Tuesday, May 10, 2011

UN: Renewable energies can meet world’s power needs

By David Worthington | May 9, 2011, 5:35 PM PDT

The United Nations has found that renewable energy alone can meet global power needs - countering the burgeoning belief that nuclear power is the only viable solution.

Today, the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN). The report painted a rosy future for renewable energy technologies.

IPCC’s working group of 120 researchers determined that nearly 80 percent of electricity could be generated through renewable sources by mid-century, eliminating between 220 to 560 Gigatonnes of carbon dioxide pollution by 2050.

This shift would hold the world’s temperature down two degrees Celsius, which meets the goal of the UN’s Cancun Agreements. The energy mix studied by IPCC includes forms of bioenergy, geothermal energy, hydropower, solar, and wind.

“With consistent climate and energy policy support, renewable energy sources can contribute substantially to human well-being by sustainably supplying energy and stabilizing the climate,” said professor Ottmar Edenhofer, the group’s current co-chair.

The report acknowledged political disagreement among developed economies vis-à-vis developing economies, and seeks to help policy makers understand that there are solutions for a collective way forward.

“What is unique about this assessment is that the IPCC allows us to draw on and bring together a broad spectrum of experts on each of the technologies reviewed in collaboration with scientists studying energy systems as a whole. It represents a systemic, broad, impartial and state of knowledge report on the present and future potential of a low carbon, more resource efficient energy path,” Edenhofer said.

Other key findings were:

  • The energy potential of renewable technologies exceeds current global demand.
  • Renewable energy capacity grew in 2009 across also categories in spite of the global economic downturn.
  • Developing nations account for over 50 percent of the world’s current renewable energy capacity.
  • Most reviewed scenarios showed that renewables would exceed the low carbon energy provided by nuclear power or fossil fuel power plants equipped with carbon capture technologies.
  • There is no “one size fits all” policy for encouraging renewable power development.
  • Some renewable power technologies can stand on their own today.
  • Renewable energy solutions are not the only solution to reduce carbon emissions.

The IPCC working group also offered projection for different forms of renewable energy. See here There’s also a brief video overview of the findings.

“What is unique about this assessment is that the IPCC allows us to draw on and bring together a broad spectrum of experts on each of the technologies reviewed in collaboration with scientists studying energy systems as a whole. It represents a systemic, broad, impartial and state of knowledge report on the present and future potential of a low carbon, more resource efficient energy path,” Edenhofer said.

The report stands in contrast to recent comments made by public figures such as Microsoft CEO Bill Gates who endorsed nuclear power at a conference in New York last week. Gates dismissed renewable technologies as “cute,” but unable to meet energy demands.

Gates noted that there is a lot of room for innovation in nuclear reactor designs. “The room to do things differently is quite dramatic,” he said. Gates is not a disinterested party: He has invested in nuclear power company TerraPower.

(Reference - http://www.smartplanet.com

Life and the Cosmos, Word by Painstaking Word


By CLAUDIA DREIFUS

Published: May 9, 2011

TEMPE, Ariz. — Like Einstein, he is as famous for his story as for his science.At the age of 21, the British physicist Stephen Hawking was found to have amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Lou Gehrig’s disease. While A.L.S. is usually fatal within five years, Dr. Hawking lived on and flourished, producing some of the most important cosmological research of his time. 

In the 1960s, with Sir Roger Penrose, he used mathematics to explicate the properties of black holes. In 1973, he applied Einstein’s general theory of relativity to the principles of quantum mechanics. And he showed that black holes were not completely black but could leak radiation and eventually explode and disappear, a finding that is still reverberating through physics and cosmology.

Dr. Hawking, in 1988, tried to explain what he knew about the boundaries of the universe to the lay public in “A Brief History of Time: From Big Bang to Black Holes.” The book sold more than 10 million copies and was on best-seller lists for more than two years.

Today, at 69, Dr. Hawking is one of the longest-living survivors of A.L.S., and perhaps the most inspirational. Mostly paralyzed, he can speak only through a computerized voice simulator.

On a screen attached to his wheelchair, commonly used words flash past him. With a cheek muscle, he signals an electronic sensor in his eyeglasses to transmit instructions to the computer. In this way he slowly builds sentences; the computer transforms them into the metallic, otherworldly voice familiar to Dr. Hawking’s legion of fans.

