By this standard, gas is cheap

When someone rolls up to the gas pump next to you in a behemoth that's a black hole for fossil fuels, at least you have the satisfaction that at least they're having to pay a lot more than you for fuel.

Not really.

You're actually subsidizing that driver's gas guzzling life in paradise. And under the most aggressive scenarios, you and fellow drivers are paying more for that gas than they are.

An International Center for Technology Assessment study suggests that immense government subsidies for fossil fuels mean American consumers pay much of the cost of their gasoline through taxes rather than their gas company credit cards.

And that means that even if you're working hard to conserve, you're paying disproportionately for those who overconsume.

The status of the “real” price of gas is of interest in the face of new federal energy legislation, which the federal government had to water down to get through Congress and to gain a Presidential signature. Does it finally level the playing field with respect to the true costs of fossil fuels versus alternatives?

The House version would have added taxes that might balance some of the tax-breaks and subsidies to the oil companies, but the taxes were dropped in the face of Senate opposition.

We weren't able to find a current study of the true cost of gas, so the up-to-date numbers may be somewhat different than the ones we found, but they're a nice example.

The International Center for Technology Assessment, in “The Real Price of Gasoline,” a study that's now nearly a decade old but was updated in 2005, found that government has established a multi-tiered subsidy program that reduces significantly the price consumers pay at the pump for gasoline.

That doesn't mean you're not paying the full price, just that the sucking sound comes from costs beyond the pump—like when you're paying your taxes.

(See the 1998 study and the 2005 update under publications at www.icta.org.)

Among the study's listed subsidies to oil companies are the percentage depletion allowance, nonconventional fuel production credit, immediate expensing of exploration and development costs, enhanced oil recovery credit, foreign tax credits, foreign income deferral, accelerated depreciation allowances, and more, They add up to billions upon billions of bucks.

The report says that since most states base their taxation on federal calculations, those benefits also apply when the fuel firms calculate their state income taxes.

“Provisions in the tax code reflect unparalleled government support of the oil industry and significantly distort...the real price of gasoline,” the report says.

Still, all those subsidies only amount to a few pennies per gallon.

The report says the bigger subsidy is in the government's support of highways, waterways and harbors to promote the transport and use of petroleum fuels, government costs of oil spill cleanup, government sale of oil leases at cheap prices, the government and public costs associated with air pollution caused by the burning of the fuels, the costs of dealing with climate change and so forth. It goes on and on.

If you toss in all the subsidies and costs—and admittedly, you could make a strong argument for not including at least some of those costs—it adds up to hundreds of billions of dollars. And if those costs were included at the pump, a gallon of gas—in 1998—would have cost from a low of $5.60 to a high of $15.14 per gallon. The 2005 update, which adds the costs of the Iraq war and others, adds 20 or 30 cents to that.

The difference between the actual and unsubsidized price represents the indirect tax consumers pay for fuel. You also pay direct taxes at the pump. The American Petroleum Institute in a July 2007 report says the national average tax on fuel is 46.9 cents a gallon. API listed Hawaii as sixth highest in the nation at 51 cents a gallon. (See data on fuel taxes and other issues at the API website, www.api.org.)

Understandably, the petroleum industry argues that it's paying plenty of taxes and it argues against changing the playing field.

Says a statement on its website:

“In 2004, America's major oil and natural gas companies paid an estimated $48.36 billion in income tax. In addition, these companies collected over $45 billion in excise taxes in 2004 on behalf of the IRS. Additional taxes and fees imposed on the industry include gross production or severance taxes, import duties, and property, sales, and use taxes. U.S.-based petroleum companies must compete in the global oil and gas market to ensure a stable supply here at home. Taxes can affect our companies' ability to stay competitive in the world market.”

Does the artificial deflation of pump-paid fuel cost affect things like driving and automotive choices? What if you paid the real cost of fuel at the pump rather than paying it through income taxes and other costs? The international example suggests costs can drive changes in behavior.

Parts of Europe are familiar with gas in the $6-per-gallon range. In England last year, prices were closer to $7 a gallon.

One result? Europeans buy cars with nearly double the average fuel economy of those in the U.S. The average fuel economy in Europe is more than 40 miles a gallon, while ours is in the 20s.

Even the new federal energy bill will only push U.S. fuel economy up into the 30s by 2020.

The next time you suffer sticker shock when you see the price of gas at the pump, take a deep breath. Chances are, that price is cheap compared with what you're actually paying.

© 2007 Jan W. TenBruggencate

Gas is cheap

When someone rolls up to the gas pump next to you in a behemoth that's a black hole for fossil fuels, at least you have the satisfaction that at least they're having to pay a lot more than you for fuel.

Not really.

You're actually subsidizing that driver's gas guzzling life in paradise. And under the most aggressive scenarios, you and fellow drivers are paying more for that gas than they are.

An International Center for Technology Assessment study suggests that immense government subsidies for fossil fuels mean American consumers pay much of the cost of their gasoline through taxes rather than their gas company credit cards.

And that means that even if you're working hard to conserve, you're paying disproportionately for those who overconsume.

The status of the “real” price of gas is of interest in the face of new federal energy legislation, which the federal government had to water down to get through Congress and to gain a Presidential signature. Does it finally level the playing field with respect to the true costs of fossil fuels versus alternatives?

The House version would have added taxes that might balance some of the tax-breaks and subsidies to the oil companies, but the taxes were dropped in the face of Senate opposition.

We weren't able to find a current study of the true cost of gas, so the up-to-date numbers may be somewhat different than the ones we found, but they're a nice example.

The International Center for Technology Assessment, in “The Real Price of Gasoline,” a study that's now nearly a decade old but was updated in 2005, found that government has established a multi-tiered subsidy program that reduces significantly the price consumers pay at the pump for gasoline.

That doesn't mean you're not paying the full price, just that the sucking sound comes from costs beyond the pump—like when you're paying your taxes.

(See the 1998 study and the 2005 update under publications at www.icta.org.)

Among the study's listed subsidies to oil companies are the percentage depletion allowance, nonconventional fuel production credit, immediate expensing of exploration and development costs, enhanced oil recovery credit, foreign tax credits, foreign income deferral, accelerated depreciation allowances, and more, They add up to billions upon billions of bucks.

