Legislative Update & Lawrence Krauss on Science

Legislative Update & Lawrence Krauss on Science

Articles, Blog , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 9 Comments


>>>Coming up next on “Arizona Horizon,” there could be a break through in the fight over Medicaid expansion. Find out more in our weekly legislative update with “The Arizona Capitol Times.”>>>And carbon dioxide levels have reached proportions never seen by Humane Society. What does it mean? We’ll have world renowned physicist Lawrence Krauss. Those stories next on “Arizona Horizon.”>>”Arizona Horizon” is made possible by contributions from the friends of eight. Members of your Arizona PBS station. Thank you.>>>Good evening, and welcome to “Arizona Horizon.” I’m Ted Simons.>>>The logjam over the budget and Medicaid expansion may be nearing an end. Here to give us the latest is Luige Del Puerto, of “The Arizona Capitol Times.” Good to see you. Very busy day. Let’s just start from ground zero. This all begins with senate president Andy Biggs deciding he’s got a plan.>>Senate president Andy Biggs decided to push ahead with his own budget proposal, and that started the ball rolling. His budget plan includes his alternative proposal to the governor’s Medicaid expansion. Basically what he’s seeking to do is for the state to pay for the childless adult population, yes going to continue the freeze to their — On their enrollment and if the feds decide they are not going to pay or to continue or expand their share of the costs of paying for their insurance, the state alone would pay for that. Of course that runs counter to the governor’s own Medicaid expansion proposal. And so that started the ball rolling it.>>sounds like the senate plan was similar to the governor’s plan except for that one big caveat.>>That’s true. There are several portions of the senate plan that is close to what the governor wants to do when it comes for money for CPS, for example. The way it’s described the governor should be happy with the rest of the budget plan.>>So with that in mind, was this a surprise move by the senate president? Was it an unusual move?>>It wasn’t necessarily a surprise move on the part of the president. He’s been trying very hard to get a budget in the last few weeks. He tried this tactic before, and it has failed. It has failed because he doesn’t have the support to get a budget out without the Medicaid expansion proposal. That the governor wants to see in the budget. Now, by actually doing this now, he may in fact be facilitating the beginning of the ending of this Medicaid expansion debate. Because there is no way that this budget — The press deposits — What the president is offering will get out of the senate without the governor’s Medicaid expansion proposal. Either that, or the budget fails.>>So it sounds like the votes are there in the senate.>>Yes.>>For the expansion plan.>>Yes. That’s true. What’s likely going to happen is that now that the senate appropriation committee has approved all 10 budget bills, they’re going to move to the floor for debate and a third reading tomorrow. Senator McComish will offer the Medicaid expansion amendment to one of the bills, and as far as we can tell there is sufficient votes to pass the particular amendment and to get the budget out of the senate.>>That means there are a number of Republicans going along with the idea of expansion. How many, who are they?>>There’s at least three, there could be up to five members. We know, for example, that senator rich Crandall, senator bob Worsley and Steve Pearce have all declared support for the proposal. Of course we have senator john McComish who said he’s in support of the plan. And we will likely see senator bob Worsley also supporting this proposal.>>So we had a hearing today — Everything else went pro forma as far as the appropriations hearing? Any fireworks?>>It was a pretty civil discussion, democrats pretty much voted against the budget. It was a part line — Party line vote. They had a chance to criticize the points of the budget and basically said we need more funding for this area, that area. But it was pretty civil and they got a budget out. I think in a shorter time than most people had an at this time pated.>>The floor debate is set for tomorrow, and that we should get at least sparklers going.>>We should get fireworks. I think president Biggs has declared several times he’s opposed to Medicaid. There are a good number of Republican senators who are adamant against this proposal, and on the other hand, we have this group of senators, democrats and Republicans, who want to see it through and like I said, they have the votes.>>I want to get to the house, but as far as today, with everything else going on in appropriations, that’s a lot of bills passed, a lot of budget stuff going O was there any concern there this was rushed, not as transparent as it should have been?>>I didn’t hear so much of that. I think people expect the at some point somebody has to give in. Some would have to start this process. And senate president Andy Biggs started this process, and in a way facilitated the passage of the governor’s expansion proposal. We don’t know that for sure, because once the senate approves this budget plan, with the governor’s Medicaid expansion proposal in it, it moves over to the house, and now it is in a house speaker Andy Tobin’s court.>>Let us move to the house as well. It sounds like the speaker is floating his own idea, letting you and me decide.