Re: [Biofuel] Multitude -was (Radiation Ovens, the Proven Dangers of Microwaves)
Joe...what reading do you suggest regarding neural networks? Thanks. Mike DuPree - Original Message - From: Joe Street To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 4:01 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Multitude -was (Radiation Ovens, the Proven Dangers of Microwaves) Hey Robert; The manifold interests is not a flaw but a FEATURE of the multitude. You're not getting it. It seems like a flaw if you are thinking in terms of conventional ideas of organization. Do some reading on neural networks because it is something quite radically different from what you are thinking. Perhaps you should check out the book. But going to your example, did you notice that the big oil feild in Kuwait hit peak recently? Well talk about fuel prices raising this will be an incentive when the impact trickles into the farmer's bottom line and his practices and pertochemicals use cannot be sustained any longer. Systemic attitudes will run smack into objective realities and there will be a shift in incentives. Multitude offers a radically different and truely democratic way for things to proceed. Joe robert and benita rabello wrote: Joe Street wrote: Hi Robert; If I could comment on this, I don't think it is as bleak as you indicate with the mushroom clouds. big snip for the sake of brevity Interesting, but the flaw I see is this one: The network to which you refer is not a singular, unified entity, but rather, a manifold collection of groups with diverging interests. There are certainly parts of that network who are actively working for positive change, but the parts of that network that are devoted to sustaining the status quo are VERY large. It's not just the power brokers themselves that are the problem--it's a disease that impacts all of the underlying participants, too. I used my sister as an example to Keith--a woman who has been hearing me talk about the dangers we're discussing for nearly 40 years, with absolutely NO impact! As an example of how pervasive this is, I heard a collection of interviews while listening to NPR this morning. Steve Inskeep spoke to people from Illinois, Indiana and Ohio concerning their views for the upcoming Congressional session. Nearly every one interviewed complained about gas and diesel prices, suggesting that the solution to the problem is to drill for oil in Alaska. None of these people live in Alaska. None of these people understand how insignificant the Alaskan reserves are when compared to overall US demand. Not a single soul interviewed this morning thought that we should fundamentally change our energy use paradigm. My pessimism stems from an understanding that the VAST majority of people are unwilling to alter their behavior, or change their lifestyle, because--as you rightfully point out--there is no incentive for them to do so. (At least, no incentive that they are able, or willing, to understand.) One man, a farmer, said that the only solution would entail raising gas prices high enough to discourage what he called recreational driving. Isn't that nice? He's not willing to adjust his farming techniques. He's not willing to stop using petrochemical fertilizers, or parcel out his farm into smaller pieces so that he doesn't have to burn so much diesel fuel in preparing his soil, planting and harvesting his monocrop fields. He doesn't want to move into biodynamic agriculture. He doesn't want a mixed farm. He wants recreational drivers to take the brunt of the pain so that he can keep on doing what he's always done. He's obviously not a recreational driver when he drives his combine around the countryside, harvesting corn for the hogs of America to eat. He's feeding the world, and he's got a RIGHT to do so! This kind of attitude is systemic. My comments concerning the mushroom clouds reflect a natural consequence of this unwillingness to act BEFORE a crisis hits. When Mr. Bush said: The American way of life is not negotiable, he was merely reflecting the opinion of the vast majority of people to whom you also refer. Our collective attitudes are ticking off a whole sea of humanity--people who live in other places on earth--and many of them see our world through a very different lens than we do. Some of them consider us infidels and think we all ought to die, and many of us think the same way of them. (Sadly, this kind of hatred is often fomented in the name of God, too!) If the only solution involves extracting resources at a breakneck pace, and that solution leads to endless misery heaped upon the rest of the world's people, how long will it be before the rest of the world's people rise up and say Enough! ? How will the rest of the world compell us to stop exploiting resources and stop throwing our military might around? Will we let them shut down our economy? Will
Re: [Biofuel] Water Powered Engine / Electrolysis
Kirk McLoren wrote: Fuel cells of 50% efficiency can be purchased now. Really? Where? ___ 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] We're all wrong
Temperature is supposed to hit 10 degrees C tomorrow which is roughly 20 degrees above normal for this time of year in the area I live. But then there's this.ah news; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fu32oKEkcAcmode=relatedsearch= ROFL...gasp.choke Joe ___ 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] Save the Humans!
