[Biofuel] Okay, This time I really am going to take down the list, , , , but first, please read
Good day all of you who are left, I really want to thank everyone who has sent their thoughts on taking the list down. There have been some, , no, not some, all, great stories. Before I take the list down, , I was wondering how many of you are still interested in keeping something like this going. reason I ask is that I am becoming involved in a new software project that I find very exciting, and hence have chosen to do the work to update my respective servers, including the mailing list server. Kind of a pain in the neck, I went through a life-change over the last 6 years, and walking away from all things IT was part of that. Since I had many dangling obligations (being a denizen of the internet) I tapered it all down to where about the only thing I was responsible for was this mailing list. However, that particular attempt at resolving some things in my life by not doing systems administration have cropped back up again, so that wasn't the fix for which I had hoped. So, it doesn't make sense really to abandon all those skills I had developed, even though I am moving into my dotage, (heh) but rather to double down and dive back in. The project of which I speak is FarmOS https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCOqg5iH6fM Take a look, give me some feedback, if there is interest, I'll migrate some or all of this list into a new community. Thanks kindly for your attention in this matter; --chipper ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Happy Solstice all, Taking the list down.
It has been many years now since Keith passed. As things stand, Darryl is about the only traffic posted here and even that is echoing (admittedly interesting) stuff posted elsewhere. If anyone is interested, I can and am willing to provide the subscriber's list if anyone wishes to continue this work. As things stand, this mailing list is the only mailing list left on my mailman server that gets any traffic at all, and the spam to post ratio is about 70:1 (intercepted). As of 20170101, the list will shut down. The archives will of course remain in place until such a time as those responsible for them decide to take some other action. Please take these few days to make your farewells. So long and thanks for everything. your list-admin --chipper ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] List is back up.
I think this issue is resolved. Thanks kindly for your forbearance. -- ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] Temporarily Taking Down the Mailing List for 24 hours
Oh You may continue to submit articles for the list, they will be held and released to the list once I've tended to the problem. - Original Message - From: Chip Mefford c...@well.com To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2015 9:22:54 PM Subject: Temporarily Taking Down the Mailing List for 24 hours Dear All; I've got a spam problem that I have to sort out. In order to do this, I have to shut down the mailman list server for a day and let the queue clear out. I host a few mailing lists, and the amount of traffic they generate is making it difficult to parse out my mail logs. The mailing list server and it's related mail server are all cross encrypted and secured. Unfortunately, I was still using SSLv3 on the web server front end of the mail server, and it appears that it may have fallen to a vulnerability and at least one of my users credentials were compromised. I've dropped all SSL support, and am now TLS only, I've made changes to those suspect accounts and now I need to verify that all leaks have been plugged, so I have to let things cool down for a day. I'll be bringing the mailing list back up Sunday night, Mar 29 or early Mon, Mar 30. I'm very sorry for having to take this somewhat unilateral action, but the reputation of the service, once lost, is gone forever. I have to take action. --chipper. Any questions, please email me direct. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] Cheaper wind turbines.
Call me skeptical of *ALL* so-called energy breakthroughs. As to wind power here in the US, here's what I wrote on industrial scale wind power a few years back, and for the most part, I still agree with myself. :) http://cubic-dog.blogspot.com/2010/06/wind-farms-some-considerations.html ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] The Future of the Biofuels mailing list, your input needed.
Well, I gotta admit, I've gotten a huge response to my query, and honestly I wasn't expecting it. Aside from the responses you've all perhaps read, I've received many off-list as well. Okay, we'll leave it up. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] The Future of the Biofuels mailing list, your input needed.