>>Yes. The speaker wants to punt this Medicaid question over to the voters. The key differences in the way he would want this Medicaid expansion to happen, but basically the speaker and the governor agrees that the state should expand its AHCCCS coverage to 133% — To cover those who earn up to 133% of the federal poverty level. That’s a key element in both proposals.>>But still in all, why is he punting? My impression is he thinks he needs a two-thirds vote S that one of the reasons?>>There’s speculations about why he’s doing it. He may be trying to protect his members, to give them as much political cover as possible by punting this question to the voters. They’re not directly violating the constitution, maybe, they’re not directly raising taxes. Or they’re not directly putting themselves in the line of fire. The Republican grass-roots are adamantly against this proposal. That may be one of it. There is another speculation that he’s probably doing it just to start the discussion. Meaning to say, he may not necessarily ultimately push for moving over the questions, but he wants to offer his proposal. So then he has a starting point. This is what he wants, this is what the governor wants, maybe they can meet somewhere in the middle.>>When they find out what the senate wants and it’s sent over there, of those three ideas, making us make the decision, the senate’s budget coming over by way of senator McComish, or the third, what?>>The third one would be the state basically paying for the insurance –>>which is not going to happen.>>It’s probably DOA in the senate. I don’t see the senate passing the senate president’s Medicaid alternative proposal. In fact, what we know right now is that there’s — Of the three options, there’s only one that has sufficient support of passing the senate and most likely the house. That’s the governor’s plan.>>Referral to the ballot is one thing, but when you send it to the senate what’s going to happen there?>>The five Republicans and the third democrats in the senate who support the governor’s expansion plan are probably going to balk at the idea of punting this question to voters.>>Does it seem like the president of the senate and the speaker of the house are on the same page?>>Clearly they are not. Senate president Biggs has his own proposal. He initiated his budget process by saying here’s our senate budget plan, and the speaker has his own proposal about how to go about with Medicaid expansion. So clearly they are not on the same page.>>Not on the same page, but they could be within the same ballpark because they both realize something’s got to be done, they gotta get out of there and this may get a couple balls rolling toward the finish line.>>I think what’s happening is that we are seeing the beginning of the ending of this Medicaid expansion debate for. For the last four months or so this subject has dominated the state capitol and subsumed every other major issue we have out there. Finally, by having three interpretive proposals, we could see one of them finally getting out.>>It’s certainly dominate our discussions on our weekly legislative update with “The Arizona Capitol Times.” We look forward to exciting times tomorrow during the floor debate.>>>It’s time again for our monthly science news update with ASU physicist Lawrence Krauss. Tonight we talk about unprecedented carbon dioxide levels and potential break throughs in both solar and electronics technology. Here now is Lawrence Krauss. How are you doing?>>It’s good to be here, as always.>>Good to have you here as always. Let’s start with this business of new info on monitoring of CO2. It’s getting up there.>>Yeah, you know, there’s a curve called the keeling curve named after Professor Keeling, who was started in 1950s, moderating the carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere, which goes up and down during the year as vegetation grows and dies. But in fact, it’s the basis of our understanding of the fact that the greenhouse effect is happening. And it’s been elevating up every year, and it’s now reached a threshold that many people feared. In fact it was 315 parts per million when he started, I believe. And now it’s past the 400 parts per million. There was one day last week where for a full 24 hours, because it depends on the time of day, it goes up and down, but for a full 24 hours it passed the 400 parts per million level, which was a threshold we hoped not to get to.>>How do we know this is the highest level ever? We know this index, but what about ever?>>Ever, since humans have been human, at least. One of the ways we can do that is by look at ice cores, drilling deep ice cores down in that Antarctica. The ice builds up, and as ice forms, air bubbles get trapped in the ice. And you can like a tree in fact, by looking at rings of a tree, by drilling down and looking at those cores, you can see — You can measure the air bubbles as a function of height, and that’s as a function of time. And you go back 500,000 years, and measure the carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, and you can see that it was never near, never near what it is now. Over the last 500,000 years. There are times in human history when it was much greater. It was very important for the history of the earth actually when the earth formed, the sun was 15% cooler, or — Basically 15% cooler, and the earth would have been an ice cube except there was 10,000 times more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere back then. And that greenhouse effect kept the oceans liquid. So in fact it was important for the evolution of life. But that was 4 billion years ago.