The report says that since most states base their taxation on federal calculations, those benefits also apply when the fuel firms calculate their state income taxes.

“Provisions in the tax code reflect unparalleled government support of the oil industry and significantly distort...the real price of gasoline,” the report says.

Still, all those subsidies only amount to a few pennies per gallon.

The report says the bigger subsidy is in the government's support of highways, waterways and harbors to promote the transport and use of petroleum fuels, government costs of oil spill cleanup, government sale of oil leases at cheap prices, the government and public costs associated with air pollution caused by the burning of the fuels, the costs of dealing with climate change and so forth. It goes on and on.

If you toss in all the subsidies and costs—and admittedly, you could make a strong argument for not including at least some of those costs—it adds up to hundreds of billions of dollars. And if those costs were included at the pump, a gallon of gas—in 1998—would have cost from a low of $5.60 to a high of $15.14 per gallon. The 2005 update, which adds the costs of the Iraq war and others, adds 20 or 30 cents to that.

The difference between the actual and unsubsidized price represents the indirect tax consumers pay for fuel. You also pay direct taxes at the pump. The American Petroleum Institute in a July 2007 report says the national average tax on fuel is 46.9 cents a gallon. API listed Hawaii as sixth highest in the nation at 51 cents a gallon. (See data on fuel taxes and other issues at the API website, www.api.org.)

Understandably, the petroleum industry argues that it's paying plenty of taxes and it argues against changing the playing field.

Says a statement on its website:

“In 2004, America's major oil and natural gas companies paid an estimated $48.36 billion in income tax. In addition, these companies collected over $45 billion in excise taxes in 2004 on behalf of the IRS. Additional taxes and fees imposed on the industry include gross production or severance taxes, import duties, and property, sales, and use taxes. U.S.-based petroleum companies must compete in the global oil and gas market to ensure a stable supply here at home. Taxes can affect our companies' ability to stay competitive in the world market.”

Does the artificial deflation of pump-paid fuel cost affect things like driving and automotive choices? What if you paid the real cost of fuel at the pump rather than paying it through income taxes and other costs? The international example suggests costs can drive changes in behavior.

Parts of Europe are familiar with gas in the $6-per-gallon range. In England last year, prices were closer to $7 a gallon.

One result? Europeans buy cars with nearly double the average fuel economy of those in the U.S. The average fuel economy in Europe is more than 40 miles a gallon, while ours is in the 20s.

Even the new federal energy bill will only push U.S. fuel economy up into the 30s by 2020.

The next time you suffer sticker shock when you see the price of gas at the pump, take a deep breath. Chances are, that price is cheap compared with what you're actually paying.

© 2007 Jan W. TenBruggencate

Sex, evolution and picture-wing flies

In what was certainly a harrowing voyage, a tiny fly 26 million years ago made the trip across the ocean to what is now Hawai'i.

(Photo: Some of the diversity in wing patterns of Hawaiian picture-wing flies. Image courtesy Ken Kaneshiro.)

It would have been a different place then. The atolls that are now Midway and Kure would have been where the Hawaiian Islands are today. Now, they're more than 1,000 miles to the northwest of Kaua'i. (See www.soest.hawaii.edu/GG/HCV/haw_formation.html for more on the geography.)

Many of the plants and creatures that later were found in the Islands weren't here yet.

That single fly thrived, evolved to feed on the available food sources, and eventually flew or blew from island to island as new islands erupted, evolving further as it went.

Today genetic studies suggest there are close to 1,000 distinct species of the fly genus Drosophila that are found only in Hawai'i, and all of which are believed to have descended from that single fly.

It's an amazing amount of genetic change in a very short period. That diverse assemblage of closely related species is a goldmine for the study of evolution, and in the latest step, researchers have been comparing genetic markers with the wing patterns on one group of the Hawaiian Drosophila.

That group, perhaps the most famous, is known as the picture-wing flies. The different species can sometimes be distinguished from each other by the patterns of dark and light on their tiny wings.

The work was published earlier this year under the title, “A Database of Wing Diversity in the Hawaiian Drosophila,” in PloS ONE, a peer-reviewed online publication of the Public Library of Science. The authors are Kevin A. Edwards of Illinois State University and Daisuke Yamamoto of Tohoku University in Japan, and at the University of Hawai'i at Mānoa Center for Conservation Research and training, Linden T. Doescher and Kenneth Y. Kaneshiro.

It's all about flies, but from a broader scientific standpoint, this research is about learning how to link differences in the physical appearance of things to the genetic basis of those differences.

Researchers have been studying the Hawaiian flies for a generation, but even with these small, simple creatures, there's lots to learn. One key thing: Why did all those wings develop those distinct patterns? Scientists believe there must have been a reason that has something to do with their survival—maybe it's camouflage or perhaps a certain pattern has a link to sexual attractiveness, but researchers arent

sure.

“Without a firm grasp on their functional relevance in the wild, it is difficult to assess why the patterns have diversified so extensively. We speculate that...the patterns strike a balance between the need to hide from predators and the need to attract mates,” the authors write.

Among the findings is that very small changes at the genetic level can result in dramatic differences in actual appearance. The wings display an amazing variation of spots and dots, stripes and swirls, patterns like scales and ones with feather-like shadings.

Still, Kaneshiro said the bigger question for genetics is how this fly managed to evolve so dramatically in “such a short period of evolutionary time.”

Kaneshiro's groundbreaking genetic work suggests that much of the diversity in Drosophila can be explained by sexual selection—the tendency of females to select mates based on certain characteristics, thus favoring those characteristics in the resulting population. That kind of selection may have been key to the early development of the Drosophila after their arrival in the islands, he said ina n email.

“Sexual selection appears to have played a much more important role at least during the initial stages of speciation, in the generation of novel genetic recombinants, upon which the forces of natural selection can act during adaptation to new habitats,” Kaneshiro said.

A dozen of the 112 species of picture-wings are on the federal endangered species list—one listed threatened and 11 endangered.

© 2007 Jan W. TenBruggencate

Climate change to disrupt marine life generally, and fisheries

Marine life follows oceanic temperature bands, nutrient-rich areas and current flows—but how will all those things change in a changing climate?

