Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Introduction

What is this blog about?

At the age of 75, this blog deals with some stories (from memory) on a working life of research. Most are chronological, back to teenage years. However, this blog starts with three items exemplifying 
(1) research on a climate issue, 
(2) my world view on energy depletion, and 
(3) cycles of research management.  

A Climate Issue

Regarding the mechanism of global warming, hurricanes were supposed to play a crucial role in the process. Especially, while they were obviously connected to higher sea water temperatures of over 26.5 degrees Celcius. 
Hurricanes have always been intriguing to me, at first from a navigation point of view, especially regarding the sailing ship era. They revolve with extremely high speeds, but move as a system slowly along, at not much beyond 'bicycle speed'. 
Then, more recently, hurricanes were kept responsible for distributing global warming, a logical proposition within their role of tropical circulations. So, I started to look more closely at their origin and behavior. From my days of study I did not remember, that much attention was paid to them, and restarted more or less from scratch. Furthermore, I considered that climate could not be connected to the short term characteristics of weather of one year. For that reason, I decided to add the yearly frequences of the Atlantic hurricanes to decade numbers. The figures could be derived from the well documented diagrams of the authoritative National Hurricane Center in Miami. 
While the one year figures did not show any structure to me, the resulting diagram surprisingly did. Summing the frequences clarified cycles of 60 year. From 1851 on we see highs around 1880, 1940 and 2000, and lows in-between around 1910 and 1970. Extrapolating we might expect a new low around 2030, to be followed by a new high around 2060. I communicated the resulting diagram with the National Hurricane Center, and also Woods Hole of the same esteem.
The 60-year hurricane cycle did not only show gradual waves, but also a slight rise. However, not very steep compared to the so-called 'Hockeystick', which rises sharply since 1910, and more recently is skyrocketing. Besides, and interestingly, its peaks do precede the hurricane 'highs' some 10 years, and its 'lows' to half this extent. The entire phenomenon  is now known as the 60-Year Climate Cycle. Its occurrence might be a bit disturbing to science, as the physical origin is more likely to come from outside the realm of the earth, instead of being triggered by human cause, as is widely supposed. May be the gradual rise can be attributed to the latter?
For the time being, the 60-year cycle seems to represent sound empirical evidence of the development of our climate. Yet, much of it is still hypothetical, hampered through the lack of a proper correlation of causal nature. Moreover and regrettably, the discussion has taken on quite a political inclination nowadays. Accompanied by founded or unfoumded accusations, outside forces produce an inevitable burden for further research.  
This counterproductive development might have been triggered by two seemingly incompatible lines of reasoning. Let us for a start, regard the wave lengths (not heights) of the decadal hurricane frequencies, and those of the hockeystick (again disregarding the wave heights), I observed a peculiar phenomenon, which did not seem to make sense. The hockeystick highs precede some 10 years those of the hurricane frequencies, while the lows precede some 5 years. One would expect from causal reasoning of the climate of the world, at least a different sequence, the other way around. Is there a logical explanation?
Assuming then, as a systems approach, three major determinants of climate development. 
Firstly, some external force, resulting in the order of a 60 year cycle of the climate, of mostly unknown origin. 
Secondly, and fluctuated by the first determinant, the fundamental heating up of the earth, particularly by the sun´s almost rectangular inclination at lower latitudes. 
Thirdly, at higher latitudes, a green house effect. 
The two latter ones are 'measured' differently, in two completely separate physical states: water and atmosphere. Hurricane frequences depending on sea water temperatures vs. tree rings depending on atmospheric temperatures. Although oceanic and atmospheric approaches are both indirectly related to their subjects to be measured, as such, they seem to be genuine representatives of climate development, i.e. if measured correctly, and if climate is only defined as outcomes of particular research. 
Could the gradual rise of the hurricane graph be explained from global warming? Then, the next reasoning might be adopted. Water masses will take longer to adapt to temperature changes, then air masses. Hence, hotter air masses might after some 10 years have helped enough to heat up surface sea water to such an extent, that more hurricanes result. If less hot, it takes only 5 years to reach some temporary equilibrium at the lows, resulting in less extra hurricanes. (Again, this reasoning can only be true, if the tree ring data have been allocated correctly to the time scale. It should also be noted, that dutch research of tropical tree rings indicates, that latitude is no issue).
What about the climatological phenomena that we observe by eye, then? In this rationale, surface ice will melt sooner as it is exposed to atmospheric temperatures, while submerged ice in contact with colder water, will take much longer. Differences in thermal stability between water and air determine melting behavior of both environments. 
Now, what if we again do incorporate the wave heights of both curves in our reasoning? We observe in the latest decades a gradual rise of the hurricane activity versus a sharply upwards turning hockeystick representing the atmosphere. There is no apparent correlation between the hockeystick tree ring data, and hurricane frequences, whatsoever. This is hard to comprehend. At least in more recent decades, one should trace to some extent the risen influence from atmospheric changes to oceanic water masses.  
All in all, even if the above reasoning proves to be correct, it will not change my general expectations of climate development and sea water rise. A gentle rise is more likely, in stead of a hockeystick type development, staying rather close to the gradual rise of hurricane frequency waves. In this process, the wave lengths might shorten.

