Wednesday, October 30, 2013

Rom 1 reply, 41: Mike Licona answers Bart Ehrman et al on the reliability of the NT Gospels, in light of a commonplace hostility to Christians on College campuses

In the video below, Dr Michael Licona begins by speaking to a situation of entrenched hostility to especially Evangelical Christians and our faith on College Campuses. (And, while his statistic of 53% hostility on the part of lecturers is specific to North America, the general pattern is plainly an issue we too must face in the Caribbean.)

His pointing out how in several cases professors are asking Christian students to identify themselves and are then announcing an objective to rob such of their faith is revealing. As, is his comparative challenge: would you even hear of a case like that with Muslim, Jewish or Hindu students?

His comment that it is clearly open hunting season on Christians, is plainly on target, quite revealing, and very troubling.

Indeed, so serious is this, that we need to have a serious alternative.

But, that is just the introduction.

We need to watch the video:, as he takes on what the YouTube blurb sums up as the ABCDE's --

A -- Authorship, 
B -- Bias, 
C -- Contradictions, 
D -- Dating, and 
E -- Eyewitness Testimony
Let's watch:



WK (HT!) has a useful summary
  • What a Baltimore Ravens [NFL American Football] helmet teaches us about the importance of truth
  • What happens to Christians when they go off to university?
  • The 2007 study on attitudes of American professors to evangelical Christians
  • Authors: Who wrote the gospels?
  • Bias: Did the bias of the authors cause them to distort history?
  • Contradictions: What about the different descriptions of events in the gospels?
  • Dating: When were the gospels written?
  • Eyewitnesses: Do the gospel accounts go back to eyewitness testimony?
For more, you may want to read here on in context. END

PS: Dr William Lane Craig has a podcast here, on how he was recently subjected to a pre-planned personal attack in Australia (co-ordinated with one on YouTube) designed to "expose" him as a charlatan and liar, multiplied by rather unprofessional behaviour by his opponent -- multiple dozens of interruptions including repeated use of a buzzer that took the dialogue format out of the control of the moderator. There are troubling indicators of a spreading intention to poison the well by distractive, alienating personal attacks,  in order to discredit effective Christian spokesmen and to cow into silence any who would try to speak up for the gospel. That in turn speaks sad volumes about where those who make, enable or support such attacks are headed, especially when we multiply by the sort of attitude to Christians Dr Licona exposes. Surely, we can do better as a civilisation.

Sunday, October 27, 2013

Matt 24 watch, 227: Former Israeli Ambassador to the US Michael Oren sits down to discuss the state of Israel with the author of a book on the June 1967 six day war

Amb. Michael Oren, an historian in his own right, is always worth listening to. So, let's watch:



Food for thought as we ponder the ever boiling over pot that is the Middle East. END

Saturday, October 26, 2013

1 Chron 12:32 report, 115: On the Jamaican New Testament vs the Queen James Bible, and on rising debates on alternative interpretations and translations of scriptures regarding homosexual behaviour

The Jamaican NT (HT: Amazon)
Earlier this week, while I was in a local shop looking for a high quality compact fluorescent light bulb, I chanced to hear a debate on the local radio station ZJB here in Montserrat, about the new translation of the Bible into the emerging Jamaican Language, more usually known as Patois or Patwa, or "Jamaicanese" or more formally, Jamaican Creole. (Actually what was translated is the New Testament, or -- in the language itself: Di Jamiekan Nyuu Testiment. Online, chapter by chapter with audio, here on.)

Someone -- understandably -- was very concerned indeed as to why millions had been spent on making a translation that was in a language that by and large, people could not even read. 

(Jamaica Talk is an oral tradition that originally developed on the plantation in the days before English itself was fully standardised. It is currently best understood as it is heard, not by trying to make out how it is spelled when it has been put on paper. Especially, when a more consistent phonetic rendering of sounds into letters is used than we will find in standard written English! [Do that to standard written English and it will look very strange, too.])

I found the discussion interesting, but realised that it would be wise to add some balance. 

I therefore borrowed use of a phone and called the studio. I found out that this was a new show by a former student, and was invited to call back after a news break. So, I called back, and we had quite a lively discussion, complete with a call-in from someone who seems to have parked her car to phone in, and with another journalist joining the host in the studio.  (This was not really a call-in show, but in a community like this, things are a bit less formal. And of course, even when names are not explicitly used, everybody knows who is calling, by recognising the voice.)