Good day all; As of this morning, there are 456 subscribers to this list. The recent news of Keith's passing come as sad news to us all and we saw a tiny uptick in traffic over those few days. Since then, we're back to some updates on issues that many of us find interesting by Darryl, and not much else. So, I need to hear from you, as in a *lot* of you if you want to see this list continue. The archives are in place, and as of right now, it's the intention to keep them in place, but I'm uncertain that this list is really serving any further purpose. Keith and I have discussed this very issue many times over the last 5 or so years. I offered to host the list in order to keep it going a few years back. But now that we are no longer blessed with Keith's insights, well, I'm not sure this list is really relevant. So, please respond to this posting with your thoughts. I'll need to hear from a lot of you. --chipper ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] Oil Is Back! A Global Warming President Presides Over a Drill-Baby-Drill United States
FWIW; I've only been alive long enough to have paid attention since Nixon, and in that time, every single president has made big public noises about how we had to break our dependence on oil, and every single president (yes, including Carter, and Clinton) has done what they could to increase our consumption of it. So, none of this is really news. All this talk about is mostly about adjusting to the price at the pump, once folks get used to it, they go out and buy bigger SUVs and trucks. Just how it is. And always has been. - Original Message - From: Darryl McMahon dar...@econogics.com To: Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org Sent: Saturday, September 6, 2014 11:11:12 AM Subject: [Biofuel] Oil Is Back! A Global Warming President Presides Over a Drill-Baby-Drill United States http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/25993-oil-is-back-a-global-warming-president-presides-over-a-drill-baby-drill-united-states [multiple links in on-line article] Oil Is Back! A Global Warming President Presides Over a Drill-Baby-Drill United States SNIP ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] Any beekeeping contacts in Switzerland?
Hey Zeke, We're going to be in switzerland for a few days in early oct. I too share these interests, and we know folks who know folks too. - Original Message - From: Zeke Yewdall zyewd...@gmail.com To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 2:39:28 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Any beekeeping contacts in Switzerland? I am trying to find out more about the beehouses used in Switzerland (and other mountainous regions in Europe). There's very little info on them here in the US, but the standard langstroth hive does not work as well in cold winter climates, from what I can gather. And, they require electric fences for any protection from bears, and even with them, bear invasions are common in the mountains. But, they're cheap... the US way of doing things.I am considering making a trip to Switzerland next summer to research these more and see how they function, however, I need to get some contacts there first and see if it's possible to set up a tour of beehouses, etc. My not speaking German is not helping the research ;) But, I figured this list might have some ideas. Thanks Zeke ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] The rise of social capital
Good thread folks! I, use open source, free as in speech tools exclusively and have since the mid-90s, going on 20 years now. Never looked back. I, could give a shit about cars anymore. And I'm something of a car nut. Just for fun, here's a short and incomplete list of cars I've owned that I put together a while ago, just as a mental exercise: http://cubic-dog.blogspot.com/2010/07/cars-i-have-owned.html I, am a fan of solar power, don't really care anymore what the utilities in the US think about anything, I think that they are a bunch of bastards. They don't have to be, but they go out of their way to choose to be. I don't care about electric cars at all. Cars, irrespective of how they are powered, are not the answer. Cars, irrespective of how they are powered, are the problem. That said, they are fun to fiddle with. :) --me ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] Are Utility Companies Out to Destroy Solar's 'Rooftop Revolution'?
In a word? Yu Becha! - Original Message - From: Keith Addison ke...@journeytoforever.org To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 8:41:54 AM Subject: [Biofuel] Are Utility Companies Out to Destroy Solar's 'Rooftop Revolution'? http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/10/09-0 Published on Wednesday, October 9, 2013 by Common Dreams Are Utility Companies Out to Destroy Solar's 'Rooftop Revolution'? In California, customers who install solar systems and battery arrays are finding themselves cut off from grid - Jon Queally, staff writer In the nation's largest state, California, the major utility companies are trying to limit growth. Of rooftop solar panels, that is. According to reporting by Bloomberg, the state's three largest utilities-Edison International, PGE Corp. and Sempra Energy-are putting up hurdles to homeowners who have installed sun-powered energy systems, especially those with battery backups wired to solar panels, in order to slow the spread of what has become a threat to their dominant business model. The utilities clearly see rooftop solar as the next threat, Ben Peters, a government affairs analyst at solar company Mainstream Energy Corp., told Bloomberg. They're trying to limit the growth. According to Peters, as the business news outlet reports, the dispute between those with solar arrays and the utility giants threatens the state's $2 billion rooftop solar industry and indicates the depth of utilities' concerns about consumers producing their own power. People with rooftop panels are already buying less electricity, and adding batteries takes them closer to the day they won't need to buy from the local grid at all. Citing but one example, Bloomberg reports: Matthew Sperling, a Santa Barbara, California, resident, installed eight panels and eight batteries at his home in April. We wanted to have an alternative in case of a blackout to keep the refrigerator running, he said in an interview. Southern California Edison rejected his application to link the system to the grid even though city inspectors said it was one of the nicest they'd ever seen, he