Re: [Biofuel] shockwaves
Hey- that looks very interesting; it is a kind of reactor that I've seen in some chemistry labs. One word of caution for anyone trying to build this at home: that looks like a high-pressure rig at the left end. Mess up with something like that and you can seriously injure yourself. I wish the site had more info about operation and how the input oil and alchohol are blended with the catalyst - that would tell you more about its operation. I. Peter Solem --- Kelly Parker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are any of you familiar with this? It looks very interesting. I would think that it could be built using an old centrifical pump housing with some modification. http://www.advancedbiofuel.net/ The mothership site has a video of the inside of the machine. http://www.hydrodynamics.com/index.htm Kelly ___ 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/ __ 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] [SPAM] Re: The Age of Autism: Hot potato on the Hill
Vaccines - a very complex topic. The idea is that by exposing your immune system to dead bacterial cells or to disrupted viruses (much smaller then bacteria) you can 'train' your immune system to rapidly recognize and fight off a foreign invasion. If you accidentally inject yourself with live cells or virus, you have a problem. So quality control is critical, and there isn't much money to be made by pharmaceuticals in vaccine production. Sloppily-produced vaccines are a real threat. In the case of rapidly mutating viruses (like HIV) vaccines can be useless. Vaccines did put a stop to polio, which was a great boon to human health. Secondly, thimerosol is an organomercury compound (ethylmercury is a portion of the compound); unlike inorganic mercury, organic mercury goes right through cell membranes (this is why it is a good preservative). However, inside a growing human cell it can bind to proteins and disrupt all kinds of critical developmental processes. For example, our nervous system makes a lot of cell-cell contacts with our immune system (something modern science knowns almost nothing about, but which is obviously important). Disruption of critical developmental pathways by mercury poisoning has definitely been observed. Finally, some individuals are more sensitive to mercury poisoning then others; variations in things like liver biochemistry are responsible for this. Thus, mercury preservatives for infant vaccines are a very very bad idea; the link to autism is probably very real. That's likely why they were phased out; pharmaceutical companies are likely trying to bury the issue because they are afraid of lawsuits. I. Peter Solem --- robert luis rabello [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gary L. Green wrote: With slight variations, A child was born, normal, healthy, 10 on the APGAR scale. Then came the first vaccination. Something happened either a fever, convulsion, something. Then out the other end of the vaccination came a damaged child. How often does this happen? Obviously a statistically insignificant amount but it's only statistically insignificant when it isn't your child. This may be true. But I also remember polio, whooping cough and other nasty, debilitating diseases for which there was no cure and no effective treatment before vaccination. If there are demonstrable problems with the ingredients in our vaccines, then let's do something to change the ingredients. Doing away with vaccinations will only return us to the bad old days BEFORE vaccinations were available. My daughter? Oh, I've doomed her to certain death by never vaccinating her here in germ infested Malaysia. Eleven years plus and going strong. Seems to get sick less often than her vaccinated counterparts. Just my quack delusional view of the world, I know. She's lucky she didn't grow up among a large population of other children who likewise DIDN'T get vaccinated. I have spent many years in classrooms and I have YET to see a child adversely impacted by vaccinations. My own children have been vaccinated and routinely get their booster shots. Neither of them suffer from health issues or learning problems, nor have any children in my extended family. Now the sample population from whence I derive my anecdotal evidence is vanishingly small. Perhaps my experience is limited to healthy children. But I remember three children living in my neighborhood who'd been stricken with polio when I was a child, and that was also a very small population sample. I only know ONE person who has contracted the disease since then, but he lived in India as a small boy and DIDN'T get vaccinated. (He subsequently became the bass player for the Canadian band Bass is Base, and I've known few musicians who are more talented!) There has to be a better solution to this issue than either blithely believing every vaccine is harmless, or espousing a desire to rid the world of vaccines altogether. robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.newadventure.ca Ranger Supercharger Project Page http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/ ___ 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/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [Biofuel] Antarctic Air is Warming Faster Than Rest of World
For those interested in climate change (one of the best reasons to promote sustainable agriculture, biofuels, and renewable electricity) take a look at http://www.realclimate.org very up to date with great analysis I. Peter Solem --- Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Also: http://enn.com/aff.html?id=1196 2005 Hottest Year On Record March 28, 2006 - By Earth Policy Institute -- http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2111772,00.html Published on Friday, March 31, 2006 by the Times/UK Antarctic Air is Warming Faster Than Rest of World New finding could have implications for sea level rises by Mark Henderson AIR temperatures above the entire frozen continent of Antarctica have risen three times faster than the rest of the world during the past 30 years. While it is well established that temperatures are increasing rapidly in the Antarctic Peninsula, the land tongue that protrudes towards South America, the trend has been harder to confirm over the continent as a whole. Now analysis of weather balloon data by scientists at the British Antarctic Survey (BAS) has shown that not only are the lower reaches of the Antarctic atmosphere warming, but that they are doing so at