Marilyn Dunstan

Emperor Penguin Chick

2012-01-19T13:58:00.001-08:00

Emperor Penguin Chick, originally uploaded by Marilyn Dunstan Photography.

With the snow and ice storm in the Pacific Northwest I thought it appropriate to post this photo of an emperor penguin chick on ice in Snow Hill Island, Antarctic Peninsula, Antarctica. To those in the Pacific Northwest dealing with the ice storm, be careful and stay safe.

01-19-2012

Mt Rainier, Mt Rainier National Park, Washington

2011-11-19T21:01:00.001-08:00

Mt Rainier, Mt Rainier National Park, Washington, originally uploaded by Marilyn Dunstan Photography.

Photo of Mt Rainier, Washington, taken as traffic was stopped for seasonal road maintenance.

President Obama’s Departure from Seattle, September 25, 2011

2011-09-27T12:56:00.002-07:00

President Obama’s Motorcade Approaches, Seattle, Washington (image on Flickr)

President Obama visited Seattle, Washington on September 25, 2011, making a number of campaign stops, covered by here by PBS, here by The Daily Beast as “The New Obama” and here by the Seattle Times.

As our President passed by in his motorcade, I wondered at length and extravagance of campaigning, of the time spent by all parties, the Democrat President and his opponents in the Republican party. On the one hand, campaigning is a test of endurance and wills where the contender must consistently outperform opponents to prove him or herself. On the other hand, campaigning carries a heavy cost. A cost measured in campaign contributions and the expenses of campaigning. An opportunity cost as time spent campaigning is time not spent elsewhere. A cost measured in obstruction, as the party not in office sees no benefit in compromise.

President Obama Waving, Seattle, Washington, September 25, 2011 (Image on Photoshelter)

President Obama waved as he passed by, leaving Seattle, and on his way to more campaign stops in California. Campaigning, speaking the message, bringing in campaign contributions, a little over a year out from the election.

One could hardly fault President Obama for his new campaign tone. It has become increasingly clear that a group of Tea Party conservatives has frightened the broader Republican Party to the point that our American system of compromise has broken down. The resulting stasis has meant a government lurching from crisis to crisis. Obstructionism is no way to move a nation forward.

Surely there must be a better way.

Reform the campaign system.

The political process is getting in the way of governance.

There is a balance of risks involved.

Air Force One Leaving Seattle, Washington, September 25, 2011 (Image on Photoshelter)

Tenth Anniversary, September 11, 2001 Attacks

2011-09-11T11:27:00.001-07:00

September 11, 2001 Damage, World Trade Center, New York, NY, December, 2001 (image on Photoshelter)

It is difficult to believe that ten years has passed since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers; the attack at the Pentagon and the heroic action by the passengers of United Flight 93 in bringing down the hijacked jet before it could reach its target in Washington D.C. Almost three thousand lives were lost in the attacks.

So much has happened in the time frame since the attacks, including the war on terrorism instigated by President Bush in the aftermath of the attacks, and a continuation of the fight by President Obama.

Importantly, Osama Bin Laden, whose Al Qaeda organization was responsible for the attacks, was killed in Abbottabad, Pakistan, in a U.S. C.I.A. raid conducted by special forces, including the Navy Seals unit that killed Bin Laden. Bin Laden’s death provides a sense of justice for the horrific damage his organization has done; however, importantly, it also stopped his ability to conduct more attacks. His death, however, may provide the weakened Al Qaeda organization he leaves behind with motivation for future attacks.

These events string themselves along the arrow of time as particularly significant and memorable. They take their place in the hall of memories amongst the family gatherings, the company picnics, the morning rush hour, the vacations and the hometown football victories and vigorously drown them out. We will always remember where we were when the September 11, 2001 attacks were launched. We will remember what we were doing when Osama Bin Laden was killed. These events are etched in our memories and will march down the hallway of time with us as we age and relate this history to the younger generation.

We will remember those who lost their lives. Our hearts go out to them and the families they left behind. We stand behind our government in its efforts to bring Al Qaeda to justice and we applaud the raid against Osama Bin Laden that resulted in his death.

This tragic event has had an impact upon all of us that will be with us the rest of our lives.

September 11 Memorial, Lower Manhattan, NYC, December, 2001 (image on Photoshelter)

While a sense of time may give us pause to consider past events there is no place that shows the impact of time more than its impact on the health of first responders and others in the World Trade Center area who were exposed to the dust from the attack.

New York City Fireman and Police Vehicle, Lower Manhattan, NYC, December, 2001 (image on Photoshelter)

For those exposed to the World Trade Center’s dust, time is not simply a memory of the event; it represents the impact of inhaled noxious pollutants, marching in physiological time within the body, damaging bodily systems. A witches brew of toxic substances contained in the dust has triggered a variety of dangerous health effects. It is clear that as time marches on, the toxic aftermath of September 11, 2001 still impacts first reponders.,

There is a World Trade Center Health Registry for people that lived, worked and went to school in the World Trade Center area.

Legislation has been passed to provide compensation to first responders, however it does not currently cover cancer, as discussed in CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta’s coverage of the dust impacts of September 11 attacks.

The impacts of the the World Trade Center attacks will more fully emerge as time unfolds and the effects of dust, particles, toxic and alkaline substances play out on the people affected.

Standard and Poor’s Downgrade of the United States Long Term Sovereign Credit Rating from AAA to AA+

2011-08-22T14:22:00.004-07:00

American Eagle on Perch, Skagit Valley, Washington (image on Photoshelter)

Rating agencies, including Standard and Poor’s, Moody’s and Fitch, use different, proprietary models to rate debt and financial strength. While there may be no such thing as a perfect model, each company promotes its own model and methodology. Rating agencies serve a purpose in providing the marketplace with information on the financial health of the companies, governments and financial instruments they rate.

Taking into account differences in models (and agency inclinations), it is not surprising that rating agencies should differ in their ratings from time to time. Thus, Standard and Poor’s downgraded the United States credit rating from AAA to AA+ while Moody’s and Fitch have maintained their ratings while warning that future downgrades were possible if the United States did not enact debt reduction measures and if the economy weakened.

A more definitive statement would have been made if all three major rating agencies had dropped the rating of United States debt.

Standard and Poor’s rating change reflects their perception of the political stasis leading up to the recent move to raise the debt limit.

The Standard and Poor’s downgrade remained in place after a $2 trillion dollar error in their calculations was discovered by the Treasury department. Standard and Poor’s defended their decision, reinforcing the perception that the downgrade reflected to a large degree the inability of our government to get the job done.

Standard and Poor’s is under attack for their rating of mortgage backed securities involved in the financial debacle of 2008. These securities were rated AAA just prior to their default. The U.S. Justice Department is investigating Standard and Poor’s for their ratings of these instruments.

The ratings process is complex. Complex models are involved. When the ratings model indicates problem areas indicating a potential downgrade a number of paths may be taken. A rating agency may work with the organization to solve its problems (or to assure the model is adequately capturing an organization’s weaknesses and strengths). Either way, the focus is to assure capital adequacy.

This may give the organization an opportunity to avoid a downgrade while fixing the problem and risk a potential disastrous cascade into insolvency. There is a balance of risks -- a cascading failure could be a far worse alternative both for the organization , related entities and the economy. However, measures taken to solve the underlying problems should be appropriate, rather than window dressing which overvalues assets or undervalues liabilities.

If the agency does not downgrade an organization (or financial instrument), they risk a potential hit to their reputation if the entity does tank while holding the original, pristine rating.

In many instances companies pay a significant fee to be rated. This raises the issue that the agencies are serving the companies they rate rather than the overall public (or potential investors). This issue is to some degree offset by the reputation issue that rating agencies face when they fail to downgrade a company (or financial instrument ) that fails. Their services are judged by their ability to accurately rate entities.

The actual downgrade aside, Standard and Poor’s was correct in its appraisal of the ineffectiveness of our government in addressing the national debt issues. Standard and Poor’s mentioned the political brinksmanship, differences between political parties, and the failure to consider tax increases among other issues.

The sad thing is that our elected representatives performed so horribly that it gave Standard and Poor’s an opportunity to downgrade government debt from AAA for the first time in the history of the United States. There are many that depend on the United States to provide a stable financial milieu; the threat of a default; the inability of some representatives to compromise was an arrogant abrogation of their electoral duty to act in the best interest of the United States.

