Thoughts On Prague

at Cardwell Bay

5 posts! Tumblr is sure easier to use than WordPress.

Dome City Blog 2 - What is my vision for a Dome City? Why might we build one?

The Guardian newspaper Reported on 6 October 2014, in an article by Nicholas Watt, that Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats are proposing 5 new garden cities between Oxford and Cambridge.  He suggested that this would provide around 50,000 new houses.  He was quoted as saying: “Garden cities are a vital cornerstone of our plan to boost house building to 300,000 homes a year – enough to meet demand and keep prices in reach – while still protecting our precious green space and preventing urban sprawl. Our plan is to build a series of high quality new towns and cities where people want to live, with green space, sustainable transport and spacious homes."

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/06/nick-clegg-promises-10-garden-cities-built-train-line-oxford-cambridge

  It is my view that dome cities could help to accomplish this aspiration of 300,000 homes per year.    Of course this is no use if no one would want to live in a dome city.  I have spoken to a few people and most of them are initially reluctant to consider living in a dome city.    First and foremost a dome city must be a place that is pleasant to live.  Briefly allow me to set out what I think a dome city will offer.   In my first blog of this series I proposed that a dome city is a geodesic dome 1 km in diameter and 500m high.  This first pass proposal would have around 48 equally spaced levels and a population density of 3860 people per square kilometre to house a total of around 100,000 persons.  To put this into context, this is a population density of Birmingham, UK or Miami, FL.  However, given the compactness of the site there will not be a need for cars within the dome.  I would suggest that lanes of about 4m in width will provide space for people to walk and cycle everywhere within the level.  Levels would be linked with elevators, escalators, stairs and ramps.  Walking and cycling are good for one's health.  In addition, I think these activities can foster a better sense of community because we are seeing and interacting with a fellow citizens as we walk and cycle.  When we're in our car our interaction is minimal.   I hope that this form of structure is feasible from a structural engineering point of view.  This isn't something I can answer at this stage so it could be something that destroys the feasibility of this proposal.   My second biggest concern would be to provide light to the centre of the dome, especially in the lower levels where the centre could be upto 500m from the edge.  I am hopeful that we could replicate daylight conditions during daylight hours with modern low energy lighting.  This lighting would follow the outdoor lighting levels so there will be a form of night in the dome with street lights for the residential areas.  Lighting is another aspect of the proposed design that I still have to investigate so it could be a show stopper.   Housing would mainly be in the form of single family dwellings.  In most cases people would not share any walls with their neighbours.  These homes could be prefabricated and built in a factory environment within the dome.  They should have outstanding design and flexible layouts and features.  I would hope that the initial residents would order a bespoke home to suit their exact needs.  These houses would then be delivered to their final location with only hook up and final fit out required.  This factory construction could greatly improve quality.  The housing should have high energy efficiency.  I would hope that we could make these homes very affordable.  Beside factory construction, another factor that could lead to lower cost is less need for waterproofing of the roof since the dome itself provides this.    I would propose that there be a power station adjacent to the dome city to provide electricity for the city.  The waste heat that arises from electricity production could be easily used for the supply of hot water all year round and heating in winter.  I was recently in Reykjavik. Iceland for a short holiday.  Hot water is never in short supply there and it make for some wonderful swimming opportunities.  Swimming is something I greatly enjoy.  This power source will form the topic of a future blog.   I would hope that we can provide extensive public spaces with opportunities for recreation such as sports like football, hockey (field and ice), bowls, tennis, badminton, basketball, swimming, ping pong etc...  We wouldn't want to neglect cultural aspects and there should be plenty of areas where these activities are encouraged and allowed.  To foster one facet of a vibrant and caring community, religions would be encouraged to provide churches/mosques/temples for their people to celebrate their religious beliefs in.  Public halls would also be a feature of the dome to encourage clubs, bands, youth groups and other organizations that allow us to build a civil society and connect with our fellow citizens.   Around each level in the dome, I would want to see a buffer of unbuilt space to allow people to see the sky and feel the wind on their face.  Given that Britain is a temperate country I do not envisage very much glazing on the exterior of the structure.  These buffer zones may become the places where the community goes for a stroll every evening.  I was once in Rostov on Don, and the Rostovian  make this a regular habit when I was visiting.    I would propose that here be a green belt at least 500m wide around the base of the dome. This green belt would mainly be in the form of park land  but some of it should be set aside for allotments, a community farm, and outdoor sporting facilities like grass football and rugby pitches.   With a population of around 100,000 people, good public transport links would be viable.  In addition, I expect that some of the residents will still need cars for commuting and excursions. An extensive parking garage would need to be provided.  I would also hope that some sort of car sharing/rental scheme arises to allow access to cars for those who don’t need to own a car. However, within the dome city, cars will not be required so some of the building area that is currently turned over to allow cars, trucks and buses to move around in modern cities becomes available for people.  Transport in the dome, for heavy goods, deliveries and for those with limited mobility, would be provided using electric vehicles.   With 100,000 people living in the dome there is an extensive demand for public services like schools, hospitals, police, fire fighters.  The city will need to provide services like energy, waste disposal, water and sewerage. Retail space would be needed to supply the needs to of the dome.  Light manufacturing would be encouraged as well as service industries.  I would hope that the dome city becomes a magnet for some that will form new businesses because they are attracted to the high density, good communication links and high quality of the community.  I would hope that it does not simply become a dormitory for commuters working in a nearby city.   Some people tell us to buy land, because they're not making any more of it. For a dome city the land area at the base of this dome is 0.785 square kilometres (194 acres, 78.5 hectares).  With the 48 levels the building area available within the dome is 25.3 square kilometres (6250 acres, 2530 hectares).  This has increased the available land area by a factor of 32.   The total land take assuming we have a 500m green belt around the site is 3.14 square kilometers.    This particular blog prompted by the extract shown below from The Economist magazine dated 04/10/2014   Having workers in the right places is critically important to generating more and better jobs. In both the rich and the emerging world unmet demand for housing is a significant constraint on growth. In developing economies many large cities have outgrown their capacity to house their populations, resulting in sprawling slums that harbour crime and disease. India’s government, for example, tightly restricts land use, making new construction costly and modern housing extremely expensive.   In rich countries restrictions on the supply of housing can be just as pernicious. In economically dynamic places such as New York and London the shortage of housing is a serious constraint on growth in output and highly paid jobs. Inadequate investment in infrastructure exacerbates the problem. As roads and trains become more crowded, residents grow wary of agreeing to new developments, and so it goes on.   Taken from: The Economist, Special report: The world economy, In this special report - The third great wave, Article Title: Means and ends - How governments can deal with the labour imbalance, Oct 4th 2014 | From the print edition   I hope this blog has made you consider dome cities as one possible way to address this problem of having workers in the right place. Dome City Blog Number 2  12 October 2014 Joe Heffernan   