(Photo: Hawksbill turtles are among the top predators whose reactions to climate change will be studied. NOAA photo.)

Researchers aren't sure, but what they are sure about is that as the ocean changes, the habits of marine creatures will, as well.

“Oceanic top predators respond to changes in their environment by changing their behavior and shifting their distribution,” said John Sibert, manager of the Pelagic Fisheries Research Program at the University of Hawai'i.

The could mean significant disruptions in locations of fisheries as well as the ability of the oceans to produce food.

“Ocean ecosystems may experience changes in the relative abundance of different species, as well as changes in overall productivity. This can have major economic impacts and may determine the food security of many coastal communities in the developing countries of the world,” Sibert said.

Hawai'i researchers joined 150 international scientists in Mexico this month to launch a 10-year research project to try to get a handle on the changes. It has the acronym CLIOTOP, for Climate Impacts on Oceanic Top Predators.

Their goal is to study the impacts of climate change on tuna, billfish, shark, whale, dolphin, sea turtle and seabird species.

They'll be looking at air and sea temperatures, wind changes, ocean currents and rainfall.

Sibert, who helped organize the CLIOTOP symposium and serves on its steering committee, said oceanic changes are likely to affect feeding, migration, population size and much more.

The threat” “Global warming may lead to severe contraction of favorable reproductive zones for some species of tunas that will have larger effects than fisheries on tuna stocks by the end of the 21st century,” Sibert said.

© 2007 Jan W. TenBruggencate

For more information see web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/regional/cliotop/cliotop.htm

Where's Hawai'i in fuel economy battle?

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, insisting that it has auto fuel economy well under control, has refused to allow 17 states to demand more.

California, at least, says it will appeal. Other states can be expected to join in.

Hawai'i, arguably a state with the most to gain, is ironically not participating in this little example of “think globally, act locally.” That's despite having some of the highest fuel prices in the nation, having an economy critically dependent on fossil fuel imports, a coastline now eroding due in part to climate change, immense traffic problems, parking space issues statewide and so on.

The New York Times listed three arguments used by EPA administrator Stephen L. Johnson to support the agency's decision to ban state action.

1. The state rules are pre-empted by federal authority.

2. The new federal energy bill, which President Bush signed, makes the issue moot.

3. And furthermore, “The Bush administration is moving forward with a clear national solution, and not a confusing patchwork of state rules. I believe this is a better approach than if individual states were to act alone,” he said

Never mind that the EPA has approved virtually all previous California waivers of the Clean Air Bill, that no “clear national solution” has been described, and that the new rules, watered down to gain passage in the Senate, don't go nearly as far as some of the states wanted to go.

The Congress brought the U.S. to automotive fuel economy of 35 miles a gallon by 2020.

Auto makers say they're working hard on improvement fuel economy, but it's not as if this is going to take a monumental technological leap. In Europe, average fuel economy is 20 percent higher than that right now.

The states demanding more fuel economy in cars are Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Utah and Washington. They represent something like half the cars in the nation.

Several of those states have some of the highest fuel costs in the nation (see below for a link to state-by-state fuel costs), although emissions rather than fuel cost is the primary target of mileage standards. Hawai'i, which currently the highest-priced gasoline in the country, is notably missing in the group insisting on tough fuel economy standards.

California says it will appeal the EPA decision: "California sued to compel the agency to act on our waiver, and now we will sue to overturn today's decision and allow Californians to protect our environment," said a statement from the office of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

The California fuel economy plan would have taken that state's fleet to close to the European level of fuel economy by 2016. Twelve states have already adopted the California standard.

“Let's be clear; the California standard is stronger and more effective than the 35 mpg floor established in the new energy bill," said David Doniger, climate center policy director for the National Resources Defense Council.

In a statement on the NRDC website, Doniger added: “California is suffering severe impacts from global warming. Mr. Johnson's 'policy preference' for a different approach is exactly the kind of illegal free-lancing the Supreme Court rejected in its landmark April decision on global warming.”

The auto industry earlier tried to block state-by-state fuel standards, but a federal judge in September 2007 threw out their suit, saying he wasn't convinced that they couldn't meet the California requirements.

President Bush, in a press conference, seemed committed to a national energy strategy: "The question is how to have an effective strategy. Is it more effective to let each state make a decision as to how to proceed in curbing greenhouse gases, or is it more effective to have a national strategy?”

The Association of International Automobile Manufacturers, which represents the major car makers, insists its members consider fuel economy a priority, but that the states have no right to establish fuel economy standards independent of the federal government. In a statement issued today (Dec. 20, 2007), AIAM president Michael Stanton said:

“AIAM supports efforts to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and improve fuel economy but believes strongly that it is the federal government’s responsibility to establish one uniform national fuel economy standard rather than permit a patchwork of state laws. We look forward to working with EPA and other federal agencies to develop nationwide GHG emissions regulations for motor vehicles that will more effectively address global warming and climate change concerns related to CO2 emissions from automobiles.”
© 2007 Jan W. TenBruggencate
Some numbers: According to the AAA's fuel cost report updated to Dec. 20, 2007, (www.fuelgaugereport.com/sbsavg.asp), Hawai'i's price for regular gasoline was the highest in the nation, leading California by nearly 20 cents and Connecticut by a quarter.

Life evolving in the wet darkness below

Deep in the rock of the Islands, in dark crevices where groundwater flows toward the sea, life is evolving into new forms.
(Photo: These 'ōpae 'ula from Kalaeloa on O'ahu are not as deeply red-colored as ones from Kona. Scott Santos photo.)

Among them are tiny red shrimps, which come into the light only in the rare ponds and anchialine pools where caves and cracks open up to the sunlight. But they are also found in wells dug around the islands, indicating that they inhabit the dark areas as well.

These little crustaceans, less than a half-inch long, are known as 'ōpae 'ula in Hawaiian and Halocaridina rubra to science. They graze on the bacteria and algae that line the walls of their watery habitats. They have been mainly found in lava areas, but have also been located in pools in limestone, like the once-common sinkholes of the 'Ewa plain.