Summarizing, the diagram below represents the NOAA-based Atlantic decadal hurricane frequency developments from 1851-2010 by way of blue columns. The upper line graph, prematurely running out of the diagram, represents the so-called 'hockeystick' findings based on arctic tree ring interpretations (tropical tree rings are said to show comparable outcomes). Obviously, these latter terrestrial figures precede the oceanic temperature findings, although the wave lengths (not the heights) do correspond in general.
Evidence is growing that warming up is staying behind after 2000, crippling the hockeystick development hypothesis. Superficially viewing the '60'-year hurricane cycle, it even seems reasonable to falsify CO2 emissions for warming up/cooling down causes. At first sight, a correlating economic cycle does not fit the hurricane temperature cycle as shown. However, after scrutinizing a 60- to 70-year credit expansion-contraction cycle, suggested in economics, one might unearth some or more explanatory force for the hurricane cycle as it did develop during 160 years.  
 
  

Ecology, Energy Shortage and Infrastructural Future

Although research should be value-free in my opinion, the choice of my research items had and has everything to do with my world view. So, some clarification might be given in advance, so a reader can decide whether it is of any interest to him or her. 
First of all a typical example of an ecological project. A Nature Policy plan for the Netherlands had been published, its main goal being to connect our scattered nature areas by some sort of 'nature infrastructure'. It was called the Ecological Main Structure. However, implementation fell short for a couple of years.
Then, Rijkswaterstaat asked me to 'have a look at it'. When I studied the Nature Plan I was surprised to read that this particular ínfrastructure, consisting of nature connection zones, should be situated along roads. I considered it far better to concentrate these along water bodies, the Netherlands are actually covered with. So, I started using (1) the rough connectivity arrows of the Plan, (2) our advanced Faculty Geographical Information System, and (3) the official water maps, to meticulously design this new structure across the country.
The outcomes, presented to the Heads of the Regional Water Systems of Rijkswaterstaat, were met with enthousiasm, and now it did not take long for implementation to start. The Goverment forwarded the money needed, and the original scope of 25 years is mostly behind us by now, presenting its results clearly to everyone in the Dutch landscape.
Another major issue cocerns the availability of energy. The world with its fast growing population moves towards energy shortage, and the consequences should be considered. As no one wants to do with less, the question is how to provide the same quality of life, with less available energy. The economic rationale dictates - if goods become scarce, they will be more costly. So we will see less trade and freight, less bulk transport, more specialization, shorter distances to work, (alternative) energy sources, such as coal and uranium, and reduced energy consumption. Still, differences in energy consumption can be expected according to incomes. But the majority will one way or the other feel the consequences, if only at the work place, influencing production. Those old enough to have done with less in the past will probably adapt more easily, and suffer less as a consequence. Also those who have experienced existence in remote places, or on board long distance sailing boats. They know how to deal with sparse circumstances. 
Let us consider some major amenities - enough food and drink, temperature and moisture comfort at home as well as in the work place, comfortable transport, and comfortable tools to perform one's daily activities. Major infrastructure and machinery can hardly be reduced upon, as mass food and drink have to be produced and distributed for a long time to come. The world growing population is likely to live, more and more in urban areas, and in need of equal or even better nourishment. So, the energy demand of our already efficient food producing system will have to stay at least at the current level, if we do not want people to starve or trigger food wars. In a way it is an iron ration, that cannot be fiddled with. 
Comfort at home and in the work environment has been improved through central heating and air conditioning. Even to a high level of redundancy. In the past heating was often reduced to one room, and the entire family, often quite large, would concentrate there and do all what was needed. In a way this pattern might return. But, very local electrical heating of clothes, chairs and beds may make a difference in comfort in the future. However, cooling will have to be achieved by better building systems, as energy-related cooling will have to be reduced substantially.
As stated, heavy transport will remain, although better regulated by clearing houses, to minimize empty or partly loaded trucks. Heavy machinery in agriculture stays indispensable for mass food production. However, in the realm of personal transport, major changes can be expected without peril. Development of far more efficient transport, through far less weight of vehicles, even including pedaling for health reasons, is already outgrowing its infancy. Related construction of separate high tech infrastructure, to offer safe and competitive opportunities, is likely to develop much further, as I originally advocated in the Province of Noord-Brabant in its project 2030.  

Seven Year Research Cycle

The university department I worked in had the explicit assignment to do research that was related to society, the so-called 'practical world'. In those days lecturers had the freedom to initiate and organize their research, which professors could not effectively interfere with. Yet, my research appeared to differ from others.
I was asked to offer a last presentation at my final department 'two day retreat' (a yearly occasion) on 'how-I-did-it'. 
I started to make a shortlist covering the major problems in society. Then I looked at the long project list of my colleagues, and I tried to relate their projects to one or more of society's problems. Such as, immigration, energy, traffic congestion, etc. But, I hardly could, while mine matched more or less. So, my view on problems in society, or my propensity to address them, certainly differed from my colleagues. My research could at least be defined as kind of 'deviating'. Working hard, not considering the issue very much, I even supposed to have done the right thing, and rather foolishly, thought that my work would at some time be recognized in the end. 
I had to delve in my old agenda's and my memory, to get some idea of how my projects had actually evolved. Then, also to my own surprise, it turned out that each major research field I had pursued, covered some seven year period. But also, that these periods had a halfway overlap. The first half of the seven year period I was involved in proved getting accustomed to the new topics, collecting data, and sometimes making a starter mistake, or trying an unfruitful dead end alley. Yet, at its halfway peak beginning to produce tangible results. The second half became less time consuming and was mainly filled with presentations and publications the project material offered abundantly. However, during this second half of easy time, I got in one or the other way, involved in a subsequent project, that repeated the familiar 'first half characteristics'. Again, this did not produce substantial results above the prescriptive, descriptive and explanatory phase. Yet, no one noticed, as I was still easy riding on the previous project, avoiding gossip, as well as the well-known 'publish or perish' consequences. It also had as a result, that I was still offering presentations after my retirement, as if nothing happened.
How did these major project periods trigger off? In general, I was approached by a representative of some external organization, asking me to 'have a look' at a problem they experienced. But, in some cases, I already expected the project to come about, so I had done some preliminary investigations. I.e. at the time I was still having the means available. Almost always, I could on short notice estimate whether I would be able to produce worthwhile results, and how I was to design my approach in general. I learned afterwards that my easy attitude to such questions could be surprising to third parties. Especially, if they had digested a couple of refusals beforehand. Not seldom being told of the impossibilities of the research question.
However, my ready approach towards research demands did not come about that easy. When I had to organize my PhD research on matters of computer use for Provincial monitoring I felt a more than usual need to answer the questions of designing my research project. I required fundamental reasoning, but literature was largely absent in that respect. Most arguing restricted itself to mere editorial recommendations, which were inadequate in my case. The only way out was to develop a general research design myself, that comprised solid internal consistency.

