Re: [Biofuel] What Kind of Car? What kind of society is more like it.

[John Miggins]

better deal than that on solar panels, I can get you 4.5 cents per watt US. 
Anyway, talking about cars, on my recent trip to Galway Ireland to visit my 
ancestoral home I saw many biofuel capable vehicles, indeed for many years 
these vehicles have served man well and still do without any biodiesel at 
all.  Of course I am talking about 4 legged vehicles that eat hay!  but 
think of it, the message of the film the end of suburbia is to return to 
locally met needs within 10 or even 5 miles and I cannot think of a better 
place for this than Ireland.


With this model, a biofuel, 4 legged vehicle would suffice.
I long to return there and take up the simpler way of life, perhaps when I 
am older.


What does Man need on a daily basis to survive?  Seriously let's examine 
that:


1000 to 2000 calories- fruits vegetables, protien, fish, chickens, meat
clean water,
Shelter,
Warmth or cooling
Light to extend the day
intellectual pursuit
company to dull the boredom
and perhaps some good books and a good pub nearby
would be nice

Indeed Ireland has all of these in abundance.

Let's all move to Ireland and start a revolution!

cherish what you have,
address your core needs strategically,
get some land, 5 acres will do
get it paid off,
get in a local community that can support your needs
and enjoy life.

No wonder there are thousands of Germans buying up Ireland.

John Miggins
Harvest Solar & Wind Power
"renewable solutions to everyday needs"
www.harvest-energy.com
Phone/Fax 918-743-2299
Cell: 918-521-6223

- Original Message - 
From: "Paddy O'Reilly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 10:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] What Kind of Car?


The Dutch have lined a considerable stretch of one of their motorways with 
solar cells. Don't know what the purpose of the exercise is but anything 
to bring solar panel into mass production and bring down the price is 
good. I've priced solar panels for my house at 1000 Euros per 165 watt 
panel. I figure I'd need 10 of them to get 1kW average in Irish climate so 
the cost is 10k Euros and at an electricity rate of 12 cents per kW and an 
average of 8 hours per day of light, that's about 30 years to amortise my 
investment while the panels are guaranteed for something like 10 years and 
have a working life of 20 - hmm, much as I love this planet and all, I 
need cheaper solar panels to come out on top. Solar water heaters are a 
different matter - but this is a biofuel forum so we'd better stick to the 
topic like using biofuel to fire burners to heat the house - but wait, 
weren't we talking about powering cars.


Apologies, I'm wandering - my brain has indeed reached meltdown - roll on 
the weekend. Maybe the heat from my brain could be used to power a 
Stirling engine to get me home this evening!!!


bob allen wrote:

how about decking over the parking spots with solar panels?  How much 
energy could be captured if the whole parking space is paneled?  the 
spaces in front of my building are 9X18 ft or 162 feet each. or about 15 
meters squared.





Paddy O'Reilly wrote:

I've often thought about a car that would re-charge itself by solar 
panels when its sitting outside our offices for 8+ hours a day. Based on 
current technology it could convert about 2.6kW (0.33kwH x 8 hours) into 
electrical energy. However a 20 mile journey home could use up this 
energy in the first few miles. Has anybody looked at this scenario - 
where the electric-only car recharges itself during daylight hours 
through the use of solar panels integrated into the body panels?


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


ILEA Leaf #10: WHAT KIND OF CAR?

You're concerned about the environment, but you need to drive. Which
car will do the least damage? There's no easy answer, and you will
have to make some tradeoffs between your budget and your determination
to help  change the world. But you will also need to think about what
"changing the world" means to you:


 Is it more important to (a) help reduce future emissions an uncertain
amount by investing in advanced technology or (b) reduce immediate
emissions a known amount with existing technology?

 Is it more important to (a) fight climate change and foreign oil
dependence by reducing fossil fuel use or (b) help clean the air in
your region by reducing traditional pollutants from the car tailpipe?


 At ILEA we are all about life-cycle assessment, so we like to take
the big picture approach: advancing technology trumps personal
emissions, and greenhouse gases trump local pollutants.  If you answer
the questions differently, keep those differences in mind as you read
through our recommendations; near the end of the email there's a
comparison table to help you do this.
   Below are five basic choices you can take, beginning with the most
conventional and ending with the most adventurous.[1] <#_edn1>   We
think the most adventurous steps probably have the most impact on the
big picture, but if you answered the  question

[Biofuel] Running out of Oil -- Was "End of Suburbia"

This got me thinking - how much oil do we have left ?

Consumption/Resources source 2003.
http://www.marktaw.com/culture_and_media/politics/GlobalOil.html


Consumption Numbers:
USA = 25% of oil in the world
USA = 19,650,000 BBL a day 
World = 4 X 19,650,000 = 78,600,000 A day 
World = 28,689,000,000 Per/Year 

Oil Reserves:
Saudi = 25% or world reserves 
Saudi = 261,700,000,000 BBL
World = 4 X 261,700,000,000 = 1,046,800,000,000 BBL

Supply in years @ current consumption 
1,046,800,000,000 / 28,689,000,000 = 36.4 Years

Convert to BTUs for comparison to Methane reserves. 

6.2 Million BTU/BBL
6.49016E+18 BTU Reserves in Oil 
177,871,800,000,000,000 BTU/Year in Oil consumption. 


Now what is available in Methane/Natural Gas reserves. 
http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/001841.html

Stated as 400 million Trillion Cubic Feet. 
4E+20 Cubic Feet of Methane in Hydrate form . 
850 Btu/CF 
3.4E+23 BTU Reserves. 

Total Methane BTU   reserves/ Year usage = years supply 
3.4E+23 / 177,871,800,000,000,000  = 1,911,489 Years (At current
usage) 

This assumes that all 100% of the Methane can be extracted. 

Assume only 1% can be 

1,911,489 Years /100 = 19,114 Years. 

So it look like in the next 15-20 years the world is going to have to
convert to 
the Methane economy.  Doesn't this sound like Mad Max Thunder Dome,
Minus the pigs of course. 