They are generally found near the coast, living in waters that are close enough to the ocean to sometimes have some salt content. The shrimps seem to tolerate a range of salinities.

Researchers say Hawai'i is the perfect place to study these creatures, which some folks keep as aquarium pets, because it has the most extensive anchialine habitats in the world. Auburn University shrimp researcher Scott Santos said he and his team are looking into the origins of some of the shrimp being sold on the internet and in stores as aquarium curiosities.

Earlier this year, researchers Jennifer Ivey and Santos of Auburn University, reported the complete mitochondrial DNA of the shrimps. They reported, in the genetics journal Gene, that this is a step in making it easier to study the population structure of the shrimps and for planning for their conservation.

More recently, researchers looking into the genetics of the shrimp have found that while they are located throughout the Hawaiian underground world, the 'ōpae 'ula do not appear to mix much once they're established.

A study, to be published in 2008 in the journal Limnology and Oceanography, looked at the genetics of 573 shrimp found at 34 different sites on three islands—Hawai'i, Maui and O'ahu.

As you might expect, they found that the ones nearest to each other were likely to be closely related, and those on different islands or far away on an individual island are likely more distantly related. They appear to form geographically isolated breeding groups.

The research found 13 genetic groupings, which were associated with eight “lineages.”

On the Big Island, the shrimp of west Hawai'i are distinct from the ones on the east side of the island, and there's another group in east Ka'u. On Maui, the ones at south Maui and different from the ones near Hāna. On O'ahu, the windward side's shrimps are distinct from those off Wai'anae and the ones at 'Ewa are different still.

The only multi-island lineage was that the shrimp of west Hawai'i are closely related to shrimp found at O'ahu's Kapapa Island in Kāne'ohe Bay.

Clearly, in order to take up residence on a new island, the shrimps must have some ability to disperse across the ocean. But they apparently don't do so often, and the ocean seems to represent a significant barrier. Metaphorically speaking, the ocean for them is a wall you might be able to climb in extraordinary circumstances, but which you seldom do.

Researchers suggest that the Kapapa Island 'ōpae 'ula manage to remain genetically distinct from the ones nearby on O'ahu because they are protected by the ocean barrier.

Within an island, the researchers identified mechanical barriers to transport—essentially features in the rock of the islands that prevent shrimps from one region from communicating with shrimps from another.

The 'ōpae 'ula, thus, are trapped between oceanic and geological barriers, and left to evolve independently in their subterranean domain.

An extensive team of researchers has been studying these cryptic critters. The co-authors of the Limnology and Oceanography article will include among them Jonathan Craft of Auburn University, Atlantis Russ of the University of Hawai'i at Hilo Tropical Conservation Biology and Environmental Sciences Program, Mike Yamamoto of the state Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR), Thomas Iwai Jr. of DAR's Anuenue Fisheries Research Center, Skippy Hau of DAR, John Kahiapo of DAR, Charlie Chong of Lanakila Learning Center in Hilo, Sharon Ziegler-Chong of UH-Hilo's Pacific Aquaculture and Coastal Resources Center, Cam Muir of UH's Biology Department, Yoshihisa Fujita of the University of the Ryukyus, Dan Polhemus formerly of Bishop Museum and now head of DAR, Robert Kinzie III of the Hawai'i Institute of Marine Biology and Santos of Auburn University.

© 2007 Jan W. TenBruggencate

November was wet, but on annual basis, Hawai'i still dry

While most of the state still has below-average rainfall on an annual basis, as anyone living in Hawai'i knows, November was a pretty wet month almost everywhere.

Is the drought of the middle of the year over? It would appear so, from data supplied by National Weather Service senior hydrologist Kevin Kodama. That, and December continues to be plenty wet over much of the state.

The break began with heavy rains over Kaua'i early in the month, which dumped 8 to 10 inches over parts of O'ahu when it got there, then drenched Moloka'i and Maui. Another system brought heavy rain to the southern Big Island, and a statewide storm pounded all the islands at the end of the month.

Kodama's report for Kaua'i: “While wet conditions pushed a couple of sports into the near normal range, most of the available totals for 2007 through the end of November remain in the below normal range. Mount Wai'ale'ale's 291.17 inches leads all totals statewide and is 77 percent of normal.”

For O'ahu: A number of locations are near normal for the year. “However, many gage totals remain below normal in the range of 50 to 80 percent. The Oahu Forest NWR gage leads all Oahu totals with 162.06 inches (87 percent of normal) and has passed Maui’s West Wailuaiki for third highest in the state behind Mount Wai'ale'ale and Pu'u Kukui.”

For Maui: Most rain gages remain below normal for the year. “The wet conditions of November helped push the Kaunakakai total into the near normal range after being below normal all year. Pu'u Kukui’s 174.43 inches (50 percent of normal) leads all Maui County totals and is second highest in the state behind only Mount Wai'ale'ale.”

Kodama said his data come from a range of sources, including National Weather Service weather station network, the Hydronet automated network, sites run by cooperative observers, and automated stations operated by the state Department of Land and Natural Resources, the U.S .Geological Survey, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, the U.S. Department of Defense, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

© 2007 Jan W. TenBruggencate

Table of statewide rainfall data: www.prh.noaa.gov/hnl/hydro/pages/data_tbl_11.html

Comet missing! Hawai'i telescopes aided in search

The comet 85p/Boethin, which normally passes near the sun every 11.8 years, has disappeared.

Did the mile-wide comet explode due to volatile gases inside it? Did something crash into it and cause it to vaporize? Are little bits of it still on the comet's orbital path, too small to be detected from Earth? Or is it something else?

Astronomers don't know. “It's an intriguing mystery,” said University of Hawai'i astronomer Karen Meech, in a telephone conversation.

(Photo: Artist's conception of Deep Impact spacecraft flying by Earth. Credit: NASA, University of Maryland.)

"We were confident we could find the comet, and we were astonished when it wasn't there," said Meech, of the university's Institute for Astronomy and co-investigator for the mission of the Deep Impact spacecraft. That's the vehicle that in July 2005 crashed a big chunk of metal into Comet Tempel 1 to find out what it was made of.

The Deep Impact team had hoped to redirect their spacecraft to check out Boethin when it arrives near Earth next year. But after a search by an international team of observatories, it seems to be gone.

