Meditations on the future of the chew toy

From the busy life of a student, I have moved on to living the busy schedule of newborn's parent, thus I have not yet found much extra time in a week to write, and whatever personal writing time I do find is often better devoted to the artsy sort of writing I learned at the academy. In the last few weeks, I had many ideas for blog posts, but none of them got done. I absolutely should consider other ways to post to my blog without always having to sit down and blog it out. In fact, I already do quite a bit of writing in a week, yet rarely do I consider this work blog writing. Yes, I just raised the existential question: What is blog writing?

It's not a very important question though, so I'll just cut to the chase here. I have decided to start posting some of the article writing I do at work. I also reminded myself that this blog can contain more of the random, unfinished philosophical arguments I poke at in a week. Ultimately, what I want to learn how to do is use the chew toy as a reservoir of past ideas I've had.

And so I give you an article I wrote for the Buehler Planetarium's monthly publication:

NASA Research Fuels: A Seed of Global Responsibility?

In all reaches of technology, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration has made great impacts on everyday life. Its list of inventions and patents already includes, but is hardly limited to: ear thermometers that take a temperature with one click, scratch-resistant eyeglass lenses, and the insoles that make shoes more comfortable. And just consider where humankind would be without long-distance telecommunications, cordless power tools, and water filters.

In recent years, NASA has even begun using innovative thinking to study the causes of, and possible solutions to, global environmental change. A recent NASA article, “Alternative Jet Fuels Put to the Test,” outlines one potential example for influential change in daily human life around the globe. Along with various other research groups, NASA is testing the engine performance and aircraft emissions of two jet fuels made from non-petroleum materials. The two focus fuels of the study are synthesized from coal and natural gas, because these resources actually contain the energy necessary to power a commercial airliner.

Given not only the rising cost of oil but also its ever-decreasing supply, exploring alternatives to petroleum seems more important than ever. The technology to synthesize non-petroleum fuels has been in existence for decades, practical interest remained low, but in light of the recent rabid fluctuation in oil prices, the high cost of building the processing plants that would synthesize non-petroleum fuels may now seem like a viable economic alternative. In addition to decreasing the amount of oil used for jet airline travel, these non-petroleum fuels may also reduce the amount of environmental damage done to the skies. In NASA’s words, “it is thought that synthetic fuels create fewer particles and other harmful emissions than standard jet fuel” (“Alternative”).

Yet, the glaring problem with this research is lack of any suggested departure from human dependence on fossil fuels. Coal, natural gas, and oil are all sources of energy being consumed much faster than the Earth can replenish supplies. All fossil fuels are non-renewable sources of energy, limited by formation time. Fossil fuels came into existence gradually from the heat and pressure of the Earth’s crust acting on the fossilized remains of plants and animals that died hundreds of millions of years ago.

Fossil fuels are quite useful as sources of energy, but when burned, they release the byproducts of their energy into the atmosphere. These are greenhouse gases, which come in many forms. Carbon dioxide has been the main focus of recent greenhouse gas discussions, since it is “the leading human-produced greenhouse gas driving changes in Earth's climate” (“NASA Mission”). Meanwhile, an ever-increasing human population demands the burning of more fossil fuels than ever. “Eighty-five percent of all human-produced carbon dioxide emissions come from the burning of fossil fuels,” which means the global addition of “almost 1.4 metric tons of carbon per person per year to the atmosphere” (“Human Factor”).

To put this impact in terms of accumulated effect, “more than half of all fossil fuels ever used by humans have been consumed in just the last 20 years” (“Human Factor”). Humans are creating a global problem of atmospheric proportions. Clearly, humans have not properly learned to weigh the costs of industrial and commercial ventures alongside the benefits. While the Industrial Revolution has greatly benefited the human way of life, it has also led to a startling increase in concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases. The evidence is in the air. “Before industrialization, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was about 280 parts per million. By 1958, the concentration of carbon dioxide had increased to around 315 parts per million, and by 2007, it had risen to about 383 parts per million. These increases were due almost entirely to human activity” (“Human Factor”).

