Rép. : Re: [Biofuel] safety issues of biofuels
thanks indeed ! Guy [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/08 5:03 I have a document called Biodiesel Production Technology published by National Renewable Energy Laboratory, USA. You may find what you want in this document. You may able to download it from www.nrel.gov. PJW - Original Message - From: Guy MARLAIR To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 9:43 PM Subject: [Biofuel] safety issues of biofuels I am currently working at identifying current status on safety related issues pertaining to biofuels products and related processes : May some of you provide me with pertinent sources of information (handbook, safety dedicated valuable works and so on...) Thanks Guy MARLAIR INERIS www.ineris.fr ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] [off topic]Israel plan for new settler homes
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4605877.stm Friday, 3 June, 2005, 08:42 GMT 09:42 UK Israel plan for new settler homes Maale Adumim, east of Jerusalem, is already home to 35,000 settlers Israel has announced plans to build 22 more homes in a Jewish settlement in the West Bank. This comes a week after US President George W Bush called on Israel to stop all settlement expansion in line with commitments made under the roadmap. Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said the plan, announced on Thursday, undermined efforts to revive talks. He urged the international community to try to stop the building at the Maale Adumim settlement, east of Jerusalem. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is pushing ahead with plans to withdraw from the Gaza Strip but has said Israel will hold on to parts of the West Bank, including the Maale Adumim settlement and another at Ariel, to the north of Jerusalem. In April, Israel unveiled plans for 3,500 extra homes on occupied land near Maale Adumim - the largest Israeli settlement in the West Bank - forming a corridor to Jerusalem. Israel has occupied the West Bank and Gaza since 1967. The international community considers all settlements in Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, as illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this. ___ How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
RE: [Biofuel] question on aquaculture
Kim, Here's a discussion about it that might get your search started again. http://www.ibiblio.org/london/permaculture/mailarchives/allforums1/0038.html Craig. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Garth Kim Travis Sent: 07 June 2005 22:07 To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: [Biofuel] question on aquaculture Greetings, While I am well aware that I am not the greatest at searching on the internet, I am fed up after two days of trying to find the information that was there a year ago. Yes, I did down load it, but it went the way of much of my data with computer crashes. I hate to print everything out, but I guess I should have. Anyway, I am looking for information on the manure/fish/plants type of aquaculture. All I am finding is bought food/fish/plants kind. What happened to the information on how much manure of what kind to use with which fish? The last thing I need is anything else on the feed bill and I really would like to put my rabbit manure to good use. [And not as pit pearlsgrin] Can anyone help me, please? Bright Blessings, Kim ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
RE: [Biofuel] question on aquaculture
Thanks Craig, Bright Blessings, Kim At 05:37 AM 6/8/2005, you wrote: Kim, Here's a discussion about it that might get your search started again. http://www.ibiblio.org/london/permaculture/mailarchives/allforums1/0038.html Craig. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
[Biofuel] General Motors Layoffs
Hallo Folks, I am an old Flint, Michigan boy. I know that Detroit gets all the press but Flint is the home of Buick and Chevrolet. My grandfather began working at the Buick factory in Flint in 1915. He was in the strikes back in '36 and told me that the union went bad, became the mirror image of management in '55. But that isn't what this is about. General Motors is laying off 25,000 employees in order to become more competitive. It blames its employees for the economic problems citing wages, pension and health benefits. Oddly enough there is no mention of building and promoting the gas guzzling monsters it produces. There is no mention of the salaries and benefits of management either. Nothing about the bonuses and benefit packages upper management receive. Nothing but a lot of finger pointing. There does not appear to be an ounce of responsibility in the entire crew controlling things at GM, and for most other companies I think. They not only want to have their cake and eat it too they want to eat from everyone else's plate and force them to like it. This is systemic. The airlines are using bankruptcy to put the screws to their employees already. Worldcomm, Enron, the airlines, GM. We, those of us in at least Michigan and Ohio, are going to get 25,000 new McDonalds workers IF they can find the work. And this is the capitalist model we want to force on everyone else in the world? All take and no give? I am so tired of hearing things like, These are the realities of the situation..., Our profit margin is not big enough., The problem is due to the high cost of energy., We have to impose these wage and benefit cuts because..., and on and on and on. What confounds me is that their machinations are so obviously transparent and so many people just accept what they say and go along with it. Talk about cranial-rectal inversion. I really do not understand how we allow those with money and power to divert our attention by setting one class/religion/race/country/economic system or whatever against another and thereby control us. Are we that stupid? If we aren't then why, as we are being bent over and raped, do we turn our heads and say, Please, use a coarser grade of sandpaper.? It is all too apparent that the political and economic powers that be of all countries are not truly interested in the welfare of the world in general. Neither the welfare of either the entire human race or the world of nature. The welfare they are most interested in is the immediate bottom line. How sad. There has been a lot of talk on this list and others and among the general public (in the US) about our flag, our military, honor, duty, etc., etc., etc. Well folks, flags, all flags, are only bits of rag which are worth nothing. None of them. One flag is not worth the life of one individual human being. Nor is the bottom line, or race, or nationality, or religion, or political persuasion, or economic system or any other extraneous condition. No one owns the truth. Not the Christians, or the Muslims, or the Jews, or the Hindus, or the Buddhists, or any religious group, or the philosophers, or the economists, or the politicians. No one. Each have bits and pieces and snatches of the truth and many claim to have and own the whole thing but that is an illusion or an outright lie. If we burnt ever single book in the world, bar none, every holy text and philosophical and ethical treatise, everything, we would be left with ourselves and what resides within. What are we going to point to then for justification of our excesses? Who are we going to blame? There are some things which appear to defy logic but they really don't. We just don't have all the information even though we may think we do or we don't understand what we are seeing or we aren't seeing it because we're looking in the wrong places or for the wrong thing. One has to see the dots before they can be connected. One has to get beyond name and form to recognize substance. It is a matter of perception and association.That which perceives can perceive everything it is supposed to except...itself. Simple, elemental and oh so difficult to understand let alone own. Friends, we are all one. One race one world. None more important than the other, none of more or less worth. If we can't treat each other and our world with respect then we are headed to hell in a handcart and getting what we deserve. The differences I have seen are artificial constructs and not worth spit. Do others find it odd that some of us claim that God or the gods created us, our world and everything and others of us claim that everything came into being naturally through evolution but what we find important is not the product of this
