Showing posts with label #NaturalDisasters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label #NaturalDisasters. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 22, 2014

Earth to Rosetta, Time to Wake Up


After napping for a little over two years, the European Space Agency’s Rosetta is ready to stretch her…panels. On the 20th of January this year the ESA held a competition to see who could issue the best wake-up call to the hibernating spacecraft. While I don’t know who won I do know they are quite lucky, as they win a free trip to Mission Control in Germany to see what Rosetta discovers.
In 2008 it passed a comet while flying by Mars. While 2867 Šteins had been discovered in 1969, this was the first time clear images of the comet were transmitted and its massive 5.6 km size could be clearly determined. In 2010 she flew by another one, 21 Lutetia, once again transmitting crystal clear images of an asteroid discovered in 1852. How was it discovered in 1852 with the limited technology available you ask? Probably because it’s over 1,000 km in diameter. That’s astronomically huge! (pun intended)
What makes this spacecraft so unique an sets her apart from other satellites is that Rosetta is the first one to be powered solely by solar technology! As it hibernated during its orbit around the sun to gain momentum its instruments were powered down in order to conserve energy. But while it was powered down it was gaining energy from the sun by gathering it on its massive solar arrays. Hopefully this will give Rosetta the extra “umph!” she needs to survive her mission out in deep space where she will only receive 4% of the sun’s power.
It’s been awhile since we’ve flown out into the deep reaches of space here at To Infinity And…In Theory. So let’s strap on our rocket boots, throw on some Elton John, and climb aboard the red eye to see what Rosetta and her little buddy Philae the Lander have in store for scientists at the ESA.

Comets, Asteroids, and Meteoroids

Yay! We get to start with terminology. I know what you’re saying, “my favorite…” but it’s important to understand there are very important differences between comets, asteroids, and meteoroids. The only reason I do this is because technically these words aren’t really interchangeable like so many others in Astronomy. There are a few key variances.
Let’s start with a comet.


Quite possibly one of the most well-known comets is Halley’s. It was discovered in 1531. Then discovered again in 1607…and again in 1682. It wasn’t until a man named Edmond Halley dug through the various reports of these sightings that he came to one very important conclusion. This comet was the same one. He also predicted that it would come back in 1758. While he didn’t live long enough to see that he was right, plenty of other astronomers did, which led to this comet being named after him.
So what makes a comet a comet? A comet is defined as a relatively small solar system body that orbits the Sun. When close enough to the Sun they display a visible coma (a fuzzy outline or atmosphere due to solar radiation) and sometimes a tail. But what creates the tail on a comet?
As it passes by the sun (which as we know is pretty darn warm…) it begins to burn gases and ice off the surface of the orbiting rock. These superheated gases trail behind the asteroid, sometimes miles long, as it rockets through space. This is what turns the space rock from an asteroid into a comet.
Speaking of asteroids, let’s talk about those next.


That’s Ceres. I know, I know, you’ve seen Armageddon and you’re saying “woah dude, that isn’t an asteroid, that’s totally a planet.” Well you’re half right. It was discovered in 1801 by Sicilian astronomer Giuseppi Piazzi. Originally he thought it was a comet but upon further observation it was determined that it was indeed a planet. Well…a dwarf planet. (They prefer to be called “Little Celestial People”) But seeing as it floats within the asteroid belt, it’s earned its moniker as an asteroid.
Asteroids are small solar system bodies that orbit the Sun. Made of rock and metal, they can also contain organic compounds. Asteroids are similar to comets but do not have a visible coma (fuzzy outline and tail) like comets do. It floats happily between Mars and Jupiter and actually contains one third of the mass of the entire asteroid belt. (Once again…huge) That’s not to say that if it broke orbit and passed close enough to the sun it couldn’t develop a tail, after all, the surface is believed to be made of dust and ice, perfect conditions to grow a coma. However that scenario is quite unlikely considering it’s been content with its lot in life to this point.
The third space rock type we’re going to talk about now is the Meteoroid. This particular floating stone actually has three forms like a Dragonball Z villain. Meteoroids are the first stage, Meteors are the second, and Meteorites are the last. We’ll break down all three in the next section.


