TED Talk Tuesday: Part 3

I’ve commented before on the science behind fracking, and the lack of media acknowledgement of the improvement in techniques over the 50+ years of the technology. In this TED talk, T. Boone Pickens discusses the possibility that natural gas could be one way to cut America’s dependence on foreign oil. Not sure I agree with everything in the talk, but it is worth considering whether he is making valid claims that would lead us out of our constant need to police the waters of the Persian Gulf to keep the oil coming.

A Good Use of 30 Minutes

Take the time to watch this video. It is 30 minutes long, and I’d suggest actually turning off your cell phone, clearing some mental space and really focusing on the content. There are two important things going on here. The first, and most important, is a call to action to tell our government that sometimes we need to do the right thing even if there is “nothing” in it for us. Finding this man will not make our lives in America more comfortable, and won’t solve all of the world’s terrors, but it will make a world of difference to the people of the nations in central Africa that he is tormenting. The other thing that is going on here is a referendum on whether the connected social network worldwide can turn the tide and bring to the forefront issues that the people deem to be important rather than allowing the media and the government to tell us as a people what we should think is important. I am hopeful that the creators of this video are correct, and that by mobilizing attention to this among the general public the effect will filter “up” to those in power and cause real change. I pray that our government, and others around the world, will help to equip the people of those countries affected (starting in Uganda, and spreading to the neighboring countries) to find this fugitive. I also pray that God would work in his darkened heart by the Holy Spirit to convict him of his sin and draw him to the One who died for sinners, even sinners as seemingly “gone” as Joseph Kony. What could be more pro-life than hoping for the apprehension and life change of someone who is spreading death? What could be more Christ-like than praying for the worst of sinners to receive forgiveness and salvation? I hope he has his heart changed by the Spirit, gives himself up and accepts the earthly penalty for his actions. I also pray for the healing and restoration of the thousands he has victimized. May they receive mercy and grace, and a PEACE that passes all understanding. Even so, Lord.

How Not to Do International Aid

Found this post a week ago or so, but wanted to share it with you. Matador Change highlighted what it calls the seven worst international aid ideas. Here are the intro, the seven ideas, and the conclusion:

Maybe their hearts were in the right place. Maybe not. Either way, these are solid contenders for the title of “worst attempts at helping others since colonialism.”

1. One million t-shirts for Africa
2. TOMS Buy-One-Give-One
3. Machine gun preacher
4. 50 Cent ransoming children in Somalia
5. Donor fund restrictions
6. Making food aid the same color as cluster munitions
7. Making USAID a foreign policy tool

Sometimes bad aid is just the consequence of someone caring too much, but knowing too little. Other times it’s people who should have known better not being diligent in considering the consequences of their actions. And sometimes politicians and unscrupulous businessmen are simply manipulating the suffering of others for their own ends. When it’s benign or thwarted, it’s easy enough to laugh it off. But when a bad idea is carried through, the results can be diabolical.

You can read their comments about what is wrong with each of these ideas here. If you want to connect with an organization making a positive difference while avoiding these pitfalls, check out Hope International.

Is Obama Really a Conservative?

On the heels of the kerfuffle over John Fea claiming that Barack Obama is the most explicitly Christian president the US has ever had, I was pointed by a friend (thanks Adam Yankay!) to a thought provoking piece from The Political Compass that places Obama clearly on the conservative end of the political spectrum. Here is a chunk of their post.

This is a US election that defies logic and brings the nation closer towards a one-party state, masquerading as a two-party state.