http://eatthestate.org/11-09/SaveHumans.htm Save the Humans! (January 4, 2007) Save the Humans! by Colin Wright It is no exaggeration to say that we are facing the largest human crisis since at least the nuclear arms race. Of course, instead of building up nuclear warheads, we are building up carbon dioxide. But because global warming is a slow, drawn out affair, we are the proverbial sedentary frog in the warming pot. We are programmed to respond to immediate, physical needs and threats. Future-planning, race issues aside, is not our strong point (as Jared Diamond warned us in Collapse). But the global warming crisis is linked with another that will influence solutions: resource depletion on a small planet. How we react to such crises will determine whether the Earth will be able to support large numbers of our species. These crises won't be solved by any particular strategy or agreements between nations. They won't be solved by moderate lifestyle changes among the peoples of the wealthy nations. They won't be solved by changes in human consciousness that prioritize conflict resolution over militarism. They won't even be solved by new cooperative economic arrangements that minimize greed and over-consumption. If we are to survive in anything like the current numbers we will need all of these things to happen and more. The chances of even one or two of these partial solutions happening is small. But for all of them to happen is surely utopian thinking of the most deluded kind. Yet the biggest utopian illusion of all is that there is no real problem at all, that the market and the status quo will solve everything. It's much easier to bury our heads in the sand than to contemplate the challenges that lie ahead. But things will have to change, and change relatively soon. In a matter of decades. First, according to James Hansen, probably the most respected scientist on global climate change, we have 10 years to come up with and start enacting a comprehensive plan to cut carbon emissions by substantial amounts, say 70 percent. Given the power and reach of Big Oil and Coal, how likely is this to happen? Yes, the new Congress will pass some cosmetic legislation. But given what happened to Jimmy Carter in the 70s, what president would dare tell the American people the cheap-oil American Dream is going to end? Secondly, resource depletion is raising its ugly head in terms of Peak Oil and Gas. The exact dates of the half-way points of extraction don't matter. (Conventional oil, the easy-to-get stuff, could already have peaked.) What matters more is their inevitability and the lack of feasible alternatives. Once those peaks hit, decline rates will start at (conservatively) two percent per year. If we try to replace the oil and gas with coal we will fry the planet. The lag time to build new nuclear plants is over a decade (even if they could be financed). Wind and solar currently make up less than one percent of our energy budget. Only a war-time effort could double that percentage each year when the shortfall starts to appear. That energy gap will be felt in escalating fuel prices and electricity blackouts. That in turn threatens the whole global economic system which traditionally goes into recession after an oil spike. Only an international agreement, such as an Oil Depletion Protocol, could distribute the remaining oil equitably. This new post-Cold-War period is dubbed the Post-Abundance era by respected political scientist Michael Klare. It is a time of heightened international tensions with increasing probabilities of more resource wars, the two Gulf Wars perhaps being preludes to larger conflicts. What do you think the American people will demand of Venezuela or Nigeria or Iran once the lights go out, given the venal exploitation of xenophobia by politicians? Finally, let's say by some miracle green capitalism saves us. A new renewable energy bonanza staves off the worst of global warming and peak oil. The global economy rebounds. A new international order brokers agreements that divide up the remaining energy and mineral resources of the planet equitably. Well, that economic system is still driven by growth that churns natural resources into objects that are made desirable by advertising and marketing forces. Does anyone think that such a system is sustainable given that the peaks in oil and gas will be followed (or preceded) by peaks in metals like copper and uranium, agricultural water, fertilizer and grains, and so on? How much topsoil or rainforest do you think will be left in a century? How about commercial fisheries, which were recently projected to collapse by mid-century? Only about 20 percent of the world lives at first-world material levels. Don't those other five billion people want our lifestyles? What about the three billion more people projected by mid-century? Yet free market fundamentalism and neo-liberalism are
[Biofuel] What's In Your Milk?
