[Biofuel] Biodiesel production proposal wins the Australian eChallenge - Impress Media Australia
http://www.impress.com.au/innovation/biodiesel-production-proposal-wins-the-australian-echallenge.html Biodiesel production proposal wins the Australian eChallenge Newsroom - Innovation Saturday, 02 November 2013 00:00 A business plan to convert grease-trap waste into commercial-grade biodiesel won the 2013 University of Adelaide Entrepreneurship, Commercialisation and Innovation Centre (ECIC) Australian eChallenge. Energy from Waste Pty Ltd., with members Lisa Chao, Philip Curran, Dr David Rutley, Brian O’Neil and Ted McMurchie, not only won first prize at an awards’ dinner on Friday night, but also received the $10,000 Adelaide Airport Clean Tech Award and a trip to Austin Texas to compete in the Global Venture Labs Investment Competition – prizes totalling $52,218. Energy from Waste’s winning business plan outlines how it will design, construct, commission and operate biodiesel production plants at major waste processing companies that currently collect and dispose of grease-trap waste, eliminating their disposal costs and creating a new revenue stream. Professor Noel Lindsay, ECIC Director, says Energy from Waste was awarded first prize because the team delivered a proficient business plan that could result in positive outcomes for both local businesses and the environment. “The Australian eChallenge is growing in popularity each year, with 35 highly creative and innovative teams competing in this year’s competition,” Professor Lindsay says. “Energy from Waste was selected because the team’s business plan is thorough and professional. The team’s proposal clearly outlines an opportunity to reduce the cost of waste processing and decrease its impact on the environment.” Further winners announced at the awards’ night, which was held at the National Wine Centre, include: Flarum, an internet-based service aiming to connect people with common interests – winner of the second prize and the ECIC Commercialisation Encouragement Award (totalling $21,399); Florence Energy, with a proposal to recycle plastic using an efficient and environmentally-friendly method – winner of the third prize (totalling $7,359); Family Footprint, a secure place for storing families’ digital footprint – winner of the $6,750 Best Solutions International ‘Diamond in the Rough Prize’; Cinematick, an online platform to instantly connect consumers and cinemas – winner of the $5,000 Vroom Award; The annual eChallenge, now in its 12th year, sees teams of up to six people (with at least one member being a South Australian tertiary student) develop a plan for a new, previously unfunded business concept. The competition incorporates business and entrepreneurial workshops, team mentoring by industry professionals, networking opportunities and help in developing new business ideas. For more information, visit www.adelaide.edu.au/echallenge. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Abu Dhabi should capitalise on local plants, experts say | The National
http://www.thenational.ae/uae/environment/uae-scientists-hope-to-transform-abu-dhabi-coastline-into-profitable-green-biofuel Dr Mette Hedegaard Thomsen, Grzegorz Przemyslaw Brudecki and Reda Farzanah November 2, 2013 Updated: November 2, 2013 17:18:00 All along the UAE’s 2,000 kilometres of coastline, sea grass and seaweed grow. And while many might neglect or even fail to notice them, these plants could just provide a useful future industry for Abu Dhabi. These salt-water loving plants are packed with sugar, protein, and a wide range of biologically active compounds. And just as corn can turned into ethanol, they can be grown and converted into biofuels that can be used in place of carbon-emitting fossil fuels. Not only that, they have known medical properties and have been used as traditional remedies for untold years. And they are productive – up to 10 times more so than land plants – as mini-factories for natural sugars, proteins, and bioactive compounds that can be extracted and turned into food supplements, medicines and other products. Such bio-chemical refining is expected to become a very lucrative and high demand industry in the coming years, providing Abu Dhabi with a new range of export products. To help capitalise on this dual potential, our research team at the Masdar Institute is exploring whether these local plants can be used to create fuel and chemicals that have economic value for the UAE. We are gathering samples of locally-grown plants and examining their chemical components and energy value to find out what they can be used for. So far we have found three different types of sea grass, and more than eight interesting seaweeds that have adapted to the UAE’s extreme conditions – of which three thrive especially well. The project also aims to discover ideal ways of extracting, isolating, and analysing the materials found in the plant matter, and of optimising biofuels processes to suit these new aquatic biomasses. We hope our project will eventually provide the UAE with the information and methodology it needs to turn its coastline into farms for native aquatic plant life that will provide the country with new and diverse revenue sources from the resulting biofuel and biochemicals. We then intend to seek out industrial partners to put our findings to commercial use. We hope to be able to provide efficient chemical and biotech processes to extract and convert biomass components into valuable, marketable products. It is our hope that in time, the UAE may see many otherwise unused miles of coastland be turned into productive, profitable and green biofuel and biochemical producing farmlands. This could also help Abu Dhabi reduce its carbon footprint and improve its environmental status, as cultivating sea grass and seaweed will help remove carbon from the atmosphere and filter water while providing vibrant and beneficial natural habitats. Dr Mette Hedegaard Thomsen is an assistant professor of chemical engineering at the Masdar Institute of Science and Technology. Grzegorz Przemyslaw Brudecki is a post-doctoral researcher and Reda Farzanah is a chemical engineering student, both working on the project. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Scariest Christian Movie Ever?