Working through a Life

A Climate Issue
Energy Shortage and Infrastructural Future
Seven Year Research Cycle
___

    Teenage Years
    Military G2 Service
    Library
    Study


      Working for a Living While Studying
      University Employee
      Locating a Hospital
      Democracy

        An Estuary Project
        Traffic Issues
        External Orientation
        Backtracking

          Innovation vs. Rumination
          A Narrow Escape
              Lessons Learned or Just the Familiar Innovation Trap?

            From Crystal Receiver to Road Pricing
            3-D Designs
            Basics

Teenage years

In my days, teenagers started their summer holidays picking fruit to earn some vacation money. However, successfully picking fruit asked for supple fingers, which, apparently, I did not have. Related work was sometimes available - such as carrying fruit baskets with a cart to the factory. I liked to do that better. I also worked on an agricultural test farm, where I had to mix different types of soil, and put these in earthenware pots. 
But the real difference came about quite unexpectedly. My interest from my youngest years on, were boats, and I read a lot on boat building and maintenance. So, I knew how to paint, and do all the preparatory work, such as sandpapering, putting on filler, and primers. In theory, that is.
But reading proper manuals, usually make me do things right. Also, time was still very short of money and taking practical lessons was restricted to professional courses. Although I knew that in the US DIY was already daily practice, with materials easy at hand, this development was still absent in my case, although it soon would change. Professionals at the time were often reluctant to favor such developments, seeing them as a hazard for their living.
How she knew I do not know, but our single female neighbor thought she could have her house painted by me. She asked a professional workshop to deliver the materials, and cast an eye on my work. As far as I remember the shop owner also suggested my reward, which was quite acceptable to me, as it could buy me a canoe. 
So, the next moment I collected ladders, brushes, sandpaper, paints, stones, and instructions from the shopowner. He stressed the need for sandpapering, which was not my favorite part of the job, but I already understood the importance of it. The weather must have been favorable, as I do not remember any delay. The shopowner came sometimes by on his bicycle, telling me some professional secrets. He had no complaints regarding my work. 
The job came to an end, and became the beginning of many such jobs in the neighborhood. To my surprise, a female doctor, living at the corner of the street, praised my work. Some years before, I had involved her son in smoking a first cigaret, which of course had made her furious. As far as I know, no permanent damage was done; later I read in the newspaper about his ground breaking work in the medical field in Africa.
My 'paint-neighbor' also allowed me to put an eyebolt in her side-window pane, so I could tie a rope across our very quiet street to a tree. That enabled my friends and I to play volleyball at the end of the afternoon. After some time, however, the police arrived, telling us, that it was not allowed. Luckily, one of the players could convince his parents, that a part of their backyard was ideally suited for our game.  
During the rest of our summer vacation we were often on the beach, playing volleyball. A friend and I organized a tournament between all of the beach teams, and recently I read in the newspaper that this tournament was still alive. 

Monday, February 13, 2012

Military G2 Service

After leaving high school I was not sure about my future, and requested for an early draft of the military service, one had to fulfill anyway. I started with an infantry role, got into a commando platoon, and went through a long series of tests leading to a G2 functiion at division staff level. 
I was supposed to become a liaison man between the ground troops and the Thunderflash 306 fighter squadron, that flew air photo reconnaissance sorties, for which the targets I had to provide. However, at the time that was a brand-new position, so I was soon redirected to the special school, where different intelligence functions got their crash course training. 
As I was a couple of months early for the course, I had to file and plot thousands of air photos from WWII, mainly taken by British spitfires over Germany. It made me fully aware of the destruction and misery that a war can bring about, and left me a bit older and wiser. 
When my class started, most of my classmates were at least four years older, having already passed examinations, earning grades in a wide variety of disciplnes. Thus, through their presentations and discussions, offering me a free and exciting opening towards a wide range of knowledge realms. It helped me decide on the university study I was going to undertake..

