Heartland Institute

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heartland_Institute

 

Heartland Institute

Heartland Institute in September 2016   The Heartland Institute is an American conservative and libertarian public policy think tank known for its rejection of both the scientific consensus on climate change and the negative health impacts of smoking.

Founded in 1984, it worked with tobacco company Philip Morris throughout the 1990s to attempt to discredit the health risks of secondhand smoke and lobby against smoking bans. Since the 2000s, the Heartland Institute has been a leading promoter of climate change denial.

History

The institute was founded in 1984 by Chicago investor David H. Padden, who served as the organization's chairman until 1995. Padden had been a director of the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank headquartered in Washington, D.C., since its founding as the Charles Koch Foundation in 1974. Padden was also a former director of Citizens for a Sound Economy, the Acton Institute, the Foundation for Economic Education, and the Center for Libertarian Studies. At age 26, Joseph L. Bast became Heartland's first employee. Bast's wife Diane, was Heartland's publications director.

In the 1990s, Heartland worked with the tobacco company Philip Morris to question serious cancer risks from secondhand smoke, and to lobby against government public-health regulations. Starting in 2008, Heartland has organized conferences to question the scientific consensus on climate change.

After the election of U.S. president Barack Obama in November 2008, the Institute became involved with the Tea Party movement. In 2011, the organization's director of communications said that "the support of the Tea Party groups across the country has been extremely valuable." Heartland was among the organizers of the September 2009 Tea Party protest march, the Taxpayer March on Washington.

Heartland is registered as a 501(c)(3) non-profit charity. It reported revenues of $5.8 million in 2018.

In March 2020, Heartland laid off staff, reportedly in response to financial issues, and then removed its president, Frank Lasee.

Policy positions

The institute advocates free market policies. The policy orientation of Heartland has been described as conservative, libertarian, and right wing. The institute promotes climate change denial, advocates for smoker's rights, for the privatization of public resources including school privatization, for school vouchers, for lower taxes and against subsidies and tax credits for individual businesses, and against an expanded federal role in health care, among other issues. In addition to lobbying activities, Heartland hosts an internet application called "Policybot" which serves as a clearinghouse for research from other conservative organizations such as The Heritage Foundation, the American Legislative Exchange Council, and the Cato Institute.

Tobacco regulation

Heartland has long questioned the links between tobacco smoking, secondhand smoke, and lung cancer and the social costs imposed by smokers. One of Heartland's first campaigns was to oppose tobacco regulation. According to the Los Angeles Times, Heartland's advocacy for the tobacco industry is one of the two things Heartland is most widely known for.

During the 1990s, the institute worked with tobacco company Philip Morris to question the links between smoking, secondhand smoke and health risks. Philip Morris commissioned Heartland to write and distribute reports. Heartland published a policy study which summarized a jointly prepared report by the Association of Private Enterprise Education and Philip Morris. The institute also undertook a variety of other activities on behalf of the tobacco industry, including meeting with legislators, holding off-the-record briefings, and producing op-eds, radio interviews, and letters.

A 1993 internal "Five Year Plan" from Philip Morris to address environmental tobacco smoke regulation called for support for the efforts of the institute. In 1996, Heartland president and chief executive officer Joe Bast wrote an essay entitled "Joe Camel is Innocent!," which said that contributions from the tobacco industry to Republican political campaigns were most likely because Republicans "have been leading the fight against the use of 'junk science' by the Food and Drug Administration and its evil twin, the Environmental Protection Agency." In the "President's Letter" in the July 1998 issue of The Heartlander, the institute's magazine, Bast wrote an essay "Five Lies about Tobacco", which said "smoking in moderation has few, if any, adverse health effects." In 1999, Bast referenced the essays in soliciting financial support from Philip Morris, writing "Heartland does many things that benefit Philip Morris' bottom line, things that no other organization does." A Philip Morris executive, Roy Marden, the firm's manager of industrial affairs, was a member of the board of directors of the institute. Marden collected Key Actions promised by think tanks  Heartland's were "blast faxes to state legislators, off-the-record briefings, op-eds, radio interviews, letters". In 2005, the institute opposed Chicago's public smoking ban, at the time one of the strictest bans in the country. In 2008, Heartland's Environment and Climate News ran an article claiming no danger from secondhand smoke, featuring image of man puffing smoke next to a young girl. In 2011, Environment and Climate News ran article by Fred Singer casting doubt on United States Environmental Protection Agency 1993 findings of harm.

Climate change

The institute rejects the scientific consensus on climate change, and promotes climate change denial with claims that the amount of climate change is not catastrophic, claims that climate change might be beneficial, and that the economic costs of trying to mitigate climate change exceed the benefits. According to The New York Times, Heartland is "the primary American organization pushing climate change skepticism." The institute has been a member of the Cooler Heads Coalition, a group dedicated to denying climate change science, since 1997. Institute staff "recognize that climate change is a profound threat to our economic and social systems and therefore deny its scientific reality," wrote Naomi Klein in This Changes Everything.