A meteoroid is a small rock or particle of debris in our solar system. They range in size from dust to around 10 meters in diameter (larger objects are usually referred to as asteroids). But don’t mistake their smaller diameters for cute and cuddly. Once they enter the atmosphere of Earth they become known as a Meteor. Most of the time they’ll burn up in orbit, but as the blast in Chelyabinsk, Russia in February of last year showed us that’s not always the case.


Once a Meteoroid enters our atmosphere and becomes a Meteor about to cause an impending strike it is officially classified as a Meteorite. The effects of a Meteorite impact can be devastating, equivalent to several nuclear megaton blasts. (Time to call in Bruce Willis) That’s why NASA’s new Near Earth Object monitoring program is so important so we are able to identify threats like this long before they enter our atmosphere in the future so we don’t end up embedded in the crust of the Earth next to the dinosaurs.
So why am I telling you all this? Because the ESA is looking to land on a comet and it’s important to know the extreme challenges they face in doing this. Comets slingshot through the solar system gradually gaining speed as they play off the gravitational forces of the bodies they orbit. Asteroids like Ceres are essentially locked in orbit unless a huge impact was to send them rocketing out of alignment. (Typically that’s how an asteroid becomes a comet or a meteoroid)
Next we’ll talk about the challenges the ESA faces, how they intend to overcome them, and what they expect to learn from this unique mission into the far reaches of space. Let’s start with the biggest one of all, how exactly they intend to make contact with this orbiting mass. The details are far more intricate than you may think.

Space Darts


We’ve all played darts, but space agencies around the world have adapted the game to a whole new level. Think of it like this. When you look at a dart board you select the spot you want to hit. You close one eye, pull your arm back, take a couple practice swings and release it. If you’re experienced, nine times out of ten you hit what you’re aiming at.
Now imagine that dart board is several million miles away. It takes more than closing one eye and a deep breath to hit what they’re aiming for. It takes a series of complicated mathematical equations, physics, and a whole plethora of very expensive technology. Luckily, the ESA has all three down to a…well…a science.
When Rosetta was initially conceptualized in 1993 they were aiming at a different dartboard altogether. Comet 46 P/Wirtanen was caught in the crosshairs but due to postponements and complications with the rocket Ariane 5 ECA they switched it up. So in 2004, when Rosetta was launched its new target was designated 67 P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko.
But in order for Rosetta to “dock” with this comet certain parameters needed to be met at the outset. First and foremost speeds have to be matched. But 67 P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko has been orbiting for a long time. It’s had thousands upon thousands of years to gather the speed it moves at. Unfortunately, we don’t have thousands of years to follow it in orbit trying to play catch up. So how are they going to dock with it?
Through a process called a Gravity Assist Maneuver or Gravitational Slingshot. What it’s doing is moving around the sun and using its gravitational mass in order to gain momentum. The process can be used to accelerate or even decelerate depending on the arc of the object in motion. During its approach vector it makes a wide loop first, then, in order to garner further velocity, the orbit gets smaller and smaller on each approach until finally it’s commanded to break free toward its target.


Think of it in terms of a tether ball. The ball tied to the end of the string in this analogy would be Rosetta; the pole that the string is attached to is the sun. When the ball is struck hard enough it makes a lazy, slow loop around the pole. As the string gets shorter and shorter the speed at which the ball is moving begins to increase until it reaches its terminal velocity. If the ball were to be released from the string it would rocket off in the direction of its trajectory until outside factors like gravity and resistance pulled it down.
However, as we all should know, the voids of space have no gravity or atmosphere; therefore there is no resistance to slow the object down until it enters the gravity of another celestial body. Because of this the object maintains its velocity and is able to quickly get up to the speed of its intended target. But this is just the first problem the ESA has to overcome, the second one, believe it or not, is far more difficult in comparison to that.
The gravity on 67 P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko is a million times less than that of Earth’s. In other words, one wrong step and you’re floating off into deep space. (Yikes!) This poses a huge obstacle to the European Space Agency in getting Rosetta’s lander Philae to catch a piggyback ride through space.