Hopefully I have not made error in the math. 


Mark 





___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/

RE: [Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"

[John Mullan]

Excluding the global warming thing, the end of fossil fuel will, I believe,
cause a die-off of sorts.  Overall production and delivery of food won't
quite keep up to todays rate.  And there will be those that cannot cope
without plastic this-and-that.  Can't cope with or figure out alternatives.
Family sizes will shrink.  I think then that world population will start a
decline.  Hence, a so-called die-off.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Keith Addison
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 5:39 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"


Hello Rob

>The film is not predicting "die-off", it is predicting/describing  a
>probable coming change.

I wasn't talking about the film, and this below was a quote from a
previous message:

>>>Are they starving? No. This has been going on for quite a while
>>>now, but nobody seems to have noticed. Or very few anyway. So much
>>>for "die-off" at the end of Big Oil.

This time round, it was quoted as part of a comment on another film,
Yank Tanks, mentioned by Kirk. The whole message is here:
http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20050221/006287.html
[Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"

I said at the end:

>Hm, fancy that - no massive die-off as predicted by the oil addicts
>when cold turkey day finally comes round.

Whether or not "The End of Suburbia" mentions die-off, many other
people do in connection with "Oil depletion and the collapse of the
American Dream", including here, recently, and also off-list. It's
nonsense, as the film "Yank Tanks" apparently indicates, as well as
what I was saying about food supply in Cuba. As you say, more
sensible behaviour will simply become unavoidable. Perhaps above all
else, humans as a species are good at adapting, and adapt we will.

Meanwhile, so many of the people who talk about a massive die-off
with the end of (cheap) oil are still quibbling about or denying
global warming, caused mainly by cheap oil (and coal), which really
does threaten a massive die-off.

Apart from the insurance estimates I posted yesterday (see
),
there's this, for instance:

>Suffering progress
>
>Rising global temperatures will result in 290 million more cases of
>malaria worldwide
>
>About 2.5 million premature deaths will occur every year in India
>due to air emissions
>
>Asthma, diarrhoea, dengue, cancer, malnutrition will burden public health
>
>Climate change is bad news for global human health.
[more]
CSE- Health Environment Newsletter March-April 2003
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/26715/

And much besides.

:-(

Regards

Keith


>As I assume (yikes! ..pardon) most of us agree, long over due
>changes such as organic farming, and resource conservation will
>simply become unavoidable.
>
>I guess another reason I like the film is simply because it exists
>at all. While it may not address every aspect, consequence, or
>possibility, this is the first film I have come across that even
>breeches the issue, and really questions the sustainability of
>suburban America.

___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/

___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/

RE: [Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"

[Marylynn Schmidt]

Population growth is according to the available food source.

It's always seemed strange that (at least here in USA-NJ) we see signs 
advertising the sale of Deer Feed .. and the accepted reason for hunting 
deer, other than the sport, is for population control .. and after every 
"culling" the deer population doubles and/or triples because all the females 
give birth to twins or triples.


Equally, we have groups striving for population control .. counties 
sterilizing their citizens .. and groups collecting food and money under the 
banner of "FEED THE CHILDREN".


I take no stand on this issue .. I just find it .. strange.

Mary Lynn
Mary Lynn Schmidt
ONE SPIRIT ONE HEART
TTouch . Animal Behavior Modification . Behavior Problems . Ordained 
Minister .
Pet Loss Grief Counseling . Radionics . Dowsing . Nutrition . Homeopathy . 
Herbs. . Polarity . Reiki . Spiritual Travel

The Animal Connection Healing Modalities
http://members.tripod.com/~MLSchmidt/





From: "John Mullan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: [Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:47:00 -0500

Excluding the global warming thing, the end of fossil fuel will, I believe,
cause a die-off of sorts.  Overall production and delivery of food won't
quite keep up to todays rate.  And there will be those that cannot cope
without plastic this-and-that.  Can't cope with or figure out alternatives.
Family sizes will shrink.  I think then that world population will start a
decline.  Hence, a so-called die-off.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Keith Addison
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 5:39 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"


Hello Rob

>The film is not predicting "die-off", it is predicting/describing  a
>probable coming change.

I wasn't talking about the film, and this below was a quote from a
previous message:

>>>Are they starving? No. This has been going on for quite a while
>>>now, but nobody seems to have noticed. Or very few anyway. So much
>>>for "die-off" at the end of Big Oil.

This time round, it was quoted as part of a comment on another film,
Yank Tanks, mentioned by Kirk. The whole message is here:
http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20050221/006287.html
[Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"

I said at the end:

>Hm, fancy that - no massive die-off as predicted by the oil addicts
>when cold turkey day finally comes round.

Whether or not "The End of Suburbia" mentions die-off, many other
people do in connection with "Oil depletion and the collapse of the
American Dream", including here, recently, and also off-list. It's
nonsense, as the film "Yank Tanks" apparently indicates, as well as
what I was saying about food supply in Cuba. As you say, more
sensible behaviour will simply become unavoidable. Perhaps above all
else, humans as a species are good at adapting, and adapt we will.

Meanwhile, so many of the people who talk about a massive die-off
with the end of (cheap) oil are still quibbling about or denying
global warming, caused mainly by cheap oil (and coal), which really
does threaten a massive die-off.

Apart from the insurance estimates I posted yesterday (see
),
there's this, for instance:

>Suffering progress
>
>Rising global temperatures will result in 290 million more cases of
>malaria worldwide
>
>About 2.5 million premature deaths will occur every year in India
>due to air emissions
>
>Asthma, diarrhoea, dengue, cancer, malnutrition will burden public health
>
>Climate change is bad news for global human health.
[more]
CSE- Health Environment Newsletter March-April 2003
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/26715/

And much besides.

:-(

Regards

Keith


>As I assume (yikes! ..pardon) most of us agree, long over due
>changes such as organic farming, and resource conservation will
>simply become unavoidable.
>
>I guess another reason I like the film is simply because it exists
>at all. While it may not address every aspect, consequence, or
>possibility, this is the first film I have come across that even
>breeches the issue, and really questions the sustainability of
>suburban America.