the fastest rate observed anywhere on Earth. Temperatures in the troposphere - the lowest 8km (5 miles) of the atmosphere - have increased by between 0.5C and 0.7 C (0.9F and 1.3F) per decade over the past 30 years. This signature of climate change is three times stronger than the average observed around the world, suggesting that global warming is having an uneven impact and that it could be greater for Antarctica. It is already known that temperatures in the Arctic are rising steeply, but with the exception of the Antarctic peninsula, the data for the southern ice-cap are more mixed. Although the Antarctic peninsula has warmed by more than 2.5C during the past 50 years, most surface measurements suggest that there have been no pronounced temperature changes elsewhere on the continent, while some have indicated a small cooling effect. The new research, led by John Turner, of the BAS, shows that the air above the surface of Antarctica is definitely warming, in ways that are not predicted by climate models and that cannot yet be explained. The results are published today in the journal Science. The rapid surface warming of the Antarctic Peninsula and the enhanced global warming signal over the whole continent shows the complexity of climate change, Dr Turner said. Greenhouses gases could be having a bigger impact in Antarctica than across the rest of the world and we don't understand why. The warming above the Antarctic could have implications for snowfall across the Antarctic and sea level rise. Current climate model simulations don't reproduce the observed warming, pointing to weaknesses in their ability to represent the Antarctic climate system. Our next step is to try to improve the models. The weather balloons from which the data has been collected have been launched daily from many of Antarctica's research stations since 1957. These balloons carry instrument packages known as radiosondes, which measure temperature, humidity and winds at altitudes of 20km and beyond. The radiosonde data showed a pronounced warming effect throughout the troposphere during the winter months, while the stratosphere above cooled appreciably. There is increasing evidence that greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide are creating a blanket about the Earth that traps heat at lower levels, warming the troposphere and surface, while cooling the stratosphere above. The study is the third to be published this month to suggest that the effects of global warming on Antarctica are likely to be more pronounced than has often been predicted. Research has indicated that the melting of the Greenland ice-cap in the Arctic could produce sea level rises that destabilise Antarctic ice-shelves, and Nasa satellite data have shown the internal Antarctic ice-sheets to be thinning. © Copyright 2006 Times Newspapers Ltd. ___ 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/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___
Re: [Biofuel] Donald Rumsfeld Rakes in $5 Million For Tamiflu
If you are interested in this topic, take a look at this link http://dissidentscientist.blogspot.com/2006/04/avian-bird-flu-tamiflu-and.html (and the links included in the article) I. Peter Solem --- Chip Mefford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: D. Mindock wrote: As shares skyrocket as a result of the bird flu hoax, Do you know for a fact that the H5x virus is a hoax? ___ 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/ __ 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] David Ray Griffin speaks on facts of 9/11.
How to sort out information from disinformation? Important issue for anyone trying to work off web sites - but also important for everyone, everywhere. How do you know whether any claim is true or not? What if you base your start-up sustainable biofuel business on poor information and bad technology, spend a few thousand dollars, and wind up with nothing - or worse, a huge mess on your hands? Here is a good place to begin thinking about these issues: http://www.library.jhu.edu/researchhelp/general/evaluating/counterfeit.html Note: I'd be pretty skeptical about a lot of the 9/11 'conspiracy theories'; many of them are so blatantly ridiculous that the only 'conspiracy theory' that makes sense to me is that they are deliberately put out there by some government PR agency trying to make Bush administration critics seem 'crazy'. As they say, caveat emptor, or, consider the facts carefully and trust your own reasoning abilities. __ 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] Donald Rumsfeld Rakes in $5 Million For Tamiflu
Well, I don't think it's a hoax in terms of the danger to poultry - this could wipe out a large section of agriculture; there's no doubt about that. However, the jump to humans, and then to human-human transmission, is a lot less clear; it could have happened 20 years ago, or it could happen 20 years from now. What is a hoax is the idea that stockpiling Tamiflu from Rumsfeld's company, Gilead, will solve the problem. I'd be more worried about drug-resistant tuberculosis and SARS ; the answer to that, and to any other epidemic, is good public health networks. --- Chip Mefford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I. S. wrote: If you are interested in this topic, take a look at this link http://dissidentscientist.blogspot.com/2006/04/avian-bird-flu-tamiflu-and.html (and the links included in the article) I. Peter Solem Hi Peter; Thanks kindly for the link, and the links to the links, But there isn't anything there to indicate that H5N1 is a hoax. I called a friend who works over at the NIH, who has friends at the CDC, and asked her what she thought about the concept of H5N1 being an elaborate hoax, after calming down (the question really rankled) she pointed me at; http://www.who.int/csr/disease/avian_influenza/country/en/ and indicated (in so many words) that she did not feel that characterising H5N1 as a hoax was either accurate or even appropriate. Personally; I am not an epidemiologist, nor am I likely to ever become one. I have to rely on other folks for expertise. Someone states flatly that the bird flu (H5N1) is a hoax, they should be ready to back that assertion up. Now, if this had read; Donald Rumsfeld Rakes in $5 Million For Tamiflu; As shares skyrocket as a result of sensationalised, almost fictional coverage of the spread of H5N1 in the press, Rumsfeld collects the cash. Or something like that, I've have bought it. But it didn't. --- Chip Mefford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: D. Mindock wrote: As shares skyrocket as a result of the bird flu hoax, Do you know for a fact that the H5x virus is a hoax? ___ 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/ __ 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 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/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ 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] off-topic [Hydroponic gardening]