In their 2010 book Merchants of Doubt, Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway wrote that the institute was known "for its persistent questioning of climate science, for its promotion of 'experts' who have done little, if any, peer-reviewed climate research, and for its sponsorship of a conference in New York City in 2008 alleging that the scientific community's work on global warming is fake." The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society in a chapter "Organized Climate Change Denial" identified Heartland as a conservative think tank with a strong interest in environmental and climate issues involved in climate change denial. Heartland "emerged as a leading force in climate change denial" in the decade 2003–2013, according to sociology professor Riley Dunlap of Oklahoma State University and political science professor Peter J. Jacques of the University of Central Florida. Historians James Morton Turner and Andrew Isenberg describe Heartland as a leader in the "scientific misinformation campaign" against climate change.

Fred Singer was the founder and president of the closely-allied Science and Environmental Policy Project, and Heartland is a member organization of the Cooler Heads Coalition.

"Heartland's influence on national climate policy is at an apex" in March 2017 according to PBS Frontline.

The institute previously employed German YouTube personality Naomi Seibt as an "anti-Greta". The institute's president, James Taylor, considered Seibt the star of its "media strategy for the masses" in the "fight against climate protection measures" which "needs a better image"—to "move away from old white men and instead showcase a younger generation."

Heartland's list of scientists said to doubt global warming

In 2008, the institute published a list purporting to identify "500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares". The Sydney Morning Herald reported that the work of Jim Salinger, chief scientist at New Zealand's National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, was "misrepresented" as part of a "denial campaign". In response to criticism, the institute changed the title of the list to "500 Scientists Whose Research Contradicts Man-Made Global Warming Scares." Heartland did not remove any scientist's name from the list. Avery explained, "Not all of these researchers would describe themselves as global warming skeptics...but the evidence in their studies is there for all to see." The institute's then president, Joseph Bast, argued that the scientists "have no right—legally or ethically—to demand that their names be removed" from Heartland's list.

International Conferences on Climate Change

Heartland's conventions of climate change doubters are one of the things the institute is largely known for, according to the Los Angeles Times. Between 2008 and 2019 the institute has organized thirteen International Conferences on Climate Change, bringing together hundreds of global warming deniers. Conference speakers have included Richard Lindzen, a professor of meteorology at MIT; Roy Spencer, a research scientist and climatologist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville; S. Fred Singer, a senior fellow of the institute and who was founding dean of the School of Environmental and Planetary Sciences at the University of Miami and founding director of the National Weather Satellite Service; Harrison Schmitt, a geologist and former NASA astronaut and Apollo 17 moonwalker; Dr. John Theon, atmospheric scientist and former NASA supervisor; and Wei-Hock "Willie" Soon, a part-time employee of the Solar and Stellar Physics (SSP) Division of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.

In the first conference, participants criticized the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Al Gore. In 2010 the BBC reported that the heavily politicized nature of the Heartland conferences led some "moderate" climate skeptics to avoid them. In an article in The Nation, the 6th conference was described as "the premier gathering for those dedicated to denying the overwhelming scientific consensus that human activity is warming the planet". The 7th conference (May 2012) was the main subject of the October 2012 documentary, Climate of Doubt, by Frontline, a public television series of original, in-depth documentaries. At the conclusion of the 7th conference, Joseph Bast announced that the organization might discontinue the conferences, but the eighth conference was held in Munich, Germany later the same year (30 November and 1 December 2012). The ninth conference was held during July 2014 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The 2015 tenth conference was held in Washington D.C. The 2019 thirteenth conference was held at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.

"Unabomber" billboard campaign

On Thursday May 3, 2012, Heartland launched an advertising campaign in the Chicago area, and put up digital billboards along the Eisenhower Expressway in Maywood, Illinois, featuring a photo of Ted Kaczynski, the "Unabomber" whose mail bombs killed three people and injured 23 others, asking the question, "I still believe in global warming, do you?" They withdrew the billboards a day later. The institute planned for the campaign to feature murderer Charles Manson, communist leader Fidel Castro and perhaps Osama bin Laden, asking the same question. The institute justified the billboards saying "the most prominent advocates of global warming aren't scientists. They are murderers, tyrants, and madmen."

The billboard reportedly "unleashed a social media-fed campaign, including a petition from the advocacy group Forecast the Facts calling on Heartland's corporate backers to immediately pull their funding," and prompted Rep. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) to threaten to cancel his speech at the upcoming seventh International Conference on Climate Change organized by Heartland. Sensenbrenner ultimately did speak at the conference. Within 24 hours Heartland canceled the campaign, although its president refused to apologize for it. The advertising campaign led to the resignation of two of the institute's 12 board members, and the resignation of almost the entire Heartland Washington D.C. office, taking the institute's biggest project (on insurance) with it. The staff of the former Heartland insurance project founded the R Street Institute and announced they "will not promote climate change skepticism."