___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/

___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/



___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel

Bio

Re: [Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"

[Ken Provost]

on 2/25/05 5:47 PM, John Mullan at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



> Excluding the global warming thing, the end of fossil fuel will, I believe,
> cause a die-off of sorts.  Overall production and delivery of food won't
> quite keep up to todays rate.  And there will be those that cannot cope
> without plastic this-and-that.  Can't cope with or figure out alternatives.
> Family sizes will shrink.  I think then that world population will start a
> decline.  Hence, a so-called die-off.



Especially in America -- my parents bought their second car 50 years ago.
They wouldn't do well tomorrow. Most of the next generation (me included)
may not do a lot better. Some places will cope better than others. It's a
matter of remembering how it worked before, and relocalizing to get there.

-K

___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/

[Biofuel] Fw: Rachel's #807: The Diesel Opportunity

[Joanne Olafson]

and references to older reports.  Also about using a risk-based approach vs
a precautionary approach.  Etc.
Joanne


To: "Rachel News" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  Date: Fri, 25 Feb
2005 12:17:05 -0700
Subject: Rachel's #807: The Diesel Opportunity Status:
Normal
CC:  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


To start your own free subscription to Rachel's,
send a blank Email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH NEWS #807
http://www.rachel.org
December 23, 2004
Published Feb. 24, 2005




The Diesel Opportunity

The deadly effects of breathing diesel fumes came into sharp
focus
this week when the Clean Air Task Force (CATF) released a
report[1]
estimating that diesel fumes kill about 21,000 U.S. citizens
each
year.

Furthermore, diesel fumes cause 27,000 nonfatal heart
attacks and
410,000 asthma attacks in U.S. adults each year, plus
roughly 12,000
cases of chronic bronchitis, 15,000 hospital admissions, 2.4
million
lost-work days, and 14 million restricted activity days.

And that is almost certainly not the worst of it. The Clean
Air Task
Force report cites numerous studies revealing that diesel
soot

** degrades the immune system (the system that protects us
all from
bacteria, viruses and cancers);

** interferes with our hormones, reducing sperm production,
masculinizing female rats, altering the development of baby
rats
(changing their bones, thymus, and nervous systems),
modifying their
adrenal and reproductive hormones;

** causes serious, permanent impairment of the nervous
system in
diesel-exposed railroad workers;

** induces allergic reactions, not limited to asthma,
causing children
to miss thousands upon thousands of school-days -- a primary
cause of
school dropout, consequent low self-esteem, and subsequent
life-
failure.

The new report is based on the most recent available data
from the
federal EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) combined with
EPA risk
models, with calculations carried out by Abt Associates, a
consulting
firm that frequently performs contract studies for the
EPA.[2]

The key findings of the report should come as no surprise.
The dangers
of breathing diesel fumes have been known for at least two
decades.

More than 20 years ago, numerous researchers confirmed and
reconfirmed
that they could cause lung cancer in laboratory animals
breathing air
laced with diesel fumes.

To anyone taking a precautionary approach, this confirmed
knowledge of
diesel's ill effects on animals would have jump-started a
search for
alternative ways to power on-road and off-road machines, to
phase out
diesel in an orderly step-wise fashion.

But the National Academy of Sciences did not take a
precautionary
approach. The New York Times reported Dec. 23, 1981, that
the Academy
acknowledged that diesel soot is known to contain suspected
cancer-
causing substances. But the Academy said, "no convincing
epidemiological evidence exists" that there is "a connection
between
diesel fumes and human cancer." In other words, let's not
act on the
animal evidence -- let's hunker down and wait until we can
line up the
dead humans. This is the risk-based approach to public
health. It is
the opposite of a precautionary approach.

Twenty years ago, in the spring of 1985, the Natural
Resources Defense
Council (NRDC) issued a scientific report about the dangers
of diesel
fumes in New York. The New York Times reported May 18, 1985:
"Diesel
emissions are probably the single most important air-quality
threat in
New York City today," said Eric A. Goldstein, a lawyer for
the
environmental group and an author of the report. "But city,
state and
Federal agencies have not yet mounted a broad-based
counterattack."
The Times reported then that a spokesperson for the New York
State
Environmental Conservation Department acknowledged that
diesel fumes
cause lung cancer in humans but, he said, the state was "not
yet sure"
how big the problem was. The state had no plan for dealing
with diesel
because "we have not identified the extent of the problem,"
he said.

This is a classic example of the risk-based approach.
Ignore the
evidence so long as it is not 100% airtight. Use uncertainty
as an
excuse to delay. Wait for the dead bodies to pile up, then
slowly
acknowledge the need for action.

By 1985, there was no doubt that dead bodies were piling up.
But the
exact number of corpses remained uncertain, so the
risk-based approach
allowed "business as usual" to continue.


From a precautionary perspective, knowing that a technology

causes
lung cancer, and knowing that hundreds of millions of people
are
exposed to it, just naturally kicks off a search for
less-harmful
alternatives. But no one in 1985 was taking a precautionary
approach.

In 1988 the federal government's Robert A. T

Re: [Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"

[Kirk McLoren]

I recall my daughter researching cow gestation. I
think there is a 3 week spread between the breeds.