There really is a range of options available; the main thing is to adapt to your own unique circumstances while using as little energy and material as possible. I like the idea of the guy growing in an urban wasteland - real urban renewal, that is. With drip tubing and very well aerated soil (use 50-75% non-absorbant material; perlite or coconut husks can be used) you can grow plants in fairly small containers with daily watering and minimal effort (drip tubing is really optional); note that in this case you have to continually add nutrients to the water since there is little available in the soil material. This is a completely different prospect from a farmer who rotates crops and continually adds manure/seaweed to fallow fields, etc. If you are stuck in a city with no other options, the above strategy minimizes your use of soil, and you don't have to bother will all that hydro equipment. The planting mix can be recycled crop after crop, as well, with maybe a little fresh slow-release organic soil amendment now and then. It all comes down to nutrients - using organic fertilizers is the way to go. You can go to your garden store and buy a bag of earthworm casings, a bag of fish meal and a bag of kelp, mix this up in a huge tank of water, and use that for watering. Experiment with the concentrations to see what works best; often people use way more fertilizer then they need to, which is a waste. Pretty simple, cheap and organic. I do agree that the oil-refinery byproduct chemical fertilizer mixes are best avoided, for many reasons - whether you are gardening on your roof or in an open field. In any case, happy gardening! [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Evergreen Solutions [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Err...not sure where all that's coming from. I'll tell you why hydro's the way for me, since apparently it's so horrible or whatever. My yard is entirely surrounded on all sides by overhead vegitation. No portion of my yard gets more than 2-3 hours of direct sun a day, so hydro lets me use my roof. Sure, I could concoct some elaborate system to carry 50lb containers of soil to my roof just so I could have to worry about the rotting effects it would have on my roof, or I could have some 4 lb containers in a series. As for not sustainable, I was just talking to a fellow the other day who uses seaweed and urine as his only 2 nutrients, growing tomatoes and basil in the cement wasteland that is his lot in whatever major urban metropolitan area he has to call him own. Everybody keeps telling him it's not going to work, and he keeps harvesting a rediculous amount of fruit every year. While I'm sure you understand that he could indeed build a planter in the same space, you also understand that the dirt method involves removing additional topsoil from some other location, bringing it where he lives, and replacing it/fertilizing it every year and/or discarding it. How that's any more sustainable than organic hydro, I don't understand. Actually, much like JTF has international projects to keep people fed, there's a large aquaponics group that helps areas of dense population w/ no or poor soil to have a very inexpensive, non-motorized, system of food production vis-a-vis the fish and vegetables grown in the same location. Anyway, had I 15 acres to farm on, I wouldn't use hydro or even advocate it. However, I don't. There are several other benefits too, like handicapped accessibility and whatnot. And...as for propping up the plant in the soil, sure, some systems involve a growth medium, which for the most part are non-composted organic materials, but there are plenty of other systems that don't use any growth media @ all, like NFT and deep water culture. You'll probably take offense to this, but you seem to read way too much into my posts, as in you assume too much. You're probably thinking I'm all about grow lights and grow rooms and what not. No way! I just like summer based, outdoor systems. I can grow 10 tomatoes in just over 27 square feet, and if I feel like moving inside when it gets cold, I can propogage/clone those tomatoes into infinity simply by taking cuttings and rooting them in water. My water usage is about 1 gallon per week per tomato, my nutrient use is 1lb per 100 gallons of water, and since I have full control over the substrata I have 0 worry about fungi, root bugs, etc, and a simple once a week vinegar/water mix keeps the foliar bugs at bay. I cannot see how that's any harder on ol' Mother Earth than a soil garden, especially comparing final pounds of fruit per square foot. ___ 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):
Re: [Biofuel] [SPAM] Re: Pollution: Where have all the baby boysgone?
Ummm.. China? --- Mike Weaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 4) Girls are more intelligent Then why do they hang out with men? ;-) Hakan Falk wrote: Steve, Well, you know that, 1) Girls live longer than men and are physically superior, except for muscle power (might be a training question) 2) Girls are more resistant to illness 3) Girls survive twice as long as men in a cold water 4) Girls are more intelligent the above are averages and proven facts, so it might be something in it. Hakan At 13:35 06/04/2006, you wrote: You're entitled to your opinion sexist! Steve - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Gary L. Green To: mailto:Biofuel@sustainablelists.orgBiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 1:43 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] [SPAM] Re: Pollution: Where have all the baby boysgone? Just my opinion but girls are better anyway. On 6 Apr 2006, at 07:58, mark manchester wrote: Every year, thousands of British babies who should be boys are born girls. The answer to this mystery could lie in a small town in Canada. Geoffrey Lean reports ___ 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/ __ 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] the end of big biodiesel?