Following the 2012 document leak and the controversial billboard campaign, substantial funding was lost as corporate donors, including the General Motors Foundation, sought to dissociate themselves from the institute. According to the advocacy group Forecast the Facts, Heartland lost more than $825,000, or one third of planned corporate fundraising for the year. The shortfall led to sponsorship of the institute's May 2012 climate conference by Illinois' coal lobby, the Illinois Coal Association, the institute's "first publicly acknowledged donations from the coal industry," and The Heritage Foundation. The billboard controversy led to the loss of substantial corporate funding, including telecommunications firm AT&T, financial service firm BB&T, alcoholic beverage company Diageo and about two dozen insurance companies, including State Farm and the United Services Automobile Association. Pharmaceutical companies Amgen, Eli Lilly, Bayer and GlaxoSmithKline ended financial support. Heartland's May, 2012, climate conference was smaller than previous years.

Repeal of mandates on renewable energy

The institute wrote model legislation to repeal mandates on renewable energy, such as solar and wind power, and presented the model legislation to the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a nonprofit organization of conservative state legislators and private sector representatives that drafts and shares model state-level legislation for distribution among state governments in the United States. ALEC's board of directors adopted the model legislation in October 2012.

False endorsement claim

In 2013, the Chinese Academy of Sciences published a report from the Heartland Institute in order to better understand the public debate and encourage discussion of other views. The preface included a disclaimer that the academy did not endorse the views in the report, but in June, the institute announced that the Chinese Academy of Sciences supported their views, and said the publication placed significant scientific weight against climate change. The Chinese Academy of Sciences, responding to the announcement, said "The claim of the Heartland Institute about CAS' endorsement of its report is completely false," clarified that they did not endorse the views of the institute, and asked for a retraction.

Vatican Council on climate change

On April 28, 2015, the Catholic Church convened a council to discuss the religious implications of global warming. Held at the Vatican and hosted by the Vatican's Pontifical Academy of Sciences, it was attended by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, as well as national presidents, CEOs, academics, scientists, and representatives of the world's major religions. The institute sent a delegation in an attempt to present a dissenting opinion. It held a "prebuttal" of the conference and argued that climate science does not justify papal recognition of the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

After the council ended, a representative (Marc Morano) from the institute broke into a press briefing being given by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who was reporting on his meeting with the Pope. He interrupted the Secretary-General and the moderator, asking that global-warming skeptics be allowed to speak. After a few minutes, he was escorted from the premises by Vatican officials. In response to the papal encyclical "Laudato Si'", which outlined the Church's moral case for addressing climate change, and in anticipation of Pope Francis' September 2015 visit to the United States, Gene Koprowski, director of marketing for the institute, suggested that the Pope's pronouncements on climate change indicate that "pagan forms are returning to the Church this day."

Mass mailing of unsolicited material to science teachers

In March 2017, the institute's program the Center for Transforming Education began an unsolicited mailing of the institute's book Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming and a companion DVD to all 200,000 K-12 science teachers in the U. S., with a cover letter giving a link to an online course planning guide. "The material is not science and was intended to confuse teachers", according to the National Center for Science Education.

Privatization of government services

The institute is a critic of current federal, state, and local budgets and tax codes. Several of the institute's budgetary views include privatization of federal services to a competitive marketplace, changing the tax code to a more simplified version of the current code, and implementing Taxpayer Savings Grants.

In 1987, the institute advocated for tenant ownership of the Chicago Housing Authority's Cabrini-Green Homes public housing complex through a cooperative or condominium conversion. In 1990, the institute advocated for lower taxes in Illinois to foster job growth.

The institute advocated for the privatization of Illinois' toll highway system in 1999 and 2000. In 2008, the institute opposed state subsidies and tax credits for local film productions, saying the economic benefits are less than the incentives.

Education

The institute supports charter schools, education tax credits to attend private schools, and vouchers for low-income students, as well as the Parent Trigger reform that started in California. The institute supports the introduction of market reforms into the public K–12 education system to increase competition.

In 1994, the institute criticized the Chicago Public Schools' reform efforts and advocated privatization of public schools and school vouchers.

Healthcare

The institute advocates for free-market reforms in healthcare and opposes federal control over the healthcare industry. Heartland supports Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), replacing federal tax deductions for employer-based healthcare with a refundable tax credit to allow individual choice over health insurance, removing state and Federal healthcare regulations aimed at providers and consumers of healthcare, and reducing litigation costs which are associated with malpractice suits.

In 2010, Heartland published the 66 page book, The Obamacare Disaster, by Peter Ferrara, which opposed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

In 2015, the institute filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the petitioner in King v. Burwell, a Supreme Court case challenging income tax subsidies to those who enroll in health insurance under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act via the federal as opposed to the state health insurance exchanges.