Kirk


--- Kim & Garth Travis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Greetings,
> 
> I live in the middle of nowhere and yes, we do see
> this all the time.  No 
> one walks anywhere, no bicycles, very few
> motorcycles.  They drive 25 miles 
> to the city daily for whatever, even if they do not
> work.  Many who live 
> here drive 150+ miles a day to work and back.
> 
> Me, I go to town once a week, in my Volks TDI.  I
> did look at getting a 
> motorcycle, but the animal feed ect. just doesn't
> fit.  Eventually we hope 
> to lower the amount we are spending off farm, but it
> takes time and effort 
> to build the place, improve the soil and keep
> everything done.  Being self 
> sufficient is really hard to set up.  For example,
> right now I have to buy 
> milk and milk products because my cow is almost 2
> weeks overdue to have her 
> calf.  I did have some milk in the freezer, but we
> ran out.  Mother Nature 
> makes this lifestyle an art, not a science.  I have
> read books like 5 acres 
> and independence, but they obviously did not have a
> Jersey cow.
> 
> The biggest problem I have found it that local
> economy is so 
> expensive.  They expect you to pay dearly for the
> privilege of buying 
> locally, to the tune of double what I can pay 25
> miles away.
> 
> Worse than that, the local produce store carries
> Californian oranges, not 
> the Texas or Louisiana oranges that I get a Walmart.
> [I am in east 
> Texas]  We have nothing produced locally that is
> sold locally.  The high 
> gas prices have had little effect on the lifestyle.
> 
> Most people who have moved here from the city have
> no interest in doing for 
> themselves.  Less than 10% of the homes have
> gardens, and this in a place 
> where gardening year round is easy.  The reality of
> today makes it hard to 
> believe that any 'new urbanism' is going to be an
> improvement.
> 
> Bright Blessings,
> Kim
> 
> At 12:51 PM 2/24/2005, you wrote:
> >I think the reason the film spoke of "new urbanism"
> as one possible result 
> >(not solution) is that a possible trouble with
> moving further out is that 
> >unless you can provide all of your own
> goods/services (which most can 
> >not), the increased distance will require MORE not
> less transportation 
> >(and hence more energy). High density living
> facilitates a 
> >reduction/concentration of transportation, and also
> enables the use of 
> >higher efficiency transportation methods (mass
> transit for individuals, 
> >trains for goods, etc).
> >_
> 
> ___
> Biofuel mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel
> 
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> 
> Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
> http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
> 




__ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 
___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/

RE: [Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"

[Chris Lloyd]

> It's always seemed strange that (at least here in USA-NJ) we see signs

advertising the sale of Deer Feed .. and the accepted reason for hunting

deer, other than the sport, is for population control .. and after every

"culling" the deer population doubles and/or triples because all the
females 
give birth to twins or triples. <

Here in the south of the UK we use deer feed to create feeding areas to
draw the deer into safe shooting areas. Most mature deer have multiple
berths after their first breeding season. There is little sport in
shooting deer in Southern England but I do eat venison, shooting on the
Scottish hillsides is a demanding skill and hard work.Chris.



 


-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.0 - Release Date: 25/02/2005
 

___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/

RE: [Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"

[John Mullan]

Thanks Mary Lynn.  This sort of adds credence to what I had said.  "Culling"
the deer population is not Nature balancing things out.  But the rebound in
births is.

The world population is, at least in my opinion, un-naturally high.  We have
cheated the natural evolution and "survival of the fittest".  As we lose our
ability to cheat this natural order, population will decline.

One of my theories suggest that because we cheat the Natural Selection
process, we see more birth defects and other deficiencies and it gets
perpetuated.  If, on our decline we become more dependant on ourselves
(farming, hunting, gathering) we would (over decades/centuries) become, on
the whole, healthier.

I know, I'm rambling again.  I just love the ability to share the thoughts
spewing from my noodle.

Cheers.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Marylynn Schmidt
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 9:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"


One of those "facts" that kind of "stand out there".

Population growth is according to the available food source.

It's always seemed strange that (at least here in USA-NJ) we see signs
advertising the sale of Deer Feed .. and the accepted reason for hunting
deer, other than the sport, is for population control .. and after every
"culling" the deer population doubles and/or triples because all the females
give birth to twins or triples.

Equally, we have groups striving for population control .. counties
sterilizing their citizens .. and groups collecting food and money under the
banner of "FEED THE CHILDREN".

I take no stand on this issue .. I just find it .. strange.

Mary Lynn
Mary Lynn Schmidt
ONE SPIRIT ONE HEART
TTouch . Animal Behavior Modification . Behavior Problems . Ordained
Minister .
Pet Loss Grief Counseling . Radionics . Dowsing . Nutrition . Homeopathy .
Herbs. . Polarity . Reiki . Spiritual Travel
The Animal Connection Healing Modalities
http://members.tripod.com/~MLSchmidt/




>From: "John Mullan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: [Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"
>Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:47:00 -0500
>
>Excluding the global warming thing, the end of fossil fuel will, I believe,
>cause a die-off of sorts.  Overall production and delivery of food won't
>quite keep up to todays rate.  And there will be those that cannot cope
>without plastic this-and-that.  Can't cope with or figure out alternatives.
>Family sizes will shrink.  I think then that world population will start a
>decline.  Hence, a so-called die-off.
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Behalf Of Keith Addison
>Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 5:39 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"
>
>
>Hello Rob
>
> >The film is not predicting "die-off", it is predicting/describing  a
> >probable coming change.
>
>I wasn't talking about the film, and this below was a quote from a
>previous message:
>
> >>>Are they starving? No. This has been going on for quite a while
> >>>now, but nobody seems to have noticed. Or very few anyway. So much
> >>>for "die-off" at the end of Big Oil.
>
>This time round, it was quoted as part of a comment on another film,
>Yank Tanks, mentioned by Kirk. The whole message is here:
>http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20050221/006287.html
>[Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"
>
>I said at the end:
>
> >Hm, fancy that - no massive die-off as predicted by the oil addicts
> >when cold turkey day finally comes round.
>
>Whether or not "The End of Suburbia" mentions die-off, many other
>people do in connection with "Oil depletion and the collapse of the
>American Dream", including here, recently, and also off-list. It's
>nonsense, as the film "Yank Tanks" apparently indicates, as well as
>what I was saying about food supply in Cuba. As you say, more
>sensible behaviour will simply become unavoidable. Perhaps above all
>else, humans as a species are good at adapting, and adapt we will.
>
>Meanwhile, so many of the people who talk about a massive die-off
>with the end of (cheap) oil are still quibbling about or denying
>global warming, caused mainly by cheap oil (and coal), which really
>does threaten a massive die-off.
>
>Apart from the insurance estimates I posted yesterday (see
>),
>there's this, for instance:
>
> >Suffering progress
> >
> >Rising global temperatures will result in 290 million more cases of
> >malaria worldwide
> >
> >About 2.5 million premature deaths will occur every year in India
> >due to air emissions
> >
> >Asthma, diarrhoea, dengue, cancer, malnutrition will burden public health
> >
> >Climate change is bad news for global human health.
>[more]
>CSE- Health Environment Newsletter March-April 2003
>http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/26715/
>
>And much besides.
>
>:-(
>
>Regards
>
>Keith
>
>
> >As I assume (yi