Thus, human beings have upset the natural balance of the Earth’s carbon cycle. “If we think of Earth as ‘breathing,’ the balance between photosynthesis, or ‘inhaling,’ and respiration, or ‘exhaling,’ was about equal until humans began mining and burning large amounts of fossilized organic matter like coal, oil and natural gas a couple hundred years ago” (“Orbiting”). Once upon a time, humans only exhaled the carbon dioxide produced by their own bodies. Now, in the age of technology, humans also ‘exhale’ lots and lots of fossil-fuel carbon dioxide. Hundreds of millions of years ago, these fossil fuels were stored as ‘inhalations’ in the Earth. Now their rapid release by humans has gradually and increasingly tipped the balance on the Earth's carbon cycle. In other words, humans have been exhaling much, much more than their own share of carbon dioxide.

But the topic of global climate change need not be entirely a discussion of doom and gloom. Another recent NASA article, “The Orbiting Carbon Observatory and the Mystery of the Missing Sinks,” outlines a new spacecraft scheduled to launch February 23 of this year. Primarily, the Orbiting Carbon Observatory will focus on how “forests, grasslands, crops and soil are absorbing carbon dioxide” (“Orbiting”). NASA has chosen to focus on land sinks because scientists currently have decent estimates for how human activity distributes carbon dioxide between the atmosphere and the ocean, but less is known about how land sinks absorb the greenhouse gas.



Despite clearer estimates, and despite deforestation and (sub)urban development, plants still seem to have the upper hand on land, according to Scott Denning, a professor of atmospheric sciences at Colorado State University, who says “plant life is growing faster than it's dying,’” or in his more scientific explanation, “‘land is a net sink for carbon dioxide, rather than a net source’” (“Orbiting”). Via Denning, the Orbiting Carbon Observatory article outlines the six main ways a carbon ‘sink’ can develop on land. In all cases, human activity plays a role in creating the proper circumstances for more plant growth. More plants means less carbon dioxide acting as a greenhouse gas. In other words, human development and/or interference naturally leads to more plant remediation and/or prosperity.

The underlying message is quite clear. Regardless of how much or how little humans realize and respect what plants do for them, the plants of Earth will continue working as they always have to undo the ‘exhalations’ of humans, be they the essential exhalations of human respiration or the convenient emissions of human activity. And while plants cannot make up for all of the carbon dioxide released by human fossil-fuel use, they deserve some recognition for having done their part.

Here, NASA too should be commended for participating in the research that returns this fact to the human attention. Projects like the Orbiting Carbon Observatory show that the Administration seems to be thinking in the right direction by revealing the damage done, and their current research on jet fuels seems at least one humble baby step on behalf of humankind. And who knows? Given NASA’s innovative spirit, maybe someday it will announce research being done on plant-based jet fuels. One generation of plants could help to ‘inhale’ the emissions created by the energetic burning of the previous generation, and so on. Such a breakthrough would allow a different kind of progress leading back toward that more balanced point in the Earth’s carbon cycle history before humans knew the means for technological progress without restraint. On the other hand, the future holds only that inevitable point in time when the age of fossil fuels comes to an end. The development of responsible technology alone will determine how humans make the transition.

Given its technological contributions thus far, and its current focus on environmental matters, NASA's current environmental research seems as good a reason as any to remain optimistic that scientific research will someday work hard at making fossil fuels a thing of the past. After all, technology seems to have brought us too far to turn back now. Therefore, technology may very well serve as the eventual solution that bridges the gap between a society’s unchecked desire for innovation and its promotion of the healthy ecosystem acting as its life-support system in the vast expanse of space.

References

NASA, Alternative Jet Fuels Put to the Test.

---, The Human Factor: Understanding the Sources of Rising Carbon Dioxide.