said. We've installed a $30,000 system and we can't use it, Sperling said. The utilities argue that customers with solar energy-storing batteries might be rigging the system by fraudulently storing conventional energy sent in from the utility grid, storing it in the batteries, and then sending it back to the grid for credit. The solar companies say there is no proof that this is happening. What environmentalists and solar energy advocates see is the utility companies putting barriers up to a decentralized system they will not no longer be able to control or profit from. As Danny Kennedy, author of the book Rooftop Revolution and co-founder of solar company Sungevity in California, said in an interview with Alternet earlier this year: Solar power represents a change in electricity that has a potentially disruptive impact on power in both the literal sense (meaning how we get electricity) and in the figurative sense of how we distribute wealth and power in our society. Fossil fuels have led to the concentration of power whereas solar's potential is really to give power over to the hands of people. This shift has huge community benefits while releasing our dependency on the centralized, monopolized capital of the fossil fuel industry. So it's revolutionary in the technological and political sense. As this Sierra Club video shows, the idea of a 'rooftop revolution' is fundamental to what many see as the most promising development in terms of undermining the dominance of the fossil fuel paradigm in the U.S.: The tensions between decentralized forms of energy like rootop solar or small-scale wind and traditional large-scale utilities is nothing new, but as the crisis of climate change has spurred a global grassroots movement push for a complete withdrawal from the fossil fuel and nuclear paradigm that forms the basis of the current electricity grid, these tensions are growing. As this segment from a PBS profile of the work of Lester Brown shows, a future of a society based on renewable energy shows what's possible: But the resistance to these changes is coming strongest from those with a vested interest in the status quo. With most focus on the behavior of the fossil fuel companies themselves, the idea that utility companies will be deeply impacted by this green energy revolution is often overlooked. Earlier this summer, David Roberts, an energy and environmental blogger at Grist.org, wrote an extensive, multi-part series on the role of utilities in the renewable energy transition, explaining why understanding the politics and economics of the utility industry (despite the grand tedium of the task) would be essential for the remainder of the 21st century.
Re: [Biofuel] Monsanto gives up fight for GM plants in Europe
Good Morning all: - Original Message - From: Darryl McMahon dar...@econogics.com To: Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 8:27:49 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Monsanto gives up fight for GM plants in Europe http://www.dw.de/monsanto-gives-up-fight-for-gm-plants-in-europe/a-16851701 Monsanto gives up fight for GM plants in Europe Date 31.05.2013 The world's largest producer of seeds, Monsanto, has apparently given up on attempts to spread its genetically modified plant varieties in Europe. A German media report said the firm would end all lobbying for approval. I wouldn't believe this for one minute, sounds like they are switching tactics now. They have an entire modern military grade intelligence service at their disposal, not the mention a team of lawyers that goes right up to and including sitting justices on the supreme court of the US. Good Job EU, but I expect the real battle is just beginning. Monsanto is wholly serious about what they are doing, and I'm sure they'd love to have a 'Change of State' in their trophy room. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] Cost of electric cars dropping to gas equivalents
Good morning all; - Original Message - From: Dawie Coetzee dawie_coet...@yahoo.co.uk To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2013 2:31:28 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Cost of electric cars dropping to gas equivalents To answer the first question, What would it take to get you into an electric car today?, probably the exercise of violence, possibly fatal violence. In other words, over my dead body. But then, much the same applies, to a very slightly lesser extent, to every new car made today. It is to me highly significant that all these cars are offered primarily on a lease basis, with outright purchase prices hardly mentioned. The very notion of possession is being redefined from on high, in all kinds of more or less subtle ways. It is part of the programme to turn the automobile from something substantially like a cuckoo-clock into something substantially like a cellphone, i.e. something that has no parts but instead a sort of ephemeral unitary sophistication which betrays a wholesale, veil-dropping embrace of planned obsolescence. This shift - part of a near-century-old development - is necessary to prop up the prevailing system of industrial production and ultimately the power basis of the entire government-corporate state. And that is the sole cause of the ecological crisis the world is in. -Dawie Coetzee Good comments Dawie; I kinda gave up reading at the point where I was unable to get past the lease-pricing bit. Yeah, sure, paying rent might be cost-equiv, so what? Folks I do some work for were teetering on the edge of jumping in and getting a Nissan Leaf. But in the end, they went for the new Prius. Now, these folks are good folks, and I enjoy the work I do for them. One of the background projects floating about is a town-car replacement in the form of yet-still-another domestically produced Velomobile. It's pretty cool in that he is a true believer, already been around the block on project development, granting, and all that and built a few prototypes. Anyway, the target market is her. So if we can come up with something she would drive to work, then we've met our target. :) Being a cycling fascist, I'm of the well-considered opinion, that cars, irrespective of how they are powered, are not the answer. Cars, irrespective of how they are powered, are the problem. Just like we all love to moan about how the 'corporations' are so good at externalizing all their negative costs onto society at large, and the ecosphere in total, Drivers like to externalize their same cost models by paying for their fuel. This is evidenced