Re: [Biofuel] "End of Suburbia" and Ruralization

[Pannir P.V]

   Kim 

 Greetings

  All the overcrowed  urban  , the place in MEGA  City become 
much expensive, ecologically  destructive , the  under developed
suburban areas having less  people.These suburban  place around the
city can be used  make  food, fuel , feed needed  for the urban city.
But the same model for the  urban developments  of destroying the
lands  are also used in  all the places , no employments , no local
work , no  local industry  as importation   is  made easy than local
production
It is true that that any 'new urbanism' is not going to be a
improvement  , but  decentralized  Ruralized  suburban can  really 
make  the  urban areas sustainable and a lot of the improvements. For
this we need to have  peoples power in the hands of the  people who
love the place and democracy and  suburban  people to make  the place 
more productive , by local production and sharing.The global economy 
need  not  be allowed to  kill the local development and local economy
.The  combined fuel and food production done locally and sharing the
products  are still practised in sevral urban areas. The local   small
city  local economy in  Brasil is not yet destroyed by global economy
, thussaving  and serving the poor  and middle class people  via
week end  free , street open markets in rural ares , still in  urban
areas too. It is very hard to believe how this   can  survive 
together with  the globalised super market  closed marketing system
.The end of this ruralized  economy  in urban areas  is the reason for
the  increased violence , terror  and  all need  to pay very hard  to
have the balance.
Thanking  you

Yours 
Pannirselvam



On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 01:22:29 -0800 (PST), Kirk McLoren
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I recall my daughter researching cow gestation. I
> think there is a 3 week spread between the breeds.
> 
> Kirk
> 
> --- Kim & Garth Travis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > Greetings,
> >
> > I live in the middle of nowhere and yes, we do see
> > this all the time.  No
> > one walks anywhere, no bicycles, very few
> > motorcycles.  They drive 25 miles
> > to the city daily for whatever, even if they do not
> > work.  Many who live
> > here drive 150+ miles a day to work and back.
> >
> > Me, I go to town once a week, in my Volks TDI.  I
> > did look at getting a
> > motorcycle, but the animal feed ect. just doesn't
> > fit.  Eventually we hope
> > to lower the amount we are spending off farm, but it
> > takes time and effort
> > to build the place, improve the soil and keep
> > everything done.  Being self
> > sufficient is really hard to set up.  For example,
> > right now I have to buy
> > milk and milk products because my cow is almost 2
> > weeks overdue to have her
> > calf.  I did have some milk in the freezer, but we
> > ran out.  Mother Nature
> > makes this lifestyle an art, not a science.  I have
> > read books like 5 acres
> > and independence, but they obviously did not have a
> > Jersey cow.
> >
> > The biggest problem I have found it that local
> > economy is so
> > expensive.  They expect you to pay dearly for the
> > privilege of buying
> > locally, to the tune of double what I can pay 25
> > miles away.
> >
> > Worse than that, the local produce store carries
> > Californian oranges, not
> > the Texas or Louisiana oranges that I get a Walmart.
> > [I am in east
> > Texas]  We have nothing produced locally that is
> > sold locally.  The high
> > gas prices have had little effect on the lifestyle.
> >
> > Most people who have moved here from the city have
> > no interest in doing for
> > themselves.  Less than 10% of the homes have
> > gardens, and this in a place
> > where gardening year round is easy.  The reality of
> > today makes it hard to
> > believe that any 'new urbanism' is going to be an
> > improvement.
> >
> > Bright Blessings,
> > Kim
> >
> > At 12:51 PM 2/24/2005, you wrote:
> > >I think the reason the film spoke of "new urbanism"
> > as one possible result
> > >(not solution) is that a possible trouble with
> > moving further out is that
> > >unless you can provide all of your own
> > goods/services (which most can
> > >not), the increased distance will require MORE not
> > less transportation
> > >(and hence more energy). High density living
> > facilitates a
> > >reduction/concentration of transportation, and also
> > enables the use of
> > >higher efficiency transportation methods (mass
> > transit for individuals,
> > >trains for goods, etc).
> > >_
> >
> > ___
> > Biofuel mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel
> >
> > Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> >
> > Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
> > http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
> >
> 
> __
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> _

[Biofuel] INOVATIVE CLEAN TECHNOLOGY FROM BIOMASS WASTE FOR DAIRY

[Pannir P.V]

  Gretings  to all

 Here is the summary of our work for the the  integrated  rural energy
form  Biomass.
Any new informations and  sugestions are welcome .Feel free to get 
the complete paper which is yet to be published.

