backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 54 comment(s) - last by phxfreddy.. on May 15 at 10:55 PM

IBM's next generation water-cooled super computer architecture will replace three previous supercomputers, all while increasing processing power nearly 4-fold  (Source: Carlye Calvin, UCAR)

The Integrated Computing Environment for Scientific Simulation (ICESS) project at NCAR is overseen by Tom Bettge, director of operations and services for NCAR's Computational and Information Systems Laboratory. He hopes the research will be applied to saving lives from severe weather.  (Source: Carlye Calvin, UCAR)
New IBM built climate computer in Colorado will help analyze deadly severe weather and climate change

It's a well known fact that developing realistic models to simulate climate change scenarios is a challenge, arduous, and cerebral task that currently is done rather poorly.  Many models feature glaring flaws, and most models lag behind true prediction, trying to be able to repeat previous weather patterns as proof of concept that there future predictions will hold true.  And most have trouble even doing that.

Half of the equation is coming up with a better understanding of the math and physics driving the problem.  The other half of the equation to improve the struggling weather modeling community is allocating more computing resources.  Weather models take massive amounts of number crunching to generate semi-accurate results. 

The National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) is working to shore up the latter count with the addition of a massive new IBM supercomputer to its Boulder, CO research center.  The center is arguably the nation's largest hotbed for climate and weather research.  The new supercomputer, a Power 575 Hydro- Cluster, will not only allow it to improve its analysis, but also to conserve energy, thanks to an energy efficient design by IBM.

Part of the use of the cluster will center on climate change.  Researchers hope to analyze effects that warming (or cooling) might have on the environment, such as future patterns of precipitation, droughts, changes in growing seasons, and warming's influence on hurricanes.

The system will also analyze severe weather in the present.  Researchers hope to use the system's power to develop more accurate weather forecasting models.  These models will in turn help to forewarn citizens of impending severe weather.  With tornado deaths in the U.S. jumping from 67 to 81 between 2006 and 2007, and with 75 U.S. tornado casualties already this year, these models can literally be life-saving.

The new supercomputer "bluefire" is up to the task.  Using the IBM Power 575 architecture, the system sports POWER6 microprocessors, operating at a speedy 4.7 GHz.  The system utilizes 4,064 of these blazingly fast processors, 12 terabytes of memory, and 150 terabytes of FAStT DS4800 hard drive storage.  The computer is one of IBM's new systems that utilizes water cooling, which allows higher clock speeds and lower energy usage, as the PC enthusiast market has long recognized.

The new system is equipped with cooling copper plates on every processor, which water flows over.  The water cooling improves energy efficiency by 33 percent.  Factoring in the much higher energy efficiency of the processors, the system is three times as energy efficient per rack as its predecessor.

It can also handle a lot more number crunching.  The system replaces three separate supercomputers with a combined capacity of 20 teraflops (20 trillion floating-point operations per second).  The "bluefire" system nearly quadruples this, offering 76 teraflops.

Says Tom Bettge, director of operations and services for NCAR's Computational and Information Systems Laboratory, "Bluefire is on the leading edge of high-performance computing technology.  Increasingly fast machines are vital to research into such areas as climate change and the formation of hurricanes and other severe storms. Scientists will be able to conduct breakthrough calculations, study vital problems at much higher resolution and complexity, and get results more quickly than before.  We're especially pleased that bluefire provides dramatically increased performance with much greater energy efficiency,"

The computer will undergo acceptance testing and come online in August and is expected to remain in use through 2011, serving a variety of purposes.  The computer is phase two of the Integrated Computing Environment for Scientific Simulation (ICESS) at NCAR.  The ideal fit of IBM supercomputer innovation for the multifunctional nature of the mission is described by strong supporter, Dave Turek, vice president of deep computing at IBM.  Turk states, "NCAR has a well-deserved reputation for excellence in deploying supercomputing resources to address really difficult challenges.  Bluefire will substantially expand the organization's ability to investigate climate change, severe weather events, and other important subjects."

One of the computer's first main tasks will be a heady and likely controversial one.  The system will be tasked with developing climate simulations for use in the next meeting of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN organization monitoring global warming and other climate change phenomena.  The organization shared the Nobel Prize in 2007, but has been harshly criticized by global warming critics.

The supercomputer is quite oblivious to the controversy, though, and will likely soon be happily crunching away numbers, and hopefully helping save lives across the country by providing better warning of severe storms.

NCAR is under the administration of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR).  The National Science Foundation (NSF) primarily sponsors the center's research.  Other funding comes from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Department of Defense (DOD), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Comments     Threshold


Nice
By TheDoc9 on 5/9/2008 10:56:10 AM , Rating: 5
Thats pretty impressive, hopefully the weather models will catch up




RE: Nice
By Hulk on 5/9/2008 11:05:12 AM , Rating: 5
Don't worry, the Navier-Stokes equations will give bluefire all it can handle and more. More nodes, smaller time slices, and less dumbed down approximations will provide better accuracy at the expense of bluefire's sweat!


