Monthly Archives: September 2006

Energy, Security

Significant Numbers of Fuel Cell Cars on the Road by 2004

Leave a comment

It is the ideal source of energy, this article explains. The author suggests “Nothing is perfect, except hydrogen”. What could be cleaner and better for our vehicles than hydrogen fuel cells? And so, in 2000 the author predicted that in just four years there would be significant numbers of the vehicles on the road, like the Honda V3. However, he also acknowledged just one tiny little problem:

Hydrogen may be ecologically and technologically the logical fuel right now for fuel cell cars, but there is no consumer distribution system in place. While methanol, a liquid, can be piped, trucked and stored in the existing network for gasoline with minor conversion costs, hydrogen will require an entire new fuel distribution infrastructure. Partly for this reason, fuel cell vehicles even in California, where government subsidies and regulations are the most favorable to fuel cell development in the world, fuel cell vehicles are not expected to be on the road in significant numbers until 2004.

Ooops. Maybe he meant four years from 2004? Or four years from 2008? The simple problem is that the beauty of the current gasoline and diesel fueling system is distribution and availability. Although it is centrally controlled by only a few select powerful men, they make it easily available to us for consumption. Who will build the super-structure necessary for hydrogen distribution? It is no small task given that nothing exists today that is suitable. In other words, the very thing that makes a fuel source useful (availability) appears to be a huge and almost insurmountable problem for hydrogen right now. There is not even a safe and universal standard for how to get the hydrogen out of a tank and into a car. And this problem is not getting better at any perceivable rate (last I checked discussion was still open on the practicality and safety of ISO 17268:2006 — refueling connector devices).

Compare that with the tried-and-true diesel engines, as discussed in the same article:

When asked about diesel cars, Matsuo had definite opinions, since it turned out he had a background in diesel engineering. His comments were interesting: “The efficiency of the diesel engine is very good, but the bad point is that it can’t get rid of some of the pollutant material, especially the particulate matter. The newest carburators produce precise high pressure injection into the cylinder which greatly increases combustion.”

Like others we talked with that day, Matsuo’s comments reflected a perception that the U.S. market, and California in particular, is more committed to zero-emissions than the rest of the world. When asked how close the new diesel cars have come to complying with ultra-low emissions standards, Matsuo wasn’t sure. He said “there are new catalysers being developed to absorb more particulate matter, it’s getting better year by year.”

And that is prior to changing the fuel itself to biodiesel, which has been proven to reduce harmful emissions. So the current pace of advancing engine technology along with the advance in biofuel availability has real potential that can immediately impact hundred of millions of vehicles on the road today. You also can buy a brand new Honda, Mercedes, Dodge, Audi, VW, etc. diesel vehicle, get 40-50 mpg with lower harmful emissions and start making a significant individual impact right away. And, of course, diesel fuel itself is already highly available and biodiesel is trivial to store safely even in large quantities.

That being said, I am really curious if the hydrogen fuel cell vehicle has improved since 2000, since the article mentions that the technology was not yet safe to drive on the open road:

We asked him what the car was doing, going in circles around the lot, and his answer indicates the cars are still very much in a development stage, “This fuel cell is not very good at lower temperatures, so we do not want to start the fuel cell system on a public road.” The car in question, Honda’s V-3, is one of the most advanced hydrogen fuel cell cars in the world, but it can not run on the open road before being warmed up for at least 5 minutes. So much for a quick start.

There’s a good slogan: “Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles: going in circles”. According to a 2006 press release from Honda, their V3 is at least another…wait for it…four years away from being released to consumers. Now why does that sound so familiar? For comparison sake, that is a year later than the release of their 2.2L i-CTDi diesel engine to the US market (made available in 2005 elsewhere in the world).

Aside from the danger of just operating the hydrogen vehicles, I wonder what would happen in an accident when an EMT has to decide whether they can use heavy machinery to pry open the car. Would they hesitate? Are these new technologies being designed with the ultimate safety test in mind? I remember some confusion and controversy about hybrids:

A network of high-voltage circuitry that may require some precise cutting to save a trapped victim.

“You don’t want to go crushing anything with hydraulic tools,” said Samuel Caroluzzi, an assistant chief with the Norristown Fire Department outside Philadelphia. “It’s enough to kill you from what they’re telling us in training.”

At least with hybrids the car manufacturers have been trying to get the word out about how to handle the cars in an emergency, according to the Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Safety site:

To ensure safety, Honda and Toyota created specific guides for first responders.

Toyota sent its guide to every fire department in the nation when its first hybrid was introduced a few years ago, said Sam Butto, a company spokesman. New guides are available for the company’s latest hybrid Lexus and Highlander models. All the guides can be found free online.

Thus, I propose a better test. Hydrogen fuel-cell readiness should be measured by the date that the manufacturers try to send a guide to every fire department in the nation. Accurate predictions could be based on an increasing number of visits to fire departments per year, such as an 80% coverage program might indicate fuel-cell vehicles will be on the road within three to six months. Until then, why not get a new diesel and run biofuel?