http://www.world-wire.com/news/0701030001.html What's In Your Milk? An Exposé of Industry and Government Cover-Up on the DANGERS of the Genetically Engineered (rBGH) Milk You're Drinking CHICAGO, Illinois, January 3, 2007 --/WORLD-WIRE/-- Dr. Samuel S. Epstein, professor emeritus of environmental medicine at the University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health and world renowned author, has announced the publication of his new book, What's in Your Milk?, a powerful exposé of the dangers of Monsanto's genetically engineered (rBGH) milk, and the company's no-holds-barred conspiracy to suppress this information. rBGH (recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone) is a genetically engineered, potent variant of the natural growth hormone produced by cows. Manufactured by Monsanto, it is sold to dairy farmers under the trade name POSILAC. Injection of this hormone forces cows to increase their milk production by about 10%. Monsanto has stated that about one third of dairy cows are in herds where the hormone is used. Monsanto, supported by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), insist that rBGH milk is indistinguishable from natural milk, and that it is safe for consumers. This is blatantly false: * rBGH makes cows sick. Monsanto has been forced to admit to about 20 toxic effects, including mastitis, on its Posilac label. * rBGH milk is contaminated by pus, due to the mastitis commonly induced by rBGH, and antibiotics used to treat the mastitis. * rBGH milk is chemically, and nutritionally different than natural milk. * Milk from cows injected with rBGH is contaminated with the hormone, traces of which are absorbed through the gut into the blood. * rBGH milk is supercharged with high levels of a natural growth factor (IGF-1), which is readily absorbed through the gut. * Excess levels of IGF-1 have been incriminated as a cause of breast, colon, and prostate cancers. * IGF-1 blocks natural defense mechanisms against early submicroscopic cancers. rBGH factory farms pose a major threat to the viability of small dairy farms. rBGH enriches Monsanto, while posing dangers, without any benefits, to consumers, especially in view of the current national surplus of milk. Of still greater concern, based on 37 published scientific studies as detailed in the book, excess levels of IGF-1 in rBGH milk pose major risks of breast, colon and prostate cancers. The introduction to What's in Your Milk? by Ben Cohen, Co-founder of Ben Jerry's Ice Cream, with a Foreword by Jeffrey M. Smith, author of the bestseller Seeds of Deception Many prominent experts in the environmental field have endorsed the new book including Congressman John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Democrat, House Judiciary Committee, Mark Achbar, Executive Producer of the multiple prize-winning documentary The Corporation, Ronnie Cummins, National Director, Organic Consumers Association, and Dr. Joseph Mercola, founder of the world's most visited natural health website. The book is a unique resource on rBGH milk. It presents Dr. Epstein's trailblazing scientific publications since 1989, which have played a major role in influencing other nations, including Canada, 24 European nations, Norway, Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan to ban rBGH milk. The book also presents: the author's editorials and letters to major newspapers, and correspondence with the FDA, Congressman John Conyers, and other key members of Congress and the Senate. Epstein also details evidence of interlocking conflicts of interest between Monsanto and the White House, the American Medical Association and American Cancer Society. He also details evidence of Monsanto's white collar crime; the suppression and manipulation of information on the veterinary and public health dangers of rBGH milk; and evidence of Monsanto's Hit Squad, which attempted to stifle and discredit him. Of compelling interest is the story behind Fox Television's firing of Jane Akre, a veteran journalist, following her in-depth interview on rBGH with Dr. Epstein, his subsequent day-long deposition by Monsanto on her