With the gravity being so low on the surface of this comet one misstep could destroy over two decades of hard work and effort. Because of this Philae was outfitted with some special equipment to help it “stick” to the comet. Two harpoons will inject themselves into the surface to anchor it in place. Philae has also been equipped with self-righting landing gear to make sure he doesn’t tip over and once the feet make contact they will drill into the surface, further ensuring this multi-million dollar piece of tech doesn’t just fling off into space.
Outfitted with several different instruments including radio-spectrographs and sub-surface drills to take samples of the rock to determine the composition, this may be one of the most ambitious projects launched in recent years. But what exactly are they intending to learn from this mission? Would you believe me if I told you they’re looking to answer the question of where we came from? I hope so, because it’s basically the goal here.
But how exactly will some barren ice rock in space tell us where the complicated diversity of life on our planet originated from. Glad you asked. Let’s briefly explore that next in our final section today.

From Space Rocks to Building Blocks


Comet’s, Asteroid’s, and Meteoroids are all capable of containing a variety of materials. Certain classes of the space rocks contain mostly metals, some have been found to be highly dense carbon (diamonds), and some are even stranger still, because they contain organic compounds. If you don’t know, we’re organic compounds, and if you subscribe to the theory of evolution such as I do, then you know we all evolved from single celled organisms that likely were transported here by these tourists of the solar system.
Our planet didn’t start out as a planet. It started out as superheated gasses that formed into heavy elements. As gravity pulled those elements together it formed a solid mass. That solid mass slowly became heavier and generated more gravity and passing comets, asteroids, and meteoroids were pulled into its gravity. That is how we ended up with such a diversity of elements on the planets in our solar system…well, theoretically anyway.
But if some of the bacteria and organic compounds hitching a ride on the backs of these objects survived the entry into atmosphere that would certainly explain how we got here. That’s why landing on this comet is so important. By studying the subterranean composition of it and the formation of its coma as it passes the sun it will give scientists a much clearer understanding of exactly how comets play into the evolution of our solar system.
Philae is expected to make its daring descent onto the surface of 67 P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko later this autumn. I’ll be following this mission closely in the news and when new information develops I’ll be sure to write a follow-up blog on Rosetta and Philae. Until then, good morning, good morrow, and Godspeed Rosetta. I hope you enjoyed your nap, because now it’s time to get down to business.

-       Ryan Sanders


Thanks as always for reading and be sure to share this on Twitter, Facebook and Reddit and EVERYWHERE ELSE! J You guys and gals continue to make this one of the most enjoyable and ambitious undertakings for me to write and I hope they are just as enjoyable for you to read. Comments, questions, or corrections are always welcome so feel free to post them below. For further reading you can follow-up on any of the links listed below. Happy learning everyone!

-       Wiki entry on Rosetta











Friday, January 10, 2014

The Inquisitive Reader #1: What the Frick is Fracking?


Anyone who has been paying attention to ecological news in the last decade has heard the term “Fracking.” They’ve heard it praised and they’ve heard it demonized by the media, politicians, CEO’s, and environmentalists. But what is Fracking? The short answer is Hydraulic Fracturing but the long answer is much, much more than that.
No matter what side of the coin you fall on, whether you support it or are strongly against it, there is one factor that neither side can deny; it is a lucrative and profitable industry, and the methods don’t look as though they will disappear anytime soon.
The reason for Hydraulic Fracturing is simple. Natural gas. But how do we extract this natural gas by drilling into the Earth and causing it to crack? Furthermore, how did this gas get there in the first place, and what is it even made of? But perhaps the most burning question of all that’s on the tip of everyone’s tongue is plain and simple.
Is Fracking safe?
Yes and no. It has its upsides but there are clearly pitfalls to it. Here at To Infinity And…In Theory I have no political agenda so I’m not going to cast my vote for or against it. What I am going to do is talk about all of the sciences that coalesce into this controversial and complicated technique of extracting fossil fuels from miles deep within the crust of the Earth.