My basic point was that translating the Bible or a major part of it like the NT into a new language is a breakthrough recognition of the language that standardises its alphabet, spelling, grammar etc and opens the door to a new literature, primary school education in the real language of the people and more. For instance, that points to education reforms  that recognise the real mother tongue of the mass of the Jamaican people, with possibilities for a breakthrough.  Just so, we may notice from a news article on the London, UK launch event that was held a year ago:
The Revd Courtney Stewart, General Secretary of the Bible Society of the West Indies said, ‘This New Testament will achieve a kind of engagement of our people with the Word of God in a way that has never happened before.
‘There will be transformation in people’s lives. For the first time they will have an understanding of God’s Word.’
He revealed how controversial the translation had been both in Jamaica and in the UK, as critics claimed that Jamaican Patois was not a language in which the Bible could be written.
But he said, ‘At the Bible Society we believe that everyone has a right to have access to the Word of God in their own language.
‘The time has come for Jamaican people to have the Word of God in their own language, in their mother tongue,’ he said.
In the Jamaican New Testament when the Angel Gabriel announces to the Virgin Mary that she is pregnant with Jesus, he tells her that he has ‘nyuuz’ which will ‘mek yu wel api’.
The familiar Christmas reading ‘Behold a virgin shall be with child’, is translated as ‘Lisn op! Di uman we neehn sliip wid no man ago get biebi.’
And When the Wise Men come to give their gifts to the baby Jesus – or ‘Jiizas’ – they tell Herod that they want to give him ‘rispek’.
- See more at: http://www.biblesociety.org.uk/news/jamaican-new-testament-launched/#sthash.wdcsL25t.dpuf
 The Revd Courtney Stewart, General Secretary of the Bible Society of the West Indies said, ‘This New Testament will achieve a kind of engagement of our people with the Word of God in a way that has never happened before.

‘There will be transformation in people’s lives. For the first time they will have an understanding of God’s Word.’


He revealed how controversial the translation had been both in Jamaica and in the UK, as critics claimed that Jamaican Patois was not a language in which the Bible could be written.


But he said, ‘At the Bible Society we believe that everyone has a right to have access to the Word of God in their own language.


‘The time has come for Jamaican people to have the Word of God in their own language, in their mother tongue,’ he said. [Cf. Jamaica's Gleaner report on the launch in Jamaica, here.]
The Revd Courtney Stewart, General Secretary of the Bible Society of the West Indies said, ‘This New Testament will achieve a kind of engagement of our people with the Word of God in a way that has never happened before.
‘There will be transformation in people’s lives. For the first time they will have an understanding of God’s Word.’
He revealed how controversial the translation had been both in Jamaica and in the UK, as critics claimed that Jamaican Patois was not a language in which the Bible could be written.
But he said, ‘At the Bible Society we believe that everyone has a right to have access to the Word of God in their own language.
‘The time has come for Jamaican people to have the Word of God in their own language, in their mother tongue,’ he said.
In the Jamaican New Testament when the Angel Gabriel announces to the Virgin Mary that she is pregnant with Jesus, he tells her that he has ‘nyuuz’ which will ‘mek yu wel api’.
The familiar Christmas reading ‘Behold a virgin shall be with child’, is translated as ‘Lisn op! Di uman we neehn sliip wid no man ago get biebi.’
And When the Wise Men come to give their gifts to the baby Jesus – or ‘Jiizas’ – they tell Herod that they want to give him ‘rispek’.
- See more at: http://www.biblesociety.org.uk/news/jamaican-new-testament-launched/#sthash.wdcsL25t.dpuf
The Revd Courtney Stewart, General Secretary of the Bible Society of the West Indies said, ‘This New Testament will achieve a kind of engagement of our people with the Word of God in a way that has never happened before.
‘There will be transformation in people’s lives. For the first time they will have an understanding of God’s Word.’
He revealed how controversial the translation had been both in Jamaica and in the UK, as critics claimed that Jamaican Patois was not a language in which the Bible could be written.
But he said, ‘At the Bible Society we believe that everyone has a right to have access to the Word of God in their own language.
‘The time has come for Jamaican people to have the Word of God in their own language, in their mother tongue,’ he said.
In the Jamaican New Testament when the Angel Gabriel announces to the Virgin Mary that she is pregnant with Jesus, he tells her that he has ‘nyuuz’ which will ‘mek yu wel api’.
The familiar Christmas reading ‘Behold a virgin shall be with child’, is translated as ‘Lisn op! Di uman we neehn sliip wid no man ago get biebi.’
And When the Wise Men come to give their gifts to the baby Jesus – or ‘Jiizas’ – they tell Herod that they want to give him ‘rispek’.
- See more at: http://www.biblesociety.org.uk/news/jamaican-new-testament-launched/#sthash.wdcsL25t.dpuf
Indeed, now that we have standard spelling, pronunciation, vocabulary and grammar, we will now be able to learn -- yes, learn -- how to read the Patois. 

(I have tried it and it takes some effort to read until you become used to the new patterns of spelling. I strongly advise one and all to get the MP3 audio CD! But, I notice, the CD is not properly promoted. [I did see a Kindle version at Amazon], and that there is apparently no Wikipedia page. I hope there is a Twitter account and a Facebook page, and something on Reddit etc. Somebody should start a blog too.

Making such a translation also advances the study of language itself. 

That is why, it is no accident that Wycliffe Bible Translators is closely connected to the Summer Institute of Linguistics. (And yes, I know, terms have been updated: Wycliffe Global Alliance, and SIL International, but I am using more familiar terms.)

Now, one of the concerns that came up in the discussion was this, from Revelations:
Rev 22: 18 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book. [ESV]
This text of course primarily refers to the Book of Revelations, but it is -- for good reason -- commonly seen as applying to the canon of Scripture as a whole. The idea here, is DON'T TAMPER. That is at eternal peril.