It seem that the rating agencies are, in a way, a force unto themselves that rest above governments and pass judgement upon them. Do we really want the institution of money to rule us in this way?

Wikipedia article on 2011 downgrade.

Entitlements

2011-07-26T16:25:00.002-07:00

Entitlements

Completing the George Washington Memorial Bridge (Aurora Bridge-SR99), Seattle, Washington, 1932 (B&W)

This photo of the George Washington Memorial Bridge (Aurora Bridge or SR 99) was taken by my father as it was being completed in 1932, during the period of the Great Depression. It was converted to black and white. Connecting Seattle’s Queen Anne Hill to Fremont, spanning over the Lake Washington Ship Canal, the Bridge’s construction was an engineering accomplishment in the midst of hard times.

A bridge spans an obstacle to bring two areas together, to allow passage. It may be used symbolically in others areas such as a music bridge, an interlude that connects two parts of a song, or a bridge loan (interim financing).

For me, it also symbolizes bridging the gap between work and retirement.

In these days before the August 2, 2011 deadline to raise the national debt limit, it also symbolizes the need to bridge the gap between parties, to compromise on a solution to our national debt problem. Should that attempt fail, it will symbolize solutions to solve the financial gap.

As we march towards a potential default of the national debt, a large part of the debate centers around the impact that entitlements have on our nation’s expenditures. Entitlements consist of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Entitlements have grown to comprise a large portion of our nation’s expenditures and contributions to our nation’s burgeoning national debt.

Social Security comprised 20% of the nation’s 2010 fiscal year budget while Medicaid and Medicare together comprised 23% (Wikipedia). Together, the three programs comprised 43% of the nation’s 2010 fiscal budget. Moreover, the cost of these three programs are expected to grow over the coming years.

With such a considerable portion of our nation’s budget tied up in entitlement programs, it is difficult to find areas to cut. If you leave entitlements alone, you are left with 57% of the budget. If military expenses (20%) are left untouched, only 37% of the budget is left to work with.

Historically, the concept of cutting Social Security has been likened politically to touching the electrified “third rail”. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid have a storied history and a large degree of public need and acceptance (and entitlement) that makes them difficult to reduce.

There has been a greater willingness to tackle the issue of entitlement programs in the recent national debt talks; however such endeavors may leave a sense of disconnect with the public who may be unaware of the cuts should they actually occur.

There are many factors reflected in the increases in entitlement costs (and their projected costs into future years). One common factor is demographics.

Demographics

Baby boomer demographics is a major reason for the increase in entitlement costs now and into the future. Baby boomers are considered to be those individuals born between 1946 and 1964, following World War II. There was a peak in births during that time period that has resulted in increased proportions of individuals for that cohort as the cohort has progressively moved down the arrow of time from birth to retirement.

Consider a snake that has swallowed a mouse for dinner; you can see the progress in the snake’s digestion of the mouse as the mouse’s shape progresses down the long sleek lines of the snake’s body. In a demographic diagram, the baby boomer population exhibits somewhat similar characteristics, impacting each age group disproportionately as it ages.

Thus, the increased birth rate during the baby boomer years results in increased expenses as baby boomers age. These increased older populations will stress entitlement programs, with fewer younger workers to provide the population base to pay for benefits for the older population.

The Challenge

The projected growth in entitlement spending represents a real challenge, and must be faced by creative solutions that address the problem for not just the immediate future, but for the long term. Such solutions must address needed social needs while at the same time managing costs.

Political Risk

2011-07-18T18:00:00.001-07:00

Mt St Helens crater and Toutle River, Cascade Range, Washington, 2011 (image on Photoshelter)

Discussions between Congress and the White House regarding raising the National Debt Limit are an example of the considerable political risks in our current system. My concern is that failure to agree on a solution to raise the debt limit may cascade into financial disaster. It is a balance-of-risks issue that our leaders will ultimately be judged on.

Political risk issues include:

The polarization of political parties such that the more extreme elements dominate each party, and become nominated for office, crowding out the moderates.

The emergence of non-elected individuals ‘asking’ that candidates sign ‘pledges’ which politically tie candidates to certain positions, limiting their flexibility to act.

The inability of politicians to act in the interest of the nation.

Politicians need to be able to consider the best interest of the nation as a whole. Their inability to do so jeopardizes our nation. The clear and present danger is that the United States will default on its debt on August 3, 2011 if the national debt limit is not raised by that time.

Should the United States default on its debt, there would be serious ramifications. Ratings agencies have already given warnings regarding our debt rating. In this July 14, 2011 Bloomberg story, Moody’s placed the United States’s Credit rating under review for a downgrade. In this July 16, 2011 LA Times article, Standard and Poor’s has also warned that they may cut the United States’s top AAA debt rating as a result of the lack of an agreement to raise the debt limit.

In an article in Reuters 7/18/2011, Moody’s stated that the United States should “eliminate its statutory limit on government debt to reduce uncertainty among bond holders”.

A decrease in the United States’s ratings by rating agencies would likely result in an increase in the interest rate that our country pays on our debt. This would increase the cost of financing the United States debt and also have reverberations throughout the marketplace, driving up interest rates generally. Failure to raise the debt limit could conceivably cascade into a financial catastrophe.

The seriousness of what could be a cascading financial disaster is brought home by an article in the Insurance Journal: S&P Threatens Downgrade of Insurers, Financial Firms Over Debt Ceiling” indicating that S&P could downgrade a number of financial institutions should the government fail to act to raise the debt limit.

Currently, Treasuries are regarded as “risk-free” currencies. Should our Government’s rating be downgraded they and other government securities may well be assessed higher capital charges in regulatory and rating agency models. The securities would included various securities including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the latter two key to the mortgage market. Increased capital charges may potentially result in financial institutions being downgraded by rating agencies. If a financial institution is so downgraded as a result of the government failing to act on the national debt, it could trigger other events. “Ratings triggers” in the financial institution’s policies could be triggered, allowing a large withdrawal of policyholder funds from large investors, perhaps at book value,

An increase in the interest rate would have impact in the marketplace, in valuation of assets, in home and auto loans and refinancings. It would alter institutional and personal behavior. Depending on the size of the interest rate increase, an increase in rate could impact stable value funds that promise payout at book value. Importantly, it would cost more to finance the United States debt with a higher interest rate.

Treasuries have been long regarded as ‘safe’ and it is be “interesting” to speculate how changes in their quality rating would reverberate throughout the financial marketplace in the event the U.S. government fails to raise the debt limit by August 3, 2011.

President Obama does not want to “kick the can down the road” instead preferring a longer term solution to the problem that includes spending cuts and revenue increases. The Republicans do not want to consider revenue increases. Some have signed a pledge not to increase taxes and are constrained by that.

The danger is that the United States will default on its debt on August 3, 2011 if it does not raise the debt limit.

We have an examples in history where one small thing cascaded into a major calamity. One event that comes to mind is the Great Seattle Fire of 1889 where glue boiling over into a gasoline fire ignited wood chips and eventually burned down 32 blocks of Seattle, including business district, wharves and railroad terminals.

Do we want our government leaders shackled by the bounds of rigid ideology, watching the debt limit “glue pot” boil over into the “incendiary” market of interest and credit risk, cascading into a market conflagration that “burns” many in our economy?

I would hope our leaders get wise and come to an agreement that will avert disaster in our financial markets. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe these risks won’t materialize or will do so to a minor extent. However it is uncharted waters and do you want to bet the farm that the serious risk will not materialize? President Obama needs to consider a short term deal that gets us over this deadline. The Republicans need to consider raising taxes, even if it means violating a pledge not to raise taxes.

In 2012 the voters will hold our leaders accountable if they watched the pot boil over into the flames and cascade into disaster when they could have come to agreement.

It is an issue of balance-of-risks. The risks of watching the debt pot boil over and cascade into a financial conflagration over over some ideological shackles are just not worth it.

Nuclear Balance-of-Risks

2011-07-16T18:19:00.001-07:00

Trojan Nuclear Power Plant Cooling Tower, Rainier Oregon (before being dismantled) - image on Alamy

Nuclear reactor technology has allowed the world-wide use of nuclear reactors for energy production. With the world faced with mounting carbon dioxide levels and global warming a concern, nuclear energy provides a low carbon emission alternative to traditional energy sources (World Nuclear Association and MIT study). This aspect of nuclear energy makes it a very attractive energy alternative. With President Obama wishing to expand the United States nuclear power plant program, the question becomes an issue of balance-of-risks.

