RE: [Biofuel] Let Them Eat Rocket Fuel
How would perchlorate be removed from drinking water? Simple or complex process? Inexpensive or expensive? I will be happy to do a test run with our EM water-cleaning technology if someone will provide the fuel and pay for the lab tests. We can dilute the contamination of the fuel to various percentages and make the runs according to a standard protocol such as degrees of power in the electric fields and the magnetic field and combined fields (which is where the real power is seen). We are happy to use your lab or a local lab and if we have excellent results, we can partner (as pre-agreed and negotiated before we ever begin) to address this concern. As I mentioned before, we consistently get 5 log reduction in microbial content in our in-line system. I just don't have the money to do the next rounds of testing now that I am so deeply involved in our fuel ethanol start-up company. If anyone is interested, please contact me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] With all the time and effort we have already invested in developing this water-cleaning device, it is a shame to just let the project sit on the shelf. Once the fuel ethanol projects are far enough along that I can hire as assistant, then I can go back to the water-cleaning project development. So far our only chemical type tests have been with arsenic reduction (small), phosphate reduction (excellent), and dissolved solids reduction (good). We have the data available that we use in our grant proposals; yet, it is very difficult to win a grant. After we establish that the system works for rocket fuel reduction in water and to what degree, we can crunch the numbers for anticipating expense. What makes me really excited is that we are attaching electrical generators to our small fuel ethanol stills. This electricity could be used in the water-purification process and reduce or eliminate the power expense associated with water purification via our method. For a person who seeks self-sufficiency, this phase of living (water purification) becomes a part of one's BIG picture. Thanks, Peggy Appal Energy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.tompaine.com/articles/let_them_eat_rocket_fuel.php Let Them Eat Rocket Fuel Erik D. Olson January 27, 2005 The fact that there's a rocket fuel additive called perchlorate in your water is bad enough. What's worse is the fact that the Bush administration likely manipulated the National Academy of Sciences to designate a lax perchlorate standard. The National Resources Defense Council sued the White House, Defense Department and EPA to release documents relating to perchlorate contamination and the NAS. What they found was evidence of an elaborate campaign designed to downplay the hazards of a dangerous chemical.snip ___ 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] Let Them Eat Rocket Fuel
babies in utereo? hypocrisy is one of the most upsetting transgressions if you ask me. Appal Energy wrote: http://www.tompaine.com/articles/let_them_eat_rocket_fuel.php Let Them Eat Rocket Fuel Erik D. Olson January 27, 2005 The fact that there's a rocket fuel additive called perchlorate in your water is bad enough. What's worse is the fact that the Bush administration likely manipulated the National Academy of Sciences to designate a lax perchlorate standard. The National Resources Defense Council sued the White House, Defense Department and EPA to release documents relating to perchlorate contamination and the NAS. What they found was evidence of an elaborate campaign designed to downplay the hazards of a dangerous chemical. Erik D. Olsen is a senior attorney at the National Resources Defense Council specializing in safe drinking water issues. He is the national coordinator of the Campaign for Safe and Affordable Drinking Water, a coalition of more than 300 public interest groups dedicated to improved drinking water protection. More than 20 million Americans have rocket fuel in their drinking water. That's right. Rocket fuel. It's also likely in your milk. And in your lettuce, too, because farmers out West inadvertently use rocket-fuel-contaminated water to irrigate their crops. You might not think that's a good thing. Scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency didn't, either. Especially since a toxic salt in rocket fuel, called perchlorate, can harm the thyroid and may disrupt fetal and newborn brain development. In 2002, EPA proposed a safe level in drinking water of only 1 part per billion. That's equivalent to half a teaspoon of perchlorate in an Olympic-size swimming pool. The Pentagon and its contractors-who have polluted food and drinking water across the country-argued that 200 parts per billion is safe. Earlier this month, a National Academy of Sciences panel issued a report finding that on a per body-weight basis, more perchlorate can be tolerated than the EPA had concluded-but still far less than what the Pentagon and its corporate pals had claimed. Why was NAS' conclusion higher than EPA's? Perhaps NAS was responding to enormous pressure from the White House, the Defense Department, and defense contractors. According to government documents recently obtained by the Natural Resources Defense Council, they collaborated in a backroom campaign to try to strong-arm the academy and manipulate the report. Despite this campaign, the panel did conclude that low levels of perchlorate exposure may cause health problems, and that fetuses are at particular risk. For decades, the Defense Department and its contractors have carelessly used millions of pounds of perchlorate, contaminating water and food supplies. At the same time, the Pentagon has been blocking EPA efforts to address perchlorate pollution, and in the last few years it intensified its campaign in the face of new revelations about perchlorate's harmful effects. In January 2002, when EPA recommended that 1 ppb was the safe level in drinking water, the Pentagon and its contractors lobbied to stop the assessment process and-with the help of the White House-wrested the assessment from EPA and handed it to NAS in 2003. Then the White House, the Pentagon and its contractors went to work to influence the NAS