[170] HAARP The Herald Angels Sing

La web es vasta y misteriosa.  Tiene toda la verdad, la esconden entre ruido.  Cada dia las busquedas deben ser mas especificas para esquivar los algoritmos que empujan producto.  Ya este tema lo he presentado antes, en distintas vertientes.  Sin embargo ahora lo traigo pensando en las cadenas de emails ciclicas que recibo.

Cada vez que un evento como Katrina, el tsunami de India, Haiti o ahora Japon ocurre comienzo a ver en los foros y emails teorias de conspiracion.  La que estan resucitando ahora es el programa HAARP y la presencia de armas escalares.  Por que cualquier sandez que dice un astrologo o 'profeta' es verdad absoluta mientras que verdades cientificas son imposibles de transmitir?
La humanidad necesita una explicacion para todo.  Si no se la proveen directamente buscara con que llenar la explicacion aunque sea una causa falsa.



[denle una visita a su site.  tiene mucha ilustracion de comics al estilo vintage]



El HAARP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Frequency_Active_Auroral_Research_Program) es esta base en Alaska donde se indica que se manejan grandes cantidades de energia electromagnetica.  Esta transferencia de energia causa resonancias que se reflejan como terremotos, incremento en energia volcanica o con el potencial de alterar el clima global.  Cuanto puede ser verdad?  Cuanto falsedad?  Y lo mas relevante...alterara el modo que vivimos?

No lo creo.  Soy de la escuela que piensa que estos son distracciones para descuidarnos de otras cosas que pasan de dia a dia.  Y antes que lo digan.  Si, es verdad, estos temas me entretienen, aunque tenga serias dudas de que sean viables.  Para que vean el mensaje anti HAARP pueden ver el evangelio de The Core.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Core

Critical reaction

The film received 42% positive reviews out of 159 reviews, with an average rating of 5.3/10 at the movie review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes. Several reviews cited the numerous scientific inaccuracies in the film. The film was a box office bomb, making less than half of its production budget back during its time in US theaters.
Elvis Mitchell, of the New York Times, said, "The brazen silliness of The Core is becalming and inauthentic, like taking a bath in nondairy coffee creamer. The Earth core's inability to turn is mirrored in the cast's inability to give the picture any spin."^[1] Kenneth Turan, of the LA Times, was a little more forgiving, saying, "If The Core finally has to be classified as a mess, it is an enjoyable one if you're in a throwback mood. After all, a film that comes up with a rare metal called Unobtainium can't be dismissed out of hand."^[2]
On March 30, 2009 it was reported that Dustin Hoffman was leading a campaign to get more real science into science-fiction movies. Hoffman is on the advisory board of the Science & Entertainment Exchange, an initiative of the National Academy of Sciences, intended to foster collaborations between scientists and entertainment industry professionals in order to minimize inaccurate representations of science and technology such as those found in The Core.
In a poll of hundreds of scientists about bad science fiction films, The Core was voted the worst.^[3]
On February 21, 2010, The Guardian ran an article about American professor Sidney ­Perkowitz's proposals to curb bad science in science fiction movies. In the article, Perkowitz is said to have hated The Core. "If you violate [the coherent rules of science] you are in trouble. The chances are that the public will pick it up and that is what matters to Hollywood. The Core did not make money because people understood the science was so out to lunch," he added.^[4]

Anyway, mas del HAARP aqui.  El de atlantean conspiracy es el mas impactante, con graficas de alta energia y todo.

http://boingboing.net/2010/01/18/haiti-haarp-and-cons.html

http://haarp.net/
http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2011/03/japan-tsunami-caused-by-haarp.html

Y con el HAARP siempre resucitan a Tesla.  Y es que las armas electromagneticas (EMP) fueron desarrolladas bastante en Alemania y el bloque sovietico durante la Segunda Guerra mundial y la guerra fria:

Por si no leyeron el articulo de Tesla [103 - 07/11/2010 - Nikolai Tesla Y El Mundo Moderno], algo mas aqui
http://www.damninteresting.com/teslas-tower-of-power
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_energy_transfer

Teaser:  Otro tema del tintero.  Propaganda, Usando Supersticion.
Propaganda de OVNIS en los 50s, jugando el juego hasta Life Magazine:
http://www.project1947.com/shg/csi/life52.html

Cierro con esta vieja caricatura de Chuck Jones:


la ilustracion de los ni/nos en marte es de este website:
http://www.plan59.com/galleries/space_art/space_art.htm

Dejo el articulo aqui.  Llevo como dos semanas tratando de sacarlo.  Por mas que lo abrevio no tiene el 'punch' que queria ponerle inicialmente, ni tiene un rumbo definido.  Pero... tampoco quiero borrarlo, asi que mejor dejo que fluya con YOB al alcantarillado sanitario.  [sayonara HAARP, we hardly knew ya!]

Legislacion por Encargo: Consecuencia de la Desinformacion

No tiendo a comentar noticias locales, ni a discutir lo que hacen nuestros legisladores, pero este es el caso mas reciente de legislacion por encargo (acaso no todos lo son).  Comienzo con la noticia del Proyecto de la Camara 1449 por Jorge Navarro (http://www.elnuevodia.com/pirateriafarmaceutica-923991.html).  Vamos a regular la entrada de drogas falsas a Puerto Rico.

http://www.camaraderepresentantes.org/noticiasread4.asp?r=%7B4E7AC583-3050-431E-9FF4-3E54B1A30411%7D
http://www.wapa.tv/print-version.php?nid=20110325164138&other=/noticias/salud/ojo-a-los-medicamentos-falsificados/20110325164138

La practica de falsificar drogas existe y es un mercado negro a nivel mundial.  Si buscas una medicina barata (aunque no la apruebe la FDA) o lo compras en un flea market o tienda de suplementos naturales deberias saber que posiblemente no tenga la potencia o dosis correctas.  Esto es sentido comun.  Es mas, es lo que promueve la FDA (http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/ucm048380.htm)

Donde se dificulta es cuando se compra el medicamento en linea o en el mercado negro, donde el inescrupuloso (a alto nivel) vende su producto adulterado.  Se supone entonces que tenemos salvaguardas.  El principal, a nivel de Puerto Rico, es que tenemos a la FDA, que regula las farmaceuticas y toda formulacion o producto farmacceutico.  Si eso no bastara los medicamentos son distribuidos y aprobados por un farmaceutico, debidamente licenciado y que tiene una licencia que perder si te vende un producto adulterado.  Ademas, se despacha mediante recetas.  Donde se debe prestar atencion es en auditar apropiadamente a los centros de distribucion como Drogueria Central, solo por decir uno.  O sea, si compras tus medicinas en una Farmacia de la Comunidad, Farmacias Plaza, Walgreens o CVS posiblemente no tengas problemas.

Eso fue lo que debio haber argumentado el Colegio de Farmaceuticos y las grandes cadenas de farmacias.  Sin embargo, prefirieron vender el miedo.  Haciendo legislacion para perseguir los suplementos naturales y crear miedo a los genericos y bioequivalentes.  La guerra, realmente, es a los distribuidores de productos y suplementos naturales denominados 'Potencia Sexual", igual al Viagra, etc.  Me imagino que Carbotrap y el Te Chino del Doctor Ming estaran en su mirilla.

Uso el ojo de Thundera, viendo mas alla de lo evidente, para ver lo que realmente esta en juego aqui.  Es una guerra a los suplementos, pero tambien aprovecharon para desprestigiar a las genericas y bioequivalentes sin decirlo.

El Miedo a lo Distinto
Si lee las recomendaciones de los sites de salud te dan el siguiente mensaje generico:

Ejemplos debajo:
http://www.fraud.org/fakedrugs/faq.htm

How can I tell if my drugs are counterfeit?

