New research indicates that penguins can count, or maybe subtract. Either way, they can measure energy spent in order to predict the time to stop flying.

When fishing in open water, the ten free-rangers studied, over the course of 15,978 dives stayed under for an average of 5.7 minutes. When fishing from a hole in the ice however, the three birds under study dived 495 times but stayed under much longer, which led the researchers to believe that the penguins’ decision to end their time under water wasn’t about how long they’d been under at all. This led them to consider the possibility that it was based on energy expended instead, which is how they came to start counting how many times the penguins flapped their wings to propel themselves while chasing after fish.

Turns out regardless of whether the penguins are fishing in open water, or through a hole in the ice, they flap on average 237 times before surfacing. Thus, it seems rather clear that they are basing their time spent under water on energy spent flapping, rather than on some predetermined time span; though, how they count and keep track, is still anyone’s guess.

Emperor penguins flying. Photo by Guillaume Dargaud

A sad and somewhat funny story in MotoringFile by the MINI USA Product Manager

I’ve been on a personal mission to get Diesels here in the US since 2007. I’ve owned oil burners myself (PowerStroke F-250, X5 35d) and love the purring clatter of a Diesel that let’s everyone know that you’re smarter than the current crop of Prius drivers on the road. Couple that with incredible fuel economy, great drivability and the 40% increase in fuel economy, it is so obvious that we should have a MINI Diesel in the US. While many people think we’ve been dragging our feet and that we’re anti-Diesel, the opposite is true. I know many claim that they have gone to other makes because we don’t have the Diesel here, but we hope we can win them back.

Oh, that sounds good, although he is missing emissions as one of the virtues of diesel. Perhaps that’s not a mistake given his list of his prior diesel engines are both trucks with horrible mileage and emissions. Keep that in mind when you see how he blames the regulators for Mini’s inability to import their engines.

…Diesel vehicles in Europe conform to very rigid but more importantly, predictable, BIN standards that do not require SCR. This is unlike the US where every lawmaker is trying to get a book deal by becoming automotive engineers and petroleum industry experts overnight and to re-write the law as they go.

So MINI Diesel won’t be coming anytime soon. Apparently the company is unable to figure out how to stay ahead of American requirements, which most people would say are long overdue. Case in point, he describes Mini design and engineering as not responsive enough to adapt to what they call a surprise in requirements:

…the changes to the CAFE and EPA regulations by the Obama administration meant that we’d (by law) have to add urea injection two years sooner by 2013, during the lifecycle of the current R5x platform. So, Plan A was to sell a MINI Diesel for two years without SCR and to then add urea injection when it was needed. Plan B was to add urea injection right away, so that we wouldn’t have to worry about it. We asked the engineering team, the Oxford plant and the internal project financing team what it would take. The answer was a STAGGERING amount because of the necessary changes to the body-in-white. We all love our MINIs but often forget just how tightly packages the car is today and to provide a place for the urea mixture tank, pump, lines, wiring and injection system, we needed to re-engineer the car with a new floorpan, left rear quarter panel, inner wheelhouse and attendant hardware (including interior panels and trim.)

Maybe that’s a huge problem and a surprise to a person who buys an F250 or a X5 diesel for a town car but achieving better emissions definitely should have been no great hurdle for the company that makes the Mini and wants to sell into the small/efficient car market.

If I had a dollar for every company that said “regulators are always behind” and then later said they can’t meet regulations because they change too quickly…

The truth is regulators move in response to large and obvious trends in public sentiment. The politicians react to public and private influence that is no secret and easily predictable. Mini should have been anticipating the rules and working with the regulators directly ahead of time if they had any concerns about meeting them. I don’t accept their excuses at all.

Imagine if Mini made the same argument in other areas of marketing as they do with their emissions problems. Note how the story describes the virtues they measure in an engine, in line with the opening paragraph above:

Now I know you will all hate me, but I had a chance to drive it and the thing is incredible. It was Pepper White manual R56 Cooper SD on 17s. It rips out of the gate like the current Cooper S and just revs, all the way to 4,500 rpm. It has noticeably more noise than the N18 (about 40% more) but like I said, it’s GOOD noise! Best part, it can get 48 mpg (true US conversion.)

Unfortunately “rips out of the gate” is not the full set of criteria to measure the success of their engineering. Even 48 mpg for a high-performance engine is not enough (and unimpressive, given that a full-size Jaguar diesel averages 62 mpg; a Fiat 500 diesel gets 56 mpg).

Although Mini marketing probably pushed engineering into performance and mpg and thought they were important to grow market share, even more important was the ability to exceed basic expectations of clean emissions (e.g. regulatory requirements).

Engineered wrong and unable to win you back: the dirty Mini Cooper Diesel

Wired reports that the F/A-18, dubbed the green hornet in 2010, will receive a new shipment of biofuel.

Two companies will split the Navy order. Dynamic Fuels, half-owned by agribusiness giant Tyson Foods, converts fats and waste greases into biofuels. Solazyme uses algae as a means of fermenting everything from plant matter to municipal waste into fuel. Both are considered leaders in the next-gen biofuel industry — Dynamic is one of the first companies in the field to have a commercial-scale refinery up-and-running. Solazyme has already delivered 150,000 gallons of its fuels to the Navy.

Substantial hurdles remain, however. The Navy paid about $1,000 for each barrel of biofuel it bought to test out in its jets. This new purchase will cost just as much: $26 per gallon, or $1,092 per barrel. (In contrast, old-school jet fuel is currently trading at $126 per barrel.)

$1000/barrel? That’s a lot of green (pun intended). The Navy claims the price is now half as much as the same fuel cost them in 2009. Perhaps it is a true bargain when compared to other Pentagon initiatives of the past like the $435 hammer.

The hammer contract has been investigated by Congress, discussed during the 1984 presidential debates, and used as Exhibit A by politicians, journalists, and businessmen in their recent calls for military reform.

But here’s the rub: the DOD didn’t pay $435 for a hammer. It’s a good bet we paid too much for it (for reasons related in part to something called the equal allocation method and in part to larger problems in defense procurement). But the Pentagon didn’t pay nearly $428 too much.

Aside from the accounting oddities in the story, it is no secret that innovation brings with it a higher cost than just production. It is the same argument used by the oil industry to ask for help subsidizing their exploration. And of course if you factor in the cost of overseas American military operations to protect petroleum into the current price of petroleum (e.g. defending foreign soil) then “old-school jet fuel” might not seem so inexpensive.

The bottom line is that domestic and localized production of fuel for military vehicles is a far more secure model with a much lower total cost over time.

“The Navy has always led the nation in transforming the way we use energy, not because it is popular, but because it makes us better war fighters,” stated [U.S. Navy Secretary Ray] Mabus.

[…]

The biofuel will be mixed with aviation gas or marine diesel fuel for use in the Green Strike Group demonstration. It is a drop-in fuel, which means that no modifications to the engines are required to burn the fuel. Its cultivation did not interfere with food supply and burning the fuel does not increase the net carbon footprint. In preparation for this demonstration, the Navy recently completed testing of all aircraft, including F/A-18 and all six blue Angels and the V-22 Osprey, and has successfully tested the RCB-X (Riverine Command Boat), training patrol craft, Self Defense Test Ship, and conducted full-scale gas turbine engine testing.

Although the U.S. is still in the early phase of military testing and trials I suspect the results will filter into the civilian market in the next five to ten years. The new fleet of 120 mpg high-performance cars may therefore run on waste grease or algae thanks to gov/mil innovation and investment, as I presented at BSidesLV 2011.

Video from the Navy of what some now call the earth-friendlier killing machine: