Congress is currently under huge pressure to change the way the Internet is regulated. Large corporations would like to be able to pay/charge to have higher-priority access to their data, thereby regulating free internet access to a second tier of service quality.
There is a large resistance movement to this effort, devoted to the cause of "Saving Internet Neutrality." However, it is proving difficult to get the word out about this effort, as shown in this video starring Moby (also available here), which lobbies ordinary citizens to Call Congress Today and Tell Them to Save the Internet.
Congress, of course, can be reached at 202-224-3121 and saying your zip code to get your representative.
Monday, June 05, 2006
Thursday, May 25, 2006
Steps towards a Renewable Energy Future
Open Letter to the Oregon Renewable Energy Working Group
There are many things that we can do to increase our use of clean energy and cut global warming pollution in Oregon.
We need to work to take recent technological improvements developed at OSU and other places that allow for biodiesel micro-reactors to convert organic farm waste into biodiesel fuel, and deploy these devices across the state, to be used any place where organic waste matter is produced.
We need to encourage the development of more hybrid diesel-electric vehicles to run on this fuel, so that it is consumed in the most efficient manner possible. These vehicles should all be plug-in electric hybrids, so that they can be charged off the grid for short trips, and run off biodiesel for longer ones. Additionally, solar technology can be built into the skin of the vehicle to allow for additional charging during daylight hours.
Small wind micro-plants (conical wind turbines) could be installed on the roofs of many buildings, along with more solar technology, so that each building could have the capacity to manufacture a significant portion of the electricity that it uses, if not produce a surplus for sale back to the grid.
We need to construct a comprehensive statewide electrified rail passenger and freight transportation system, built both as an expansion of and in addition to our existing rail system. This will allow us to rely less on inefficient automobile and truck transportation, and will also have the side effect of making more destinations in the state accessible to more people, including tourists and bicycle tourists.
As much of Oregon's energy as possible should come from wind and solar by 2025, in addition to tidal, fish-friendly hydro and waste-based biofuels, to power both stationary sources and the transportation system.
Oregon should become a leader in using solar power, small-scale local renewable energy like micro-wind turbines, community wind farms, biodiesel micro-reactors, small community tidal power plants, and other technologies as they are developed and tested for environmental friendliness.
This can be achieved by expanding incentives for residents and businesses to use clean energy sources, as well as encouraging research at the state research institutions, and establishing government policies mandating compliance by government agencies and setting standards for the free market.
There are many things that we can do to increase our use of clean energy and cut global warming pollution in Oregon.
We need to work to take recent technological improvements developed at OSU and other places that allow for biodiesel micro-reactors to convert organic farm waste into biodiesel fuel, and deploy these devices across the state, to be used any place where organic waste matter is produced.
We need to encourage the development of more hybrid diesel-electric vehicles to run on this fuel, so that it is consumed in the most efficient manner possible. These vehicles should all be plug-in electric hybrids, so that they can be charged off the grid for short trips, and run off biodiesel for longer ones. Additionally, solar technology can be built into the skin of the vehicle to allow for additional charging during daylight hours.
Small wind micro-plants (conical wind turbines) could be installed on the roofs of many buildings, along with more solar technology, so that each building could have the capacity to manufacture a significant portion of the electricity that it uses, if not produce a surplus for sale back to the grid.
We need to construct a comprehensive statewide electrified rail passenger and freight transportation system, built both as an expansion of and in addition to our existing rail system. This will allow us to rely less on inefficient automobile and truck transportation, and will also have the side effect of making more destinations in the state accessible to more people, including tourists and bicycle tourists.
As much of Oregon's energy as possible should come from wind and solar by 2025, in addition to tidal, fish-friendly hydro and waste-based biofuels, to power both stationary sources and the transportation system.
Oregon should become a leader in using solar power, small-scale local renewable energy like micro-wind turbines, community wind farms, biodiesel micro-reactors, small community tidal power plants, and other technologies as they are developed and tested for environmental friendliness.
This can be achieved by expanding incentives for residents and businesses to use clean energy sources, as well as encouraging research at the state research institutions, and establishing government policies mandating compliance by government agencies and setting standards for the free market.
Monday, May 22, 2006
Walking and Transit Oriented Development
I'm going to tie together two threads on separate blogs in this post:
The first, on Portland Transport, is this: How Far Will You Walk to Transit?
The second, on Blue Oregon, is this: What would it look like if, instead of paying unwarranted “compensation” to landowners who want to perpetuate the unsustainable post-World War II suburban sprawl model, we revised the land use laws to encourage more light rail oriented development so more people have the choice of living that way in the rapidly emerging era of high priced petroleum?
The first question has always intrigued me. It seems to have different anwers depending on how you ask it.
Is the question, how far away can you build really transit-dependent development? That is, buildings with no on-site parking requirements, where presumably the lions share of their occupants take transit, walk or bike to and fro? This might seem to be a third-of-a-mile radius.
Is the question, how far away can you build developments that are transit-oriented, but not perhaps 100% transit-dependent? This would seem to be more like a half-mile walking radius.
Is the question, how far might somebody conceivably walk from their house to transit, without beginning to think seriously of another alternative? If the scenery is interesting along the way, this would seem to be more of an average one-mile walking radius.
...but some people just like to walk. So, there are probably larger distances that will be reported, too.
As for the second question, there's two main tools that can be used to get at this issue.
1) The first is to supply the transit. There are only a few light rail lines so far in Oregon. Back in the 1920s, there used to be many more, as well as electric interurban lines and other commuter and passenger rail lines, but right now they're all in Portland. First off, right away, more need to be built, opened and operated. Central Oregon could use some service (in the Bend/Madras/etc. area). Southern Oregon could use a line or two or three (in the Grants Pass/Central Point/Medford/Ashland/Eagle Point/etc. area). Eugene is building a BRT (bus rapid transit, buses running in dedicated Right Of Way) system to connect it with Springfield, but I'd suggest that it could use more. As could Corvallis/Albany/Salem.
2) The second is to supply the land for development. How? Zoning. Most zoning laws are artificial restrictions on the maximum level of development and use allowable on any given parcel of land. Single-family neighborhoods are not built simply because it is "what the market demands." Rather, they are built because that is what the local governments zone the land for. So, if you want higher-density development near transit, oriented towards transit so that its occupants use transit, then you zone the land for such and include a design review overlay that has specifications pertaining to the provision of walking, bicycling and community amenities that allow for a transit-oriented development.
It's not rocket science. Most of the older towns and cities in Oregon were built according to these principles, from about the 1870s through the 1920s. It made sense then and it makes sense now. And not just in Oregon. Throughout the West Coast, throughout America, throughout the world.
The first, on Portland Transport, is this: How Far Will You Walk to Transit?
The second, on Blue Oregon, is this: What would it look like if, instead of paying unwarranted “compensation” to landowners who want to perpetuate the unsustainable post-World War II suburban sprawl model, we revised the land use laws to encourage more light rail oriented development so more people have the choice of living that way in the rapidly emerging era of high priced petroleum?
The first question has always intrigued me. It seems to have different anwers depending on how you ask it.
Is the question, how far away can you build really transit-dependent development? That is, buildings with no on-site parking requirements, where presumably the lions share of their occupants take transit, walk or bike to and fro? This might seem to be a third-of-a-mile radius.
Is the question, how far away can you build developments that are transit-oriented, but not perhaps 100% transit-dependent? This would seem to be more like a half-mile walking radius.
Is the question, how far might somebody conceivably walk from their house to transit, without beginning to think seriously of another alternative? If the scenery is interesting along the way, this would seem to be more of an average one-mile walking radius.
...but some people just like to walk. So, there are probably larger distances that will be reported, too.
As for the second question, there's two main tools that can be used to get at this issue.
1) The first is to supply the transit. There are only a few light rail lines so far in Oregon. Back in the 1920s, there used to be many more, as well as electric interurban lines and other commuter and passenger rail lines, but right now they're all in Portland. First off, right away, more need to be built, opened and operated. Central Oregon could use some service (in the Bend/Madras/etc. area). Southern Oregon could use a line or two or three (in the Grants Pass/Central Point/Medford/Ashland/Eagle Point/etc. area). Eugene is building a BRT (bus rapid transit, buses running in dedicated Right Of Way) system to connect it with Springfield, but I'd suggest that it could use more. As could Corvallis/Albany/Salem.
2) The second is to supply the land for development. How? Zoning. Most zoning laws are artificial restrictions on the maximum level of development and use allowable on any given parcel of land. Single-family neighborhoods are not built simply because it is "what the market demands." Rather, they are built because that is what the local governments zone the land for. So, if you want higher-density development near transit, oriented towards transit so that its occupants use transit, then you zone the land for such and include a design review overlay that has specifications pertaining to the provision of walking, bicycling and community amenities that allow for a transit-oriented development.
It's not rocket science. Most of the older towns and cities in Oregon were built according to these principles, from about the 1870s through the 1920s. It made sense then and it makes sense now. And not just in Oregon. Throughout the West Coast, throughout America, throughout the world.
Thursday, May 18, 2006
Eco-Friendly Hybrid Ferries
The new Alcatraz to SF ferry operator is proposing to use some really futuristic hybrid ferry boats, featuring wind, solar, sail and electric power to move the boats, plus the ability to plug in and charge up at the dock, as well as a backup low-emission diesel generator to provide additional power.
How long before ferries like these can start replacing ferries on other runs across the bay?
How can technologies like these be used more broadly to reduce our reliance on foreign oil?
~g
***
News Story:
New S.F.-Alcatraz ferry operator plans to use hybrids
Bay City News Service
With the signing of a new 10-year contract between the National Park Service and Hornblower Cruises and Events, two hybrid-electric ferries will eventually be crossing to the famed former penitentiary Alcatraz Island from San Francisco, according to the environmental advocacy organization Bluewater Network.
Alcatraz Cruises, a division of Hornblower Cruises and Events, will take over the route, now handled by Blue and Gold Fleet, on Sept. 25, the National Park Service announced today.
The new boats will comply with emission requirements set by the Environmental Protection Agency. Hornblower Cruises and Events has agreed to build the first ferry within two years and the second vessel within five years.
The 600-passenger boats are modeled on ferries designed by the Australian company Solar Sailor and operate at between 12 and 15 knots.
