Skip to main content

Two Realities

Yesterday I was in Dallas.  I participated in a panel discussion: "What Cost Gas Drilling?" at the 48th Annual Conference of the Society of American Business Editors and Writers (SABEW) that took place in the beautiful Collins Executive Center at SMU.

The participants of my panel included Mr. Calvin Tillman, the Mayor of Dish, Texas; David Pool, Senior VP and General Counsel of Range Resources; Elizabeth Souder, a Staff Writer for the Dallas Morning News; and Andrea Gabor, a Professor of Business Journalism at the Baruch College - the panel leader.

Mr Tillman's deep anguish and fear for his children made the largest impression on me.  Mr. Tillman was demonized by the industry sources as an unreasonable person, who made crazy demands on the well-meaning companies producing natural gas in his community.  Mr. Tillman says that he is quitting the mayor's job, and is moving away from Dish to protect his children from what he fears are real health threats.

It was really heart-wrenching for me to see his anguish and be unable to help him.  But what would I tell him?  That I am a scientist and engineer, who knows all these highly specialized things no one understands?  That I would not fear as strongly for the health of my children, because I know better?  But do I?  I was never in Dish, and I never did any of the air-quality measurements myself, nor did I verify their correctness.

How would I communicate my highly structured and logical approach that is based on decades of training in science?   Physics, physical chemistry, organic chemistry, thermodynamics, phase equilibria, etc., are a bunch of empty words to most people, who have no way of relating to science and discerning what is true and what is not.  Who is lying, and who is not?  How big is the health risk of hydrocarbon vapors?  What does it depend on?  What happens to shallow aquifers with drinking water when they drill for gas?  If the water is cloudy and smells funny, is it a result of drilling in the neighborhood, or something else?

How does anyone know that I am not lying?  By watching my demeanor and body language, or by understanding my arguments?  Will anyone trust someone like me, who works with the industry and might know the truth, as opposed to someone else who has no experience, might be talking nonsense, but is not lying for sure?

On the way back, I reread most of a short book written by the famous British physicist, C. P. Snow, entitled: "The Two Cultures."  C. P. Snow talks there about the scientific and literary cultures, and how the two shall never meet, because of the irreconcilable cognitive and attitude differences.  Here is an appropriate quote that illustrates my anguish as well as any:
...It is obvious that between the two, as one moves from the physicists to the literary intellectual society, there are all kinds of tones of feeling on the way. But I do believe the pole of total incomprehension of science radiates its influence on the rest.  That total incomprehension gives, much more pervasively than we realize, living in it, an unscientific flavor to the whole "traditional" culture, and that unscientific flavor is often, much more than we admit, on the point of turning anti-scientific. The feelings of one pole become the anti-feelings of the other. If the scientists have the future in their bones, then the traditional culture responds by wishing that the future did not exist.  It is the traditional culture, to the extent remarkably undiminished by the emergence of the scientific one, which manages the western world. (Page 17)

Am I then surprised that some of the Regents of the UT System, and their experts, are anti-science?  Anti-research?  Anti-anything they do not understand, perceive as useless to their lives, and expensive to the society at large?  No, I am not.  We need to do a much better job explaining what it is that we do for others.  The usual "trust us" will not suffice. Perhaps the two cultures should meet, if only occasionally, fifty years after C. P. Snow's famous little book.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ascent of the Angry and Stupid

Scientifically speaking,  stupid  people harm themselves while also harming others. In addition, stupid people are irrational and erratic, and are very dangerous to others. After discussing the destructive role of the stupid in any society whatsoever, I will focus on the delicate interplay of actions of intelligent and helpless people, who in balance make or break a functioning democracy.  Unless things change fast in the US, we can kiss our democracy goodbye for decades. If you want to see how a virulent ascent of the stupid looks up close, and what implications it has for our fight against social injustice and climate change, please watch the brilliant " Don't Look Up " movie. Unvaccinated people demonstrating in Los Angeles. There are tens of millions of the raving mad and/or angry, stupid people in the US and other developed countries. Source: New York Times , 12/25/2021. I overlapped at UC Berkeley with Professor Carlo M. Cipolla for a decade, until his death in t

Confessions of a Petroleum Engineer and Ecologist

I just attended an SPE workshop, "Oil and Gas Technology for a Net-Zero World – Defining Our Grand Challenges for the Next Decade."  Of the 60 people in the audience, I knew 1/3, some very well.  It makes sense, because I have been an SPE member for 40 years, and a Distinguished Member for 20 years.  Last year, I received an SPE EOR/IOR Pioneer Award for my work at Shell and UC Berkeley on the thermal enhanced oil recovery processes that involved foams, and their upscaling to field operations. This was nice, because Shell recognized me as one of their best reservoir engineers, and in 1985 I received an internal Shell Recognition Award for the same work. But I am not a mere oil & gas reservoir engineer.  First and foremost, I am a chemical engineer and physicist, who has thought rigorously about the sustainability of human civilization , ecology and thermodynamics of industrial agriculture and large biofuel systems, as well as about the overall gross and net primary produc

Net Ecosystem Productivity is Zero on Planet Earth

In the last bog , I told you how the law of mass conservation governs the large-scale behavior of Earth's households - ecosystems - that must recycle all mass on average and export only low quality heat into the cold universe.  Now, I will give you a few useful definitions of cyclic processes, sustainability, and ecosystem productivity. Let me start from stating the obvious:  We live in a spaceship we cannot leave, a gorgeous blue, white and green planet Earth that takes us for a spin around her star, the Sun, each year. But this statement is imprecise. We really live on a vanishingly thin skin of the Earth, her ecosphere .   Think of this skin as of a thin delicate membrane, teaming with life and beauty, but incredibly fragile. We trample on this membrane and poison it.  Then we act surprised when it brakes and shrivels. Practically all life on the Earth exists between two concentric spheres defined by the mean Earth surface at the radial distance from the Earth's