Tega Brain: Hi, every­one. I’m Tega. I’m an artist and envi­ron­men­tal engi­neer. And I call what I do eccen­tric engi­neer­ing. So, I do exper­i­ments with data and tech­nolo­gies and com­put­ers that ask ques­tions of how we design and engi­neer the sys­tems with­in which we live.

I’m par­tic­u­lar­ly con­cerned with how to design from the dystopi­an posi­tion of the Anthropocene. How to make cre­ative work that is simul­ta­ne­ous­ly crit­i­cal and gen­er­a­tive. We’re scram­bling to fig­ure out what it means to have moved an enor­mous amount of car­bon from the ground into the atmos­phere large­ly via com­bus­tion. And so this talk con­sid­ers some of my work deal­ing with envi­ron­men­tal data and a chang­ing cli­mate, and hope­ful­ly points to some of what is at stake as we col­lec­tive­ly face this. What does it mean to have aug­ment­ed the atmos­phere and the ocean’s capac­i­ty to absorb heat? And to be rapid­ly increas­ing the entropy of those sys­tems?

The term entropy of course has two def­i­n­i­tions, one in ther­mo­dy­nam­ics and one infor­ma­tion the­o­ry. So to start with the ther­mo­dy­nam­ic def­i­n­i­tion, entropy is the ran­dom­ness of the con­stituents in a sys­tem. In oth­er words, if you heat or increase the tem­per­a­ture of a gas, it increas­es its entropy, its ran­dom­ness.

And so what ways can we see this in our shared envi­ron­men­tal sys­tems? So first of all, we can look at the bio­log­i­cal inter­faces that sur­round us and how they change through time. This is the study of phe­nol­o­gy. Phenology’s the tim­ing of recur­ring bio­log­i­cal events such as flow­er­ing and migra­to­ry pat­terns in dif­fer­ent ecosys­tems. And it’s of great inter­est to researchers because it’s show­ing how the bios­phere is chang­ing with cli­mate change. Observing phe­nol­o­gy is to observe a com­plex, rhyth­mic, and cycli­cal rela­tion­ship between tem­per­a­ture and time.

The old­est writ­ten bio­log­i­cal data set on record is the cher­ry blos­soms bloom in Kyoto, Japan. This is of inter­est because it her­alds the begin­ning of the cher­ry blos­som fes­ti­val, and it’s being pieced togeth­er since 1800 AD, from the records of emper­ors ands aris­to­crats in Japanese his­to­ry.

This has become an impor­tant cli­mate record because the cher­ry blos­som bloom starts after a series of warm days at the begin­ning of spring. And so it’s very clear from look­ing at this record that the bloom is becom­ing soon­er and hap­pen­ing soon­er and soon­er in the year as our sys­tem is warm­ing up.

So look­ing at some of these phe­nol­o­gy data sets is at the heart of this project, which was a col­lab­o­ra­tive project I did at the Environmental Health Clinic at NYU called The Phenology Clock.” This is visu­al­iza­tion soft­ware that visu­al­izes phe­nol­o­gy data from dif­fer­ent ecosys­tems. And it pro­duces twelve-month clocks. So January’s at the twelve o’clock mark. And each band of col­or shows a flow­er­ing pat­tern from a par­tic­u­lar species of plant. So it shows the dura­tion of that flow­er­ing event.

And what is revealed is tem­po­ral rela­tion­ships with­in the ecosys­tem. So you can see Sydney on the left, flow­ers all year round. New York on the right, like noth­ing hap­pens for six months of the yeah, right? As an Australian I’m hor­ri­fied by this.

So I’ve used this soft­ware to look at a num­ber of phe­nol­o­gy data sets from dif­fer­ent places, and here is a clock gen­er­at­ed from a fam­i­ly of euca­lypt trees. And what’s amaz­ing about this image is you’ll notice that there’s always five or six species in flower at any one time. Why would this be? Why would a fam­i­ly of trees dis­trib­ute them­selves tem­po­ral­ly through­out the year?

The rea­son being is it’s thought that they’re coe­volved with this species, the fly­ing fox. The fly­ing fox is the dat­ing ser­vice for the trees; it pol­li­nates them. And the trees pro­vide a food source. So, by tem­po­ral­ly dis­trib­ut­ing flow­er­ing pat­terns, this guy has a food source through­out the year.

Plants medi­ate the atmos­phere. Increasing entropy flows on to desta­bi­lize mutu­al­is­tic rela­tion­ships such as these. Increasing over­all tem­per­a­ture increas­es the unpre­dictabil­i­ty of these species syn­chronic­i­ties.