RE: Nice
By masher2 (blog) on 5/9/2008 11:30:33 AM , Rating: 5
> "Don't worry, the Navier-Stokes equations will give bluefire all it can handle and more"

Very true. Current GCMs often can't use grid sizes of 100,000 cubic miles or more, and they leave out more factors than they include.

It's my personal opinion that we're at least 25 years away from having the computing power to even approximately model global climate.


RE: Nice
By masher2 (blog) on 5/9/2008 11:38:32 AM , Rating: 2
edit: often can't use grid sizes smaller than 100,000 cubic miles...


RE: Nice
By FITCamaro on 5/9/2008 11:54:41 AM , Rating: 2
That won't stop global warming alarmists for spouting their "facts" for the next 25 years. They'll continue to argue it even if a glacier skids on by taking out their home.


RE: Nice
By JonnyDough on 5/10/2008 12:18:16 AM , Rating: 3
Oh yes. Let's please go against what the large majority of the scientific community is saying as if know everything. Have you ever bothered LISTENING to the facts? Try it. The polar ice caps aren't melting at ridiculous rates for nothing. Polar bears are on the endangered list. Think about that...they may go EXTINCT. The world as we knew it as children is not the same world of tomorrow. Wake the hell up already. This isn't something you can "argue." This isn't religion. It is SCIENCE. YOU are the person saying the world is flat. Quit being a cynic and begin listening to reason. It isn't debatable. If you think it is, try arguing with the largest scientific gathering ever in the history of earth. Don't feed us your bullcrap about what you "think." Maybe you should watch the $5 1.5 hour movie you can pick up at Wal-Mart called the 11th hour. It contains plenty of explanation and "facts" for you. They DID their research. Did you? Or are you just spewing at the mouth about what you "think?"

/end rant.


RE: Nice
By ADDAvenger on 5/10/2008 2:44:28 AM , Rating: 2
Global warming is a fact, that's fair enough. However, just because change is in the air doesn't mean we're all going to die.

There was a little ice age around the 1500s, and we're still here. Everyone was throwing fits about global cooling some forty years ago, and we're still here. What makes you think Earth is static anyway? All the evidence points to an earth that has had wide ranging climate fluctuations for as long as life has been here. Ok so polar bears are dying, guess what, they aren't the first species to go extinct because of climate change (think dinosaurs, and yet here we are). And if you'll look at your own numbers you'll see volcanos etc producing a lot more greenhouse gases than all of humanity combined. Heck, iirc, the amount of CO2 released by volcanos can vary by more per year than humanity releases in that same year.

Now if you want to talk about reducing smog so we don't have so many allergy problems I'm all for that. I also don't like inefficient cars, but that's because of a national dependency / economic issue, not because I think we're going to light the world on fire if we have too many cars running at the same time.


RE: Nice
By JonnyDough on 5/10/2008 3:39:50 AM , Rating: 4
Ok so polar bears are dying, guess what, they aren't the first species to go extinct because of climate change.

Except that our climate is changing at an alarming rate this time due to de-forestation and the like.

Furthermore, melting ice isn't the only reason polar bears are becoming extinct - although shifting icebergs have led to many bears suffocating under water, unable to resurface. Fishing, waste/garbage dumping, oil spills, and development have all led to the decline of the polar bear.

I really urge anyone who hasn't seen 11th Hour to rent/buy it. It's remarkably better than Al Gore's video.


RE: Nice
By JonnyDough on 5/10/2008 5:33:03 AM , Rating: 2
That first bit should be in quotes. Sorry!


RE: Nice
By sinful on 5/11/2008 10:14:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
However, just because change is in the air doesn't mean we're all going to die.


GW isn't necessarily about that, but, suppose this:
if the Midwest of the United States became a dust bowl, while Uganda suddenly becomes better for growing crops, due to climate change.

GW opponents go "Ah, see, nothing really changed, if one place becomes better and one place worse, it all works out in the end, no change!".

The problem is that the US is a huge food producer; it has the technology, equipment, capital, and infrastructure to support growing lots of food and distributing it.

If climate changes disrupt where food can be grown, it could potentially be disasterous for everyone.

People complain about how Ethanol is driving up food prices, but then those same people go "Oh we shouldn't worry about GW at all!".

In other words, it is in the US' best interest not to "fiddle with the climate control knobs" too much.
While we won't be starving, the price of food could potentially skyrocket - suddenly there isn't as much food, and the places that can grow it now might be 3rd world countries that don't have fancy tractors, fertilizers, irrigation systems, and an infrastructure to move that food out.

In other words, it's not so much of a "Doom & Gloom" scenario as "It could get really expensive for everybody really fast."

Spending some money now might save us a TON in the future. So, the question isn't really "Is it caused by man", since it doesn't really matter WHY it is happening, as it is that it IS happening.