Without being immodest, we’d go so far as to claim that the Swindon-built CR-V i-CTDi is the greenest and most socially responsible SUV in the land.

Diesel is the future fuel of today.

History, Poetry, Security

Bhambatha

Leave a comment

I recently watched a movie about South Africa called Tsotsi. One thing in particular, out of many, that caught my attention was the music by Bonginkosi Dlamini (Zola). A quick search revealed that he has since released an album called Bhambatha. A little further research uncovered that this name is a reference to a legendary Zulu chief.

Also known as Bambata, or Mbata, Bhambatha was a chief of the Zondi tribe in Kwazulu-Natal. He is famous for his role in an armed rebellion in 1906 when the poll tax was raised from a tax per hut to per head (£1 tax on all native men older than 18) increasing hardship during a severe economic depression following the Anglo-Boer War. The Natal Police believed Bhambatha was going to resist the tax with force and so about 150 men were sent to subdue or arrest him. Instead the police were ambushed and four policemen killed. Thousands of colonial troops were then sent after him, including calvary and heavy artillery, leading to 3,500 dead. Bhambatha himself reportedly was killed in the Battle of Mome Gorge. Thus, today he is often credited as an inspiration to native resistance.

The greater political and economic context to the rebellion, in relation to the Anglo-Boer War, is also interesting. For example, guns and ammunition Bhambatha and other Zulu chiefs used were apparently awarded to King Dinuzulu in 1901. The British formally recognized him as a king and provided weapons in order for him to assemble a large army that would speed the demise of the Boers. In addition, 250 of his men were put directly under the command of General Bruce Hamilton. After the Boer capitulation in May, 1902, however, the Natal government banned blacks from possessing firearms. The government also prohibited them from drinking alcohol, refused to replace their lost homes, forced them to work for the Boer farmers, and then increased the poll tax to have them pay for the war.

During this transition, the Zulu king was given 100 head of cattle as a reward and “demoted” back to local government status with his travel restricted. His guns and ammunition were seized. Although he complied, local whites reported that not all the guns were returned. This could have been a rumor spread by the settlers in order to motivate colonial armies to enforce control of the area, or the Zulus may really have been planning an organized armed resistance to the Natal government. It is both hard to imagine the latter, given the harsh treatment of the Boers by the British during the war, as well as understandable given the oppressive treatment after fighting on behalf of the British. In either case, tension was already high by the time Bhambatha engaged the armed policemen who had come to arrest him and started what he called a “War with the Europeans“. Instead, it seems to me, his rebellion marked the final chapter to the Anglo-Zulu war of 1879 and the beginning of the Freedom Struggle.

Portions of this were posted to Wikipedia, to help give context to the music/poetry of Zola.

Security

Amnesty International opposes Bush pot shots

Leave a comment

The Amnesty International site offers some background to their opposition and criticism of the Bush administration’s detainee program:

On June 29, 2006, the Supreme Court issued a sweeping decision that found the commissions as currently constructed to be invalid. The Court held that the President did not have the authority to convene military commissions that deviated so far from established procedures without specific Congressional authorization. In addition, the Court ruled that the commissions must be in line with the due process protections found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice and Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, which prohibits “the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.�

Recently, President Bush announced that 14 “high value detainees� who had been in secret CIA prisons, including the purported masterminds of the September 11 attacks, had been transferred to Guantanamo and were awaiting trial by military commission. President Bush has also sent Congress draft legislation to authorize military commissions very similar to those already struck down by the Supreme Court. In addition, he is asking that Congress to retroactively strip habeas corpus and to provide immunity from prosecution for civilians, CIA agents and administration officials who may have violated the War Crimes Act. Amnesty International will continue to insist that any legislation meets the basic fair trials protections and standards for treatment required by the Supreme Court and US and International law.

I am shocked (no pun intended) that anyone would really consider military tribunals without fair representation as a valid system. We have the means and the opportunity to try terrorists successfully in a court of law, with International backing. Instead, by attacking the system of justice and working in a partisan manner to undermine Constitutional and International human rights provisions, the American president has his aim pointed in the wrong direction. Like Cheney shooting his friends in the back in pursuit of some other objective, Bush will do more damage than good to the US and actually foment more opposition at home and abroad through his proposed detainee program.

Just as disturbing is the political foundation of the system implemented to try Saddam Hussein himself. Again, the Bush administration has shown that its aim is to toss aside concepts of justice in search of political expediency. The Case School of Law’s blog explains:

The US managers of Iraqi post-conflict justice who were at the NSC, Department of Defense (DoD) and Department of Justice (DoJ) failed to see that “special� tribunals have the connotation of exceptional tribunals, which are in violation of international human rights law and thus smack of illegitimacy. Not only the name, but other aspects of the IST’s statute which remained unchanged in the modification brought about in the IHCC in 2005, are in violation of international principles of legality, which Iraqi law also embodies. This applies to the definition of the crimes within the jurisdiction of the tribunal and also to several other provisions of the statute. The statute that US drafters developed was so influenced by American thinking that it had the fingerprints of the foreign occupying power all over it. It also had glaring violations of Iraqi law. This was followed by a decision to establish the IST through the Governing Council, a politically-appointed body by the US – a foreign occupying power in Iraq. Moreover, the selection of judges, investigating judges, and prosecutors by the GC was in violation of Iraqi laws on judicial appointments. All of this cast a dark shadow on the tribunal’s legitimacy and legality, which continued even though a name change and minor modifications occurred in 2005.