[Biofuel] Check the Per capita energy use of Five Families
Energy use of Five Families from around the world scroll down check Per Capita energy use in kilogram oil equivalent. Jamie http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/worldbalance/material.html __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
[Biofuel] MIT Tech Review article on new biofuel process
http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/06/wo/wo_060705jaffe.asp?p=0 ACTUAL TEXT FOLLOWS: Eco-dreamers have long hoped for a way to drive around without contributing to global warming, but the slow pace of progress in alternative fuel technologies has kept that vision from materializing. Now, a promising new process, designed by researchers at the University of Wisconsin and outlined in a paper that appeared in the journal Science on June 2, could be a significant step toward turning that dream into a reality. The paper details a new way to produce biodiesel fuel, which is made out of plant matter. Traditional biodiesel refining uses only the fatty acids of a plant, which typically make up less than 10 percent of the mass of dried plants. Rather than converting only the fat, this new method promises to turn all of the dried plant material, including roots, stems, leaves, and fruit, into biodiesel or heat energy. Ethanol, the most popular and commercial biofuel, has long been refined out of plant matter, but it requires the costly, energy-intensive step of distilling every molecule of water out of the solution. In contrast, the new biodiesel process is based on aqueous phase reactions, which don't need to go through the expensive distillation phase. The biggest advance we have to offer is the lack of that distillation process, says George Huber, one of the paper's authors and a graduate student at the University of Wisconsin who will soon be teaching at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. That means that our process is exothermic. In other words, it doesn't need a lot of extra energy. And that's important, because the largest cost in the current biofuel refining process is energy. The new method is divided into four parts. First, a stream of processed biomass consisting of water and sugars is fed over a nickel-tin catalyst to strip off some of its hydrogen atoms. Then the stream is treated with acids that take out most of the water. The resulting goo is then transported over a solid base catalyst, which forms it into long carbon chains, called alkanes. Finally, those alkanes are run through a platinum-silica-alumina catalyst at high temperatures, while the hydrogen from the first step is fed into the reactor. The resulting liquid has almost the exact same chemical structure as traditionally refined biodiesel and burns the same way in diesel engines. And the only byproducts are water and heat. If the process can be scaled up to industrial levels, it could be a major step toward the creation of a transportation fuel that is relatively clean burning, doesn't contribute to global warming, and provides U.S. farmers with billions of dollars of new income. According to Bill Jones, Chairman of the Board of Pacific Ethanol, a leading biofuel company, the oil industry currently views the emerging bio-fuels industry with fear, rather than acceptance. But eventually they'll come around, he says. They'll understand that this isn't just competition, it's a whole new market for them to get into. He points out that the Brazilian petroleum industry also resisted government attempts to promote biofuels, but it is now a big supporter -- more than half of Brazil's oil imports have been replaced with biofuels (see the Technology Review April http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/04/issue/feature_gp_brazil.aspcover story on world-changing ideas). Others don't need to be convinced, though. Charles Wyman, a distinguished professor at Dartmouth College in Hanover NH, whose specialty is the biological conversion of cellulosic biomass to ethanol and other products, says this new methodology could give biodiesel a fighting chance to succeed in the commercial marketplace by allowing manufacturers to make either ethanol or biodiesel fuel. Once you break down all the sugars in the plant material, the only option we had before was to make ethanol, Wyman says. This presents more options. In the future, a single manufacturing center, after refining the biomass into sugars, could make biodiesel or ethanol, depending on market demand. However, Wyman also points out that the economic battle hasn't necessarily been won. In the end it's the price at the gas station where these technologies win or lose, not in the laboratory, he says. To insure that both biodiesel and ethanol become more competitive in the marketplace, Wyman says that a key breakthrough is needed to make diesel fuel or other products such as ethanol competitively from sugars. According to him, advances in this area could beat wholesale gasoline prices. And some believe that breakthrough is on the horizon. Advancements in the last two years in enzyme technology by the National Renewable Energy Laboratories and private companies such as Iogen and Novozymes have substantially reduced the costs of cellulose transformation, which is tantalizingly close to making the whole system
RE: [Biofuel] General Motors Layoffs
/me rewatches Roger and Me -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Gustl Steiner-Zehender Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 12:23 AM To: Biofuel Subject: [Biofuel] General Motors Layoffs Hallo Folks, I am an old Flint, Michigan boy. I know that Detroit gets all the press but Flint is the home of Buick and Chevrolet. My grandfather began working at the Buick factory in Flint in 1915. He was in the strikes back in '36 and told me that the union went bad, became the mirror image of management in '55. But that isn't what this is about. General Motors is laying off 25,000 employees in order to become more competitive. It blames its employees for the economic problems citing wages, pension and health benefits. Oddly enough there is no mention of building and promoting the gas guzzling monsters it produces. There is no mention of the salaries and benefits of management either. Nothing about the bonuses and benefit packages upper management receive. Nothing but a lot of finger pointing. There does not appear to be an ounce of responsibility in the entire crew controlling things at GM, and for most other companies I think. They not only want to have their cake and eat it too they want to eat from everyone else's plate and force them to like it. This is systemic. The airlines are using bankruptcy to put the screws to their employees already. Worldcomm, Enron, the airlines, GM. We, those of us in at least Michigan and Ohio, are going to get 25,000 new McDonalds workers IF they can find the work. And this is the capitalist model we want to force on everyone else in the world? All take and no give? I am so tired of hearing things like, These are the realities of the situation..., Our profit margin is not big enough., The problem is due to the high cost of energy., We have to impose these wage and benefit cuts because..., and on and on and on. What confounds me is that their machinations are so obviously transparent and so many people just accept what they say and go along with it. Talk about cranial-rectal inversion. I really do not understand how we allow those with money and power to divert our attention by setting one class/religion/race/country/economic system or whatever against another and thereby control us. Are we that stupid? If we aren't then why, as we are being bent over and raped, do we turn our heads and say, Please, use a coarser grade of sandpaper.? It is all too apparent that the political and economic powers that be of all countries are not truly interested in the welfare of the world in general. Neither the welfare of either the entire human race