Catalytic Cracker is a term from the petroleum refining business; it is the reason that a barrel of black gunk can be turned into short-chain gasoline hydrocarbons; they rely on an inert solid-state catalyst to 'crack' the gooey long-chain hydrocarbons into shorter molecules. (Those big tower in refineries combine distillation with cracking). Cracking vegetable oil with methanol and lye is also 'catalytic cracking'. In a recent issue of Nature, some Japanese scientists report making a solid state biodiesel catalyst using carbonized sugar (to replace the lye) (really!) - I'll try and find the reference. There are other solid state biodiesel catalysts out there, I believe. --- Bob Carr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: anyone know how a catalytic cracker works? If they are cheaper to run than than the FAME system we all know and love, why aren't we building them instead? Regards Bob - Original Message - From: Doug Foskey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 9:34 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] the end of big biodiesel? So why is no-one doing this already? There must be some underutilised refineries around? regards Doug On Thursday 06 April 2006 3:59, bob allen wrote: I heard a presentation from a researcher at NREL (Pachecko?)at a biomass conference in Little Rock, Arkansas last week. He basically predicted the death of big biodiesel only a few years beyond peak oil. The story goes like this: when global production of crude oil starts to fall significantly, and crude supplies in the us start to fall, the fossil refineries will turn to alternative feedstocks to keep their big catalytic crackers busy. Easier than coal liquids will be the supplementation with lipids. Big oil will buy up every drop of available fat and oil, blend it with crude oil and run it through the refineries. Because large scale catalytic cracking is cheaper than FAME synthesis, they can undercut the price, and drive biodiesel out of the market. ___ 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/ __ 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] off-topic [Hydroponic gardening]
Hi Keith, I completely agree. I was just thinking about the poor guy who had to haul 5-gallon buckets of soil up to the top of his roof. If you had absolutely no other choice( say you lived in a high rise and just had a little window space) the system I described is the friendliest potted-plant system I could come up with. Growing and sustaining a plot of soil is definitely a better way to go. When the first Europeans arrived in the eastern Americas 500 years ago, the locals showed them how to grow corn - take a little fish, stick it in the ground next to the corn seed, and watch the corn take off. Sustaining the soil is at the root of everything, literally. --- Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Peter There really is a range of options available; the main thing is to adapt to your own unique circumstances while using as little energy and material as possible. I like the idea of the guy growing in an urban wasteland - real urban renewal, that is. Urban wastelands the world over are riddled with city farms and greening projects these days, no need to go wrong-tech about it. Lots here: http://journeytoforever.org/cityfarm.html City farms This is quite a nice project: http://journeytoforever.org/garden_con-mexico.html Organic food production in the slums of Mexico City With drip tubing and very well aerated soil (use 50-75% non-absorbant material; perlite or coconut husks can be used) you can grow plants in fairly small containers with daily watering and minimal effort (drip tubing is really optional); note that in this case you have to continually add nutrients to the water since there is little available in the soil material. This is a completely different prospect from a farmer who rotates crops and continually adds manure/seaweed to fallow fields, etc. If you are stuck in a city with no other options, the above strategy minimizes your use of soil, and you don't have to bother will all that hydro equipment. The planting mix can be recycled crop after crop, as well, with maybe a little fresh slow-release organic soil amendment now and then. Why minimise the use of soil? Use soil, make compost, have great crops and no problems. It all comes down to nutrients - using organic fertilizers is the way to go. Sorry to disagree, but nutrients aren't the way to go, whatever the source. Do it organically and you never have to bother about nutrients. It makes little difference if the nutrients are organic or not, nutrient feeding is chemical growing, not organics. You wouldn't expect a guy lying in a hospital bed being fed a nutrient drip to have vibrant health and an invulnerable immune system either. You can go to your garden store and buy a bag of earthworm casings, a bag of fish meal and a bag of kelp, mix this up in a huge tank of water, and use that for watering. Experiment with the concentrations to see what works best; often people use way more fertilizer then they need to, which is a waste. Pretty simple, cheap and organic. Only in origin. Organic growing is a system, what it boils down to is feeding the soil, not the plant. If the soil is healthy the plants look after themselves, much better than you ever can. So-called fertilisers aren't fertilisers, they're just plant nutrients. Organic fertiliser is compost, it's just about the only thing that will reliably fertilise the soil. And it's very easy to make, even in small quantities. No need to buy anything. I do agree that the oil-refinery byproduct chemical fertilizer mixes are best avoided, for many reasons - whether you are gardening on your roof or in an open field. In any case, happy gardening! Indeed, in any case. Best Keith [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Evergreen Solutions [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Err...not sure where all that's coming from. 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/ __ 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] the end of big biodiesel?
