Author Archives: curiouscat

2004 Medal of Science Winners

Presidential Medal of Science - USA

President Announces 2004 Medal of Science Winners

Winners included:

Biological Sciences, Regarded as the “Father of the Green Revolution,” Norman Borlaug, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970 for his efforts to feed the world’s hungry through improved farming techniques
Engineering, Edwin N. Lightfoot is Hilldale Professor (emeritus) at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. He was one of the first biochemical engineering professors in the United States and a forerunner in biomedical engineering. He is awarded the Medal of Science for vigorous and sustained leadership in developing the fields of biochemical and biomedical engineering, particularly in the areas of blood oxygenation, oxygen diffusion into tissue, mathematical modeling of biological pathways, bioseparations and studies of diabetic responses
Chemistry, Stephen J. Lippard is the Arthur Amos Noyes Professor of Chemistry at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. An expert in the interactions between metal ions and biological molecules, Lippard is considered the leader in inorganic chemistry in living systems. He revealed the mechanism by which the anti-cancer drug cisplatnin binds to DNA and inhibits growth in cancer cells and is currently applying that knowledge along with other chemical and gene-therapy strategies to develop better platinum-based molecules and protocols for cancer chemotherapy.
Behavioral or Social Sciences, Kenneth J. Arrow professor of economics (emeritus) at Stanford University. He made groundbreaking contributions to the pure theory of economics

Converting Emissions to Biofuels

Converting emissions to biofuels at GreenFuel Technologies:

In the unit, non-toxic photosynthetic algae ‘eat’ the carbon dioxide and break the nitrogen-oxygen bonds. Scrubbed gas vents from the chimneys at the unit apex. Inline sensors monitor system performance and provide remote reporting, and a built-in automated harvesting system gathers algae ‘crops’ on a preprogrammed schedule, typically daily. The bioreactors are even self-cleaning.

The technology was tested at the MIT Cogeneration Plant (delivered 86% NOx reduction under all conditions, along with 50% CO2 reduction on rainy days, and 82% CO2 reduction on sunny day) and is now being tested at a commerical power plant.

Read news reports about the technology: Power Plants and How Algae Clean the Air

Read a more detailed report from the company: Air-Lift Bioreactors for Algal Growth on Flue Gas: Mathematical Modeling and Pilot-Plant Studies

Shortage of Engineers?

Training Engineers – Continually by Ken Jarboe, quoting a Wall Street Journal article:

Many companies say they’re facing an increasingly severe shortage of engineers. It’s so bad, some executives say, that Congress must act to boost funding for engineering education.

Yet unemployed engineers say there’s actually a big surplus. “No one I know who has looked at the data with an open mind has been able to find any sign of a current shortage,” says demographer Michael Teitelbaum of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.

I would like to see data to confirm on refute this claim (such as the unemployment rate for engineers over time and pay for engineers over time) but some evidence seems to indicate there is a demand to pay engineers well. That makes me think it is unlikely there is a huge oversupply of engineers (if there was a huge oversupply prices would fall). Granted skill mismatches could account for increasing salaries for engineers while other engineers are unable to find jobs.

Also the marketplace (for any employees, including engineers) is indeed inefficient. But that inefficiency is not complete (so while waste is in the system where employers are not most effectively employing available candidates the system does match the employers and employees). I think it is definitely true the inefficiency of the marketplace hurts companies, potential employees and the economy.

Making the marketplace more efficient would be great but we seem to be making little progress in that area. On a personal level I have long believed the employment marketplace is very inefficient. I think this is true for a variety of complex reasons. I also think companies that figure out how to do so more effectively will gain a competitive advantage. I don’t think their are easy solutions. I believe companies that chose to manage the employee recruitment process using management improvement concepts will gain an advantage over others.

Graphic from the CNN article (April 2005): Average starting salaries for class of ’05 higher — in some cases notably — than last year. 6 of the highest paid starting salaries by major are engineering majors (the other is computer science).

Aerospace and aeronautical engineering majors, for instance, are enjoying a 9 percent increase in starting salaries; marketing majors have seen a 6 percent increase in starting salaries; while economics and finance majors are getting paid 5.1 percent more than last year.

Meanwhile, chemical, mechanical and civil engineers are also seeing paychecks that are at least 4 percent higher.