Accelerating nuclear reactor development provides a low carbon emission energy source; however there is risk associated with the use of nuclear materials. If we do not take advantage of nuclear’s low carbon footprint and instead pursue other, higher carbon footprint strategies, we risk exacerbating global warming issues. There are other options, as well, such as cleaner technologies, emerging energy technologies and reducing fertility rates to decrease population size.

We seek to understand the low probability, high impact, long-tail risks associated with the use of nuclear materials. Since the dawning of the nuclear age, mankind has worked to harness the power of the atom. There have been many benefits from the use of radionuclides. However, there are risks as well.

Risk areas to consider in looking at nuclear energy include:

Economic, including Externalities
Design and Construction
Natural Disasters
Operations and Management
Political and Regulatory
Terrorism, War and Sabotage
Radioactive Waste Treatment and Storage

We have had experience with nuclear accidents that display some of that high impact, long-tail risk. Previous blog articles have discussed Chernobyl, Three Mile Island and Fukushima (3/12/11, 3/25/11 and 3/28/11).

We have seen historical flooding on the Missouri River which threatened Fort Calhoun Nuclear Plant and Cooper Nuclear Plant in Nebraska. Recently we have seen the large Las Conchas Wildfire threaten the Los Alamos Energy Department facility in New Mexico.

These situations, including those situations where facilities were threatened but not breached, are all reminders that radiation is a serious risk and not simply an abstract probability.

Externalities

2011-07-06T09:38:00.003-07:00

Externalities

Refinery Exhaust Stacks, Anacortes, Washington (image on Photoshelter)

Air pollution from a fixed stack is a good example that can be used to explain the concept of an externality. I discussed the externalities previously in a blog article (Risk and Externalities) in the context of the BP oil spill and its widespread impact in the Gulf of Mexico.

On the production side, externalities come into play when the full cost of production is not reflected in the cost of the good.

Air pollution emissions may contain various pollutants, gaseous and particulate matter. The area impacted and the degree of impact will be affected by the pollutants released and the meteorological conditions.

For example, a temperature inversion will keep cold air close to the surface under a layer of warm air so that the air does not mix well vertically. The pollutants will be kept closer to the surface and their impact will be greater.

Sulfur dioxide emissions may impact lakes and fish (as acid rain), and thus ecosystems. Sulfur dioxide is a harmful pollutant for humans as well as fish. Sulfur dioxide can adhere to airborne suspended particulate matter. If the particulate matter is small, this may ease entry into the lung where the sulfur dioxide can do greater harm.

Air pollution is a direct result of the manufacturing process that extends from the stack into the community and beyond. It’s impact results in costs to others. Thus there are costs associated with air pollution that are not included in the production costs. To the extent that this is true, the product produced is under priced, and the public, an external entity, is paying those additional costs.

Costs include medical costs, as well as reduced life expectancy due to the pollution. Air pollution, in addition to being unhealthy, reduces visibility, may add odor, and adds quality of life issues. Pollution impacts maintenance of buildings and other structures.

Determing costs attributable to air pollution is a complex problem. There have been studies done to ascertain such costs. For example, a RAND study looked at health costs in California attributable to air pollution above state standards. That study would reflect air pollution due to a variety of causes, not just the point sources discussed in this blog article. California has a great deal of automobile pollution which contributes to carbon monoxide and ozone pollution problems.

Monitoring and regulation of air pollutants requires resources as well. Air pollution regulation and monitoring exists at the federal, state and local levels.

To reiterate, the producer’s price does not reflect these costs. Thus the price of the good is under priced with respect to other options because it does not include the cost of these “external” costs which others must bear.

When full external costs are brought into the mix, the producer’s price must necessarily increase. As it increases, other competing options may become more attractive and the producer may lose business. Alternatively, the producer may choose to upgrade the method of production to reduce the pollution, a cost they may not be willing to take if full external costs were included.

Air pollution is one example of an externality.

The situation becomes more complicated where the risk matrix considers low probability, high risk events. Such events may be difficult to estimate and to price for. Even assuming these low probability, high risk events could be reasonably priced for, it may be impossible for the producer to compete with prices reflecting such a risk margin. Competitors in the same field may refuse to include such a risk margin, thus driving the producer out of business. Competitors in other fields without such a risk margin will be at an advantage.

Where the risk margin for the low probability, high impact event is not priced for and is not included in the pricing there is the potential for considerable externality impacts should the low probability high impact risk event materialize.

As previous nuclear disasters have shown, the low probability, high risk event presents considerable externality issues in the nuclear arena, considering the serious impacts of radiation. (See my blog articles, Chernobyl 25th Anniversary and Energy Choices and Risk).

Mt Rainier - Balance of Risks

2011-07-01T15:07:00.002-07:00

Mt Rainier and Puget Sound Vessel Traffic, Seattle, Washington (on Photoshelter)

Low probability - high impact events present difficulties in weighing the balance of risks in such events. There may be an intellectual understanding that the risk exists and what its consequences are. However, how that intellectual understanding is translated into that marriage of sense and intellect that informs the weighing of risks, is problematic when the high impact event happens so rarely in our experience. Experience, after all, guides our reactions and decision-making in the face of risk. We experience intellectually and emotionally, and this informs future choices. We are guided by instinctual underpinnings that alert us to danger.

When we weigh the balance of risks we look at how to mitigate the low probability - high impact event. This includes identifying the risks and probabilities, assessing how to prevent them if possible and how to mitigate the impacts should they occur. What is the cost of dealing with the risk versus the impacts of ignoring them as if they could never occur in our lifetimes, putting our heads in the sand and tempting to fate?

Studies that the United States Geological Survey (USGS) have done regarding the various risks associated with Mt Rainier are an example of risk assessment. These studies outline probabilities of various classes or sizes of volcanic events occurring.

In recent blog articles, Mt St Helens 31st Anniversary of May 18, 1980 Eruption and

Mt St Helens and other Cascade Volcanoes I discussed the impact of the Mt St Helens 1980 volcanic eruption and potential volcanic hazards in the Cascade volcanoes.

Risks of volcanic hazards have been closely studied on Mt Rainier and are discussed in the USGS report on “Volcano Hazards From Mount Rainier, Washington”, 1995. Mt Rainier’s proximity to major population centers, and it’s size, with a summit at 14,410 feet, mean that Mt Rainier presents an important risk, both in the scale of a potential geological event and potential population impact. Mt Rainier is 54 miles southeast of Seattle and 37 miles east of Tacoma..

The USGS examines each of the volcanic risks in detail. It discusses risks from tephra (volcanic gas/rock ejecta), ballistic projectiles, pyroclastic flow and surges, lava flows, volcanic gasses, debris avalanches and lahars, lateral blasts and glacial outburst floods. All of these are impressive risks. My previous post on Mt St Helens and other Cascade Volcanoes points to excellent USGS material on these topics.

What impressed me most about the Vocanco Hazards From Mount Rainier, Washington (USGS) was the information regarding hazards from debris avalanches, debris flows and lahars. The report states:

“Circumstances conducive to future debris avalanches and debris flows—substantial volumes
of hydrothermally altered rock, substantial topographic relief, great volumes of ice, and the
potential for renewed volcanism—are all present at Mount Rainier. Thus, debris flows are a greater threat to communities down valley from Mount Rainier than any other volcanic phenomenon.” “Volcano Hazards From Mount Rainier, Washington”, (USGS)

Debris avalanches, flows and lahars can arise from weakened mountain rock that has been hydrothermally altered by the action of acidic volcanic gases below the surface to a clay substance that undermines the structure of the mountain, leaving it susceptible to failure. The USGS report, explains this as: “Like a house infested with termites, the affected part of the volcano eventually becomes so weak that it collapses under its own weight, and generates a debris avalanche”

These type of debris flows, containing high quantities of water and hydrothermally altered material are called “cohesive” debris flows.