Studies of the Jacaranda, the Cowslip Orchid, the Texan Blue Bonnett and the Sturt’s Desert Pea for the peri­od from 20022013. from Keeping Time

A project fol­low­ing this, also explor­ing phe­nol­o­gy was a project I did scrap­ing the Flickr data­base, look­ing to see if I could see these pat­terns in messy, crowd­sourced data. The result­ing images are made up of thou­sands of images that are tagged with par­tic­u­lar species name and laid out accord­ing to time­stamp. So January on the left, December on the right, and each band is a year. And here we can see a very clear Southern hemi­sphere flow­er­ing pat­tern. This is the jacaran­da, which is an Australian flower.

But these images are large­ly made up of things that look like this, right, a Texan fam­i­ly goes into the field to be pho­tographed with the blue­bon­nets because you’re not allowed to pick them. So these images actu­al­ly became… What stood out for me was they were about how we actu­al­ly relate to these dif­fer­ent species, how we see them and how we use a data­base such as Flickr. They’re as much a result of our social rela­tion­ships with species as they are index­es of a chang­ing envi­ron­ment.

Environmental obser­va­tion has of course become increas­ing­ly com­pu­ta­tion­al. And we no longer rely on direct obser­va­tion of the bios­phere to under­stand cli­mate. Instead, we use a net­work of satel­lites, weath­er sta­tions, data cen­ters and so forth to do this. We process unthink­able amounts of data, and our com­pu­ta­tion­al sys­tems burn up mil­lions of dol­lars of elec­tric­i­ty every month to do this, pro­duc­ing enor­mous amounts of heat. The trans­fer of infor­ma­tion can­not take place with­out a cer­tain expen­di­ture of ener­gy, which is what Norbert Wiener said, the father of cyber­net­ics.

Processing data is nev­er ther­mo­dy­nam­i­cal­ly neu­tral. Any active orga­niz­ing push­es against a ten­den­cy for every­thing to degrade, and cool­ing has always set the lim­its on com­pu­ta­tion­al design. Computation is about man­ag­ing heat. It deter­mines how dense­ly com­po­nents can be packed and where data cen­ters are to be built. If you put them in the Arctic, it real­ly reduces your ener­gy costs.

In oth­er words, cyber­space is hot. Computing is an exother­mic reac­tion. Of course, despite the over­due push to increase the use of renew­ables, data cen­ters and com­put­ers are still run on coal and use [?]. And they use some­where between 13% of our elec­tri­cal out­put, and this is ris­ing. Every video, image, Google search we make has an envi­ron­men­tal effect. Every com­pu­ta­tion­al automa­tion, every machine learn­ing inno­va­tion, relies on com­bus­tion some­where. Shouldn’t these costs be con­sid­ered in how we assess the suc­cess or fail­ures of our com­pu­ta­tion­al sys­tems? And how might we rethink our net­work inter­faces to make these mate­r­i­al costs more tan­gi­ble?


These ques­tions are posed by a series of exper­i­men­tal WiFi routers, eccen­tric WiFi routers that I made in a series called Radiotropisms. This one, called Open Flame is a router that is paired with a can­dle. To bring up the wire­less net­work, you have to light the can­dle. When you blow it out, your net­work dis­ap­pears. Wax is laid down over time, depend­ing on your online life.


Each WiFi router also offers a net­work. Another one in the series, An Orbit, oscil­lates its sig­nal strength with the orbit of the moon. So for one day a month you get real­ly strong, great Internet, and for one day a month you get none. And it changes over a twenty-eight day peri­od. Again, how might we invite our envi­ron­men­tal sys­tems into our net­works?


Finally, this is a WiFi router con­trolled by a house­plant. And the plan is equipped with a cam­era. It can take pho­tos of itself and replace images in your net­work feed. So any unen­crypt­ed data ends up with a pho­to of this plant.

So those are provo­ca­tions. How can design of our net­work inter­face empha­size our ecol­o­gy rather than hide it behind seam­less user inter­faces?

So to con­clude, I want to return to this term entropy.” But I want to con­sid­er it from the point of view of infor­ma­tion the­o­ry. In infor­ma­tion the­o­ry, entropy is a mea­sure of the loss of infor­ma­tion con­tent in a sig­nal or a sys­tem. A term devel­oped by the father of infor­ma­tion the­o­ry Claude Shannon to describe the prob­a­bilis­tic mea­sure of uncer­tain­ty in a sys­tem.