Deep Impact, whose mission is named EPOXI*, will be redirected to a backup comet, Hartley 2. It should pass by that comet in October 2010.

Boethin was scheduled to be visible within the inner solar system in fall 2008. While Boethin is normally visible from Earth only during the six months when it is closest to the sun, astronomers went looking for its infrared radiation signature when it was still out of sight. They'd expected it could be detected by October 2007.

When they couldn't find it, they enlisted 10 of the world's biggest telescopes, as well as NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope. Among the Earth-bound scopes were two on Mauna Kea, the 8-meter Subaru Telescope and the 3.6-meter Canada-France-Hawai'i telescope

“Their combined international observations constituted the most intense search for an astronomical object every undertaken,” the astronomy institute said in a press release.

Michael A'Hearn, principal investigator for the Deep Impact and EPOXI missions, said researchers feel there may be remnants of the comet, even if it exploded. They say blasts big enough to destroy a comet are rare.

"The last time we saw comet Boethin, we estimated it was at least a mile across. If we can't see it, it must have broken into pieces no more than a quarter-mile across," he said. Astronomers around the world will be watching late next year to see if pieces are visible, and whether remnants form a visible tail.

Meech said the situation is compounded by the fact that astronomers were not confident about their estimate of Boethin's location. It normally takes three comet passes to get an accurate comet orbital assessment. Boethin was only first spotted in 1975, and was viewed again in 1986. But its 1997 pass was on the other side of the sun from Earth, so only two passes have been measured.

Astronomers calculated the possible errors in their positions, and searched all the likely locations for the comet, with no luck.

“We searched that whole area very deeply,” Meech said.

Meanwhile, the Deep Impact/EPOXI spacecraft will have a longer voyage before its next cometary contact. Getting to Comet Hartley 2 will take two years more than a visit to Boethin would have, but Meech said the comet study effort is yielding lots of new information.

"Up to now we have seen only four comets close up, and each was different. Since comets tell us about the chemistry and physical conditions of the early solar system, the more we learn about comets, which delivered some of Earth's early water and organic compounds, the more we may learn about how life began on Earth," Meech said.

© 2007 Jan W. TenBruggencate .

* EPOXI is a blending of the acronyms for two space missions. During the next six months or so, Deep Impact's spacecraft will use one of its two telescopes to search for Earth-sized plans around five stars, a project called Extrasolar Planet Observations and Characterization (EPOCh). The second mission, to fly by and use telescopes and other gear to inspect Comet Harley 2, is the Deep Impact eXtended Investigation (DIXI).

Hawai'i's most energy self-sufficient school: Ni'ihau

Tiny Ni'ihau School, one of the smallest public schools in the state, is now perhaps Hawai'i's only school that is entirely off the grid.

It is hooked up to a new 10.4 kilowatt photovoltaic power system.

(Photo: Niihau School buildings to left, solar array and battery building at right. Kiawe and tamarind forest all around. Photo courtesy Kaua'i County.)

Ni'ihau School, with 30 students from kindergarten through high school, has never been a power hog. For many years, it used no electric power at all. There is no islandwide power grid on the small, privately owned island off Kaua'i. When electricity was needed, it came from batteries, or someone fired up a fossil-fuel-powered generator.

That's the way it is in the hamlet of Pu'uwai, with its dirt streets and scattered wood-frame homes enclosed by rock walls—to keep the livestock out.

Horses are far more common than motor vehicles. And pigs, sheep and an array of other wildlife wander the countryside.

Only a couple of hundred people live here.

There are no phones, except for cell phones that residents can use to call relatives on Kaua'i. Those cell phones don't work in Pu'uwai, which is on the far side of the island from Kaua'i. Ni'ihau folks have to go miles from home to a high spot from which they can view Kaua'i in order to get a cell signal.

There's no running water, and folks collect the scant rain that falls on their roofs. When it's been dry a long time, they can resort to a well. Some have small solar systems to provide them with juice for lights and small electric appliances.

Residents move regularly back and forth to Kaua'i, and students switch occasionally between Ni'ihau School and one of the several public schools and charter schools on the west side of Kaua'i.

Niihau Ranch manager and island co-owner Bruce Robinson said the installation of the new solar system at the school was a community-wide effort, with the help of the county, the state Department of Education, Gay & Robinson, Niihau Helicopters, Niihau Ranch, Ron's Electric, Seattle-based DPK Inc, and U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development.

“This project shows that renewable energy self-sufficiency can be achieved in our DOE schools through the cooperative efforts of community, government and business,” Robinson said.

The new system will provide power for computers and other technology in the school building, and will provide the school with refrigeration for food in its cafeteria. Until now, the school could make only limited use of fresh produce, dairy products, and other food requiring cooling.

“The basic need for electricity at Ni'ihau Island School has been one of many challenges for the community,” said Bill Arakaki, the Department of Education's Kaua'i district chief, and a former principal at Ni'ihau School and Waimea High School.

A field of 80 Kyocera solar panels with peak production of 130 watts each is linked to a bank of 72 deep cycle marine batteries. Those and the associated electronics cost $207,000, which came from a $150,000 USDA grant, $32,000 from the county Energy Extension Service and $25,000 from the Department of Education. Niihau Ranch built the buildings, a stone wall windbreak and did other work.

A county press release said that Ron Sakoda of Ron's Electric and Charlie Cowden of Hanalei Solar provided training, and thanked for their help former Kaua'i DOE chief Daniel Hamada, Randall Higa of the department's safety and security division, Ronald Ho & Associates electrical engineering consultant Tim Higa, and county energy coordinator Glenn Sato.

© 2007 Jan W. TenBruggencate

Lemon corals and cauldron sponges at Papahānaumokuākea

Marine researchers have recently discovered stunning new coral and sponge beds in mile-deep water within the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument.

(Photo: The lemon yellow bamboo coral at right was first spotted within the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument from a Hawai'i Undersea Research Laboratory submersible during a recent cruise. Photo courtesy Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument.)

They used the Hawai'i Undersea Research Laboratory (HURL) deep submersible Pisces V to survey a volcanic ridge near Twin Banks and a seamount near French Frigate Shoals. The water was 3,000 to 6,000 feet deep.