I have to point out here, I've encountered just as many dishonest and greedy small businesspeople as I have dishonest and greedy large corporations. I rather work with a large group of ethical and dedicated people, perhaps organized into an employee-owned corporation, then I would with some of the independent biofuel entrepreneurs I've come across. A certain fraction of people in 'green business' just view it as an opportunity to rip trusting people off - that's the sad truth. As they say, measure twice, cut once, and trust your instincts. Peter I. Solem --- Joe Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Except before all that gets turned on the practice and mindset will be status quo which means that the whole industry will be operating on established methods and historical means and techniques. But the end of the petro cycle will entail a huge rise in cost for all of that. Trucking all the bio-oil in to the central refinery will be terribly expensive which also means the new biofuels also will be exhorbitant and will remain so. On the other hand small scale local production will see very little change from what it can be now if it is done sustainably. Small IS beautiful. Joe Zeke Yewdall wrote: Well, assuming this is true... If they are turing all of the biodiesel feedstock into fuel, who cares if there is no biodiesel any more -- isn't the goal of biodiesel to turn bio-feedstocks into fuel. Which sounds like what they would be doing, just via a different method. On 4/5/06, bob allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I heard a presentation from a researcher at NREL (Pachecko?)at a biomass conference in Little Rock, Arkansas last week. He basically predicted the death of big biodiesel only a few years beyond peak oil. The story goes like this: when global production of crude oil starts to fall significantly, and crude supplies in the us start to fall, the fossil refineries will turn to alternative feedstocks to keep their big catalytic crackers busy. Easier than coal liquids will be the supplementation with lipids. Big oil will buy up every drop of available fat and oil, blend it with crude oil and run it through the refineries. Because large scale catalytic cracking is cheaper than FAME synthesis, they can undercut the price, and drive biodiesel out of the market. -- 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/ ___ 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/ __ 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] NYTimes.com: With Big Boost From Sugar Cane, Brazil Is Satisfying Its Fuel Needs
The nice thing about Brazil's ethanol program is the closed-loop cycle thatthey use. The sugar cane is harvested and brought to the mill where it pressed into a sugary syrup and dry mass. The dry mass is burned in efficient double-stage heat-capture boilers (at least in the better plants) to provide all the energy required torun the mill. The syrup is fermented uising high-yield yeast strains to 15-20% ethanol 'cane beer'. This is then distilled to 96% pure ethanol (the azeotrope limit) using energy from burning the dry cane (bargasse). There are a number of methods for taking 96% ethanol to 100% ethanol; 100% ethanol blends well with gasoline or diesel fuel.The waste - ash from burning the cane (phosphate-rich) and yeasty sediment residue (nitrogen-rich) is then trucked right back out to the fields, replenishing the soil and vastly reducing any need for fossil-fuel fertilizers. Crop rotation might also be a good idea. Basically, this is an energy-efficient and environmentally friendly large-scale method of fuel production; it deserves careful study by anyone embarking on such a project. Compare this to the coal-fired ethanol distilleries currently being built for 'economic efficiency' in the Midwestern states - sure it helps stimulate the demand for coal, the dirtiest, lowest-energy, and most climate-damaging of all the fossil fuels.Peter I. Solem Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.___ 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] The Accidental Farmer
I just checked the journeytoforever site on ethanol stills - a FANTASTIC resource! Enough info to set up any kind ofhigh-quality system, with references - Once again I'm amazed at the concentration and quality of information - gracias!Peter I. SolemRon Shirley Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:THIS MIGHT BE USEFUL FOR YOU ETHANOL USERS !--[if !supportEmptyParas]--!--[endif]-- I once saw in an old copy of Mother Earth News where a farmer had a good crop of corn but every one else had a good crop too and the market had taken a dive. He decided to convert his crop to ethanol. He had to go through all sorts of rigmarole to get the permits etc but prevailed in the end. After his mix had worked and the time came to get the ethanol from the mash, he devised a solar still. Using sunlight to extract an ethanol that he then used to run his vehicles and farm equipment. There was water in it already but not so much that it would not work. The still was simplicity itself, with an elevated reservoir with (I think) a Hessian or similar product, to siphon the liquid down a slope (angled to catch the sun). This whole area was covered with glass (like a solar hot water heater) and there were two reservoirs at the bottom. One for the finished mash liquid and another, which collected the alcohol/water mix, which had condensed on the under side of the glass. I imagine that some experimentation would be needed with the flow rate and length of the slope to ensure that there was not too much water in the ethanol. !