Library

My mother was an offspring of a maritime family, while my father was the youngest of a large farmer family. An unusual combination. As such, I was born on a farm (alongside an estuary), but my father was soon forced by the Great Depression to stop farming, and apply for a job at the Ministry of Agriculture. 
Now living near a town center, I often went to the library on a free afternoon, and enjoyed the silence, and the wealth of information directly available to me. I never saw one of my friends in there. May be my peculiar appetite was also nourished by the fact that we did not have that many books at home, although we read three newspapers, and some periodicals. 
Starting my study at Drift 21, Utrecht, the information about the study was hardly overwhelming, covering one side of an A4, and half of the backside. The Almighty Professor gave some additional information in a short welcome speech. A regular visit to the beautiful library was encouraged, but immediately followed by tales of students, who had asked stupid questions. It became soon clear that such students were expelled with success through a special exam. 
It left us with an everlasting sword of Damocles hanging over the library. This was regarded a positive outcome though, because the Almighty Professor expected only about five of us (out of some 100) would in the end get a job. In reality, quite a shortage would extend for more than a decade. 
On hearing that my beloved library visit had become an extremely dangerous affair, I wondered whether I should pursue my decision for this study. But then, a couple of days later a Senior Lecturer took away all reservations. He gave a clear presentation on the ins and outs of the study, and also an outlook, that one could end the study as a planner. My trust was restored, although it appeared later on, that the Almighty Professor, and the Senior Lecturer had painfully different views on the contents of the study. That happened to be in the harness of a strict hierarchical system. Nevertheless, I thought I could circumvent all dangerous barriers, but it was not to be.

Study

A couple of students from various faculties of most universities founded  a Student Union. They shared the same negative experiences in their study and sought improvement. I became President of the Utrecht Division. Although we could not change the law, we achieved a major improvement in student grants. It went as follows. My older brother had finished his professional exam, earning him a grade in civil engineering. Yet, he was enlisted for his military service time with air artillery. He wanted to join the Engineer Corps, making his service time more useful, and asked me to write a draft letter for a request to the Minister of Defense. The request resulted in a positive decision. 
So, my proposal was to have every Utrecht student send a request to the Minister of Education, asking for better pay. We also coined a sum, twice the amount we thought we could get. Then, we made up a general letter of request, and stenciled thousands of copies. We punched a hole in the corner, so we could tie them in bundles, and pin them to the Institute publication boards of Utrecht University. 
Within a couple of days, we were summoned to the Ministry in the Hague. A delegation of ours took the train, to be directed at the Ministry immediately to the Secretary-General himself. He proved to be very angry, and said that thousands of requests had reached the Minister. On toilet paper, that is!
So, our students had not written their own letters, we asked, not used our example? What a shame, what a shame. In this crucial hour of decision, we needed all hypocracy available. After apologizing for the very very bad manners of our students, the man calmed down. 
Well, he said, if you can stop this avalanche, the Minister is prepared to meet your request. We were perplexed at this sudden generous offer, far exceeding our expectations, and we promised to do whatever we could, to relieve the Minister of these letters. 
Never during later student uprisings, such a financial success was achieved again. Yet, the law was changed, and it would prove to be much to my benefit.
Regarding the stranding of my early study phase, I could long afterwards trace another cause for its collapse. A high school report I found, did show a very high mark for history. As we had to turn it in at the start of the study, I did remember a peculiar warning by the Almighty Professor. He had experienced that a student had used his study, to take a reroute to history, which apparently was very bad. As I had no plans in that direction, I now realized that quite other conclusions could have been drawn from my report.

Working for a Living while Studying

Although my father did lend me some money, I took the basic position of taking care of myself, and earn myself a living during my study. First of all, through a variety of jobs in factories, which made me aware of our economics in practice. Then, I applied for a job as General-Secretary of the Utrecht Youth Council, which introduced me to the intricate workings of a large town. That is, at policy level. An insight that was profitable, but the job was gradually too much a burden to my study progress, although I managed to complete a full construction course during those years. Luckily, I was offered a job as a high school teacher, which proved to be a more convenient job for switching back to my original study. 
So, after I was expelled from the study by the Almighty Professor, I had been advised to do a construction course. It happened to be of great interest to me, as now I acquired full technical knowledge. It also brought about two refreshing insights - again high marks for my exams, and the conviction, that it was not me who was wrong, but the Almighty Professor. So I went again succesfully through a couple of pre-exams, until the Almighty Professor wanted me to go down the expelling route of a main exam. However, the other professors now refused to cooperate, so he was forced to hand me my bachelors, apparently against his will. 
Having earned my bachelors opened the road to become a planner, and join the Institute of the eminent Lecturer, now Professor, with an independent Institute.

University Employee

As a post-bachelor student, I soon became an assistant in the Planning Institute. After my final cum laude exam, including economics and metrics, I had a choice of positions inside and outside the university. However, for me the choice was evident- the eminent Professor of the Planning Institute, who had determined my study years before, provided the logical work environment. 
Doing so, I overlooked the peculiar situation his Institute was in. He and his Institute had been more or less expelled by the Almighty Professor of the 'Geofaculty' (naming the faculty for short, for reasons of clarity). That way, he and his Institute became part of another faculty, which I will call for short 'Sociofaculty'. As the Institute was still functioning as an independent unit, the main stream of post-bachelor students would still come from the 'Geofaculty', but also from the 'Sociofaculty' to a lesser extent.