Both ferries will harness solar and wind energy and each will be fitted with a sail that can be used in windy conditions but also retracted in extreme weather, according to Bluewater Network.
The boats will be fitted with large batteries that will power the vessels' electric motors and which can be recharged onshore.
When necessary, the ferries will use diesel generators that are designed to reduce emissions to between 70 and 90 percent of the emissions released by conventional diesel-powered boats, Bluewater Network reported.
The ferries could also serve as transbay shuttles in the event of emergencies such as earthquakes because they are able to run at low speeds on wind and electricity alone, according to the organization.
Copyright © 2006 by Bay City News, Inc. -- republication, re-transmission or reuse without the express written consent of Bay City News, Inc. is prohibited.
How long before ferries like these can start replacing ferries on other runs across the bay?
How can technologies like these be used more broadly to reduce our reliance on foreign oil?
~g
***
News Story:
New S.F.-Alcatraz ferry operator plans to use hybrids
Bay City News Service
With the signing of a new 10-year contract between the National Park Service and Hornblower Cruises and Events, two hybrid-electric ferries will eventually be crossing to the famed former penitentiary Alcatraz Island from San Francisco, according to the environmental advocacy organization Bluewater Network.
Alcatraz Cruises, a division of Hornblower Cruises and Events, will take over the route, now handled by Blue and Gold Fleet, on Sept. 25, the National Park Service announced today.
The new boats will comply with emission requirements set by the Environmental Protection Agency. Hornblower Cruises and Events has agreed to build the first ferry within two years and the second vessel within five years.
The 600-passenger boats are modeled on ferries designed by the Australian company Solar Sailor and operate at between 12 and 15 knots.
Both ferries will harness solar and wind energy and each will be fitted with a sail that can be used in windy conditions but also retracted in extreme weather, according to Bluewater Network.
The boats will be fitted with large batteries that will power the vessels' electric motors and which can be recharged onshore.
When necessary, the ferries will use diesel generators that are designed to reduce emissions to between 70 and 90 percent of the emissions released by conventional diesel-powered boats, Bluewater Network reported.
The ferries could also serve as transbay shuttles in the event of emergencies such as earthquakes because they are able to run at low speeds on wind and electricity alone, according to the organization.
Copyright © 2006 by Bay City News, Inc. -- republication, re-transmission or reuse without the express written consent of Bay City News, Inc. is prohibited.
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
New Progressive Vision for America
List of topics:
1: Build a nationwide high-speed rail network. Make this the focus for federal transportation spending, just as building the original nationwide freeway network beginning in the 1950s was the focus during that period of time (and from then until the 1990s, when the focus shifted with ISTEA). Use federal incentives to encourage concentration much of the continued urban growth in the country around the nodes on the high speed rail network. Make the network triple-tracked everywhere to allow for a mix of uses, i.e. passengers as well as freight. Begin construction as soon as possible, using American engineering, labor and materials so as to provide the maximum boost to the domestic economy. Consider raising the gas tax to fund it, but also consider cost recovery from uses fees on built-out system, i.e. passenger fares and freight charges.
2: Raise federal gas mileage standards to 40mpg fleetwide. Encourage biofuel production. Legalize industrial hemp for biofuel input.
3: Look for alternative sources of electricity. California's "Million Solar Roofs" initiative provides one model, of distributing electrical production to, potentially, ever consumer of electricity. Household wind turbines, rooftop solar cells, and biofuel processors/fuel cells could contribute to this. New larger plants could include offshore wave/tidal plants, onshore wind/solar plants, geothermal plants, etc.
4: Continue/expand programs such as HOPE VI that direct federal funding into turning failed public housing projects into mixed-income livable communities.
5: Health care: Let John Kitzhaber's Archimedes Movement lead the way in finding solutions, using Oregon as a testbed. Nationwide, let this be an 2008 issue, aknowledge it as an issue in 2006 but don't start throwing out too many ideas just yet.
1: Build a nationwide high-speed rail network. Make this the focus for federal transportation spending, just as building the original nationwide freeway network beginning in the 1950s was the focus during that period of time (and from then until the 1990s, when the focus shifted with ISTEA). Use federal incentives to encourage concentration much of the continued urban growth in the country around the nodes on the high speed rail network. Make the network triple-tracked everywhere to allow for a mix of uses, i.e. passengers as well as freight. Begin construction as soon as possible, using American engineering, labor and materials so as to provide the maximum boost to the domestic economy. Consider raising the gas tax to fund it, but also consider cost recovery from uses fees on built-out system, i.e. passenger fares and freight charges.
2: Raise federal gas mileage standards to 40mpg fleetwide. Encourage biofuel production. Legalize industrial hemp for biofuel input.
3: Look for alternative sources of electricity. California's "Million Solar Roofs" initiative provides one model, of distributing electrical production to, potentially, ever consumer of electricity. Household wind turbines, rooftop solar cells, and biofuel processors/fuel cells could contribute to this. New larger plants could include offshore wave/tidal plants, onshore wind/solar plants, geothermal plants, etc.
4: Continue/expand programs such as HOPE VI that direct federal funding into turning failed public housing projects into mixed-income livable communities.