>>We didn’t have New York City or civilization going on.>>We can measure the sea levels at the same time as we measure the carbon dioxide levels over those 500,000 years, and the sea levels have gone up and down. Even though it’s never achieved the level it has now, the sea levels have gone up and down by 80 meters.>>So with this in mind, you wrote something about us being able to remove and sequester CO2 from the atmosphere.>>What people don’t realize is they think, OK, we can put it off, we have a bad economy now, we can put it off. But this is cumulative. The carbon dioxide that is in the atmosphere now will stay there, even if we turned open everything now, would stay there for a few thousand years. So no matter what we do, and we’re not doing much, unfortunately, address the production of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, we’re going to have to begin to wonder whether we need to reduce it. Because at 400 parts per million, there is going to be severe consequences. And as I say, 15 we stopped all industrial production now, it wouldn’t go below 400 parts per million. So we began to think about whether it’s necessary to at least begin to investigate the need to reduce it from the atmosphere. And that means directly take it out from the atmosphere. Right now at coal plants, we can try and remove the carbon dioxide in the flues. But people have proposed actually trying to just have devices that will trap carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and eventually reduce the level. Because we’re in a situation now, and there’s no evidence that we’re cutting back, so 400 as bad as it was is nowhere near as high as we’re going to get. We could get to 50, 500 before we get to our senses.>>So how would you capture this stuff in the air?>>There’s a lot of proposals out there. And one is to — One that is particularly interesting is to use resin that when it’s dry will capture carbon dioxide and when it’s wet will release it. And you can use — Otherwise the energy cost of doing this is incredibly — You know, trees store carbon dioxide, and — But it all has an energy cost. And you don’t want to use more energy to trap the carbon dioxide than you need to otherwise it’s pointless endeavor. So this is interesting, because what you basically do is go to dry parts of the country, trap the carbon dioxide, then you run water over it and as the water evaporates, you run the water out, release the carbon dioxide which you then sequester underground, then let the water evaporate by sunlight and then repeat the whole process again. The question is, is this practical? And the answer is we don’t know. But the point is, we’re spending hundreds of billions of dollars on subsidies for fossil fuel exploration and amenities, but we’re not funding research at all. At the level of even millions of dollars. So what with a we’ve argued is we have to start thinking about these new technologies and fund research to see if they’re practical.>>Is anyone thinking about these new technologies?>>There are lots — Yeah. We had a meeting here at ASU and there’s a group at Columbia that’s been thinking about these new technologies that claim it’s practical. But they don’t have any government support. Or any private investor support. So there are a lot of ideas about ways to trap and sequester carbon dioxide, and we don’t know if they’re practical. I’m skeptical about many of them. But unless you invest the money to see, then you’ll never know. And I guess the point is, we’re approaching a climate emergency. We’ve been saying that for a while. But hopefully maybe the 400 part per million level, which we’ve been dreading getting to, will be enough of a wake-up call that maybe we should spend some money.>>It’s almost like someone who has clogged arteries decides to exercise and eat right, that’s great, but the arteries are still clogged.>>exactly. We’ve created a mess — A lot of people say, why should we in the United States be thinking about this right now China is a big polluter. But the point is, we created the mess. Most of the carbon dioxide that’s up there was based on industrial activity in this country. And so in some sense you’d say we have an ethical obligation to at least think about cleaning it up.>>Let’s talk about something that I think you would be even more skeptical about. I thought this was fascinating. A guy by the name of Ronald Ace. It’s a good name.>>He invents what he’s calling a flat panel solar trap that could be able to — It sounds to me, I’m talking to you like I know what I’m talking about, but it sounds like it would be able to store high temperatures. Store solar energy.>>It sounds too good to be true.>>It does.