--[if !supportEmptyParas]--!--[endif]-- !--[if !vml]-- !--[endif]--!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--!--[endif]-- !--[if !supportEmptyParas]--!--[endif]-- !--[if !supportEmptyParas]--!--[endif]-- !--[if !supportEmptyParas]--!--[endif]-- !--[if !supportEmptyParas]--!--[endif]-- !--[if !supportEmptyParas]--!--[endif]-- BLUE; reservoir for mash RED; glass needs to cover the whole thing and be sealed so the ethanol does not get out. !--[if !supportEmptyParas]--GREEN; slope for the liquid to run down. The hessian needs to sit in the top reservoir and go up and over the edge and down the slope. It would probably be best for it to go all the way to the bottom thereby providing a much larger surface area for the mash to absorb heat etc. The crude diagram does not show the two reservoirs at thr bottom.!--[endif]-- !--[if !supportEmptyParas]--He then sold the depleted mash as a stock feed and ended up in front.!--[endif]-- It would be a cheap way to make white lightning !--[if !supportEmptyParas]--!--[endif]-- Ron (Canberra)[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We made most of our ethanol out of rice. We added 20% water and drove our car and truck on it with excellent results. MarilynBiofuel@sustainablelists.org wrote: Sticky/Glutinous rice from the fields makes real good ethanol. If used with and injection of 15 to 20% water it produces much more energy in a tuned engine to the fuel water mix than gas. Why the need to go to other Bio-Fuels? The Ethanol with the water injection would be sufficient to run pumps, generators and the likes as long as the intake to the engine was as short as possible for easy starting.Doug - Original Message - From: "Johnathan Corgan" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 3:24 AM Subject: [Biofuel] The Accidental Farmer I've recently acquired through inheritance about 20 acres of farm land in rural Philippines. It's currently being used for rice and I think some tobacco. My wife's extended family works the land and the operation has now passed into our hands.Being a professional engineer and California-based city boy, I have no clue whatsoever about anything to do with farming. My lifetime agricultural experience is watching seeds sprout in egg carton planters as a child in an elementary school science project.By pure coincidence, I've recently begun experimenting with WVO-based biodiesel production, currently at the "successful 1L batch" stage. In addition, we've thought of building a vacation/retirement home on this land, emphasizing "off the grid" energy--PV, wind, battery-based power leveling, and diesel-generator backup.So all this adds up to a grand opportunity--can the land be made sufficiently productive to support methanol or ethanol based biodiesel manufacture for a small community, for a suitable definition of "small"? My understanding is that the climate is suitable for several different types of oilseed crops, but I don't even know the right questions to ask. I do know, though, that rural Philippines has many interesting logistical issues, not to mention some geopolitical instability and poor infrastructure.I have many ideas, but little understanding of practicalities :-)
Re: [Biofuel] small oil presses, WVO and sustainability
Photovoltaics are pretty sustainable; let me explain why I think so before I get jumped! The original cells made in the fifties at Bell Labs are still generating power today; very long lifetimes exist with well built silicon infrastructure. New third generation silicon technology has the potential to double the output of today's silicon cells.This would mean a big boost for solar PV. For a technological overview: http://www.pv.unsw.edu.au/Research/3gp.aspOf course, microelectronics manufacturing can be polluting - just look at Silicon Valley's host of Superfund sites. PVmanufacturing is definitely not a do-it-at-home endeavor. There is a right way to do the manufacturing; that, by the way, is what government regulations are for. Taking care of the glycerine by-product of home biodiesel synthesis also needs to be done right - dumping it in the local sewer is not a good idea. Take care of your ins and your outs (raw materials and wastes), and try and come up with closed loop systems. Also try and get Pimental to mention sustainable agriculture...Chip Mefford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Zeke Yewdall wrote: one acre of PV will produce enough electricity to run an electric car roughly 1.5 million miles per year... Or alternatively, you could run it 12,000 miles or so with about 300 square feet of PV. Yeah, *but*How sustainable are PV arrays?As much as I like PVs, and i do, I'mnot convinced of their 'green-ness'.Agriculture is pretty adaptable,high tech electronic manufactureand related is a bit less so, I think.___Biofuel mailing listBiofuel@sustainablelists.orghttp://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.orgBiofuel at Journey to Forever:http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.htmlSearch the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.___ 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] [Fwd: [IP] Is the US preparing to bomb Iran?]