Hydraulic fracturing

The institute advocates for hydraulic fracturing (aka "fracking"), a well-stimulation technique in which rock is fractured by pressurized liquids, publishing essays in support of fracking in various national newspapers. On March 20, 2015, Heartland's science director defended hydraulic fracturing on the Your World With Neil Cavuto program on Fox News.

Funding

The institute no longer discloses its funding sources. According to its brochures, Heartland receives money from approximately 5,000 individuals and organizations, and no single corporate entity donates more than 5% of the operating budget, although the figure for individual donors can be much higher, with a single anonymous donor providing $4.6 million in 2008, and $979,000 in 2011, accounting for 20% of Heartland's overall budget, according to reports of a leaked fundraising plan. Heartland states that it does not accept government funds and does not conduct contract research for special-interest groups.

Oil and gas companies have contributed to the institute, including $736,500 from ExxonMobil between 1998 and 2005 Greenpeace reported that Heartland received almost $800,000 from ExxonMobil. In 2008, ExxonMobil said that it would stop funding to groups skeptical of climate change, including Heartland. Joseph Bast, president of the institute, argued that ExxonMobil was simply distancing itself from Heartland out of concern for its public image.

The institute has also received funding and support from tobacco companies Philip Morris, Altria and Reynolds American, and pharmaceutical industry firms GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and Eli Lilly. State Farm Insurance, USAA and Diageo are former supporters. The Independent reported that Heartland's receipt of donations from Exxon and Philip Morris indicates a "direct link...between anti-global warming sceptics funded by the oil industry and the opponents of the scientific evidence showing that passive smoking can damage people's health." The institute opposes legislation on passive smoking as infringing on personal liberty and the rights of owners of bars and other establishments.

As of 2006, the Walton Family Foundation had contributed approximately $300,000 to Heartland. The institute published an op-ed in the Louisville Courier-Journal defending Wal-Mart against criticism over its treatment of workers. The Walton Family Foundation donations were not disclosed in the op-ed, and the editor of the Courier-Journal stated that he was unaware of the connection and would probably not have published the op-ed had he known of it. The St. Petersburg Times described the institute as "particularly energetic defending Wal-Mart." Heartland has stated that its authors were not "paid to defend Wal-Mart" and did not receive funding from the corporation; it did not disclose the approximately $300,000 received from the Walton Family Foundation.

In 2010, MediaTransparency said that Heartland received funding from politically conservative foundations such as the Castle Rock Foundation, the Sarah Scaife Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation, and the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation. Between 2002 and 2010, Donors Trust, a nonprofit donor-advised fund, granted $13.5 million to the institute. In 2011, the institute received $25,000 from the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation. The Charles Koch Foundation states that the contribution was "$25,000 to the Heartland Institute in 2011 for research in healthcare, not climate change, and this was the first and only donation the Foundation made to the institute in more than a decade".

In 2012, a large number of sponsors withdrew funding due to the 2012 documents incident and the controversy over their billboard campaign. The institute lost an estimated $825,000, or one third of planned corporate fundraising for the year.

According to the organization's audited financial statements for 2014 and 2015 approximately 27% and 19% of revenues, respectively, came from a single unidentified donor.

Funding for the latest year publicly available (from IRS Form-990 yr2020) shows donations at $3,748,445, revenue at $3,779,901, and expenses at $3,593,087.

In 2022 ProPublica claimed that Barre Seid was “the major patron”.

2012 documents leak

On February 14, 2012, the global warming blog DeSmogBlog published more than one hundred pages of Heartland documents said to be from the institute. Heartland acknowledged that some internal documents had been stolen, but said that one, the "Climate Strategy memo", was forged to discredit Heartland.

The documents were initially anonymously sourced, but later found to have been obtained by climate scientist Peter Gleick. The documents included a fundraising plan, board of directors meeting minutes, and the organization's 2012 budget. The documents were analyzed by major media, including The New York Times, The Guardian, United Press International and the Associated Press. Donors to the institute included the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, Microsoft, General Motors, Comcast, Reynolds American, Philip Morris, Amgen, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and Eli Lilly, liquor companies, and an anonymous donor who had given $13 million over the past five years.

The documents contained details of payments to support climate change deniers and their programs, namely the founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Craig Idso ($11,600 per month), physicist Fred Singer ($5,000 plus expenses per month), geologist Robert M. Carter ($1,667 per month) and $90,000 to blogger and former meteorologist Anthony Watts. The documents also revealed the institute's plan to develop curriculum materials to be provided to teachers in the United States to promote climate skepticism, plans confirmed by the Associated Press. The documents also disclosed Heartland's $612,000 plan to support Wisconsin Act 10 and to influence the Wisconsin's recall elections called "Operation Angry Badger." Carter and Watts confirmed receiving payments.

Microsoft said its donation had taken the form of gratis software licenses which it was issuing to all nonprofits, and Glaxo said their donation was for "a healthcare initiative" and they did not support Heartland's views on climate change.