or the world of nature. The welfare they are most interested in is the immediate bottom line. How sad. There has been a lot of talk on this list and others and among the general public (in the US) about our flag, our military, honor, duty, etc., etc., etc. Well folks, flags, all flags, are only bits of rag which are worth nothing. None of them. One flag is not worth the life of one individual human being. Nor is the bottom line, or race, or nationality, or religion, or political persuasion, or economic system or any other extraneous condition. No one owns the truth. Not the Christians, or the Muslims, or the Jews, or the Hindus, or the Buddhists, or any religious group, or the philosophers, or the economists, or the politicians. No one. Each have bits and pieces and snatches of the truth and many claim to have and own the whole thing but that is an illusion or an outright lie. If we burnt ever single book in the world, bar none, every holy text and philosophical and ethical treatise, everything, we would be left with ourselves and what resides within. What are we going to point to then for justification of our excesses? Who are we going to blame? There are some things which appear to defy logic but they really don't. We just don't have all the information even though we may think we do or we don't understand what we are seeing or we aren't seeing it because we're looking in the wrong places or for the wrong thing. One has to see the dots before they can be connected. One has to get beyond name and form to recognize substance. It is a matter of perception and association.That which perceives can perceive everything it is supposed to except...itself. Simple, elemental and oh so difficult to understand let alone own. Friends, we are all one. One race one world. None more important than the other, none of more or less worth. If we can't treat each other and our world with respect then we are headed to hell in a handcart and getting what we deserve. The differences I have seen are artificial constructs and not worth spit. Do others find it odd that some
[Biofuel] China coal mine gas leak kills 19
Ah yes, china just doesn't care how many die providing fuel for its furnaces. as well as coal for export. does your local PowerStation run on blood stained coal? http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/536641/590794/ China coal mine gas leak kills 19 Jun 8, 2005 At least 19 miners died, two were missing and 86 were rushed to hospital after a gas leak at a coal mine in central China, state media reported. The accident happened at the Zijiang coal mine in Loudi city, Hunan province, the Xinhua news agency said. China Central Television reported that 19 bodies had been found and two workers were unaccounted for. It said 86 miners were in hospital but gave no news on their condition. A Hunan work safety bureau official said 224 miners were in the pit at the time. Six rescue teams were at the site, Xinhua said. In a separate development, Xinhua said four more bodies had been retrieved from a coal mine in north China's Hebei province following an accident on May 19. It took the death toll at the Nuanerhe mine to 49. Safety at China's mines is often sacrificed as mine owners pursue profits at all cost to meet a rising demand for coal to fuel China's economic growth. Official figures show that more than 6,000 miners died in accidents in China last year, although independent estimates say the real figure could be as high as 20,000. The State Administration of Work Safety has said it would not be until 2020 that China's mining industry would reach the level of safety seen in medium developed countries, such as South Korea. China has pledged to invest $2.5 billion into improving coal mine safety this year. Bede Meredith Phone +64 21 892 801 Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.codesmith.info ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] China coal mine gas leak kills 19
Oh but we're so much better here in the usa, we fuel our furnaces with foreign blood. Bede wrote: Ah yes, china just doesn't care how many die providing fuel for its furnaces. as well as coal for export. does your local PowerStation run on blood stained coal? http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/536641/590794/ China coal mine gas leak kills 19 Jun 8, 2005 At least 19 miners died, two were missing and 86 were rushed to hospital after a gas leak at a coal mine in central China, state media reported. The accident happened at the Zijiang coal mine in Loudi city, Hunan province, the Xinhua news agency said. China Central Television reported that 19 bodies had been found and two workers were unaccounted for. It said 86 miners were in hospital but gave no news on their condition. A Hunan work safety bureau official said 224 miners were in the pit at the time. Six rescue teams were at the site, Xinhua said. In a separate development, Xinhua said four more bodies had been retrieved from a coal mine in north China's Hebei province following an accident on May 19. It took the death toll at the Nuanerhe mine to 49. Safety at China's mines is often sacrificed as mine owners pursue profits at all cost to meet a rising demand for coal to fuel China's economic growth. Official figures show that more than 6,000 miners died in accidents in China last year, although independent estimates say the real figure could be as high as 20,000. The State Administration of Work Safety has said it would not be until 2020 that China's mining industry would reach the level of safety seen in medium developed countries, such as South Korea. China has pledged to invest $2.5 billion into improving coal mine safety this year. Bede Meredith Phone +64 21 892 801 Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.codesmith.info ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ -- Bob Allen http://ozarker.org/bob Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves Richard Feynman ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] General Motors Layoffs
I agree. While wars are raging, the environment is getting destroyed and the survivors of those wars will inherit the bounty of a dying earth. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hallo Folks, I am an old Flint, Michigan boy. I know that Detroit gets all the press but Flint is the home of Buick and Chevrolet. My grandfather began working at the Buick factory in Flint in 1915. He was in the strikes back in '36 and told me that the union went bad, became the mirror image of management in '55. But that isn't what this is about. General Motors is laying off 25,000 employees in order to become more competitive. It blames its employees for the economic problems citing wages, pension and health benefits. Oddly enough there is no mention of building and promoting the gas guzzling monsters it produces. There is no mention of the salaries and benefits of management either. Nothing about the bonuses and benefit packages upper management receive. Nothing but a lot of finger pointing. There does not appear to be an ounce of responsibility in the entire crew controlling things at GM, and for most other companies I think. They not only want to have their cake and eat it too they want to eat from everyone else's plate and force them to like it. This is systemic. The airlines are using bankruptcy to put the screws to their employees already. Worldcomm, Enron, the airlines, GM. We, those of us in at least Michigan and Ohio, are going to get 25,000 new McDonalds workers IF they can find the work. And this is the capitalist model we want to force on everyone else in the world? All take and no give? I am so tired of hearing things like, These are the realities of the situation..., Our profit margin is not big enough., The problem is due to the high cost of energy., We have to impose these wage and benefit cuts because..., and on and on and on. What confounds me is that their machinations are so obviously transparent and so many people just accept what they say and go along with it. Talk about cranial-rectal inversion. I really do not understand how we allow those with money and power to divert our attention by setting one class/religion/race/country/economic system or whatever against