process. NRDC sued the White House, Defense Department and EPA in March 2004 after they ignored more than a dozen Freedom of Information Act requests, refusing to disclose any records documenting their campaign to steamroll NAS or details of the perchlorate problem. In response to the suit, the White House and the two agencies recently provided about 30 boxes of documents to NRDC, but are still withholding thousands of other records-including virtually all the key papers documenting White House and Pentagon efforts to influence NAS. However, they were required by court order to issue a Vaughn Index describing each of the withheld documents. This index reveals an extraordinary level of White House and Pentagon effort to limit the scope of NAS' inquiry and select the panelists, as well as collaboration with DOD contractors to pressure the panel. Scientists at the EPA, in state agencies, and in academia have concluded that very low levels of perchlorate threaten fetusus' and infants' health. The NAS panel's recommendation for a safe level is based on industry studies that fed perchlorate to a small number of healthy adults for a short time. Those studies tell us little about how perchlorate can harm fetuses or infants, or harm adults over a longer period of time (particularly millions of Americans with thyroid problems or who are iodine deficient). Studies of animals, also funded by the industry, showed that perchlorate may cause abnormal brain development in young rodents, but accepting the arguments of the Pentagon and industry, the academy said more
[Biofuel] Let Them Eat Rocket Fuel
Let Them Eat Rocket Fuel Erik D. Olson January 27, 2005 The fact that there's a rocket fuel additive called perchlorate in your water is bad enough. What's worse is the fact that the Bush administration likely manipulated the National Academy of Sciences to designate a lax perchlorate standard. The National Resources Defense Council sued the White House, Defense Department and EPA to release documents relating to perchlorate contamination and the NAS. What they found was evidence of an elaborate campaign designed to downplay the hazards of a dangerous chemical. Erik D. Olsen is a senior attorney at the National Resources Defense Council specializing in safe drinking water issues. He is the national coordinator of the Campaign for Safe and Affordable Drinking Water, a coalition of more than 300 public interest groups dedicated to improved drinking water protection. More than 20 million Americans have rocket fuel in their drinking water. That's right. Rocket fuel. It's also likely in your milk. And in your lettuce, too, because farmers out West inadvertently use rocket-fuel-contaminated water to irrigate their crops. You might not think that's a good thing. Scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency didn't, either. Especially since a toxic salt in rocket fuel, called perchlorate, can harm the thyroid and may disrupt fetal and newborn brain development. In 2002, EPA proposed a safe level in drinking water of only 1 part per billion. That's equivalent to half a teaspoon of perchlorate in an Olympic-size swimming pool. The Pentagon and its contractors-who have polluted food and drinking water across the country-argued that 200 parts per billion is safe. Earlier this month, a National Academy of Sciences panel issued a report finding that on a per body-weight basis, more perchlorate can be tolerated than the EPA had concluded-but still far less than what the Pentagon and its corporate pals had claimed. Why was NAS' conclusion higher than EPA's? Perhaps NAS was responding to enormous pressure from the White House, the Defense Department, and defense contractors. According to government documents recently obtained by the Natural Resources Defense Council, they collaborated in a backroom campaign to try to strong-arm the academy and manipulate the report. Despite this campaign, the panel did conclude that low levels of perchlorate exposure may cause health problems, and that fetuses are at particular risk. For decades, the Defense Department and its contractors have carelessly used millions of pounds of perchlorate, contaminating water and food supplies. At the same time, the Pentagon has been blocking EPA efforts to address perchlorate pollution, and in the last few years it intensified its campaign in the face of new revelations about perchlorate's harmful effects. In January 2002, when EPA recommended that 1 ppb was the safe level in drinking water, the Pentagon and its contractors lobbied to stop the assessment process and-with the help of the White House-wrested the assessment from EPA and handed it to NAS in 2003. Then the White House, the Pentagon and its contractors went to work to influence the NAS process. NRDC sued the White House, Defense Department and EPA in March 2004 after they ignored more than a dozen Freedom of Information Act requests, refusing to disclose any records documenting their campaign to steamroll NAS or details of the perchlorate problem. In response to the suit, the White House and the two agencies recently provided about 30 boxes of documents to NRDC, but are still withholding thousands of other records-including virtually all the key papers documenting White House and Pentagon efforts to influence NAS. However, they were required by court order to issue a Vaughn Index describing each of the withheld documents. This index reveals an extraordinary level of White House and Pentagon effort to limit the scope of NAS' inquiry and select the panelists, as well as collaboration with DOD contractors to pressure the panel. Scientists at the EPA, in state agencies, and in academia have concluded that very low levels of perchlorate threaten fetusus' and infants' health. The NAS panel's recommendation for a safe level is based on industry studies that fed perchlorate to a small number of healthy adults for a short time. Those studies tell us little about how perchlorate can harm fetuses or infants, or harm adults over a longer period of time (particularly millions of Americans with thyroid problems or who are iodine deficient). Studies of animals, also funded by the industry, showed that perchlorate may cause abnormal brain development in young rodents, but accepting the arguments of the Pentagon and industry, the academy said more studies are needed to prove that these same effects would occur in infants and children. Still, in an implicit nod to the possible effects of perchlorate on babies, the NAS panel