It’s an exhausting and time-consuming process. Yet this is how he stays connected to the world, directing research at the Center for Theoretical Cosmology at the University of Cambridge, writing prolifically for specialists and generalists alike and lecturing to rapt audiences from France to Fiji.

Dr. Hawking came here last month at the invitation of a friend, the cosmologist Lawrence Krauss , for a science festival sponsored by the Origins Project of Arizona State University. His lecture, “My Brief History,” was not all quarks and black holes. At one point, he spoke of the special joys of scientific discovery.

“I wouldn’t compare it to sex,” he said in his computerized voice, “but it lasts longer.” The audience roared.

The next afternoon, Dr. Hawking sat with me for a rare interview. Well, a kind of interview, actually.

Ten questions were sent to his daughter, Lucy Hawking, 40, a week before the meeting. So as not to exhaust her father, who has grown weaker since a near-fatal illness two years ago, Ms. Hawking read them to him over a period of days.

During our meeting, the physicist played back his answers. Only one exchange, the last, was spontaneous. Yet despite the limitations, it was Dr. Hawking who wanted to do the interview in person rather than by e-mail.

Some background on the second query, the one about extraterrestrials. For the past year, Lucy Hawking was writer in residence at the Origins Project at Arizona State University. As part of her work, she and Paul Davies, a physicist at Arizona State, started a contest, “Dear Aliens,” inviting Phoenix schoolchildren to write essays about what they might say to space beings trying to contact Planet Earth.

Q. Dr. Hawking, thank you so much for taking time to talk to Science Times. I’m wondering, what is a typical day like for you?

A. I get up early every morning and go to my office where I work with my colleagues and students at Cambridge University. Using e-mail, I can communicate with scientists all over the world.

Obviously, because of my disability, I need assistance. But I have always tried to overcome the limitations of my condition and lead as full a life as possible. I have traveled the world, from the Antarctic to zero gravity. (Pause.) Perhaps one day I will go into space.

Q. Speaking of space: Earlier this week, your daughter, Lucy, and Paul Davies, the Arizona State University physicist, sent a message into space from an Arizona schoolchild to potential extraterrestrials out there in the universe. Now, you’ve said elsewhere that you think it’s a bad idea for humans to make contact with other forms of life. Given this, did you suggest to Lucy that she not do it? Hypothetically, let’s say as a fantasy, if you were to send such a message into space, how would it read?


A. Previously I have said it would be a bad idea to contact aliens because they might be so greatly advanced compared to us, that our civilization might not survive the experience. The “Dear Aliens” competition is based on a different premise.

It assumes that an intelligent extraterrestrial life form has already made contact with us and we need to formulate a reply. The competition asks school-age students to think creatively and scientifically in order to find a way to explain human life on this planet to some inquisitive aliens. I have no doubt that if we are ever contacted by such beings, we would want to respond.

I also think it is an interesting question to pose to young people as it requires them to think about the human race and our planet as a whole. It asks students to define who we are and what we have done.

Q. I don’t mean to ask this disrespectfully, but there are some experts on A.L.S. who insist that you can’t possibly suffer from the condition. They say you’ve done far too well, in their opinion. How do you respond to this kind of speculation?

A. Maybe I don’t have the most common kind of motor neuron disease, which usually kills in two or three years. It has certainly helped that I have had a job and that I have been looked after so well.

I don’t have much positive to say about motor neuron disease. But it taught me not to pity myself, because others were worse off and to get on with what I still could do. I’m happier now than before I developed the condition. I am lucky to be working in theoretical physics, one of the few areas in which disability is not a serious handicap.


Q. Given all you’ve experienced, what words would you offer someone who has been diagnosed with a serious illness, perhaps A.L.S.?

A. My advice to other disabled people would be, concentrate on things your disability doesn’t prevent you doing well, and don’t regret the things it interferes with. Don’t be disabled in spirit, as well as physically.

Q. About the Large Hadron Collider, the supercollider in Switzerland, there were such high hopes for it when it was opened. Are you disappointed in it?


A. It is too early to know what the L.H.C. will reveal. It will be two years before it reaches full power. When it does, it will work at energies five times greater than previous particle accelerators.