The best way for consumers to identify potential counterfeits is to be as familiar as possible with the drugs they regularly take. It’s difficult to tell just by looking at them, but the more familiar you are with both the packaging and the drugs themselves, the better the chances are that you’ll detect a fake drug before taking it. If you know the size shape, color, and taste of the medications you take, you will more easily identify possible counterfeits. When something doesn’t look or taste quite right, be suspicious. Check for altered or unsealed containers, or changes in the packaging or label. You might also be able to tell if a drug doesn’t have the effect that it promises, has different side effects than described, or doesn’t work in the same way as it did when you took it previously. You can reduce the risk of getting counterfeit drugs by buying from reputable pharmacies, but even they sometimes offer counterfeit drugs for sale without realizing it.

Un medicamento generico usualmente tiene forma distinta y sabor distinto al medicamento de marca.  Sin embargo, su forma y color son correctos si fueron aprobados por la FDA.

Mea Culpa de Farmaceuticas Locales
Farmaceuticas de renombre como Schering, SB Glaxo y McNeil tuvieron sus dias de suerte cuando la calidad de sus productos de marca fue cuestionado por la FDA.  Grandes ordenes administrativas les fueron puestas y estan bajo gran escrutinio federal.  Pudiesemos hasta estar hablando de que habian redes de mercado negro donde se sospecha pudieron haber infiltrado productos 'off spec' a un publico incauto.
Esa regalmentacion contra corrupcion es cada vez mas fuerte.  En cualquier charla de seguridad de una farmaceutica o entrevista de empleo se vera que haber sido implicado en uno de esos casos te pone una mancha negra en el expediente donde tu unica oportunidad de volver a trabajar en un ambiente de higiene es en un McD o BK.  Repasando algunos de estos casos debajo:

esta fue de SB Glaxo:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/side-effects/201101/bad-medicine-glaxosmithklines-fraud-and-gross-negligence
That last claim would be more persuasive if we didn't learn from the 60 Minutes report that the 900 people working at the plant made "20 drugs for patients in the U.S.," among them such blockbusters as Avandia for diabetes, Paxil antidepressants, Tagamet antacids, and the anti-bacterial ointment Bactroban. Or that "it was an FDA inspection that first revealed problems at Cidra... That's why Glaxo sent Eckard's team in to resolve those FDA concerns." It had to, in short.
Cheryl Eckard asserts that she discovered far worse infractions and contaminations of the drugs than even the FDA investigators, and that, despite repeatedly alerting her colleagues at GSK to these problems--colleagues who had trusted her judgment enough to make her a manager of global quality assurance, after ten years' work for Glaxo in quality control--senior management at the corporation both ignored her documented concerns, then lied to federal investigators about them, saying it was "extremely unlikely" that its plant had sent out batches of Paxil containing two different doses, despite pharmacists calling the plant directly when patients showed up with different colored pills in their medicine (signaling different doses of the antidepressant). The opening of sealed packets of Paxil revealed the same problem. One of the people affected was an 8 year-old boy whose prescription included adult doses of the powerful anticholinergic antidepressant.
According to 60 Minutes, Eckard nevertheless produced a chart for company executives documenting "the kinds of mix-ups that were happening at Cidra. She identified nine, including Avandia diabetes pills mixed in packages with over-the-counter Tagamet antacids and Paxil antidepressants, mixed with the Avandia diabetes drug." According to Eckard, she went to the FDA--and taped the conversation as proof, given GSK's repeated disputes of her findings--after those and many other infractions were ignored.
In pleading guilty to the felony, Glaxo admitted that it distributed "adulterated drugs Paxil CR, Avandamet (a diabetes drug), Kytril (a drug given to cancer patients), and Bactroban," which strongly suggests that Eckard was telling an inconvenient truth all along.
Among the lessons we can take from this case is, first and foremost, how readily and extensively a vast corporation such as GSK will mask, dispute, or spin the truth, when it suits the corporation, to avoid addressing even glaring safety concerns. This is perhaps the most shocking part of the scandal at Cidra. Not only can we not trust a drug giant like GSK to avoid distributing defective medication, contaminated by bacteria and adulterated in dose, but we also discover just how far such corporations will go to ensure that we never learn the full extent of such problems in the first place.

Y espera, que Schering tambien fabrica la medicina amarga.  Tendra que ver con la que distribuyo Fortu/no con la Ley 7?
http://lubbockonline.com/stories/051802/bus_0518020006.shtml
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2002/10/14/330051/index.htm

Schering, of course, isn't alone in skirmishing with the FDA. The agency--despite its lack of a leader at the helm (see "The Big Gap at the FDA" on fortune.com)--is becoming more rigorous about drug industry oversight. In the past two years Abbott Laboratories, Eli Lilly, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, and Pharmacia have all come under fire for production violations. None of those companies, however, rival Schering-Plough in the severity or protracted nature of their violations.

The FDA's regulations are admittedly strict. Under its "current good manufacturing practice" guidelines, every aspect of production--from handling procedures and laboratory conditions to the ingredients in the products--must be tested and retested continually. If, for example, a company changes a single piece of equipment in its production line, plant managers are required to generate several studies of the entire production line to guarantee uniformity of the end product. The rules change from time to time. "If one company comes up with a new way to ensure quality, that quickly becomes the standard for the industry," says William Vodra, a former FDA lawyer who wrote the current regulations in the late 1970s. All these quality controls, of course, are meant to ensure that the drugs that reach consumers' medicine cabinets are safe and effective. And though they have their faults, the regulations aren't difficult for the majority of drug companies to adhere to.

http://www.caribbeanbusinesspr.com/news03.php?nt_id=48252&ct_id=1

Oh no, Bristol Myers Squibb Manati tambien!!!  Is there no God!!!

Regulators said the New York drugmaker’s plant in Manatí has not established or followed rules to prevent contamination of drugs. The observation followed an inspection in March, and federal officials found similar cleanliness problems in 2005 and 2009.
Regulators also said the company has failed to investigate subpar manufacturing practices and standards, and that there have been ongoing problems with employees complying with procedures implemented due to these recurrent violations.
The agency also faulted Bristol for not thoroughly investigating the failure of a batch or its components.
The FDA warning did not specify which drugs were involved or whether the violations involved distributed products. The letter did cite injectable lyophilized products, which are packaged in glass vials.

Mientras Las Patentes Expiran, Las Genericas Son El Nuevo Rey
A pesar de su alto precio y una calidad que ha decaido en los ultimos a/nos, segun las auditorias de FDA, basado en la discusion anterior, ahora tienen la competencia de las genericas.  Que cada dia crecen, segun las patentes expiran.  Eso redunda en un menor precio para el consumidor (y para los planes de salud pero eso es harina de otro costal).  Las grandes cadenas le temen a estos peque/nos manufactureros, que pueden fabricar su caro producto, basado en a/nos de research and development y de mucho refinamiento, pero ahora a una fraccion del costo y mucho mas eficiente.  Plantas como INYX, TEVA y otras pueden cambiar sus recetas ante la FDA como si fuese escoger entre vainilla, chocolate o rocky road.

