[Biofuel] Health Ills Abound as Farm Runoff Fouls Wells - NYT
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/18/us/18dairy.html?_r=1hpw Published: September 17, 2009 MORRISON, Wis. — All it took was an early thaw for the drinking water here to become unsafe. There are 41,000 dairy cows in Brown County, which includes Morrison, and they produce more than 260 million gallons of manure each year, much of which is spread on nearby grain fields. Other farmers receive fees to cover their land with slaughterhouse waste and treated sewage. In measured amounts, that waste acts as fertilizer http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/f/fertilizer/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier. But if the amounts are excessive, bacteria and chemicals can flow into the ground and contaminate residents’ tap water. In Morrison, more than 100 wells were polluted by agricultural runoff within a few months, according to local officials. As parasites and bacteria seeped into drinking water, residents suffered from chronic diarrhea http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/symptoms/diarrhea/overview.html?inline=nyt-classifier, stomach illnesses and severe ear infections. “Sometimes it smells like a barn coming out of the faucet,” said Lisa Barnard, who lives a few towns over, and just 15 miles from the city of Green Bay. Tests of her water showed it contained E. coli, coliform bacteria and other contaminants found in manure. Last year, her 5-year-old son developed ear infections that eventually required an operation. Her doctor told her they were most likely caused by bathing in polluted water, she said. Yet runoff from all but the largest farms is essentially unregulated by many of the federal laws intended to prevent pollution and protect drinking water sources. The Clean Water Act of 1972 largely regulates only chemicals or contaminants that move through pipes or ditches, which means it does not typically apply to waste that is sprayed on a field and seeps into groundwater. As a result, many of the agricultural pollutants that contaminate drinking water sources are often subject only to state or county regulations. And those laws have failed to protect some residents living nearby. To address this problem, the federal Environmental Protection Agency http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/e/environmental_protection_agency/index.html?inline=nyt-org has created special rules for the biggest farms, like those with at least 700 cows. But thousands of large animal feedlots that should be regulated by those rules are effectively ignored because farmers never file paperwork, E.P.A. officials say. And regulations passed during the administration of President George W. Bush http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/george_w_bush/index.html?inline=nyt-per allow many of those farms to self-certify that they will not pollute, and thereby largely escape regulation. In a statement, the E.P.A. wrote that officials were working closely with the Agriculture Department and other federal agencies to reduce pollution and bring large farms into compliance. Agricultural runoff is the single largest source of water pollution in the nation’s rivers and streams, according to the E.P.A. An estimated 19.5 million Americans fall ill each year from waterborne parasites, viruses or bacteria, including those stemming from human and animal waste, according to a study http://www.springerlink.com/content/m2u37h072610/ published last year in the scientific journal Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. The problem is not limited to Wisconsin. In California, up to 15 percent of wells in agricultural areas exceed a federal contaminant threshold, according to studies. Major waterways like the Chesapeake Bay have been seriously damaged by agricultural pollution, according to government reports. In Arkansas and Maryland, residents have accused chicken farm owners of polluting drinking water. In 2005, Oklahoma’s attorney general sued 13 poultry companies, claiming they had damaged one of the state’s most important watersheds. It is often difficult to definitively link a specific instance of disease to one particular cause, like water pollution. Even when tests show that drinking water is polluted, it can be hard to pinpoint the source of the contamination. Despite such caveats, regulators in Brown County say they believe that manure has contaminated tap water, making residents ill. “One cow produces as much waste as 18 people,” said Bill Hafs, a county official who has lobbied the state Legislature for stricter waste rules. “There just isn’t enough land to absorb that much manure, but we don’t have laws to force people to stop,” he added. In Brown County, part of one of the nation’s largest milk-producing regions, agriculture brings in $3 billion a year. But the dairies collectively also create as much as a million gallons of waste each day. Many cows are fed a high-protein diet
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
would that be the original publication of the study? no. I'll keep an eye out. i first heard of it on a program called 'ring of fire', hosted by robert f. kennedy, jr. and mike papantonio. i've heard them a few times, they seem to do good work. It seems they do, thankyou. http://airamerica.com/ringoffire anyway, they spent an hour on the topic. i then heard another program which discussed it, but can't remember which one that might have been. anyway, by that point i'd sort had my fill of it, so to speak. that mythmaking 101 is an interesting little article. will have to make an effort to read barthes at some point. Somebody ought to put all this stuff together in a single, integrated, accessible resource, all about spin. Like an online course, unspin yourself and learn some self-defence, start here, everything you need to know. Same as physical health, we live in a toxic soup, you need to know how to detoxify