---, NASA Mission to Help Unravel Key Carbon, Climate Mysteries.

---, The Orbiting Carbon Observatory and the Mystery of the Missing Sinks.

A litter of one

The zimpup arrived yesterday
He came in the natural way
Young Griffin is strong
With feet that are long
The rest I see no need to say



Emily's 39-week wait has ended. Early on January 2nd, I awoke in bed, still not fully recovered from a stupid New Year's hangover. When I became aware of her, I realized she was using her laptop, tracking her contractions at contractionmaster.com. When they came at five-minute intervals, we calmly loaded the car and went to the hospital.



Emily was a goddess. I have never seen her, nor anyone, in so much pain. It hurt me seeing her like that, but by the end of labor, she said pushing was such a relieving outlet after waiting through the pain of intensifying contractions. At 12:08pm on January 2nd, she delivered our son, Griffin Porter Zimmerman: 7 pounds, 9 ounces (or 3.43 kg for those who prefer metric), with his parents' height (19.5 inches).



Those are the scissors I used to trim the cord. Someday, he gets to blame me if he doesn't like his innie/outie.



That's Griffin's "in utero life-support system" (or, the placenta). He no longer needs it now that he has the Earth's atmosphere for breath and his mom's breast milk to eat. The human organism is quite special.

As Emily lie writhing and making painful exhalations that made me cry, I kept wondering when the beauty of labor would become apparent to me. The whole process seemed more a form of torture than the wonderful experience people often recall. But when my son's head finished passing through the birth canal, and the rest of him came sliding out with the amniotic fluid, the reward for Emily's pain was clear.

But Emily wasn't the only one who had a rough day. The process of labor makes for a pretty sleepy baby...



... and proud parents too!

Sorry, Ralph.

I admit, I did at least look at Ralph Nader's spot on the ballot. He was pretty far down from the top (the top two of course being the two most powerful political parties in the nation: Reps and Dems). Then, once I'd made my peace with not voting for the best candidate, I filled in the bubble for Obama Biden.

Sorry, Ralph. I respect you.

I can understand why most people get all worked up when I say I'm a Nader supporter. After all, he stole the 200 election from Gore. (Or was it W. that did that?) I also understand that voting for Nader just because he's not a Rep or a Dem is equally shallow. It's as shallow as voting for any one candidate based on one issue (Ralph's issue being the sad state of election affairs in this nation, where one must become an entirely different person so as to puppet for one of the big two and their corporate supporters).

But what if I wanted Ralph Nader to be President because he'd focus on issues like everyday life? What pisses me off most about the anti-Nader (or anti-Nader-voting) conglomerate is their often ignorant attitude toward a man who has devoted his life to confronting corporate greed and laziness. The effect has been a long career of making every American's life safer and more respected. Because of Nader, seat belts are standard in your automobile. Because of the non-profit organizations inspired by his work, you now know what's in the food you eat. You know that nuclear energy has some drawbacks. You know that water and air should stay clean, and that forests may be important to us. Granted, the respect corporations have for us and our ecosystem are by no means genuine, but thanks to Ralph Nader, at least this respect is required on some levels.

Once more, sorry, Ralph. I know it's been said before, but this country truly does not deserve you.

And I've come to decide that Obama may not be a terrible substitute. His victory speech brought some moisture to these eyes. And who knows? Maybe Obama will be wise enough to throw Nader a cabinet position. The only thing to know about Nader is that he only does things his way, meaning that Obama will have to approach him with all his morals in check. If Nader smells even one hint of corporate money, he's gone.

Sounds like the kind of guy I'd like running my country.

