G. D. Akin wrote:
Does anyone have any experience with or knowledge of Gotham Writers'
Workshop? How about any other on-line workshops?
I've been amici (inactive lurker) with Critters Workshop
(http://www.critters.org/) for a while and was semi-active for a few
months. It's focused around
On 1/10/2008 11:09:29 PM, Ronn! Blankenship
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
At 06:13 PM Thursday 1/10/2008, Lance A. Brown wrote:
Perhaps. The use of corn to produce ethanol is already driving the
cost
of corn higher, impacting food costs already[1]. I
don't think we want
to use corn _or_
Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro wrote:
Jim Sharkey wrote:
_Scientific American_ is saying grass as a source of ethanol has the
potential to be vastly more efficient than corn. Pretty cool
stuff, I think.
But still less efficient than sugarcane :-P
Probably true, but I'd wager grass is a lot
Julia Thompson wrote:
1) Where do you order Dublin Dr. Pepper?
I just order it from here:
http://www.dublindrpepper.com/
2) Mexican Coke.
I've heard its praises sung before, but I'm in NJ, so...
Some high-end US soda bottlers are making their stuff with cane
sugar.
They did an article
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008, Jim Sharkey wrote:
Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro wrote:
Jim Sharkey wrote:
_Scientific American_ is saying grass as a source of ethanol has the
potential to be vastly more efficient than corn. Pretty cool
stuff, I think.
But still less efficient than sugarcane
Robert Seeberger said the following on 1/10/2008 8:56 PM:
The problem with corn is that it produces a lower energy ethanol.
Sugarcane *is* much better in that regard.
But why are you worried about sugarcane? We don't use it all that much
in the US, even for making sugar. Last I heard, sugar
On 11/01/2008, at 10:39 AM, Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro wrote:
Jim Sharkey wrote:
I'm sure some of you knew this, what with your big brains and all,
but I found it interesting:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=grass-makes-better-ethanol-than-corn
_Scientific American_ is saying
Lance A. Brown wrote:
The problem with corn is that it produces a lower energy ethanol.
Sugarcane *is* much better in that regard.
But why are you worried about sugarcane? We don't use it all that much
in the US, even for making sugar. Last I heard, sugar beets was the
big resource in
Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Unused land suitable for corn or sugarcane?
You didn't parse my e-mail address. Do it now.
There's plenty of suitable land for sugarcane here... :-)
Yer right. I didn't. Assumption has once again worked against me. :-)
--[Lance]
--
Celebrate The Circle
At 01:04 PM Friday 1/11/2008, Jim Sharkey wrote:
Lance A. Brown wrote:
Being able to grow switchgrass on marginal land not suitable for
other, more traditional, crops is one of its benefits.
To me that certainly seems like one of its biggest benefits. It's
grass; it doesn't require nearly the
Lance A. Brown wrote:
This is not necessarily true - if there's unused land and
the new crop grows into that land, then this would have no positive
impact in the food price. The reverse would even be more likely,
since if it becomes not viable to turn the food crop into fuel,
the new crop
Lance A. Brown wrote:
Being able to grow switchgrass on marginal land not suitable for
other, more traditional, crops is one of its benefits.
To me that certainly seems like one of its biggest benefits. It's
grass; it doesn't require nearly the same kind of care that more
traditional food
Alberto Monteiro wrote:
This is not necessarily true - if there's unused land and
the new crop grows into that land, then this would have no positive
impact in the food price. The reverse would even be more likely,
since if it becomes not viable to turn the food crop into fuel,
the new crop
On Jan 4, 2008 8:10 PM, Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jan 2008, Doug Pensinger wrote:
Does it filter spam before it checks the users filters? I set up a Brin-l
label and filter it using the to: address. I would hope it filters to my
label _before_ it sends it to
Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
I, too, have issues with all those cellulouses who yakity-yak constantly,
oblivious of where they are driving . . .
Hang up and ferment, you cellulouses! We're having an energy crisis
here!
Oh, the costs of an extra u. :-(
Jim
On Fri, 11 Jan 2008, Jim Sharkey wrote:
Lance A. Brown wrote:
Being able to grow switchgrass on marginal land not suitable for
other, more traditional, crops is one of its benefits.
To me that certainly seems like one of its biggest benefits. It's
grass; it doesn't require nearly the
On Friday 2008-01-11 12:04, Jim Sharkey wrote:
Lance A. Brown wrote:
Being able to grow switchgrass on marginal land not suitable for
other, more traditional, crops is one of its benefits.
To me that certainly seems like one of its biggest benefits. It's
grass; it doesn't require nearly the
On Friday 2008-01-11 12:04, Jim Sharkey wrote:
Lance A. Brown wrote:
Being able to grow switchgrass on marginal land not suitable for
other, more traditional, crops is one of its benefits.
To me that certainly seems like one of its biggest benefits. It's
grass; it doesn't require nearly the
Trent Shipley wrote:
How much private land is there that could be converted from lower yield to
cellulose production? Could ex-farms on the Montana and Dakota prairies be
put back into production as cellulose ranches? (In AZ we can grow agave on
some private ranch land.)
I dunno. We
At 02:16 PM Friday 1/11/2008, Jim Sharkey wrote:
Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
I, too, have issues with all those cellulouses who
yakity-yak constantly, oblivious of where they are driving . . .
Hang up and ferment, you cellulouses! We're having an energy crisis
here!
Oh, the costs of an extra
On Jan 11, 2008, at 11:10 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Lance A. Brown wrote:
This is not necessarily true - if there's unused land and the new
crop
grows into that land, then this would have no positive impact in the
food price. The reverse would even be more likely, since if it
becomes
On 12/01/2008, at 6:10 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
You didn't parse my e-mail address. Do it now.
There's plenty of suitable land for sugarcane here... :-)
Hasn't it got rainforest on it?
Charlie
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
On 12 Jan 2008, at 00:10, Dave Land wrote:
On Jan 11, 2008, at 11:10 AM, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Lance A. Brown wrote:
This is not necessarily true - if there's unused land and the new
crop
grows into that land, then this would have no positive impact in
the
food price. The reverse
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jim Sharkey
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 4:08 PM
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Take that, Iowa!!
I'm sure some of you knew this, what with your big brains and all,
but I found it
24 matches
Mail list logo