All Shale To The King, Baby



That picture above isn’t just any old gray rock. It’s a rock called Shale. In a sense this is the very substance the gas companies are after, or rather, the contents contained therein. See Shale is a fairly weak rock and at a molecular level there are lots of little pockets that form inside it. It’s the pockets that everyone’s after.
When organic material dies it decomposes and rejoins the Earth. The Shale forms around this organic material and sinks deeper into the planet. As pressures and temperatures rise the remainder of organic matter is essentially burned off and reduced to a gaseous form. This “Shale gas” is the final prize.
But in order to get this natural gas you can’t just extract it from Shale on the surface. It hasn’t had the time or the right conditions to break down the organic material trapped inside it. If you started fracking surface Shale all you would be succeeding in doing is looking like an idiot and wasting a lot of water. So for the purposes of the gas companies we need to drill.
The drilling process spans about 2 miles in total but it’s not all straight down. In fact after about a mile deep the drill makes a slight turn until the drill path resembles a one mile deep, one mile long “L” shape. It’s not because the drill has difficultly digging down any deeper, it’s because it only works if you do it this way.
As I said before, Shale isn’t very strong. Because of this there are already tiny micro-fractures that run across Shale deposits. Once the core is drilled out in the L shape exposing these fractures, hundreds of thousands (sometimes MILLIONS!) of gallons of water, sand, and various chemicals are thrust into the hole at extremely high pressures. Once it’s full, with nowhere else to go, it begins to seep and worm it’s way into the small cracks along the drill path. Once the Shale breaks the gas is released and pumped into tankers on the surface.

Is It Supposed To Burn Like That?


Hydraulic Fracking is comprised of several parts. First the Shale deposit must be discovered, second the land must be legally obtained for drilling rights, third millions upon millions of dollars must go into specialized equipment in order to ensure environmental and worker safety. After those three conditions are met, the science begins.
As I mentioned above the way the gas is extracted is by splitting the rock using a mix of water, sand, and chemicals. But the word “chemicals” can be a rather scary one to some individuals, especially when it comes to those in areas affected by Fracking.
I know what some of your saying, “shouldn’t sand and high water pressure be enough?” Yes, technically that would accomplish it to a degree, but it wouldn’t be nearly as lucrative as it is now. You need certain chemicals like Hydrochloric acid in order to stimulate the micro-fractures. This is what opens them up into larger cracks that can be broken apart by the pressure.
But using that Hydrochloric acid has a serious drawback. Turns out, acid is corrosive… (Gee, I’m so surprised…) and a corrosion inhibitor must be used to protect the drilling gear and other equipment essential to extraction and safety. For this chemicals like Formic acid and Acetaldehyde are used.
You need biocides to treat the water to prevent damaging byproducts from forming during the drilling process. For that various ammonium chlorides are used. There are a lot of chemicals that go into Fracking, from friction reducers to stabilizers; citric acid is even used to prevent precipitation of metal oxides.
If you want to see a complete list of chemicals used in the process you can by clicking here. Most of them are fairly harmless, some can be deadly in massive quantities, but the vast majority of gas companies in the U.S. stand behind the Environmental codes and regulations laid out for them, however I cannot speak for all.

From Sea To Shining Sea



Depending on where you live you may or may not see Fracking equipment moving into your neighborhood anytime soon. But it might not be so bad if you did. See here in America, if you own the land above the resource, you own the rights. And if you own the rights, you got them by the…well, you get the picture.
See the company has to first purchase the drilling rights to your land from you. After that happens, if the well begins producing, you begin seeing royalty checks. In a BBC documentary titled Fracking: The New Energy Rush a rural farmer from Louisiana becomes an overnight millionaire, receiving monthly checks close to half a million dollars in royalties once the wells began producing.
The map above should give you a pretty good idea based on where you live in the United States whether or not you have a chance at becoming a Shale-ionaire (Sorry, watch the documentary, couldn’t help myself.). It’s important to know that even if you’re in an area rich in Shale, it doesn’t mean they can just start drilling.
You need a lot of open area for the piping, storage, and drilling equipment. If you live in a big city, it doesn’t matter if you own that whole acre parcel of land, gas companies aren’t interested. Sorry to shatter your Beverly Hillbilly fantasies, but I figure it’s better to do it now then to wait for you to run out and rent a backhoe.
Perhaps someday there will be another method of extracting the gas that will allow us city slickers to get in the game, but it doesn’t look like that will be any time soon. Experts estimate that there is more Shale gas in the United States than there is oil in all of Saudi Arabia. Perhaps that’s why operations and explorations are underway in 30 states already, with more supporters jumping aboard every day
But for every supporter there is opposition. And like most scientific advances, there are great benefits to mankind, but there can potentially be catastrophic side effects. Next, let’s talk about some things that can go horribly wrong, what variables can cause these events to occur, and what steps can be taken to prevent these problems from happening again in the future.