I got sent this spam puff for a new end times movie, below, courtesy of its Email Marketing campaign. It has already scared several people to Christ which is good, the puff says. A movie that _scares_ people to Jesus? And it's good? My my. God ls love it says in the Bible. It only says it twice, but that's enough - it's all you need to know, IMHO. It's in the first epistle of St. John the Revelator, so beloved of end-timers, but there you go, consistency not required. I don't think it says anywhere that God is a scary terrorist (apart from nuking the odd ungodly city, but that was BC). It does say this though (also BC): For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity. All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again. Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth? (Ecclesiastes 3 19-21) Maybe they didn't read that bit, but what I'd like to know is, when all these faithful pre-Millennial Rapturist eschatological dispensational tribulationist nutters get themselves wafted on up to Heaven, leaving their clothes (and hopefully their wallets) behind, as allegedly promised by God the Scary, will their dogs and so on get wafted on up with them, leaving their collars behind, or will they all just crumble to dust like Dracula? Or will it be yet another re-run of the Mayan 2012 prophecy? (Excellent odds on the last bet.) 2012ology http://www.mail-archive.com/sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org/msg76691.html Anyway, I've said it here before and I'll say it again, sorry if it offends anyone: this is not Christianity, they got the wrong guy, it's an evil cult, and it's caused a huge amount of damage and suffering, a tribulation if ever there was one. A self-fulfilling prophecy, as usual, in exactly the opposite sense to what they believe, typical of neurotics. The movie gets top ratings at the Internet Movie Database - 8.6: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2710368/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1 MRQE though, the excellent Movie Review Query Engine, while acknowledging its existence, has no reviews at all: [0 articles]. Rotten Tomatoes: No Reviews Yet... The movie was released nearly two months ago, so it probably isn't going to get any press reviews, good news. The Houston Chronicle's review that Pastor Mark quotes is no longer to be found online without a subscription, and the quote The filmmakers want to scare the living daylights out of non-Believers draws a blank at Google, but the Chronicle's review started like this: 13 Sep 2013 ... Instead of a new installment of the infamous Left Behind series from the past decade, Final: The Rapture is... Infamous. Methinks Pastor Mark isn't very honest. Bests Keith --0-- From: Final Outreach ma...@seefinal.com To: i...@journeytoforever.org Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2013 01:35:52 -0400 Subject: Scariest Christian Movie Ever? Trailer is inside The Rapture Discussion WARNING: This trailer for a new movie shows a very realistic portrayal of the Rapture. It has already scared several people to Christ which is good. The trailer ahas over 29,000 views! See it here: http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=16225062msgid=46528act=H7UQc=1394694destination=http%3A%2F%2FSeeFinal.comhttp://SeeFinal.com When this film was released last month in the theaters in Houston, it had the #3 highest per-screen average in the nation according to Box Office Mojo! I was at the theater where people were being SAVED in the LOBBY OF THE THEATER. I've never seen a more powerful, frightening, and realistic portrayal of the Rapture. 'Final: The Rapture' was shot in 6 countries and it's an EPIC, BIG-BUDGET look at what many pastors and leaders believe will HAPPEN SOON. Please support the film and the filmmakers! They have an advanced screener of the film that you can get now. The filmmakers have been supported by Campus Crusade for Christ, YWAM, Youth for Christ, Greg Laurie, Kay Arthur, Precept Ministries, Philip Yancey, CMA, Hillsong, and churches all over the world of all denominations. God bless, Pastor Mark To view the trailer, go here: http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=16225062msgid=46528act=H7UQc=1394694destination=http%3A%2F%2FSeeFinal.comhttp://SeeFinal.com Here is the poster: http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=16225062msgid=46528act=H7UQc=1394694destination=http%3A%2F%2FSeeFinal.com Some Reviews I've collected: Scariest Christian movie ever. Maranatha News 'Scariest Christian movie of the decade - Christian Post The filmmakers want to scare the living daylights out of non-Believers' - Houston Chronicle The most realistic Rapture movie ever - Pastor Steven Kay, Reach
[Biofuel] OTA concerned about new Ontario biodiesel requirement
http://www.trucknews.com/news/ota-concerned-about-new-ontario-biodiesel-requirement/1002695181/ OTA concerned about new Ontario biodiesel requirement TEXT SIZE bigger text smaller text 2013-11-03 TORONTO, Ont. -- The province of Ontario has announced a new biodiesel mandate, which will require a 2% biofuel component in on- and off-road diesel beginning in April 2014, and ramping up to 4% in 2015. The Ontario Trucking Association (OTA) said it will be raising concerns about the new requirement with the province. It has until December to raise issues with the new requirement, and to outline any impact the new rule could have on the industry. The OTA says it questions the need for a biodiesel requirement, in light of new greenhouse gas emissions reductions that are being achieved by vehicle OEMs beginning in 2014. “Following the consultations, OTA expects the government to make a final decision in the early new year about moving forward with a mandate, potentially leaving fuel suppliers with little time to react in the event the proposal is in fact implemented in April 2014,” the association said in a release. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] NZ on track to miss targets by huge margin