"UV" -

I was down at the Boat Club today. David Jenkins and I did a 500m swim in around 16 minutes without wetsuit. Water temperature 9 degC. Highish tide going out. After our swim I needed to get more steps. These birds were sitting on The Esplanade railing across from the Old West Kirk. (at Greenock Esplanade)

Thoughts on our visit to Prague

Helen and I returned from our holiday in Prague last night. We had a good time, I’ve returned feeling relaxed and somewhat recharged.

I liked Prague a lot and I was thinking about what makes it such a nice city (for tourists like us).

In no particular order:

1 - Friendly and honest people. 2- A great city centre for walking around. 3 - Good public transport. 4 - Green space easily accessible from the city centre. 5 - Good affordability. 6 - A compact city centre with plenty of bars, pubs and Restaurants.

I will discuss this more in my future blogs.

Boxing Day Swim 🏊 - High tide, Force 7 High Winds Near Gale - David, Ernie and I didn't go far. We went up The Esplanade for around 100m the went towards the MOD slip and then back. We were in for around 12 minutes. The squalls and spray when you in the water are exciting. Water temperature 8.2degC (at The Royal West of Scotland Boat Club)

Geo-engineering with Nuclear Power - Biorock

Geo-engineering to me means man as a species doing something to change the whole world.  It is of interest because it has been suggested that perhaps we could use geo-engineering to either mitigate or delay the impacts of climate change caused by our proliferate use of fossil fuels.  Proposals range from the simple such as painting all roofs white to reduce the earth's albedo. To the grandiose of deploying large mirrors in space to reduce the the amount of solar radiation reaching the earth.  