Subterranean Politics


As much as I despise politics in any form and have no wish to discuss them in a sacred place of Science, it’s impossible to talk about Fracking without getting into them to a certain extent. The two have practically become synonymous with one another. On one side you have the environmentalists screaming at the politicians to put a stop to this Mother Nature manslaughter. On the other side of the fence are the politicians brimming with cold sweat over energy dependence. No matter how you look at it there’s no clear winner in any of this.
It’s hard to deny that we’re dependent on foreign oil. You also can’t deny that we are a very, very resource hungry country. We’re a developed nation after all with a lot of people, so it’s no wonder our consumption is so high. Fracking could lead to cheaper methods of powering foundries and chemical plants, effectively bringing jobs back that were once phased out to overseas labor. The cost of foreign labor would actually be more expensive than the mined Shale gas to run them here.
Energy independence may be a tantalizing notion, but poking a stick a mile down into our planet and pressurizing it till it explodes may not be so much. The long term effects of Fracking are relatively unknown as this technique of mining really into came into full swing around 2007. One thing is certain though, the Earth’s crust never intended to be drilled into and hyper-pressurized without fighting back at some point. Fracking destabilizes the geological structure in a region; if you do it too much you can sink that area, and trust me, if you’ve ever seen a sinkhole its way less fun than it sounds.
There’s also the problem of underground water supplies. In Pennsylvania it’s been noted by chemical engineer, Robert Jackson, that 115 out 141 shallow well water sites were contaminated with high levels of methane. Not just methane created by microorganisms around and in the well. The levels were far too high. They came from within the Marcellus Shale due to the destabilization of Fracking in the region.


Pipes can break (looking at you BP), casings can rupture, and chemicals and gas can leak out. Most of the chemicals are contained well below the drinking water line so the risk of contamination from them is extremely minimal. However, if a pipe breaks while pumping gas to the surface; it can leak out, contaminating water sources.
New safety measures need to be taken into account in order to ensure this doesn’t happen again in the future. But there’s one thing that reading all this should’ve brought to your attention that’s positive. If there’s all this new work coming into town…
Then by default it has to create jobs.
While some jobs on Fracking sites require specific training and skillsets in order to perform your daily duties, others are as simple as trucking water, sand, and other materials in and out, basic heavy machinery operation, and a general understanding of industrial construction. That may sound imposing, but believe me, there are many out of work contractors out there who have more than a general understanding about an extensive lot of different specialties.
But there are some towns that aren’t happy with this. The sudden economic boom has raised the standard of living in some areas and not everyone has been able to find work with these companies. It’s actually brought an entirely new plethora of social issues along with it raising the public’s questionable and doubtful eyebrows about fracking, and the last question on our list…
Is Fracking worth the risk?

So What The Frack Are You Saying Exactly?


In conclusion I will simply restate what I said at the beginning of this article. I am in no way trying to push any political agenda with this piece so please don’t mistake some of my sarcasm for anything but that (I have been told I’m rather cynical at times.) I will say two things however to close this out and you may take them or leave them.
I agree with the politicians to the extent that we are far too dependent on foreign sources for our energy resources. The biggest doorway we have to reopen is making it cost effective for big companies to have the incentive to move back to our shores and open old factories again. This will be the key in bringing jobs back to America.
I also agree with the environmentalists in that current methods of Fracking aren’t foolproof and some companies choose to take immoral (and often dangerous) roads in order to turn a larger profit. More research needs to go into improving methods and equipment in order to safely extract the gas without disturbing the geological composition of the area to a catastrophic degree.
This hot button issue will continue to cause media fire storms and public outrage in the future, but I hope this article gave you a better understanding of what Fracking really is.

-       Ryan Sanders

Thanks for reading, and as always if you enjoyed this article and found it insightful why not share it around! Knowledge is more fun when it’s socialized! Happy learning everyone and for further reading follow any of the links below.