Today on the University ofCalifornia,Santa Cruz campus, an organized group of student protestors succeded in shutting down the campus job fair until the military recruiters were forced to leave! One student who was taking photos of police surveillance officers was arrested, but the students surrounded the building he was in and eventually the student was released, apparently without charges. This is just a little thing in practical terms, but a huge thing in symbolic terms. If we keep it up, Bush won't dare bomb Iran (we hope). Waking up is a reality!Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been posting stuff on this here for months, so have a few others, very few people have taken any notice.It is utterly unbelievable that Americans, only now so belatedly waking up with growing fury at how they were lied to and manipulated on the road to the Iraq debacle are actually swallowing the exact same set of lies and manipulations in order to do the same or worse in Iran.What the hell is the matter with you people??? What are you going to do about it? Vote??? Good God, WAKE UP!!!Stop it happening!Now!Damn, thank heavens for Seymour Hersh."Hopefully" you say Mike:Let's all pray that reason and sanity prevail once again.Best wishes for world peace,With all due respect it'll take a little more than hopes prayers and wishes. Do it! Put a stop to your mad dogs.KeithHakan,Agreed. The sh-t would hit the fan. Hopefully enough reason and sanity willeventually prevail like it did during the cold war (we survived it somehow). Ofcourse it may have been MAD (a form of insanity called Mutually AssuredDestruction, the idea that no one wins, except by not fighting or starting anuclear war), that actually saved us during the cold war.What I find to be so ludicrous (silly, ridiculous) is that if IRAN really wantedto Nuke Israel or the USA they would not need a real nuclear weapon, and theywould have done it already with a dirty nuclear weapon since they already havenuclear power plants with uranium.I suspect they have not done so, even if they wanted to, because they know if theydid the US or Israel would level Iran in retaliation, probably with nukes.The really scary part, I fear, is that even if the US does back down, Israel willstill not allow Iran to make nuclear bombs and therefore will not back down. So,anyway you look at it, if Iran does not back off on the nuclear issue we will allbe in deep sh-t.What also concerns me is that if the US attacks Iran, North Korea will probablyfreak out and go nuts since they would believe they were next. I have heard nomention of this yet in the news.Let's all pray that reason and sanity prevail once again.Best wishes for world peace,Mike McGinnessHakan Falk wrote: Mike, As a foreigner and hearing Bush preparing for attacks on Iran, I sometimes have a very short moment of wishing him doing it, because it would be so stupid and probably finish him. Then I think about my American friends with my positive experiences from US and wish strongly that he would be stopped. If US attack Iran, then we would rapidly understand what the _expression_ "the sh-t hits the fan" means. The global consequences for US would be enormously negative. Hakan At 06:16 09/04/2006, you wrote: Reading the article discussed below is just plain scary as hell. If it's true we need to contact our congresspersons and senators and tell them how we feel so that they can put a stop to this madness now before it is too late. Since there is an election coming up in November, something tells me if they hear from enough of us now they will take decisive action.Mike McGinnessMarty Phee wrote: Original Message Subject: [IP] Is the US preparing to bomb Iran?Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 15:43:42 -0400From: David Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: ip@v2.listbox.comReferences: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Begin forwarded message: From: Tim Finin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Date: April 8, 2006 3:40:18 PM EDTTo: Dave Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Subject: Is the US preparing to bomb Iran? Seymour Hersh has a 6000 work article in next week's NewYorker on possible plans for a pre-emptive bombing strikeagainst Iran including the use of nuclear weapons. WhileHersh has not always been right in his predications, he has apretty good track record on the whole. It's a good article and also a worrisome one. No matter what you believe of thewisdom of attacking Iran, if we do there are bound to be manymore difficulties ahead before things get better. -- THE IRAN PLANSWould President Bush go to war to stop Tehran from getting the bomb?Seymour M. Hersh, New yorker issue of 2006-04-17, posted 2006-04-10http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060417fa_fact The Bush Administration, while publicly advocating diplomacyin order to stop Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon, has
Re: [Biofuel] Loose Change -- new video sheds new light on 9/11
At the risk of generating a huge amount of hate mail, I have to point out that Bush's real crime was ignoring the FBI warnings as well as failing to act on the August 6th presidential daily briefing titled "Osama Bin Ladin determined to strike inside US". No warning to the airlines - why not? IfBush deliberately allowed terrorists to make a strike on US soil, isn't that alone grounds for impeachment and charges of treason?Think a little bit, folks! - if the CIA or some other government agency wanted to fake a terrorist attack on US soil, all they'd have to do is park four huge truck bombs under the WTC, scatter some Arab corpses around with "Holy Jihad" letters, and blow the thing up. No need for elaborate bombs in the WTC, planes being hijacked, missles hitting the Pentagon, etc. However, if fanatical Al Queda recruits motivated by US occupation of Saudi soil, the Israeli-Palestine conflict, and fundamentalist ideology wanted to do this, planes seem the only way they could have done it - with thedeliberate blind eye of Bush to assist them, that is.Loose Change in my opinion is a government produced disinformation film designed to produce deep divisions within the anti-war and impeach-bush movements; it is alsodesigned to drive a wedge between 9/11 families and other protestors. This is the essence of many government propaganda / disinformation campaigns. Compare it to the NOVA special on the collapse of the twin towers, and JUDGE FOR YOURSELF!http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/Now, I'm perfectly willing to admit I could be wrong - unlike the "9/11 Truth Networks", Ihold that careful analysis and independent thinking