>>And most things that sound too good to be true are too good to be true. It was announced in an article that this guy had filed a patent for this new technology. But I have to say, it has all the ear marks that make me worry. First of all I’m always skeptical about any new claim. Revolutionary discoveries are usually wrong. But this has another trap. He doesn’t want to talk about the details because he wants to wait until the patent. So it’s all secret. So no one has been able to peer review it. It’s this incredible discovery — Except a friend of his who’s reviewed the calculation and says oh, it’s obvious when you see this. I have seen this happen so many times before. If you want to make a bet about whether it’s going to work — The there are a lot of smart people who have been spending a lot of time trying to figure out how to make solar panels more efficient. If we could, it would be incredibly important. Now, it’s not impossible that someone working in their abatement comes up with some idea that many, many scientists who spend their lives on this haven’t come up with it. It’s certainly not impossible, but it’s highly unlikely. As I’ve told you before, I have this policy, I like to keep my an object open mind but not so open my brains fall out.>>There’s no peer review, no working prototype –>>just calculations.>>OK. And the best friend says this guy is a genius. Besides all that, why can’t we store energy over like 1400 degrees — Whatever it is? Why is that so difficult?>>The problem is it’s a law of physics that you radiate more efficiently the higher the temperature. The hotter you are, the better you radiate. And so you want to get these things hot to make it efficient turbine to run power, but the hotter they get, the more quickly they radiate the energy that you put in. And it turns out at about 14 or 1600 degrees these things radiate out more energy than you’re putting in. It’s a simple law of physics. The power radiated goes as the fourth power of the temperature. And — Of any system. So black bodies radiate more efficiently when they’re hotter. And it’s hard to overcome that basic law of physics.>>Last point on this, he’s describing it as something similar to a black hole in space. Everything goes in there and it’s captured, you’re not buying that.>>That makes me even worried more.>>All right. We’ll move on and talk about something called graphing, which apparently there’s some new discovery here, what is graphing?>>Graphing actually won the Nobel prize in physics in the 2010 for two guys at the University of Manchester. Really interesting physicists, one of whom had a hard time finding a job, have you got — So what graphing is, it’s carbon, just plain old carbon, like graphiTE, but it’s a single atomic layer. It’s carbon atoms layered in hexagons over a single plane. Carbon is a fascinating material. In a certain case it looks like coal, or graphite for a pencil, diamond is another configuration. Another Nobel prize was given a while ago, if you let the carbon molecules form carbon atoms for molecules, they form these Bucky balls. 60 carbon atoms form something like a dome. And they’re strong, and they can conduct electricity in an interesting way, and they were given Nobel prize. People have predicted if you could somehow make a single atomic layer of carbon, forms these hexagons, it would be incredibly strong and have really interesting electronic properties. In fact it would be so strong, a single layer of this, like a layer of paper, would be able to hold up a four kill gram cat, but the material would weigh as much as the cat’s whisker. It would be the strongest material. So these guys –>>we’ve been looking at this, what is this?>>The HEXAGONS is a carbon layer that’s built on a substrate, but they’ve put this weird hot complex molecule on top of it, and they found out that it orders itself to produce kind of a magnet. That’s interesting. The conduction properties of graphENE are interesting. It’s been produced. They produced it, let me just say, not by that very fancy substrate layer, but they just peeled graphite of and used scotch tape to pull off a single atomic layer, then melted the tape and that’s how they did it. It was literally in the Nobel museum they have scotch tape dispenser. That is really low tech, not high-tech. But — And they produced this single layer and found out it has these incredible electronic properties, but if you could make a magnet on it, then you could use it to store magnets — Store more information. Because the electrons that are on that surface that move around in a magnet, if they’re spinning, if they spin in one direction, they have a different energy than if they spin in the other direction. And that allows you to store information, and that allows a whole new set of possibilities for creating magnetic storage, optical storage, all sorts of new things. The amazing thing about graphene is they won the prize, because it had great promise. It hasn’t yet produced new devices. But this is one big step towards — If you can make a magnet on top of graphene, you can use it to make all sorts of new storage devices.>>When you mention spinning, is that when they talk about spintronics?>>It’s like electronics but Spintronics You can store — Obviously these devices can be used to move current, because they have very high conductivity, but if you want to store information, you can store it by storing charges, which is one of the ways we do in computers, but if you can store information using electronic spins you have twice as much information to store. If they’re spinning this way the magnets turn this way, if they’re spinning this way, the magnets produce that way, and there’s two spin states as well as each charge state. So spintronics is a way to make storage smaller and quicker. It’s the next stage of information technology.>>OK. The next stage, how soon before this next stage arrives? How big a deal is this?