5: Health care: Let John Kitzhaber's Archimedes Movement lead the way in finding solutions, using Oregon as a testbed. Nationwide, let this be an 2008 issue, aknowledge it as an issue in 2006 but don't start throwing out too many ideas just yet.
Monday, May 15, 2006
MAX, Powell, Foster, Hawthorne and the Streetcar
In Sunday's Oregonian, Jim Mayer has an article about light rail in Portland. It mentions that Tri-Met is seriously considering light rail out the Powell/Foster corridor. Basically, after light rail is installed on the Portland Mall, the first branch would head south to Milwaukie. The second line would branch off of this where it crossed Powell, and head east, probably just past I-205 to 122nd Ave or somewhere thereabouts (see the .pdf here).
Wow!
This article was the first time I've seen a serious discussion of light rail in the Powell/Foster corridor. (Did I miss something?)
This corridor has been a subject of much debate, in the Portland blogosphere and elsewhere, for some time now. However, I think this is a good proposal. While at first blush, this would actually seem to be a natural streetcar route... the more you think about it, the more you realize that, no, light rail out Powell/Foster makes the most sense.
Why?
Two reasons:
1. Capacity
2. Development Potential
1. Combined, that corridor already produces enough capacity on its bus lines to overload a streetcar-only solution. Two-car MAX trains would be the only solution for upgrading transit. The 14-Hawthorne could make a little loop out of 50th, Foster and 52nd, and then turn back around and increase headways down Hawthorne Blvd. (Or, a streetcar could do the same thing, as a Hawthorne-only streetcar line would probably have the capacity handle Hawthorne-only loads.)
2. Development potential. Both Powell and Foster have a *lot* of underdeveloped land, including large parking lots, strip malls, etc., which would be ripe for redevelopment into TODs. Light Rail could be the catalyst to add some significant density to these neighborhoods, and in doing so, raise the general standard of living by bringing the customers to make more and higher-quality services (shops, etc.) available to the neighborhood populations.
If Tri-Met builds a light rail line out the Powell/Foster corridor, then a Hawthorne-only, or Hawthorne to 50th to 52nd & Foster streetcar line would probably work like a charm, and also be able to handle all of the capacity in a basically Hawthorne-only corridor.
And I think that Hawthorne still has some room to densify... that Safeway on Hawthorne could probably be redeveloped to add a couple hundred units, ala the Safeway downtown. Ditto for Freddys and most of the other businesses that currently still have surface parking. So, there might be a little bit of room for additional infill TOD around a Hawthorne streetcar alignment.
Wow. What a great proposal. And finally, it could be funded by a Multnomah-county-only referendum, which would most likely pass, as opposed to recent tri-county referendums or referendums involving Clark County, which have failed.
Three cheers for Tri-Met on the Powell/Foster LRT idea!
Wow!
This article was the first time I've seen a serious discussion of light rail in the Powell/Foster corridor. (Did I miss something?)
This corridor has been a subject of much debate, in the Portland blogosphere and elsewhere, for some time now. However, I think this is a good proposal. While at first blush, this would actually seem to be a natural streetcar route... the more you think about it, the more you realize that, no, light rail out Powell/Foster makes the most sense.
Why?
Two reasons:
1. Capacity
2. Development Potential
1. Combined, that corridor already produces enough capacity on its bus lines to overload a streetcar-only solution. Two-car MAX trains would be the only solution for upgrading transit. The 14-Hawthorne could make a little loop out of 50th, Foster and 52nd, and then turn back around and increase headways down Hawthorne Blvd. (Or, a streetcar could do the same thing, as a Hawthorne-only streetcar line would probably have the capacity handle Hawthorne-only loads.)
2. Development potential. Both Powell and Foster have a *lot* of underdeveloped land, including large parking lots, strip malls, etc., which would be ripe for redevelopment into TODs. Light Rail could be the catalyst to add some significant density to these neighborhoods, and in doing so, raise the general standard of living by bringing the customers to make more and higher-quality services (shops, etc.) available to the neighborhood populations.
If Tri-Met builds a light rail line out the Powell/Foster corridor, then a Hawthorne-only, or Hawthorne to 50th to 52nd & Foster streetcar line would probably work like a charm, and also be able to handle all of the capacity in a basically Hawthorne-only corridor.
And I think that Hawthorne still has some room to densify... that Safeway on Hawthorne could probably be redeveloped to add a couple hundred units, ala the Safeway downtown. Ditto for Freddys and most of the other businesses that currently still have surface parking. So, there might be a little bit of room for additional infill TOD around a Hawthorne streetcar alignment.
Wow. What a great proposal. And finally, it could be funded by a Multnomah-county-only referendum, which would most likely pass, as opposed to recent tri-county referendums or referendums involving Clark County, which have failed.
Three cheers for Tri-Met on the Powell/Foster LRT idea!
Monday, May 08, 2006
Beer, Pubs & Maps
I just knew, when I declared the coming year to be the Year of the Geographical Revolution, that there would be good things in store.
... and this is one of them. Yes, that's right, I've taken this Platial.com thing (itself a mashup between Google and, uh, I dunno, Tribe and Yelp) and used it to create an online, interactive Fabulous Map O' Beer, along with a companion site, the Fabulous Blog O' Beer.
So, what is it?