behalf, her subsequent litigation against Fox, and Fox's successful counter suit. Monsanto's corporate recklessness, compounded by FDA's complicity and refusal to require labeling of rBGH milk, more than justify the rejection of any assurances of its safety. Of further interest is the critical relevance of this information to the ongoing growing concerns and debate on genetically engineered foods, including irrefutable evidence discrediting the trust us safety assurances of Monsanto, and other industries. The book also presents resource materials, including listings of national and international anti-biotech, public health, veterinary and animal rights activist groups. Also listed are rBGH-free U.S. dairy producers, such as Horizon Organic, and Swiss Valley Farms. What's In Your Milk's critical message to consumers is, BOYCOTT rBGH HORMONAL
[Biofuel] Fuelling a Food Crisis: The impact of peak oil on food security
FULL REPORT: Fuelling a Food Crisis (PDF 550KB) http://snipurl.com/16kik --- http://www.energybulletin.net/24319.html Fuelling a Food Crisis: The impact of peak oil on food security | EnergyBulletin.net | Peak Oil News Clearinghouse Published on 3 Jan 2007 by carolinelucasmep.org.uk. Archived on 3 Jan 2007. Fuelling a Food Crisis: The impact of peak oil on food security by Caroline Lucas MEP, Andy Jones and Colin Hines DWINDLING oil stocks and EU trade and energy policies threaten food price hikes - and could cause the UK to be vulnerable to food shortages for the first time since the Second World War, according to a new report by Green Party Euro-MP Caroline Lucas. The report calls on the Government to establish a Royal Commission on Food Security to examine the issue - and for the UK 's Competition Commission to consider its findings in its ongoing investigation of the supermarkets' dominance of the food retailing sector. From the introduction to the report: Introduction When the price of oil climbed above $50/barrel in late 2004, public attention began to focus on the adequacy of world oil supplies - and specifically on when production would peak and begin to decline. Analysts are far from a consensus on this issue, but several prominent ones now believe that the oil peak is imminent. 1 US Department of Energy, 2005 Over recent months, there has been much speculation about the causes of higher oil prices, and over the likelihood of whether or not they will continue. Commentary has focused on the geopolitical instability in the Middle East; increasing dependence on Russia; governments in Latin America retaking control of their oil industries; and supply bottle necks such as refining capacity. The geological constraints on future energy supply, known as peak oil - the point at which oil production stops rising and begins its inevitable long-term decline - have received much less attention, however. Yet while the majority of constraints on access to oil could potentially be overcome through political or economic means, the geological reality of ever-dwindling fossil-fuel supplies is non-negotiable. While it has taken 145 years to consume half of the 2-2.5 trillion barrels of conventional oil supplies generally regarded as the total available, it is likely that, given the huge increases of demand from China and India in particular, the other half will be largely consumed within the next 40 years. Some 98% of global crude oil comes from 45 nations, over half of which may already have peaked in oil production, including seven of the 11 OPEC nations. Major oil field discoveries fell to zero for the first time in 2003, while the excess capacity held by OPEC nations has dwindled, from an average of 30% to about 1% of global demand today.2 World oil and gas production is declining at an average of 4-6% a year, while demand is growing at 2-3% a year. The implications of this, for every aspect of our lives today, are overwhelming. Some analysis has begun on the impacts on our transport systems, and on how we heat our homes. Very little has so far focused on the implications for our food systems. This report makes the case that, unless we take urgent action, as oil security