Sadly, we're doing no better in Canada, though our government has its doublespeak talking points well in order. CBC news story http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-failing-to-meet-2020-emissions-targets-1.2223930 Canada failing to meet 2020 emissions targets Environment Canada says there's been 'significant progress' on Copenhagen Accord targets By Kathleen Harris, CBC News Posted: Oct 24, 2013 1:57 PM ET Last Updated: Oct 24, 2013 8:01 PM ET Canada will fail to meet its 2020 greenhouse gas reductions targets under the Copenhagen Accord even with more regulation of the oil and gas sector, according to a new report and internal government analysis obtained by CBC News. A report released today titled Canada’s Emissions Trends shows projections to 2020 with a significant and growing gap for targets even under variable economic growth and energy resource development scenarios. With current measures in place, emissions are now projected to be 734 megatonnes – 122 megatonnes higher than Canada’s target of 612 megatonnes under the international treaty signed in 2009, according to the Environment Canada report. But, the report notes “significant progress” and says emissions would have risen to 862 megatonnes if no action had been taken by consumers, businesses and governments since 2005. Environment Minister Leona Agglukaq, during question period on Thursday, said the Conservatives – unlike the Liberal government before them – have reduced emissions. Agglukaq also noted the Harper government has introduced coal power regulations and harmonized vehicle emissions regulations with the U.S. We're getting results, Agglukaq said. Canada’s commitment under the Copenhagen Accord is to cut emissions 17 per cent below 2005 levels by 2020, which is aligned with the U.S. An internal government analysis shows that while emissions intensity continues to decline and Canada is making progress, there will still be a substantial gap in meeting the target. NDP MP Linda Duncan, speaking on CBC News Network's Power Politics on Thursday, criticized the federal government for its lack of action. Environment Canada has been issuing the same report for quite some time … They are simply saying the same thing again but the government isn't listening, Duncan said. An environmental advocacy group decried the report on Thursday saying the Canadian government is dragging its feet when it comes to protecting the environment. The alarming numbers in today’s report demonstrate a failure to be on track to meet our climate goals, said Hannah McKinnon, the national program manager at Environmental Defence Canada. McKinnon said the federal government could take action by introducing federal regulation for the oil and gas sectors to see emissions go down. While more federal regulation to oil and gas and emissions intensive and trade-exposed industries would lead to greater reductions, the report concedes this will not be enough for Canada to achieve its target. 'Significant uncertainty' Last year’s report also projected a sizable shortfall by 2020, but said upcoming federal policies, in particular oil and gas regulations, along with other provincial measures, would push Canada to meeting its Copenhagen commitments. This year’s report notes that emissions projections depend on evolving economic and energy variables and are subject to “significant uncertainty.” In addition, future developments in technologies, demographics and resource-extraction will alter the future emissions pathway,” it reads. The federal government has adopted what it calls a “sector-by-sector” approach, and has imposed regulations for transportation and electricity, two of the biggest emitters of greenhouse gases. Plans to further reduce emissions include regulation for the oil and gas sector; natural gas electricity generation and “emissions intensive trade exposed industries” including chemicals, fertilizers, aluminum, iron and steel, cement, and pulp and paper. The report also predicts that if trend lines continue in all the sectors, Canada will only cut a total of three megatonnes of greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. [Where 'progress' is measured against how badly we could have possibly done rather than against where we actually were. Of course, we could meet our target if we simply reduced the size of the tar sands operations.] For more Canadian government spin, see the Environment Canada piece at: http://www.ec.gc.ca/indicateurs-indicators/default.asp?lang=enn=CCED3397-1 [sorry, can't bring myself to even copy and paste this blather] For a more rational and grounded take on the impacts of the tar sands from a different perspective, consider this Paul Beckwith piece. I have heard Beckwith speak once, and read some of his stuff on abrupt climate change, and I think it is worth following.
