NanoSapiens

www.festo.com Bionic projects in the technical automation
Video Rating: 4 / 5

Pop!Tech 2008 – Festo Air Jelly Demonstration


Image by Pop!Tech

Continue Reading

The expert, all-inclusive guide on LNG risk based safety Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) is the condensed form of natural gas achieved by cryogenic chilling. This process reduces gas to a liquid 600 times smaller in volume than it is in its original state, making it suitable for economical global transportation. LNG has been traded internationally and used with a good safety record since the 1960s. However, with some accidents occurring with the storage Read More…

Original post source

Continue Reading

Hubble, Kepler and sophisticated ground-based telescopes are all very well, but for Stephen Curry nothing matches the elation of seeing the stars and planets with your own eyes

Stephen writes the Reciprocal Space blog

“The Earth is too much with us; late and soon, getting and spending we lay waste our powers; little do we see in Nature that is ours,” wrote Wordsworth of the commodification of the natural world by the industrial revolution. The poet’s lyrical sonnet mourns the loss of intimacy between Man and Nature, a privation I recognised last month when I lugged my telescope on holiday to Cumbria, Wordsworth’s birthplace and home.

My shiny eight-inch Newtonian reflector, a prized possession of just a few months, had till then only scanned the night skies of London. Though the view was dimmed by light pollution, I revelled in my first magnified sightings of the star-studded heavens. I saw the cratered moon, tracked down most of the globular planets and, on one memorable night guided by my daughter’s sharper eyesight, the Orion nebula; to say nothing of the swarm of new stars made visible by my telescope.

I was giddy with an amateur’s love but knew there had to be more. So I dismantled and packed the instrument for our trip to the darker night skies offered by the Cumbrian countryside, my wife looking on with a mixture of bemusement and pity.

“You’re not serious?”

But I was. And this city boy was richly rewarded for his efforts with two clear nights in that August week. Further north, the skies didn’t darken until about 10pm but when they did, what magnificent illumination was made visible. I stood and gazed and grinned at the feast of light: stars galore, everywhere I looked – even with the unaided eye – and, stretched across it all, the luminous swathe of the Milky Way.

The sense of superfluity was heightened by the sight of stars seemingly flung wastefully to Earth as the planet blundered through the Perseid cloud, its rocky fragments igniting as they shot through the upper atmosphere.

With my telescope I was in heaven. Old friends produced new wonders. I got my clearest view yet of Jupiter and could discern for the first time the banded pattern of clouds on its surface. Triangulating by the stars nearby I got my first fix on – my first fix of – Uranus, too dim for me to find from under London’s orange canopy.

Beneath bright Vega, halfway between its starry partners Sulafat and Sheliak, I saw the ghostly halo of the Ring Nebula (M57). And there, towards the west, was the elliptical glow of the great galaxy of Andromeda (M31). It is the most distant object I have ever seen. Far outside our own galaxy, its light took two and a half million years to reach me.

My simple observations are nothing compared with the work of professional astronomers, who have access to the latest instruments. Of these, the Hubble Space Telescope has probably grabbed the most headlines, with its spectacularly detailed images of nebulae and galaxies. But last week, it was the turn of the Kepler spacecraft and the European Southern Observatory to dance in the limelight, as reports came in of the first discoveries of multi-planet systems orbiting distant stars – solar systems something like our own.

These reports filled the newspapers because our precious sun has been demoted. It is no longer unique in its possession of planetary satellites. But despite my astronomical interests, the stories didn’t grab me. In part, the revelations were hardly surprising, since our understanding of planetary formation made it inconceivable that planets would not exist elsewhere among the myriad stars in the universe.

But there’s something else. A curious aspect of the Kepler and ESO results is that the planets that have been discovered have not actually been seen. Instead, they were detected indirectly.

For over six years the ESO group recorded the wobbles and subtle colour shifts of HD 10180 due to the gravitational pull of its invisible planets and deduced that the star is orbited by five Neptune-sized objects. Kepler, by monitoring the incremental dimming of the light from a star now called Kepler-9 as its planets passed in front, detected two Saturnine gas giants and tantalising evidence for a third Earth-sized object.

These results are outstanding feats, both of measurement – the disturbances of the stars by their planets are minuscule – and the complex analysis needed to decode the composition of each star system. I have no doubt that the scientists involved rejoiced in their discoveries. But the results, as presented, are numerical. For those outside the project there is nothing to see. Or to feel.

So, as exciting and dramatic as these new breakthroughs may be on the wider stage of astronomy, for me there is nothing to compare with the elation felt as I leaned time and again into the eyepiece on those Cumbrian nights, to discover new things about the night sky, not for the world, but for myself.

Those scientific nights let me see more of Nature and bolstered a connection that would surely earn Wordsworth’s approval. On the first clear night after my return to London I was disappointed with the dim and dismal prospect above me, the Milky Way washed out and so many newfound stars veiled by the electric glow.

But all is not lost. The sky is friendlier to me now; we are better acquainted and I look forward to deepening that relationship.

Stephen Curry is a professor of structural biology, not astronomy, at Imperial College and writes a regular blog at Reciprocal Space

Original post source

Continue Reading

Photography adds another dimension to wild food foraging – not just for identification purposes but as an art form

• Send your photos of nature’s harvest to our Green shoots Flickr group

There are as many reason for the current resurgent rise in enthusiasm for all things wild food and foraging-related as there are wild foods themselves – from belt tightening austerity measures, to a desire to source local, sustainable food without the organic price tag and creativity in the kitchen. Some people choose to forage rather than shop in order to connect with seasonal rhythms instead of the discordant economic and clock-watching dictates of a mundane working week.

As a full-time forager – someone with an all-encompassing hobby that I sometimes try to pass off as work – all of the above, as well as deep-seated philosophical, psychological and spiritual reasons, have led me to an all-embracing commitment to wild food. It is a commitment that seeks to engage with – indeed even capture in some small way – the verdant, fleeting and ephemeral delights that nature exhibits.

As a child, the first books I encountered that seemed to capture in small part the magnificence of nature were Edith Holden’s delightful 1906 The Country Diary of an Edwardian Lady and Rev William Keeble Martin’s exquisitely illustrated The Concise British Flora in Colour. Later, as a teenager, I came upon the book Wild Food by the now grand master of photographic guides, Roger Phillips. His superb photography seemed to truly capture the mysterious elements that made foraging for wild food so appealing – delightfully arranged rustic compositions showed tarte aux myrtilles on the banks of a woodland stream; blackberry pies, tarts and jams against a backdrop of stubble-burning field, and Carragheen soup precariously balanced on craggy waveswept rocks. These pictures were alive with the raw beauty, hinted dangers and creative promise of wild food.

Being neither well-suited to poetry nor painting, photography allowed me to add an engaging and enjoyable dimension to my wild food pursuits. The photographic dimension to foraging is wonderfully varied: plant portraits for identification; final dish shots; underwater photography of seaweeds resplendent in their natural element, or arty photos just for the creative and celebratory joy of it all.

In the UK, the changing seasons and varied habitats of specific wild plant foods offer endless scope for exciting pictures: nuts, berries, leaves, roots and fungi, their fascinating colours naturally juxtaposed against storm-leaden skies, misty rivers, and sun-baked earth. Raw settings and macro lens offer up the unique perspective of the intimate and super close-up view, revealing hidden details and mysterious patterns in seed husks and fruit skins.

The following list of wild foods available in September is in no way exhaustive. Apart from Hottentot figs and bilberries, that don’t grow here, and truffles that I’ve never been lucky enough to find, these are all the things I regularly forage down in Kent:

Fruit: Elderberry, Juke of Argyle’s “Goji” tea plant berries, black nightshade berry (some caution advised), dog rose hip, mulberry, wild service tree and other sorbus spp berries, Japanese rose hip, hawthorn berry (haws), staghorn sumac berries, blackberries, dewberries, bilberries, sloes, sea buckthorn berries, apples, crab apples, rowan berries, pears, figs, Hottentot figs, Himalayan honeysuckle berries (some caution advised), Yew berries (lots of caution advised), cherry plums, greengages, Juniper berries, hops.

Leaves: Watercress, sea aster, seabeet, sea purslane, perennial wallrocket, fat hen, water mint and other mints, Canadian fleabane, sow thistle, wood sorrel, common sorrel, ox-eye daisy, sea plantain, marsh samphire (tips), bristly ox-tongue.

Flowers: Yarrow, heather, common mallow.

Roots/bulbs: Burdock root, horse radish root, dandelion root, ramsons/wild garlic bulbs (and roots).

Nuts/seeds: Walnuts (soft – for making pate), beech nuts (mast), Himalayan balsam seeds, hazelnuts, great plantain seeds, wild carrot seeds, fennel seeds, poppy seeds, cabbage family plant seeds, common hogweed seeds.

Fungi: Giant puffball, summer truffle, chanterelle, parasol, fairy ring, jelly ear, penny bun and other boletes, fly agaric (caution advised, toxins must be leached out first before consuming) summer truffles, cauliflower fungus, beefsteak fungus, field and horse mushroom and other agaricus species.

Seaweeds: Dulse, laver, Carragheen, grape pip weed, oyster thief,

Wracks: Bladder, toothed, horned, egg, spiral, channelled,

Kelps: Oarweed, furbellows, sugar kelp, thongweed, sea lettuce, gutweed and other ulva species, dabberlocks, japweed, pepper dulse.