We can guess at what this will reveal, but our experience has been that when we open up a new range of observations, we often find what we had not expected. That is when physics becomes really exciting, because we are learning something new about the universe.

Q. I’m wondering about your book “A Brief History of Time.” Were you surprised by the enormous success of it? Do you believe that most of your readers understood it? Or is it enough that they were interested and wanted to? Or, in another way: what are the implications of your popular books for science education?

A. I had not expected “A Brief History of Time” to be a best seller. It was my first popular book and aroused a great deal of interest.

Initially, many people found it difficult to understand. I therefore decided to try to write a new version that would be easier to follow. I took the opportunity to add material on new developments since the first book, and I left out some things of a more technical nature. This resulted in a follow-up entitled “A Briefer History of Time,” which is slightly briefer, but its main claim would be to make it more accessible.

Q. Though you avoid stating your own political beliefs too openly, you entered into the health care debate here in the United States last year. Why did you do that?

A. I entered the health care debate in response to a statement in the United States press in summer 2009 which claimed the National Health Service in Great Britain would have killed me off, were I a British citizen. I felt compelled to make a statement to explain the error.

I am British, I live in Cambridge, England, and the National Health Service has taken great care of me for over 40 years. I have received excellent medical attention in Britain, and I felt it was important to set the record straight. I believe in universal health care. And I am not afraid to say so.

Q. Here on Earth, the last few months have just been devastating. What were your feelings as you read of earthquakes, revolutions, counter-revolutions and nuclear meltdowns in Japan? Have you been as personally shaken up as the rest of us?

A. I have visited Japan several times and have always been shown wonderful hospitality. I am deeply saddened for my Japanese colleagues and friends, who have suffered such a catastrophic event. I hope there will be a global effort to help Japan recover. We, as a species, have survived many natural disasters and difficult situations, and I know that the human spirit is capable of enduring terrible hardships.

Q. If it is possible to time-travel, as some physicists claim, at least theoretically, is possible, what is the single moment in your life you would like to return to? This is another way of asking, what has been the most joyful moment you’ve known?

A. I would go back to 1967, and the birth of my first child, Robert. My three children have brought me great joy.

Q. Scientists at Fermilab recently announced something that one of our reporters described as “a suspicious bump in their data that could be evidence of a new elementary particle or even, some say, a new force of nature.” What did you think when you heard about it? A. It is too early to be sure. If it helps us to understand the universe, that will surely be a good thing. But first, the result needs to be confirmed by other particle accelerators.

Q. I don’t want to tire you out, especially if doing answers is so difficult. But I’m wondering: The speech you gave the other night here in Tempe, “My Brief History,” was very personal. Were you trying to make a statement on the record so that people would know who you are?


A. (After five minutes.) I hope my experience will help other people.

(Reference - http://www.nytimes.com)

Contrite Cisco Regroups Before Skeptical Wall Street

By VERNE G. KOPYTOFF

Published: May 8, 2011

SAN FRANCISCO — John T. Chambers, one of the best salesmen in Silicon Valley, has been having trouble selling anyone on his company’s future.

Cisco Systems, where he is chief executive, is in a slump. The management system he put in place slowed decision-making and innovation. The company’s growth has slowed and its profits are falling.

His latest sales pitch is that he can revive Cisco — a technology colossus that makes computer networking equipment — by pruning its sprawling business and refocusing on its strengths.

But investors, Wall Street analysts and customers are a little bit skeptical of Mr. Chambers’s promises. No major improvement in Cisco’s finances is expected when it reports third quarter earnings on Wednesday. Given Cisco’s size, the scope of the overhaul and the increasing competition that is eroding the company’s market share, a turnaround could take time.

Last week, Cisco said it would reduce bureaucracy by eliminating a crazy-quilt management structure that had executives responsible for geographic regions as well as serving on “councils” that were supposed to encourage cooperation between the different groups. Instead, it slowed decision-making.

Last month, Mr. Chambers, who declined to be interviewed for this article, took his first step to fix Cisco by suddenly shutting down its Flip video camera business. Only two years earlier, Cisco had acquired Flip’s parent company for $590 million to expand its nascent consumer products division. The camera was popular and, indeed, the company was days away from release of the latest version of the video camera.

“This isn’t simply a midcourse correction,” said Jeffrey Kvaal, an analyst with Barclays Capital. “They’re facing challenges that are multi-year.”