Miren un ejemplo con TEVA:
http://www.biojobblog.com/2010/03/articles/biobusiness/the-bidding-war-is-over-teva-to-acquire-ratiopharm/
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd announced today that it has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire Ratiopharm, Germany's second largest generics producer (Novartis AG’s Hexal unit is first and Stada Arzneimittel AG is third) and the sixth largest generic drug company worldwide, for €3.625 billion ($ 5.0 billion). Teva expects to complete the transaction by year-end 2010.
The acquisition will position Teva as the leading generic pharmaceutical company in Europe. Ratiopharm's extensive product portfolio includes 500 molecules in over 10,000 presentation forms covering all major therapeutic areas marketed in 26 countries. Also, Ratiopharm has valuable know-how in biosimilars (a market that Teva has entered and is extremely bullish on) which consists number of products in advanced stages of development and a well-established sales and marketing team. The combined company will have 40,000 employees worldwide, of which 18,000 will be based in Europe. The purchase will bolster Teva’s visibility and standing in European markets.
Late last month, Ratiopharm board members implored Pfizer to enter a new bid, after it had rejected an earlier offer by the company. Apparently, the new bid was not sufficient to prevent Teva from acquiring the highly sought after generics manufacturer. Iceland-based generics manufacturer Actavis also put in a failed bid to acquire Ratiopharm.

Los Brand Names como Abbott y Pfizer estan en Guerra con Generic Lands
http://www.gibbonslaw.com/files/1172848563.pdf
Brand drug manufacturers whose patent law monopolies expire will continue to
develop competitive strategies to preserve market share in the face of new competition.
Those strategies may predictably rely on the non-price dimensions of competition
over which the brand manufacturers enjoy an advantage. State DPS laws may well
refl ect a legislative desire to give primacy to the price dimension of competition by
relieving generic manufacturers of the usual costs and burdens of non-price competition
in the areas of name recognition, brand loyalty and marketing prowess. A brand
manufacturer that deliberately avoids triggering those DPS laws may be impairing
that legislative policy choice. Such a strategy, however, cannot necessarily be termed
anticompetitive, if the strategy is properly understood to force competition across all
competitive dimensions, including non-price factors. This is not to say that particular
implementations of the reformulation strategy may not run afoul of the antitrust
laws. Rather, courts should be careful to determine whether the conduct in question
actually forecloses entry of a competitive product, or merely avoids triggering legislation
that gives the new entrant an advantage it would not otherwise enjoy. If entry is
not foreclosed, then judicial second-guessing of the manufacturer’s design-choices
is ill-advised for the reasons expressed in Berkey Photo. Under those circumstances,
the more deferential test for antitrust illegality announced in Berkey Photo is more
appropriate. If the ability to avoid triggering DPS laws is undesirable from a regulatory
policy perspective, that problem should be left to FDA and state legislatures to
fi x, not addressed by a misapplication of the antitrust laws.

Un Ejemplo: Bloquear Las Cadenas de Distribucion
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703808904574529690806933018.html
WASHINGTON—The Federal Trade Commission expressed concern about the practices of brand-name drug makers after generic drug companies complained they can't get bulk supplies of some medicines they want to copy.

GlaxoSmithKline PLC and Celgene Corp. are among the brand-name makers citing a federal drug-safety program in declining at this point to supply bulk quantities of certain drugs. They say the generic companies aren't authorized to buy drugs under the program. The generic companies say that's an excuse to block competition.

The situation has gotten the attention of the FTC, which investigates anticompetitive behavior in consumer markets. "We're going to be very concerned about any practice that could increase prescription-drug costs to American consumers," FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz said in an interview. "You can't let drug safety be used as a tool to delay generic competition."

Asi que tenga usted cuidado.  Que Amiplin no es una droga registrada (por mi mai, miralo aqui)
http://www.drugs.com/international/amiplin.html
No se si la jodeina sea ilegal.  Parece que nadie la mercadea.

Fake and Counterfit Drugs
El punto es.  Existe un mercado de drogas falsas e ilegales.  Mi esposa me llamo la atencion a este documental de National Geographic y PBS sobre el tema: Illicit.  Info debajo:
http://www.nationalgeographic.com/illicittrade/
Join undercover agents and slip into the shadowy web of illicit trade, where dangerous multi-billion dollar criminal networks threaten whole sectors of the world economy. Illicit: The Dark Trade travels the globe to expose the dire consequences of this dirty industry: money laundering, political corruption, and the subversion of entire governments. From knock-off handbags to bootlegged compact discs to fake pharmaceuticals, this hard-hitting special reveals how consumers' insatiable demand for counterfeit merchandise has given birth to a vast criminal system.
Based on the bestselling book "Illicit" by Dr. Moises Naim, acclaimed editor of Foreign Policy magazine.

http://www.pbs.org/programs/illicit/
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2010/06/fake-drugs-a-global-health-threat.html#
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/business/pharmaceutical-industry-battling-counterfeit-drugs-52385.html
http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2006/December/20061201120711LNkaiS0.2569086.html

Simplemente expongo que estos temas no son simples.  Requieren analisis y tienen otras cosas detras.  Los Farmaceuticos y Farmacias estan detras de los que venden suplementos naturales.  Si los homeopaticos y suplementos naturales funcionan o no es irrelevante en esta discusion.  Solo digo que el esfuerzo deberia ir enfocado en caerle arriba a los programas de auditoria a sistemas de salud publica y sistemas de suplidores de Medicare para que no le pasen gato por liebre para poder completar el pago del yate de este mes.

Esta legislacion, como siempre, les terminara mordiendo el rabo.

Head of Pills above: http://singularityhub.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/head-of-pills.jpg
fukitol: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhADX3JGkuJ9ZzAvBycmR-ZORpZkpzc_B4PItHicekdcsMQBkeaXbB13121n23OkRqDVO7UR0XPYB1tcfyIEAnZHrYlLcxPseyyXwk4EDroGuN6Vtrq0YWIpJvngI9P0aW08l76Gs7Mqm_8/s1600/fukit.jpg
[End of Line]

Planificacion Necesaria - Tema 3 - Manejo Escorrentia

Como introducir este tema de hidrologia basica sin mencionar estadisticas de eventos extremos, climatologia o usar ecuaciones extra/nas?  Quiero correlacionar lo que pasa con derrumbes, sitios que no se inundaban y ahora desbordan de agua o erosion donde no debe ocurrir.  Como hacerlo?

Comencemos con la moda del barril.  Algo que se ha puesto de moda entre los horticultores aficionados del norte.  No dudo que la moda llegue aqui en algun momento, con el auspicio de algunos ambientalistas de escritorio.  El concepto es sencillo y llegamos a hacerlo en mi casa.  Colectas el agua del chorro del techo en un dron (contenedor) de 55 galones, que luego usas para irrigar las plantas.

Suena lindo, es verde, es sustentable.  Pero realmente protege el ambiente?  No lo creo.  Estos articulos debajo discuten de ese tema.  Los anglos y LEED le llaman a eso water harvesting:
http://chanceofrain.com/2011/03/rain-barrels/
http://owendell.com/blog/general/roll-out-the-rain-barrels
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania

Litmus test.  Cuanto acumula un dron?
V = 55 galones
Techo (estimado) 50 x 100 = 5000 sq ft
C = 0.8 (el 80% de lo que cae se hace escorrentia)
55 gal = (0.8)(5000 sq ft)(H en in / 12)(7.48)
H = 0.022 inches rain
un aguacero de tan poca agua.  No lo creo.  Veredicto: muy peque/no.


La lluvia normal de Puerto Rico aqui
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/sju/?n=climo_monthly_precipitation

Area Caguas 4 a 7 pulgadas de lluvia promedio mensual
Evento extremo Diez A/nos 24 horas
9 pulgadas en 24 horas

Digamos el aguacero fue de 4 pulgadas
V = (0.8)(5000 sq ft)(4 / 12)(7.48)
V = 9973 galones

Un aguacero tipico es entre 0.5 - 1.0 inches
1246 - 2493 galones

O sea, si quiero water harvesting necesito volumen.