What I found particularly interesting was that debris avalanches and flows can occur without the type of warning that is typically available when a mountain begins eruptive activity. This may happen if the debris avalanche is due to causes not related to magma movement within the mountain. Weakening in the mountain structure due to underlying hydrothermally altered rock, or, a steepening in mountain slope walls with attendant loss of stability due to glacial erosion (USGS report) can increase the risk of debris avalanche. The historical retreat of glaciers has let mountain sides steepen as the glacier retreats.

The Osceola Mudflow, 5600 years ago, was a cohesive debris flow and the largest debris flow in the last 10,000 years. The flow reached Commencement Bay. The National Lahar, about 1200 years ago flowed all the way to Puget Sound, inundating the Nisqually River.

Nisqually Tideflats and Boardwalk, Nisqually Wildlife Refuge, Olympia, Washington (on Flickr)

The USGS has grouped debris flows into categories according to severity. Class M, the greatest, applies to the Osceola mudflow. This category occurs too infrequently to allow the USGS to assess an annual probability. The USGS Map Insert Low Probability High Consequence Events shows the extent that would be covered by a class M event.

The USGS Map Volcano Hazards From Mount Rainier similarly displays flows expected from Class I, II and III events. An example of a Class I event is the Electron Mudflow which reached the Puget Sound lowlands. According to the USGS, Category I occurs on average 500 to 1,000 years (over a 5,600 year period) with an annual probability of .1 to .2 percent. Class II occurs on average 100 to 500 years tending towards the lower end of the range with an annual probability of 1 percent. The USGS puts this more in the realm of a engineering categorization of a “100 year flood” in it’s paper. Class III debris flows are more common.

Kautz Creek, Mt Ranier National Park, Washington, March 2008 (on Photoshelter)

The Kautz Creek Debris Flow of October 2-3, 1947 was an intermediate size debris flow of class II. It was the largest debris flow since the park was established. It is thought to have been triggered by heavy rains that triggered an outburst flood from Kautz Glacier. The photo shows Kautz Creek in snow, with the water coloring reflecting the iron deposits and geothermal activity of Mt Rainier.

Tahoma Creek on a Foggy Morning, Mt Rainier National Park, Washington, June 2011 (on Photoshelterl)

Debris flows occur along Tahoma Creek. These debris flows may impact a bridge near the park entry, thus requiring dredging and other maintenance.

Mt Rainier has displayed some powerful rock and snow avalanche activity in recent days. An article and photographs in the Seattle Times portray this powerful activity.

Mt Rainier “speaks to us”. We cannot simply consider our environment an inanimate actor upon which we act; indeed our environment may present us with challenges that tax our abilities just at the moment when we are most complacent.

I can recall being on the Emmons Glacier with a group when it was 90 degrees in Seattle; suddenly boulders were rolling down the moraine and we soon (carefully) crab-like scurried down the moraine. A wonder that a glacier would want to melt in the heat, but apparently it does just that.

Debris flows often have their origin in heavy rains and hot temperatures.

So the challenge is to internalize the risks in a fashion that doesn’t over exaggerate the low probability high impact event, yet at the same time seeks to mitigate the associated risks with all risk classes. This involves enjoying Mt Rainier in its many splendors while at the same time understanding its risks, even those that may at time seem remote.

Mt St Helens and other Cascade Volcanoes

2011-06-11T22:08:00.001-07:00

Mt St Helens Crater shrouded by clouds, May 16, 2011 (Image on Photoshelter)

In a recent blog article on Mt St Helen’s 31st anniversary, I discussed a visit to the Mt St Helens National Volcanic Monument and displayed some images of earlier 2006 volcanic steam activity.

Today, in 2011, Mt St Helens today is relatively peaceful. The U.S.G.S. Cascade Volcano Observatory has assigned it a “normal” rating (since July 2008) reflecting its relative quiet. The explosive eruption (and buildup) of May 18, 1980 is far behind us, and the volcano has left some distance between the eruptions of 2004-8 and today. The image shows clouds dancing across the crater, not steam of volcanic origin.

Indications are that Mt St Helens will continue its eruptive activity and is likely to erupt again in this century. (Mt St Helens - A 30 Year Legacy of Volcansim - EOS-AGU). This is based on its age and past history.

In my last article, “Calculating Odds and Probabilities” I discussed the assessment of various odds and probabilities ranging from coin tosses to weather forecasting. It is clear that some predictions are relatively straightforward and others are incredibly complex.

The events, risks and probabilities associated with volcanic hazards present a great challenge because of the wide ranging risks, the variability of impacts and the low probabilities of occurrence associated with very high impact events.

Mt St Helens showed us in 1980 that a low probability, high impact event can happen in our lifetime and region (Washington State). While Mt St Helens is the most active of Cascade Volcanoes, the other Cascade Volcanoes are also of interest.

The USGS provides an interactive map of the Cascade Volcanoes from Washington to Northern California. The summary provides a broad overview picturing the scope of Cascade Volcanoes throughout the region. The map/page provides links to each of the Cascade Volcano “Visit a Volcano Site” providing a photo and information for each volcano.

The difficulty in assessing the risk associated with an event, whether it is meteorological or seismic, is in assessing the probability that it will occur, the severity of the event should it occur, and the impact on the population.

The USGS has done a great deal of work in identifying hazards for the Cascade volcanoes. The Mount St Helens eruption, and other volcanic eruptions have allowed geologists to gain a great deal of information regarding volcanic hazards, and develop advanced monitoring technologies to allow them to better manage volcanic risk.

A USGS Fact Sheet (What are Volcano Hazards?) describes Volcano hazards, both in text and with a graphic that displays the hazards on a simplified Cascade volcano.

The hazards shown in the Fact Sheet include hazards that we saw with the 1980 Mt St Helens eruption. The pyroclastic flow that blasted down numerous trees, scorched others and killed people. The towering ash cloud that rained ash fall on Eastern Washington and continued around the world. The debris flows that sculptured the landscape in destructive lahars , racing down the Toutle River, washing out bridges and silting up the Columbia River.

Entrance to Ape Cave, Mt St Helens National Volcanic Monument (Image on Flickr)

In addition, we see the impact of much earlier lava flows in Mt St Helen’s Ape Cave Lava Tube. Ape Cave contains the continental United States’ longest continuous lava tube, occurring around 2,000 years ago in the Cave Basalt.

Cascade volcanoes have an extensive volcanic history, as displayed in a display of their eruptive history over the past 4,000 years which is available as a pdf or poster to order from USGS.

We can look at the chart of volcanic history and wonder given the frequency and time since last eruption, whether a particular mountain is “due” for an eruption. We do know that future eruptions may occur, we simply may not know when. Once volcanic activity has started, geologists are better able to monitor and respond to the ongoing situation.

It is a matter of living with uncertainty and managing risks.

The USGS has comprehensive risk assessments for each Cascade Volcano. More information can be obtained through the USGS’s Cascade Volcano Observatory Website.

Calculating Odds and Probabilities

2011-05-21T12:07:00.000-07:00

1986 Liberty Half Dollar Tossed on Grass (Heads) (Image on Photoshelter)

A team will have an opportunity to call “heads or tails” for a coin toss at the beginning of a football game. If the call is successful, heads in the case of the coin pictured above, the team will have the opportunity to chose to take the ball (go on offense) or defend a particular goal. The choices are non-trivial as a team’s defense may be superior to their offense, or the wind may determine the choice of the goal defended. These choices represent the team’s expectations of their success, given their strengths, weaknesses and prevailing conditions.

The coin toss, for a fair coin, will give a probability (p) of .5, or 50% that the call (either heads or tails) will be successful. Coins flipped successively will tend, over a period of time to “revert to the mean”, or tend towards their expected value of 50% heads and 50% tails. The odds ratio for the coin toss is 1:1. Odds ratio is calcuated as the ratio of the probability of the event happening (p) to the probability that it won’t happen (1-p). Thus, out of 2 possible outcomes (heads or tails), one outcome (out of 2) is successful, one outcome (out of 2) is unsuccessful, for a ratio of 1:1.

While the coin toss is random, there is a balance of risks involved in the result. For example, a team with a superior offense can choose to go on offense, sputter on three downs, punt, and turn the ball over to the other team in good field position, despite their expectation of offensive success.

Two Sixes Dice Toss (infrared digital effect) (image on Photoshelter)

People use probabilities and odd ratios in their daily lives, consciously and unconsciously computing expectations and making decisions based on those expectations.