Likewise, we find in 2 Peter 3, where Peter speaks up for his colleague-apostle, Paul, warning against the equally spiritually perilous companion-problem to scripture-tampering, namely scripture-twisting:
2 Pet 3:15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. 17 You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability. 18 But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen. [ESV]
In that context, my response was the obvious one: responsible translation is not scripture tampering. 

Indeed, in the NT, the apostles often cite not the original Hebrew OT text, but what we could call the "King James Version" of that day, the Septuagint translation into Koine Greek, the common -- some would suggest, bastardised -- Greek used in the First Century. (And likewise, responsible informed Bible Study or pro-grade technical exegesis that soundly interprets, explains and applies scripture is not scripture-twisting.)

For a couple of days thereafter, people kept bringing up the lunch time discussion on ZJB to me as I walked about. In one particular case, someone drew my attention to a much more serious concern than the question of translating the Bible into Jamaica's Patois.

He said, go look up The Queen James version.

The what?

The Queen James Version.

I did. 

And in so doing, I learned the following, here from the Amazon promo blurb: 
"The Queen James Bible is based on The King James Bible, edited to prevent homophobic misinterpretation . . . . Anti-LGBT Bible interpretations commonly cite only eight verses in the Bible that they interpret to mean homosexuality is a sin; Eight verses in a book of thousands!

The Queen James Bible seeks to resolve interpretive ambiguity in the Bible as it pertains to homosexuality: We edited those eight verses in a way that makes homophobic interpretations impossible. "
What is going on here? 

Unfortunately, it seems, scripture tampering based on irresponsible handling of translation and interpretation, cf. details here and here.

This puts a much broader problem on the table, however. 

Is it true or justified to claim that the traditional understanding of:
a:  the story of Divine destructive judgement of Sodom and Gomorrah (for what has long since been known as "sodomy"), or 

 b: the designation of a man lying with a man as he would lie with a woman in Leviticus as an abomination liable to capital punishment, or 

c: the statement in Rom 1 that both female and male homosexual lusts and behaviours are against the creation-rooted nature and evident purpose of human sexuality, or 

d: the declaration that homosexuality is next to things like thieves or swindlers or kidnappers as utterly incompatible with godliness
. . . are merely reflections of hate and bigotry-driven "homophobia" rather than a true and fair rendering of the underlying Hebrew or Greek text?

As I thought on this, I felt that a good place to begin is Jesus' remarks in answer to a question on Divorce, which sets marriage and sexuality in Creation-order context:
Mt 19: 3 And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?” 

4 He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” 

7 They said to him, “Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and to send her away?” 

8 He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.” [ESV]
In short, Jesus points us back to the Creation order for human family and sexuality as the plumb-line standard for addressing any practice that affects marriage, family and sexuality. At the beginning God made us male and female, to be man and wife so that when their son is grown up, he as a man in turn would leave his mother and father and cleave to his wife, and unite with her, closing the generational cycle. This order, as established by God, is not to be disturbed, at peril of God's judgement. Starting here, with the easy divorce and remarriage game -- which is actually a more insidious and widespread problem in our day than the one we will need to focus on.

Likewise, Paul is quite plain in Romans 1, responsibly translated:
Rom 1: 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

 24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.


 26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.


 28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. 29 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Though they know God's decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them. [ESV]
In short, the apostle quite directly teaches -- whether or no we want to accept it --  that rampant  homosexuality in a culture is a sign that that culture has in large part turned its back on God and on the evidence of creation without and our hearts, minds and consciences within that jointly point us to him and to our duty under him. As a part of such turning away from God and replacing truth with lie, we lose control of sexuality, and some go so far as to turn to dishonourable passions and unnarural sexual relations. Which, we may then try to "justify" in our en-darkened minds as acceptable and worthy of approval.

Resemblance to our civilisation in our time, is not coincidental.

For, images made to look like men, birds, reptiles etc and surrounded by idolatrous stories will have the same effect, whether we speak of the pagan temples of old:


. . . or whether we label similar images as scientific reconstructions, put them in museums or textbooks and use them under the colours of science, to erect stories of how we came to be by blind chance and mechanical necessity, from goo to you by way of the zoo [cf. discussions here (short, "simple") and here on], as someone aptly summarised:




But, someone will say, don't we see in Matt 19 how Moses gave permission for divorce, doesn't that give us room to change rules on sexual behaviour to meet the times and advances in scientific understanding? 
[NB: Cf  here for a significant corrective to this last, one that deserves a much wider audience than it seems to have.]
Yes, Moshe did provide regulations for the already existing institution of divorce, for the hardness of men's hearts in response to existing violation of the marital covenant through adultery.

The prophet Malachi pithily sums up the true divine attitude to this manifestation of the sinful hardness of our hearts:
Malachi 2: 13 And this second thing you do. You cover the LORD's altar with tears, with weeping and groaning because he no longer regards the offering or accepts it with favor from your hand. 

14 But you say, “Why does he not?” Because the LORD was witness between you and the wife of your youth, to whom you have been faithless, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant. 