Locating a Hospital

An article in a professional periodical did stress that all new hospitals in the country were located in a wrong place. However, with one unique exception in the Utrecht area. A miracle. 
How did this miracle come about? Actually, very down to earth. The Hospital Board sought the advice of the Planning Institute, and do an investigation on the relocation of the old renowned hospital. The city location it was in, offered no room to expand. When I was asked to do the research, my main issue was - where do the patients and their visitors come from. I was enabled to lead a group of medical students, that visited the patients, and filled-in my questionnaire. The important role of the hospital presented itself clearly. It turned out, that about one third of the patients (and their visitors) originated from the city of Utrecht, about one third from the surroundings of Utrecht, and about one third from over the Netherlands. 
As a result I wanted to secure, that the hospital could be easily approached by public transport, as well as by individual means. All modes had turned out to be essential. A proper location in the, then expanding, fringe of the town of Utrecht was proposed. It fulfilled all criteria. The proposal was adopted carefully, and the hospital grew in name and fame until this very day.
At a later stage, I wanted to do some research with my students (as part of their curriculum) on the planned relocation of the University Hospital. That was refused, so the students had to fill in their questionnaire outside the gate. One main result coming out of the investigation was the lack of rail transport at the new location. 
I proposed a rail connection from the Utrecht main station. At the same time proposing it as a transfer and check-in point to Amsterdam-Schiphol Airport. The latter, because of its location, not only at the eastern fringe of Utrecht, but also of the Randstad as a whole. Recently, a newspaper reported such a rail line to be implemented, although the wider Randstad scope is apparently lacking. One cannot have them all. 

Democracy

As a representative of our Planning Institute I was assigned, not only a member of the national Planning Section of the Aacademic Council, but also a member of the General Council of the 'Geofaculty', a democratic body that came with the new law. The Almighty Professor had lost a lot of power, so strong voices were raised to return the Planning Institute to the 'Geofaculty'. This seemed to be a convenient option, as there was no problem in available posts. The hard-working 'Geofaculty' was growing and growing against all odds, while I expected the 'Sociofaculty' soon to have to give up posts. All conditions were met to make an easy transfer profitable for everyone, which I did advocate. Then quite unexpectedly, two or three of my colleagues proved to be very opposed to the suggested transfer. I was accused of seeking promotion through the Institute transfer, and had to be fired. 
However, under the new law and subsequent ruling, the University Board had to establish a temporary 'Court', that would rule over a democracy-born conflict. It took some years of struggling, in which I was expelled from the Institute. Yet, I could do my research, and write my PhD thesis. It regarded monitoring issues of computer usage by a Provincial Department in close coordination with the Department. The aim was to control their policies in an advanced manner. As far as I was concerned, no employment time was wasted. These type of information systems became later of general use, after the advent of internet. Nowadays, the world is familiar with search facilities, such as Google, and accustomed to Wikipedia libraries. After completion of my thesis, I was transferred alone to the 'Geofaculty' on condition, that I was not allowed to do research on cities. At that transfer moment I was exhausted and asked for a short break, which was not granted. My backpain ruined my arrival, as I could hardly speak, and it was to become the forerunner of two hernias later on. 
At the opposite side, the 'Sociofaculty' had appointed, as a reward, one of the opposing colleagues to a professorate. A rash decision, they told me, they soon became to regret. When the smoke had cleared, they realized I had been right on the worsening of the budgettary situation. They had to fire people of their own. The end result was, that the Planning Institute was discarded, and only three of my former colleagues were also transferred to the 'Geofaculty'.
 

An Estuary Project

Halfway during the eighties, Rijkswaterstaat asked the 'Geofaculty' to take the initiative of a multidisciplinary project on the Western Scheldt estuary. The aim was to coordinate research of various existing university departments and research institutes. Actually, asking for research being concentrated on this one water system. 
I had contributed already to the project of the Oosterschelde Stormvloedkering (Eastern Scheldt Storm Surge Barrier) and was familiar with the organization of Rijkswaterstaat. Thus, I became for a period of some five years a non-profit Project-Coordinator, as there was not much money available. Only students could be put on a payroll for a short time. 
My first task was to gather scientists from various disciplines all over the country, who might be interested in the project. Enough of them were willing to participate and contribute. The project involved a range from economic to ecological issues of the estuary. The estuary was under heavy stress of human activities, but the river Rhine had already shown, that water quality could be improved substantially, without curtailing economic activities. A useful yardstick.
The project contributed to end results, such as: (1) the construction of a 6 km. two-tube tunnel, (2) the first plan in the world of an estuarry, and (3) the advent of what might have been the first digitized marine chart in the world. The last contribution was an offspring of my efforts to make GIS the main vehicle for coupling research outcomes of different origin.
As a general outcome, I was also asked to take part in a long term planning group on the Netherlands (aiming at 2050), and also follow-up projects directly related. A first project I initiated in relation to these activities was a GIS-based computer animation on the Netherlands. It stretched from the ice-age to the future with four alternative developments for the country, used in an exhibition in Amsterdam and Rotterdam. Many of my colleagues were willing to contribute, taking care of the scientific quality of the product in all its respects. 
Furthermore, I was involved in a subsequent project for the extension of the town of Utrecht, which had proved to be deadlocked by surrounding communities at the time. A situation, that was extensively reported by a student group of mine in their final thesis. The Rector-Magnificus of our university, and member of our faculty, organized a working party to break that deadlock, in which I was asked to participate, to calculate the costs of the alternative extensions. It so happened during the process, that I actually triggered off the major extension direction of the town by convincing the working party of its rationale, for environmental and infrastructural reasons. The city itself had to go to The Hague to the Minister to get permission, but the results made Utrecht a prosperous city, now in effect housing the largest ratio of highest educated. 
Only later on, when implementation had started already, I realized that I had broken my 'city rule'. I was not allowed to do any research on cities, whatever that meant. However, it was the faculty itself, that wanted me in the project.
In another project, I could make a practical solution to the National Plan on Nature, which initially did not show any progress towards implementation. I was asked by Rijkswaterstaat to look at the problem, and made a GIS-plan to connect nature areas, not along roads as stipulated in the plan, but along our many waterways, which I considered to be more convenient locations. Although not specified in the plan, it became widely accepted as a useful vehicle for implementation. At home and abroad, it raised much interest, and met positive reactions. Eventually culminating in a European policy after my time.
For unspecified reasons, the faculty home front proved to be less impressed by my research activities. For instance, the Chairman of the Faculty Research Unit told me, that the estuary project was not much use. Possibly as a consequence, my meager experimental research money I had earned was taken from me. It was distributed to other, obviously more important, faculty projects outside my scope. My research was forced to a full stop. An unexpected shock to my external partners, while I had to redirect my research outlook.