Florida voters

To dispel some of the myth surrounding Sunshine State voters, I share with you now Obama's deep understanding of the important Floridian vote:



When I read the words "MY VOTER PLAN," I assume that means I'll have spaces to jot notes about the state and local amendments. Not so. In case you can't read them, the flyer asks me to plan my vote by checking one of the boxes:

I WILL VOTE:
[ ] Before work
[ ] During lunch
[ ] After work
[ ] Other

So, basically, I'm a Floridian heartbeat. I know this because my vote-able heart beats with glee when I cast my eyes upon the other side of the flier:



Cant'cha just feel the chipper birds singing the sunny-shade tune of Obama's day out with a perfect nuclear family?

Don't get me wrong. Neither McCain nor Palin is an option. I'm only wondering whether I should feel insulted by Obama or terrified by American expectations. These sorts of mailers smell like wasted money to me. Do candidates still deem this sort of bullshit necessary, or worse yet, is this the clincher for some Floridians?

Of course now I'm talking about those Floridians whose voter plans consist of checking a box so they can remember when they might be able to fit the foundation of democracy into their work schedule. Let's see. Do I wake up early, vote instead of eating, or get home late?

And what of the "Other" box? To tell the truth, I was considering voting Nader--or "not voting" as the sound-bytten mass public calls it. Maybe Barack Obama believes so strongly in democracy that he wants me to write in another candidate there, or jot some notes on amendments, etc. Given the theft of 2000, I'd me more inclined to believe this Obama flyer was dispersed by a radical covert branch of the conspiring evangelical Republicans of Florida, and they included the "Other" choice and blank line so heathens like me will realize that not voting is an option too.

I actually considered all this until Emily checked today's voice mail messages. We missed a call from Matt Damon, who contacted us on behalf of Barack Obama's Florida Campaign for Change. He wants us to vote Obama too, because "the issues are too important to sit this one out." Now I figure maybe I can check the "Other" box and write in the blank line next to it: Preferably conscious, but not required, as long as I vote for Barack Obama so Nader doesn't steal another one for the evangelicals.

Academonic Times

I am convinced the academy is sucking the life out of me. I just told Emily today that I feel like a degree in creative writing is actually making me less creative. Just look at the lack of snazzy metaphors and e-prime verbage thus far in this entry.

In the last month, how many blog postings have gone undone, despite the strong desire to rant and rave on some topic? Must finish thesis, that thing for which I have no time because I teach (only) two freshman composition classes. Must finish degree before I know whether or not I can be a writer. Although I suppose if I were a true writer, I'd say fuck the stupid degree and just write right now. (Still, I feel this process of getting a master's is teaching me how to compile a large project, which probably counts for something.)

How're everyone elses' days?

zimdog's syntax secular

In an essay my students and I read for class, the author writes "Gilbert and Sullivan" as something of a punchline. I understood the reference, and even chuckled at its use, but what I was thinking about most was the use of "and."

For some years now, I've wondered what the difference is between "&" and "and." There may be an accepted usage for each, but since I prefer to speak with ignorance on rational matters I have decided free of external influence, I shall now state how I think the usage differs. You let me know if you agree or disagree. Honestly, I'm getting much better at talking about absolutely nothing for a really long time. I learned it from one of my professors.

My decision, from this moment forward, is that I shall use "&" to join two commonly/closely-related entities. The syntactical purpose is to eliminate confusion in sentences that have lots of "and"s in them. For instance:

Civil War history teaches us the dynamics of color like black and white and blue and gray.


Pretend I have just descended in a UFO and learned English, but I know nothing about the American Civil War. How do I know what color dynamics my non-alien self just wrote about? How do I know the "black and white" refers to races of people and the "blue and gray" refers to the clothing of warring sides. I say, think of the aliens (or anyone else who may encounter confusion from lack of context). Use more &s.

Now try the same sentence on for size, using &s:

Civil War history teaches us the dynamics of color like black & white and blue & gray.


... or perhaps this other example, which also uses &s to establish which "and" joins two choices and which "&" joins one word & another:

When considering the creators of musicals, I like Gilbert & Sullivan and Rogers & Hammerstein the least.

True story by the way...