Several environmental organizations called on General Motors and Microsoft to sever their ties with Heartland. Climate scientists called on Heartland to "recognise how its attacks on science and scientists have poisoned the debate about climate change policy."

Gleick described his actions in obtaining the documents as "a serious lapse of my own and professional judgment and ethics" and said that he "deeply regret[ted his] own actions in this case". He stated that "My judgment was blinded by my frustration with the ongoing efforts—often anonymous, well-funded, and coordinated—to attack climate science and scientists and prevent this debate, and by the lack of transparency of the organizations involved." On February 24, he wrote to the board of the Pacific Institute requesting a "temporary short-term leave of absence" from the institute. The Board of Directors stated it was "deeply concerned regarding recent events" involving Gleick and the Heartland documents, and appointed a new Acting Executive Director on February 27. Gleick was later reinstated to the Pacific Institute after an investigation found Gleick did not forge any documents, and he apologized for using deception to get the documents.

Publications

Books

• Bast, Joseph L. (2006). Please Don't Poop in My Salad. Chicago. ISBN 978-0978695903.
• Bast, Joseph L.; Gilder, George; Gilroy, Leonard; Glans, Matthew; Haney, Hance; Lehrer, Eli; Moore, Adrian; Stanek, Steve; Vedder, Richard; Walberg, Herbert J. (2010). The Patriot's Toolbox: Eighty Principles for Restoring Our Freedom and Prosperity. Heartland Institute. ISBN 978-1934791332.
• Idso, Craig Douglas; Singer, S. Fred (2009). Climate change reconsidered: 2009 report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change. Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change. ISBN 978-1934791288.
• Singer, S. Fred (2008). Nature, not human activity, rules the climate. Heartland Institute. ISBN 978-1934791011.
• Watts, Anthony (2009). Is the US surface temperature record reliable?. Heartland Institute. ISBN 978-1934791295.

Zazen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zazen

 Kodo Sawaki practicing zazen

Zazen is a meditative discipline that is typically the primary practice of the Zen Buddhist tradition.

The generalized Japanese term for meditation is 瞑想 (meisō); however, zazen has been used informally to include all forms of seated Buddhist meditation. The term zuòchán can be found in early Chinese Buddhist sources, such as the Dhyāna sutras. For example, the famous translator Kumārajīva (344-413) translated a work termed Zuòchán sān mēi jīng (A Manual on the Samādhi of Sitting Meditation) and the Chinese Tiantai master Zhiyi (538–597 CE) wrote some very influential works on sitting meditation.

The meaning and method of zazen varies from school to school, but in general it is a quiet type of Buddhist meditation done in a sitting posture like the lotus position. The practice can be done with various methods, such as following the breath (anapanasati), mentally repeating a phrase (which could be a koan, a mantra, a huatou or nianfo) and a kind of open monitoring in which one is aware of whatever comes to our attention (sometimes called shikantaza or silent illumination). Repeating a huatou, a short meditation phrase, is a common method in Chinese Chan and Korean Seon. Meanwhile, nianfo, the practice of silently reciting the Buddha Amitabha's name, is common in the traditions influenced by Pure Land practice, and was also taught by Chan masters like Zongmi.

In the Japanese Buddhist Rinzai school, zazen is usually combined with the study of koans. The Japanese Sōtō school makes less or no use of koans, preferring an approach known as shikantaza where the mind has no object at all.

Practice

Five types of Zazen

Kapleau quotes Hakuun Yasutani's lectures for beginners. In lecture four, Yasutani lists five kinds of zazen:

• bompu, developing meditative concentration to aid well-being;
• gedo, zazen-like practices from other religious traditions;
• shojo, 'small vehicle' practices;
• daijo, zazen aimed at gaining insight into true nature;
• saijojo, shikantaza.

Sitting

A young master Hsuan Hua sitting in full lotus

In Zen temples and monasteries, practitioners traditionally sit zazen together in a meditation hall usually referred to as a zendo, each sitting on a cushion called a zafu which itself may be placed on a low, flat mat called a zabuton. Practitioners of the Rinzai school sit facing each other with their backs to the wall, while those of the Sōtō school sit facing the wall or a curtain. Before taking one's seat, and after rising at the end of a period of zazen, a Zen practitioner performs a gassho bow to their seat, and a second bow to fellow practitioners. The beginning of a period of zazen is traditionally announced by ringing a bell three times (shijosho), and the end of the period by ringing the bell either once or twice (hozensho). Long periods of zazen may alternate with periods of kinhin (walking meditation).

Posture

The posture of zazen is seated, with crossed legs and folded hands, and an erect but settled spine. The hands are folded together into a simple mudra over the belly. In many practices, the practitioner breathes from the hara (the center of gravity in the belly) and the eyelids are half-lowered, the eyes being neither fully open nor shut so that the practitioner is neither distracted by, nor turning away from, external stimuli.