>>Well, it’s very exciting. I’m always worried about the hype, but it’s an important step. I was kind of surprised, frankly, they gave the Nobel prize for graphene when they did. It was something that clearly had great promise, but usually something has to show the promise works before it does. But every bit of evidence suggests it’s going to be a material that’s the strongest material ever made, let me say that. The strongest material ever made. It’s got conductivity levels that have never been observed before, and now that you can create magnets on it, it’s almost on the threshold of revolutionizing information technology. We’ll see if it does, but I’m much less skeptical of that than I am of the solar power — you mean the black hole of solar energy –>>the picture you saw was based on electron micrograph, so it’s been done. Promising to do something and actually doing it are two different things.>>You scientists.>>What can you do? It’s a tough life but someone has to do.>>Thanks for joining us as always.>>>And Thursday on “Arizona Horizon,” find out about an upcoming public hearing regarding the proposed south mountain freeway.>>>And we’ll tell you about a new research from the U of A regarding a link between Alzheimer’s and blood sugar levels. and 10:00 on the next “Arizona Horizon.”>>>That is it for now. I’m Ted Simons. Thank you so much for joining us. You have a great evening. Captioning Performed By LNS Captioning Www.LNScaptioning.com>>”Arizona Horizon” is made possible by contributions from the friends of eight. Members of your Arizona PBS station. Thank you.>>>When you want to be more informed, eight delivers news and analysis with multiple perspectives. Thanks to financial support from you and –>>best dental care AZ identifies selected dental offices in the Phoenix metro area, providing services from basic cleanings and fillings to advanced cosmetic procedures. More information at bestdentalcareaz.com.>>>Later on eight HD –>>in Africa, zebra foals must join a great migration for food and water. Strong family ties are vital, because for these zebras, it’s all about life, death, and an endless march. on eight HD.>>>Eight HD. Eight life. And eight world. This is Arizona PBS. Supported by viewers like you. Thank you.>>>Do you love to cook, travel, craft, paint, or woodwork? Then get the most out of life, an entire channel devoted to your favorite Robinson. Watch eight life on Cox 80 or over the air on 8.2. To find out how to tune in through your satellite or another cable provider, visit www.azpbs.org/life. Or call 602-496-2308. Get the most out of life. Eight life.>>>Eight celebrates Arizona history with a moment in time. Made possible by meteor crater. Beginning in 1918, prolific author ZANE frequented his cabin.>>Coming soon to eight HD.>>The easiest and best way to support eight, Arizona PBS S. by becoming a sustaining member. Your monthly contribution of $5 or more comes directly from your bank account or credit card. So you know your membership is always current. It also means no more renewal notices in your mailbox. More of your dollars go to the programs you love. It’s convenient for you, greener for us, and better for the planet. Become a sustaining member today.>>>Hi. I’ll Alberto Rios. Join me Sunday afternoons for an all-newer season of “books and company.” This week Mary Johnson stops by to discuss her book an all-new “books and company.”>>>on eight HD.>>>It’s amazing the fakery we were able to perpetrate.>>You can make them believe we were coming in with an armored division. There was nothing between the germane army and Paris but a bunch of rubber tanks. Setting ourselves up as targets. Suddenly you realize that’s the enemy. on eight HD.>>>Support for eight comes from viewers like you and from –>>hospice of the valley. Serving diverse patients and families with quality end of life care since 1977. The not for profit hospice cares for all, regardless of ability to pay. HOV.org.>>>The Persian room. Travel to another world, to a land of exotic aroma and period decor, for a fine dining experience. The Persian room in north Scottsdale on Scottsdale road one light north of Frank Lloyd Wright Boulevard.

9 thoughts on “Legislative Update & Lawrence Krauss on Science

  • Whateverworks. Post author

    YES!! Thanks for upload and thanks to Dr. Krauss.

  • Skorost' Post author

    Skip to 10:20 for krauss

  • freezewindow1 Post author

    thx!

  • bluewhale18 Post author

    My man Krauss!

  • Saffi M Post author

    If we trap the carbon dioxide, we can take it to Mars to kickstart the new atmosphere for us there 😀 Kill two birds with one stone!

  • Jonathan Michael Malatesta Post author

    I wonder if graphene could help in the future with making space elevators.

  • Artem Borisovskiy Post author

    "Kill two birds with one stone". Sometimes English idioms make me laugh. In Russia we say "kill two hares with one shot". A little bit closer to real life 😀

  • xxxxxrandom Post author

    How to get carbon dioxide off the atmosphere easy: plant a crapton of trees.
    Unfortunately that's not going to happen…

  • Koroistro Post author

    Have you any clue of how much energy would be needed for such a task?

    And anyway it's way easyer to trow into mars some meteorite/asteroid because it would lead to arleadly existing CO2 to outgass triggerring a runaway greenhouse effect 😀

    (Methane is even better than CO2 , it's over 40 times more efficient mass wise)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *