| Strategic Research Home |
Nexus of energy production and use, agriculture and the environment.
Taken individually, these three areas represent some of the biggest challenges facing mankind. Yet, these three systems are so strongly coupled at their nexus through their reliance on finite resources or external factors so that a major change in one will strongly impact the other two. Amongst these critical resources lies water. The projected population increase in the next two decades alone will place increasing demands on these three systems thus forcing choices that will favor one or more at the expense of the others. The demands put upon each system reflect societal choices as well as physical constraints. Understanding the critical processes that occur at the nexus of these systems will aid in making informed decisions for the future.
Often these choices are made by considering one of the three systems in isolation from the other two. Yet, the reality is that the three systems are so closely coupled that changes in one will often produce profound changes in the other two.
Already a scarce commodity in most parts of the world, changing the amount of water used in one system at the expense of the other two will have significant effects on both physical and societal processes. Thus, it is important to study the three as one large, complex system. This approach is particularly important as one considers long term changes induced by global climate change.
The University of Idaho has significant strength in these separate areas as well as available natural study areas comprising Idaho and the Inland Northwest. This program fits in well with the EPSCoR program and builds upon strengths in IWRRI, the Waters of the West, the Ecohydraulics Center and the Colleges of Law, Art and Architecture, Natural Resources and Agriculture and Life Sciences to name a few. .
Dr. John Tracy, Director of IWRRI, is the coordinator for this area.
Water fits in many of the suggested frameworks and is front and center in none – but crucial to almost all 5. Water is important for ag and energy. It is also important for urban areas, habitat and fisheries. In fact, it is the disconnect between these areas that is both a problem in society and academia. The proposed signature areas continue that disconnect and divide up a program already underway. Water may not be the defining element for the system studied across disciplinary boundaries — as conceived in the waters of the west program, it is both too broad and too narrow for the signature areas — maybe it is economic regions, or ecological regions, or something else, but regardless, research on habitat and urban development needs to be joined with research on energy and ag. My suggestion would be to get everyone back into the same room and start over with defining areas with faculty involvement in that. Maybe starting that with presentations by the interdisciplinary strategic initiatives on what they are already trying to accomplish would also be good – it may be some of our efforts need to be dropped and the new administration will take a different direction, but I would hope to see a dialog on that.
The English department is in the process of hiring a faculty member whose area of expertise will be addressing environmental issues through literature. We expect to complete the hire by mid-March. Part of our goal in this hire is to offer humanities-based perspectives for students and research faculty for projects like those discussed at today’s forum. We believe we can provide help with curriculum, mainly, but also with conferences and grant proposals. As soon as the person accepts our offer, we’d like to put him/her in touch with whoever is leading the charge on this initiative, even though our new faculty member won’t arrive on campus until August.
Tuesday, Feb 9, 2010, 1536h
Although I was only able to tuen in for about 30-45 minutes from Idaho Falls, here is what I observed in random order as I remember them.
1) with any ‘nexus’ of multiple disciplines, we need someone with system analysis expertise or interest. There is an INL CAES group that I work with that does cross-issues systems analysis
2) we cannot make progress if we worry about the ordering of words in the strategic research theme
3) we also cannot make progress if we promote specific sub-domain disciplines such as food safety
4) we need a process by which faculty who engage in interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary research (substantiated) step forward. I suggest posting CVs on a Website and for interested faculty to ‘rate’ the 1-10 degree of interdisciplinary-ness of say, publications and thesis titles
5) UI like most universities are classified across colleges and departments; it is not made for interdisciplinary research except per initiative of faculty members
6) we need a one or more buildings where faculty rotate setting up office for a semester or academic year where initiating interdisciplinary research is a required deliverable
7) we need an online poster forum (powerpoint with audioclip) on what interdisciplinary research we are interested in; that is, we need a ‘classified’ add that says, “male mechanical engineering researcher looking for female interested in biometrics” (just kidding but serious).
More later.