by the growth in the sense of entitlement being non-proportionate to the amount of $$$ folks spend on fuel, the more they spend, the radically more they feel entitled to do whatever the hell they want with the roads, air, water, etc etc. Heck, the only form of legal homicide in the world I think, is drivers running down cyclists and pedestrians. Okay, I'm ranting, sorry. Moving along, the idea being that folks drive, driving EVs is not actually really any worse than driving anything else in the form of 2 ton personal transport. The key step, in my considered opinion, is tying the operator to the impact in a more direct fashion than merely swiping a card at a fueling station, irrespective of what the fuel actually is. This is where I love home-brewed biofuels. Those of you doing this are taking a huge chunk of the responsibility for your impact, and with that, comes a deepening awareness. You *know* what it takes to move that thing down the road, in ways the regular motorist never will. never can. EVs are similar, if you are actually involved in the harvesting of the electrical power, otherwise, it's just a feel-good externalization. Had a chevy volt nearly blow me off the road as I cycled up alongside the university the otherday, at least after it passed, it didn't stink. :) -- ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Test, please ignore
Changes to the email system behind the list, Just checking to see if they are working. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] News is bad for you, your health, your mind, your body.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/apr/12/news-is-bad-rolf-dobelli And I believe every word of it. It makes sense: News is bad for you – and giving up reading it will make you happier News is bad for your health. It leads to fear and aggression, and hinders your creativity and ability to think deeply. The solution? Stop consuming it altogether In the past few decades, the fortunate among us have recognised the hazards of living with an overabundance of food (obesity, diabetes) and have started to change our diets. But most of us do not yet understand that news is to the mind what sugar is to the body. News is easy to digest. The media feeds us small bites of trivial matter, tidbits that don't really concern our lives and don't require thinking. That's why we experience almost no saturation. Unlike reading books and long magazine articles (which require thinking), we can swallow limitless quantities of news flashes, which are bright-coloured candies for the mind. Today, we have reached the same point in relation to information that we faced 20 years ago in regard to food. We are beginning to recognise how toxic news can be. News misleads. Take the following event (borrowed from Nassim Taleb). A car drives over a bridge, and the bridge collapses. What does the news media focus on? The car. The person in the car. Where he came from. Where he planned to go. How he experienced the crash (if he survived). But that is all irrelevant. What's relevant? The structural stability of the bridge. That's the underlying risk that has been lurking, and could lurk in other bridges. But the car is flashy, it's dramatic, it's a person (non-abstract), and it's news that's cheap to produce. News leads us to walk around with the completely wrong risk map in our heads. So terrorism is over-rated. Chronic stress is under-rated. The collapse of Lehman Brothers is overrated. Fiscal irresponsibility is under-rated. Astronauts are over-rated. Nurses are under-rated. We are not rational enough to be exposed to the press. Watching an airplane crash on television is going to change your attitude toward that risk, regardless of its real probability. If you think you can compensate with the strength of your own inner contemplation, you are wrong. Bankers and economists – who have powerful incentives to compensate for news-borne hazards – have shown that they cannot. The only solution: cut yourself off from news consumption entirely. News is irrelevant. Out of the approximately 10,000 news stories you have read in the last 12 months, name one that – because you consumed it – allowed you to make a better decision about a serious matter affecting your life, your career or your business. The point is: the consumption of news is irrelevant to you. But people find it very difficult to recognise what's relevant. It's much easier to recognise what's new. The relevant versus the new is the fundamental battle of the current age. Media organisations want you to believe that news offers you some sort of a competitive advantage. Many fall for that. We get anxious when we're cut off from the flow of news. In reality, news consumption is a competitive disadvantage. The less news you consume, the bigger the advantage you have. News has no explanatory power. News items are bubbles popping on the surface of a deeper world. Will accumulating facts help you understand the world? Sadly, no. The relationship is inverted. The important stories are non-stories: slow, powerful movements that develop below journalists' radar but have a transforming effect. The more news factoids you digest, the less of the big picture you will understand. If more information leads to higher economic success, we'd expect journalists to be at the top of the pyramid. That's not the case. News is toxic to your body. It constantly triggers the limbic system. Panicky stories spur the release of cascades of glucocorticoid (cortisol). This deregulates your immune system and inhibits the release of growth hormones. In other words, your body finds itself in a state of chronic stress. High glucocorticoid levels cause impaired digestion, lack of growth (cell, hair, bone), nervousness and susceptibility to infections. The other potential side-effects include fear, aggression, tunnel-vision and desensitisation. News increases cognitive errors. News feeds the mother of all cognitive errors: confirmation bias. In the words of Warren Buffett: What the human being is best at doing is interpreting all new information so that their prior conclusions remain intact. News exacerbates this flaw. We become prone to overconfidence, take stupid risks and misjudge opportunities. It also exacerbates another cognitive error: the story bias. Our brains crave stories that make sense – even if they don't correspond to reality. Any journalist who writes, The market moved because of X or the company went bankrupt because of Y is an idiot. I am
Re: [Biofuel] Battery Breakthrough?
I've got a 10 y/o prius, still working, though not as well. but mostly, I ride a bicycle. Ride a bicycle. through the rain, through the snow, through the nice weather, it's better than any EV. i want to get rid of the prius, be a 1-car family, but there'll be time for that later, it sill comes in handy. Once the house is finished perhaps, and I don't need to haul the utility trailer out for supplies. the mrs has a newer prius, also at least paid for, it still gets in the mid to upper 50s, my old one, not so much. - Original Message - From: robert and benita rabello rabe...@shaw.ca To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 6:45:14 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Battery Breakthrough? On 4/19/2013 2:06 PM, Darryl McMahon wrote: Hi Robert, as you might expect, I saw this announcement earlier in the week. While industry analysts are excited, my enthusiasm is restrained. When they get this to market as an affordable product in a size that is relevant to vehicle propulsion, then I will be excited. Right now I'm underwhelmed. I've read periodic announcements like this before, and I can't help but wonder how much is hype designed to stir investment dollars, as opposed to a genuine breakthrough. Today, we have OEMs making electric cars that are affordable (e.g., 2012 Mitsubishi i-MiEV can be acquired today for about $21,000 (after rebates and before taxes) in Ontario - range about 100 km (reliable in winter). The 2012 Nissan Leaf can be acquired locally now for about $25,000 (after rebates and before taxes) - range about 120 km (reliable in winter). The Leaf is supposed to be a nice car. I've also been ogling that Ford Focus EV, but that's running close to $50K. My Ranger is aging not so gracefully now, my boys are getting ready to leave home, and if I'm going to buy a car at all, it's going to be an EV. Having written this, I'd prefer to avoid buying ANYTHING, as the embodied energy in an automobile, along with its requisite infrastructure, contributes mightily to dependence on fossil energy and climate change. The Tesla Model S (85kWh) can be acquired for about $92,000 (after rebates and before taxes) - range about 400 km (reliable in winter). (An amazing car.) That's with technology we saw on the market in small form factors a decade ago. We saw one in Langley a couple of weeks ago. It's a beautiful machine, for certain! I wonder what is stopping people from buying these vehicles in huge numbers today. They want to support the oil industry? Climate change is a hoax? They think the price of gasoline and diesel is going to drop dramatically in the near future and stay there indefinitely? The Osborne Effect (waiting for the next generation of a product which they expect to be better and cheaper, creating the risk that the vendor founders before they can produce it)? The last car we bought was a hybrid Camry, more than 6 years ago. We decided to support hybrid technology because if there is no demand, innovation will stop. The same thing is true of battery electrics. But while hybrids have been steadily gaining market share (there are quite a few of them in our neighborhood), battery electrics remain rare birds. People I've spoken to about this believe they're too expensive and don't like the limited range. They really do travel over 4 hours at a time at highway speeds, multiple times per day, on a routine basis? (I telecommute now, but I remember resenting 20 minute commutes as a colossal waste of time.) No, of course not. But perception and reality are often two different things. If, however, I had to work in Vancouver, I'd hit the range limit of the Focus EV in a single direction. Is it really still the sticker price? Supposing you plan to own a car for 10 years, and travel 20,000 km/year, and it gets a real world fuel consumption in the order of 8 litres/100 km, and gasoline is an average of just $1.50 per litre over the next 10 years. Well, 200,000 km at 8 L/100k is 16,000 litres for fuel. At $1.50, that's $24,000 - more than the price of the car (for the Leaf or i-MiEV). The electricity cost is almost trivial - charging at off-peak times, it really is, but let's say it's 2 cents per km over the 10 years, for a total of $4,000 for the whole decade. i-MiEV plus electricity for 10 years: $25,000. New gasoline econobox (e.g., Ford Focus) $17,000 vehicle + $24,000 fuel: $41,000. That's before we impose a carbon tax. Agreed. The maths make sense. Our family laughed at us for buying a hybrid, but they're not laughing now . . . The other exciting place for low-cost, high-capacity, long-life batteries (weight not an issue) is in storage for renewable energy from solar, wind, tidal and other intermittent sources.