It's a way to let people in the Ecotopia region (the Pacific Northwest & Northern California get to know more about the wild bounty o' beer that we have available to us here on the West Coast. And talk about it. And offer critiques. Who has the best ESB? Seasonal Winter Ale? Dopplebock? You get the picture. :-)
Go check it out, and let me know watcha think!
cheers,
~Garlynn
... and this is one of them. Yes, that's right, I've taken this Platial.com thing (itself a mashup between Google and, uh, I dunno, Tribe and Yelp) and used it to create an online, interactive Fabulous Map O' Beer, along with a companion site, the Fabulous Blog O' Beer.
So, what is it?
It's a way to let people in the Ecotopia region (the Pacific Northwest & Northern California get to know more about the wild bounty o' beer that we have available to us here on the West Coast. And talk about it. And offer critiques. Who has the best ESB? Seasonal Winter Ale? Dopplebock? You get the picture. :-)
Go check it out, and let me know watcha think!
cheers,
~Garlynn
Wednesday, April 05, 2006
So, these were our ancestors?
A fossil of a "fishapod" has recently been discovered, according to the NY Times. This fossil represents the long-sought missing link, of a fish in the process of evolving from a sea-dwelling creature to a land animal. It looks a lot like a fish... but it's developing rudimentary arms, and it has a neck that allows its head to swivel.
This pretty much kills the creationist theory, and is seen by many to be solid proof that evolution, Darwin's proposal for how we got here, is no longer just a theory but is pretty much the best available explanation -- science fact, scientific doctrine, as it were.
Which means that ultimately, us humans evolved from these guys.
Wow.
Wonder what it must have been like, to be a fishapod? I wonder what proto-fishapod-me would have been like?
Original "Fishapod" story from the NY Times:
April 5, 2006
Scientists Call Fish Fossil the 'Missing Link'
By JOHN NOBLE WILFORD
Scientists have discovered fossils of a 375 million-year-old fish, a large scaly creature not seen before, that they say is a long-sought "missing link" in the evolution of some fishes from water to a life walking on four limbs on land.
In addition to confirming elements of a major transition in evolution, the fossils are widely seen by scientists as a powerful rebuttal to religious creationists, who hold a literal biblical view on the origins and development of life.
Several well-preserved skeletons of the fossil fish were uncovered in sediments of former stream beds in the Canadian Arctic, 600 miles from the North Pole, it is being reported on Thursday in the journal Nature. The skeletons have the fins and scales and other attributes of a giant fish, four to nine feet long.
But on closer examination, scientists found telling anatomical traits of a transitional creature, a fish that is still a fish but exhibiting changes that anticipate the emergence of land animals — a predecessor thus of amphibians, reptiles and dinosaurs, mammals and eventually humans.
The scientists described evidence in the forward fins of limbs in the making. There are the beginnings of digits, proto-wrists, elbows and shoulders. The fish also had a flat skull resembling a crocodile's, a neck, ribs and other parts that were similar to four-legged land animals known as tetrapods.
The discovering scientists called the fossils the most compelling examples yet of an animal that was at the cusp of the fish-tetrapod transition. The fish has been named Tiktaalik roseae, at the suggestion of elders of Canada's Nunavut Territory. Tiktaalik (pronounced tic-TAH-lick) means "large shallow water fish."
In two reports in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature, the science team led by Neil H. Shubin of the University of Chicago wrote, "The origin of limbs probably involved the elaboration and proliferation of features already present in the fins of fish such as Tiktaalik."
Dr. Shubin, an evolutionary biologist, let himself go in an interview. "It's a really amazing remarkable intermediate fossil — it's like, holy cow," he enthused.
Two other paleontologists, commenting on the find in a separate article in the journal, said that a few other transitional fish had been previously discovered from approximately the same Late Devonian time period, 385 million to 359 million years ago. But Tiktaalik is so clearly an intermediate "link between fishes and land vertebrates," they said, that it "might in time become as much an evolutionary icon as the proto-bird Archaeopteryx," which bridged the gap between reptiles, probably dinosaurs, and today's birds.
The writers, Erik Ahlberg of Uppsala University in Sweden and Jennifer A. Clack of the University of Cambridge in England, are often viewed as rivals to Dr. Shubin's team in the search for intermediate species in the evolution from fish to the first animals to colonize land.
In a statement by the Science Museum of London, where casts of the fossils will be on view, Dr. Clack said the fish "confirms everything we thought and also tells us about the order in which certain changes were made."
H. Richard Lane, director of paleobiology at the National Science Foundation, said in a statement, "These exciting discoveries are providing fossil 'Rosetta Stones' for a deeper understanding of this evolutionary milestone — fish to land-roaming tetrapods."
The science foundation and the National Geographic Society were among the financial supporters of the research. Besides Dr. Shubin, the principal discoverers were Edward B. Daeschler of the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia and Farish A. Jenkins Jr., a Harvard evolutionary biologist.
Michael J. Novacek, a paleontologist at the American Museum of Natural History in Manhattan, who was not involved in the research, said: "Based on what we already know, we have a very strong reason to think tetrapods evolved from lineages of fishes. This may be a critical phase in that transition that we haven't had before. A good fossil cuts through a lot of scientific argument."