The doubt in Mr. Chambers’s sales pitch began last year when Cisco’s sales started to show weakness that Mr. Chambers initially attributed to the sour economy. When profits continued to wither quarter after quarter, Mr. Chambers alternately blamed a decline in government spending and a “transition” after the introduction of new switches for computer networks.

In the last 12 months, its shares have fallen 31 percent as the Nasdaq index gained 22 percent. While Cisco’s shares fell, those of its rivals like Juniper Networks rose 35 percent. Alcatel-Lucent’s shares doubled.

In April, in a memo to employees, Mr. Chambers acknowledged systematic problems at Cisco. He blamed slow decision-making and a lack of accountability. “We have disappointed our investors and we have confused our employees,” Mr. Chambers wrote. “Bottom line, we have lost some of the credibility that is foundational to Cisco’s success — and we must earn it back.”

The contrition is unusual for Mr. Chambers, who is known for his unwavering optimism during his 16 years leading Cisco. He has paused his cheerleading only once before — during the dot-com crash more than a decade ago, when Cisco was unprepared for customers sharply cutting back orders. Cisco had been one of the hottest companies of the Internet boom of the 1990s with a high-flying stock to match. Much of the blame for its shortcomings fell on Mr. Chambers, much as it does today.

The last few years should have been golden for Cisco. Telecommunications companies worldwide were rapidly expanding their infrastructure to accommodate growing traffic from online streaming and mobile phones.

But Cisco failed to keep pace with changes in the network switching and routing equipment, which accounts for nearly half its revenue. The industry has shifted from more standardized technology — a landscape in which Cisco thrived — to specialized equipment for various niche markets.

For example, Cisco’s market share in edge routers, used by Internet providers to route traffic near the edges of their networks, dropped 11 percentage points over three years to 42.2 percent in 2010, according to the Dell’Oro Group, a market research firm.

“They’ve been lagging,” said Shin Umeda, an analyst with the Dell’Oro Group. “As a result, the competitors have been able to move in.”

Rivals like Alcatel-Lucent and Juniper Networks grabbed market share from Cisco in edge routers. Meanwhile upstarts like F5, based in Seattle, have chipped away at Cisco in other specialized markets like the equipment for controlling the load on Web servers in data centers.

Analysts said Cisco stumbled because Mr. Chambers distracted the company by trying to push into new businesses like videoconferencing, smart meters for monitoring electricity use, television set-top boxes, video screens for stadiums and even a tablet computer for businesses. These initiatives, called “adjacencies” within the company, were supposed to be the foundation of future growth.

Some of them have gained momentum, like Cisco’s corporate voice-over-Internet telephone systems and WebEx, the business videoconferencing service it acquired four years ago. But others, like the consumer products and digital signs, failed to catch on or are so far afield from the company’s main focus that analysts say Cisco is better off without them.

In addition to cutting Flip, Cisco folded its Umi home videoconferencing into its business-oriented unit. Eos, a service for media and entertainment companies to manage online content, will most likely be discontinued as a stand-alone product or sold. So far, Cisco has cut 550 jobs, but it has also offered voluntary buyouts to some of its employees in the United States and Canada.

Despite Cisco’s troubles, the company remains a powerful force with $40 billion in annual revenue and nearly 73,000 employees.

Still, more reorganization at Cisco is expected. The Linksys unit, which sells routers for home networking, is among the most likely targets because of its lower profit margins, analysts said. Cisco is expected to pay closer attention to its main router and switching businesses.

In his memo, Mr. Chambers largely signaled as much by saying that Cisco will “compete to win in the core.”

He added that the company’s breadth of products gave it a big advantage.

However, achieving the long-term goals of up to 17 percent annual revenue growth is no easy feat for a company so big. Indeed, Mr. Kvaal, the Barclays analyst, said that he would be happy if Cisco simply shored up its business and kept up with the networking industry’s growth.

Sales of switches are expected to be flat this year, but grow 6 percent the following three years, according to the Dell’Oro Group. Router sales are supposed to grow 9 percent annually over that period.

“Cisco doesn’t have to be a market-share gainer, they just have to hold onto the share they have,” Mr. Kvaal said. “They have taken the first step, but it’s not the only step.”

(Reference - http://www.nytimes.com)