another and thereby control us. Are we that stupid? If we aren't then why, as we are being bent over and raped, do we turn our heads and say, Please, use a coarser grade of sandpaper.? It is all too apparent that the political and economic powers that be of all countries are not truly interested in the welfare of the world in general. Neither the welfare of either the entire human race or the world of nature. The welfare they are most interested in is the immediate bottom line. How sad. There has been a lot of talk on this list and others and among the general public (in the US) about our flag, our military, honor, duty, etc., etc., etc. Well folks, flags, all flags, are only bits of rag which are worth nothing. None of them. One flag is not worth the life of one individual human being. Nor is the bottom line, or race, or nationality, or religion, or political persuasion, or economic system or any other extraneous condition. No one owns the truth. Not the Christians, or the Muslims, or the Jews, or the Hindus, or the Buddhists, or any religious group, or the philosophers, or the economists, or the politicians. No one. Each have bits and pieces and snatches of the truth and many claim to have and own the whole thing but that is an illusion or an outright lie. If we burnt ever single book in the world, bar none, every holy text and philosophical and ethical treatise, everything, we would be left with ourselves and what resides within. What are we going to point to then for justification of our excesses? Who are we going to blame? There are some things which appear to defy logic but they really don't. We just don't have all the information even though we may think we do or we don't understand what we are seeing or we aren't seeing it because we're looking in the wrong places or for the wrong thing. One has to see the dots before they can be connected. One has to get beyond name and form to recognize substance. It is a matter of perception and association.That which perceives can perceive everything it is supposed to except...itself. Simple, elemental and oh so difficult to understand let alone own. Friends, we are all one. One race one world. None more important than the other, none of more or less worth. If we can't treat each other and our world with respect then we are headed to hell in a handcart and getting what we deserve. The differences I have seen are artificial constructs and not worth spit. Do others find it odd that some of us claim that God or the gods created us, our
[Biofuel] Bush Aide Softened Greenhouse Gas Links to Global Warming
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/08/politics/08climate.html?ei=5094en=7 079af2e17ad5cebhp=ex=1118203200partner=homepagepagewanted=alloref =login Bush Aide Softened Greenhouse Gas Links to Global Warming By ANDREW C. REVKIN Published: June 8, 2005 A White House official who once led the oil industry's fight against limits on greenhouse gases has repeatedly edited government climate reports in ways that play down links between such emissions and global warming, according to internal documents. National Academies Statement (pdf format) http://nationalacademies.org/onpi/06072005.pdf ClimateScience.gov http://www.climatescience.gov/ In handwritten notes on drafts of several reports issued in 2002 and 2003, the official, Philip A. Cooney, removed or adjusted descriptions of climate research that government scientists and their supervisors, including some senior Bush administration officials, had already approved. In many cases, the changes appeared in the final reports. The dozens of changes, while sometimes as subtle as the insertion of the phrase significant and fundamental before the word uncertainties, tend to produce an air of doubt about findings that most climate experts say are robust. Mr. Cooney is chief of staff for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, the office that helps devise and promote administration policies on environmental issues. Before going to the White House in 2001, he was the climate team leader and a lobbyist at the American Petroleum Institute, the largest trade group representing the interests of the oil industry. A lawyer with a bachelor's degree in economics, he has no scientific training. The documents were obtained by The New York Times from the Government Accountability Project, a nonprofit legal-assistance group for government whistle-blowers. The project is representing Rick S. Piltz, who resigned in March as a senior associate in the office that coordinates government climate research. That office, now called the Climate Change Science Program, issued the documents that Mr. Cooney edited. A White House spokeswoman, Michele St. Martin, said yesterday that Mr. Cooney would not be available to comment. We don't put Phil Cooney on the record, Ms. St. Martin said. He's not a cleared spokesman. In one instance in an October 2002 draft of a regularly published summary of government climate research, Our Changing Planet, Mr. Cooney amplified the sense of uncertainty by adding the word extremely to this sentence: The attribution of the causes of biological and ecological changes to climate change or variability is extremely difficult. In a section on the need for research into how warming might change water availability and flooding, he crossed out a paragraph describing the projected reduction of mountain glaciers and snowpack. His note in the margins explained that this was straying from research strategy into speculative findings/musings. Other White House officials said the changes made by Mr. Cooney were part of the normal interagency review that takes place on all documents related to global environmental change. Robert Hopkins, a spokesman for the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, noted that one of the reports Mr. Cooney worked on, the administration's 10-year plan for climate research, was endorsed by the National Academy of Sciences. And Myron Ebell, who has long campaigned against limits on greenhouse gases as director of climate policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a libertarian group, said such editing was necessary for consistency in meshing programs with policy. But critics said that while all administrations routinely vetted government reports, scientific content in such reports should be reviewed by scientists. Climate experts and representatives of environmental groups, when shown examples of the revisions, said they illustrated the significant if largely invisible influence of Mr. Cooney and other White House officials with ties to energy industries that have long fought greenhouse-gas restrictions. In a memorandum sent last week to the top officials dealing with climate change at a dozen agencies, Mr. Piltz said the White House editing and other actions threatened to taint the government's $1.8 billion-a-year effort to clarify the causes and consequences of climate change. Each administration has a policy position on climate change, Mr. Piltz wrote. But I have not seen a situation like the one that has developed under this administration during the past four years, in which politicization by the White House has fed back directly into the science program in such a way as to undermine the credibility and integrity of the program. A senior Environmental Protection Agency scientist who works on climate questions said the White House environmental council, where Mr. Cooney works, had offered valuable suggestions on reports from time
[Biofuel] Shell Predicts Two Decades of Rising Energy Prices