The legs are folded in one of the standard sitting styles:

• Kekkafuza (full-lotus)
• Hankafuza (half-lotus)
• Burmese (a cross-legged posture in which the ankles are placed together in front of the sitter)
• Seiza (a kneeling posture using a bench or zafu)

It is not uncommon for modern practitioners to practice zazen in a chair, sometimes with a wedge or cushion on top of it so that one is sitting on an incline, or by placing a wedge behind the lower back to help maintain the natural curve of the spine.

Samadhi

Main article: Samadhi § Buddhism

The initial stages of training in zazen resemble traditional Buddhist samatha meditation. The student begins by focusing on the breath at the hara/tanden with mindfulness of breath (ānāpānasmṛti) exercises such as counting breath (sūsokukan 数息観) or just watching it (zuisokukan 随息観). Mantras are also sometimes used in place of counting. Practice is typically to be continued in one of these ways until there is adequate "one-pointedness" of mind to constitute an initial experience of samadhi. At this point, the practitioner moves on to koan-practice or shikantaza.

While Yasutani Roshi states that the development of joriki (定力) (Sanskrit samādhibala), the power of concentration, is one of the three aims of zazen, Dogen warns that the aim of zazen is not the development of mindless concentration.

Koan introspection

Main article: Koan

In the Rinzai school, after having developed awareness, the practitioner can now focus their consciousness on a koan as an object of meditation. While koan practice is generally associated with the Rinzai school and Shikantaza with the Sōtō school, many Zen communities use both methods depending on the teacher and students.

Shikantaza

Main article: Shikantaza

Zazen is considered the heart of Japanese Sōtō Zen Buddhist practice. The aim of zazen is just sitting, that is, suspending all judgemental thinking and letting words, ideas, images and thoughts pass by without getting involved in them. Practitioners do not use any specific object of meditation, instead remaining as much as possible in the present moment, aware of and observing what is occurring around them and what is passing through their minds. In his Shobogenzo, Dogen says, "Sitting fixedly, think of not thinking. How do you think of not thinking? Nonthinking. This is the art of zazen."

Geotechnical engineering

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geotechnical_engineering 

Boston's Big Dig presented geotechnical challenges in an urban environment.

Precast concrete retaining wall

A typical cross-section of a slope used in two-dimensional analyzes.

Geotechnical engineering, also known as geotechnics, is the branch of civil engineering concerned with the engineering behavior of earth materials. It uses the principles of soil mechanics and rock mechanics to solve its engineering problems. It also relies on knowledge of geology, hydrology, geophysics, and other related sciences.

Geotechnical engineering has applications in military engineering, mining engineering, petroleum engineering, coastal engineering, and offshore construction. The fields of geotechnical engineering and engineering geology have overlapping knowledge areas. However, while geotechnical engineering is a specialty of civil engineering, engineering geology is a specialty of geology.

History

Humans have historically used soil as a material for flood control, irrigation purposes, burial sites, building foundations, and construction materials for buildings. Dykes, dams, and canals dating back to at least 2000 BCE—found in parts of ancient Egypt, ancient Mesopotamia, the Fertile Crescent, and the early settlements of Mohenjo Daro and Harappa in the Indus valley—provide evidence for early activities linked to irrigation and flood control. As cities expanded, structures were erected and supported by formalized foundations. The ancient Greeks notably constructed pad footings and strip-and-raft foundations. Until the 18th century, however, no theoretical basis for soil design had been developed, and the discipline was more of an art than a science, relying on experience.

Several foundation-related engineering problems, such as the Leaning Tower of Pisa, prompted scientists to begin taking a more scientific-based approach to examining the subsurface. The earliest advances occurred in the development of earth pressure theories for the construction of retaining walls. Henri Gautier, a French royal engineer, recognized the "natural slope" of different soils in 1717, an idea later known as the soil's angle of repose. Around the same time, a rudimentary soil classification system was also developed based on a material's unit weight, which is no longer considered a good indication of soil type.

The application of the principles of mechanics to soils was documented as early as 1773 when Charles Coulomb, a physicist and engineer, developed improved methods to determine the earth pressures against military ramparts. Coulomb observed that, at failure, a distinct slip plane would form behind a sliding retaining wall and suggested that the maximum shear stress on the slip plane, for design purposes, was the sum of the soil cohesion, ${\displaystyle c}$, and friction ${\displaystyle \sigma }$ ${\displaystyle \tan (\varphi )}$, where ${\displaystyle \sigma }$ is the normal stress on the slip plane and ${\displaystyle \varphi }$ is the friction angle of the soil. By combining Coulomb's theory with Christian Otto Mohr's 2D stress state, the theory became known as Mohr-Coulomb theory. Although it is now recognized that precise determination of cohesion is impossible because ${\displaystyle c}$ is not a fundamental soil property, the Mohr-Coulomb theory is still used in practice today.