The Democratic incumbent has surrounded himself with conservative advisors and key figures — many from previous administrations, and an unprecedented number from the Trilateral Commission. He also appointed a former Monsanto executive as Senior Advisor to the FDA. He has extended Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, presided over a spiralling rich-poor gap and sacrificed further American jobs with recent free trade deals.Trade union rights have also eroded under his watch. He has expanded Bush defence spending, droned civilians, failed to close Guantanamo, supported the NDAA which effectively legalises martial law, allowed drilling and adopted a soft-touch position towards the banks that is to the right of European Conservative leaders. We list these because many of Obama’s detractors absurdly portray him as either a radical liberal or a socialist, while his apologists, equally absurdly, continue to view him as a well-intentioned progressive, tragically thwarted by overwhelming pressures. 2008′s yes-we-can chanters, dazzled by pigment rather than policy detail, forgot to ask can what? Between 1998 and the last election, Obama amassed $37.6million from the financial services industry, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. While 2008 presidential candidate Obama appeared to champion universal health care, his first choice for Secretary of Health was a man who had spent years lobbying on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry against that very concept. Hey! You don’t promise a successful pub, and then appoint the Salvation Army to run it. This time around, the honey-tongued President makes populist references to economic justice, while simultaneously appointing as his new Chief of Staff a former Citigroup executive concerned with hedge funds that bet on the housing market to collapse. Obama poses something of a challenge to The Political Compass, because he’s a man of so few fixed principles.

As outrageous as it may appear, civil libertarians and human rights supporters would have actually fared better under a Republican administration. Had a Bush or McCain presidency continued Guantanamo and introduced the NDAA, the Democratic Party would have howled from the rooftops. Under a Democratic administration, these far-reaching developments have received scant opposition and a disgraceful absence of mainstream media coverage.

For the rest, including comments on Ron Paul, check it out here. You can also find a link there where they explain their methodology. They also offer a survey that allows you to find where on this you would be. Can’t wait until Glenn Beck sees this!

Interesting Statistics from 60 Minutes

I can’t embed the videos here at this point, but here are a series of videos from recent 60 Minutes episodes that reference statistics in the news.

First, on a recent case of forged credentials and misrepresented data at Duke University.

• The main piece can be found here.
• A bit about the researcher and his overstated credentials.

Secondly, a study of the placebo effect that seems to indicate that anti-depressant medication may be nothing more than a very expensive investment in the placebo effect.

• The main piece about looking at all of the research over the years and finding a stunning lack of significance.
• The journalist reflects on the story.

As a statistician, the ability to get a drug approved if two studies show an effect and ten studies show none is ridiculous. This is not good scientifically or statistically.

The Danger of the Single Story

This is a great TED talk about Africa, and all of us. There is a danger in having only one story about any place or person. As the speaker  Chimamanda Adichie, says, the danger in a stereotype is not that it is wrong. Often, there is a seed of truth, but the problem is that the story is incomplete, and therefore leads to incorrect and dangerous conclusions. This is worth 20 minutes of your time. (HT: Peter Greer via his blog.)

I Knew Him Way Back When

Peter K. Greer

I don’t usually turn to CBN or the 700 Club for my news, but they had a nice piece on microfinance  yesterday that featured my college friend Peter Greer and the microfinance organization he founded, HOPE International. We were in an outreach group together back in those days at Messiah College, but I don’t think I can take much credit for the good work he is doing. I will say that I have proudly donated to his work several times over the last few years and believe in the power of what he is doing! I can’t post the CBN video here, but be sure to check it out here. You can find previous posts about HOPE by clicking the HOPE International category above.

Writers at The Onion Must Be Jealous!

A Photo of a Closed Circuit Camera Used by British Police

I bet that they wish that they could have come up with this one, but this is apparently entirely legitimate. The headline alone is worth the post, but I’ll include part of the article just to back it up (there are more specifics in the full piece, found here). (HT: Jesse Thouin)

CCTV police officer ‘chased himself’ after being mistaken for burglar

An undercover police officer “chased himself round the streets” for 20 minutes after a CCTV operator mistook him for suspect.

The junior officer, who has not been named, was monitoring an area hit by a series of burglaries in an unnamed market town in the country’s south.