By the way, el que quiera adquirir el documento de los eventos extremos que vea el NOAA Atlas 14 para Puerto Rico, esta en linea aqui:
http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pr/pr_pfds.html

Ese tema de por si es bien interesante, aunque es sumamente teorico.  Uno de estos dias presentare aspectos relacionados a planificacion y determinacion de cotas de inundacion.

A lo que iba.  Los eventos de lluvia, sobre todo los valores extremos generan un volumen de agua significativo.  Ese volumen esta influenciado por varios factores, a saber:

Area de Drenaje - El flujo generado es directamente proporcional al area.  Mas area, mas escorrentia.

Percolacion y Evapotranspiracion - Los efectos de percolacion del agua al terreno, la evapotranspiracion de las plantas, el tipo de suelo, la permeabilidad, vegetacion, etc. es una influencia directa a la cantidad de lluvia.  Terreno vegetativo, matorrales y arboledas retienen los golpes de agua y absorben parte de la escorrentia.  Solo un fragmento fluye.  A grandes rasgos un terreno rural con mucha vegetacion puede tener solo un 20 a 30% del agua que se convierte en escorrentia mientras que el 90% o mas del agua que cae en una loseta de hormigon se convierte en escorrentia.

Estructuras Para Disipar la Energia, retencion - El uso de muros, vallas, pocetos de retencion y otras medidas estructurales reducen la intensidad del chorro de agua, reduciendo su efecto erosivo y alargando el tiempo en lo que llega a su destino final.


Cotejen esta presentacion del hidrologo Gregory Morris y sus programas implantados en rios de Puerto Rico para desarrollar guias (eso de control de erosion costera es otro tema del tintero).
http://www.awra.org/PR2010/doc/papers/GregoryMorris_a556f230_6812.pdf

Estos elementos toman importancia cuando el sistema en Puerto Rico consiste en hacer nuevas construcciones que puedan manejar una inundacion de 100 a/nos.  Si miramos el micro, sin tener una vision global de la situacion es que tendremos muchas piezas de 100 a/nos que no inundan pero que desvian sus aguas a otros lados.

Ese tema de por si es bien complicado.  A lo que voy.  Nuestra planificacion debe incorporar la evaluacion de sistemas que acumulen o desvien aguas de escorrentia excesivas para luego soltarlas poco a poco.  Como introduccion al tema les dejo par de links.  Luego lo desarrollo en futuros articulos:
http://www.watertronics.com/#/skyharvester
http://www.gdrc.org/uem/water/rainwater/introduction.html
http://ag.arizona.edu/pubs/water/az1052/harvest.html

Les anticipo algo.  Hacer este tipo de proyectos requiere dinero y planificacion.  Pero por ejemplo, algunas jurisdicciones en los Estados Unidos requieren tanques de retencion para los golpes de agua de por ejemplo: estacionamientos de centros comerciales.

Mencionando entonces que los programas de planificacion necesitan ver globalmente los efectos que han tenido el desarrollo de tantos proyectos residenciales y hacer desvios o estructuras de control para maejar el cambio.  Tambien esta accion corregiria la tendencia a ver proyectos como islitas y no como un todo.  Van viendo porque es tan necesario ese Plan de Uso de Terrenos?

Ese plan de uso, puesto como layers de GIS o como capas en Google Earth pudiese permitir que futuros profesionales y voluntarios que queremos un cambio puedan aportar a una solucion entre todas las partes, que deberia ser la intencion de la reglamentacion y las agencias.

Para entrar en ese tema pueden ver este panfleto que desarrollo Sea Grant para grupos comunitarios que quieren resolver problemas ambientales.  Es bueno, siempre y cuando no le metan la maldita politica barata:
http://www.seagrantpr.org/outreach/water_quality_files/guiaambientalcompletafinal.pdf

Se que dejo muchos cabos sueltos.  Pero creo prudente dejar el tema aqui y lo desarrollo en temas especificos.

Looking Out for Number One

 Este post esta relacionado con seguridad ocupacional y la implantacion de un nuevo programa en mi oficina.  Todo el que toma charlas de seguridad ocupacional ha tropezado con la imagen de la piramide o del iceberg.  Siempre es una sensacion de mala espina.  Una preocupacion exagerada de que no ha pasado nada, pero que ese primer incidente serio y reportable es un sintoma de un problema mucho mayor.  Por ende, reforcemos el programa de seguridad.  Looking Out for Number One se refiere a eso.  A la expectativa de que ese gran evento catastrofico viene y tenemos que reforzar nuestra seguridad.

De por si eso es saludable y hasta loable.  Pero las cosas tienen un limite.  'Me gusta el recao.  Pero no tanto', 'lo muy dulce empalaga'.  Asi que como iba diciendo, la seguridad es fundamental en nuestro diario vivir.

Es el modo de vida del que trabaja en cualquier industria.  Mi enfasis en el tema siempre ha enfocado en el sentido comun.  Se iguala la proteccion al riesgo que se va a tomar.  Se conoce el ambiente donde se va a laborar.  No se obliga, se debe pensar en un modo de vida.

Es lo pragmatico.  Cuando no lo haces te sientes incomodo.  Dicen los sicologos que por eso es tan bueno establecer rutinas y actividades programadas desde que somos peque/nos.

Eso mismo decia nuestro sensei judoka.  Los movimientos repetitivos se programan en el subconsciente y los ejecutas sin pensarlo.

La postura de estas ultimas charlas me preocupa, en el sentido de que quieren hacer participar a la gente, pero a la tragala.  Si lo viste, es tu problema.  Escribelo y documentalo.

Entonces, ya la seguridad deja de ser un modo de vida, se convierte en contar como debo vivir mi vida.  O sea, un monton de papeleo para algo que debe salir de mi mentalidad segura.

Los slides de la presentacion (by the way, el primer dibujo fue hecho durante el lunch training en lapiz y luego lo puli entre la oficina y el tren a casa, la tinta en casa) enfatizaban la dualidad GOOD / BAD, Safe Good - Unprepared Bad.  El enfasis de la dualidad me recordo un personaje de la era dorada de los comics, el Sr. A.  Mr. A, un personaje de Steve Ditko (creador de Spiderman y Doctor Strange) tenia una mentalidad objeivista.  Lo blanco y lo negro no hay terminos medios.  Algo inspirado en los libros de Ayn Rand.  Links debajo de personajes de ese tipo com Mr. A o the Question:

http://www.dialbforblog.com/archives/296/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._A

http://blog.kobek.com/2007/12/10/comics-an-appreciation-of-steve-ditkos-mr-a/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Question_(comics)

http://www.vicsage.com/misc/mistera.php

http://twomorrows.com/comicbookartist/articles/09moore.html

http://schulzlibrary.wordpress.com/2010/03/12/steve-ditko-and-mr-a/

No quiero dar mas detalles, solo una de las caricaturas que pasaban por mi mente mientras almorzaba , dormia atendia la presentacion.

Planta Nuclear BONUS Rincon

Los surfers le llaman Domes, los indocumentados la entrada a la libertad, los ambientalistas desastre inminente, los conspiradores diran que tiene una historia oculta.  Los domos de Rincon son en realidad un prototipo de planta nuclear creado a mediados de los 60 en Rincon.  Ahora es un gift shop y museo.



foto planta BONUS 06/21 1962 de el mundo.  link al final.

 Segun wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_Nuclear_Superheater_(BONUS)_Reactor_Facility
BONUS was a prototype to investigate economic and technical feasibility of the integral boiling superheating concept.
Construction started in 1960 and had its first controlled nuclear chain reaction on April 13, 1964. In September 1965 was archived 50MW thermic (full power) and highest steam temperature (900°F/482°C). The reactor ended operations in June 1968 because of high cost modifications and technical problems. The reactor was decommissioned by Puerto Rico Water Resources Authority between 1969 and 1970.
The fuel and control rods were returned to the United States for disposal. The remainder of the radioactive material was either decontaminated on site or placed into the core which was then entombed in concrete. Additional cleanup and shielding was completed in the 1990s and 2000s. A museum is planned for the main floor of the facility.