15 Did he not make them one, with a portion of the Spirit in their union? And what was the one God seeking? Godly offspring. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and let none of you be faithless to the wife of your youth. 

16 “For the man who does not love his wife but divorces her, says the LORD, the God of Israel, covers his garment with violence, says the LORD of hosts. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and do not be faithless.”  [ESV]
Yes, God is gracious and forgives and cleanses us if we repent, but we must never ever make the error of thinking divorce and adultery mean but little to him.

But, there is no similar precedent whatsoever for homosexual behaviour or similarly perverse conduct such as bestiality etc. Instead we read quite plainly in the OT, after a long list of primarily sexually oriented prohibitions:
Lev 18:22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. 23 And you shall not lie with any animal and so make yourself unclean with it, neither shall any woman give herself to an animal to lie with it: it is perversion.

 24 “Do not make yourselves unclean by any of these things, for by all these the nations I am driving out before you have become unclean, 25 and the land became unclean, so that I punished its iniquity, and the land vomited out its inhabitants. 26 But you shall keep my statutes and my rules and do none of these abominations, either the native or the stranger who sojourns among you 27 (for the people of the land, who were before you, did all of these abominations, so that the land became unclean), 28 lest the land vomit you out when you make it unclean, as it vomited out the nation that was before you. [ESV]
That is, gross and widespread sexual misconduct is a major factor in bringing down the destructive judgement of God on a nation It is thus no surprise to see, among other civil penalties for such misconduct in the coveantal nation of Israel (one where adultery was a capital offense):
Lev 20: 13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. 14 If a man takes a woman and her mother also, it is depravity; he and they shall be burned with fire, that there may be no depravity among you. 15 If a man lies with an animal, he shall surely be put to death, and you shall kill the animal. 16 If a woman approaches any animal and lies with it, you shall kill the woman and the animal; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. [ESV]
In the New Testament, we read a redemptive element (and no civil law rulings), but there is no watering down whatsoever of the seriousness of the sins involved:
1 Cor 6: 9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality
[= ούτε (oute) nor + αρσενοκοίται (arsenokoitai) homosexuals -- Paul here seems to have coined or used a Hebraic Greek term that has no earlier record in Greek texts currently in hand, by taking the Septuagint rendering of "men lying with men as with women" in Lev 18:22 and joining them as a single word, so there is no reasonable doubt as to his meaning. That meaning is of course exactly what the C19 coinage, "homosexuality" means. ESV also joins in  μαλακοί (malakoi) soft -- effeminate, i.e the passive male homosexual partner (in those days usually a youth) in the rendering. The NET Bible aptly renders: "passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals . . . "],
10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. [ESV. ]
How then should we interpret say Gen 18 - 19? 

Is that passage a case of inhospitable action or attempted rape as an expression of such, sothat other homosexual acts between the consenting are not disapproved by God ? 

Actually, there is indeed an obvious element of lack of decent hospitality and even of attempted rape involved. 

But at the same time, there is no doubt that the intended sex acts were homosexual and that they were not approved by God. Indeed, in light of Leviticus 18 as cited already -- part and parcel of the same Pentateuch, it is clear that the fate of Sodom was a capital example of the very land vomiting forth a people who approved of and widely indulged in sexual perversity. In this case, it seems by volcanic eruption -- sulphur or brimstone (doubtless with other hot lava bombs . . . ) being erupted and falling from the sky that may also have involved bitumen and similar petroleum deposits in the area that are mentioned in Gen 14, erasing the cities of the plain through a never to be forgotten cataclysm of fire and destruction.

The land itself literally vomited them forth, at God's command.

Just as, in a later day -- over a thousand years later, Israel would go into exile in Babylon for refusing to heed the word of God and smaller corrective judgements in the face of its own national sins. A further sobering warning to all nations, including those of our day.

So, we find Jude, our Lord's brother:
Jude 1:Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints. For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.

Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved[c] a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day— just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire,[d] serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

Yet in like manner these people also, relying on their dreams, defile the flesh, reject authority, and blaspheme the glorious ones. [ESV]

Yes, this is the stormy North side of the scriptures, but that does not mean that it is not a valid and accurately translated warning from God that we neglect at our peril. 

Whether or not it may be politically correct and appealing in a given day, scripture tampering and scripture twisting are at our eternal peril and that of those misled thereby. Which is what marks such as utterly different from responsible translation and distribution of the scriptures such as now in the Jamaican language, or sound Bible Study, teaching and -- at professional level -- exegesis. 

Let us find a positive note to close on:
2 Tim 2:15 Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved,[c] a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth . . . . 

14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom[a] you learned it 15 and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God[b] may be complete, equipped for every good work. [ESV]
And so, let us be eager to learn, study, preach and live by the blessed Word, in season and out of season. END
_________________

F/N: Since pornography and perversion are evidently a rising challenge across the region, let me link some onward readings that may prove helpful to the troubled or concerned, including some help for those caught up in a swirling current of same sex attractions in light of the twelve step addiction recovery approach:

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Sci-Tech watch, 7: Three-Dimensional (3D) Printers and potential for industrial transformation

Yesterday, an IBD article on how GE -- General Electric -- sees 3D printers changing their manufacturing approach caught my eye:
General Electric (GE) is expanding the uses for 3D printers and expects the emerging
a model of a GE Jet engine made using "direct metal laser"
3D printing technology (Source: IBD, fair use)
technology to "touch" more than half of its manufacturing in 20 years.