'Tis bureaucracy, m'lord. Simple, hog-rotting bureaucracy.

A few minutes ago, I checked my Broward College e-mail account. I tend to do this at work when I get hung up on a project. It's one way to take a mindless break from the constant thinking that non-pleasure writing requires. Normally, these BC e-mail excursions do not last very long. I do a quick pan with the eyes, followed by a vast sweeping highlight before I purge the inbox of the many college-wide e-mails that have gathered since my last work day.

Today was different. I saw all these e-mails about polo shirts, so I'm thinking to myself I can understand college-wide e-mails about Hurricane Ike or maybe phishing scams and other notable scandals, but polo shirts? I had to read them...

Here's the seed crystal e-mail, sent 9/9/2008 4:22:24 PM:

I have had a couple of inquiries about who is eligible to receive a shirt...any full-time employee of the college can have a shirt.

Jillian

And the downtrodden respond:

1. Jillian, I truly believe that the college was remiss in not offering the shirts to those of us in Adjunct positions. Some of us have been serving (and successfully so) the college for a significant number of years. I have just begun my 17th year of teaching at the North Campus. The tenure of many of the Adjuncts far exceed that of the relatively-new or recent full-timers.

We have heard at almost every one of the Adjunct meetings and seminars over the years that the college would not be able to function effectively without us.

Why then, are we now being snubbed?

Steve

2. I would agree. I have just begun my 18th successful year as an Adjunct.

Jimmy

Fortunately, there is hope:

1. Good Morning! Never shouldl 'anyone' should be slighted, after all we are a 'TEAM' and Together as a TEAM we make BC.
This is not much, however, I would like very much to donate my Polo shirt to the adjunct community.
Thank you,
Barbara

2. I second the thought. Adjuncts, feel free stop by my office, Bldg. 71, Rm. 121 (south) for a medium T-shirt. I am guessing I will have it in a few weeks. First come, first fitted.

Gary

The most recent e-mail, from Gary, was sent 9/10/2008 12:49:51 PM. In the course of less than a day, I have borne witness to the tension brewing at Broward College: the uprising of the masses, having found their issue upon which to declare their equality, and whose pleas do not go entirely unheeded, for they find sympathizers in positions of power who are quick to dismount their full-time horses, seeing it as their duty to offer alms to the adjuncts. The revolution has been avoided.

Or has it? I will keep you updated when I know more about the Polo Shirt Situation of 2008. After all, I'm at work. What else should I focus on?

...

Since I posted this entry, two more e-mails have come along. Now I actually look forward to checking my work e-mail!

This e-mail is directly addressed to a previous participant, Steve, whose heated reply (cited above) opened widespread debate on the topic of a college's moral obligation to provide polo shirts for adjuncts. In his reply to Steve, James aligns himself with the adjuncts using Bill Clinton's famous message of 'I feel your pain':

I believe it is generous to offer workers free garments, but if there aren't enough to go around, and that prompts exclusion, then maybe it is something to be re-thought. I often hear that BC is a family. Does this mean adjuncts and part-timers are its stepchildren? I certainly hope not. I know and work with many adjuncts and part timers who are some of the most dedicated people in this college, and that I have ever had the good fortune to work with, and also believe they should not be treated as second class citizens. Suggestion: If there aren't enough shirts for everyone, perhaps they should be donated to a charity that feeds and clothes the needy. If my words come across as soaked in umbrage, perhaps it's because I was a stepchild myself who was often overlooked during gift-giving occasions -- so I know the feeling. I think what you guys do make BC the wonderful institution that it is, and know you will continue to do so, freebee or not. Another suggestion: A shirt only for Adjuncts and part-timers that reads: "Unsung Heros," or better yet: "Backbone of the College."
Just a thought.

One thing's for sure. If the college does make "Unsung Heros" t-shirts for adjuncts and part-timers, I say leave the misspelling of heroes. I think it means something.