Con todo esto de tsunamis, terremotos y el negro porvenir que siempre vemos en las cosas esta ganando credibilidad de algo oculto en este site.  Buscando un poco mas encontre este forista Carlos Velez que aparenta conocer algo de la historia del BONUS.  Lo encontre refutando un articulo de lonely planet que discute de 'incidentes de cancer que obligaron su cierre'.
http://www.lonelyplanet.com/puerto-rico/southern-and-western-puerto-rico/rincon/sights/museum/bonus-nuclear-power

Siguio su discusion, en mucho mas detalle en este thread:
http://ca2pr.com/2009/01/26/the-dome-in-rincon-puerto-rico-the-real-deal/

Crei prudente presentar estos detalles de lo mas interesantes de la historia del sistema.

Highlights debajo por si desaparece el thread:


Carlos Velez Says:
10/21/09 743am
Kris:
After working for PREPA for more than 30 years, the last 22 surveying the Dr. Modesto Iriarte Technological Museum (former BONUS Nuclear Station; name changed by virtue of law in 2001) I would like to clarify some of the issues you mention in your article. First, thanks for taking the time to really search into it’s history. The Atomic Energy Commission (now Department of Energy; DOE) made only two plants with the superheater concept; BONUS and Pathfinder (which was also decomissioned and demolished), but were not the only ones under DOE ( you can search for Halley, Piqua and others, as well). DOE used the entombment process as a safe and economical mean to ensure safe radiation levels exposure so that it could be open to the public. As a matter of fact, if you look at the newspapers of 1970, it was inagurated as a museum. Due to the new environmental regulations (EPA and EQB were created in 1970) which required more cleanup and the fact that there was no organizational structure within PREPA to take care of the museum, it closed and went under radiological surveillance. In 1993, the former Mayor of Rincon requested the lighthouse to the US Coast Guard and asked PREPA to grant him access (the Coast Guard had to go thru the beach to access it; the facility is surrounded by 135 acres that belong to PREPA; from Calipso Bar to the mountain). He also asked PREPA to develop an historical museum, along with the technological museum, as well. PREPA agreed and asked DOE”s permission to grant access to the public (DOE is the owner of the radioactivity, PREPA is only the custodiant and owner of all the structures and land within the site). Cleanups, public meetings and environmental statements were done, residual radiation levels were taken to natural background levels (same levels you would find at your home or surroundings) and finally access to the public was granted; still no organizational structure to open. But, you can visit by appointment calling Eng. Francisco Lopez, Division Head of Enviromental and Quality Assurance of PREPA at (787) 521-4060. Numerous groups and students have already visited the site. Hope this clarify more.

Carlos Velez 10/21/09 752am

Also, the Department of Health of PR made an study in 1975, due to the issue of cancer in Rincon, which concluded that the rate of cancer was normal for towns with the same population and exposures as Rincon and not due to the plant. Remember it was a prototype, the eight plant constructed by the US and was closely monitored by local agencies and scientists from around the world that visited it.

Carlos Velez 10/21/09 805am
Two corrections: it was Law 307 of September 2, 2000 (not 2001) that changed the name To the plant and it was Hallam not Halley the plant under DOE.

Glenn 03/13/10 1508
I was wondering if Carlos had any thoughts on why the reactor was put in Rincon. The area has the potential for large earthquakes because of the Puerto Trench. The earthquake in 1918 in the Mona Rift, just 40 miles off the nw coast,created a tsunami inundating the coastline from Aguadilla to Mayaquez. I don’t know if there are any good places to put a nuclear reactor, but this place certainly doesn’t seem to be one.

Carlos Velez 04/07/10 1326

Sorry for the delay Glenn. With regards to your concern over sismic activities and the decision to build on that area, I always like to put references on my answers and not assume them, so I checked in the FINAL HAZARDS SUMMARY REPORT (February 1, 1962; copy of which are located on Rincón´s Public Library and its Municipal Assembly, PREPA´s Environmental Division and the DOE). And from page 822-1 we quote:

“The seismographical classification of the station site is Zone II. This means that as far as probability of seismic damage is concerned it falls in the same category as the States of’ Utah, Nevada, Montana, and the most stable parts of California. Most of California falls in the Zone III category for which the seismic force factors are twice as large as those for Zone II. The containment building shell, along with its anchor footing, floor s Lab , and the internal foundations for the reactor and turbine equipment, are designed for moderate to severe earthquake activity under the requirements of the Uniform’ Building Code for Zone II Seismic Disturbances. These criteria were also the basis for the design of external structures, the stack, the underground waste disposal tanks, the entrance building, and the power distribution towers.

If a tremor is sensed, the reactor will be automatically scrammed by a special switch that has been provided in the scram circuit, and reactor steam will be bypassed to the condenser. The reactor will be depressurized gradually by continuous bypassing of the steam to the condenser.”

With regard the decision to build on that area, on pages 100-1 to 100-4, we quote:“On February 4, 1960, the United States Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) contracted separately with General Nuclear Engineering Corporation (GNEC) and the Puerto Rico Water Resources Authority (PRWRA) for the detailed design of the BOiling NUclear Superheater (BONUS) Power Station. Contracts AT(40-l)-2674 and AT(40-l)-2672 were awarded, respectively, to GNEC and PRWRA for the nuclear and the electric power generating portions of the power station. These awards followed completion by GNEC and PRWRA of studies and a preliminary design of the BONUS Power Station under Contract AT(40-l)-2484. The results of this study established the technical feasibility and safety of a small (17.5 Mw(e)) nuclear power plant using a boiling water reactor with integral nuclear superheating. The design study was published in December 1959 and January 1960.

The Preliminary Hazards Summary Report for the BONUS Power Station (PRWRA-GNEC 2) was reviewed by the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) at its twenty-fourth meeting, March 10-12, 1960, following a meeting of the ACRS BONUS Subcommittee on February 16, 1960. Subsequent to these meetings, Mr. L. Silverman, Chairman of the ACRS (March 1960) advised the Chairman of the AEC on March 14, 1960, that except for certain reservations the ACRS “concludes that the proposed reactor may be constructed with reasonable assurance that it can be operated at the site selected without undue risk to the health and safety of the public.” The reservations attached to the above approval are quoted below:

“Presupposing the continuation of present generally favorable experience with the boiling water reactors the nuclear superheater represents the main experimental item of the proposed reactor. Prior to operation, pertinent information developed for gas-cooled reactors as well as information from the VBWR superheater experiment will have to be reviewed. It is recognized that this information will leave some questions unanswered, such as long-term integrity of the superheater fuel elements and radioactive contamination of the turbine. It will be necessary to show that these open questions do not cause a hazard to the health and safety of the public.”

After the review by the ACRS, a public hearing was held in San Juan, Puerto Rico on April 27, 1960. As a result of this hearing, an intermediate decision was issued on June 28, 1960, by the Presiding Officer, Mr. Samuel W. Jensch, in the matter of Puerto Rico Water Resources Authority, Power Demonstration Reactor Project, Docket No. PP-4. The conclusions of this decision are repeated below:

“1. Construction is authorized for the erection to completion of the proposed nuclear reactor utilization facility described in the contracts and proposals executed between and among the United States Atomic Energy Commission, Puerto Rico Water Resources Authority, General Nuclear Engineering Corporation, and Maxon Construction Company and in accordance with the Hazards Summary Report, which are a part of the record herein.