With business segments in aviation, energy technology, medical equipment and home appliances, the industrial conglomerate's increasing adoption of "additive manufacturing" could shake up printer makers 3D Systems (DDD), Stratasys (SSYS) and ExOne (XONE) as well as U.S. industry overall.
Less than 10% of GE's manufacturing uses 3D printing in some form today, though that share should rise to 20% to 25% in 10 years and 50% or more in 20 years, the company told IBD.
"I'm not saying that 25% of all parts will be 3D-printed, but that 3D printing will touch it in some way," Christine Furstoss, GE's technical director of manufacturing and materials technologies, told IBD in an interview.
"Maybe it's the tool that we are using or the early prototypes we make," Furstoss said. "We are committed to driving it in as many areas as we can."
Notice, GE is already using 3D printing in its manufacturing, starting with design and development.

That is already telling us of yet another technological transformation "already in progress."

So, just what is 3D printing, why the fuss? Wiki:

Additive manufacturing or 3D printing[1] is a process of making a three-dimensional solid object of virtually any shape from a digital model. 3D printing is achieved using an additive process, where successive layers of material are laid down in different shapes.[2] 3D printing is also considered distinct from traditional machining techniques, which mostly rely on the removal of material by methods such as cutting or drilling (subtractive processes).

A materials printer usually performs 3D printing using digital technology. The first working 3D printer was created in 1984 by Chuck Hull of 3D Systems Corp.[3] Since the start of the 21st century there has been a large growth in the sales of these machines, and their price has dropped substantially.[4] According to Wohlers Associates, a consultancy, the market for 3D printers and services was worth $2.2 billion worldwide in 2012, up 29% from 2011.[5]

The 3D printing technology is used for both prototyping and distributed manufacturing with applications in architecture, engineering, construction (AEC), industrial design, automotive, aerospace, military, engineering, civil engineering, dental and medical industries, biotech (human tissue replacement), fashion, footwear, jewelry, eyewear, education, geographic information systems, food, and many other fields. It has been speculated[6] that 3D printing may become a mass market item because open source 3D printing can easily offset their capital costs by enabling consumers to avoid costs associated with purchasing common household objects.[7]
So it looks like a pool of liquid or powdered raw material or a tape is scanned layer by layer to incrementally build up a 3D object. Or, we can even have an extruding print head that prints shapes, layer by layer, building up the object -- how the molten metal printer can work.

Desai and Magloicca comment (with an emphasis on implications for intellectual property law):

Change may be coming rapidly to the world of copyright and intellectual property law thanks to new printers that create three-dimensional objects at home and at work.
3D printing is the next step in general-purpose computing. The technology is developing rapidly. The cost of printers is falling just as the cost of personal computers did in the 1980s when they reached homes and businesses of all sizes.
Editor’s note: The authors’ full research paper is available on the Social Science Research Network here.
The quality of printing is improving with new printers able to print items made of plastic, metal, and even compounded chemicals. Design software makes it simple to create an item and then print it. Scanners allow someone without design skills to capture the contours of an object and print it.

Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/news/science/3D_printers_The_next_intellectual_property_game_changer.html#roWfgFjry5BW3yAI.99
 3D printing is the next step in general-purpose computing.
The technology is developing rapidly. The cost of printers is
falling just as the cost of personal computers did in the 1980s
when they reached homes and businesses of all sizes.


Editor’s note: The authors’ full research paper is available on
the Social Science Research Network here. [no embed . . . ]


The quality of printing is improving with new printers able to
print items made of plastic, metal, and even compounded
chemicals. Design software makes it simple to create an item
and then print it. Scanners allow someone without design
skills to capture the contours of an object and print it . . .

Change may be coming rapidly to the world of copyright and intellectual property law thanks to new printers that create three-dimensional objects at home and at work.
3D printing is the next step in general-purpose computing. The technology is developing rapidly. The cost of printers is falling just as the cost of personal computers did in the 1980s when they reached homes and businesses of all sizes.
Editor’s note: The authors’ full research paper is available on the Social Science Research Network here.
The quality of printing is improving with new printers able to print items made of plastic, metal, and even compounded chemicals. Design software makes it simple to create an item and then print it. Scanners allow someone without design skills to capture the contours of an object and print it.

Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/news/science/3D_printers_The_next_intellectual_property_game_changer.html#roWfgFjry5BW3yAI.99
Change may be coming rapidly to the world of copyright and intellectual property law thanks to new printers that create three-dimensional objects at home and at work.
3D printing is the next step in general-purpose computing. The technology is developing rapidly. The cost of printers is falling just as the cost of personal computers did in the 1980s when they reached homes and businesses of all sizes.
Editor’s note: The authors’ full research paper is available on the Social Science Research Network here.
The quality of printing is improving with new printers able to print items made of plastic, metal, and even compounded chemicals. Design software makes it simple to create an item and then print it. Scanners allow someone without design skills to capture the contours of an object and print it.

Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/news/science/3D_printers_The_next_intellectual_property_game_changer.html#roWfgFjry5BW3yAI.99
Abstract of the law journal paper: 
Digitization has reached things. This shift promises to alter the business and legal landscape for a range of industries. Digitization has already disrupted copyright-based industries and laws. As cost barriers dropped, individuals engaged with copyrighted work as never before. The business-to-business models of industrial copyright faltered and in some cases failed. Industries had to reorganize, and claimed foundations for copyright had to be re-examined. This Article examines a prime example the next phase of digitization: 3D printing and it implications on intellectual property law and practice.

3D printing is a general-purpose technology that will do for physical objects what MP3 files did for music. The core patent bargain — sharing the plans on how to make something in exchange for exclusivity — may be meaningless in a world of digitized things. While these devices will unleash the creativity of producers and reduce costs for consumers, they will also make it far easier to infringe patents, copyrights, and trade dress. This will force firms to rethink their business practices and courts to reexamine not only patent doctrine but also long established doctrine in areas ranging from copyright merger to trademark post-sale confusion. Moreover, Congress will need to consider establishing some sort of infringement exemption for 3D printing in the home and expanding the notice-and takedown provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to websites that host software enabling the 3D printing of patented items and distinctive trade dress. While a 3D printer is not yet a common household item, the time to start thinking about that future is now.
The cynical comment on legal issues is: first, kill all the (troublesome) lawyers. 

But we should take a pause, as if people cannot get a reasonable return, creative effort will dry up. 

Maybe we need an open source DIY print and build movement, with an emphasis on helping bootstrap development, on the analogy of open source computing.

In which case,  maybe a consortium of universities, research centres, development agencies and the like could come together to sponsor an open source industrial base developed through faculty and student projecys and inputs from the public spirited or even corporations doing an open source with proprietary add-ons or support services as a business model.

In any case already 3D printing is a billion-dollar plus market. 

With US$ 299 kits and US$ 1,200 forges on sale at Amazon, this is already at the "in your school/office/ home" level.  

Amazon's Flash Forge offering, US$ 1,200:

The Flash Forge
 Video, by Explaining The Future (notice the idea of 3D printed, personalised shoes made using this technology):



 This is disruptive technology indeed, with all sorts of implications. (Unfortunately, not all of them are good, this can for instance be used to make weapons.)

Where this comes in, is that via digital technology, we are again moving to Industrial Civilisation 2.0 where a database of open designs with a cluster of modular general purpose manufacturing techniques such as 3D printing, can make a small town or an island with reasonable access, largely independent of having to import basic goods.

That points to an age where the crucial issue will be to have skilled people, not so much heavy  industry. (Just think, the parts of a tractor, bus or truck are by and large fairly small and amenable to such techniques. And to others such as numerically controlled milling or lathes.)

 So, where is development headed, and where should education go to keep up, in an age where digital productivity technologies are being repeatedly revolutionary and transformational?

Let us ponder . . . END

PS: I earlier inadvertently hit publish with a very incomplete article, sorry.

Saturday, October 19, 2013

Sci-Tech watch, 6: Hot Dry Rock, engineered/enhanced geothermal electicity generation systems and the Montserrat case . . .

Energy and its link to long term sustainability of development are major concerns for a Caribbean region that is largely dependent on imported oil for its commercial energy sources. 

(Cf. Montserrat Energy Policy, here.)

Though, it must be noted that the the degree of official interest in alternatives to the volatile oil market in an era of concern about fossil energy use and impacts on global weather patterns tends to wax and wane accordingly as oil price surges or falls back, as well as, as the degree of interest (or otherwise) of political leadership similarly waxes and wanes.

In this context, one of the emerging hot topics -- especially here in Montserrat -- is Geothermal energy, [GT energy]; that is, energy stored in hot rocks and associated water-based fluids in the Earth's crust that are reasonably accessible to drilling similar to drilling for oil. (There are of course significant differences relating to the different geology: in effect, it is a difficult challenge to try to catch a 2-inch crack filled with hot water a mile or more down, and the wells involved are now multi-million dollar tosses of the dice.)

In the past several years, improved geo-imaging technology has allowed for a higher confidence in hitting a resource. In Montserrat's case after a field investigation, it was suggested that odds of hitting a resource in a target zone were maybe 80%, quite up from the 20 - 25% industrial average rate of success for exploratory wells identified by the US NREL only several years ago.

So, after prodding, UK's DfID was able to obtain grant funding for risky exploration, perhaps GBP 8 - 9 millions so far. (The potential payoff is significant and Montserrat is both struggling to recover from volcanic devastation and has few options.)

Over several months two wells were drilled, about 2500 - 3000 m. There was a bit of excitement in August, over noise and a steam cloud, which seemed on investigation to be due to injected water boiling off.

A clue.

(The powers that be are being fairly cagey about developments and plans. But, it seems we are facing lack of permeable rocks full of fluids.) 