While Dr. Shubin's team played down the fossil's significance in the raging debate over Darwinian theory, which is opposed mainly by some conservative Christians in the United States, other scientists were not so reticent. They said this should undercut the creationists' argument that there is no evidence in the fossil record of one kind of creature becoming another kind.
One creationist Web site (emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/evid1.htm) declares that "there are no transitional forms," adding: "For example, not a single fossil with part fins part feet has been found. And this is true between every major plant and animal kind."
Dr. Novacek responded in an interview: "We've got Archaeopteryx, an early whale that lived on land and now this animal showing the transition from fish to tetrapod. What more do we need from the fossil record to show that the creationists are flatly wrong?"
Dr. Shubin and Dr. Daeschler began their search on Ellsmere Island in 1999. They were attracted by a map in a geology textbook showing the region had an abundance of Devonian rocks exposed and relatively easy to explore. At that time, the land was part of a supercontinent straddling the equator and had a warm climate.
It was not until July 2004, Dr. Shubin said, that "we hit the jackpot." They found several of the fishes in a quarry, their skeletons largely intact and in three dimensions. The large skull had the sharp teeth of a predator. It was attached to a neck, which allowed the fish the unfishlike ability to swivel its head.
"Fish feeding in water readily orient the mouth toward food by maneuvering the entire body," said Dr. Jenkins, who assisted in the interpretation of the fossils. "The head is rigidly attacked to the trunk by bones linking the skull and shoulder girdle, and thus fish have no neck."
If the animal spent any time out of water, he said, it needed a true neck that allowed the head to move independently on the body.
Embedded in the pectoral fins were bones that compare to the upper arm, forearm and primitive parts of the hand of land-living animals. The scientists said the joints of the fins appeared to be capable of functioning for movement on land, a case of a fish improvising with its evolved anatomy. In all likelihood, they said, Tiktaalik flexed its proto-limbs primarily on the floor of streams and may have pulled itself up on the shore for brief stretches.
In their journal report, the scientists concluded that Tiktaalik is an intermediate between the fish Panderichthys, which lived 385 million years ago, and early tetrapods. The known early tetrapods are Acanthostega and Ichthyostega, about 365 million years ago.
Tiktaalik, Dr. Shubin said, is "both fish and tetrapod, which we sometimes call a fishapod."
This pretty much kills the creationist theory, and is seen by many to be solid proof that evolution, Darwin's proposal for how we got here, is no longer just a theory but is pretty much the best available explanation -- science fact, scientific doctrine, as it were.
Which means that ultimately, us humans evolved from these guys.
Wow.
Wonder what it must have been like, to be a fishapod? I wonder what proto-fishapod-me would have been like?
Original "Fishapod" story from the NY Times:
April 5, 2006
Scientists Call Fish Fossil the 'Missing Link'
By JOHN NOBLE WILFORD
Scientists have discovered fossils of a 375 million-year-old fish, a large scaly creature not seen before, that they say is a long-sought "missing link" in the evolution of some fishes from water to a life walking on four limbs on land.
In addition to confirming elements of a major transition in evolution, the fossils are widely seen by scientists as a powerful rebuttal to religious creationists, who hold a literal biblical view on the origins and development of life.
Several well-preserved skeletons of the fossil fish were uncovered in sediments of former stream beds in the Canadian Arctic, 600 miles from the North Pole, it is being reported on Thursday in the journal Nature. The skeletons have the fins and scales and other attributes of a giant fish, four to nine feet long.
But on closer examination, scientists found telling anatomical traits of a transitional creature, a fish that is still a fish but exhibiting changes that anticipate the emergence of land animals — a predecessor thus of amphibians, reptiles and dinosaurs, mammals and eventually humans.
The scientists described evidence in the forward fins of limbs in the making. There are the beginnings of digits, proto-wrists, elbows and shoulders. The fish also had a flat skull resembling a crocodile's, a neck, ribs and other parts that were similar to four-legged land animals known as tetrapods.
The discovering scientists called the fossils the most compelling examples yet of an animal that was at the cusp of the fish-tetrapod transition. The fish has been named Tiktaalik roseae, at the suggestion of elders of Canada's Nunavut Territory. Tiktaalik (pronounced tic-TAH-lick) means "large shallow water fish."
In two reports in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature, the science team led by Neil H. Shubin of the University of Chicago wrote, "The origin of limbs probably involved the elaboration and proliferation of features already present in the fins of fish such as Tiktaalik."
Dr. Shubin, an evolutionary biologist, let himself go in an interview. "It's a really amazing remarkable intermediate fossil — it's like, holy cow," he enthused.
Two other paleontologists, commenting on the find in a separate article in the journal, said that a few other transitional fish had been previously discovered from approximately the same Late Devonian time period, 385 million to 359 million years ago. But Tiktaalik is so clearly an intermediate "link between fishes and land vertebrates," they said, that it "might in time become as much an evolutionary icon as the proto-bird Archaeopteryx," which bridged the gap between reptiles, probably dinosaurs, and today's birds.
The writers, Erik Ahlberg of Uppsala University in Sweden and Jennifer A. Clack of the University of Cambridge in England, are often viewed as rivals to Dr. Shubin's team in the search for intermediate species in the evolution from fish to the first animals to colonize land.