Traffic Issues

I was left with the decision myself of finding a new research field. As the estuary project still offered a lot of publication material, no dent was made in my publication trail. Then, rather unexpectedly, my subsequent course of action in research came on track. An excellent former student of mine, already having managed major infrastructural projects, wanted a comprehensive research project on the history of car use after WWII. He took care of my financial problems, as he proposed to hire a well-known private consultant, who would in turn consult me. So, no research money could be redirected. As usual, a committee from external public officers was supervising, but the project and its product also required the approval of two of my colleagues. I had no problem with that, as I could not see what damage that could do to my project design and my outcomes. I was also granted to pick them myself. To prevent unnecessary delays, I only presented the final copy to them for approval, and that worked out without any fuzz or change. 
As stated, the study was about the postwar development of car use, and the many changes it brought about to society and its transportation. A completely different infrastructure had resulted, and with it appropriate large scale and specialized distribution systems. As such, a very useful exercise, highlighting the advent of a fully different society.
But considering the bottom line - was this project also of any practical use? At some meeting, a scholar of Delft Technical University, said he knew me. He told, that he had presented our report in China, making the Chinese in detail aware of the fundamental changes to their country they were going to face. A remark, I greatly appreciated, while it convinced me that no research capacity of mine had been wasted during my forced research transition.
Furthermore, this transition to traffic issues was greatly facilitated by the growing number of senior students, that sought my expertise and guidance during the final stage of their study. Our mutual interest developed often into co-research. 

Recognition

One needs some recognition to give sense to life. It is likely to be most profitable coming from the own working environment. Mine mostly came from external sources, and especially international one's. Such as remarks by foreign intellectual heavyweights, that I wrote and spoke like a professor (but did not use my title). Or commentaries by attending professors, that my contribution had been very helpful in fully understanding the problem. For instance, I was asked to present my paper as the keynote on a large international meeting. Later on I was pleased to read in the newspaper, that my suggestions were repeated by the Secretary-General of the UN. 
The only time I interfered with my fate at the home front, came very late in my 'career' - when I was going to retire, and heard accidentally, that I was the only one still kept on a junior pay level. As I did not want to be punished for the rest of my life, for reasons related to historic institutional problems, I wrote to the University Board with my credentials. It resulted in an invitation by the personnel staff member of the faculty, who did admit, that I outperformed the faculty professoriate, but that I had to understand too, comparing him and me, I was not at a disadvantage. 
However, the faculty did not want to leave it completely unrepaired, and raised me one scale. Despite the fact, that 'my professor', had admitted that he met strange differences in pay, when he arrived at the faculty. Although he knew my credentials, he made no corrections.

Sunday, February 12, 2012

Backtracking

When I became involved in traffic and transport research, much attention was paid to get people out of their cars and into public transport. In my opinion we were actually comparing two modes of transport, that had very different characteristics. As I already assumed, and what became evident from British research, people tend to think in terms of travel time, when regarding their home to work trips, not in terms of miles to cover or even costs. 
So, I started thinking of a method to analyze this phenomenon more precisely. As our faculty was a foremost developer in the field of GIS, I went for a completely different approach to the problem. The idea sprang from listening to the pilots of planes that had landed on the runway of Juliana Airport St. Maarten. After landing, and coming to a standstill, the pilots informed the control power, that they were ready to backtrack, i.e. returming on the same runway to the terminal platform. I discussed this with two students, who had to conceive their final thesis. They were willing to pursue this new approach on the important circle group of cities in Holland, called Randstad by KLM-founder Plesman. This entrepreneur argued that because of environmental reasons related to the advent of jet planes, a new airport had to be located in the central area of Holland, and not close to Amsterdam. Although politics did not comply, the name Randstad survived.
Realizing, that on the one hand work opportunities were rather concentrated (in regional space), such as in ports, airports and city centers, it was evident, that contrariwise, living had more and more deconcentrated in sprawled suburban areas. I pursued a GIS-based travel time analysis, which started at the work concentrations, to backtrack to the housing areas, along the existing infrastructure. The students collected data on the amount of jobs in the work areas, also establishing establishing their relative importance. Furthermore, a mean ultimate travel time of 37 minutes had already been concluded from previous research, so this limit was used to eventually coin the outer boundaries of the analysis. 
Especially, the living area covered by public transport was (as expected) much smaller, than that by car, but (far more importantly) well-defined on the map by now. It proved to be an eye-opener to regional planners as well as planners of public transport. No need to say, that by computer all kinds of analysis could be performed to analyze different policies on infrastructure and urban developments. Once, I happened to see a professor seeking through the trash can for a copy of my map, I just had discarded. Not stupid though, as the Minister herself thanked me personnally for the analysis I sent her.
How did I manage to keep up the necessary speed of my research work? I worked more or less in isolation with my assistants and students, and did not react to silly remarrks. Often also working outside office hours, starting at 7 (and 10') o'çlock, when the door of the building was unlocked, staying late, and working in the weekend. Nevertheless, I have been accused of laziness. Yet, my schedule consisted of a tight program, with many external obligations and deadlines. That left no time and will to consider gossip issues.
To prevent false conclusions, I should stress that my daily work environment was very efficient and pleasant, consisting for the most part of hard working posittive juniors outside the 'policy realm'. The newest and best apparatus was always at hand. It was an energetic faculty, stll growing in contrast to most other faculties of the university. However, in the past I used to be paid for what I produced, and expected a university to do the same. The fact that this did not happen (leaving me permanently on a junior scale level) left a feeling of shame of course, but I had no time and willingness to nourish that.

