arnie Barr, a field supervisor.

McConnell points out there is no hydraulic fluid in the storage system; it is simply moved into a tank and then sent back up the mast to be recompressed by the power of the wind.

“There is a pressure exchanger to convert the energy in the (hydraulic) fluid into the storage medium (nitrogen gas),” he said.

….

After a lifetime in the offshore-oil business, McConnell said he returned to Canada with the idea of buying a couple of drilling rigs. But then he had a better idea.

If this is a “Much better idea,” I’d hate to see a worse one!

Basically what we have here is a simple pneumatic power transmission system. One which is envisioned as being so enormous that the pipes and the pressure tank are actually one in the same. There are two things that make it a bit different than most conventional pneumatic systems: first, for some inexplicable reason it uses a combination of hydraulics and pneumatics, instead of just one or the other. Secondly, for other unexplained reasons, it uses nitrogen gas, rather than just using air, which is 80% nitrogen to begin with and works just as well.

(more…)

To build a nuclear weapon you need weapons grade fissile material.   This could be plutonium or uranium.  (It could theoretically also be something like neptunium or americium, but nobody has ever bothered with that, as it would be far more difficult.)   In the case of uranium, it must be highly enriched uranium and in the case of plutonium, it must be “weapons grade” plutonium.

The process of extracting plutonium from spent fuel for reprocessing, use in fast reactors or MOX fuel usage is similar to that used to extract plutonium for use in nuclear weapons.  For this reason, many nuclear energy opponents will scream “AH HA!” and say that a nuclear power reactor is clearly a “proliferation hazard” regardless of what type it is.  Furthermore, they’ll tell you that reprocessing is the ultimate danger and that if we dare recycling fuel, then others will recycle their fuel too (many already do, by the way) and if they do that then certainly they’ll be building weapons.

Of course, there are plenty of countries that reprocess fuel to one degree or another and don’t have nuclear weapons.   Germany, South Korea, Japan, Belgium and Italy either reprocess fuel or have done so in the past but never had a nuclear weapon.   Countries like Russia, France and the UK reprocess civilian reactor fuel but have never used this fuel to build a nuclear weapon.

There’s a good reason for this.   As it turns out, the spent fuel from a modern power reactor, such as a BWR or PWR reactor is completely unusable for a nuclear weapon.

Here is why:

(more…)

I hope this does not make me a conspiracy theorist, because on this one, I think the government is hiding something and I disagree with those who have dismissed this as a non-event.

On December 9 1965, a fireball streaked across North America and was sited in the Great Lakes region of both the United States and Canada.   There’s no doubt that this happened, as it was seen by many and produced sonic booms which were recorded on seismometers.   It was also seen in Pennsylvania, where some reports indicated that debris or meteorites may have started grass fires (there were grass fires, but whether or not this caused them is unproven.)

In the town of Kecksburg PA, local residents reported that an object landed (or crashed) in a small wooded area.   It has been pointed out that it’s not uncommon for observers of a meteor or other falling object, such as a satellite, to mistakenly believe that it has landed somewhere it has not due to an illusion which occurs when the object crosses over the horizon.  If there are trees or some other obstruction in the foreground, it can appear that the object has landed in the area behind the obstruction.   This phenomena is fairly common and it’s certainly possible that this is what occurred in Kecksburg, although there is some evidence to the contrary.

The Pennsylvania State Police were called and arrived to search the area, and the local volunteer fire department was also on the scene.   The State Police initially stated that they were turning over the site to the US Military, implying that there was something significant in the area and beyond their experience of jurisdiction.   However, later an official statement was released stating “The Pennsylvania State Police have made a thorough search of the woods. We are convinced that there is nothing whatsoever in the woods.”

At this point, the official documentation ends.   While there’s no doubt that something was reported and that there was an official report, any information about an object in the woods that night comes only from eyewitnesses – who are, of course, notoriously unreliable.   There are, however, a few pieces of indirect documentation to the event.   A Journalist from a local newspaper filed a report stating that an object had been found and the military had secured the area.   The reporter Bob Gatty, was at the site at the time and his story indicates that he had verified these events and seen them himself.   Despite these reports and the fact that the State Police had clearly stated that they did summon the military, the official line is that the US military never went to the location that night.

There is no doubt that many people in the area believed something did crash at the site on that night, although this does not mean anything did.

(more…)

There’s no doubt that radiation saves lives when applied properly in a medical setting.  In recent years, narrow beam radiation therapy has made it possible to zap cancerous tumors while keeping damage to nearby tissue to a minimum.   CT scans and digital filmless x-ray imaging has improved at an astonishing rate, making it possible to see inside the body with unprecedented detail.

The exposure from imaging procedures tends to be fairly low and no empirical evidence exists for any harm from routine diagnostic imaging.  However, it’s no surprise that a lot of scaremongering has come about over this.   People seem to fear “radiation” like few other things an reports that indicate patients are exposed to more radiation than ever before (on average) raise alarm even though they never state that there’s actually any harm arising from this.

Of course, the greater danger is that these reports, empty though they may be, could lead some to avoid life saving diagnostic imaging and radiation therapy.  Forging radiation therapy for a tumor that cannot be removed completely with surgery can be a death sentence, but some of the sensational reporting makes it seem like radiation could be even worse, emphasizing the dangers without any context.