In this blog I wish to suggest nuclear power be used to undertake geo-engineering.  I would like to think the proposal contained in this blog is at the simpler end of the geo-engineering scale.  The proposal is to use a nuclear reactor to produce electricity that in turn would power Biorock coral reef growth and restoration.  From Wikipedia - "Biorock, also known as Seacrete or Seament, is a trademark name used by Biorock, Inc. to refer to the substance formed by electro-accumulation of minerals dissolved in seawater."  The nuclear power plant (NPP) would be the source of the electricity in this process.

In this proposal, a NPP would be located near the coast and provide electricity for the electro-accumulation.  The wikipedia article suggests "that one kilowatt hour of electricity will result in the accretion of about 0.4 to 1.5 kg (0.9 to 3.3 lb) of biorock, depending on various parameters such as depth, electrical current, salinity and water temperature."  The main components of biorock are mainly calcium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide, again as provided by the Wikipedia article.

The chemical formula for limestone, a major component of biorock is Calcium Carbonate (CaC03).  Therefore one mole of CaCO3 weights (40g + 12g + 3*16g) = 100g.  I don't know the typical ratio of calcium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide in biorock but let me guess it is 50% calcium carbonate and 50% magnesium hydroxide.  Assume that  1 kw-hr of electricity will produce 0.4 kg of biorock which converts to 0.2 kg Calcium Carbonate.  Therefore each 0.2 kg of Calcium Carbonate contains 24g of Carbon (Chemical symbol "C").

Now assume we build a NuScale SMR which has a nominal output of 45Mw electric with 90% availabilty and  typical carbon lifecycle output of 16g CO2 per kw-hr which converts to 4.4g Carbon per kw-hr (4.4g = 16g *12/44).  Therefore each kw-hr of electricity can remove 19.6g (24g - 4.4g = 19.6g) of Carbon from seawater.  The NuScale reactor produces 45,000 * 0.9 = 40,500 kw electric over the life of the reactor.  Therefore each year a NuScale reactor would remove (40,500 * 24 * 365)kw-hr * 19.6 g per kw-hr = around 7,000,000,000 grams or 7 million kg or 7000 tonnes of carbon per year.  It is also expected that the new or repaired reefs will sequester further Calcium Carbonate by biologic means as corals reestablish 

Is this worth doing?  It turns out that according to Tesco the average British person has a carbon footprint of 15 tonnes of CO2 (around 4 tonnes carbon per year).  Therefore, 1 NuScale plant will offset the carbon emissions of 1750 people.  On this basis this doesn't seem a very sensible idea.  That seems to me to be a large effort to offset the emission of 1750 Brits or 0.003% of the population.  This shows just how hard it is to remove carbon from the world once we have dumped it by burning fossil fuels.

On the other hand some low lying topical islands might consider this a reasonable idea if it were to make their communities less vulnerable to storm surges or rising sea levels.  The NuScale reactor would allow the production of around, 40,500 * 24 * 365 * 0.4 / 1000 = 141,912 tonnes of biorock per year.  The typical density of limestone is around 2.5 tonnes per cubic metre.  I will assume that biorock has the same density. Therefore, the NuScale reactor would allow around 56,000 cubic metres of biorock to be produced in a year. If the biorock were grown in a strip 100m wide and 1m thick each year around 560m of coastline could be protected.  

The above is a very simple calculation with simple assumptions.  I recognise that the above has not considered the carbon input required for the metal used to make the initial structure.  It is my understanding that the biorock process can continue for many years as the biorock accumulates.  There are probably other carbon inputs that I have missed. On the other hand some of the assumptions above are conservative.  Two conservative assumptions are the production of biorock per kw-hr and the availability factor of 0.9 for the NuScale reactor.  Both numbers could well be larger. 

The next time I write about geo-engineering with nuclear power I will look at biochar.

Have a nice day.

The Economist | Land-shackled economies: The paradox of soil via @theeconomist

First entry into Tumblr

This is my first post in Tumblr.  This seems a nice system for writing blogs.  I have sort of tried Wordpress but it doesn't lend itself to short posts.  I will move the blogs that I have created so far to here.  I'm not going to put any tags on this entry.  - Note to myself - Only one entry per day.  I was following a blog on Tumblr called "Today I learned (TIL)".  With a title like that you might expect to learn one new and hopefully important thing per day.  No he/she seems to put things out every hour and it completely clogged up things.  I got fed up and stopped following the blog.