Some may choose to gamble on the roll of the dice. In this case, the probability of rolling two sixes is (1/36) while the odds are 1 to 35 (1 good outcome, 35 losing outcomes). When gambling in an establishment, the house will include a margin in for themselves, to cover expenses and profit. Given fair dice, the underlying odds (and the probabilities) will tend towards their mathematical expected value (1 to 35 and 1/36), thus giving over time a margin to the house.

Mathematical models can calculate the odds that there will be a city rivalry World Series this year, the odds of a particular candidate winning the 2012 election, and many other events.

Of particular interest are the mathematical models that deal with environmental issues, such as weather and climate change, given the emergence of extreme weather events.

Albert Einstein was quoted as saying “I, at any rate, am convinced that He does not throw dice.” (paraphrased as “God does not play dice with the universe”). However Stephen Hawking is quoted as saying “So Einstein was wrong when he said, "God does not play dice." Consideration of black holes suggests, not only that God does play dice, but that he sometimes confuses us by throwing them where they can't be seen”.

The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has sophisticated climatological models which forecast the weather, and they are continually improving these models in order to provide the maximum amount of warning possible to the populace. Through their efforts, NOAA is seeking to minimize the amount of risk, and maximize the information provided, seeking the “load the dice” in the publics favor.

We rely on weather forecasts in our daily plans. Should we call off the company picnic with a 70% chance of thunderstorms? How about that outdoor wedding? Do you pack the rain slicker or umbrella or leave it behind? Governments and businesses rely on weather forecasts for their daily operations and long term plans. Seasonal hurricane forecasts are looked at with interest by many sectors in planning ahead into the coming hurricane season.

Two United States Coast Guard Cutters monitoring the Westport, Washington Bar entrance (image on Photoshelter)

Nowhere is the issue of balance of risks and weather forecasting more apparent than in the maritime arena. When is the storm predicted to arrive? Is there a confidence interval around that arrival time, as well as its expected intensity? Sailors will balance the risk of venturing out and making headway to their destination versus the risk that the weather will take an unexpected turn for the worse, making for difficult, or hazardous headway, or worse.

The United States Coast Guard (USCG) is a branch of the U.S. Armed forces and is charged with maritime safety, security and stewardship. In this image, the two Coast Guard Cutters are monitoring the closed Westport Bar / navigational entrance from the Pacific Ocean to Westport, Washington. The USCG monitors ongoing conditions and weather forecasts to decide whether or not to close the bar, thus managing safety for mariners. The United States Coast Guard, in its decision-making, relies on the concept of balance of risk, as it makes decisions that affect the public. The public, in turn, makes decisions using balance of risk as it relies on NOAA guidance, the actions of the Coast Guard, and other factors.

It is human nature to calculate probabilities, calculate odds, consciously or unconsciously assess balance of risks. We do so continuously in our daily lives and rely on others to help us do so. We need to expand that awareness to include the risks we face due to environmental changes, consider the balance of risks inherent in the evolving situation, and find a way to meet the considerable challenges head on.

Mt St Helens 31st Anniversary of May 18, 1980 Eruption

2011-05-18T22:14:00.001-07:00

Aerial View of Steam Eruption, Mt St Helens, May 20, 2006, taken from Johnston Ridge Observatory, Mt St Helens National Volcanic Monument, Washington (image on Photoshelter)

Thirty-one years ago, at 8:32 am on May 18, 1980, Mt St Helens erupted, in a cataclysmic eruption, that would change the face of the environment and sow the seeds of future renewal. Nature has its way of promoting renewal, through cycles of creation and destruction, and nowhere is this more evident than at Mt St Helens, where the volcano and environs continue to emerge in their new environment shaped by the vehicles of geological change.

Mt. St Helens National Monument can be reach from I-5 southbound at Toledo, SR 505, or from I-5 northbound at Castle Rock, SR 504 (Spirit Lake Highway). I took the latter route, visiting Washington State’s Silver Lake Visitor Center, 5 miles east along SR 504, and took in their presentation on the Mt St Helens Eruption “Cycle of Chaos and Creation”.

I entered Mt St Helens National Volcanic Monument, stopping at Hoffstadter Bluffs Visitor Center, enjoying a view of Mt St Helens in the distance and an excellent Elk Burger in their dining area before heading up to Johnston Ridge Observatory. As you drive towards Johnston Ridge Observatory, there are opportunities to pull over and enjoy differing views of the mountain as you get closer, including at the Elk Rock and Loowit Viewpoints.

The sense of closeness to the volcano becomes more than distance as you become more and more aware of the impact of the blast area on the landscape. Even as it is being transformed, being renewed, you are aware that there are thirty-one years of renewal, and that contrasts with the age of the landscape you left behind.

Mt St Helens Steam Eruption, May 20, 2006, viewed from Hummocks Trail showing renewal of vegetation, Mt St Helens National Volcanic Monument (image on Photoshelter)

The road heads downward before the last ascent to the Johnston Ridge Observatory. The Hummocks Trail provides an opportunity to hike amongst the hummocks, created by the Mt St Helens debris avalanche. The debris avalanche created by the eruption of Mt St Helens offered geologists an opportunity to learn about and identify such formations elsewhere.

From the Hummocks Trail, the road then climbs upwards towards Johnston Ridge Observatory at 4,255 feet. As you hike up an incline from the parking lot towards the Visitor Center, you are greeted with a marvelous view of Mt St Helens, looking right down into the throat of the volcano. It is up close and personal, looming as a reminder of the blast impact, as the crater opens up its giant maw to the visitor, you are struck by the awesome power that so forcefully reconstructed the landscape in the wake of its eruption.

As the clouds dance across the crater and the lava dome inside it, you are reminded that Mt St Helens, the youngest of Cascade volcanoes, has not been quiet since it’s May 18, 1980 eruption. Eruptive activity continued into 1986 and then resumed during 2004-2006, including dome building activity.

A visit to the Visitor Center gives the opportunity to explore exhibits, view a movie, “Message from the Mountain”, and attend ranger-guided talks. In one talk, the ranger used still photographs to illustrate various stages of Mt St Helens’s activity leading up to and including the eruption events. We saw Mt St Helens’s pre-eruptive recreational splendor as a near-perfect volcanic cone and glimpses of pre-eruptive awakenings.

As explained by the ranger, volcanic activity beneath the surface of the volcano eroded and weakened the rock structure on the side of the mountain, turning it to clay. This weakened area provided an opportunistic path for the upwelling magma to take, versus the hardened rock plug at the top of the volcano. The side of the mountain bulged with pressure and structural weakening. The landslide and accompanying 5.1 earthquake triggered the event that would unleash the power and fury of Mt St Helens, with resultant lateral blast, pyroclastic flows, lahars (mud flows) and an ejection of ash that would circle the globe.

It is sobering to realize that volcanism can eat away at a mountain’s rock structure from within, weakening it and exposing the mountain to risk of collapse. It is yet another example of a “tipping point” where a marginal change can have a result out of proportion to its own magnitude.

Geologists and volcanologists study volcanoes and other geological system and we are all continually learning from their experience. Johnston Ridge Observatory was named in memory of geologist David Johnston, volcanologist, who witnessed the May 18, 1980 eruption from what is now Johnston Ridge, and radioed in the message “Vancouver, Vancouver, this is it” before perishing in the blast.

The Mt St Helens 1980 eruption has resulted in a continued expansion in knowledge and monitoring tools for understanding the behavior of volcanoes.

In one study, the impacts of volcanic hydrothermal systems on Cascade volcanoes is being studied by the United States Geological Survey.

A wide range of information about Cascade Volcanoes can be found on the Cascade Volcano Observatory (CVO) site.

Chernobyl 25th Anniversary

2011-04-26T20:31:00.001-07:00

An aerial view of Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in April, 1986, with the red glow towards the center showing the heat from Unit #4. Source: epa.gov

The Chernobyl Disaster was a nuclear accident which occurred on April 26, 1986. It occurred in the Ukraine Republi c (formerly part of the former USSR (Soviet Union)). Now the Chernobyl site is part of the country Ukraine. Today marks the 25th anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster.

It is particularly compelling to consider the impacts of Chernobyl today, twenty-fives years later, as we witness the unfolding of another nuclear disaster at Fukushima, Japan, following the 9.0 earthquake and tsunami on March 11, 2011. The two disasters arose from different circumstances and unfolded differently, however they share in common the impact of a low probability-high risk event.