Chris Kelley, the principal investigator for the work, said these will be the first of many new discoveries in the vast preserve. New discoveries from shallow and deep reefs seem are being announced from almost every scientific voyage into the region.

In part, that's because most of the monument is below SCUBA diving depths and has not been completely surveyed. The monument includes the 10 islands, atolls and reef complexes of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, which extend from beyond Kaua'i to Kure Atoll, more than 1,000 miles away.

“It's important to find ways to explore these deepwater ecosystems where the inhabitants are virtually unknown,” said zoologist Randy Kosaki, monument research coordinator with NOAA.

Among the recent finds are a lemon yellow bamboo coral that grows like a tree, and a giant sponge with a hole in it that researchers are calling “the cauldron sponge.”

“HURL has operated in Hawaiian waters for over 20 years and never before came across these species until last month,” the monument said in a press release.

The recent research trip, a 22-day voyage aboard the University of Hawai'i research vessel Ka'imikai-o-Kanaloa, was led by Frank Parrish of NOAA's Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center and Rob Dunbar of Stanford University. Their work included a range of research objectives, including locating and mapping new coral beds, determining age and growth rates of precious corals, and studying current speed and direction around deep coral beds.

These beds of corals, sponges and other life don't blanket the ocean floor. They occur in patches, and these patches can be alive with life, providing habitat for crabs, anemones, oysters, urchins, barnacles, lobsters and fishes. They can attract foraging monk seals.

Two key research goals for the deep waters around the Hawaiian archipelago, according to a national deep coral report released this year, are to identify what's down there and to map its extent, and then to figure out how it fits into the web of life.

That requires “determining the important physiological and ecological components of deep coral ecosystems,” said the report, The State of Deep Coral Ecosystems of the United States: 2007.

It says that minimal bottom trawling, which has never been a big industry off the Hawaiian Islands and which has been banned for some time, means the coral beds of the deep waters around the archipelago should be in pretty good shape. They may be at some risk from lost longline and bottom-fishing gear and from the use of traps for species like marine shrimp.

The primary value of the beds of Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument may be to provide a better understanding of the role these beds play in the marine world.

“Being remote from the anthropogenic influences of the main Hawaiian Islands make them important biological reference sites for future research,” the deep coral report says.

© 2007 Jan W. TenBruggencate

For a copy of the report, The State of Deep Coral Ecosystems of the United States:2007, see www.nmfs.noaa.gov/habitat/dce.html.

For information on the monument, see www.hawaiiatolls.org, www.hawaiireef.noaa.gov and www.fws.gov/pacificislands.

Birds at Christmas: An accounting

Wondering what that bird is that's eating your papayas?

And whose melodious call drifts through the garden?

Or which green bird is hopping through that 'ōhi'a tree on your forest hike?

(Photo: A pair of 'alae 'ula, or Hawaiian moorhens. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service photo.)

The Audubon Society's Christmas Bird Count provides an essentially free (you may need to pay $5 to join Audubon) opportunity to learn about birds. It's open to veteran birders and rank beginners alike—so if you're in the latter category, the century-old bird count is a chance to get a free seminar in bird identification.

The society's 108^th national count (the 63^rd in Hawai'i) will be conducted in Hawai'i from Dec. 14 to Jan. 5.

For more information on the web see www.hawaiiaudubon.com/xmas.html for the Hawai'i count, and nationally, www.audubon.org/bird/cbc/.

Attached below is the schedule and island-by-island contact information, clipped from the Hawai'i Audubon site.

© 2007 Jan W. TenBruggencate

Island	Date	Coordinator	phone/email
O`ahu
Honolulu	Sun 12/16	Arlene Buchholz	808-988-9806 (snovakz@juno.com)
Waipi`o	Sat 01/05	David Bremer	623-7613 (bremerd001@hawaii.rr.com)
Kaua`i
*Waimea	Sat 12/22	Michelle Ho`okano Koke`e Natural History Museum	808-335-9975 (kokee@aloha.net)
Hanalei	TBA	Brenda Zaun	808-828-1413 (Brenda_zaun@fws.gov)
Maui
Pu`u O Kaka`e (East)	TBA	Jennifer Higashino	(jenn@maui.net)
`Iao Valley (West)	TBA	Jennifer Higashino	(jenn@maui.net)
Moloka`i
Kalaupapa	Mon 12/17	Arleone Dibben-Young	808-553-5992 (nene@aloha.net)
Hawai`i Island
Volcano	12/15	Eldridge Naboa	(enaboa@tnc.org)
North Kona	1/3	Nick Mitchell	808-322-2735

*A Bird Identification meeting will be held on December 19. Call the Koke`e Natural History Museum at (808) 335-9975 for more information.

Polynesian voyaging curbed by climate change?

Is there a role for climate science in archaeology.

Increasingly, the answer seems to be yes.

One of the mysteries of Hawaiian history has been why voyaging between the Hawaiian Islands and the South Pacific stopped several hundred years before the arrival of Europeans in the Islands.

Climate researchers say that the decline in long-distance Pacific voyaging may have coincided with a significant change in climate, which would have changed weather patterns throughout the region.

For traditional navigator Bruce Blankenfeld, the link between climate and voyaging success is perfectly reasonable.

“You take a lot of your cues from the weather. If the weather changes, that changes everything,” he said.

Blankenfeld is one of five Hawai'i non-instrument navigators who recently was inducted into a traditional Micronesian navigation society. He is one of the veteran navigators of the Polynesian Voyaging Society's canoe, Hōkūle'a.

Around the year 1300 the global climate began a switch from a warm period, often referred to as the Medieval Warm Period, to a cooler pattern known as the Little Ice Age.

“There were changes in weather patterns and climate patterns, and there were more storm events in the Little Ice Age. This would have made traveling much harder, less predictable and less successful,” said Oliver Timm, a paleoclimatologist with the University of Hawai'i's International Pacific Research Center.

What caused the climate to cool? There are a couple of suspects, Timm told RaisingIslands.

One is that solar radiation dropped at the end of the warm period, although the drop was so small, about a tenth of a percent, that Timm believes it was unlikely to be the sole cause of cooling.