your body and beef up your immune system. We live in a toxic soup of spin too, we're emotionally diseased. IMHO it's THE problem. Maybe it's something I could do bit by bit on the back-burner in the meantime (ie until time isn't so mean). I think I have most of what's needed to hand, much of it free, links to the rest at amazon or wherever. Often there are DVDs too, as with Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent, eg. Some good docus on DVD, though all I can find for Adam Curtis, who's rather essential, is 10 hours of Youtube, aarghh! There are lots of good articles for online reading, though they'd need sorting, and great stuff in the list archives (even more sorting). Links to online checking resources like SourceWatch and others. I'll think about it. It won't be quick, , but even the beginnings of such a resource could be useful, get the core stuff online first, quite easy, then keep adding to it as and when. We'll see. Best Keith ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
[Biofuel] The Transportation Lobby
http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/transportation_lobby/ The Transportation Lobby Introduction America's transportation policy is dysfunctional. It's also nearly bankrupt. Now, as debate reaches a crescendo over a new $500 billion transportation bill, can the national interest trump hundreds of special interests? Don't bet on it. Read More http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/transportation_lobby/articles/entry/introduction/ Crafting a Transportation Bill A TROUBLING PROCESS, A SHORTAGE OF CASH, AND PLENTY OF LOBBYISTS By Matthew Lewis | September 16, 2009 [more] About This Project http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/transportation_lobby/pages/about/ LOBBYING A Lobbying Free-for-All Almost 1,800 special interests spent at least $45 million over the first six months of this year to help Congress draft a new transportation bill. Who are they? Check out our story and the accompanying interactive map. http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/transportation_lobby/articles/entry/1668/ A Lobbying Free-for-All THOUSANDS OF SPECIAL INTERESTS VIE FOR INFLUENCE ON NEW TRANSPORTATION BILL By Matthew Lewis | September 17, 2009, 5:00 am | ShareThis | Print This * What's in this story * Crafting a New Bill as the Clock Ticks * Desperate Search for New Money * Special Interests, Not National Interests * Lobbyists and their Ties to Lawmakers * A Bias Toward Roads * A New Group of Players * What Happens Next [more] ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
[Biofuel] Batteries Made from Salt and Paper Could Replace Lithium
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/09/batteries-made-from-salt-and-paper-could-replace-lithium.php?dcitc=daily_nl Batteries Made from Salt and Paper Could Replace Lithium by Jaymi Heimbuch, San Francisco, California on 09.15.09 SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY Thin film battery laboratory prototype image credit: Maria Stromme, Uppsala University; Image of RFID card and reader via katielips A new battery made of salt and paper could prove to be an environmentally benign replacement for lithium batteries in things like smart cards, RFID tags, and other low power portable devices. Researchers at Uppsala University in Sweden are testing out a prototype, and while it has a few down sides compared to lithium, it certainly has upsides as well. It sounds like an elementary school science experiment gone pro. Technology Review reports that the new battery is made simply of pressed mats of tangled cellulose fibers acting as the electrodes, and a salt solution acts as the electrolyte - the simple ingredients mean cheap, easy manufacturing and the potential to replace lithium batteries in a range of small portable devices. Now that the researchers have the design down, they're working on making the paper and salt batteries more comparable to lithium in capabilities. According to Technology Review: Lithium batteries can deliver 4 volts and have energy densities of 200 to 300 milliwatt-hours per gram. In comparison, a single paper battery cell delivers 1 volt and can store up to 25 milliwatt-hours of energy per gram. When providing maximum current, it loses 6 percent of its storage capacity after 100 recharging cycles. However, Stromme says that her team has already run the battery for 1,000 recharging cycles at lower current. She also points out that these are numbers from an initial laboratory prototype. One thing that is fascinating about the design is not only that it could be more ecologically sound than lithium thanks to its ingredients, but that the cellulose that comprises the paper layers is made from a polluting algae found in seas and lakes. This could not only be a boon for particular water ways should the battery concept make it to manufacturing, but also the composition of the cellulose helps it to charge as much as 100 times faster than lithium. As published in Nano Letters: These algae has a special cellulose structure characterised by a very large surface area, says Gustav Nyström, a doctoral student in nanotechnology and the first author of the article. By coating this structure with a thin layer of conducting polymer, we have succeeded in producing a battery that weighs almost nothing and that has set new charge-time and capacity records for polymer-cellulose-based batteries. There's still research to do to improve its capabilities, but the scientists are hopeful we could see these thin-film batteries on the market and being used for small devices in as little as three years. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
[Biofuel] World Bank Spends Billions on Coal-Fired Power Stations Despite Own Warnings