They are set apart in both time and space, one occurring in vastness of the then-Soviet Union; the other set on the more densely populated island of Japan. The Chernobyl Disaster and the Fukushima disasters were both were graded as a 7 on the International Nuclear Event Scale. (Fukushima was raised from a 5 to a 7 on April 12, 2011, one month and a day following the earthquake and tsunami on March 11th).

How do we fathom such events as we seek to understand the risks of pursuing nuclear energy? How do we internalize these low probability-high risk events so that we carefully assess risks yet do not fall prey to unwarranted fears and suspicions? Do we hide our heads in the sands of improbability and ignore the potential of a very small yet very dangerous risk? Do we pour millions and billions of dollars to hedge against a risk that may never, in our lifetime occur? Do we even care about the impact of our decisions on those ancestors who may follow us many generations down the turnpike?

It is critical how we answer these questions, because our fate and the fate of our planet may hang in the balance. With the burgeoning population on this planet, the growing scarcity of resources, and the challenges presented by rising carbon dioxide levels, and other indications of planetary strain, we must find a way to make informed decisions that appropriately incorporate the low probability/high risk event in our search for and use of energy resources.

In my last blog posting, Emperor Penguin Energy-Risk Model - Part 2 , I discussed mathematical modeling, random variables and evolved a stochastic model of emperor penguin energy-risk behavior. I discussed some of the variables that may be considered in the emerging emperor penguin population, including mortality, morbidity and accident. I introduced the concept of a low probability event into the model (an eruption of an Antarctic volcano), and discussed the values of the stochastic process in informing results. The post was intended to discuss energy seeking behavior in a different (emperor penguin) population as an energy seeking risk example using stochastic modeling.

In my last post I stated “The objective of the stochastic processes is to help us inform our decision making process, to help us understand the impact of variables under a wide range of assumptions, conditions, and scenarios. Thus a stochastic process should inform us about the expectations of the model under a wide variety of conditions, including the impacts of low probability / high risk events.”

However, a stochastic process cannot inform without reasonable assumptions. Assumptions must be developed to allow the stochastic process to produce a credible range of results that will indeed be informative for the intended usages. There are many variables to consider, and assumptions to be made in analyzing risk. For a variety of reasons it may be difficult to obtain a robust set of assumptions that everyone agrees with for all potential uses.

Emperor Penguin Energy-Risk Model - Part 2

2011-04-21T21:56:00.000-07:00

Emperor Penguin Diving onto Ice Shelf from Sea, Stancomb Wells Ice Edge, Weddell Sea, Antarctica (Image on Alamy.com)

In my last blog post “An Emperor Penguin Energy-Risk Model” on April 14, 2011, l discussed the predator-prey relationship between the leopard seal and emperor penguin in Antarctica. The leopard seal waits at the edge of the ice shelf and opportunistically picks off emperor penguins entering or leaving the sea. For the emperor penguin, feeding at sea is a decision between the need to feed to live and the risk of dying in the mouth of a leopard seal..

In the blog post I state: “From studying the emperor penguin and the leopard seal we know the emperor penguins will continue to feed, but so will the leopard seal. Some emperor penguins, despite their various risk protection strategies, will get eaten. It is important to note that in a probabalistic sense, we know that some penguins will be eaten by the leopard seal, but we don’t know which specific penguins will “bite the dust”.” This is true casually looking at a row of emperor penguins lined up to go into the sea in search of food.

However, upon closer analysis and study, over a period of time, it might be possible to determine which emperor penguins have a bit of catch in their step, have been injured in a narrow escape from a leopard seal, or have slowed down. These emperor penguins might come a belly-flop short of landing on the ice, and end up as prey in the mouth of a leopard seal. However, it is also possible, that a healthy, fit, member of the emperor penguin colony might suffer a particularly ill-fated episode of bad luck. This penguin might be in the wrong place at the wrong time when the leopard seal is rising out of the water with its mouth wide open ready for business. In fact, you could have the emperor penguin equivalent of the 4.0-40 yard dash champion, and end up as leopard seal “dinner”, with some bad luck and timing.

Looking at emperor penguin energy-seeking behavior and risk, it becomes apparent that probabilities have a great deal to do with the outcome but are not deterministic. You may attach a relatively higher probability of being eaten to the more fragile members of the emperor penguin population and a relatively lower probability of being eaten to those fitter members. The larger the colony size, and the more emperor penguins entering the sea at the same time, the lower the risk, the probability of being eaten, for any particular emperor penguin as there are more penguins entering the sea. (“there’s safety in numbers”).

You can run scenarios with differing proportions of fragile and fit emperor penguins, with higher and lower probabilities of being eaten (mortality rates), varying degrees of illness (morbidity rates) or accident, including leopard seal attack. In such scenarios, the leopard seal would most likely pick off different emperor penguins each time the scenario is run, however there would be objective tendencies to pick off more members of the more fragile group versus those of the fitter group.

In performing mathematical modeling of the fate of the emperor penguins by running scenarios with objective data and assumptions, we may set up a stochastic process which helps us to understand the behavior of the system as it evolves under a variety of scenarios.

Mathematical models involve expressing real world problems in mathematical language. This entails defining variables and establishing a formulaic process which will express the model as evolves. Variables are elements in the model which may change during the model. Because they may change, the model needs to calculate how they change over the course of the model and how they interact with other model variables, and are affected by the constants assumed by the model. Constants may arise from established data or may be assumptions plugged in to the model.

Stochastic processes incorporate non-deterministic, random elements into a mathematical model. The result may vary with time and with each model run. In comparison, a deterministic model will always produce the same result given the same assumptions and initial state. Thus, a stochastic process is run using random processes, employing a variety of assumptions and probability distributions informing objective tendencies for various model events to occur..

The random process in stochastic modeling will randomly choose which penguins are attacked, survive, suffer morbidity or injury from accident, and die over a period of time. Each run will be unique, as specific, members of the colony are differently impacted by the random process each time. By running many such models, one can get a picture of the survival data for the colony as a whole under a wide range of assumptions. Depending on the characteristics of the data, model and variables, results may be similar on an overall group basis, while differing by individual members impacted over time.

Under a normal range of assumptions and outcomes, this model may well predict overall group behavior over a period time. However modeling becomes much challenging when very low probability events enter into the model or rear their head in actual life.

For example, a eruption of an Antarctic volcano may be infrequent, however it could certainly impact emperor penguins. If the model assumed a volcanic eruption with a low probability, a robust number of stochastic model runs may randomly select such an event resulting in a BBQ penguin supper for the leopard seals.

The objective of the stochastic processes is to help us inform our decision making process, to help us understand the impact of variables under a wide range of assumptions, conditions, and scenarios. Thus a stochastic process should inform us about the expectations of the model under a wide variety of conditions, including the impacts of low probability / high risk events.

An Emperor Penguin Energy-Risk Model

2011-04-14T23:01:00.005-07:00

Emperor Penguin Preparing to Dive off Riiser-Larsen Ice Shelf (Image on Alamy)

The emperor penguin (aptenodytes fosteri) is the largest of the penguin species and lives in Antarctica in large colonies. Emperor penguins live in the harshest of climates in Antarctica, where the temperatures can get down to 40 degrees Fahrenheit and with strong winds up to 89 mph, developing a sizable wind chill factor. The penguin breeding colony stays together during the harsh winter, constantly churning the boundaries of the colony, sustaining the group.

The female emperor penguin lays one egg, which is nurtured by the male while the female returns to sea to fish. The male will then nurture the young chick in his brood pouch. Later, both parents take turns hiking to the ice shore, diving into the Antarctic waters, in search of food. Fish and crustaceans such as krill provide sustenance for the penguin, energy to keep it going.

This source of penguin energy is available from “the deep”. Lots of krill. Lots of fish. Lots of energy to power penguins. One catch. A predator. The leopard seal (Hydrurga leptonyx). The leopard seal is a large mammal (between 400 and 1300 pounds) that attacks the emperor penguin, often at the edge of the ice where it can make opportunistic kills. This video by BBC Earth shows the interaction between a leopard seal and emperor penguins.