PROJECT DEVELOPMENT OF CO PRODUCTION OF HOT AND COLD THERMAL ENERGY
FOR SMALL DAIRY PLANT USING INOVATIVE CLEAN TECHNOLOGY FROM BIOMASS
WASTE

Pannirselvam P.V.* Mattei G.** Simoni S.** Santiago B. H. S.* Fernandes M. R.P.*
* - Departamento de Engenharia Química e enghenaria de material /CT
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte – Núcleo de Tecnologia
Grupo de pesquisa em Engenharia de Custos e Processos – GPEC; Natal-RN.Brasil.
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; www.ufrnet.br/biocombustivel  - www.gpechp.cjb.net
** - CIRPS Centro Interuniversitario di Ricerca per lo Sviluppo Sostenibile
Università La Sapienza di Roma -
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] - www.cirps.it

 Several problems are encountered to make possible to obtain the
energy for the   process plant that can make capable the viable small
scale milk processing plant. The use of the energy from conventional
fuel is one of the main factors for the rise in the cost of the 
product. The use of alternative sources of energy tends to diminish
the cost of the process. In this context, this project using energy
integrated system for  the milk production using small scale  energy
generation  from biomass wastes  are the purpose of this study. The
main objective of this  project is to develop a new process synthesis
for use of the residual biomass of the animal in a dairy farm for the
energy production applied to the milk processing plant with
co-production of hot, cold thermal energy using biogas and wood gas
from solid wood biomass wastes and animal wastes. Our project using
residual biomass produces energy from this biomass via pyrolysis,
gasification and biodigestion.
After carried out the bibliographical research about the current state
of art technology of the production of energy based on the residual
animal and vegetable biomass, mostly lignocelluloses, thermo
conversion processes, reactor,  and bioconversion, an engineering
projects had been developed with the use of the software Super Pro
Designer V 4.9. Some simulations of processes of the fast pyrolysis,
gasification, biodigestion, generation of energy have been realized
including system integration of energy production as innovation of the
present work. From this study, three scenes have been developed: one,
the current process of conventional energy using boiler and the other
one  with using combined pyrolysis and gasification , and  the last
one  with biogestion for combined power , heat  and chilling .These
three project were  studied in detail using dynamic process models.
The  results  about project investment and the cost  analysis ,
economic viability and cash balance using software Orc2004 were
obtained. A new design is obtained  to recover the energy from biogas
and  the purified biogas is used  to rum Internal combustion engine
where the out put lost energy is recovered via heat pump to make
available thermal energy not only for the processing of the  milk but
also to make the ice ,hotwater , liquid fertilizers..Several
techno-economic parameters of the selected scenes have been compared
and analyzed, where an better income of energy and materials
utilization were observed in relation to conventional process. This
project which is still in development phase involves small scale
integrated system in such a way that allows the sustainable milk
production and clean technology with significant improvement of the
economy and energy from dairy wastes

KEYS-WORDS: Gasification.Biogas, Clean Technology ,Dairy, milk processing


-- 
 Pagandai V Pannirselvam
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte - UFRN
Departamento de Engenharia Química - DEQ
Centro de Tecnologia - CT
Programa de Pós Graduação em Engenharia Química - PPGEQ
Grupo de Pesquisa em Engenharia de Custos - GPEC

Av. Senador Salgado Filho, Campus Universitário
CEP 59.072-970 , Natal/RN - Brasil

Residence :
Av  Odilon gome de lima, 2951,
   Q6/Bl.G/Apt 102
   Capim  Macio
EP 59.078-400 , Natal/RN - Brasil

Telefone(fax) ( 84 ) 215-3770 Ramal20
2171557
Telefone(fax) ( 84 ) 215-3770 Ramal20
 2171557
___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/

Re: [Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"

[Keith Addison]

on 2/25/05 5:47 PM, John Mullan at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Excluding the global warming thing, the end of fossil fuel will, I believe,
> cause a die-off of sorts.  Overall production and delivery of food won't
> quite keep up to todays rate.


Disagree. Many and diverse examples prove the opposite. One welcome 
casualty (make it soon!) wlno doubt be the current production and 
distribution system, which does not aim to produce food to feed 
people but to produce commodities for trade. With it will end all the 
evils of inequitable distribution (poverty and starvation), 
food-miles madnesses, uneven subsidies, rigged "fair" trade rules, 
and dumping, along with quite unbelievable and utterly reprehensible 
amounts of sheer waste. Plus a very great deal of environmental 
wreckage, and massive health problems. There's nothing good about 
so-called "conventional" agriculture (read industrialised 
agriculture, more akin to mining than to farming/husbandry). A 
farming system needs to prove itself **sustainable** for longer than 
a mere 50 years if the wants to be called "conventional" - those 
conventions are more than 10,000 years old, not to be purloined by 
some rapidly-to-pass system of wanton extraction.


See:

http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_food.html#starve
Biofuels - Food or Fuel? > Starvation?


And there will be those that cannot cope
> without plastic this-and-that.  Can't cope with or figure out alternatives.
> Family sizes will shrink.  I think then that world population will start a
> decline.  Hence, a so-called die-off.

Especially in America -- my parents bought their second car 50 years ago.
They wouldn't do well tomorrow. Most of the next generation (me included)
may not do a lot better.


You've got something there Ken. We've been grievously deskilled, 
especially in the industrialised countries. With exceptions, my 
generation isn't early as competent as their parents were, and they 
weren't as competent as their late-19th century parents were. 
Compared with us now, for all our fancy degrees, our gadgetry and 
scientific wonders, the average Joe from 1890 or so makes most of us 
look like arrested development cases. Which I suppose we are. It's 
preferred that we should be helpless and dependent, and the 
powers-that-be have put considerable resources into seeing to it that 
most of us are just that.


That is one of the most important aspects of biofuels, IMO: the sheer 
impact on your outlook of making your own fuel for the first time and 
running your motor on it, knowing that it's BETTER than the stuff the 
big guys make, and that ANYBODY can do it, is more empowering than 
anything else I know of. If you can do this, then what else can you 
do??? And what else that you've been told for so long shouldn't you 
believe??? Very subversive!


There's a lot of this going on, in a lot of places, from a lot of 
directions, reskilling people for independence and self-reliance. 
Again IMO, if you don't do that first, nothing else will work, that's 
where it has to start. Conversely, if you do do that first, then all 
the allegedly do-gooding hand-me-down directives and initiatives from 
Top Level are without significance.


Many/most/all centralists seem to find it impossible to see things 
this way. Hey, I'm going to quote Margaret Mead again: "Never 
underestimate the power of a small group of individuals to change the 
world. In fact, it is the only thing that ever has."


To return to the current topic, yes - "the angels also serve who only 
stand and wait", it says, but this time round, in the context of no 
more cheapo oil and rising climatic calamity, deskilled people who 
only stand and wait for their betters to help them possibly are 
candidates for a die-off.