Akira Tokuhiro
PS As an undergrad at Purdue, I made my own curriculum that was approved by a faculty committee under Interdisciplinary Engineering. Purdue has had IDE for many years. Is there such an option at UI?
I suggest renaming this effort “Nexus of Energy Systems, Land Use and the Environment.” See messages below.
(John K. McIver to Jay O’Laughlin, Jan. 29, 2010) I have no problem with renaming the area. Your comments are both good and relevant particularly with respect to thinking of energy as a system. If truth be told, I think of the nexus as a system. This should be part of the discussion and could be a recommendation that comes out of the meeting. Ultimately we are going to have to chose a particular aspect since it is impossible for any university to claim excellence in the broader area.
(Jay O’Laughlin to John Tracy, Jan. 29, 2010) In my opinion this theme is too narrowly drawn and should be retitled “Nexus of energy systems, land use and the environment.” While I am not disputing that agriculture is a major land use and economic engine in Idaho, so are forests and rangelands. Through my role as a task force leader for the Idaho Strategic Energy Alliance, I have come to think of energy as a system, rather than a product, and I suggest we adopt that way of thinking.
I regret that I will be out of town when the discussion group meets, giving an invited presentation to a tri-state meeting of the Society of American Forests at Auburn University on “Ethics Regarding Carbon Credits.” Discussions of energy systems need to include carbon management and this should be a major part of this group’s focus, through life cycle analysis, economics and policy analysis, among other disciplinary approaches.
The forestry sector embraced sustainability in the mid-1990s, and most of the private timberlands in Idaho have been certified as meeting internationally accepted standards. There is a large potential for all of the state’s timberlands to contribute to a different energy future and to help capture and store atmospheric carbon.
I look forward to participating as the group moves ahead and beyond a too-narrowly drawn focus on agricultural land use.
I attended the Feb 09 forum. I was expecting this be centered on Energy, Agriculture and the Environment. Instead, it seems as if the decision had already been made, long before Feb 09, to center the focus and discussion on water. Yes, water is important and affects everything but so does the sun, the air and the soil. Focusing on Energy, Agriculture and the Environment plays to a much greater pool of talented people throughout the University. I believe that focusing only on one narrow area will exclude almost everyone in our community who isn’t already, for example, ‘working on water’. I would like to see a focus area that encourages people all across the University to join in on new activities.
I suggest this breakdown / classification of issues:
1) natural resources: land, water, minerals etc.
2) resource consumption: energy-derived from land, water, air, minerals. this includes the entire technology ‘cycle’ of energy usage
3) socio-politico-economic: self evident
Also common to all are the following fundamental metrics:
1) number-scales: things that you can ‘count’
2) time-scales: things that you can ‘clock’
3) distributions: a location metric
4) two key derived metrics: time rate change in number scales that gives the derivative; product of number scales with time that gives the integrative measure.
As for decisions, decision are always a ‘hybrid’ of many factors such as the following:
1) deterministic: binary, stochastic, risk-informed, Bayesian, majority, probabilistic etc.
2) epistemci and aleatory
I fear that unless you look at the big picture and as a system, we will not get very far.
I am just submitting a proposal on systems analysis of many of the issues under this nexus.
There are both systematic problems with interdisciplinary initiatives on a traditional campus like UI and frankly, the discretionary funds that VPR McIver spoke of, when divided up, is not going to amount to much. At best it might partially to fully fund one GRA.
So, even if we could pursue interdisciplinary research, here are some problems, given the structure that we have today:
1) except for interdisciplinary studies under COGS, the Deans / Department will try to take credit for any interdisciplinary graduate the faculty produce. The ‘home field’ for the participating grad student and faculty advisor has to be resolved as an issue.
2) unless we pool resources such as bringing in matching GRA funds, having seed money for one GRA will not make an impact or be significant by any means.
3) I suggest we start a Google Group page to post our interdisciplinary research interests and accomplishments.
Otherwise, we will be posting comments for a long time with limite participation. There is strength in numbers and teaming. Having a blog is a linear process and does not necessarily build community online.