In the 19th century, Henry Darcy developed what is now known as Darcy's Law, describing the flow of fluids in a porous media. Joseph Boussinesq, a mathematician and physicist, developed theories of stress distribution in elastic solids that proved useful for estimating stresses at depth in the ground. William Rankine, an engineer and physicist, developed an alternative to Coulomb's earth pressure theory. Albert Atterberg developed the clay consistency indices that are still used today for soil classification. In 1885, Osborne Reynolds recognized that shearing causes volumetric dilation of dense materials and contraction of loose granular materials.

Modern geotechnical engineering is said to have begun in 1925 with the publication of Erdbaumechanik by Karl von Terzaghi, a mechanical engineer and geologist. Considered by many to be the father of modern soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering, Terzaghi developed the principle of effective stress, and demonstrated that the shear strength of soil is controlled by effective stress. Terzaghi also developed the framework for theories of bearing capacity of foundations, and the theory for prediction of the rate of settlement of clay layers due to consolidation. Afterwards, Maurice Biot fully developed the three-dimensional soil consolidation theory, extending the one-dimensional model previously developed by Terzaghi to more general hypotheses and introducing the set of basic equations of Poroelasticity.

In his 1948 book, Donald Taylor recognized that the interlocking and dilation of densely packed particles contributed to the peak strength of the soil. Roscoe, Schofield, and Wroth, with the publication of On the Yielding of Soils in 1958, established the interrelationships between the volume change behavior (dilation, contraction, and consolidation) and shearing behavior with the theory of plasticity using critical state soil mechanics. Critical state soil mechanics is the basis for many contemporary advanced constitutive models describing the behavior of soil.

In 1960, Alec Skempton carried out an extensive review of the available formulations and experimental data in the literature about the effective stress validity in soil, concrete, and rock in order to reject some of these expressions, as well as clarify what expressions were appropriate according to several working hypotheses, such as stress-strain or strength behavior, saturated or non-saturated media, and rock, concrete or soil behavior.

Roles

Geotechnical investigation

Main article: Geotechnical investigation

Geotechnical engineers investigate and determinate the properties of subsurface conditions and materials. They also design corresponding earthworks and retaining structures, tunnels, and structure foundations, and may supervise and evaluate sites, which may further involve site monitoring as well as the risk assessment and mitigation of natural hazards.

Geotechnical engineers and engineering geologists perform geotechnical investigations to obtain information on the physical properties of soil and rock underlying, and adjacent to, a site to design earthworks and foundations for proposed structures and for the repair of distress to earthworks and structures caused by subsurface conditions. Geotechnical investigations involve both surface and subsurface exploration of a site, often including subsurface sampling and laboratory testing of soil samples retrieved. Sometimes, geophysical methods are also used to obtain data, which include measurement of seismic waves (pressure, shear, and Rayleigh waves), surface-wave methods and downhole methods, and electromagnetic surveys (magnetometer, resistivity, and ground-penetrating radar). Electrical tomography can be used to survey soil and rock properties and existing underground infrastructure in construction projects.

Surface exploration can include on-foot surveys, geologic mapping, geophysical methods, and photogrammetry. Geologic mapping and interpretation of geomorphology are typically completed in consultation with a geologist or engineering geologist. Subsurface exploration usually involves in-situ testing (for example, the standard penetration test and cone penetration test). The digging of test pits and trenching (particularly for locating faults and slide planes) may also be used to learn about soil conditions at depth. Large-diameter borings are rarely used due to safety concerns and expense but are sometimes used to allow a geologist or engineer to be lowered into the borehole for direct visual and manual examination of the soil and rock stratigraphy.

A variety of soil samplers exists to meet the needs of different engineering projects. The standard penetration test, which uses a thick-walled split spoon sampler, is the most common way to collect disturbed samples. Piston samplers, employing a thin-walled tube, are most commonly used for the collection of less disturbed samples. More advanced methods, such as the Sherbrooke block sampler, are superior, but expensive. Coring frozen ground provides high-quality undisturbed samples from any ground conditions, such as fill, sand, moraine, and rock fracture zones.

Geotechnical centrifuge modeling is another method of testing physical scale models of geotechnical problems. The use of a centrifuge enhances the similarity of the scale model tests involving soil because the strength and stiffness of soil are very sensitive to the confining pressure. The centrifugal acceleration allows a researcher to obtain large (prototype-scale) stresses in small physical models.

Foundation design

Main article: Foundation (engineering)

The foundation of a structure's infrastructure transmits loads from the structure to the earth. Geotechnical engineers design foundations based on the load characteristics of the structure and the properties of the soils and bedrock at the site. In general, geotechnical engineers first estimate the magnitude and location of loads to be supported, before developing an investigation plan to explore the subsurface and also determining the necessary soil parameters through field and lab testing. Following which, they may begin the design of an engineering foundation. The primary considerations for a geotechnical engineer in foundation design are bearing capacity, settlement, and ground movement beneath the foundations.

