Category Archives: Soapbox

Drawing boundaries

147-4792_IMGMy family and I have been settling into a new home during the last few months, which is why there have been no posts for some time.  You could say that we have new boundaries which define our space in the city.  Indeed, as part of the process of buying our house we received copies of the entry in the UK Land Registry which defined the extent of the property we were purchasing. On a larger scale, ‘boundaries are lines drawn on a map and fought over by man’; this is a quote that I came across sometime ago but unfortunately I have lost the source.  It implies that the judgments made in drawing national or regional boundaries are fraught with difficulty.

Engineers have to draw boundaries in order to define a system for analysis.  In thermodynamics, which is the study of energy, a system is defined as the part of the universe that is the centre of attention and everything outside of the system is described as the ‘surroundings’.  This approach provides enormous freedom in defining the system for analysis and as a consequence there is some significant skill involved in drawing the boundaries so that an analysis is both viable and useful.  Students learning thermodynamics might say it was ‘fraught with difficulty’.

Drawing appropriate boundaries to define a system allows us to evaluate energy and mass transfers in and out of the system and thus assess the capabilities and efficiency of the system.  The system could be a jet engine, a refrigerator or a biological cell.  Of course, the freedom available in drawing system boundaries is open to abuse because organisations can draw the boundaries to optimise the claimed efficiency of their product, so we need to be careful about accepting such claims.  For instance, fuel efficiency values for electric cars look impressive alongside a conventional petrol or diesel vehicle and thus imply less use of the world’s resources; however, such values rarely take account of the generation of electricity at the power station, which might be oil-fired depending on where you live.  Thus a ‘well-to-wheel’ efficiency would be more appropriate if you are interested in global sustainability, or Euros/kilometre if you are more interested in financial efficiency.

Impact vs. breakthrough

Last week I was at a meeting to recommend the award of research grants to scientists and engineers at universities.  Weighing the relative merits of research proposals from physical scientists and from engineers is a little like trying to compare chalk and cheese.  The scientists at such meetings tend to argue that none of the engineering research proposals will lead to scientific breakthroughs, which is one criterion for the awarding of grants; while engineers might suggest that the societal impact of scientific research proposals are intangible and remote.  There is an element of truth in both perspectives since broadly speaking engineering is about the application of science for the benefit of society.  Scientists need to make breakthroughs so that there are new ideas for engineers to apply; however often it is not clear how to apply the breakthrough beneficially, reliably, safely and cheaply, thus engineers also to perform research to establish the best route to the application of existing breakthroughs.

Or to quote Einstein: ‘scientists investigate that which already is; engineers create that which has never been’.

Small is beautiful

In the context of using algae to produce aviation fuel (see my previous post), ‘small is beautiful’ to cite the title of the famous book by E.F. Schumacher.  As a society we have tended towards achieving perceived economies of scale that lead to a uniformity of approach and a lack of diversity. ‘Perceived’ because often the boundary for the economic calculation is defined in a way that excludes the entropy demanded by the second law of thermodynamics and which should be included on the deficit side of the calculation.  Engineers learn about drawing appropriate boundaries for systems and looking for the source of entropy creation.  Sometimes, perhaps as in the case of the algae-based biofuels, we are unaware of the form and magnitude of the entropy being generated and hence there is a considerable risk that we will be surprised when we find out about it.  The entropy might take the form of heat, disorder, pollution, climatic disruption or combinations of these phenomena. So, pursuing a diverse set of approaches at a modest level, reduces the risk of an unpleasant surprise with substantial ecological and, or financial consequences.

Algae-powered aircraft

Recently, I attended an event organised by Airbus which included a film about their vision of aviation in 2050 followed by a question and answer session with their VP for Engineering in the UK, Neil Scott.  A strong theme that I took away from the event was maintaining air transport as fossil fuels become scarce and expensive through the use of oceanic algae farmed and harvested to generate biofuels.  This could be a good solution but we will need to consider the environmental impact of the massive level of ocean agriculture required to supply our airline system.  Airbus propose a more balanced, diverse approach to sourcing biofuel in this short video on their website: http://videos.airbus.com/channel/iLyROoafYvHb.html; so perhaps I took away the wrong message from the event I attended.

[Photo from http://cleantechnica.com/2010/07/20/holy-sustainble-cow-ordinary-algae-can-double-as-biofuel-and-cattle-feed-too/%5D