[Biofuel] GMO Wars: The Global Battlefield
http://fpif.org/gmo-wars-global-battlefield/ GMO Wars: The Global Battlefield The case against GMOs has strengthened steadily over the last few years, even as the industry has expanded all over the world. By Walden Bello, October 28, 2013. This article is a joint publication of Foreign Policy In Focus and TheNation.com. The GMO wars escalated earlier this month when the 2013 World Food Prize was awarded to three chemical company executives, including Monsanto executive vice president and chief technology officer, Robert Fraley, responsible for development of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The choice of Fraley was widely protested, with 81 members of the prestigious World Future Council calling it an affront to the growing international consensus on safe, ecological farming practices that have been scientifically proven to promote nutrition and sustainability. Monsanto's Man The choice of Monsanto's man triggered accusations of prize buying. From 1999 to 2011, Monsanto donated $380,000 to the World Food Prize Foundation, in addition to a $5-million contribution in 2008 to help renovate the Hall of Laureates, a public museum honoring Norman Borlaug, the scientist who launched the Green Revolution. For some, the award to Monsanto is actually a sign of desperation on the part of the GMO establishment, a move designed to contain the deepening controversy over the so-called biotechnological revolution in food and agriculture. The arguments of the critics are making headway. Owing to concern about the dangers and risks posed by genetically engineered organisms, many governments have instituted total or partial bans on their cultivation, importation, and field-testing. A few years ago, there were 16 countries that had total or partial bans on GMOs. Now there are at least 26, including Switzerland, Australia, Austria, China, India, France, Germany, Hungary, Luxembourg, Greece, Bulgaria, Poland, Italy, Mexico, and Russia. Significant restrictions on GMOs exist in about 60 other countries. Restraints on trade in GMOs based on phyto-sanitary grounds, which are allowed under the World Trade Organization, have increased. Already, American rice farmers face strict limitations on their exports to the European Union, Japan, South Korea, and the Philippines, and are banned altogether from Russia and Bulgaria because unapproved genetically engineered rice escaped during open-field trials on GMO rice. Certain Thai exports-particularly canned fruit salads containing papaya to Germany, and sardines in soy oil to Greece and the Netherlands-were recently banned due to threat of contamination by GMOs. The Case against GMOs Gains Strength The case against GMOs has strengthened steadily over the last few years. Critics say that genetic engineering disrupts the precise sequence of a food's genetic code and disturbs the functions of neighboring genes, which can give rise to potentially toxic or allergenic molecules or even alter the nutritional value of food produced. The Bt toxin used in GMO corn, for example, was recently detected in the blood of pregnant women and their babies, with possibly harmful consequences. A second objection concerns genetic contamination. A GMO crop, once released in the open, reproduces via pollination and interacts genetically with natural varieties of the same crop, producing what is called genetic contamination. According to a study published in Nature, one of the world's leading scientific journals, Bt corn has contaminated indigenous varieties of corn tested in Oaxaca, Mexico. Third, a GMO, brought into natural surroundings, may have a toxic or lethal impact on other living things. Thus, it was found that Bt corn destroyed the larvae of the monarch butterfly, raising well grounded fears that many other natural plant and animal life may be impacted in the same way. Fourth, the benefits of GMOs have been oversold by the companies, like Monsanto and Syngenta, that peddle them. Most genetically engineered crops are either engineered to produce their own pesticide in the form of Bacillus thurengiensis (Bt) or are designed to be resistant to herbicides, so that herbicides can be sprayed in massive quantities to kill pests without harming the crops. It has been shown, however, that insects are fast developing resistance to Bt as well as to herbicides, resulting in even more massive infestation by the new superbugs. No substantial evidence exists that GM crops yield more than conventional crops. What genetically engineered crops definitely do lead to is greater use of pesticide, which is harmful both to humans and the environment. A fifth argument is that patented GMO seeds concentrate power in the hands of a few biotech corporations and marginalize small farmers. As the statement of the 81 members of the World Future Council put it, While profitable to the few companies producing them, GMO seeds reinforce