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=12351 WORLD: Shell Predicts Two Decades of Rising Energy Prices by Michael Harrison, The Independent June 6th, 2005 Worldwide energy prices are set to rise over the next two decades as individual countries become more concerned about ensuring security of supply and governments take a more pro-active role in dictating energy policy and regulating markets, according to the latest global outlook from the oil giant Shell. Its global scenarios report, the first to be produced since the twin shocks of the terror attacks of 11 September 2001 and the Enron scandal, also suggests that Shell in common with other oil majors will place more emphasis on developing renewable energy sources such as wind and solar than extracting more hydrocarbons through unconventional means. The report outlines three potential scenarios up to 2025. Under the first, low trust globalisation, world economic growth is assumed to be 3.1 per cent and as the process of globalisation continues, it is fettered by a much stronger regulatory role for governments and stricter curbs on cross-border movement of people, goods and knowledge. The second, open doors, envisages stronger growth of 3.8 per cent as the markets provide solutions to the twin crises of security and trust sparked by events such as 9/11 and Enron and the only restraint on exploiting new energy sources is the investment available. The third, flags, depicts a world in which nation states retreat into their shells and conflicts put a brake on globalisation, resulting in annual growth of just 2.6 per cent. Albert Bressand, the vice-president of global business environment at Shell and the report's main author, said that under each of the scenarios security of supply assumed greater importance, potentially leading to far more politicised energy relations and creating new sources of tensions among countries. The flags scenario may increase development of expensive forms of renewable energy, such as wind, as states sought to ensureindigenous supplies, the open doors scenario was likely to produce the biggest rise in the cost as growing demand drove up prices. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
[Biofuel] World Scientists say Humans are Causing Global Warming
http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/31155/story.htm World Scientists say Humans are Causing Global Warming UK: June 8, 2005 LONDON - Scientists, including from the United States and China, threw down the gauntlet to world leaders on Tuesday saying mankind was the major source of global warming and urging action, one month ahead of a G8 summit. As leaders of the Group of Eight industrial nations prepare to meet in Scotland -- with climate change and Africa at the top of the agenda -- a statement by the national science academies of 11 countries said: It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities. The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action, said the statement from the science academies of the G8 nations as well as China, India and Brazil. While most scientists agree the burning of fossil fuels for transport and to generate electricity is a major contributor to potentially catastrophic climate change, the United States under President George W. Bush is unconvinced. British Prime Minister Tony Blair has made tackling global warming, with its rising sea levels, increases in droughts and floods and threats to the lives of millions of the world's poorest people, a key goal of his 2005 presidency of the G8. It is clear that world leaders, including the G8, can no longer use uncertainty about aspects of climate change as an excuse for not taking urgent action to cut greenhouse gas emissions, said Lord May, head of Britain's Royal Society national science academy. He called US policy misguided and noted that crucial to the international acceptance of the statement was the fact that leading scientists from three of the world's biggest developing world emitters China, India and Brazil had also signed it. SILENCE ON TARGETS Blair has called for global action to cut emissions of so-called greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and insisted on a programme of action to emerge from the G8 summit at Gleneagles, some 65 km (40 miles) from Edinburgh, on July 6-8. But a leaked draft last month of the climate change declaration due from the summit was silent on the science and contained neither targets nor timetables. The national science academies likewise avoided talk of targets, calling instead for cost-effective steps to cut greenhouse gas emissions and noting that any delays would increase the problems and therefore the costs. But they also noted the potentially devastating impact of global warming on the poorest nations which lacked the money or infrastructure to cope with anticipated crop failures and water shortages, and called for international action to help. Environment group Friends of the Earth welcomed the increased pressure the science statement would put on the G8 leaders but lamented the lack of concrete goals. G8 countries must accept their historic responsibility in creating the problem, and show genuine leadership through annual reductions in emissions, campaigner Catherine Pearce said. It is crucial that the entire world -- including the United States -- recognises that there is a window of opportunity to avert potentially catastrophic climate change. Emissions must peak and decline within the next decade. The world must act now before it is too late, she added. Story by Jeremy Lovell REUTERS NEWS SERVICE ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
[Biofuel] Pointing fingers over global warming
http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2005/6/7/features/1110 8298sec=features Pointing fingers over global warming By RICHARD INGHAM You are a small island state, watching your low coastline being slowly gobbled up by rising seas and eroded by storms. You are an Australian or African farmer whose crops have been turned to dust by the third successive year of drought. You are a low-altitude ski resort in the French Alps, staring at yet another winter of snowless slopes. You are a British houseowner, whose pretty riverside home became uninsurable and lost two-thirds of its value after the authorities designated it in a zone liable to floods. What do you do? Well, today, you'd probably just shrug your shoulders and blame bad luck or the gods of weather. In the future, though, you may prefer to phone your attorney. Governments, oil producers, coal-fired power plants or their corporate inheritors, even auto companies which make gas-guzzling SUVs - all are tempting targets for climate-change lawsuits in the future, says a small but growing body of legal opinion. Parched earth surrounds the release tower at Pejar Dam in Australia. When environmental disasters strike, some may sue companies or governments for it. Litigation on climate-related damage is clearly on the horizon, says Richard Lord, a senior London attorney in commercial law. He draws a parallel with lawsuits on tobacco and asbestos that were initially tossed out of court, but doggedly returned and decades later resulted in damages in the tens of billions of dollars. But these sums would no doubt be dwarfed by any ruling that found a government or corporation deliberately promoted use of a damaging greenhouse-gas pollutant, was obstructive about cleaning it up or covered up knowledge about the threat. If generally accepted scientific assessments are accurate, global warming is likely to be the most expensive environmental problem ever, says Andrew Strauss, a professor of international law at Widener University Law School in Delaware and Pennsylvania. Determinations are going to have to be made about who is going to bear these costs ... (and) litigation will very likely play a role. Just five years ago, the idea of suing the US government, Exxon, Ford or some other big promoter or user of fossil fuels because of global warming would have raised a guffaw. Everyone agrees with the polluter pays principle - it's only fair that if someone pours sewage into a river or dumps toxic waste at sea or in the fields, he should be liable for damages. So, by this line of thinking, if oil, gas and coal release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and if carbon dioxide traps solar heat and changes the climate system, why shouldn't those who have suffered from the damage get redress? But, at that time, legal action seemed ludicrous. For one thing, the available science was poor. It was unable to prove that extreme weather events were caused by the burning of fossil fuels rather than by some natural oscillation in the climate system, of the kind that the world has experienced many times in its past. And another obstacle was how to apportion blame. If a pollutant crosses borders and is caused