In a statement by the Science Museum of London, where casts of the fossils will be on view, Dr. Clack said the fish "confirms everything we thought and also tells us about the order in which certain changes were made."
H. Richard Lane, director of paleobiology at the National Science Foundation, said in a statement, "These exciting discoveries are providing fossil 'Rosetta Stones' for a deeper understanding of this evolutionary milestone — fish to land-roaming tetrapods."
The science foundation and the National Geographic Society were among the financial supporters of the research. Besides Dr. Shubin, the principal discoverers were Edward B. Daeschler of the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia and Farish A. Jenkins Jr., a Harvard evolutionary biologist.
Michael J. Novacek, a paleontologist at the American Museum of Natural History in Manhattan, who was not involved in the research, said: "Based on what we already know, we have a very strong reason to think tetrapods evolved from lineages of fishes. This may be a critical phase in that transition that we haven't had before. A good fossil cuts through a lot of scientific argument."
While Dr. Shubin's team played down the fossil's significance in the raging debate over Darwinian theory, which is opposed mainly by some conservative Christians in the United States, other scientists were not so reticent. They said this should undercut the creationists' argument that there is no evidence in the fossil record of one kind of creature becoming another kind.
One creationist Web site (emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/evid1.htm) declares that "there are no transitional forms," adding: "For example, not a single fossil with part fins part feet has been found. And this is true between every major plant and animal kind."
Dr. Novacek responded in an interview: "We've got Archaeopteryx, an early whale that lived on land and now this animal showing the transition from fish to tetrapod. What more do we need from the fossil record to show that the creationists are flatly wrong?"
Dr. Shubin and Dr. Daeschler began their search on Ellsmere Island in 1999. They were attracted by a map in a geology textbook showing the region had an abundance of Devonian rocks exposed and relatively easy to explore. At that time, the land was part of a supercontinent straddling the equator and had a warm climate.
It was not until July 2004, Dr. Shubin said, that "we hit the jackpot." They found several of the fishes in a quarry, their skeletons largely intact and in three dimensions. The large skull had the sharp teeth of a predator. It was attached to a neck, which allowed the fish the unfishlike ability to swivel its head.
"Fish feeding in water readily orient the mouth toward food by maneuvering the entire body," said Dr. Jenkins, who assisted in the interpretation of the fossils. "The head is rigidly attacked to the trunk by bones linking the skull and shoulder girdle, and thus fish have no neck."
If the animal spent any time out of water, he said, it needed a true neck that allowed the head to move independently on the body.
Embedded in the pectoral fins were bones that compare to the upper arm, forearm and primitive parts of the hand of land-living animals. The scientists said the joints of the fins appeared to be capable of functioning for movement on land, a case of a fish improvising with its evolved anatomy. In all likelihood, they said, Tiktaalik flexed its proto-limbs primarily on the floor of streams and may have pulled itself up on the shore for brief stretches.
In their journal report, the scientists concluded that Tiktaalik is an intermediate between the fish Panderichthys, which lived 385 million years ago, and early tetrapods. The known early tetrapods are Acanthostega and Ichthyostega, about 365 million years ago.
Tiktaalik, Dr. Shubin said, is "both fish and tetrapod, which we sometimes call a fishapod."
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
The Portland Public School System
Students should definitely be considered the customers of the school system. Parents are the legal guardians of those customers, and along with local businesses and taxpayers in general, are the shareholders in the system.
Regarding the latest from the Portland Public School System: Merging all elementary and middle schools into a citywide network of K-8 schools actually sounds like a great proposal. I attended the Metropolitan Learning Center in NW Portland from 5th through 10th grade, and the presence of kids of all ages definitely made that school feel more like a family, it created more community, and it expanded the range of options available to all children (library, swimming pool, etc.) I understand why high schools need to generally be separate from K-8 -- that's the only way that the district can reasonably supply the foreign languages, science labs, etc. that high school students require.
However, I think that many high school students are, by the completion of the 10th grade, ready to begin working at the college level, and often those last two years of high school are sort of wasted, in terms of academic progress. I think Oregon needs to seriously consider making it more of a mainstream option for kids to go to college after the 10th grade, both by establishing early admission programs at some of the institutions of higher learning across the state (or starting a new institution, along the lines of the Evergreen State College, perhaps to be located in Astoria), and by making the option to leave high school after the 10th grade more generally available and acceptable within the high school environment. As in, if students perform at a high enough level (measure by their GPA, standardized testing and SAT scores, I imagine) while in grades 7-10, then they will have the option of going to college after grade 10 if they so choose.
Finally, when it comes to school consolidation... I sure hope the school district is using GIS, preferably ArcGIS with Network Analyst. Somebody needs to make a map of Portland, with all of its K-8 schools. They then need to plot quarter, half and one-mil walking distance buffers around each school. If the walking buffer of any school is completely overlapped by the buffers of the surrounding schools, then it might make sense to close it. However, if a school's buffer is not overlapped by any surrounding buffers, then under no circumstances should it be closed! This would do WONDERS for easing parents concerns, easing traffic congestion due to parents driving kids to school, and empowering students to walk and ride their bicycles to their neighborhood school!
OK, I think that's it for now.