Emperor Penguins Lining up to Dive into water at Halley Bay Ice Edge (Image on Alamy)

A decision by an emperor penguin to dive into the water at ice’s edge is a decision to face a risk of being killed by the leopard seal or starve. Emperor penguins will accumulate in a line at the edge of the ice, waiting to take off, en-masse, into the water to feed. A tipping point is reached at some point where the shared risk of the group warrants all exiting off the ice edge into the cold deep, in quick succession. Feeding takes place in the open water and the emperor penguins quickly launch themselves through the air as they exit the water to land on the ice edge. They are playing the odds.

The emperor penguin’s appearance manages its risk to a certain extent. The emperor penguin’s black and white exterior helps to mitigate risk. The penguin’s black back appears lost looking downward against the black background of the marine deep. Looking upward from below, the emperor penguin’s white belly may be lost in the white glare of the water surface. This provides some degree of camouflage.

The penguins’ group decision, so neatly balanced in their emperor penguin-risk-matrix minds conceptually captures the “weighing of risks” issue as regards satisfying their energy needs. The penguin needs to take risks in order to eat, to supply energy, in order to live.

Food, after all, supplies energy that keeps us in business just as the various types of fossil fuels, nuclear energy and alternative energy sources provide energy for us to meet our various needs.

Our planet seems to shrink around us with population growth, economic development, energy demand and climate change challenges. As we seek to manage our lifestyles in this challenging environment, we are not unlike the emperor penguin. We face risk in pursuing our energy wants and needs.

We can analyze the risk patterns associated with the various energy choices that we have. These risk patterns vary considerably depending on which mix of energy resources are employed.

From studying the emperor penguin and the leopard seal we know the emperor penguins will continue to feed, but so will the leopard seal. Some emperor penguins, despite their various risk protection strategies, will get eaten. It is important to note that in probabalistic sense, that we know that some penguins will be eaten by the leopard seal, but we don’t know which specific penguins will “bite the dust”.

Similarly, as we explore various energy choices, we need to study the associated risks. We need to anticipate risks that may happen and proactively build defenses against them. However, we are kidding ourselves if we think that we can forever eliminate all such risks. It is the nature of evolving life to defeat such a worthy goal, as accidents can happen. It may be possible to predict the fact that accidents may happen while at the same time not being able to pinpoint exactly where or when they may occur. This consideration lends itself to a more global view of risk management, rather than focusing on any one particular potentiality.

In considering the risks associated with expanding energy sources to meet demand, its also appropriate to bring up ways to reduce energy demand, to become more efficient, to do more with what we have. This option becomes more attractive as the costs of the alternative options increases.

Energy Choices and Risk

2011-03-28T14:33:00.002-07:00

Japan’s March 11, 2011 Tohoku 9.0 earthquake, ensuing tsunami and nuclear incident at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant have reminded us all that nuclear plants are subject to risk. This should be no surprise, as all sources of energy are subject to some degree of risk. In fact, just about everything in life has some degree of risk attached to it. However, nuclear plants, with their added radioactivity risk, present a considerable challenge in managing the lower probability, higher impact events.

We face global, environmental challenges in managing climate change issues. These climate change issues affect both micro-climates and have a planet-wide impact. In order to meet these considerable challenges, nuclear energy must be a part of the solution along with other energy options. We must seek to understand and mitigate risks facing nuclear plants as we go forward to solve the larger planet-wide problem which affects us all.

It has been almost 25 years since the April 26, 1986 nuclear incident at Chernobyl, in the Ukraine. That incident was ranked at “7” on the International Event Scale. The Three Mile Island Accident, beginning on March 28, 1979 ranked as a “5”. That incident, occurring exactly 32 years ago, took place at the Three Mile Island Plant in Middletown, Pennsylvania. The Fukushima Nuclear Accidents have so far been ranked as high as a “5”, and the situation has not yet been resolved .

In the midst of the efforts to bring the Fukushima Reactors under control, there have been calls to reexamine the safety of nuclear power plants. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) called for a meeting before the summer to discuss an assessment of the Fukushima accident, lessons to be learned, strengthened safety measures and strengthened responses to future incidents.

As the Japanese workers worked on the reactor, rating agencies Moody’s Japan K.K. and Standard and Poors downgraded Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco’s) long term debt. Moody’s indicated that it saw risk in GE’s nuclear business, although it did not downgrade GE, which contributes 1% of GE’s annual $100 billion revenue. GE was the designer of the Fukushima nuclear power plants., and the supplier of reactors 1,2 and 6.

At the same time, ongoing issues regarding the storage of the nation’s nuclear waste are unfolding. This waste includes waste from commercial nuclear plants and military/defense waste products. The waste is stored in a variety of locations, ranging from storage on site to storage at the Hanford Site, in Washington State, where two-thirds of the nation’s high-level radioactive waste is stored. The storage issues are complex, involving the removal of the nation’s only designated nuclear waste repository from consideration, and related litigation by states (Washington and South Carolina) and regulators (National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners).

We should develop an energy strategy that optimizes the risk profiles of the various types of power generation (including nuclear). This strategy should be science-based, above politics, in the interest of the nation (and world) as a whole, reflecting our responsibilities to the environment both in theory and in practice, and appropriately reflecting risks in pricing decisions.

Processing Risk and Uncertainty

2011-03-25T10:07:00.000-07:00

Koi Surfacing, Japanese Gardens, Washington Park Arboreteum, Seattle, Washington

In my last blog posting I discussed the question of how we integrate our feelings, our sensations, perceptions with scales we use to measure risk. My discussion centered around the Japan 9.0 Earthquake and the moment magnitude scale used to measure it.

In fact, the earthquake was originally judged to be an 8.9 by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and subsequently upgraded to 9.0 by the USGS. The moment magnitude scale, being logarithmic, meant that this reassessment implied a 41% more intense earthquake than the original 8.9. This reflects logarithmic scales in action.

As the disaster unfolded, the world could see the Japanese heroically struggling with a trifecta of horrors -- the initial earthquake itself, the tsunami that followed, and the accident at the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant (Fukushima Daiichi) in Fukushima, Japan.

News coverage of the Japan disaster was continuous in the media. However, with military intervention in Libya by a group of nations including the Canada, France, Italty, United Kingdom and the United States, the coverage of the Japan disaster on television has diminished.

How do we respond when events are at the forefront of the news? How do we respond when they are forced by circumstance to share the spotlight with other compelling, competing issues or even tucked away out of sight? How do we respond with our feelings towards others in their disaster, or triumph, and how do we translate those feelings into our own forward seeking risk assessments?

Indeed, there are compelling issues on the horizon, decisions to be made, and the evolving situation in Japan is certain to be a part of the equation in attempting to balance risks in managing our future with respect to energy, focus and other issues.

American Red Cross Donations

Log in the Surf - 8.9 Japan Earthquake (9.0 updated)

2011-03-12T15:22:00.001-08:00

Log in the Surf, Westport, Washington, November 6, 2009 as waves pound Westport, Washington causing flooding. (Flickr.com - Marilyn Dunstan)

The USGS updated the magnitude of the earthquake to 9.0 on March 14, 2011

The above picture, captured in Westport, Washington, as waves pounded the shore and caused flooding downtown, doesn’t come anywhere near to doing justice to the devastation in Japan after the 8.9 earthquake. The log, as small as it seems in the distance of the breaking wave, however, serves as a metaphor, as it seems to come out of nowhere, to be crashed with great force upon the shore. To the beach goer these logs represent unseen risk until they emerge from the seas of possibility and are thrust upon the beach.

I watched the enfolding news on CNN of the magnitude 8.9 earthquake off the east coat of Honshu, Japan. The earthquake, which occurred at 05:46:23 UTC on March 11, 2011, has been devastating for the Japanese people. The earthquake, the tsunami that followed, the tragic loss of life and injury, the damage to structures (including nuclear power plants) and communities has had a devastating impact.

Due to the scope of the event, and its aftermath, which is still unfolding, it will take some time to assess the full extent of the damage. As of this writing, there is worry about a possible nuclear plant meltdown (Voice of America article).

My thoughts go out to the Japanese people, and others impacted, with the hopes that aid can help reach those in need and aid in the rebuilding.

How do you fathom such a devastating event with such a magnitude? How do you measure an event such as this, perceive and integrate it on all levels?