Next, the most recent e-mail wins the Hypocrisy Award, considering I received it:

And so it begins.

Please stop with the 'reply all' snarky comments.

Just. Please. Stop.

Gino

Will more Broward College employees enter the e-mail coliseum to do battle wearing only their perspectives on the issue of polo shirt distribution among faculty? As we approach the 24-hour-versary of the Polo Shirt Situation of 2008, I vow to do my duty as news correspondent to remain fair and balanced in these trying times....

...

Your humble reporter is back on the case of the Polo Shirt Situation of 2008: A Symbolic Debate for Equality. Since I last did any news corresponding, only two more e-mails have been sent campus-wide.

In the first one, Shirley writes to Barbara and Gary, those humble souls who previously announced a humble willingness to donate their rightfully earned polo shirts to desiring adjuncts:

Thank you so much for your generosity. I am an adjunct who would love a polo shirt. Unfortunately, though, I would need a Large!
Any other kind soul out there with one to spare?
Thanks in advance!

As you can see, the plot thickens. We discover that generosity is not always enough. For selfless giving to meet a practical outcome, the right people must express generosity to fated counterparts. Otherwise, generosity will see none who can benefit.

The second polo shirt e-mail proves that campus-wide e-mails function based on synergy. From the generosity of full-time staff members willing to acknowledge the broader base of adjuncts beneath them, a new hope for the future of these polo shirts has come to being. As if on cue, the next e-mailer brings the light of Christian love into the discussion by illuminating the greater sense of urgency for generosity.

DEAR WONDERFUL STAFF, FACULTY AND ADMINISTRATION:

For the past couple of days I have the read various e-mails about these POLO SHIRTS for faculty and whether the adjuncts should be entitled to them, as well. As I read each e-mail I thought to myself, "Would it not be a GREAT idea that these BC POLO shirts be put to better use? Why not donate them to those that REALLY need them. How about those victims in HAITI, CUBA and the TURKS and CAICOS Islands?"

Well, just my humble thoughts and opinion.

God Bless,
Andrew


Yes, Andrew. God bless indeed. Thank you for being the voice of reason--and for reminding us that state institutions such as Broward College run on the fuel that is the love of the Christian God. If only God had thought to send those shirts directly to those in need, all this squabbling within the BC family--um, er, TEAM, might have been prevented.

I wish I could tell you more about the end use of these much-debated polo shirts, but it seems the faceless institution of bureaucracy has stepped in to bring our polo shirt democracy to an end:

BC,

The preferred method of group discussions at Broward College according to policy is the college forums at: https://forums.broward.edu//. Please consider not using the collegewide distribution list (BCC) for group discussions.

Thank You

Technology Support
Information Technology

If only this entity, this "Technology Support/Information Technology," had not stepped in to make a soft-worded suggestion for us to [p]lease consider not using the collegewide distribution list (BCC) for group discussions, we might all get to know a little more about how free clothing influence us all. It now seems clear that the distribution of swag polo shirts speaks to more than just job title. The question of who gets a free polo shirt is a deep one, and one better left to the higher powers, like God Himself.

I now see the error in my ways, blaming God for not distributing these BC polo shirts to those in need. He wanted us to learn the lesson our way. One can only assume these humble humans of Broward College made the right choice. Via God's loving hand, they have made the first hesitant step toward ensuring that their unwanted polo shirts make it to those ravaged by the very storm that God Himself invented.

To those who followed me through the many days of this emotional story, I wish only to say, God bless you, and God bless the institutions of America. And God Bless America, and all those who live here. And, I guess, God bless those upon whom we wish to bestow our charity and polo shirts (even though God obviously doesn't like them, because why else would He send Hurricane Ike their way).

In closing, I have only one more thing to add:

Please Note: Due to Florida's very broad public records law, most written communications to or from College employees regarding College business are public records, available to the public and media upon request. Therefore, this email communication may be subject to public disclosure.