by a fuel willingly used by everyone, how can a specific government or corporation be held responsible for it? Today, the blame question remains unsettled, but the scientific hurdle has shrunk significantly. Evidence that climate change is already underway has strengthened. Research has boosted the probability link between specific bouts of extreme weather and rising greenhouse-gas emissions. And scientists are becoming more skilled at calculating how and where climate change will strike. As a result, several volleys of lawsuits have now been fired in the United States, while in Europe, one case has been filed and several more are expected in the coming months. These do not focus on compensation but, instead, on the first steps of establishing responsibility, corporate or political. Twelve US states and several cities are suing the Environmental Protection Agency over its refusal to classify greenhouse gases as pollutants under the US Clean Air Act. In July last year, eight US states and the city of New York filed a suit against the five biggest American power companies, arguing that their carbon dioxide emissions are a public nuisance that should be curbed. Green groups are also suing US export credit groups for funding fossil-fuel projects abroad, a move mirrored by activists in Germany. The United States is the biggest target in the activists' crosshairs. It is the world's greatest source of greenhouse gases, a profligate user of fossil fuels and refuses to join the United Nations' Kyoto Protocol on curbing these emissions. More usefully, from the greens' view, it also has a tradition by which successful litigation often leads to changes in government policies. James
[Biofuel] Greenpeace continues Land Rover action
http://www.greenconsumerguide.com/index.php?news=2607 Greenpeace continues Land Rover action Tuesday 07 June 2005 Environmental group Greenpeace has made the next move it its campaign against Land Rover, with demonstrations at the car manufacturer's forecourts around the country. The move follows an incident last month in which the Range Rover production line at the company's Solihull factory was disrupted by protestors. The forecourt protests, which included wheel clamping vehicles and branding the garages as 'climate crime scenes' among other incidents, took place in seven major UK cities. We've taken direct action across the country to stop Land Rover selling these climate wrecking cars, said Greenpeace's Executive Director Stephen Tindale at a Kensington-based dealership. A petrol Range Rover Sport does a measly 12mpg in town, that's less miles per gallon than a model T ford did 80 years ago. In a world where 150,000 people are dying each year because of climate change selling cars like this for urban use is indefensible. The factory and forecourt protests have marked the start of Greenpeace's planned action against Land Rover and 4x4 vehicles this summer, which will include one thousand campaigners from the group across the UK using 20,000 road signs that say 'NO 4x4s', 50,000 cards to be filled in by the public and given to MP's, 25,000 4x4 'product recall notices' to be placed in car magazines, 1000 'incident boards' - notices that look like pleas for information at a crime scene and 50,000 car window stickers for use on urban 4x4s. Land Rover Ford have the know-how and expertise to develop far more fuel efficient vehicles but are choosing not to. Considering the climate crisis the world is entering that is nothing short of criminal. We're taking action across the UK to give them a message that they need to clean up their act, added Mr Tindale. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
[Biofuel] Bush: nuclear energy, technology key to climate change
http://futures.fxstreet.com/Futures/news/afx/singleNew.asp?menu=latest newspv_noticia=1118184629-c84d0f08-46427 Bush: nuclear energy, technology key to climate change Tuesday, June 7, 2005 10:50:32 PM http://www.afxpress.com WASHINGTON (MarketWatch ) --President Bush said Tuesday that the United States will support greater investments in technology and nuclear power as the solution to reduce harmful pollution and address global climate change. The president made his comments at a joint press conference with British Prime Minister Tony Blair following a meeting at the White House. Blair has placed the issue of climate change on the agenda for the forthcoming G8 summit in Scotland in July, which the U.K. will host. The U.S. is expected to face continued pressure at the international meeting to consider making a commitment to cap harmful emissions believed to contribute to climate change. The U.S., the world's biggest producer of greenhouse gases, refused to ratify the United Nations' Kyoto Climate Change protocol hammered out in 1997 that aimed to reduce greenhouse gases emitted by industrialized nations. The United Kingdom along with a number of other nations ratified the binding treaty, which went into effect this year. Bush indicated Tuesday that the administration will support additional investments in clean coal research and push for the use of nuclear power by developing countries instead of fossil fuel bringing energy sources at the meeting. To develop and make available clean and efficient technologies that will help attain these goals has got to be part of our dialogue at the G8, Bush said at a press conference. On climate change, I think everyone knows there are different perspectives on this issue, Blair said. Bush defended U.S. action on climate change saying the U.S. leads the world when it comes to dollars spent on research about climate change but said more needs to be known. We want to know more about [climate change], Bush said. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
RE: [Biofuel] question on aquaculture
Hello Kim, Try looking at this site. http://www.dec.ctu.edu.vn/cdrom/cd2/projects/univ_auburn/organic.html It might be useful, Best Wishes, Tim -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Garth Kim Travis Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 5:07 PM To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: [Biofuel] question on aquaculture Greetings, While I am well aware that I am not the greatest at searching on the internet, I am fed up after two days of trying to find the information that was there a year ago. Yes, I did down load it, but it went the way of much of my data with computer crashes. I hate to print everything out, but I guess I should have. Anyway, I am looking for information on the manure/fish/plants type of aquaculture. All I am finding is bought food/fish/plants kind. What happened to the information on how much manure of what kind to use with which fish? The last thing I need is anything else on the feed bill and I really would like to put my rabbit manure to good use. [And not as pit pearlsgrin] Can anyone help me, please? Bright Blessings, Kim ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Bush: nuclear energy, technology key to climate change
We do not need nuclear energy nor technology, we need behavior change. Alas, this behavior change will only come when enough people see how close we are to extinction. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://futures.fxstreet.com/Futures/news/afx/singleNew.asp?menu=latest newspv_noticia=1118184629-c84d0f08-46427 Bush: nuclear energy, technology key to climate change Tuesday, June 7, 2005 10:50:32 PM http://www.afxpress.com WASHINGTON (MarketWatch ) --President Bush said Tuesday that the United States will support greater investments in technology and nuclear power as the solution to reduce harmful pollution and address global climate change. The president made his comments at a joint press conference with British Prime Minister Tony Blair following a meeting at the White House. Blair has placed the issue of climate change on the agenda for the forthcoming G8 summit in Scotland in July, which the U.K. will host. The U.S. is expected to face continued pressure at the international meeting to consider making a commitment to cap harmful emissions believed to contribute to climate change. The U.S., the world's biggest producer of greenhouse gases, refused to ratify the United Nations' Kyoto Climate Change protocol hammered out in 1997 that aimed to reduce greenhouse gases emitted by industrialized nations. The United Kingdom along with a number of other nations ratified the binding treaty, which went into effect this year. Bush indicated Tuesday that the administration will support additional investments in clean coal research and push for the use of nuclear power by developing countries instead of fossil fuel bringing energy sources at the meeting. To develop and make available clean and efficient technologies that will help attain these goals has got to be part of our dialogue at the G8, Bush said at a press conference. On climate change, I think everyone knows there are different perspectives on this issue, Blair said. Bush defended U.S. action on climate change saying the U.S. leads the world when it comes to dollars spent on research about climate change but said more needs to be known. We want to know more about [climate change], Bush said. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Bush: nuclear energy, technology key to climate change
