12 the year 2010 is already well underway it seems almost like yesterday that we were anxiously anticipating the start of the year 2000 and the new millennium. our greatest fear was that all the computers would crash, but miraculously absolutely nothing happened. unfortunately, the same cannot be said of what happened last week in the Curius base. We embarked on a stressful New Year as our computers were being updated, but after barely a week the whole job had been done and dusted thanks to the assistance of our faculty technicians. We were able to continue with our work and enjoy the great success of the Pco party. This year's venue was the Lorre and the party was bigger than ever, attracting 870 people. Top model Doutzen Kroes even made a surprise appearance to venture onto the dance floor, much to the delight of the men of Delft. The ski trip was also a very memorable event. Our 62-strong group brought fear to the ski slopes of France and much the same in La Grotte du Yeti bar. Days were spent having fun on the ski slopes, with an occasional break for a delicious hot chocolate in the sun, and the evenings saw us dressing up and heading for the Yeti bar. It was a highly enjoyable, fun week that we certainly intend to repeat. Now we face the prospect of more serious activities. March will see the organisation of a Case Night for all Master's students. This special event gives students the opportunity to come into contact with companies such as the Vreeland Group and Ernst & Young. For first-year students, we plan an excursion to Amsterdam to visit the North/South underground line currently under construction. Students will have the chance to look underground and see the new lines. This year also sees the magical return of the TB dictation. Other less serious activities are also planned, including the Curius anniversary on 18 March and a laser gaming session organised by the activities committee. After the examination period, these events are a perfect way to let off steam, especially the laser gaming, where you can vent your frustrations about your courses. As the 17th Curius board, we look forward to seeing how 2010 will turn out and enjoying the activities to come. The 17th Board of SVTB Curius Curius TPM's educational programmes BSc Systems Engineering, Policy Analysis and Management ('Technische Bestuurskunde', TB) MSc Systems Engineering, Policy Analysis and Management (SEPAM) MSc Management of Technology (MoT) MSc Engineering and Policy Analysis (EPA) MSc Transport, Infrastructure and Logistics (TIL) (in cooperation with the Faculty of Civil Engineering & Geosciences and the Faculty of Mechanical, Maritime and Materials Engineering) MSc Information Architecture (IA) (in cooperation with the Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Applied Mathematics and Computer Science) MSc Geomatics (in cooperation with the Faculty of Civil Engineering & Geosciences and the Faculty of Aerospace Engineering) I www.TBM.TudELFT.nL E InFo-TBM@TudELFT.nL T 015 - 278 7100 did you thoroughly read the available information and are you considering enrollment in a TPM-programme? are you not sure your educational background is sufficient? Then please contact one of our study advisors: drs. Marja brand (m.j.c.c.brand@tudelft.nl) jeanette blokland (a.h.blokland@tudelft.nl) Ask TPM The way forward for climate science The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has recently been the subject of controversy. Errors have been found in one of the IPCC's reports, the conduct of individual climate scientists is being questioned and the IPCC chairman has been accused of a conflict of interest. Climate sceptics are convinced that the theory of global warming and the idea that it is man-made is based on shaky foundations. The IPCC has even been referred to as the 'climate mafia'. So what should we, as politicians and citizens, do about it? We put the question to Dr Henk Zandvoort, associate professor in the Philosophy section. Although important, the issues that have emerged certainly do not justify the response seen from many politicians, who claimed to be 'furious', 'outraged' and 'deeply concerned'. The errors identified (the Himalayan glaciers to disappear not by 2035 but by 2350; 26% of the Netherlands to be below sea level, rather than the 55% originally reported) are isolated errors that have no impact on the main conclusions reached in 2007, which were that the earth is warming up and this is a highly probable result of human activities. The calls in the media for the resignation of the IPCC chairman and the reform of IPCC procedures may have been justified. The concern expressed by at least one politician about the hostile relationships within the climate science community was also well founded. If the world of politics is to make enlightened decisions on these issues, these must be based on reliable and credible science. This is being hampered by the current breakdown in 23(2), 2003). If that were the case, avoidable CO 2 emissions would not be permissible unless it could be demonstrated that there were no damaging consequences for others (or these others did not object) and any actors who ignored this would be liable for the negative consequences. In our current society, the opposite view still prevails. There is no recognised right to restrict or prohibit behaviour that may cause risk to others unless there is indisputable proof that actual damage will be caused. Moreover, any liability that does exist for the negative consequences of such action is at best limited. until the 19th century, legal systems did take account of the precautionary principle to a certain extent, especially in establishing the initial parameters for liability. In the period thereafter, this principle receded into the background, with far-reaching consequences. The first of these is that creating a sustainable society would actually appear to be impossible in the current circumstances. Secondly, people who want to do what they like, without any restrictions, have nothing to gain from science that actually does its job properly. My conclusion is this: researchers and politicians who wish to contribute to the improvement of fundamental social institutions have important tasks ahead of them, and this applies far beyond the world of science and academia. For more information, see: H. Zandvoort, Globalisation, environmental harm, and progress. The role of consensus and liability, Water Science and Technology, 52(6), 43-50 (2005). relationships and politicians would be well advised to ensure that this situation improves. Some of the arguments raging in the media and in the blogo- sphere lost all sense of reason and neglected to highlight some key issues. Many of the people who believe that the IPCC's conclusions are completely without foundation fail to realise that there is equally no justification for denying these conclusions ('there is no global warming' and/or 'this warming is not man- made'). Within the existing ethical and legal frameworks, this hardy need concern them. But imagine if the precautionary principle were more firmly embedded within this framework, in the sense that anyone who wishes to engage in a particular activity that may constitute an uncertain level of risk for others, must first demonstrate that there is no risk or that the level of risk is acceptable, before proceeding. (For details of this formulation of the precautionary principle, see M.D. Rogers, Risk Analysis,
http://www.tbm.tudelft.nl, info-tbm@tudelft.nl, m.j.c.c.brand@tudelft.nl, a.h.blokland@tudelft.nl,
TBM Quarterly E main