Earthworks

A compactor/roller operated by U.S. Navy Seabees

See also: Earthworks (engineering)

Geotechnical engineers are also involved in the planning and execution of earthworks, which include ground improvement, slope stabilization, and stope stability analysis.

Ground improvement

Various geotechnical engineering methods can be used for ground improvement, including reinforcement geosynthetics such as geocells and geogrids, which disperse loads over a larger area, increasing the load-bearing capacity of soil. Through these methods, geotechnical engineers can reduce direct and long-term costs.

Slope stabilization

Simple slope slip section.

Main article: Slope stability

Geotechnical engineers can analyze and improve the stability of slopes using engineering methods. Slope stability is determined by the balance of shear stress and shear strength. A previously stable slope may be initially affected by various factors, making the slope unstable. Nonetheless, geotechnical engineers can design and implement engineered slopes to increase stability.

Slope stability analysis

Main article: Slope stability analysis

Stability analysis is needed for the design of engineered slopes and for estimating the risk of slope failure in natural or designed slopes by determining the conditions under which the topmost mass of soil will slip relative to the base of soil and lead to slope failure. If the interface between the mass and the base of a slope has a complex geometry, slope stability analysis is difficult and numerical solution methods are required. Typically, the exact geometry of the interface is not known and a simplified interface geometry is assumed. Finite slopes require three-dimensional models to be analyzed, so most slopes are analyzed assuming that they are infinitely wide and can be represented by two-dimensional models.

Sub-disciplines

Geosynthetics

Main article: Geosynthetics

A collage of geosynthetic products.

Geosynthetics are a type of plastic polymer products used in geotechnical engineering that improve engineering performance while reducing costs. This includes geotextiles, geogrids, geomembranes, geocells, and geocomposites. The synthetic nature of the products make them suitable for use in the ground where high levels of durability are required. Their main functions include drainage, filtration, reinforcement, separation, and containment.

Geosynthetics are available in a wide range of forms and materials, each to suit a slightly different end-use, although they are frequently used together. Some reinforcement geosynthetics, such as geogrids and more recently, cellular confinement systems, have shown to improve bearing capacity, modulus factors and soil stiffness and strength. These products have a wide range of applications and are currently used in many civil and geotechnical engineering applications including roads, airfields, railroads, embankments, piled embankments, retaining structures, reservoirs, canals, dams, landfills, bank protection and coastal engineering.

Offshore

Main article: Offshore geotechnical engineering

Platforms offshore Mexico.

Offshore (or marine) geotechnical engineering is concerned with foundation design for human-made structures in the sea, away from the coastline (in opposition to onshore or nearshore engineering). Oil platforms, artificial islands and submarine pipelines are examples of such structures.

There are a number of significant differences between onshore and offshore geotechnical engineering. Notably, site investigation and ground improvement on the seabed are more expensive; the offshore structures are exposed to a wider range of geohazards; and the environmental and financial consequences are higher in case of failure. Offshore structures are exposed to various environmental loads, notably wind, waves and currents. These phenomena may affect the integrity or the serviceability of the structure and its foundation during its operational lifespan and need to be taken into account in offshore design.

In subsea geotechnical engineering, seabed materials are considered a two-phase material composed of rock or mineral particles and water. Structures may be fixed in place in the seabed—as is the case for piers, jetties and fixed-bottom wind turbines—or may comprise a floating structure that remains roughly fixed relative to its geotechnical anchor point. Undersea mooring of human-engineered floating structures include a large number of offshore oil and gas platforms and, since 2008, a few floating wind turbines. Two common types of engineered design for anchoring floating structures include tension-leg and catenary loose mooring systems.

Observational method

First proposed by Karl Terzaghi and later discussed in a paper by Ralph B. Peck, the observational method is a managed process of construction control, monitoring, and review, which enables modifications to be incorporated during and after construction. The objective of the method is to achieve a greater overall economy, without compromising safety, by creating designs based on the most probable conditions rather than the most unfavorable. Using the observational method, gaps in available information are filled by measurements and investigation, which aid in assessing the behavior of the structure during construction, which in turn can be modified in accordance with the findings. The method was described by Peck as "learn-as-you-go".

The observational method may be described as follows:

1. General exploration sufficient to establish the rough nature, pattern, and properties of deposits.
2. Assessment of the most probable conditions and the most unfavorable conceivable deviations.
3. Creating the design based on a working hypothesis of behavior anticipated under the most-probable conditions.
4. Selection of quantities to be observed as construction proceeds, and calculation of their anticipated values based on the working hypothesis and under the most unfavorable conditions.
5. Selection, in advance, of a course of action or design modification for every foreseeable significant deviation of the observational findings from those predicted.
6. Measurement of quantities and evaluation of actual conditions.
7. Design modification in accordance with actual conditions

The observational method is suitable for construction that has already begun when an unexpected development occurs, or when a failure or accident looms or has already occurred. It is unsuitable for projects whose design cannot be altered during construction.