Via the New York Times:
(more…)

NOTE:  See the question mark on the end of the headline?   That means this is not reported as verified fact but rather as a possible event that is being reported
Reports have come in from Mexico describing an apparent meteorite strike that left a thirty meter crater in an area of the country about 100 miles northeast of Mexico city.  The impact is reported to have occurred yesterday evening at approximately 18:30 (6:30 PM).   This would have been around 00:30 GMT, assuming that the reported timing is correct.   Thus far there’s not a lot of information outside of the Mexican press, but based on a number of reports it does appear that there was some kind of event that did occur in the area of Pachuca, Hidalgo Mexico.

Reports include sightings of a flaming object streaking across the sky, but it should be noted that until independent verification and more data becomes available, it can’t be stated conclusively that it was indeed a meteorite.   It is possible that this could have been a piece of “space junk,” an aircraft accident or possibly even something as mundane as a propane tank exploding.  It would not be the first time that a terrestrial explosion as reported as a meteor strike.

Via Bad Astronomy:

There have been some reports of a possible meteorite in Mexico — here is one news report translated into English.

Reports are a bit sketchy right now, but apparently a bright flaming object was seen coming down about 100 miles northeast of Mexico City on Wednesday around 18:30 local time. There was a roar that was loud enough to shake buildings. Another news article is reporting a crater 30 meters in diameter was found.

At the moment this is all I know. It’s not clear if this was actually an impact event from a meteorite or some terrestrial event. In 2007 a small meteorite struck in Peru, causing a lot of confusion (with me at least!) over the source of the event; there was a lot of speculation before an actual meteorite impact was confirmed. Before that impact, it was not considered likely that a small meteorite could actually hit the ground fast enough to make a crater in the ten-meter size range (they slow down or break up high in the atmosphere), so the Peru event was a surprise. It’s still not completely understood how the meteoroid survived to hit the ground.

So it’s possible this Mexico event is a meteorite, but we don’t know yet. I’ll post more information as I find it.

Possible Seismic Confirmation???

(more…)

Interestingly I was an observer to a disaster today without even knowing it.

My parents are out of town for a while and because I live quite near to them, I am staying at their home to take care of the dogs and keep down the fort.   Their home is in Guilford CT, which is about 15 miles, as the crow flies, from Middletown CT.   That’s slightly closer than where I’d otherwise be.  A bit before noon, I felt and heard what I would describe as  “surge” of wind or vibrations.    My parents house is fairly large and when a gust of wind hits it broadside, you can hear and feel the windows and walls rattle.   This event was a bit like that, but far more acute.  While wind gusts last a few seconds, this was more like a surge of pressure that lasted under a second.   It shook the house more than normal, to the point where it felt a bit like it might have been a seismic event, transmitted through the ground.

It was noteworthy enough to make me go to the window and look outside to see if there was something going on, like maybe a big truck or something else that could account for this weird sudden surge of pressure and vibration.   The event was not like a “BOOM” but perhaps a bit like a “thud,” although not an easily heard sound.   It may have been infrasonic – the kind of sound that you don’t hear directly but which you can feel in your chest and which you can hear indirectly due to the reverberations it causes.

It’s hard to describe the event, but the words “thud,” “woosh” and “surge” are the best I can come up with.

In any case, I went back to what I was doing, which was writing the previous post (the one about diamonds).

Turns out a natural gas power plant blew up and killed at least five people!!!

It seems a bit ironic that it’s called the “Clean Energy Plant” or at least it was, before much of it was blown up.   It’s far too early to tell exactly what happened here, but it’s worth noting that the event is not entirely unique.   Some enormous explosions have occurred at natural gas fired power plants over the years, as well as at natural gas pumping stations, storage depots and other facilities that support them. A massive natural gas explosion in New Jersey left hundreds homeless in 1994 and deadly natural gas explosions have occurred in recent years in Russia, Texas, Virgina, Alaska, several parts of Canada, China, India and numerous other places. This includes explosions at the power plant location, as was the case in St. Petersburg Russia.

I have to admit that while I’m acutely aware of the potential for disaster that lurks wherever you find massive amounts of flammable gas, this reminder hit especially close to home.   In addition to living near a natural gas power plant, I also live about 20 miles from a nuclear plant.  The nuclear plant, unlike the gas plant, has never killed anyone or had a major incident that effected the safety or property of those who live in the area.    This shouldn’t be surprising, however, because while the American  natural gas industry’s safety record is fairly descent, it’s far from spotless, unlike the nuclear energy industry which has never had even a single solitary incident in it’s history that endangered the local community or caused loss of life to citizens in the area.

During its history of roughly five decades, there have been a handful of worker fatalities in the US nuclear industry.  Nearly all of them have been from common workplace accidents found in all industries, such as falling off of a ladder or catwalk.   There has never been a death of a worker at a US nuclear power plant due to reactor malfunction or a nuclear accident.  There has been only one death attributable to a “nuclear” accident of any kind – a worker died as the result of a criticality accident in 1964 at the Woods River Junction reprocessing plant when he improperly mixed a solution of uranium and plutonium, resulting in unexpected critical.    Of course, the US is not alone in this.   With the exception of the former Soviet Union, most other countries with a nuclear industry have a spotless record and the rest have a nearly spotless one.

Sadly, in a single event, the natural gas industry has killed five times that many.   So which one is the dangerous one again?