The other possible cause is volcanic activity, which can throw a great deal of material into the atmosphere that can block solar radiation.

“If you have several major volcanic events, that can significantly change incoming solar radiation,” Timm said.

The change in global average temperatures caused other changes, including a significant drop in sea level.

“The Medieval Warm Period sea level was a half meter to one meter higher than during the Little Ice Age. There was a significant drop in the sea level. That was a major stress for the societies of the Pacific islands. Suddenly, with a drop in sea levels, it changes the biology and food supply,” he said.

University of the South Pacific researcher Patrick Nunn addressed the impact of climate change on Polynesian societies in November 2007 at a conference of the International Pacific Research Center.

Nunn, a professor of oceanic geoscience, said that the change from the warm to the cool was the most rapid climate change in several thousand years.

Timm said significant change may have taken anywhere from a few generations to as long as couple of hundred years, but it was significant against a backdrop of a long period of relative climate stability.

“The problem is for societies that have adapted to one climate for hundreds of years, and then you have a change that occurs over a few generations,”
Timm said.

One of the impacts of Little Ice Age lower sea levels in Hawai'i were that some salty marshes became fresh. Kawainui Marsh on O'ahu was among these. The plain inland of Bellows also went from salty to fresh. On Kaua'i, the low coastal plain at Mānā was populated during the 1300s, perhaps associated with a reduced salinity of its marshlands.

Nunn cites similar changes around the Pacific. At Tikiopia in the Solomon Islands, an inlet was cut off from the sea by dropping sea levels and became a lake.

Also during the Little Ice Age, there were increased numbers of disruptive El Nino climate events.

There was ecosystem stress and associated societal stress. As rich reefs were suddenly above sea level, coastal habitations were abandoned. Polynesians were moving, sometimes taking up residence on now-dry former swamplands, moving out to newly formed islands on the reefs, or moving to inland villages.

“Climate change, both directly and through environmental filters, caused profound societal changes in the tropical Pacific Islands during the last millennium,” Dunn said.

Associated with these changes was the dropping off of long-distance voyaging across much of Polynesia. Hawai'i and New Zealand, in particular, became isolated from the rest of Polynesia during this period. Other islands also suffered.

Trade routes were abandoned. In the Kiribati islands, the trade in stone tools from the Marquesas stopped, Nunn said.

It may be that the changes in society alone were enough to inhibit voyaging, or perhaps the mental maps that traditional navigators used were no longer accurate in a time of changing winds, changing temperatures, perhaps altered currents, and even possible changes in the movement patterns of fish and birds.

© 2007 Jan W. TenBruggencate

Climate, Emissions, Approaches, Costs--and Hawai'i

A crucial national report released this month suggests the nation can significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions without severe disruption of the economy—if it takes effective steps early.

The report is “Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: How Much At What Cost?” It was prepared with the help of a combination of environmental organizations and energy companies by the global management consulting firm McKinsey & Co. (see details and a link for the report below)

For Hawai'i, with the threats of rising sea levels, changing rainfall patterns, increasing hurricane potential, and myriad economic disruptions from a range of warming impacts—including threats to our primary economic engine, tourism—the issue is real and the problems imminent.

The state has an opportunity, as the Legislature is about to launch its next session, to address the issue as several other states already have. Many states have been far more aggressive in this area than Hawai'i.

Seven states and a couple of Canadian provinces have joined the Western Climate Initiative in a commitment to control regional greenhouse gas emissions. California is at war with the federal government over its insistence on increasing energy efficiency of its motor vehicle fleet. Ten states joined a consortium of European and Pacific nations and provinces in forming the International Carbon Action Partnership. The governor of Alaska just appointed a sub-cabinet on climate change, to consolidate climate change information for the state and to recommend policies to help the state deal with them.

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

Rising greenhouse gases are causing planet-wide climate alterations, and are acidifying the oceans.

The McKinsey report says industry leaders are increasingly recognizing it's a problem. The report cites a recent survey by The Business Council, that found that 40 percent of chief executive officers said environmental and warming issues are very important, some saying they are “the most important policy challenge facing the nation.” That number has doubled in a year and a half.

Greenhouse gas emissions can be measured by using a standard measure called carbon-dioxide equivalents, or CO₂e. We are currently producing (effective 2005) 7.2 gigatons* of CO₂e, and without action to curtail use, will be producing 9.7 tons of CO₂e by 2030, the report says, basing its estimate on a “composite of official U.S. government agency projections.”

The report looked into 250 ways to abate our production of greenhouse gases, many of which could be accomplished at very low cost. Others, of course, are associated with higher costs.

The cheapest approach could reduce emissions by 1.3 gigatons by 2030. The mid-range would reduce them by 3 gigatons, to slightly below current production, which current legislative proposals say are still too high. The high range of a 4.5-gigaton cut is possible and would reduce production significantly, but would require “an extraordinary high level of national commitment.”

A point of the report is that the situation isn't hopeless. Reductions, and dramatic ones, are possible given current technology or the technology that's very close to ready. And while some technologies are costly, the costs can be cut by strategic reductions in use.

A key conclusion: “The United States could reduce greenhouse gas emissions in 2030 by 3.0 to 4.5 gigatons of CO₂e using tested approaches and high-potential emerging technologies. These reductions would involve pursuing a wide array of abatement options available at marginal costs less than $50 per ton, with the average net cost to the economy being far lower if the nation can capture sizable gains from energy efficiency. Achieving these reductions at the lowest cost to the economy, however, will require strong, coordinated, economy-wide action that begins in the near future.”

NO MAGIC BULLET

No single fix will solve the nation's greenhouse gas production problem, the report says. It says a broad-based approach is needed, bringing down greenhouse gas emissions in a many areas at once.

“Abatement possibilities are highly fragmented and widely spread across the economy,” it says.

But as much as 40 percent of the cuts could actually save money, generating positive financial returns. And the report says those savings could be used to help pay for some of the more expensive technologies.

Buildings and appliances: As many as 870 megatons* of reduction is possible with improved lighting, heating and cooling, building controls, high-performance consumer electronics and appliances. It would be the least costly, but “persistent barriers to market efficiency will need to be overcome.”