“2. This construction authorization is provisional to the extent that an authorization to operate the facility will not be issued by the Commission unless there be submitted at a further public hearing which shall be convened to consider the operating authorization, The Final Hazards Summary Report (portions of which may be submitted and evaluated from time to time) and the commission shall find that the final design, includlng the nuclear superheater, and data developed from the specified preconstruction experimental programs, including the integrity of the containment structure, provide reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered and that the operation of the facility will not be inimical to the common defense and security as required by the Atomic Energy Act, as amended.

“3. No allocation shall be made of nuclear fuel for the proposed nuclear reactor utilization facility until further hearing and determination by the Commission, which shall be held respecting operating authorization after the completion of the construction of this facility.

“4. Exceptions, if any, and brief in support thereof must be filed by July 18, 1960; briefs in opposition thereto shall be filed by July 20, 1960, and if the Commission does not initiate a review on its own motion, and no exceptions are filed, this decision shall, in accordance with the Commission’s Rules of Practice, become final on July 19, 1960.”

“5. There being no exceptions filed, the above decision became final on July 19, 1960.

This report, PRWRA-GNEC 5, has been prepared to comply with Item 2 of the conclusions of the intermediate decision and to conform with the laws and regulations outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations, AEC Licenses: Materials, Facilities, Operators, AEC Regulation, 10 CFR Part 115, “Procedure for Review of Certain Nuclear Reactors Exempted from Licensing Requirements.” In addition, AEC Regulation 10 CFR Part 100, “Reactor Site Criteria,” has also been used in the preparation of the report.

This report summarizes and evaluates the important design and operational features of the BONUS Power Station which have an effect on the safety aspects of the station. Detailed data on the reactor design are given in a separate report, PRWRA-GNEC 6. The design and fabrication of the reactor pressure vessel is reported in GNEC 210.

The detailed design of the BONUS reactor has taken consideration of data obtained from the VBWR superheater experiments, of the pertinent information contained in the Oak Ridge National Laboratory Status and Progress reports on the gas-cooled reactor experiment, the operational and materials aspects of the boiling water reactors in general, and the data obtained from the pre-construction BONUS R&D Program. Terminal reports were issued in connection with the pre-construction BONUS R&D program to provide detailed information regarding the various experimental tasks. The results of the R&D tasks have been taken into account in the evaluation of the BONUS hazards.

This report constitutes the final evaluation of the BONUS Power Station hazards. A separate technical specification will include significant design and operating limitations which shall become part of the authorization to operate the BONUS Power Station.” (end of quote)

Hope this clarifies any doubt you had.

Frank Bevilacqua 04/21/10 1404
By accident I came across the discussion on the BONUS nuclear power plant. I was one off the lead project engineers that developed, designed, and supervised the initial operation of the BONUS reactor plant in Rincon. Dr. Modesto Iriarte and Julio Fragoso of the PRWRA were part of the team that were assigned to the BONUS project during the design, construction and operation of the plant.

The plant was a demonstration plant to determine the feasibility of generating superheated steam within a nuclear reactor.This was successfully demonstrated. However, the fuel cost for the superheater fuel proved to be such that the overall cost for the power generation was too high in spite of the higher efficiency obtained by the superheat. The discussion presented by the USAEC covered the plant very accurately.

I would just like to add that I lived on the resort on the beach at Rincon. My fellow engineer used to go lobster spearing just outside our cabins and had fresh lobster every week.

I spent a year in Rincon during the constuction of the plant. The operation of the plant did not contaminate the area and I am sure the lobsters and the whales that were in the waters outside our cabins are very healthy

Dorn Green 10/06/10 1400
The project engineer on the Rincon Nuclear Power Plant, Ed Thompson, now deceased, hired me to repair and build numerous electronic cards that were amplifiers for signals from the numerous sensors to the main control panel room, This was in 1963. The control rods had arrived but were not yet installed. The boiler was completed

El Guanche Boricua 10/24/10
My father was a phisycs proffessor at uprm and I remember when I was about 8 years old (Im 45 Now) goingto the centro nuclear next to phisycs dept. and watched the bright light down the deep pool of the reactor and pops said to me that the energy of the uranium was producing it. Childhood Memories

Carlos Velez 10/25/10 1319
Dorn I’ve been searching for photos of people working at BONUS and have not been able to find them. I know that on special occasions, like the Secretary’s Day, they used to tour them around. If you have or know of someone that has, please let me know.

Carlos Velez 01/06/11 2004
Miguel that campaign you mention started in the ’50 with the designed of the BONUS Plant. PREPA was aware from that time that an oil crisis would eventually affect us and that is why it tried to change the way it generated for more diverse forms. The problem has been, even today: 1)that they did not get much support since oil was very very cheap and all other technologies were experimental in the early days, 2) environmental groups have concerns over the way we are going to move to diversify, be it natural gas, wind or any technology.
There is an Executive Law prohibiting the use of nuclear electrical generation. You are right, I have suggested several times to base a nuclear ship in Ramey or Ceiba to generate electricity and prove it is a safe technology. US uses mainly coal not oil. Oil is mostly for transportation. The outstages are mostly from excessive urban development not from lack of generation capacity.

Rocio Says 03/14/11 1932
Carlos Vélez: Puedes obtener fotografías del interior del reactor y personal trabajando en este enlace:
http://bibliotecadigital.uprrp.edu/cdm4/results.php?CISOOP1=exact&CISOFIELD1=CISOSEARCHALL&CISOROOT=%2FELM4068&CISOBOX1=Nuclear+energy--Puerto+Rico

Raul 03/15/11 1233
Wow!!!I was just looking for some interesting facts on the Domes plant in Rincon,P.R. I visit there two or three times a year. It is a GREAT place. What need is there for all the extra discussion on the politics of the Island. Why can we not keep our comments limited to the topic ( Domes )???

Carlos Velez 03/17/11 0028
Thanks for the comments. Rocío I already had them. Thanks for the tip. The thing is I know special events took place there (weddings, Secretaries Week tours, etc) and was wondering if anyone had photos to share.

Fotos aqui:

http://bibliotecadigital.uprrp.edu/cdm4/results.php?CISOOP1=exact&CISOFIELD1=CISOSEARCHALL&CISOROOT=%2FELM4068&CISOBOX1=Nuclear+energy--Puerto+Rico

Bono:

Posters con cutouts de plantas nucleares.

http://bibliodyssey.blogspot.com/2010/05/nuclear-reactor-cutaways.html

http://bibliodyssey.blogspot.com/2009/12/nuclear-reactor-wall-charts.html

Poder5 Rese/na la Alcantarilla

Recibi una grata sorpresa esta ma/nana cuando vi que Prometeo en Poder5 rese/no mi blog.  Prometeo es uno de los bloggers que consistentemente visita mi pagina.  Me sorprendio en el sentido que mis temas no siguen la tendencia de la mayoria de los blogs locales.  Incluso considere que estaria en la lista de Cranky Old Men blogs, si existiese algo asi a nivel local.

http://poder5.blogspot.com/2011/03/alcantarilla-alquimica.html

El que ha tomado el tiempo de ver estos articulos plagados de links se encuentra con alguien que suena como El Borrego de Cafe Tacuba (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_ZZu_D9lkA).  Y es que aunque soy catolico y estadista mis posturas a veces parecen hereticas.  Me canto ambientalista pero en otro momento favorezco al desarrollador.  No creo en el aborto pero he defendido el derecho fundamental de la mujer de dominar su cuerpo.  La busqueda de la verdad es un camino solitario.  Trato de ser consistente.

Si alguien busca la referencia de Pitufo Filosofo es que Filosofo tenia un libro para todo y cuando no lo querian oir lo tiraban fuera con todo y libro.  He escrito de muchos temas, serios y no serios, sin embargo es informacion al aire, al que le interese que le de uso, sino 'carry on'.