Some places will cope better than others. It's a
matter of remembering how it worked before, and relocalizing to get there.


Not too much has been lost, considering. Probably the main problem is 
the mindset.


Regards

Keith




-K



___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/

[Biofuel] Global Warming Is a Man-Made Disaster

[MH]

 "Because the global climate is largely driven by
 the heat locked up in the oceans,
 a rise in sea temperatures could have
 devastating effects for many parts of the world." 
 --- 

 The Final Proof:
 Global Warming Is a Man-Made Disaster 
 By Steve Connor 
 The Independent U.K. 
 Saturday 19 February 2005 
 http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/E022105B.shtml 

 Scientists have found the first unequivocal link between
 man-made greenhouse gases and a dramatic heating of the Earth's oceans.
 The researchers - many funded by the US government - have seen
 what they describe as a "stunning" correlation between a rise in
 ocean temperature over the past 40 years and pollution of the atmosphere. 

 The study destroys a central argument of global warming skeptics within
 the Bush administration - that climate change could be a natural phenomenon.
 It should convince George Bush to drop his objections to the Kyoto treaty
 on climate change, the scientists say. 

 Tim Barnett, a marine physicist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography
 in San Diego and a leading member of the team, said: "We've got a serious 
problem.
 The debate is no longer: 'Is there a global warming signal?'
 The debate now is what are we going to do about it?" 

 The findings are crucial because much of the evidence of a warmer world
 has until now been from air temperatures, but it is the oceans that are
 the driving force behind the Earth's climate. Dr Barnett said: "Over the
 past 40 years there has been considerable warming of the planetary system
 and approximately 90 per cent of that warming has gone directly into the 
oceans." 

 He told the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington:
 "We defined a 'fingerprint' of ocean warming. Each of the oceans warmed 
differently
 at different depths and constitutes a fingerprint which you can look for. We 
had
 several computer simulations, for instance one for natural variability:
 could the climate system just do this on its own? The answer was no. 

 "We looked at the possibility that solar changes or volcanic effects could
 have caused the warming - not a chance. What just absolutely nailed it was
 greenhouse warming." 

 America produces a quarter of the world's greenhouse gases, yet
 under President Bush it is one of the few developed nations not to have
 signed the Kyoto treaty to limit emissions. The President's advisers have
 argued that the science of global warming is full of uncertainties and
 change might be a natural phenomenon. 

 Dr Barnett said that position was untenable because it was now clear
 from the latest study, which is yet to be published, that man-made
 greenhouse gases had caused vast amounts of heat to be soaked up by
 the oceans. "It's a good time for nations that are not part of Kyoto
 to re-evaluate their positions and see if it would be to their
 advantage to join," he said. 

 The study involved scientists from the
 US Department of Energy, the
 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California and the
 US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
 as well as the Met Office's Hadley Centre. 

 They analysed more than 7 million recordings of ocean temperature
 from around the world, along with about 2 million readings of sea salinity,
 and compared the rise in temperatures at different depths to predictions
 made by two computer simulations of global warming. 

 "Two models, one from here and one from England,
 got the observed warming almost exactly. In fact we were
 stunned by the degree of similarity," Dr Barnett said.
 "The models are right. So when a politician stands up and says
 'the uncertainty in all these simulations start to question whether
 we can believe in these models', that argument is no longer tenable."
 Typical ocean temperatures have increased since 1960 by between 0.5C and 1C,
 depending largely on depth. Dr Barnett said: "The real key is the amount of
 energy that has gone into the oceans. If we could mine the energy that has
 gone in over the past 40 years we could run the state of California for
 200,000 years... It's come from greenhouse warming." 

 Because the global climate is largely driven by the heat locked up in the 
oceans,
 a rise in sea temperatures could have devastating effects for many parts of 
the world. 

 Ruth Curry, from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, said that
 warming could alter important warm-water currents such as the Gulf Stream,
 as melting glaciers poured massive volumes of fresh water into the North 
Atlantic.
 "These changes are happening and they are expected to amplify. It's a certainty
 that these changes will put serious strains on the ecosystems of the planet,"
 Dr Curry said.
___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/b

Re: [Biofuel] GHG do warm oceans

[MH]

 Your welcome Keith and thank you. 

 "What sort of scenario do you end up with
 if they're both right?" 

 It seems to me that
 the general consensus in these surveys would be --
   most adults in the USA believe
   the threats to be real
   and want something done about them. 

 I've read elsewhere some actually believe
 they could effect US national security and
 quiet possibly its economy. 

 Time has moved on along with growing US
 national debt, military involvement,
 global warming and energy concerns
 that not only concerns Iraq or the US
 but the international community. 


> Hm, you do post nice numbers Hoagy. Thanks once again.
> 
> Polls are so interesting. What a contrast with the PIPA polls for instance, 
> eg:
> http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20041018/001864.html
> [Biofuel] Lost in Twitland
> 
> What sort of scenario do you end up with if they're both right? Which
> they probably are.
> 
> Regards
>
> Keith 


> > > As for our current crop of American denialists here (not that they're
> > > the first or only, nor the last), any bets that they'll take any
> > > notice? They've been skilfully blind-eyeing it for 20 years now,
> > > they're not about to change.


