You are not really going to learn much unless you are interested in wading through lots of technical articles. If you want to learn, you need to wait until it has been digested by relevant experts into books. I am not sure what you think you can learn from this, but there are two good books of related information available now:
Jeff Wheelwright, Degrees of Disaster, about the environmental effects of the Exxon Valdez spill and the clean up.
Trevor Kletz, What Went Wrong?: Case Histories of Process Plant Disasters, which is really excellent. [For general reading, an older edition is perfectly adequate, new copies are expensive.] It has an incredible amount of detail, and horrifying accounts of how apparently insignificant mistakes can (often literally) blow up on you.
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
This suggests a different procedural knowledge gap: how do you tell when exercise is having an effect? Stepping on a scale doesn't give much information, since in the ideal case you're losing fat but replacing it with muscle. Counting weight and reps requires a reproducible routine, which I don't have, and only works for strength training anyways. I tried measuring endurance as "minutes on a treadmill at 6mph", but while there was a detectable upward trend it was nearly drowned out by day-to-day variance.
A good quick-and-dirty test uses the humble push-up. Periodically (every two or three days) just do as many push-ups as you can -- this will likely involve moderate discomfort on the last few -- and track the number you do over time. While there is some day to day variance, I think this is a pretty good rough proxy for general fitness and a few weeks of data would give you decent tracking of the trend, unless you are already in such good shape that marginal improvements are hard to discern.