While such data does not show the health of the entire engineering field it sure is a positive indication for those starting out.

Ken Jarboe:

Let’s put our attention on the total skill development of the S&T workforce – and everyone else, for that matter. That is how we will strengthen our competitive advantage and avoid the skills-person mismatch that seems to plague our S&T labor market

I agree with a focus on a more comprehensive look at education and skill development. A huge amount of education is now done in the workplace. But this transition away from academic learning to employment learning needs to be factored into public policy. We also need to figure out how to incorporate these changes in learning into the hiring process and the economy as a whole. We are making those changes now but in a fairly inefficient way, without much planning and thought. I don’t know what should be done but I do believe this is something in need of improvement.

Companies Not Countries

Companies, Not Countries, Hold The Key to Innovation Leadership by Lester Craft:

But given the overall trend, I would argue that we are quickly heading toward an era where corporations view innovation almost strictly in terms of their own global self-interest rather than in terms of one nation or another. If this is true, then we need to adjust our thinking about America’s role as an innovation leader. When it comes to innovation and intellectual property, it may be that companies are replacing countries as the entities that make the rules.

I agree the impact of countries is declining and companies increasing. Still governments hold a great deal of power to create environments that are supportive or hostile to innovation and thereby influence where it is done.

One, of many reasons, the Untied States succeed in the last half of the 20th century was wise government support of innovation. Now other countries such as India, Singapore, China, Korea… are taking smart action also.

There is still plenty of room for government policy to influence where innovation will take place. As mentioned in my previous posts (see below) being the country that trains doctoral candidates has many benefits. If any country trains 50% of the science and engineering doctoral candidates in 2050 they will have a huge advantage in innovation. Tax policy also has an impact. Intellectual property rights also have an impact. Many factors that governments largely define (and therefore differences exist between countries in how well these factors support innovation and where investors will choose to invest) will play a role in what countries innovation flourishes in going forward: infrastructure, legal system, primary education system, health care system, financial system, funding and encouraging basis research…

I happen to side with those like Lawernce Lessig that believe we are harming the United States economy by having a government policy that too restrictive about intellectual property. I believe countries that have sufficient clout to stand up to the United States, and who have a more sensible IP policy will gain a great advantage if the United States were not to adjust policies based on the ideas of Lessig and others.

The change that I think should be made is to see the role of government as a influencer of what the future will hold rather than a dictator. The actions the United States government takes will be one factor that determines where innovation takes place (and what geographic location gains the largest economic benefit) but other countries, companies and individuals will also make decisions. It will be a much more interdependent system than in the past. And no one player will be able to dictate the action.

Google’s success is not solely due to the fact it was formed in the United States. But there are many reasons why Google, ebay, Amazon, Yahoo… are based in the United States and have lead the way in internet innovation. The challenge for the United States is to keep those comparative advantages as high as possible even though the advantages are declining and will continue to do so, in my opinion.

Article: Is the US Patent System Endangering American Innovation?

Schoofs Prize for Creativity

Photo of interlocking bowl baby tray

Photo: “Tara Jo Schiltz designed the interlocking bowl and tray system for use with a baby’s high chair. The system locks the bowl in the tray preventing the child from throwing the bowl to the floor.”

The Schoofs Prize for Creativity is open to undergraduate students at the University of Wisconsin – Madison.

Other winners included:

First place and $10,000 — Nick OBrien, Chandler Nault and Mitch Nick for “The FireSite:” A transmitter/receiver system designed to guide firefighters out of smoke-filled buildings.
Second place and $7,000 — Ben Jaeger, Natalie Meagher, Mark Webb, Lynn Daul, Dominic Kasten for the “Baseboard Booster:” A collapsing stool that fits in the space behind the baseboard of a cabinet
Third place and $4,000 — Sean McHone for “RoboMouse:” A fishing lure that replicates the appearance and movements of a live animal in the water.

More details on the 2005 competition.

July 2005 Wall Street Journal article on the 1996 award winner: For This Inventor, The Perfect Beer Is All About the Tap:

He was not the first college student to dream of ways to get to his alcohol more quickly. What set Mr. Younkle apart is that he chose, soberly, to follow through.

