In the ever advancing world of supercomputing, a long-sought milestone has been reached by the American military at Los Alamos National Laboratory with the help of IBM and an assortment of chip-designing companies.  The computer, "Roadrunner," is capable of 1.026 quadrillion calculations per second--a petaflop and change.  The machine utilyzes 116,640 cores including 12,960 chips that are an improved version of an IBM Cell microprocessor, a small(ish) number of Opteron processors, and the parallel processing controller chip used in Sony's Play Station 3¹.  Roadrunner was built first to calculate the reliability of the aging nuclear warheads of the US arsenal by simulating the first fraction of a second of the nuclear explosion under the varying conditions of the various warheads.  Later uses will include wildfire prediction and modeling, biomolecular modeling, material behavior modeling, dark matter cosmology, and climate prediction models².  This new technology will be invaluable in years ahead for physics, biomedical science, military and civilian material science, and environmental science, especially due to the resurgence of the global climate change debate. 

Recently a pettition arguing against "man-made" global warming was signed by 31,000+ scientists (of which 9,000+ are Ph.D.s)^3,4,5.  Even if these 31,000 are mistaken, it reveals that the statement, "The debate is over" is false.  "Common sense" says that man-made emissions are harmful to the climate, but the science does not always support that assumption.  More and more scientists are recently "coming out of the climate change closet" and revealing their skepticism of such arguments.  Perhaps this new landmark in computer science will grant us a more accurate calculation upon which to base our considerations of this topic.  Perhaps it will lead to a REAL concensus.  It is vital to this area of science that people check their emotions at the door, take off their green shades, and look at the subject with cold objectivity... something that has been in meager supply within the green movement for as long as I can remember.

On a personal note, of all the Ph.D. scientists that I've talked to about this subject during my years as a graduate student, I'd say it is split about 60-40... the 60% being opposed to the the thought that man is causing a significant portion of our current global warming.  Granted this is a small sample size, it is not an uncommon split.  Most support the idea that cycles or climate are the most likely cause of our recent [minor] increase in temperature.  I am determined to remain on the fence until more information is provided.

Some argue that even if it isn't happening, we should pretend that it is just in case.  This argument is a falacy.  Using the same logic, just about any paranoia for which there is any evidence (wrong or not) should be assumed truth for safety sake. Break out the alien-defense systems!  That's all well and good unless it winds up causing drastic food shortages, economic colapses, and an increased division of the capabilities of the rich and poor.

We do not need to use scare tactics to encourage technological advances that are more environmentally sound.  Such tactics lead to bad decisions.  The ethanol fuel movement--a direct result of quick Eco-friendly decision making--is a complete disaster.  The food required to make the biofuel needed to fuel one (1) SUV for a year (average usage) could feed 26 people^6,7.  Cooler heads need to prevail and come up with sensible ideas for stewarding the planet.  The solution is not fear, it is reason.

As for computing, what does the future hold?  Exaflop (1,000,000,000,000,000,000) here we come. 

 

---

(1) Markoff, John.  Supercomputing Sets Record. International Herald Tribune. June 9, 2008. http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/09/technology/09petaflops.php

(2) White, Andrew.  Science Based Prediction at LANL.  Scientific Discovery through Advanced Computing.  http://www.scidacreview.org/0702/html/hardware.html

(3) Tibbetts, Graham.  Scientists Sign Petition Denying Man-Made Global Warming.  Telegraph.co.uk.  May 30, 2008.  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/2053842/Scientists-sign-petition-denying-man-made-global-warming.html

(4) Unruh, Bob.  31,000 Scientists Reject "Global Warming" Agenda.  World Net Daily.  May 19, 2008.  http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=64734

(5) http://www.petitionproject.org/

(6) Brown, Lester.  Corn for Cars: Will Biofuels Starve the Developing World?  Spiegel Online International.   April 27, 2008.  http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,479940,00.html

(7) Ball, Tim.  Biofuel Madness: Environmentalism Exploited for Political Purposes.  Canada Free Press.  April 8, 2008.  http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/2557