Since the (general) consenus is that it IS happening, what exactly should be done about it?
Seems to me it would be better for the US to "waste" money becoming energy independent and minimizing our impact on the environment than it would be for the US to "waste" money shipping billions of dollars to other countries buying food & energy from them....

But that's just my $.02


RE: Nice
By teckytech9 on 5/12/2008 1:35:02 AM , Rating: 2
There is no denying the argument that the worlds temperature is getting warmer, whether thats attributable to global warming factors is the cause for debate.

What is noteworthy is that if "bluefire" could somehow go back thousands of millennia and calculate the rate of change from Earths ice age to its thaw, then measure the current rate as its happening this century, and compare the data. Variables like the quantity of CO2 absorbers and producers could also be examined in detail.

As for the case for polar bears, one must examine their current plight for survival. When wildlife observers witness these bears waking up from hibernation in the middle of the ocean, and hunting walruses, then there appears to be something abnormal going on here. When arctic Eskimos, can't store their meat underground in ice cellars, as they did for generations, things are indeed warming up.

There is no debate on the global smog issue. That morning fog can be very misleading, as it probably contains some carbon industrial byproduct that has spewed its way across the globe. Big plums of toxic clouds emanating from industrial cities in Asia have been tracked via satellite making landfall in the US. Land based pollution detectors high atop the Olympics mountain range have picked up these pollutants in their filter systems. What turns out to be inefficiency in environmental regulation, automobile technology, and the transportation infrastructure they ride on, benefits the big oil companies.


RE: Nice
By phxfreddy on 5/10/2008 2:02:43 PM , Rating: 1
Why is it liberals / socialists / communists believe in global warming and conservatives do not ??? ....

When it comes to the law of gravity we all agree.

If you can't spell the hoax BS in global warming you are really in a world of hurt. Woman are going to walk all over you if you can even get one in the first place. You will constantly loose your money to con men.

And you want us to quote a reviewed paper! Do you KNOW how uncool it is to be such a follower ? ....latching onto every lame fad and fashion including global warming?

A person is never so uncool as when they are playing for acceptance. Go your own way. Think for yourself for a change.

You will wonder how your life got so much better!


RE: Nice
By rubbahbandman on 5/10/2008 2:29:24 PM , Rating: 2
Have you heard of meteorologists? You know, the people who forecast the weather for you and study weather for a living. I thought I'd mention that the vast majority of meteorologists don't buy into the man-made global warming hype.

The world changes, naturally, it is a fact of life. Africa didn't always have the Sahara desert, and the desert wasn't formed solely due to rising temperatures, but rather a disruption in previous weather patterns caused by the formation of the Himalaya mountains.

Man-made "climate change" is complete hype, and all boils down to government funding. Guess how much climatology "scientists" were funded before they brought up climate change? A few million versus the BILLIONS of dollars today.

Obviously they aren't willing to give up that kind of money so dissenting scientists are intimidated into silence by global warming alarmists with threats of having their funding removed... Anyways, while I disagree with man-made climate change, I believe in other very real man-made problems. Let's focus on those.


RE: Nice
By sinful on 5/11/2008 10:38:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Guess how much climatology "scientists" were funded before they brought up climate change? A few million versus the BILLIONS of dollars today.

Obviously they aren't willing to give up that kind of money so dissenting scientists are intimidated into silence by global


Seriously folks, it is basically "Hippies vs. Big Industry", and you're making the claim there's big money to be made on the side of the "Hippies"??
Really??
The Sierra Club has that much money to dump into Pro-GW studies??

In other words, for every million dollars Al Gore makes, there are ten Oil Industry Execs making 10x as much money that want to shut him up.

Because seriously, the Oil Industry could spend $10 Million paying people to dissent against GW and claim its bunk - because you know if Congress goes "Oh, lets impose a 1% tax on the oil industry to make them clean up any GW related issues", it is going to cost the oil industry BILLIONS of dollars.

If there is any sort of financial incentive to suppress the truth, it's going to be suppressing the studies that show GW is man-made and caused by big industry.


RE: Nice
By masher2 (blog) on 5/10/2008 3:02:09 PM , Rating: 3
> "The polar ice caps aren't melting at ridiculous rates for nothing."

The Southern ice cap isn't melting; it's increasing in mass. As for the Northern, it's been melting rather steadily for at least the last 7,000 years, since the end of the last ice age in fact.

> "Polar bears are on the endangered list. Think about that...they may go EXTINCT."

First of all, polar bears are *not* on the endangered species list...though a decision on whether they will be added is due May 15. Secondly, polar bear populations have been rapidly increasing over the past few decades, and dozens of scientists in the field have spoken out against environmentalists calls to list them.

> "It isn't debatable"

Then why do hundreds of climatologists and physicsts disagree that AGW is proven...and even the UN IPCC itself admits to a 10% chance that mankind isn't responsible for the recent warming trend?


RE: Nice
By Grabo on 5/10/08, Rating: 0