are prerequisites for any investigation. However, I think that the evidence show that Bush was forewarned about 9/11 and deliberately failed to act. The question should be this: "What did the President and his advisors know, and when did they know it?" I believe that the answer to that simple question would lead to the impeachment of Bush on charges of treason.Peter I. SolemMichael Redler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I've done some research on events discussed in this video.The facts about Operation North Woods was in fact discussed in Noam Chomsky's book Hegemony or Survival. It has a lot of credible information.In a documentary, it'sabsolutely critical to be accurate with ALL YOUR RESEARCH.On July 28th, 1945, a B-25 crashed into the Empire State Building - NOT A B-52! I doubt that theB-52 was even in development in 1945.S**T!!! That's frustrating!Mike"D. Mindock" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The video brings up new info that I've not seen before. The video makers did do a lot of work to pull a lot sources together. The 9/11tradgedy was, in spite of all the effort by the gov, a bungled job. It doesn't stand up to intelligent scrutiny. Now it is our job toget thedisgusting thugsout of office and intoprison. They (Bush/Cheney/et. al.)ARE the real enemy combatants. Peace, D. Mindock[snip]___Biofuel mailing listBiofuel@sustainablelists.orghttp://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.orgBiofuel at Journey to Forever:http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.htmlSearch the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.___ 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] Loose Change -- new video sheds new light on 9/11 -second thoughts
Dear D. MindockYou seem to be ignoring the central point - if the 'CIA' wanted to blow up the twin towers, why didn't they just put a huge truck bomb underneath them? The only reason to hijack planes and crash them into the WTC is if you really are a fanatical terrorist operating under cover in the US. Furthermore, the hijackers almost certainly told their escorts and FAA people that they were returning to the airport - in which case the fighter jets would have been unlikely to shoot them down (killing hundreds of US citizens in the process). Again, the question is why weren't the airlines warned? Why wasn't security increased? Why weren't numerous and repeated FBI memos from field agents to headquarters acted on? What did the President know, and when did he know it? Well?Peter I. Solem [EMAIL PROTECTED]"D. Mindock" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I.S., So why did Building 7 go down? It wasn't hit by anything except some fallingdebris from the towers. Why was the 757 that hit the Pentagon only able to make a 16 ft diameter hole, perfectly round? Why were all military planes kept from stopping the errant planes before they hit the towers. FAA controllers saw the planes deviate and then switch off their transponders. Look, if any one bit of the puzzle is totally out of place in the official rendition of the puzzle, the whole thing collapses.The Loose Change video brings up points, lots of them,that BushCo would not like to be made public. One is that there were largeexplosions in the lobbies of the towers and on other floors before the towers started to come down. There are witnesses to this. (Maybe by now these witnessesallhave a different song to sing after being visited by whatever.) To say that it is disinfo doesn't makeany sense. To me it is a very tight expose.It adds accelerantto the fire. BTW, Loose Changeis referred to on the www.911truth.org site. The question is: How much do we need to know before a Conspiracy Theory becomes a Conspiracy Fact? I believe we now have more than enough to charge Bush/Cheney with crimes against humanity. Peace, D. Mindock- Original Message - From: Martin Kemple To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 7:57 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Loose Change -- new video sheds new light on 9/11 -second thoughts These are all good points, I.S.For more skepticism on "Loose Change", see: http://www.indybay.org/news/2005/12/1787340.phpand a number of websites cited therein.I haven't sorted it all through yet, and even the above site could itself be a dupe. Who knows?Bottom line for me, though, is that we already have more than enough goods to send up Bush-Cheney. (And always remember to include them both together. Surely, Cheney is Dr. Strangeglove incarnate. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if Deadeye Dick's got stock in the "Impeach Bush" brigade, if not masterminding it)Make no mistake, Cheney's gotta go too; even moreso. Bush is the stooge-monkey playing the accordion in front of the audience.-Martin K.On Apr 11, 2006, at 4:10 PM, I. S. wrote: At the risk of generating a huge amount of hate mail, I have to point out that Bush's real crime was ignoring the FBI warnings as well as failing to act on the August 6th presidential daily briefing titled "Osama Bin Ladin determined to strike inside US". No warning to the airlines - why not? IfBush deliberately allowed terrorists to make a strike on US soil, isn't that alone grounds for impeachment and charges of treason?Think a little bit, folks! - if the CIA or some other government agency wanted to fake a terrorist attack on US soil, all they'd have to do is park four huge truck bombs under the WTC, scatter some Arab corpses around with "Holy Jihad" letters, and blow the thing up. No need for elaborate bombs in the WTC, planes being hijacked, missles hitting the Pentagon, etc. However, if fanatical Al Queda recruits motivated by US occupation of Saudi soil, the Israeli-Palestine conflict, and fundamentalist ideology wanted to do this, planes seem the only way they could have done it - with thedeliberate blind eye of Bush to assist them, that is.Loose Change in my opinion is a government produced disinformation film designed to produce deep divisions within the anti-war and impeach-bush movements; it is alsodesigned to drive a wedge between 9/11 families and other protestors. This is the essence of many government propaganda / disinformation campaigns. Compare it to the NOVA special on the collapse of the twin towers, and JUDGE FOR YOURSELF!http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/Now, I'm perfectly willing to admit I could be wrong - unlike the "9/11 Truth Networks", Ihold that careful analysis and independent thinking are prerequisites for any investigation. However, I think that the evidence show that Bush was forewarned about 9/11 and deliberately failed to act. The question should be this: "Wha