Innovation vs. Rumination

Since I frequented the public library in my high school days, my idea of science from the very start was 'breaking fresh ground'. During military service time, I was selected very young after high school in an intelligence class of university level with people already at graduate or even doctorial level. That strengthened my view. But then, we were all heavily selected people, mostly from the beta-side. We had gone through quite a series of tests, leaving at every stage many others behind. During my position at Utrecht University I did not change my mind. But, I knew much better by now. 
Breaking fresh ground proved to be far from evident. Most scholars are largely ruminating previous research. To avoid any misconceptions though, such research is very necessary. Not only for educational purposes, but also to strengthen and elaborate on each field of knowledge. However, one might question the wisdom of the existing skewed ratio between the overwhelming rumination, and the small innovatiion part. Striving for a 10% innovation share should be pursued, for instance, through special units. Once, during lunch, I proposed to start every publication with a summary of the new scientific material added. I found that such a statement should not be made that occasionally while people are eating - it may lead to choking. 
Actually, my analytical approach used to be contrariwise to rumination. Most of the time I assumed beforehand, that no previous research had been done. After completing one of my analyses, I started to look for publications on the subject. Then, I wrote the 'final' introduction, comparing my approach to previous research, and adding a literature list to the publication. Editors appreciate those lists very much. Of course, it is also a matter of justice to those, who have paid attention to the subject before, whether near or peripheral.

Saturday, February 11, 2012

A Narrow Escape

In my opinion one should not appoint a professor if no qualified applicant is available. That may go against the grain of bureaucracy, which presupposes, that there is always a suitable candidate around. In one case I could convince the committee I was in, that no suitable candidate had applied, i.e. for the faculty level I wanted, but could be expected later on. Some time later a very competent man showed up, being a major beneficiary to the faculty. Yet, it took some struggle to get him appointed, as external bureaucrats had concluded already, that the post was not going to be used. It also meant that I was not allowed anymore to take a position in an appointment committee, but I shrugged my shoulders. The crucial positions were taken, and according to my expectations, pushing the faculty to the top of the university. 
However, much later, a suboptimal lecturer from outside was appointed, who showed every trait of not being up to the demands of the faculty. Luckily for me, the law still stipulated, that lecturers could make up their own research plans, only to be agreed upon by the professor. I never reacted to his sour comments, such as, you should have held this presentation yesterday, knowing that I had nothing to do with the programming. Of course, I understood why - it would have saved him from a lot of sour comments by junior researchers, he apparently was not up to. 
At the very day I retired, a new law came into force, which would have given the poor man all the ammunition he wanted, making lecturers subordinates of the professor. So, under the present law, the level of silliness of your professor could determine your decision to stay or move on. May be the best way to go these days, is to become a professor yourself. That is, before taking the fresh ground approach. 
How? Let me overstate the usual 'procedure' for reasons of clarity. Start to make as many friends as possible in the relevant university circles. Put ample references to their publications into yours. Furthermore, you might also rephrase in a clever way their views, not only producing contents, but also proving the wisdom you found in their contributions. In so doing, do not forget to detect all your competitors, and use the gossip circuit to casually mention their shortcomings, which are definitely not fatal, but making them pitiful unfit for the professoriate level. Then, if you have succeeded, and still feel okay with yourself, remember that originally you wanted to break fresh ground. 
Why did my generation take riskier approaches to life, than seems to be the case these days? I think my generation that went through the war, did not expect to live that long. Also, the cold war of the fifties may have had an impact. Sacrifice was accepted as part of the individual daily philosophy. For instance, many wanted to be a fighter pilot, although everyone knew that jet fighters in those days came down easily, being unreliable.
In retrospect I consider myself a survivor, while many of my contemporaries actually passed away. I assume, they went in accordance with that postwar philosophy of not feeling sorry for yourself, but accept life and its hardship whatever way it comes..  

Lessons learned or Just the Familiar Innovation Trap?

