Temperature Control

It is definitely easy to take important technologies for granted. I find that the technology I least appreciate is that which I am not in direct control of. I have my cell phone and my laptop with me all the time so it is hard to forget that they are important to me (and that they cost quite a lot, and that I am unwilling to leave them unsupervised for even a trip down the hall and back). However, only when I venture out into the oppressive heat of midday Raleigh do I fully appreciate the value of the air conditioning, refrigeration, and running water that I routinely use to keep cool.

It’s amazing to me, having thought about it more today than I ever had before, that we have the technology to cool down millions of people simultaneously. The numbers behind this feat are probably extraordinary. I would be interested in seeing just how much electricity is used by, say, everyone in the Triangle on air conditioning. I would also like to know how much is used on refrigeration and cooling of food and water, and other essentials. I think that by comparing these numbers with other common uses we would find that an enormous part of our energy expenditure goes to keeping us cool (or in the colder parts of the year, warm).

This is intriguing to me further in that it makes me wonder if this is an opportunity to save energy. Why can’t we approach the energy problem by breaking it into parts, and approaching those individually? It certainly wouldn’t hurt to make homes and other buildings more resistant to outside temperature changes, and therefore less in need of temperature control. It wouldn’t hurt to make refrigerators, freezers, and heating and air conditioning units more efficient in their use of energy. In my opinion, if people were willing to tolerate one degree higher temperatures in the summer and one degree lower temperatures in the winter, lots and lots of energy expenditure could be completely avoided. One degree of difference wouldn’t be that significant to the people having to feel it, but compounded over millions of households and businesses, I don’t think the savings would be anything to sneeze at.

Fast Food: Is Haste Waste?

A few weeks ago while vacationing at the beach I was watching television and came across an hour long show about the recent explosion of development in and general history of fast food technology. Needless to say, I was intrigued. On one level, it struck me as very impressive that fast food chains have reached the point where they can get you your meal, in many cases, within a single minute of ordering. I felt some sense of pride, being that many of these companies are American-based. However, it also seemed odd to me that so much money is going into research and development of new technologies aimed to shave seconds off of the fast food’s production time, while a vast number of the people in the world are undernourished, much less able to go to a fast food restaurant.

I realized that I know very little about what research is in progress and what technology exists in the context of feeding those who cannot acquire food themselves. I have made the assumption that at least some attention is being given to this issue, but to what degree I am quite unsure.

In 2010, surveys revealed that nearly a billion people in the world were hungry ^[1].  That being said, billions of dollars were, and continue to be, poured into research and development of faster and more efficient fast food technology. This issue raises some questions with ranges of arguable answers. First, should money be spent on the impoverished people of the world which are unable to eat, if they have no money of their own with which to provide an economic incentive for companies to do so? Staunch capitalists would tend to argue against provision of money for the benefit of these people, but those with a more humanitarian outlook on the matter would undoubtedly want to take some sort of action towards helping this large fraction of the world’s population. This brings us to our second important question: what exactly should be done about this problem? At least to me, there is no clear solution to a problem in which much money needs to be spent but there is little to no chance of recovery of capital. This seems like it should be a hotly debated issue but I believe it is eclipsed by more “urgent” issues. As widespread hunger has been present for a very long time, people may actually consider it normal and may therefore be less inclined to seek out a solution.

I would love to be corrected if my assumption (that the research regarding the feeding of the hungry is being done on a much smaller scale than that of making a cheeseburger three percent juicier or cooking fries 2.8 seconds faster per batch). I have not been able to find much evidence to suggest my assumption is wrong, but I would be happy if it existed somewhere. I don’t feel quite right about this neglect of those in need in favor of servicing those who are too impatient to wait thirty more seconds for their meal.