[Biofuel] Our Invisible Revolution
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/our_invisible_revolution_20131028 Our Invisible Revolution Posted on Oct 28, 2013 By Chris Hedges Did you ever ask yourself how it happens that government and capitalism continue to exist in spite of all the evil and trouble they are causing in the world? the anarchist Alexander Berkman wrote in his essay The Idea Is the Thing. http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/bright/berkman/iish/idea/ideathing.html If you did, then your answer must have been that it is because the people support those institutions, and that they support them because they believe in them. Berkman was right. As long as most citizens believe in the ideas that justify global capitalism, the private and state institutions that serve our corporate masters are unassailable. When these ideas are shattered, the institutions that buttress the ruling class deflate and collapse. The battle of ideas is percolating below the surface. It is a battle the corporate state is steadily losing. An increasing number of Americans are getting it. They know that we have been stripped of political power. They recognize that we have been shorn of our most basic and cherished civil liberties, and live under the gaze of the most intrusive security and surveillance apparatus in human history. Half the country lives in poverty. Many of the rest of us, if the corporate state is not overthrown, will join them. These truths are no longer hidden. It appears that political ferment is dormant in the United States. This is incorrect. The ideas that sustain the corporate state are swiftly losing their efficacy across the political spectrum. The ideas that are rising to take their place, however, are inchoate. The right has retreated into Christian fascism and a celebration of the gun culture. The left, knocked off balance by decades of fierce state repression in the name of anti-communism, is struggling to rebuild and define itself. Popular revulsion for the ruling elite, however, is nearly universal. It is a question of which ideas will capture the public's imagination. Revolution usually erupts over events that would, in normal circumstances, be considered meaningless or minor acts of injustice by the state. But once the tinder of revolt has piled up, as it has in the United States, an insignificant spark easily ignites popular rebellion. No person or movement can ignite this tinder. No one knows where or when the eruption will take place. No one knows the form it will take. But it is certain now that a popular revolt is coming. The refusal by the corporate state to address even the minimal grievances of the citizenry, along with the abject failure to remedy the mounting state repression, the chronic unemployment and underemployment, the massive debt peonage that is crippling more than half of Americans, and the loss of hope and widespread despair, means that blowback is inevitable. Because revolution is evolution at its boiling point you cannot 'make' a real revolution any more than you can hasten the boiling of a tea kettle, Berkman wrote. It is the fire underneath that makes it boil: how quickly it will come to the boiling point will depend on how strong the fire is. Revolutions, when they erupt, appear to the elites and the establishment to be sudden and unexpected. This is because the real work of revolutionary ferment and consciousness is unseen by the mainstream society, noticed only after it has largely been completed. Throughout history, those who have sought radical change have always had to first discredit the ideas used to prop up ruling elites and construct alternative ideas for society, ideas often embodied in a utopian revolutionary myth. The articulation of a viable socialism as an alternative to corporate tyranny-as attempted by the book Imagine: Living in a Socialist USA and the website Popular Resistance-is, for me, paramount. Once ideas shift for a large portion of a population, once the vision of a new society grips the popular imagination, the old regime is finished. An uprising that is devoid of ideas and vision is never a threat to ruling elites. Social upheaval without clear definition and direction, without ideas behind it, descends into nihilism, random violence and chaos. It consumes itself. This, at its core, is why I disagree with some elements of the Black Bloc anarchists. I believe in strategy. And so did many anarchists, including Berkman, Emma Goldman, Pyotr Kropotkin and Mikhail Bakunin. By the time ruling elites are openly defied, there has already been a nearly total loss of faith in the ideas-in our case free market capitalism and globalization-that sustain the structures of the ruling elites. And once enough people get it, a process that can take years, the slow, quiet, and peaceful social evolution becomes quick, militant, and violent, as Berkman wrote. Evolution becomes revolution. This is where we