Digo, de acuerdo a SiteMeter tengo un publico nomada que le gusta ver a Adele Blanc Sec y saber del Ramayamana.  A pesar de ser las paginas mas vistas nunca han recibido comentarios.  Sin embargo, son los comentarios los que sirven de inspiracion para desarrollar nuevos temas.  Antigonum Cajan y Kofla Olivieri siempre me han traido discusiones interesantes para desarrollar mas articulos.


Creo que Prometeo pego bastante la intencion de mi blog.  Expongo ideas sueltas y las desarrollo.  Son busquedas crudas, pero trato de buscarles un hilo coherente.  Me gustaria a veces escribirlas mejor, pero mis labores profesionales no me dejan.  Le presento al lector el concepto y una peque/na opinion, pero les dejo el camino de migajas en forma de links.  Cada argumento tiene dos vertientes y si puedo les incluyo las dos para que se dirijan a las fuentes.  No soy, ni pretendo ser una autoridad en estos temas.  Solo soy un guia que busca los links.
Los primeros articulos tenian la idea de reunir ideas sueltas como para que alguien pudiese sacar una monografia o una discusion de un tema.  He enfocado en ciencia y en psicologia pop ultimamente pues parece ser lo que mas adolece la blogosfera puertorrique/na.


Aguada 2007


Tambien pongo ocasionalmente fotos y comics de mis archivos.  Esperen mas de esos, incluyendo discusiones de cine.  Recientemente mi esposa ha estado revisando nuestro viejo inventario de VHS y los ha ido transfiriendo a DVD.  Por ejemplo, repasabamos la serie de Escaflowne (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vision_of_Escaflowne) y discutiamos si la maquinaria de Atlantis en la serie era fuente nuclear o un arma escalar (scalar weapon technologies).  Ese es un tema futuro.  Teaser (http://www.prahlad.org/pub/bearden/scalar_wars.htm).

Otra buena analogia para definir este blog seria compararlo con este excelente programa de BBC llamado Connections, donde se daban las historias desde un grupo de eventos no relacionados y de diferentes disciplinas para llevarlas a un tema de actualidad.  Un wikipedia de este articulo aqui:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connections_%28TV_series%29

Connections explores an "Alternative View of Change" (the subtitle of the series) that rejects the conventional linear and teleological view of historical progress. Burke contends that one cannot consider the development of any particular piece of the modern world in isolation. Rather, the entire gestalt of the modern world is the result of a web of interconnected events, each one consisting of a person or group acting for reasons of their own motivations (e.g. profit, curiosity, religious) with no concept of the final, modern result of what either their or their contemporaries' actions finally led to. The interplay of the results of these isolated events is what drives history and innovation, and is also the main focus of the series and its sequels.

Mas de la serie y James Burke aqui :

http://x-journals.com/2009/james-burke-connections-world-views-and-technological-innovation/

Esa serie realmente desarrollo mi gusto por la historia y como los eventos se interrelacionan.  El estilo con comentarios crudos y links es de mi epoca de enviar emails con links curiosos que encontraba en la red.  En aquella epoca el estilo era como el de b3ta o metafilter:

http://www.metafilter.com/



De ENDI, me gusta la composicion de la foto.

 Recuerdan el Churnalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churnalism, o sacar articulos directos de comunicados de prensa).  Bueno, asi pongo las ideas aqui y las trato de amarrar.  Lo que hago es exponer ideas, si otro lo dice mas claro que yo, que sea el el que lo diga.  Yo solo los expongo.

Lo mas ironico de todo esto es que Prometeo saco este articulo un dia de superluna.
Tiendo a ser bien moody.  Mi esposa lo achaca a que soy canceriano recalcitrante.  Pero anyway, que buen augurio.  Que para bien sea.

Ahora si, a ver si Discus ya me deja comentarle a Prometeo...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perigee

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apoastro 

http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/will-supermoon-cause-earthquake-storm-natural-disasters-1442/

Kelley Polar - My Beauty In The Moon

La letra de El Borrego:
[ Lyrics from: http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/c/cafe_tacuba/el_borrego.html ]

Pensar que antes los kits de quimica tenian compuestos radioactivos y contador geiger.

 

Soy anarquista, soy neonazista.

Soy un esquinjed y soy ecologista.

Soy peronista, soy terrosrista, capitalista

Y también soy pacifista.

Soy activista, sindicalista, soy agresivo, y muy alternativo.

Soy deportista, del Rotarac, politeísta

Y también soy buen cristiano.

Y en las tocadas la neta es el eslam

Pero en mi casa si le meto al tropical.

Me gusta el jevimetal, me gusta el jarcor.

Me gusta Patric Miler y también me gusta el gronch.

Me gusta la Maldita me gusta la Lupita

Y escucho a los Magneto cuando esta mi noviecita

Mi jefe (en serio)

Me gusta andar de negro con los labios pintados.

Pero guapo en la oficina siempre and bien trajeado.

Me gusta aventar piedras, me gusta recojerlas,

Me gusta pintar bardas y despues ir a lavarlas.

Y en las tocadas la neta es el eslam

Pero en mi casa si le meto al tropical.

Y en las tocadas la neta es el eslam
Pero en mi casa si le meto al tropical.

(Correctly Subbed) Nuclear Reactor Nuclear Boy Poop

No lo puedo creer. Escribi todos estos links aqui:
http://alcantarillaalquimica.blogspot.com/2011/03/quick-links-to-japan-quake.html

Y no mencione a Nuclear Boy.

La Cultura del Miedo en los Medios - Tema 2 - Terror Bacteriano



http://consumerist.com/2006/02/stupid-science-make-ice-from-fast-food-toilet-water.html

 Quizas ya a esta fecha han inferido que soy ingeniero ambiental.  Que me gano el cheque resolviendo problemas asociados a alcantarillado y contaminacion.  Por ende el nombre del site.  Muestra la correlacion tipica de mi vida.  Por un lado el analisis cientifico de que sirve y que no, pero por otro lado con teorias esotericas y de conspiracion de la escuela de Andrew Alvarez..
En la Parte 1 de este articulo discutia de esta cultura del miedo, auspiciado por entes externos, que busca quitarnos de nuestra paz y tranquilidad.
Buscaba algo para presentar la idea, y me llego una buena anallogia.  De la del tipo de:


No, estas no son las bacterias
que contaminaron las teclas de Maripily.



X ES MAS SUCIO QUE UN INODORO

Especificamente el adagio de GERMOFOBIA

X tiene germenes

los germenes son malos y nos matan

por ende X es malo y nos mata

http://www.healthkicker.com/690769889/your-computer-keyboard-has-more-germs-than-your-toilet/

La discusion es cortesia de Primera Hora, donde repite, sin siquiera verificar, un estudio donde se indica lo contaminado que estan los carritos de compra de supermercados.  Quizas alguien con un apice de inteligencia le pudo haber comentado al periodico que vivimos en un planeta lleno de microorganismos.  Muchos son buenos, muchos estan en simbiosis con nosotros, y hasta nos hacen el ca/nita en Navidades sin pedir nada a cambio.  Si, es cierto que los carritos estan llenos de E Coli, pero tambien es cierto que nuestro cuerpo tiene anticuerpos que degradan estos mucho antes de atacarnos.  El E Coli muestra presencia de materia fecal, pero eso no necesariamente indica que es un virus o patogeno.  El E Coli es un organismo indicador. 

http://www.uvm.edu/rsenr/sal/ecoli/pages/waterqu.htm#indicator

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escherichia_coli

El reporte de Primera Hora aqui: http://www.primerahora.com/72porcientodeloscarritosdelacomprapresentarestosfecales-481134.html

Se trata de que un estudio de la Universidad de Arizona, recogido por Fox News, reveló que los carritos de compra contienen más de un millón de gérmenes, convirtiéndolos en algo más sucio que un baño público.