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/09/16-1 Published on Wednesday, September 16, 2009 by The Times Online/UK World Bank Spends Billions on Coal-Fired Power Stations Despite Own Warnings by Ben Webster The World Bank is spending billions of pounds subsidising new coal-fired power stations in developing countries despite claiming that burning fossil fuels exposes the poor to catastrophic climate change. The bank, which has a goal of reducing poverty and is funded by Britain and other developed countries, calls on all nations in a report today to act differently on climate change. The sun rises behind Fiddlers Ferry coal fired power station near Liverpool, northern England, in this December 15, 2008 file photo. (REUTERS/Phil Noble/Files) It says that the world must reduce its dependence on fossil fuels, but it is funding several giant coal-burning plants that will each emit millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide a year for the next 40 to 50 years. Britain is contributing £400million to a World Bank fund that claims to support clean technology but is financing coal power plants. The bank's World Development Report says: Developing countries are disproportionately affected by climate change - a crisis that is not of their making and for which they are the least prepared. Increasing access to energy and other services using high-carbon technologies will produce more greenhouse gases, hence more climate change. The report says that between 75 and 80 per cent of the damage caused by climate change through drought, floods and rising sea levels will happen in developing countries. It calls on richer nations, including Britain, to increase the amount that they spend on helping developing countries to adapt to climate change. The bank also wants global spending on research and development on sustainable sources of energy to be increased from the present $70billion (£40billion) a year to $700billion. The report says that unless the world acts now to cut carbon dioxide emissions it faces a 5C (9F) rise in global temperatures by the end of the century. Such a drastic temperature shift would cause the possible dieback of the Amazon rainforest, complete loss of glaciers in the Andes and Himalayas, and rapid ocean acidification leading to death of coral reefs, it says. The speed and magnitude of change could wipe out more than 50 per cent of species. Sea levels could rise by one metre this century, threatening 60 million people. Agricultural productivity would likely decline throughout the world and over three million additional people could die from malnutrition each year. The 260-page report advises against locking the world into high-carbon infrastructure but makes no mention of the bank's plans to subsidise coal power plants in India, South Africa, Botswana and other developing countries. Last year the bank and its partner, the Asian Development Bank, approved $850million in loans to finance a coal-fired plant in Gujarat, western India. The Environmental Defence Fund, a US lobby group, said that the plant, the first of nine planned in India, would be one of the biggest new sources of greenhouse gases on Earth, emitting 26.7million tonnes of CO2 a year for the next 50 years. The bank is also contributing $5billion towards South Africa's power generation expansion plan, which includes six coal plants. Marianne Fay, the bank's chief economist for sustainable development, said that coal was the cheapest and most secure way to deliver electricity to the 1.6billion people without it. She said: There are a lot of poor countries which have coal reserves and for them it's the only option. The [bank's] policy is to continue funding coal to the extent that there is no alternative and to push for the most efficient coal plants possible. Frankly, it would be immoral at this stage to say, 'We want to have clean hands, therefore we are not going to touch coal'. Tim Jones, policy officer of the World Development Movement, which campaigns to reduce poverty, said: The World Bank is acting in the interests of Western countries and companies and not in the long-term interests of the world's poor. It is an absolute disgrace that money meant for clean technologies will actually be used for building new coal power stations. Every pound of green aid that will be spent on funding coal power through the World Bank is money that should be spent on supporting renewable energy in developing countries. The bank said that it had lent $5billion for fossil fuel projects in the past three years and $11billion for low-carbon alternatives. A spokesman for the Department for International Development in Whitehall said: We have informed the World Bank that we will be scrutinising future coal-fired power plant proposals to ensure that they have explored all other options (including accessing the additional finance needed for cleaner alternatives), and we would expect any
Re: [Biofuel] U. S. Head of Military Intelligence Publically States 9/11 was Staged Event
ok, i googled SI, did a search of their website and found the article. i'm pretty sure it's the one paul roberts is referring to. it dates from 13 March of this year, so wonder whether it isn't another exercise entirely from the one i heard about. it was over a year ago, sometime in 2007 i think. you make a good point about liberal big lies. it's something i've given some thought to. clearly they must exist (though, in the u.s.a., there are certain semantic issues with the category left/liberal, rather more so than with right/conservative). they're very hard to pin down, though. i mean, there's the gulf of tonkin (for example), which was lbj's baby. so technically it qualifies as a liberal big lie, i guess? at least by one definition of the word. yet there were large numbers of liberals who opposed the war. i tend to think that the closest equivalent to the bush/cheney/rumsfeld et al big lie, in terms of scope and apparent untarnishability, might be the jfk myth. anyway, try the following url: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/122260824/HTMLSTART ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