Re: [Biofuel] The N.R.A. Wins Again
Good Morning all; - Original Message - From: Darryl McMahon dar...@econogics.com To: Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 7:58:14 AM Subject: [Biofuel] The N.R.A. Wins Again http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/03/the-nra-wins-again.html The N.R.A. Wins Again March 20, 2013 By Alex Koppelman After Sandy Hook, after twenty children were shot and killed at a place where they should have been safe from all harm, there was some optimism among supporters of gun control: perhaps now, finally, both Democrats and Republicans could see the light—and the suffering—and revive the assault-weapons ban. It was a futile hope. SNIP Yes, one *could* see this as a NRA 'win', for some value of 'win' whatever the heck that is supposed to mean, Or, one could see this as much ado about nothing. As this lists -pretty much only- self-admitted 'reticent gun nut', I found the entire so-called 'conversation' completely devoid of any useful information, and all of it, on both, -or more accurately- on all sides as being completely vapid and insultingly myopic rhetoric and hyperbole. The 'gun issue' is much more vast than a preposterous and pointless piece of political pandering and posturing can address, not just in a meaningful way, but in any way whatsoever. The issues surrounding the gigantic global concept known as 'small arms' are massive. The people of the country known as the united states support, as in tacitly permit and even profit from massive small arms proliferation globally. With the break up of the soviet union, the US emerged as the biggest player in this wide open market place. (not that it was doing poorly before hand). Small Arms is a big part of what might be the biggest international business there is, hand in hand with oil, the Arms Trade. which is worth trillions. And yes, it's all part and parcel of an aegis we like to call the war machine: Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. The world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children… This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron. --President, (General) Dwight D. Eisenhower And he'd know, of course, having done his level best to model the post-war US on the wartime Third Reich. Despite whatever level on intention, you'll not wish 'bad guns' away through regulation. You may succeed in driving them further underground, with all the joys, fun and massive profit seeking known to the illicit drug trade, just like all prohibitions and contraband. OR, We *could* if we so desired, Take an open, fearless and honest look at the problem of how we in the US benefit through our implicit and explicit use of force and make some real choices as to whether it's all worth it or no. real studies, devoid of political pressure need to be done, real honest assessments of all facets of every aspect of 'guns' needs addressing, really, and badly. This ties directly into our attitudes about entitlement, health care, automobility, wealth, power, influence, etc, etc, etc. An NRA win? Hardly A loss for all humanity? Certainly. But had things gone the other way, it wouldn't have made any difference. But it would have made a big difference to all those folks who ran out and stocked up on 'bad guns' in the hope that they would be banned because the value of them would double overnight, quadruple over a year, just like they did after the Bush ban, which also changed not a damned thing, at all. --me ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] Anti-nuclear madness doesn't jibe with concern about global warming
Good day all: At some point, I meant to transcribe some bits and pieces from this presentation from our annual conference last Feb at PASA (Pennsylvania Assoc for Sustainable Agriculture) due to it's relevance on asking the really tough questions that will stimulate the environment wherein we can start finding real answers. I've listened to this keynote about 6 times, and I've yet to fully 'get it' all yet, and you can hear a few of my hoots during it in places. :) Regardless, for those who are actually interested in the whole thing, here it is: http://vimeo.com/34530550 ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] Anti-nuclear madness doesn't jibe with concern about global warming
Ooops, Wrong presentation, But it's still directly germane. - Original Message - From: Chip Mefford c...@well.com To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org Sent: Sunday, December 2, 2012 9:19:37 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Anti-nuclear madness doesn't jibe with concern about global warming Good day all: At some point, I meant to transcribe some bits and pieces from this presentation from our annual conference last Feb at PASA (Pennsylvania Assoc for Sustainable Agriculture) due to it's relevance on asking the really tough questions that will stimulate the environment wherein we can start finding real answers. I've listened to this keynote about 6 times, and I've yet to fully 'get it' all yet, and you can hear a few of my hoots during it in places. :) Regardless, for those who are actually interested in the whole thing, here it is: http://vimeo.com/34530550 ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] Anti-nuclear madness doesn't jibe with concern about global warming