Re: [Biofuel] Let Them Eat Rocket Fuel
Appal Energy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.tompaine.com/articles/let_them_eat_rocket_fuel.php Let Them Eat Rocket Fuel Erik D. Olson January 27, 2005 The fact that there's a rocket fuel additive called perchlorate in your water is bad enough. What's worse is the fact that the Bush administration likely manipulated the National Academy of Sciences to designate a lax perchlorate standard. The National Resources Defense Council sued the White House, Defense Department and EPA to release documents relating to perchlorate contamination and the NAS. What they found was evidence of an elaborate campaign designed to downplay the hazards of a dangerous chemical.snip How would perchlorate be removed from drinking water? Simple or complex process? Inexpensive or expensive? 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! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' ___ 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] Let Them Eat Rocket Fuel
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/let_them_eat_rocket_fuel.php Let Them Eat Rocket Fuel Erik D. Olson January 27, 2005 The fact that there's a rocket fuel additive called perchlorate in your water is bad enough. What's worse is the fact that the Bush administration likely manipulated the National Academy of Sciences to designate a lax perchlorate standard. The National Resources Defense Council sued the White House, Defense Department and EPA to release documents relating to perchlorate contamination and the NAS. What they found was evidence of an elaborate campaign designed to downplay the hazards of a dangerous chemical. Erik D. Olsen is a senior attorney at the National Resources Defense Council specializing in safe drinking water issues. He is the national coordinator of the Campaign for Safe and Affordable Drinking Water, a coalition of more than 300 public interest groups dedicated to improved drinking water protection. More than 20 million Americans have rocket fuel in their drinking water. That's right. Rocket fuel. It's also likely in your milk. And in your lettuce, too, because farmers out West inadvertently use rocket-fuel-contaminated water to irrigate their crops. You might not think that's a good thing. Scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency didn't, either. Especially since a toxic salt in rocket fuel, called perchlorate, can harm the thyroid and may disrupt fetal and newborn brain development. In 2002, EPA proposed a safe level in drinking water of only 1 part per billion. That's equivalent to half a teaspoon of perchlorate in an Olympic-size swimming pool. The Pentagon and its contractors-who have polluted food and drinking water across the country-argued that 200 parts per billion is safe. Earlier this month, a National Academy of Sciences panel issued a report finding that on a per body-weight basis, more perchlorate can be tolerated than the EPA had concluded-but still far less than what the Pentagon and its corporate pals had claimed. Why was NAS' conclusion higher than EPA's? Perhaps NAS was responding to enormous pressure from the White House, the Defense Department, and defense contractors. According to government documents recently obtained by the Natural Resources Defense Council, they collaborated in a backroom campaign to try to strong-arm the academy and manipulate the report. Despite this campaign, the panel did conclude that low levels of perchlorate exposure may cause health problems, and that fetuses are at particular risk. For decades, the Defense Department and its contractors have carelessly used millions of pounds of perchlorate, contaminating water and food supplies. At the same time, the Pentagon has been blocking EPA efforts to address perchlorate pollution, and in the last few years it intensified its campaign in the face of new revelations about perchlorate's harmful effects. In January 2002, when EPA recommended that 1 ppb was the safe level in drinking water, the Pentagon and its contractors lobbied to stop the assessment process and-with the help of the White House-wrested the assessment from EPA and handed it to NAS in 2003. Then the White House, the Pentagon and its contractors went to work to influence the NAS process. NRDC sued the White House, Defense Department and EPA in March 2004 after they ignored more than a dozen Freedom of Information Act requests, refusing to disclose any records documenting their campaign to steamroll NAS or details of the perchlorate problem. In response to the suit, the White House and the two agencies recently provided about 30 boxes of documents to NRDC, but are still withholding thousands of other records-including virtually all the key papers documenting White House and Pentagon efforts to influence NAS. However, they were required by court order to issue a Vaughn Index describing each of the withheld documents. This index reveals an extraordinary level of White House and Pentagon effort to limit the scope of NAS' inquiry and select the panelists, as well as collaboration with DOD contractors to pressure the panel. Scientists at the EPA, in state agencies, and in academia have concluded that very low levels of perchlorate threaten fetusus' and infants' health. The NAS panel's recommendation for a safe level is based on industry studies that fed perchlorate to a small number of healthy adults for a short time. Those studies tell us little about how perchlorate can harm fetuses or infants, or harm adults over a longer period of time (particularly millions of Americans with thyroid problems or who are iodine deficient). Studies of animals, also funded by the industry, showed that perchlorate may cause abnormal brain development in young rodents, but accepting the arguments of the Pentagon and industry, the academy said more studies are needed to prove that these same effects would occur in infants and children. Still, in an