Or to break it down, what does this mean? It’s ambigu­ous. If we think about the entropy of a coin, we can get either a head or a tail when we toss it, right. This is known as one Shannon of entropy. If the coin was to have two heads on both sides, the entropy of the sys­tem is zero because it’s com­plete­ly pre­dictable what the out­come would be. If the coin was to have three or four or more faces, the amount of infor­ma­tion con­tained in the sys­tem is greater, and so the entropy of the sys­tem is greater because it’s hard­er to pre­dict.

The ulti­mate infor­ma­tion sci­ence is mete­o­rol­o­gy, and the project of weath­er pre­dic­tion is an ongo­ing attempt to low­er the entropy of our weath­er sys­tem, in an infor­ma­tion­al sense. We use data to build mod­els to hope­ful­ly bet­ter pre­dict the behav­ior of our sys­tem. And as his­to­ri­ans like Paul Edwards have shown, cli­mate pre­dic­tion is inti­mate­ly tied with the devel­op­ment of plan­e­tary com­pu­ta­tion. Computer resources are always inef­fi­cient in mete­o­rol­o­gy, and it is the ulti­mate big data sci­ence. And to me there’s a sort of dark irony that we’ve built sophis­ti­cat­ed glob­al sys­tems for col­lect­ing Earth and cli­mate obser­va­tions to pre­dict cli­mate, at the very time where our col­lec­tive impacts on human soci­ety are active­ly desta­bi­liz­ing it.

One con­se­quence of this could be observed ear­li­er this year at Oroville Dam in California, when the catch­ment received more than twice its annu­al rain­fall last win­ter. As the emer­gency spill­way was engaged for the first time in the forty-nine-year life of the dam, it began to erode, the engi­neers became con­cerned, and 200,000 peo­ple were evac­u­at­ed from the water­shed with less than an hour’s notice. Although the inci­dent is indeed a fail­ure in ade­quate engi­neer­ing and main­te­nance of that spill­way, to call it sole­ly an engi­neer­ing prob­lem over­looks it also as being a cli­mate prob­lem.

So, a water engi­neer’s job is to size stuff. The height of a dam, the size of a cul­vert, the depth of the drain…these things are sized to pre­vent flood­ing at cer­tain storm inter­vals. You gen­er­al­ly think about how big your catch­ment is upstream of the thing you’re design­ing. You think about what sort of rain pat­terns are going to hap­pen in that catch­ment and how fre­quent­ly it’s okay for it to flood. The best prac­tice guide­lines in stormwa­ter mod­el­ing used to be to mod­el ten rain­fall pat­terns for each thing you’re design­ing. And just this year this was upgrad­ed to twen­ty, so this is like dou­bling the amount of human labor and com­pu­ta­tion­al work that’s going into mod­el­ing for these sorts of water infra­struc­tures.

So what’s crit­i­cal here is that at best we only have about 150 years of rain­fall data. Much less in some regions. And this is being tak­en from a sta­ble, pre­dictable cli­mate. At the heart of this sort of engi­neer­ing is an assump­tion that past rain is a good indi­ca­tion of future rain­fall, of future weath­er. What hap­pened at Oroville is out­side of what the his­tor­i­cal data would have indi­cat­ed could have hap­pened. They got a lot more rain because their mod­el said that this would fall as snow rather than rain in the catch­ment. And so call­ing Oroville an engi­neer­ing fail­ure is actu­al­ly not accu­rate because it’s also a fail­ure in our abil­i­ty to pre­dict cli­mate.

So the work of a water engi­neer’s become increas­ing­ly dif­fi­cult as pre­cip­i­ta­tion data drawn from a sta­ble cli­mate is becom­ing less and less indica­tive of things to come. And the stakes are high. If you look around you’ll notice that all of our infra­struc­tures, our dams, our cul­verts, but also our media and com­pu­ta­tion­al tech­nolo­gies, are specif­i­cal­ly cal­i­brat­ed to sta­ble con­di­tions of the past 12,000 years. And cli­mate change promis­es to decou­ple us and these sys­tems from their cli­mac­tic nich­es. Even with the rapid advance of com­pu­ta­tion, cli­mate desta­bi­liz­ing is increas­ing the entropy of our sys­tem and reduc­ing our capac­i­ty to pre­dict it. And with all of our tech­nolo­gies, we need to be con­sid­er­ing their increas­ing ener­gy demands and their cli­mate affor­dances. Thank you.

Further Reference

Event page

Help Support Open Transcripts

If you found this useful or interesting, please consider supporting the project monthly at Patreon or once via Cash App, or even just sharing the link. Thanks.