Respectfully, we don't need technology? I though technology is what's driving the development of biofuels and other renewable energy. Not that I'm keen on nuclear or dismiss conservation, AKA, behavior change. Any investment in resource by GWB is a waste of money given his history as a leader, he ignores the facts and goes on to set out what he had in mind all along. Doug, N0LKK - Original Message - From: r [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 12:19 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Bush: nuclear energy, technology key to climate change : We do not need nuclear energy nor technology, we need behavior change. : Alas, this behavior change will only come when enough people see how : close we are to extinction. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
RE: [Biofuel] question on aquaculture
Greetings Tim, Thank you very much, it is a wonderful site. Unfortunately they don't give the amounts of rabbit to use, but i think I can figure it out with some of the advise in this article. Bright Blessings, Kim At 12:34 PM 6/8/2005, you wrote: Hello Kim, Try looking at this site. http://www.dec.ctu.edu.vn/cdrom/cd2/projects/univ_auburn/organic.html It might be useful, Best Wishes, Tim ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] New List
Hello Manoj, You can dowhole lot of things with saw dust, such as produce fuel briquettes for primary energy, generate electricity or process heat by gasifying the saw dust briquettes and even produce methanol from it. There was a similar enquiry from Upali Magedaragamage, Executive Director, National development Foundation, Sri Lanka some time back to the list. Refer to http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg40222.html Regards. balaji - Original Message - From: MANOJ To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 9:00 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] New List hi guys i am from sri lanka what are u going to do with saw dustManoj- Original Message -From: "Ron" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.orgSent: 07 June 2005 8:19 AMSubject: Re: [Biofuel] New List I could use some design photos and diagrams. I am trying to set up a fuel plant that will make 1000 gal per day from saw dust. How about the grant? How does that work? Any input much needed. Thanks, ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi ron, I built a 10 inch stripper column in 1990 I then moved a 24inch rectifier from a local oil refinary a ran for a while, selling my wet ethanol to a localethanol plant for upgrading to anhydrous, but then we got a new govener who took awayour state subsidies and my plant turned to scrapiron, at the time I was selling wet feed,and feeding 800 hogs, the stripper and condenser rusted away so I cut it up. now I am in the pickeled quail egg business and I need to startup myfeed mill and install a pellet press so I can enlarge my quail operation. 30 gallons of ethanol makes 1000 pounds of complete feed when thedistillers grains 33% of the ration, so they kinda go together, for now I will use my 1000 gallon pot still to produce 75 gallon perday, I am currently applying to USDA for a 49000 grant, to operate thisplant, I will produce anhydrous by using anhydrous lime, then using the lime as the calcium supplement for my feed. I also am buliding a pervaporation system using PVA and chitosan sorry, its hard to keep it short, 27 years of research From: ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2005/05/28 Sat PM 02:57:28 EDT To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] New List Me too Fred, How did you come with 30 gal/hr? I have done small time batch plants but yours is no batch plant. How do you do it? Is the Gov any help? Are there grants for bio diesel? So many questions and so little bandwidth!!! Ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just letting everyone know I am still here, Still trying to completemy 30 gallon per hour farm anhydrous ethanol/ plant feed mill, I recently applied for theUSDA/ DOE Grant, but there were 680 applications, I finally hired an engineer to put mypackage together. I have a very good 50 page plan, The seceret to making smallscaleethanol work is to produce a complete feed with the distillers grains. Thanks forbeing here. Fred ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.orghttp://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the full Biofuel list archives (46,000 messages): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Search the Biofuels-biz list archives: http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuels-biz/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.orghttp://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the full Biofuel list archives (46,000 messages): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Search the Biofuels-biz list archives: http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuels-biz/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the full Biofuel list archives (46,000 messages): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Search the Biofuels-biz list archives: http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuels-biz/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/___Biofuel mailing
Re: [Biofuel] Donations Catch Up
My goodness, there's been a lot of contrition lately! Whew! What a burden! Lighten up, I think. Let's remember the point here. And poor Martin has been taking a load. Come on now, guys. Cheer up. Jesse From: Gustl Steiner-Zehender [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 15:07:19 -0400 To: Biofuel Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: [Biofuel] Donations Catch Up Hallo Friends, It is way past tax time here in the states and I do not remember whether or not I got out all the receipts for donations for the donations to the biofuel list. [snip] ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
[Biofuel] RE: General Motors Layoffs(.....and everything else)