deteriorates, so too will food security. It is fast becoming the case that decisions made by government departments of energy, on whether to continue promoting fossil fuels or to shift to renewable energy sources, could have a greater effect on long-term food security than any actions taken by departments of agriculture. The amount of energy is concentrated in even a small amount of oil or gas is extraordinary. A barrel of oil contains the energy-equivalent of almost 25,000 hours of human labour. A single gallon of petrol contains the energy-equivalent of 500 hours of human labour. And across the world, food production systems make use of this stored energy from fossil fuels on a massive scale. The industrialisation of farming accelerated dramatically in industrialised countries after World War Two, and began in many poorer countries as a result of the Green Revolution of the 1950s and 1960s. These trends transformed food production around the globe, with world grain harvests increasing by 250%. Yet this reliance on fossil fuels - in the form of fertilisers (which accounts for around a third of agricultural energy consumption), pesticides, and hydrocarbon-fuelled farm machinery and irrigation systems - means that industrialised farming consumes 50 times the energy input of traditional agriculture; in the most extreme cases, energy consumption by agriculture has increased 100 fold or more. It has been estimated, for example, that 95% of all of our food products require the use of oil.3 Just to farm a single cow and deliver it to market requires 6 barrels of oil, enough to drive a car from New York to Los Angeles.4 This report details the extent to which 21st century
Re: [Biofuel] Water Powered Engine / Electrolysis
Comparison of Fuel Cell Technologies Fuel Cell Type Common Electrolyte Operating Temperature System Output Efficiency Applications Advantages Disadvantages Polymer Electrolyte Membrane (PEM)* Solid organic polymer poly-perfluorosulfonic acid 50 - 100°C 122 - 212°F 1kW 250kW 50-60% electric Back-up power Portable power Small distributed generation Transportation Solid electrolyte reduces corrosion electrolyte management problems Low temperature Quick start-up Requires expensive catalysts High sensitivity to fuel impurities Low temperature waste heat Alkaline (AFC) Aqueous solution of potassium hydroxide soaked in a matrix 90 - 100°C 194 - 212°F 10kW 100kW 60-70% electric Military Space Cathode reaction faster in alkaline electrolyte so high performance Expensive removal of CO2 from fuel and air streams required Phosphoric Acid (PAFC) Liquid phosphoric acid soaked in a matrix 150 - 200°C 302 - 392°F 50kW 1MW (250kW module typical) 80 to 85% overall with combined heat and power (CHP (36-42% electric) Distributed generation High efficiency Increased tolerance to impurities in hydrogen Suitable for CHP Requires platinum catalysts Low current and power Large size/weight Molten Carbonate (MCFC) Liquid solution of lithium, sodium, and/or potassium carbonates, soaked in a matrix 600 - 700°C 1112 - 1292°F 1kW 1MW (250kW module typical) 85% overall with CHP (60% electric) Electric utility Large distributed generation High efficiency Fuel flexibility Can use a variety of catalysts Suitable for CHP High temperature speeds corrosion and breakdown of cell components Complex electrolyte management Slow start-up Solid Oxide (SOFC) Solid zirconium oxide to which a small amount of yttira is added 650 - 1000°C 1202 - 1832°F 5kW 3MW 85% overall with CHP (60% electric) Auxiliary power Electric utility Large distributed generation High efficiency Fuel flexibility Can use a variety of catalysts Solid electrolyte reduces electrolyte management problems Suitable for CHP High temperature enhances corrosion and breakdown of cell components Slow start-up http://www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/fuelcells/fc_types.html pdf link at bottom of page Kirk Chip Mefford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kirk McLoren wrote: Fuel cells of 50% efficiency can be purchased now. Really? Where? ___ __ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] What's In Your Milk?