> > Hi Keith,
> > I suppose it's possible but they're a smaller USA percentage
> > according to the polls taken, mentioned below, in a
> > -excerpt- "submitted to the Congressional Record the
> > following statement on the Climate Stewardship Act of 2005"
> > by US Senator John McCain (R-AZ) --
> >
> >
> > http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=NewsCenter.ViewSpeech&Content_id=1519
> >
> >  Public Reaction
> >
> >  What do the American people think about this issue?
> >  A poll conducted in May 2004 for the Yale School of Forestry
> >  and Environmental Studies found that 70 percent of Americans believe
> >  that global warming is a "very serious" or "somewhat serious" problem.
> >  In contrast, only 20 percent of the 1000 adults polled believed that
> >  global warming does not represent a serious issue. "Our poll indicates
> >  that most people know about global warming. They have serious concerns
> >  about the issue, and they want public officials to address it and
> >  other environmental issues." said Dan Esty, Director of the
> >  Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy. The poll also found
> >  that 55 percent of Americans believe that "the scientific evidence is in"
> >  with regard to global warming and climate change.
> >
> >  These results are consistent with earlier polls conducted.
> >
> >  According to a poll conducted by Zogby International
> >  from October 15th through October 20th of 2003,
> >  79 percent of Americans agree that the United States
> >  should reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. The poll of
> >  1200 American adults nationwide found that
> >  75 percent responded positively to the following question,
> >  "Senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman have proposed legislation
> >  to begin addressing global warming. If enacted, the bill would require
> >  major industries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. Specifically,
> >  these industries would be required to reduce emissions to years 2000 levels
> >  within the next seven years. How do you feel about this proposal?"
> >  Additionally, 67 percent agree that requiring major industries to
> >  reduce greenhouse gas emissions can improve the environment
> >  without harming the economy.
> >
> >  A Gallup Organization poll of 1003 adults conducted in
> >  March through May of 2003 found that 75 percent of
> >  respondents favor imposing mandatory controls on
> >  carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.
> >
> >  I think these are compelling surveys given the fact
> >  they represent the opinion of the people we are sworn to represent
> >  and not those of the special interests in this town.
___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/

Re: [Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"

[stephan torak]

"lousy, I got humans" says the other
"Oh, not to worry, it'll pass".

John Mullan wrote:


Excluding the global warming thing, the end of fossil fuel will, I believe,
cause a die-off of sorts.  Overall production and delivery of food won't
quite keep up to todays rate.  And there will be those that cannot cope
without plastic this-and-that.  Can't cope with or figure out alternatives.
Family sizes will shrink.  I think then that world population will start a
decline.  Hence, a so-called die-off.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Keith Addison
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 5:39 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"


Hello Rob

 


The film is not predicting "die-off", it is predicting/describing  a
probable coming change.
   



I wasn't talking about the film, and this below was a quote from a
previous message:

 


Are they starving? No. This has been going on for quite a while
now, but nobody seems to have noticed. Or very few anyway. So much
for "die-off" at the end of Big Oil.
   



This time round, it was quoted as part of a comment on another film,
Yank Tanks, mentioned by Kirk. The whole message is here:
http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20050221/006287.html
[Biofuel] "End of Suburbia"

I said at the end:

 


Hm, fancy that - no massive die-off as predicted by the oil addicts
when cold turkey day finally comes round.
   



Whether or not "The End of Suburbia" mentions die-off, many other
people do in connection with "Oil depletion and the collapse of the
American Dream", including here, recently, and also off-list. It's
nonsense, as the film "Yank Tanks" apparently indicates, as well as
what I was saying about food supply in Cuba. As you say, more
sensible behaviour will simply become unavoidable. Perhaps above all
else, humans as a species are good at adapting, and adapt we will.

Meanwhile, so many of the people who talk about a massive die-off
with the end of (cheap) oil are still quibbling about or denying
global warming, caused mainly by cheap oil (and coal), which really
does threaten a massive die-off.

Apart from the insurance estimates I posted yesterday (see
),
there's this, for instance:

 


Suffering progress

Rising global temperatures will result in 290 million more cases of
malaria worldwide

About 2.5 million premature deaths will occur every year in India
due to air emissions

Asthma, diarrhoea, dengue, cancer, malnutrition will burden public health

Climate change is bad news for global human health.
   


[more]
CSE- Health Environment Newsletter March-April 2003
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/26715/

And much besides.

:-(

Regards

Keith


 


As I assume (yikes! ..pardon) most of us agree, long over due
changes such as organic farming, and resource conservation will
simply become unavoidable.

I guess another reason I like the film is simply because it exists
at all. While it may not address every aspect, consequence, or
possibility, this is the first film I have come across that even
breeches the issue, and really questions the sustainability of
suburban America.
   



___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/

___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/


 



___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/

Re: [Biofuel] affordable methanol in uk

[JD2005]

These guys just chargesd me £30.00 for a sample :-(

JD2005
- Original Message -
From: "philip reid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] affordable methanol in uk


> Hi,
> Try albion Chemicals,
> Approx £90 per 205L drum
> --- JD2005 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hi Chris Bennet,
> >
> > Thank you for getting back to me.I'm trying to
> > look into ways of turning
> > wvo into biofuel but havn't been able to get started
> > due to severe problems
> > getting methanol.I've even applied for a license
> > to use denatured
> > ethanol and industrial meths in case I could get any
> > of these to work.
> >
> > Utimately, I'm hoping to get off the grid and the
> > gas.   Well more off them
> > than I am already by means of a diesel generator.
> > I've found a company in
> > the uk who are looking into   importing low rev
> > diesel generators (water
> > cooled)  that can run on biofuel and svo etc without
> > adaptation.   See
> > www.utterpower.com
> >
> > Also,
> >
> > www.f1-rocketboy.com/lister.html
> >
> > I havn't had time to look at these properly yet.
> >
> >
> > JD2005
> > - Original Message -
> > From: Chris Bennett
> > > JD2005 wrote:
> > >
> > > >Hi;
> > > >
> > > >Is there anybody on this list who knows where to
> > purchase methanol for a
> > > >reasonable price in the uk, england?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >JD2005
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >___
> > > >Biofuel mailing list
> > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel
> > > >
> > > >Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> > > >http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> > > >
> > > >Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
> > > >http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > I used a company called 'Almetron' in Wrexham.
> > They charged about £14
> > > per 25litre drum plus vat.
> > > ___
> > > Biofuel mailing list
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel
> > >
> > > Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> > > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> > >
> > > Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
> > > http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Biofuel mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel
> >
> > Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> >
> > Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
> > http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
> >
>
>
> =
>
>
>
>
>
> __
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> ___
> Biofuel mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel
>
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
>
> Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
> http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/


___
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/