Dmb, As you know, I have been told not to write about my understanding of the Intellectual Level. It was a request made in late 2010 by Horse, which you are well aware of. If the accusation of evasion is based on this, I will admit that it is a topic that I avoid.
I would love to hear your interpretation of the Intellectual Level. I've asked you a number of times to explain it, but you have evaded presenting an explanation. Please explain. Marsha On Aug 13, 2013, at 10:28 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Ian, > > Okay. Thanks for the thoughtful response. I understand, but the idea is > flawed only by today's physical restrictions and understanding. Tomorrow, > who knows what the restrictions and need might demand. We now have personal > computers, and personal garbage disposals in our sinks. The educational > aspect did make an impression on me. As you stated, seeing is a good thing. > Seeing what can be done may lead people to actually demand more to be done: > garbage in, betterness out. I like it... > > > Marsha > > > > > On Aug 13, 2013, at 3:52 AM, Ian Glendinning <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi Marsha, >> The innovation is educational, and high quality because it is real, >> constructed and operated with his own hands understanding the >> underlying processes, and able to be physically shown to new >> audiences. The real recycle potential in the waste plastic is made >> empirically evident. Quality. >> >> Eco-engineering-wise it is flawed and not novel (I was doing this on >> the kitchen stove 45 years ago). It is very unlikely this is >> ecologically cost effective at this scale with random plastic >> feedstock. Questions of efficiencies of the heat source and the >> process, and emissions of hydrocarbon (and other) gases as well as the >> condensate, the need for post processing if you want to do more than >> burn it smokily and inefficiently, health and safety, and more. >> Pyrolysis plants work on an industrial scale, where the efficiencies >> and secondary processes can be managed. >> >> So it's good to educate people with their own eyes and hands that >> recycling is worth pursuing because it really works, but flawed to >> suggest private self-sufficient processing as the answer. >> Ian >> >> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 12:00 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Greetings, >>> >>> I am not in a position to respond to the efficiency and feasibility of the >>> project. You may all know more than me on this topic. It is innovative >>> and might be a good way to recycle our piles of plastic refuse. I heard, >>> not to long ago, that most of our recyclables are still dumped in landfills >>> or in the ocean. I was also impressed with what drove him to such a >>> solution. It was caring. >>> >>> >>> Marsha >>> >>> >>> Moq_Discuss mailing list >>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >>> Archives: >>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html >> Moq_Discuss mailing list >> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >> Archives: >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >> http://moq.org/md/archives.html > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org/md/archives.html Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