As the probationary officer from Sussex Police searched for suspects, the camera operator radioed that he had seen someone “acting suspiciously” in the area.

But he failed to realise that it was actually the plain-clothed officer he was watching on the screen, according to details leaked to an industry magazine.

The operator directed the officer, who was on foot patrol, as he followed the “suspect” on camera last month, telling his colleague on the ground that he was “hot on his heels”.

The officer spent around 20 minutes giving chase before a sergeant came into the CCTV control room, recognised the “suspect” and laughed hysterically at the mistake.

On Fracking, the Science is Clear

An Illustration of a Fracking Well

Unfortunately, while the science on natural gas fracking is clear, the public debate does not reflect this fact. Why? Here is a take from an op-ed piece in the NY Post by Jon Entine:

The academic face of the anti-fracking movement — Cornell marine ecologist Robert Howarth — increasingly looks like he’s willing to turn science into farce.

Last spring, the once-obscure professor became the go-to expert for anti-fracking journalists and lawmakers when he published a report claiming shale gas pollutes more than coal. The New York Times featured his study in two uncritical articles in one week, he was interviewed on dozens of talk shows — and the media echo chamber did the rest: He was a star.

Since then, other scientists have almost universally challenged his findings — but now he’s doubled down.

Last week, Howarth released another scientifically questionable study, now warning that fracking could push the world over a tipping point, sending temperatures irreversibly higher — an inflammatory and demonstrably incorrect assertion.

After some backstory, Entine turns to the science and Howarth’s motivation:

In an interview, Howarth told me his goal was to make the anti-fracking movement mainstream and fashionable. He said he met with the Ithaca-based foundation two years ago, agreeing to produce a study challenging the conventional wisdom that shale gas is comparatively clean.

The polluting impact of shale gas revolves around one key issue: how much methane gas is released during extraction. Methane has more short-term global-warming impact than any other fossil fuel. Howarth emerged from academic nowhere when he claimed shale-gas wells leak like sieves, venting methane half the time, spewing 7 percent to 8 percent of reserves into the atmosphere.

“That’s absurd,” says Michael Levi, director of the Program on Energy Security and Climate Change at the Council of Foreign Relations. “Most methane gas is either ‘delivered to sales’ with no leakage, or it’s burnt off through flaring, which diminishes its greenhouse impact.”

Renowned geologist Lawrence Cathles, also at Cornell, who published a scathing deconstruction of Howarth’s paper this month, says that he “doesn’t document venting but what the industry calls ‘capture.’”

Almost every independent researcher — at the Environmental Defense Fund, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Energy Department and numerous independent university teams — has slammed Howarth’s conclusions. At a minimum, the evidence suggests he either acted in bad faith or is ignorant of gas technology.

The core problem: Howarth uses Environmental Protection Agency estimates dating to 2007 — ancient data, given how quickly the technology is evolving.

Crucially, he fails to account for innovation. Gas lost through leakage is money lost, literally into thin air. For that reason, new wells are now “green completed” — meaning most leaking gas is captured and sold rather than vented.

Cathles notes the latest Devon study, now being verified by the EPA, documenting that shale gas is vented in only 5 percent of wells. The Energy Department estimates only 1 percent to 2 percent of methane is now lost during production.

Bottom line, almost all nonindustry-linked researchers believe Howarth exaggerates the impact of shale-gas leakage by 10 to 20 times. “His conclusions are more a politically charged articulation than a balanced scientific assessment,” Cathles says.

Howarth hired an aggressive PR firm, the Hastings Group, to promote his politicized viewpoint. Scientists aren’t buying it, but many journalists fall for the fear-mongering.

Howarth doesn’t have to convince anyone he’s right to devastate New York’s budding shale industry and put tens of thousands of jobs into question. He wins if he muddies the waters enough to give cautious Albany bureaucrats reason to stall.

Almost every news story now frames this issue as a standoff between equally valid scientific experts. In fact, it’s really a debate between science and ideology.