Ten years later, Mr. Younkle, 31 years old, is president and chief technology officer of TurboTap, a company marketing a finger-sized nozzle that attaches to standard beer faucets and pours draft beer at least twice as fast as traditional systems do, and with less spillage. The company, based here, has installed about 1,000 TurboTaps at bars, restaurants and ballparks—including Chicago’s two major-league baseball stadiums and Cleveland’s Gund Arena.

Boosting Engineering, Science and Technology

Photo of the South’s Boosting Engineering, Science and Technology (BEST) Middle and High School Regional Robotics Championship. The event was hosted by the Ginn College of Engineering at Auburn University.

Teams of middle and high school students from across the eastern U.S. headed to Auburn University this month to showcase their prize winning robots and engage in spirited head-to-head competition centered on the theme “Mission to Hubble.” They also had a chance to visit with NASA astronaut Story Musgrave
…
The competition began in September when sponsor-provided kits of standardized parts were distributed, the game challenge was revealed and teams began to design and build their remote-controlled robots. A portion of these teams also chose to compete for the BEST award, which challenges students to market and display their creations.

In October the teams competed at 26 BEST hub sites in 10 states. One month later, the winners of these hub competitions packed up their robots, displays, pep bands, cheerleaders and mascots and headed to Auburn.

We posted a few days ago about less than exciting outreach efforts. This seems like a much more captivating idea to interest students in engineering.

This year’s BEST award went to Wheeler High School, in Marietta, Georgia. Davison High School from Davison, Michigan placed first in the robotics competition.

Two more regional events are scheduled in the next few weeks. Learn more including how your school can participate next year see.

BEST is a non-profit, volunteer-based organization whose mission is to inspire students to pursue careers in engineering, science, and technology through participation in a sports-like, science and engineering-based robotics competition.

Scientific American 50 Award

Scientific American 50 Award:

first annual celebration of visionaries from the worlds of research, industry and politics whose recent accomplishments point toward a brighter technological future for everyone.

Awardees include:

Alice H. Amsden, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Identified strategies for economic development that could be of singular value to non-Western countries on the rise.
Ken Deering, Wind Turbine Company, designed new wind turbines that are more efficient and produce more power.
Lawrence Lessig, Stanford University Law School, argued against interpretations of copyright that could stifle innovation and discourse online.

Colored Bubbles

The 11-Year Quest to Create Disappearing Colored Bubbles by Mike Haney, Popular Science.

Colored soap bubbles! Of course! Everyone loves blowing bubbles. It seemed such a simple and perfect idea, the kind that would leave other inventors slapping their foreheads and saying Why didn’t I think of that? Kehoe says, “I remember walking down to the store thinking, ‘This is so easy. I’m going to be rich!’ “

Well, rich maybe, but not so easy.

The long years of desk jobs and desperate late-night experiments were finally over. He had done what the toy companies had told him to, and now it didn’t matter what they thought. He had his own well-financed company and a washable bubble. It was time to tell the world.

Photo gallery and movie of the colored bubbles.

Red Blood Cell’s Amazing Flexibility

Scientists Discover Secret Behind Human Red Blood Cell’s Amazing Flexibility:

The human red blood cell membrane skeleton is a network of roughly 33,000 protein hexagons that looks like a microscopic geodesic dome.
…
a team of UCSD researchers describe a mathematical model that explains how a mesh-like protein skeleton gives a healthy human red blood cell both its rubbery ability to stretch without breaking, and a potential mechanism to facilitate diffusion of oxygen across its membrane. “Red cells are one of the few kinds of cells in the body with no nucleus and only a thin layer of protein skeleton under their membrane: they are living bags of hemoglobin,” said Amy Sung, a professor of bioengineering at UCSD’s Jacobs School of Engineering

Seeing Cellular Machinery

An electron microscope image generated by the Nogales Lab, where kinetochore rings are visibly bound to the microtubules, from Seeing Cellular Machinery article from the always interesting ScienceMatters@Berkeley.

A cell is perhaps the most complex factory in the world. The basic structural and functional unit of all life, cells convert nutrients to energy, perform highly specialized tasks based on instructions stored in their DNA, and reproduce themselves. How are these feats accomplished though? UC Berkeley biologist Eva Nogales is using electron microscopy to watch some of these cellular mechanisms in action.