For those new to wild foods, apart from attending wild food or plant/fungi identification courses, I’d recommend Roger Phillips’s Wild Food, The Wild Flower Key by Francis Rose and Clare O’Reilly, the photographic edition of Richard Mabey’s classic Food for Free, Miles Irving’s The Forager Handbook and the excellent web-based resource and database, Plants For A Future.

• Fergus Drennan is a broadcaster and writer.

• Send your photos of nature’s harvest to our Green shoots Flickr group

Original post source

Continue Reading

The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) has published a document called ‘Myths & Facts About Nuclear Energy’. The NEI – ‘the policy organization of the nuclear energy and technologies industry and participates in both the national and global policy-making process’ – describes the document as a collection of ‘Synopses of Common Myths About Nuclear Energy and Corresponding Facts That Refute Them’.

In this series of posts we’re presenting some Corresponding Facts of Our Own That Refute the NEI’s Corresponding Facts.

The ‘Myth’: Nuclear plants can’t be built fast enough.

NEI’s ‘Fact’: In just 19 years, between 1970 and 1989, 105 nuclear energy plants were constructed and put into service in the United States. The current licensing and construction of new nuclear plants will take 8-10 years, which is comparable to similar sized electricity sources. The timeline is expected to shorten to six years or less with licensing and construction experience. Building new nuclear plants will create thousands of non-exportable jobs, help revitalize the U.S. manufacturing sector, and positively affect the U.S. economy and the environment.

Let’s face it – when it comes to climate change, we’re in a race against time. Global emissions of climate change gases must peak and fall as soon as possible. Can nuclear power do that and in time?

In a word: No.

The UK Met Office (UKMO) said last year that it would be almost impossible to keep the global temperature rise under 2 degrees centrigrade, unless global carbon emissions peak before 2020. The first few new nuclear reactors the NEI is calling for will only be coming online then (and that’s if things go to the very optimistic plan and any delays are avoided). In other words, those reactors will arrive much too late to fight a battle that needs to be won in the next ten years. Nuclear plants can’t be built fast enough.

And even if we get a massive expansion in nuclear power, its contribution to cutting global carbon emissions is small. The Energy Technology Perspectives 2008 report produced by the International Energy Agency in 2008 shows that, even if existing world nuclear power capacity could be quadrupled by 2050, its share of world energy consumption would still be below 10%. This would reduce carbon dioxide emissions by just 6% compared to the 21% reduction from renewable energy sources and the 54% from various electricity and fuel efficiency measures (see page 41 of the report).

The point is this: we don’t have the time to wait until 2020 or 2050. Safe and clean renewable energy sources and energy efficiency programmes are ready to go right now. As we say in one of our nuclear briefings: Nuclear power is a dangerous waste of time.

Original post source

Continue Reading

The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) has published a document called ‘Myths & Facts About Nuclear Energy’. The NEI – ‘the policy organization of the nuclear energy and technologies industry and participates in both the national and global policy-making process’ – describes the document as a collection of ‘Synopses of Common Myths About Nuclear Energy and Corresponding Facts That Refute Them’.

In this series of posts we’re presenting some Corresponding Facts of Our Own That Refute the NEI’s Corresponding Facts.

The ‘Myth’: Nuclear plants can’t be built fast enough.

NEI’s ‘Fact’: In just 19 years, between 1970 and 1989, 105 nuclear energy plants were constructed and put into service in the United States. The current licensing and construction of new nuclear plants will take 8-10 years, which is comparable to similar sized electricity sources. The timeline is expected to shorten to six years or less with licensing and construction experience. Building new nuclear plants will create thousands of non-exportable jobs, help revitalize the U.S. manufacturing sector, and positively affect the U.S. economy and the environment.

Let’s face it – when it comes to climate change, we’re in a race against time. Global emissions of climate change gases must peak and fall as soon as possible. Can nuclear power do that and in time?

In a word: No.

The UK Met Office (UKMO) said last year that it would be almost impossible to keep the global temperature rise under 2 degrees centrigrade, unless global carbon emissions peak before 2020. The first few new nuclear reactors the NEI is calling for will only be coming online then (and that’s if things go to the very optimistic plan and any delays are avoided). In other words, those reactors will arrive much too late to fight a battle that needs to be won in the next ten years. Nuclear plants can’t be built fast enough.

And even if we get a massive expansion in nuclear power, its contribution to cutting global carbon emissions is small. The Energy Technology Perspectives 2008 report produced by the International Energy Agency in 2008 shows that, even if existing world nuclear power capacity could be quadrupled by 2050, its share of world energy consumption would still be below 10%. This would reduce carbon dioxide emissions by just 6% compared to the 21% reduction from renewable energy sources and the 54% from various electricity and fuel efficiency measures (see page 41 of the report).

The point is this: we don’t have the time to wait until 2020 or 2050. Safe and clean renewable energy sources and energy efficiency programmes are ready to go right now. As we say in one of our nuclear briefings: Nuclear power is a dangerous waste of time.

Original post source

Continue Reading