Every person deals in life with two fields of decision making. Oneself, and one's (working) environment. I consider both equally important, in line with quantum mechanics. Both areas should be well-known to you. Yet, knowing the environment is more difficult to comprehend as it may change, while a person's character is likely to largely remain the same. I had the opportunity, in military service time, to have been scrutinized by psychologists through a subsequent series of tests, and was considered fit for a G2 post, which is recognized to be outstanding in military intellectual demands. I fulfilled the post at division level in a manner, that I was asked to stay. Yet, when I was expelled during my study, being told - not fit for university level - I had forgotten about all of it. Later on I learned the mechanisms of brainwashing, as practiced in Hanoi-Vietnam.
It also took quite some time to realize that my research goals probably aimed further in the future and more at the grand scene, than generally being practiced. The immediate future has a direct impact on current policy, not on some distant future. However, I do not consider myself completely stargazing. For instance, my strong suggestions for some of my colleagues to reserve priority time to their PhD worked out well, and not only facilitated their careers, but also the faculty at large, making us, among other developments, an international forerunner in the field of GIS. 
Suppose I was in the position to make choices again? I might hesitate more, but I would probably go for the same eminent professor, as I also would go for the same excellent organizations in society to work with in my research projects. They all provided good research platforms, although inevitably being meager in funds. However, that was made good in individual risk taking and support. They had the hard-to-find courage of facilitating my quest for ground breaking research. I should also stress, that many colleagues and students were around, who strongly supportted me in times of hardship, and without their help and loyalty I might not have succeeded.
I was and am proud of having produced some better insights and solutions, that showed to matter in the end. I survived the strong rumination defense mechanisms, generally being imperious, even in an outstanding university as Utrecht. In a way innovation might still be considered a threat. The following situation is not uncommon. The innovator may be held in contempt through curtailing his means, overloaded with secondary or even silly tasks. He is put on a tight schedule to disrupt his work. He is humiliated with over-silly remarks and belittled in the gossip circuit. His contributions to science and society are disregarded. So, in terms of career, it makes more sense to prefer the rumination protection and choose that 97% path (the percentage is estimated by the University President).

From Crystal Receiver to Road Pricing

Retired, and still going strong, old habits remain. In the early fifties I discovered two items, that facilitated me to build some primitive radio - the necessary ingredients left by a cousin on the upper floor of his parental home, and a copy of a periodical that contained an article on 'how-to'. Interestingly, the author proved to be one of those innovative Philips people of the famous Eindhoven research institute Natlab (a first and foremost target of Soviet postwar blitz-attack plans). Under an alias he was enabled to teach people the components  and applications of the secrets of the 'ether-realm'. My subsequent spanning of a roof antenna, and successful scratching under the blankets of the crystal remained reserved to my early teens.
Half a century later, in the early years of the new millennium, I read in an ad in the newspaper, that the Minister of Traffic and Transport wanted to implement road pricing. However, they still were not knowing how to build the box that was needed in each car to make the system work. Promised was a a first prize of €100.000 for anyone who could successfully. 
My initial anger, that still no proper design wass available, was soon surpassed by the need, that it had to be coined. Firstly, I concluded that a German cousin of mine, with ample experience in building dedicated computers, was needed to control my work for present day requirements. He admitted to cooperate and we answered 10 questions as the opening part of the contest. I emailed these immediately to the evaluation team. Then, I went to the library searching for a clue in that same old periodical, although renamed by now. I soon found what I needed and made the crucial diagram. My German cousin agreed with my design, and I delivered the design and the report personally to my familiar ministry. However, eventually it resulted in the remarkable decision not to award a first prize. And afterwards I was also surprisingly informed, not having ansewered the 10 questions, so I was disqualified.
Yet, the design was presented by my cousin to the German government party CDU, that wanted road pricing for freight trucks on German roads. The Siemens company produced the boxes and now hundreds of thousands fare the German infrastructure these days. As the design was supposed to be public from the start, I presented the design in the proper expertise environment, so everyone could make the box. As the design was also basic to making the TomTom, my design should have been a great help there too. The whole affair cost me some money, but I do not regret having money and time invested in the project.  

Basics


What at the age of 75 clings to the mind of a working life, happens to be a small excerpt of activities relating to one's major drive. The main thread through my years was innovation. And the overwhelming theme was - one cannot sit down and say, let us innovate. Innovation started in my experience with a tangible problem. So the first issue was - what was wrong or missing. Once this had been cleared, data on alternative courses of action had to be pursued to some depth, so the best prototype could be developed with confidence. That settled, 90% had been done; just leaving the second 90% for implementation (the most recent one I heard of a planner).
For me, it took an open mind to delve into the mechanics of a problem. With obligate perseverance, as the subsequent bumpy road provoked the usual disbelief, nullification, and laughter. It did not pay off well either. Undeniably, many of my colleagues have done substantially better in terms of their personal balance sheet. But, then again, at 75 it is your own and final verdict that matters. In my case, my present satisfaction is in daily seeing my proposals converted into reality.

When I was young I bought a down-priced copy of a book on Confucius. I must have presupposed that he had some everlasting answers. Probably expecting, that he was going to deeply influence our future. How it should be handled through daily virtues of individuals, such as humanity, uprightness, knowledge, integrity and propriety. Remarkably, as far as I remember, he was born from a 16-year old girl and a 65-year old man. Some 500 years in advance, he might be regarded as a predecessor of Christ. Both their philosophies do not contain intentions of bloodshed, many others have practiced. As such, I regard the crusades the ultimate contrast to Christianity itself. My forefather, Burg Count of Bielefeld, had been in one. On his return he renamed himself, obviously expressing the false view he had nurtured. That way, wanting his offspring to remind until this very day of the wrongdoings one can make in the name of religion. 
The very reason for being around presented itself in my late teens. It originated quite unexpectedly in reading the sermon on the mountain. I immediately realized that this sermon outlasted everything I had ever read or heard before, and also, that I would never read a better rationale on the reason to live, which I can say now, became true.

Reinier Jan Scheele (12 february 1937),
Terneuzen, o/b Zeewind.

To conclude with I might try and translate a poem by Gerrit Achterberg:

The helmsman that evening was the heart
to carry moon and shadow across its faintish chart, 
when sailing on a mirror sea,
reflected by life's memory.
To ghost with wind and rays and night
round bow and rig, beyond the latest light.