Gustl Are we that stupid? What are we going to blame? We have demonstrated an amazing capability for screwing up a good thing. My sentiments exactly. We certainly appear to live in an age of irresponsibility. On a personal level this is exemplified by cases of individuals spilling coffee on themselves, resulting in filed lawsuits. Parents that neglect their children and solely blame video games/music for violence that may follow. This mindset obviously transcends the individual to the collective(whole nations, governments, and corporations etc) in which it takes on a very destructive role and effects us all. Transnational corporations routinely failing to accept responsibility for lost lives(Union Carbide-Bhopal, India), damage to our ecosystem(too many depressing examples to point out), and lost jobs(GM etc, etc) are but a few examples of collective irresponsibility. It seems no matter what the situation, people will always find someone or something to point a finger at. In many scenarios, taking responsibility involves admitting one made a mistake or error in judgement. Admitting to a mistake or error in judgement involves introspection. This introspection will usually reveal a distortion in one's perception. If the mistake is to not be repeated, a change must be made. This all requires mental work. I think humans inherent laziness and egoism prevents this creative self criticism and reconstruction from taking place. To roughly quote David Suzukiits like we are all in a vehicle travelling at 1000miles/hour headed toward a brick wall, we are nearing the point where soon it will be too late to stop, and we're all arguing about who gets to sit at the front. We have somehow acquired/been given this wonderful gift of consciousness who's potential has not even begun to reveal itself. Through new technologies and traditional bodies of knowledge we are just beginning to see that this universe is one in which everything is interconnected. If we could just clear our minds and get past the ME, me, me, me, ME, me, me, me voice that moves through our scattered thoughts like an endless train(which I'm sure helped us survive during the Neanderthal era), then maybe we'll begin to evolve(oh, touchy word here) in positive collective direction. I do most certainly believe WE have the choice. Peace Marc ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] question on aquaculture
Check out http://www.dabney.com/ecogenics/intro.html [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Kim, Try looking at this site. http://www.dec.ctu.edu.vn/cdrom/cd2/projects/univ_auburn/organic.html It might be useful, Best Wishes, Tim -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Garth Kim Travis Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 5:07 PM To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: [Biofuel] question on aquaculture Greetings, While I am well aware that I am not the greatest at searching on the internet, I am fed up after two days of trying to find the information that was there a year ago. Yes, I did down load it, but it went the way of much of my data with computer crashes. I hate to print everything out, but I guess I should have. Anyway, I am looking for information on the manure/fish/plants type of aquaculture. All I am finding is bought food/fish/plants kind. What happened to the information on how much manure of what kind to use with which fish? The last thing I need is anything else on the feed bill and I really would like to put my rabbit manure to good use. [And not as pit pearlsgrin] Can anyone help me, please? Bright Blessings, Kim ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] RE: General Motors Layoffs(.....and everything else)
on 6/8/05 1:28 PM, Marc DeGagne at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To roughly quote David Suzukiits like we are all in a vehicle travelling at 1000miles/hour headed toward a brick wall, we are nearing the point where soon it will be too late to stop, and we're all arguing about who gets to sit at the front. Also known as rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic! It's a matter of persuading people to consider issues that have previously seemed too painful to consider. How to do that? It's not that bad -- we can do it if we try -- things will be harder than you're USED TO, but very similar to what grandpa was used to -- in fact, it'll be FUN !:-) -K ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
[Biofuel] RE: General Motors Layoffs(.....and everything else)
Hello Marc Gustl Are we that stupid? What are we going to blame? We have demonstrated an amazing capability for screwing up a good thing. My sentiments exactly. We certainly appear to live in an age of irresponsibility. On a personal level this is exemplified by cases of individuals spilling coffee on themselves, resulting in filed lawsuits. I'd say that you have the responsibility to check your facts. This is easily checked, and it's a myth. See: http://www.citizen.org/congress/civjus/tort/myths/articles.cfm?ID=785 Public Citizen | Congress Watch | Congress Watch - Legal Myths: The McDonald's Hot Coffee Case Legal Myths: The McDonald's Hot Coffee Case Parents that neglect their children and solely blame video games/music for violence that may follow. This mindset obviously transcends the individual to the collective(whole nations, governments, and corporations etc) in which it takes on a very destructive role and effects us all. I think you have it the wrong way round. You seem to be saying that governments, corporations etc are infected by the irresponsibility of the individual, which you see as a basic flaw. That could be construed as absolving governments and corporations of responsibility: if what they do goes wrong or hurts people or wrecks things it's not their fault but that of the flawed humans that work for them. That's not how it works. Governments and corporations are not just a collective. Your mistake is to see them as human. They are not human. This is from a previous post: So, who is in a better position to influence public behaviour: people like us here, or corporate blocs that effectively control media output in several different ways and can afford to spend $35 billion a year in the US alone on PR, let alone all the rest of the iceberg? My earlier post also said this (not for the first time): Humans are just fine, nearly all of them. Their institutions are another matter. The story of history, the one vs the other. A major problem now is to distinguish clearly between the one and t'other: institutions are not the same as the individuals who work for them. They might appear to be made up of humans and therefore to be human, but that misses their real nature. Which is the actor in the following cases, the individuals concerned or the corporations they work for? According to the less-than-human precepts of the bottom-line as perceived by the steel industry, electronics manufacturers, the chemical industry and others, this makes perfect sense: Toxic waste: 270 million pounds on farm fields In addition, the report said the industry sent farms and fertilizer companies chemicals which they know cause cancer and reproductive problems. Those included 6.2 million pounds of lead compounds, 1.3 million pounds of chromium compounds, 233,000 pounds of cadmium compounds, 212,000 pounds of nickel compounds, 16,000 pounds of mercury compounds and 223 pounds of arsenic compounds. Dioxins weren't measured... The Seattle Times, Local News, Thursday, March 26, 1998: http://www.crcwater.org/issues4/19980326toxicwaste.html Now would a human do that? These senior employees of corporations, probably family people with spouses and children of their own, sat down together, checked some numbers, did a risk-assessment no doubt, and decided to lace the fertilizers used to produce our food and *their own food too* with millions of pounds of toxic wastes, to save a bit of money - money that wasn't even theirs. There you go - the Harvard experiment, eh? So, in terms of risk-assessment and cost-benefit analysis, how much is a human life worth - someone else's human life of course? Remember the Pinto? $1 to make it safe, 500-900 humans burned to death. This is a human speaking, a Ford engineer: But you miss the point entirely. You see, safety isn't the issue, trunk space is. You have no idea how stiff the competition is over trunk space. Do you realize that if we put a Capri-type tank in the Pinto you could only get one set of golf clubs in the trunk? http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/1977/09/dowie.html Pinto Madness That's human? Do you think anything's changed for the better since then? Or for the worse maybe? Check out Dow and Bhopal for another view. It goes on all the time, it's the norm. But it's not the *human* norm. -- From: Re: Turbines kill cats was Re: [biofuel] RE: turbines kill birds http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg31128.html See also: http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg30628.html [biofuel] Mammoth corporations Transnational corporations routinely failing to accept responsibility for lost lives(Union Carbide-Bhopal, India), damage to our ecosystem(too many depressing examples to point out), and lost jobs(GM etc, etc) are but a few examples of collective irresponsibility. It seems no matter what the situation, people will always find someone or something to