Since Iraq was subject to the exclusive control of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) run by US Ambassador Paul Bremer, the [Iraq Special Tribunal] statute was promulgated by Bremer on December 10, 2003, by CPA Order No. 48, thus confirming the “made in America� label of the institution. Moreover, the IST judges, investigating judges and prosecutors were formally approved by Bremer. The US, acting through the Department of Justice and its Regime Crimes Liaison Office (RCLO), controlled the Tribunal, conducted and directed its investigative activities, collected and stored the evidence, directed its operations, funded it, and had the seat of the Tribunal within the “Green Zone.� In time, the judges, investigating judges, and prosecutors whose salaries were paid by the RCLO moved into the Green Zone where everything was concentrated under US protection. There was little doubt about who owned the IST. Some things changed after 2005, particularly, the Iraqis taking ownership of the process, but the rest remained as it was.

The choice of this post-conflict justice modality was dictated by US political considerations, supported by Iraqi expatriates. It is the right choice, though by no means should it have been limited to a tribunal, and certainly not to one whose statute had so many infirmities. The Administration and its Iraqi expatriate collaborators approached the tribunal’s drafting of the statute without enough knowledge or respect for the Iraqi legal system, and without much experience in international criminal justice precedents. More importantly, they ignored the first lesson of post-conflict justice, namely, to keep politics at a minimum and make sure the legalities are at a maximum. In the IST’s case, it was the reverse.

As we often say in security, it is very dangerous to adopt a “Fire. Ready, Aim.” approach to governance and management. This is even more the case when considering the effects of friendly fire (e.g. taking pot shots at an Internationally recognized system of rights and laws).

pot shot
noun

    a careless shot taken without regard for hunting law or rules, often at a close-range or defenseless object, in order to fill a prize or cooking pot
History, Security

Iran strengthens ties with the Comoros

Leave a comment

I recently mentioned the influence of China in developing parts of Africa and Asia. Now Iran is said to be providing humanitarian support to countries such as the Comoros. Here is an Iran News report from August:

four agreements were concluded this week as the islands’ new president, Iranian-trained Ahmed Abdallah Sambi, known as the “ayatollah” for his Iranian education, seeks to improve ties with Islamic nations, officials said.

In the first visit to the overwhelmingly Muslim Comoros by a high-level foreign delegation since Sambi’s election in May, a senior Iranian team inked pacts in the agriculture, education, health and defense, they said.

Meanwhile, the US again threatened to invade Pakistan. I remember a similar situation in 2004 when a US diplomat made the news, but now the warnings are from President Bush himself. The latest exchange of words could have something to do with news that Al Qaeda recently signed an actual agreement with Pakistan to operate out of their northern territory. Other reports suggest that senior US officials have been playing hardball with Pakistan since 2001:

President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan says the United States threatened to bomb his country back to the Stone Age after the 9/11 attacks if he did not help America’s war on terror.

[…]

Musharraf told 60 Minutes that Armitage’s message was delivered with demands that he turn over Pakistan’s border posts and bases for the U.S. military to use in the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Some were “ludicrous,” such as a demand he suppress domestic expression of support for terrorism against the United States.

“If somebody is expressing views, we cannot curb the expression of views,” Musharraf said.

At first glance this suggests that Iran and China are getting news for humanitarian assistance and development of third world countries, while the US is demanding that foreign nations restrict freedoms or face military attack. At a time when the US needs the most diplomacy and support from allies to build support for its war on terror, it appears to be accomplishing the exact opposite. Colin Powell’s warning seems right on target, unfortunately.

In a letter released last week, he joined Senator John McCain and other prominent Republicans in opposing the White House demand that Congress redefine the convention. “The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism,” he said.

Three fishing boats. That’s what Iran apparently gave the Comoros. It seems so incredibly minor, but the impact is undoubtedly huge compared to French or even US actions and words in the current theatre of international relations.

I will never forget how people literally honored Americans and talked about a great land of freedom and liberty in the 1980s and 1990s. In Eastern Europe I was always greeted with scowls and suspicion if I spoke German but as soon as I said I was American I was honored with open arms and warm smiles. One man, in a little town in rural Hungary, was so excited he started to cry as he told me he had waited forty years for me (the Americans) to arrive in his neighborhood.

All that global goodwill is now undoubtedly shifting, if not evaporating altogether, as the Bush administration appears to fail to understand how and why it existed in the first place.