Traditionally, Geothermal energy has tapped existing flow-fields of hot liquids, and hot dry rock engineered/enhanced GT has been a focus for pioneering research and demonstration projects since the idea was first advanced in the 1970's. Following The Economist:



 Wiki gives a broader picture, that lets us see the scale of what we are looking at:


From Wiki: Enhanced geothermal system 1 Reservoir 2 Pump house 3 Heat exchanger 4 Turbine hall 5 Production well 6 Injection well 7 Hot water to district heating 8 Porous sediments 9 Observation well 10 Crystalline bedrock

Wiki explains:


 Until recently, geothermal power systems have exploited only resources where naturally occurring heat, water, and rock permeability are sufficient to allow energy extraction.[1] However, by far the most geothermal energy within reach of conventional techniques is in dry and impermeable rock.[2] EGS technologies enhance and/or create geothermal resources in this hot dry rock (HDR) through 'hydraulic stimulation'.

When natural cracks and pores do not allow economic flow rates, the permeability can be enhanced by pumping high-pressure cold water down an injection well into the rock. The injection increases the fluid pressure in the naturally fractured rock, mobilizing shear events that enhance the system's permeability. As there is a continuous circulation, neither is a high permeability required, nor are proppants required to maintain the fractures in an open state. This process, termed hydro-shearing,[3] perhaps to differentiate it from an equivalent procedure. Nevertheless it is substantially the same as hydraulic tensile fracturing used in the oil and gas industry.

Water travels through fractures in the rock, capturing the rock's heat until forced out of a second borehole as very hot water. The water's heat is converted into electricity using either a steam turbine or a binary power plant system.[4] All of the water, now cooled, is injected back into the ground to heat up again in a closed loop.

EGS technologies, like hydrothermal geothermal, can function as baseload resources that produce power 24 hours a day, like a fossil fuel plant. Unlike hydrothermal, EGS appears to be feasible anywhere in the world, depending on the economic limits of drill depth. Good locations are over deep granite covered by a 3–5 kilometres (1.9–3.1 mi) layer of insulating sediments that slow heat loss.[5] EGS wells are expected to have a useful life of 20 to 30 years before the outflow temperature drops about 10 c (18 f) and the well becomes uneconomic.

EGS systems are currently being developed and tested in France, Australia, Japan, Germany, the U.S. and Switzerland. The largest EGS project in the world is a 25-megawatt demonstration plant currently being developed in Cooper Basin, Australia. Cooper Basin has the potential to generate 5,000–10,000 MW.
Notoriously, this is pioneering. Indeed, a few years ago, "traditional" GT was such that about a dozen seasoned operators existed globally, and much of the knowledge base was proprietary. Hot Dry Rock is even more pioneering. (As in, this is not a field where decision-making is routine and one can hire and fire expertise at will.)

Indeed, there currently seems to be only one commercial development, in Landau, Germany. That one depends on a major government subsidy for exploratory energy initiatives. Others are research or exploratory.

Commercialisation is at pioneering stages.

Worryingly, in Dec 2006, a similar effort in Berne was brought to a halt as the expected earthquakes from injecting water in one well to crack and shear rocks to induce an artificial flow field went out of control. After quake hit the red light level, peaking at 3.4 ML, the development was stopped. The man in charge then actually faced criminal charges for damage and endangerment through triggered 'quakes. Sounds a lot like what happened to seismologists in Italy recently, over failing to "predict" a quake.

Understandably, emphasis falls on remote sites, less likely to cause harm if something goes wrong. Unfortunately, that means power transmission costs will go up. (And, for those wanting to suggest that GT developments can be used to export electrical power to neighbouring islands, note that a plausible cost could be US$ 2 mn/mile of cable, and that for various reasons there is a significant breakage rate and it credibly takes a couple of months on average to mobilise a repair effort due to need for specialised ships; so that it would be wise to run two separated cables.)

Nevis, next door to Montserrat, has explored GT, in the more traditional form, partnering with a speculative developer not on the list of a dozen or so. Hot fluids were hit, but development seems to have stalled. A cautionary tale, especially if one is looking at even more pioneering technology that rests on a field of scientific research that is still very much a work in initial progress. 

Another factor must be borne in mind, levellised costs to the producer then onwards the consumer for each kWhr of electricity -- each "unit" -- consumed or produced. 

The Economist article already linked remarks:
 A typical American geothermal power station produces electricity at a cost of around $0.10/kWh. [--> NB: A 1 GW Coal plant, a typical benchmark, is often rated at about US$ 0.04/kWh] That makes geothermal power competitive with many other technologies, especially with added financial incentives such as America's production tax-credit for renewable-energy projects, currently about $0.02/kWh. (Producing electricity from coal or gas also costs around $0.10/kWh. [--> in Europe, probably part of the Euro-zone's global competitiveness problem. I think costs in North America are creeping up too, and California may be at a European level. IIRC, US$ 0.13/kWh was a comparable number for Jamaica some years back. I stand to be corrected on these figures.] )