Earthquakes are measured by scales. The Richter scale was commonly used to measure earthquake magnitudes. However the Moment Magnitude Scale is the preferred magnitude used by the United States Geological Society (USGS), as explained in the USGS link. The scales used to measure earthquakes are base 10 logarithmic scales.

The Moment Magnitude Scales of two earthquakes can be used to compare their relative intensities, as indicated in the Wikipedia article. It involves solving for the scalar moment, determining the ratio of scalar moments being considered, and boiling down the resulting equation. For two earthquakes with moment magnitude scales M1 and M2 this relative intensity boils down to 10^(1.5*(M1-M2)).

This formula shows how the relative factor between earthquakes remains the same for the same differences in Moment Magnitude, regardless of whether you are referring to differences between 5 and 5.1 or 7 and 7.1. In either case, the earthquake will be 1.4 times as intense as the earthquake you are comparing with. Similarly a 6.0 earthquake will be 31.6 times as intense as a 5.0 earthquake and an 8.0 earthquake will be 31.6 times as intense as a 7.0 earthquake. A 7.0 earthquake will be one-thousand times as intense as a 5.0 earthquake and a 9.0 earthquake will be one-million times as intense as a 5.0 earthquake.

With geometric progression the intensity curve explodes upwards at higher end magnitudes as the factor is applied to larger an larger numbers.

How do we incorporate our feelings, our sensations, our perceptions associated the an earthquake, and associated events, and how do we integrate those perceptions with the scale used to measure them? Our brains have to build some type of association, a risk measurement that links this experience together.

This is an important question as we deal with forward pointing risk assessment and risk management, as we use our minds to project both risk and opportunity.

A Basketball Photo Essay

2011-03-07T13:11:00.004-08:00

Garfield High School Boys Basketball Team, Seattle in the 2011 Washington Class 4A Tournament, Tacoma Dome, Tacoma, Washington...a basketball photo essay.

Glenn Brooks (1), Garfield H.S., Washington Class 4A Tournament, Tacoma Dome, Tacoma, Washington

Garfield H.S., Seattle played Puyallup H.S. , Puyallup, Gonzaga Prep, Spokane and Curtis H.S., University Place, in the Washington Class 4A Tournament, at the Tacoma Dome, Tacoma, Washington, March, 2011. I’ve woven together thoughts and images of the competitive experience.

Daeshon Hall, Garfield H.S., Washington Class 4A Tournament, Tacoma Dome, Tacoma, Washington

Basketball is a competitive sport that combines so many elements of mental and physical ability, weaving speed with abrupt changes in movement, precision and sometimes solitude on the free throw line. It embraces elements of strategy, as the game clock may determine forcing the pace of the game. The leading team may elect to slow the pace down, playing keep away. The losing team may commit deliberate fouls, forcing the leading team to make foul shots, trading for clock time and shot opportunity.

Glenn Brooks (1), Garfield H.S., Chris Sarbaugh (24), Parker Kelly (10), Gonzaga Prep, Washington Class 4A Tournament, Tacoma Dome, Tacoma, Washington

Does the guard bringing the ball down the court elect to take the jump shot at a distance, pass off the ball to another player closer in to the basket, or perhaps to a wing man in the corner? Or does he drive down the key, finding a route inside without committing a charging foul, and make a layup or even dunk the ball?

Tony Wroten (2), Garfield H.S., Washington Class 4A Tournament, Tacoma Dome, Tacoma, Washington

These are all decisions basketball players need to make and they often make these decisions very quickly, in an instant, as matters change very fast on the basketball court. They are not pulling up an Excel spreadsheet on their cell phones and calculating the odds, or mulling it over, sleeping on it overnight. The brain does this type of calculation very well and quickly.

Garfield Player and Parker Kelly (10) (Gonzaga Prep)., Washington Class 4A Tournament, Tacoma Dome, Tacoma, Washington

Competition sets up a sense of flow, a flow to a goal, victory in the game, or perhaps beyond when a season title or a championship are involved. This sense of flow, being “in the game” may mean that shots flow more accurately, hitting only mesh, that the rebounding opportunities are there for the taking and that free throws are made, early and often. At other times, it seems, that teams can’t buy a shot.

Tucker Haymond (23), Garfield H.S. and Parker Kelly (10) (Gonzaga Prep)., Washington Class 4A Tournament, Tacoma Dome, Tacoma, Washington

It is a game of drama and intensity. Of emotion carefully crafted to play with intensity yet avoid excessive fouling which would give the player a ticket out of the game. Sometimes things flare out of proportion. It is the essence of sportsmanship to keep them from doing so as it could hurt the team.

Garfield Players and Coach, Timeout, Washington Class 4A Tournament, Tacoma Dome, Tacoma, Washington

However, there is no doubt that emotion can be used as a tool to fuel the players’ motivation to win the game. This is one function of a coaches timeout....to retool strategy and reignite emotion.

Tony Wroten (2) Shoting Free Throw, Will Dorsey (3) Behind, Garfield H.S., Washington Class 4A Tournament, Tacoma Dome, Tacoma, Washington

It is at the foul line where the pace momentarily slows. The player fouled stands on the line without contention, object of attention, studying and then shooting the free throw. Is the object to make the free throw? Most of the time it is. However a missed free throw on the second shot could lead to a rebound, a successful basket and a three point play.

In the end, one team has to lose. It may be because the winner has a stronger team, it may be because the losing team had an off night, or peaked too soon. Whatever the reason, the game was played, the decision rendered.

Tony Wroten (2), Garfield H.S., Washington Class 4A Tournament, Tacoma Dome, Tacoma, Washington

Rebounding is an asset in a basketball game, and so it is also an asset in being able to come back from a tough loss and win the next game. This is true resilience. It helps the athlete not only in the game they just won, but in fostering resilience down the road in games against other opponents, whether in High School or beyond, playing under the lights.

Tony Wroten (2), Garfield H.S. Guard, will be attending the University of Washington where he will playing Washington Husky Basketball.

The Garfield Bulldogs won their quarterfinal game against the Puyallup Vikings 90-80. The Garfield Bulldogs lost their Semifinal game to Gonzaga Prep Bullpups 53-66, who went on to beat Curtis H.S Vikings, University Place in the Washington Class 4A Tournament Finals 61-41.

The Garfield Bulldogs came back to win against the A.C. Davis Pirates, Yakima, Washington 75-68 to capture third place in the Washington Class 4A Tournament. Garfield H.S., coached by Coach Ed Haskins and his staff has an outstanding basketball tradition and can look forward to many great seasons.

Discovery - The Will to Explore and Space Shuttle Discovery

2011-03-04T13:40:00.001-08:00

The Moon

We look up into the night sky, especially in some spot far away from city lights, and see the moon and stars. The ancients found faces in the moon and named loose collections of stars for things they could identify with, and used them as symbolic tokens and for navigation. Thus we have constellations named “Capricorn” and “Virgo” and archers and bears gracing the night sky. For many the stars assemble themselves in easily fed advice, stating things such as “feed your mind today“ or “today is a good time to chill out”. For others, the moon and stars represent a dream of future exploration, an accumulation of human knowledge, and mapping out human destiny.

There are some that look at the cost of space exploration and turn aside, thinking it too expensive, not worthy of pursuit. To these individuals, all they see is the need that currently exists on earth, and thus the opportunity cost of space exploration is expressed in terms of what could otherwise be done with the money spent on space exploration. Understanding their concern is easy, considering the extent of earth’s problems, however such individuals don’t appreciate the considerable societal benefits that space exploration confers.

Many technological advances that have occurred in the framework of the space program went on to fuel major technological achievements in the public and private sectors These advances have brought forth new industries, and have fueled overall job creation via the multiplier effect in the general economy, generating a significant economic gain and better standard of living.

NASA’s Space Shuttle Discovery is currently flying on it’s last mission. Discovery has completed more than 30 successful missions since its first flight on August 30, 1984. It has performed both assembly missions for the International Space Station (ISS) and research missions.

Discovery takes its name from a long line of historical vessels that have ventured forth to explore and discover, including Henry Hudson’s Discovery, used to explore Hudson Bay in 1610-11 in an attempt to find the Northwest Passage. The Space Shuttle Discovery has been emblematic of the quest to explore and discover new territories and new meanings. NASA Television can be viewed to get an idea of activity on the Space Shuttle.