Or google somatic cell count and milk Keith Addison wrote: http://www.world-wire.com/news/0701030001.html What's In Your Milk? An Exposé of Industry and Government Cover-Up on the DANGERS of the Genetically Engineered (rBGH) Milk You're Drinking CHICAGO, Illinois, January 3, 2007 --/WORLD-WIRE/-- Dr. Samuel S. Epstein, professor emeritus of environmental medicine at the University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health and world renowned author, has announced the publication of his new book, What's in Your Milk?, a powerful exposé of the dangers of Monsanto's genetically engineered (rBGH) milk, and the company's no-holds-barred conspiracy to suppress this information. rBGH (recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone) is a genetically engineered, potent variant of the natural growth hormone produced by cows. Manufactured by Monsanto, it is sold to dairy farmers under the trade name POSILAC. Injection of this hormone forces cows to increase their milk production by about 10%. Monsanto has stated that about one third of dairy cows are in herds where the hormone is used. Monsanto, supported by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), insist that rBGH milk is indistinguishable from natural milk, and that it is safe for consumers. This is blatantly false: * rBGH makes cows sick. Monsanto has been forced to admit to about 20 toxic effects, including mastitis, on its Posilac label. * rBGH milk is contaminated by pus, due to the mastitis commonly induced by rBGH, and antibiotics used to treat the mastitis. * rBGH milk is chemically, and nutritionally different than natural milk. * Milk from cows injected with rBGH is contaminated with the hormone, traces of which are absorbed through the gut into the blood. * rBGH milk is supercharged with high levels of a natural growth factor (IGF-1), which is readily absorbed through the gut. * Excess levels of IGF-1 have been incriminated as a cause of breast, colon, and prostate cancers. * IGF-1 blocks natural defense mechanisms against early submicroscopic cancers. † rBGH factory farms pose a major threat to the viability of small dairy farms. † rBGH enriches Monsanto, while posing dangers, without any benefits, to consumers, especially in view of the current national surplus of milk. Of still greater concern, based on 37 published scientific studies as detailed in the book, excess levels of IGF-1 in rBGH milk pose major risks of breast, colon and prostate cancers. The introduction to What's in Your Milk? by Ben Cohen, Co-founder of Ben Jerry's Ice Cream, with a Foreword by Jeffrey M. Smith, author of the bestseller Seeds of Deception Many prominent experts in the environmental field have endorsed the new book including Congressman John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Democrat, House Judiciary Committee, Mark Achbar, Executive Producer of the multiple prize-winning documentary The Corporation, Ronnie Cummins, National Director, Organic Consumers Association, and Dr. Joseph Mercola, founder of the world's most visited natural health website. The book is a unique resource on rBGH milk. It presents Dr. Epstein's trailblazing scientific publications since 1989, which have played a major role in influencing other nations, including Canada, 24 European nations, Norway, Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan to ban rBGH milk. The book also presents: the author's editorials and letters to major newspapers, and correspondence with the FDA, Congressman John Conyers, and other key members of Congress and the Senate. Epstein also details evidence of interlocking conflicts of interest between Monsanto and the White House, the American Medical Association and American Cancer Society. He also details evidence of Monsanto's white collar crime; the suppression and manipulation of information on the veterinary and public health dangers of rBGH milk; and evidence of Monsanto's Hit Squad, which attempted to stifle and discredit him. Of compelling interest is the story behind Fox Television's firing of Jane Akre, a veteran journalist, following her in-depth interview on rBGH with Dr. Epstein, his subsequent day-long deposition by Monsanto on her behalf, her subsequent litigation against Fox, and Fox's successful counter suit. Monsanto's corporate recklessness, compounded by FDA's complicity and refusal to require labeling of rBGH milk, more than justify the rejection of any assurances of its safety. Of further interest is the critical relevance of this information to the ongoing growing concerns and debate on genetically engineered foods, including irrefutable evidence discrediting the trust us safety assurances of Monsanto, and other industries. The book also presents resource materials, including listings of national and international anti-biotech, public health, veterinary and animal rights activist groups. Also listed are rBGH-free U.S. dairy producers, such as Horizon Organic, and Swiss Valley Farms. What's In Your Milk's
[Biofuel] Review - The Weather Makers: How Man Is Changing the Climate and What It Means for Life on Earth
Review - The Weather Makers: How Man Is Changing the Climate and What It Means for Life on Earth http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/954/ Get your daily alternative energy news Alternate Energy Resource Network 1000+ news sources-resources updated daily http://www.alternate-energy.net Next Generation Grid http://groups.yahoo.com/group/next_generation_grid/ Alternative Energy Politics http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Alternative_Energy_Politics/ Earth_Rescue_International http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Earth_Rescue_International/ Tomorrow-energy http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tomorrow-energy/ ___ 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] needless to say this got funding from gvt
DNA So Dangerous It Doesn't Exist from the scramble-your-genes dept. posted by samzenpus on Thursday January 04, @05:07 (Biotech) http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/04/0420238 __ 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/