The same cannot be said for EGS, at least for the foreseeable future . . .   The equipment on the surface costs about the same for EGS as it does for conventional geothermal power, but the drilling costs can be twice as much or more for EGS. [--> Here in Montserrat, HMG has borne the first drilling and exploratory costs as a grant, and we seem to have hit resources at 2,500 - 3,000 m.] Dr Wyborn estimates that electricity from EGS could initially cost an additional $0.09/kWh over conventional geothermal, or about $0.19/kWh. [--> So we may be looking at costs at the plant of maybe US$ 0.10/kWh, and it is reasonable to suggest that this might double or thereabouts by the time we see it as consumers. That would of course still be significantly below current electricity costs, but it is not down at 4 cents. However, we are not talking about heavy industry as our focus for development, so it would help.] That would make EGS economic only in places with strong financial incentives, such as Germany, where operators of renewable-energy projects receive generous subsidies in the form of feed-in tariffs—currently $0.31/kWh for power from EGS.
Economist continues:
Technological improvements, such as cheaper and better methods for drilling, creating reservoirs and improving water-flow rates, could cut the cost of EGS. Well productivity is especially important. “You want to get as much extracted energy as possible for that set of wells you've drilled, to maximise the return on your investment,” explains Jefferson Tester, associate director of the Cornell Centre for a Sustainable Future and lead author of the MIT report. So far most EGS projects have achieved flow rates of only around 25 litres per second, far short of the 50-100 litres per second that is required to operate geothermal projects profitably. [--> this is a key warning point, and we will need to look closely at flow-rates. 100 litres/s is about 25 gal/s.] Both AltaRock and Geodynamics are working on creating more fractures per well, which they hope will increase both the flow rate and heat absorption from the rocks. [--> Notice, still a subject of research.]
Sobering background. 

But not without rays of hope.

In Montserrat's case, a current news article reports:
On September 10, at Governor Davis’ most recent press conference Dr. Kato Kimbugwe reported when asked for the short-term update said: “I am up to date with it and I think what I can say at the moment and again just being cautious and conservative is that we need to wait for all the test to be finalized.”

He said that said morning he was advised the tests will be completed, “by the end of October.”  He referred to the short term testing on which we were seeking information doesn’t give as much information.

“…because the testing period, you have the initial ten day test but that doesn’t give you as much information about the whole characteristics, until you’ve done the more longer term test which tells you the size of the resource and how much power can be produced.”

The DFID private sector expert, then suggested, “I think it’s proper for us to be a little bit more patient and wait until the experts in the field,” remarking that he is, ‘not an expert (geothermal),’ who can then come back and tell us we’ve crunched our numbers, we’ve looked at the evidence and based on what we’ve seen this is the output on well number 1 and this is what is happening.”

Finally, “I’m not engaging in any sort of discussion on what the results are because I don’t have anything in writing that tells me that this is the evidence,” he said.
Given the concerns above, that caginess is understandable, but perhaps overdone. 
Surely, it can be stated in summary -- a simple press release would do -- that Well 1 of bore R was drilled dates A to B, reaching depth D, and so far it is dry and hot, measured temp being T. Well 2 was similarly drilled with similar details, and has a status S2. We are looking at the technologies for this kind of dry rock resource (with intent to use one well as fluid injector and one as production well, M metres away), and will provide more details as they come in. Or if in fact natural fluids have been detected, they are at such and so temp and flow rate to date.


A second concern is the debate that has sprung up on ownership of the investment. The same article notes that:

[The UK Government,] HMG has been saying that when the next phase of the geothermal development becomes available, they would seek private investor interest and the Montserrat Geothermal Power Co. (MGPC) [--> a corporation formed by a local pressure group, CRM] has for some time expressed an interest to, “on behalf of the people of Montserrat provide a bid for the geothermal power complex in response to an Expression of Interest (EoI) or any other legally authorised tender” . . . .

[Premier Meade, on the third hand:] “What we are saying and the stance which we are taking with the DFID minister in the UK, let us spend the money and develop that as a national resource. Let’s not get the foreign investor involved. Let government deal with it with MUL and therefore the savings and the benefits will then come to government and the people of Montserrat.”
 The immediate concern here is that there does not seem to be a sufficient acknowledgement of the ongoing technical challenges involved and the narrowness of the global base of proved expertise with a seasoned, proved developer. 

On fair comment, under these circumstances, a too-quick jump to issues of ownership, profit-making and possible cost savings seems to run a risk of overlooking the need to have a mutually acceptable agreement to develop, operate GT energy and build up local technical capacity in a context of gradual technology and management transfer with a credible, seasoned operator. (Cf. remarks on effective practices for GT development in the linked Energy Policy document.) And if indeed we are looking at hot dry rock approaches with a lifespan limited sharply by the fairly narrow zone of heat exchange down below, that puts constraints on what is possible -- economically, financially and technically. 
 
Such would possibly also tip the balance in favour of so-called binary fluid technology for a power plant, as this works with low temperature resources:

Binary Cycle plant, designed for lower temperature resources (HT: Darling)
 A definite possibility.

However, resort to such a plant is a double-whammy on efficiency, as (i) low temperature sets a lower physical limit on efficiency per the Carnot Theorem, and (ii) a heat exchanger is inherently a source of further inefficiency.


So, this live case of Sci and Tech in action bears further watching! END