Con el resultado de este estudio, se corroboran otras investigaciones realizadas con anterioridad en Austria, Corea del Norte y España, que aseguran que el 72 por ciento de los carritos tiene bacterias coliformes, originarias de las heces y asociadas con condiciones sanitarias precarias.

Universidad de Arizona...Fox News...Antibacterial...Heces Fecales...
busquemos la fuente:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dailybrew/shopping-carts-found-dirtier-public-toilets-20110302-103426-581.html

Researchers from the University of Arizona swabbed shopping cart handles in four states looking for bacterial contamination. Of the 85 carts examined, 72 percent turned out to have a marker for fecal bacteria.

The researchers took a closer look at the samples from 36 carts and discovered Escherichia coli, more commonly known as E. coli, on 50 percent of them — along with a host of other types of bacteria.

Lo copiaron a verbatim.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41838546/ns/health-kids_and_parenting/
http://health.newsvine.com/_news/2011/03/01/6161165-are-you-worried-about-grocery-cart-germs-how-do-you-deal-with-dirty-shopping-carts?threadId=3066314&commentId=52083332

A fin de cuentas el bottom line es el siguiente.  Queremos vivir en tal asepsia que lo que hacemos es matar indiscriminadamente todos los microorganismos.  A la larga esobaja nuestras defensas.  Algunos articulos que apoyan mi teoria:

http://darrengarnick.wordpress.com/2009/10/16/swine-flu-germs-purell/

http://www.phobia-fear-release.com/germ-phobia-2.html

Despite explicit instructions not to touch a molecule, regardless of
how pristine it may appear, my three-year-old son acts like a “Price
Is Right” game show hostess in a public restroom. He slowly brushes
his hand across the stall partitions and the waste baskets. He
showcases the paper towel and soap dispensers. His fingerprints even
wind up on the floor tiles.

Scrubbing him down is a logistical nightmare because he cannot reach
the sink. I tuck him underneath one arm like a football and use the
other hand to rub his hands with soap. In the end, at least a half
gallon of water winds up on his shirt. When my child is tall enough,
I’ll teach him the essentials of urinal yoga: How to flush any toilet
with your sneaker.

En ese tema de arriba, recientemente nos llego un comunicado de safety en mi oficina donde un empleado tuvo que recibir atencion medica por una caida que tuvo tratando de flushear un inodoro con un zapato...Obviamente con las politicas de seguridad se pueden imaginar al extremo que pueden llevar esto.
Y si hubiese sido con una chancleta?
Y si el toilet hubiese tenido colera?
Y si estaba con casco?
En mi casa?
Quien paga la ambulancia?

Sentido comun.  el menos comun de los sentidos.

Kill The Nanny State - Let the Bacteria Live In Peace

Por si tienen algun rato para perder.  Tiene sentido comun.  Demasiada reglamentacion nos mata.

http://nannystateliberationfront.net/2010/11/

Cual es la ironia de todo esto?  Mientras nos preocupamos del patogeno que nos va a matar buscamos los probioticos y fibra para poder tener 'un transito intestinal saludable'.  O sea, vivimos rodeados de bacterias y hemos sobrevivido.  Nuestro cuerpo humano es adaptable y contraresta los patogenos con anticuerpos.  Anticuerpos que hemos debilitado con el uso excesivo de desinfectantes.  La germofobia pudiese ser la causa de nuestra extincion.

Algunos articulos relacionados al abuso de antibioticos y desinfectantes:
http://ezinearticles.com/?Truth-Or-Consequences,-Could-Your-Germaphobia-Come-Back-to-Bite-You?&id=4512167

http://www.textbookofbacteriology.net/normalflora.html

http://www.gijoehealth.com/2010/05/bacteria-why-are-we-so-afraid/

http://www.actionbioscience.org/biodiversity/wassenaar.html

Este tema se ha alargado.  Pero toco un nuevo tema.  Me gusta el termino.  Churnalism.  O sea escribir noticias directamente de comunicados de prensa sin verificar.  Como si hicieras mantequilla (to Churn).

Finalmente, una nota al calce. 

Sensacionalismo y Panico - Contraste Entre Japon y Puerto Rico

Solo Joe expuso otro punto con el sensacionalismo y panico del terremoto de Japon y los efectos a largo plazo del incendio en la Planta Nuclear de Daiichi.  Los de la crisis estan en aceptacion, resolviendo el asunto, con paciencia.  En posiblemente el fin de sus vidas.  Cuando nos llegue la hora a nosotros, haremos lo mismo?

http://enjustaperspectiva.blogspot.com/2011/03/en-japon-no-meten-miedo-ni-te-restregan.html

Mapa del Plumacho del incidente Daiichi aqui:
No tengan miedo, no pasa nada...pero fijate ese plumacho pudiese contener radiacion.

Periodistas irresponsables!!! Diciendo PANICO en la portada.  Ya el inventario de iodo escasea.

http://chanceofrain.com/2011/03/map-of-plume-from-japan/

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/03/animated-map-shows-radioactive-materials-path-across-pacific-toward-california.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-japan-nuclear-usa-20110317,0,1431467.story

Fermi Radiation Training Manual from 1999 Here

http://esh-docdb.fnal.gov/cgi-bin/RetrieveFile?docid=304&version=1&filename=GERT.pdf

http://www.boingboing.net/2011/03/17/radiation-dose-and-r-1.html



Kirk: En cuanto tiempo tendremos agua de nuevo Scotty?
Scotty: En tres horas
Kirk: Si no tenemos agua en 1 hora nos quemamos
Scotty: En una hora sera se/nor. [*hij'eputa]

 Some important points to go along with this chart:

• The risks of radiation exposure are radiation sickness, and/or increased lifetime risk of cancer. Only people receiving very high doses develop radiation sickness—the Fukushima 50, working inside the power plant, are at risk of this. Somebody in Tokyo is not.
The other risk—an increase to the victim's lifetime risk of developing cancer—is a lot more complicated. Key thing to remember: On an individual basis, it's an increase in risk, not a promise that cancer will develop. And it has to be understood in context with already existing cancer risks. In the footnotes of the chart, Kelly Classic points out that the average American has a 42% risk of developing (not dying from) some kind of cancer in his or her lifetime. If one of us gets hit with a 300 rem dose of radiation—a high enough dose that we'd have symptoms of radiation sickness—we'd see our lifetime risk of cancer increase to 42.03%.

• When this table says "n/a" under the risk heading, that's not because the information isn't available. It's because, at that dose, the health effects are so small as to be unmeasurable.
Radiation dose and risk works on what Ralf Sudowe, professor of health physics and radiochemistry at the University of Nevada Las Vegas, calls "linear no threshold." Scientists assume that any amount of radiation—no matter how small—carries some risk. They also assume that the risks increase linearly, along with the dose.
But, Sudowe (as well as Kelly Classic, and the other health physicists I've spoken to) also say that, even though radiation isn't safe at any level, that doesn't mean there's reason to panic at every level. At low enough doses, scientists can no longer find evidence of an increased rate of cancer. And that's pretty much the point where we don't have to worry.

• Time also matters. "A high exposure given in a short time (minutes, hours) that could cause a harmful effect may not do anything if given over years because our body adapts and our cells repair minor damages," Kelly Classic says. "So if I was exposed to 500 mSv in a period of minutes, my blood would show some changes, but if I was exposed to 500 mSv over 50 years, I'd have an increased risk of cancer, but no discernible signs of radiation exposure [meaning no radiation sickness]."