Transportation: Increased fuel efficiency could cut production by up to 290 megatons, with additional savings coming from switching to diesel for light-duty vehicles, lower-carbon fuels, plug-in hybrids and other technologies.

Industrial: Upgrading equipment, efficiency of motors, changing industrial processes and other technologies could cut production here by up to 770 megatons.

Carbon sinks: Up to 590 megatons could be addressed through increasing forestation and improved soil management practices, at comparatively low cost. There might need to be carbon offset systems to help provided the money for these efforts.

Electric power: More wind and solar, additional nuclear, more efficiency in current plants, and the development of carbon capture and storage for coal-fired plants. These might be the most costly, but could reduce production by 1.57 gigatons.

COMMITMENT

If the United States is serious about the problem, it could make a big impact immediately with very little cost simply by grabbing the easy and cheap solutions first. These include increased energy efficiency and applying those emissions-reduction technologies that actually save money.

Among other things, the report calls for immediate commitment of more research money for promising technologies like solar photovoltaics, cellulosic biofuels and superior efficiency vehicles like plug-in hybrids.

It also calls for simplified and speeded permitting for more-efficient and low-emissions power production facilities, to get them into operation sooner.

Why should the U.S. take the hit for reducing greenhouse gas emissions? Because we're one whopping big producer. Our production leads the world, just ahead of China's. But of course, China has four times the U.S. population. On a per capita basis they're producing it at about a quarter our rate.

The top five per capita producers of greenhouse gas are Australia, Canada, the U.S., Netherlands and Saudi Arabia. The next five are Russia, Indonesia, Brazil, Germany and South Korea.

© 2007 Jan W. TenBruggencate

See the report: www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/ccsi/pdf/US_ghg_final_report.pdf.

The collaborators on “Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: How Much At What Cost?” are DTE Energy, Environmental Defense, Honeywell, National Grid, Natural Resources Defense Council, PG&E and Shell. It was prepared for The Conference Board, the century-old business and research organization that produces the Consumer Confidence Index and the Leading Economic Indicators. The report's authors are Jon Creyts, Anton Derkach, Scott Nyquist, Ken Ostrowski and Jack Stephenson.

*megatons, gigatons: A mega is a million, a one followed by six zeroes; a giga is a billion, or a thousand million, or a one with nine zeroes after it.

Air cars in our future? Probably, but not soon.

What's the next big step in automotive transport?

For years, true believers have talked about cars that run on water—but you haven't seen one running down the street yet. How about one running on air?

(Photos: Three of MDI's prototype air car models: In red the six-seat family car, middle in blue is the pickup, and bottomo is the the hot little three-seater Mini-CAT. Photo credit: MDI.)

Air cars already exist in working prototypes, and in foreign countries, several models are ready for roll-out as early as next year.

The air, of course, is compressed air.

And the manufacturers are touting efficiency numbers that border on astounding. Fill the air tank for a couple of bucks and do your 25-mile daily round-trip commute all week without needing a refill. You say your pickup gets 20 miles to the gallon and you're paying $3.50 a gallon? The same week costs you $22.

The average fuel car in the U.S. gets 24 or so miles per gallon. Hybrids achieve as much as 45 to 60. Electric cars, when you calculate the amount of fuel that's burned to produce the power to recharge them, are reputed to come in at 150 to 200 miles per gallon.

Now come compressed air cars.

The fuel is used to compress air, which is carried in tanks. Several different engine designs have been developed, some traditional-looking piston engines, others looking like rotary engines.

The French firm Moteur Developpment International has licensed its technology to firms in India and Spain, and says folks in those countries will be able to buy cars by next summer (2008). (See MDI's website, www.theaircar.com)

The Indian automaker Tata is estimating its car will have a 125-mile range on air alone, and that filling the air tanks will cost about $2. Just for comparison, let's quadruple that figure to account for Hawai'i's electricity costs. That's $8 for 125 miles, or 16 miles to the dollar, or six cents a mile. The financial equivalent of nearly 60 miles a gallon.

But some references suggest the Tata car will get twice that efficiency. And if Hawai'i electric firms established variable rate schedules, charging lower rates during late-night low-use periods, the cost to run the car gets cheaper still.

Now we're talking the energy efficiencies equivalent to electric cars, without the batteries to deal with.

Like hybrids, some air cars will carry their own little generators on board, which run on fuel and recharge the air tanks in a few hours. With this handy feature, they're talking about cars that can go 1,000 miles between fill-ups.

A South Africa firm, Zero Pollution Motors, for several years has touted a proposed air car called e.Volution, which appears to be using the MDI template.

A Korean firm, Energine Corp., has developed a prototype hybrid compressed air car, the pneumatic-hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). Its power sources are both electric motors and compressed air, and it uses its batteries to run a compressor and to power the motors. (www.energine.com, a site challenging for English speakers because much of it is in Korean.)

Engineair Pty. Ltd.. in Melbourne, Australia, has a rotary air engine that it has used in a variety of small vehicles. (www.engineair.com.au) But the company is not a car manufacturer, but apparently is looking for applications for its engine.

The problems with getting a compressed air car into your garage are several.

First, the announced production deadlines for these kinds of things are notoriously slippery, and until they're rolling in significant numbers, we won't be knowing what the potential problems and victories really are. For instance, while some folks are announcing the Tata air car will be out next year, Tata's own website says it has simply acquired a license to employe MDI technologies and it “envisages Tata’s supporting further development and refinement of the technology, and its application and licensing for India.”

Another issue is that everybody says it will be difficult to get the cars approved for use in the U.S. They tend to be quite a bit smaller than your average SUV, are very light, and need to be crash-tested, one assumes.

But price apparently won't be a major problem compared to other vehicles. Most references to date cite compressed air cars from $5,000 to a little more than $10,000.

One huge benefit over electric and hybrid cars is that you don't need to haul around a heavy weight in batteries that have a limited lifespan and constitute toxic waste when it's time to replace them.

For Hawai'i, a car like this would seem to be a perfect fit, although some doubtless will criticize them as glorified golf carts. But these cars are no smaller than some of the ultra-compacts currently available.

© 2007 Jan W. TenBruggencate