[ RadSafe ] Engineering & science reduced sadly to politicalabortions.

[Muckerheide, James]

Also, in the "some things never change" dept:

 

Regards, Jim Muckerheide

===================

 

NOVEMBER 2, 1917                         SCIENCE
p427-428         

 

SCIENTIFIC EVENTS

CHEMICALS AND WAR IN ENGLAND

PROFESSOR W. J. POPE, addressing a meeting of teachers at the Regent-street
Polytechnic on October 6, according to a report in the London Times, said
that Germany prepared for war by the establishment of a huge chemical
industry, which was built up about the coal-tar industry, and then by
exporting a very large proportion of the world's requirements of coal-tar
colors, and pharmaceutical and photographic products.

That success was achieved in spite of the fact that England once possessed
the whole of the heavy chemical industry of the world. We formerly produced
practically all the nitric and sulphuric acids, and the greater part of the
alkali used throughout the world. That had been taken from us as the result
of Germany's foresight and exploitation of scientific ability. The coal-tar
industry was established originally in this country. Until ten years ago
Germany was practically dependent on us for crude coal-tar, and for the
simpler first products separated from coal-tar.

Alluding to the establishment of the department for scientific and industrial
research with an endowment of £1,000,000, Professor Pope said: The question
we want answered is why that experiment was not made twenty years ago, at a
time when it would have been undoubtedly successful in preventing the horrors
of the last three years? We have suffered in the past from the exclusively
British method of making the specialist entirely subservient to the
administrator, the administrator being generally chosen because he is
available, because he is politically acceptable, and because he knows nothing
whatever about the subject which is to be administered and is therefore not
likely to be prejudiced by any previous convictions. That process of
appointing someone who knows nothing, to supervise the work of some one who
does know how to do the job, seems to have been at the bottom of a great many
of our misfortunes in the past.

Even in 1915 the government applied this same method to reestablish the
coal-tar industry in this country. An organization was established in which
all the people in control were men who knew nothing whatever about chemistry
or science, and naturally enough the government organization has proved not
only a great failure, but has had the further effect of inhibiting the
reestablishment of the coal-tar industry. That is to say, the organization
apparently was to do everything that was necessary, and consequently private
effort was to a considerable extent hampered, and could not get on with the
important problem of reestablishing this fine chemical industry.

Such prevalent, but entirely mistaken, activity arises, I think, from a lack
of education. If it were generally demanded that no person should be regarded
as decently educated who had not mastered the rudimentary principles of
natural science and of scientific method, this farce, staged for the
amusement of the whole world, in connection with this coal-tar color
question, would have been impossible.

The law had absorbed a great proportion of the youth of the nation who were
most fitted for a scientific career. The young man who was capable of
advancing knowledge, either in science or in any other branch of learning,
must be taught to regard it as his duty, not to use his abilities simply for
the sake of acquiring an easy and comfortable position in life. Above all, we
must prevent the young man of the type I have named from going into such a
blind alley occupation as that of the law, with the ultimate prospect of
quitting the world, having left nothing behind, and having made no
contribution whatever to its progress.

 

Professor Armstrong, who presided, declared that the present position of
chemistry in this country was deplorable, owing to government ignorance and
indifference. The Board of Trade had, advisedly and of set purpose, it would
seem, put all scientific advice aside, and had taken measures which had not
only proved a failure but which had actually retarded the development of the
dyestuff industry. The government seems to be bent on putting us back, body
and soul, into the hands of the Germans, in so far as the higher interests of
chemistry are concerned.

 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On

> Behalf Of Maury Siskel

> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 1:17 PM

> To: Mailing List for Risk Professionals; RadiationSafety

> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Engineering & science reduced sadly to

> politicalabortions.

> 

> 

> The US over the years has contributed great achievements to the rest of

> the world as well as for ourselves. On the other hand, the poor quality

> of leadership in the US often is impressive. The nation complained

> bitterly about fuel prices even as one of our former leaders selected

> the largest deposits of the cleanest, highest quality coal to declare

> its deposits a wilderness area and thus inaccessible for mining without

> an act of Congress. And our selected leaders outlaw drilling off the

> east coast of Florida, off the west coast of Florida, off the entire

> Atlantic coast, and off of the entire Pacific coast.

> 

> A national "executive" agency sets pollution standards for refineries

> making economic jokes of the construction of such facilities. And as the

> nation refuses to accept unsightly drilling rigs in coastal waters, it

> tries to welcome huge toy windmills in those same areas. And solar

> energy panels are pursued in spite of their known inefficiencies and of

> the pollution produced by their manufacture.  And we still outlaw the

> recovery of oil from an area in Alaska which is less than 1% of the

> Wilderness Area containing those oil deposits -- like the coal deposits,

> a wilderness no one can even see unless they backpack into it or fly

> over it! Are these not impressive achievements? Our leadership

> subsidizes the production of grain alcohol for its addition to gasoline

> -- even though alcohol reduces the efficacy of the gasoline and

> contributes more to air pollution than does the unadulterated gasoline.

> Under current conditions, no such production and usage of alcohol would

> take place in the absence of the federal tax credits for it.

> 

> Holland has successfully recovered a huge productive land area and

> protected this below sea level area from  repetitive severe storms from

> the sea. But the US has failed to construct even a simple lock or

> gateway across a narrow waterway connecting a big lake with the Gulf of

> Mexico. Such a gate would prevent a storm surge from overfilling the

> lake which overflows to submerge a major city.  Truly remarkable!

> 

> Science and engineering are made into a political miscarriage to produce

> the US abortion shown below in Table 1. It shows electricity as a

> percentage produced by nuclear energy in each country. This is an absurd

> reality. It should be noted that:

> _________________

> "Nuclear power certainly looks good to the rest of the world. France

> gets nearly 80% of its energy from nuclear power and has demonstrated

> [that] the problem of nuclear waste is political, not technological. At

> least it's waste that doesn't get into our lungs on a daily basis."

> 

> "Like Britain, Germany, Japan and Belgium,  France reprocesses its spent

> nuclear fuel rods, letting the country reduce its volume of nuclear

> waste to one-fifth its size while generating even more energy, making

> nuclear power a "renewable" resource."

>  From Investors Business Daily

> ____________________

> And now for decades, US politicians have argued vehemently over the

> suitable hole in a desert mountain to bury our unprocessed spent nuclear

> fuel. Is it not amazing? -- perhaps the 9th wonder of the modern world.

> It is as though the acceptable US political solution to nuclear

> proliferation might be bows and arrows ....

> 

> Table 1. NUCLEAR OPTION: Percentage of electricity derived from nuclear

> power in 2004. (by IAEA)

> 

> Netherlands      3.8

> Romania          10.1

> UK                  13.4

> US                   19.9

> Spain               22.9

> Finland            26.6

> Czech Rep.     31.2

> Germany         32.1

> Hungary          33.8

> Slovenia           38.8

> Switzerland     40.0

> Bulgaria           41.6

> Sweden            51.8

> Belgium           55.1

> Slovakia           55.2

> France              78.1

> Lithuania          72.1

> 

> Are there any leaders in or outside of the Congress with the ability to

> alleviate the problems described above? Are we willing to elect  or

> insist upon rational performance by them?

> Cheers,

> Maury&Dog   maurysis at ev1.net

> 

> PS. It must not be overlooked that US voters generally selected (hired,

> elected) their leadership.

> 

>