You can read the rest of the piece here.

Demography: Predicting the Downfall of China?

A very interesting look at where all of the earth’s billions of people are now, and where the population is heading. Projections place the occurrence of the world population of humans passing 7 billion at some point between 31 Oct 2011 (UN estimate) and March 2012 (US Census Bureau estimate). The most interesting piece of this article is the pointing out that the rate of increase is now slowing. (The second derivative is now negative, for my math inclined readers.) Where the fertility rate is high, and where it is low, helps to predict the economic future of countries around the world. The pertinent section follows this graph of fertility rates (live births per woman).

The low-fertility countries face the biggest demographic problems. The elderly share of Japan’s population is already the highest in the world. By 2050 the country will have almost as many dependents as working-age adults, and half the population will be over 52. This will make Japan the oldest society the world has ever known. Europe faces similar trends, less acutely. It has roughly half as many dependent children and retired people as working-age adults now. By 2050 it will have three dependents for every four adults, so will shoulder a large burden of ageing, which even sustained increases in fertility would fail to reverse for decades. This will cause disturbing policy implications in the provision of pensions and health care, which rely on continuing healthy tax revenues from the working population.

At least these countries are rich enough to make such provision. Not so China. With its fertility artificially suppressed by the one-child policy, it is ageing at an unprecedented rate. In 1980 China’s median age (the point where half the population is older and half younger) was 22 years, a developing-country figure. China will be older than America as early as 2020 and older than Europe by 2030. This will bring an abrupt end to its cheap-labour manufacturing. Its dependency ratio will rise from 38 to 64 by 2050, the sharpest rise in the world. Add in the country’s sexual imbalances—after a decade of sex-selective abortions, China will have 96.5m men in their 20s in 2025 but only 80.3m young women—and demography may become the gravest problem the Communist Party has to face.

Many countries with intermediate fertility—South-East Asia, Latin America, the United States—are better off. Their dependency ratios are not deteriorating so fast and their societies are ageing more slowly. America’s demographic profile is slowly tugging it away from Europe. Though its fertility rate may have fallen recently, it is still slightly higher than Europe’s. In 2010 the two sides of the Atlantic had similar dependency rates. By 2050 America’s could be nearly ten points lower.

But the biggest potential beneficiaries are the two other areas with intermediate fertility—India and the Middle East—and the high-fertility continent of Africa. These places have long been regarded as demographic time-bombs, with youth bulges, poverty and low levels of education and health. But that is because they are moving only slowly out of the early stage of high fertility into the one in which lower fertility begins to make an impact.

At the moment, Africa has larger families and more dependent children than India or Arab countries and is a few years younger (its median age is 20 compared with their 25). But all three areas will see their dependency ratios fall in the next 40 years, the only parts of the world to do so. And they will keep their median ages low—below 38 in 2050. If they can make their public institutions less corrupt, keep their economic policies outward-looking and invest more in education, as East Asia did, then Africa, the Middle East and India could become the fastest-growing parts of the world economy within a decade or so.

Demography, though, is not only about economics. Most emerging countries have benefited from the sort of dividend that changed Europe and America in the 1960s. They are catching up with the West in terms of income, family size and middle-class formation. Most say they want to keep their cultures unsullied by the social trends—divorce, illegitimacy and so on—that also affected the West. But the growing number of never-married women in urban Asia suggests that this will be hard.If you look at the overall size of the world’s population, then, the picture is one of falling fertility, decelerating growth and a gradual return to the flat population level of the 18th century. But below the surface societies are being churned up in ways not seen in the much more static pre-industrial world. The earth’s population may never need a larger island than Maui to stand on. But the way it arranges itself will go on shifting for centuries to come.

Here are a couple more helpful graphs of the world population and world fertility rate.

World Population Graph: Note the change in concavity in the last few years.

The Declining World Fertility Rate

You can read the rest here.