Regarding the latest from the Portland Public School System: Merging all elementary and middle schools into a citywide network of K-8 schools actually sounds like a great proposal. I attended the Metropolitan Learning Center in NW Portland from 5th through 10th grade, and the presence of kids of all ages definitely made that school feel more like a family, it created more community, and it expanded the range of options available to all children (library, swimming pool, etc.) I understand why high schools need to generally be separate from K-8 -- that's the only way that the district can reasonably supply the foreign languages, science labs, etc. that high school students require.
However, I think that many high school students are, by the completion of the 10th grade, ready to begin working at the college level, and often those last two years of high school are sort of wasted, in terms of academic progress. I think Oregon needs to seriously consider making it more of a mainstream option for kids to go to college after the 10th grade, both by establishing early admission programs at some of the institutions of higher learning across the state (or starting a new institution, along the lines of the Evergreen State College, perhaps to be located in Astoria), and by making the option to leave high school after the 10th grade more generally available and acceptable within the high school environment. As in, if students perform at a high enough level (measure by their GPA, standardized testing and SAT scores, I imagine) while in grades 7-10, then they will have the option of going to college after grade 10 if they so choose.
Finally, when it comes to school consolidation... I sure hope the school district is using GIS, preferably ArcGIS with Network Analyst. Somebody needs to make a map of Portland, with all of its K-8 schools. They then need to plot quarter, half and one-mil walking distance buffers around each school. If the walking buffer of any school is completely overlapped by the buffers of the surrounding schools, then it might make sense to close it. However, if a school's buffer is not overlapped by any surrounding buffers, then under no circumstances should it be closed! This would do WONDERS for easing parents concerns, easing traffic congestion due to parents driving kids to school, and empowering students to walk and ride their bicycles to their neighborhood school!
OK, I think that's it for now.
Wednesday, March 22, 2006
A Regional DMU Network for Portland, OR & Vancouver, WA
OK, so I've got another proposal for the Columbia River Crossing:
A regional commuter rail network, based initially on DMU technology. The relevant two links would be Vancouver to Washington County, and Vancouver to Downtown Portland.
This would not replace light rail, but rather supplement it.
Gee, I must be a DMU fan, this is the second time in as many weeks that I've brought up the topic.
The Vancouver to Washington County connection would utilize abandoned rail ROW that runs from near the west end of the St. Johns Bridge to the Beaverton/Hillsboro area, and would require extension track, bed and trestle reconstruction. I bet that DMU passenger service between Washington County and Clark County could be initiated for a fraction of the cost of a new freeway, and if everybody is right about the volume of traffic between those two points, it would do quite well.
Of course, there is the matter of the spectacular railroad trestle that burned to the ground about a decade ago, which would need to be re-built along with much of the rest of this line (if, in fact, any of the rails/trestles/tunnels are still serviceable). However, the fact that the ROW exists already should still bring the cost of implementing a new service in this corridor way down.
Perhaps DMU service could be implemented before light rail service; in this scenario, the Portland to Vancouver run might ultimately be replaced by light rail into downtown Vancouver... or it might remain as a more expensive (fare-wise) express service.
It would be interesting to determine if a stop near St. Johns might be possible for both of these services, as the only interim stop between Portland and Vancouver.
Longer-term, this basic network could add routes to Columbia County (St. Helens & Scapoose), to McMinnville, and out the Gorge to Hood River & The Dalles.
The era of building freeways in Oregon is over. We now need to think of better ways to get people around, for less money and less damage to the natural landscape. Putting old railways back to use to serve new markets is an example of the type of innovative thinking that will cause Oregon to emerge as a leader in the 21st century.
A regional commuter rail network, based initially on DMU technology. The relevant two links would be Vancouver to Washington County, and Vancouver to Downtown Portland.
This would not replace light rail, but rather supplement it.
Gee, I must be a DMU fan, this is the second time in as many weeks that I've brought up the topic.
The Vancouver to Washington County connection would utilize abandoned rail ROW that runs from near the west end of the St. Johns Bridge to the Beaverton/Hillsboro area, and would require extension track, bed and trestle reconstruction. I bet that DMU passenger service between Washington County and Clark County could be initiated for a fraction of the cost of a new freeway, and if everybody is right about the volume of traffic between those two points, it would do quite well.
Of course, there is the matter of the spectacular railroad trestle that burned to the ground about a decade ago, which would need to be re-built along with much of the rest of this line (if, in fact, any of the rails/trestles/tunnels are still serviceable). However, the fact that the ROW exists already should still bring the cost of implementing a new service in this corridor way down.
Perhaps DMU service could be implemented before light rail service; in this scenario, the Portland to Vancouver run might ultimately be replaced by light rail into downtown Vancouver... or it might remain as a more expensive (fare-wise) express service.
It would be interesting to determine if a stop near St. Johns might be possible for both of these services, as the only interim stop between Portland and Vancouver.
Longer-term, this basic network could add routes to Columbia County (St. Helens & Scapoose), to McMinnville, and out the Gorge to Hood River & The Dalles.
The era of building freeways in Oregon is over. We now need to think of better ways to get people around, for less money and less damage to the natural landscape. Putting old railways back to use to serve new markets is an example of the type of innovative thinking that will cause Oregon to emerge as a leader in the 21st century.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