Well, Just for fun, I've yet to see any real numbers on how this nuclear renaissance actually addresses anything. There's a lot of rhetoric about how it's cleaner than the fossil fuel alternatives, but that's all, just rhetoric. Very little about actually replacing burning fossil carbon with nukes, but rather, the on-the-ground facts are adding nukes to fossil carbon, additionally, not substituting anything. Further, there is question as to whether there actually are any real net gains given the entire life cycle of a nuclear plant. less hype, more facts. - Original Message - From: Jason Mier boomer2...@hotmail.com To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 2:01:41 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Anti-nuclear madness doesn't jibe with concern about global warming man... no matter which longview you take the results suck. more nukes mean more radioactive slag piles and brownfield sites, but fewer nukes means more smokestacks. honestly, the idea of multimillion year damages bothers me more than something that has the potential to be remediated in a century or two... but the problem there is how much can we adapt in that timeframe? there won't be any islands left in any ocean, a lot of the known coastlines around the world will be gone, and the weather... well... the sahara's probably going to grow up and take a trip around the world... ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] White House owes Preppers and survivalists a massive apology
- Original Message - From: Tony cr...@vianet.net.au To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, November 5, 2012 6:39:10 AM Subject: [Biofuel] White House owes Preppers and survivalists a massive apology Page / Story Link http://www.naturalnews.com/037822_liberal_media_preppers_survivalists.html Liberal media, White House owes Preppers and Survivalists a massive apology in the aftermath of superstorm Sandy [] SNIP As someone who might be called a prepper, maybe even doomer, perhaps survivalist, or whatever you want, who *also* is prior law enforcement, and has done a bit of SAR and EMS work, I think this article is heavy on rhetoric and hyperbole. here's something I wrote on this issue a few years back: http://cubic-dog.blogspot.com/2008/05/weather-be-prepared.html ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] Protecting nuclear power plants from nature's worse
Wow; While I expect nothing less from my fellow countrymen, than to lean heavily on the FUD (fear, uncertainly and doubt) aspects of 'renewables' to keep any nuclear country glowing, that others can't see through the veil that the US has done everything it can to cripple and deter real alternative energy schemes since 'the beginning' (fsvo beginning). There are so many fallacies that crop up whenever one attempts to articulate the US's posture towards power generation, it's practically impossible to list them all. For some background, I can heartily recommend Ray Reece's 1979 work The Sun Betrayed: A Report on the Corporate Seizure of U.S. Solar Energy finished and published in '79, when the whole thing was basically a fait accompli. - Original Message - From: Keith Addison ke...@journeytoforever.org To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org Sent: Sunday, November 4, 2012 10:36:06 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Protecting nuclear power plants from nature's worse U.S. needs Japan to remain nuclear, expert says Relations in region not likely to change with Obama or Romney, even in China ties http://www.japantimes.co.jp/print/nb20121103d1.html Officials drafting new regulations raked in millions Nuke industry funded NRC's safety experts http://www.japantimes.co.jp/print/nn20121104a1.html Power Politics: Japan's Resilient Nuclear Village Sunday, 04 November 2012 13:02 By Jeff Kingston, Japan Focus | News Analysis http://truth-out.org/news/item/12523-power-politics-japans-resilient-nuclear-village --0-- http://www.japantimes.co.jp/print/eo20121103a1.html Protecting nuclear power plants from nature's worse ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] Testing the new list
Okay list; We're almost there. Keith is having issues posting to the list. I'm supposing this is due to the DNS changes that I made for the new list not fully propagating across everything as of yet. Also, the new email address (@lists.sustainability.org, rather than @sustainability.org) isn't filtering into the archive as of yet. So, none of this chatter is being archived as of yet. Which is fine. I'd actually appreciate a few echos from you all. My logs show all the email except a small handfull being delivered promptly. And Zeke, all I got was a modest amount of rain, wind never topped 20mph. So we're doing fine. Back home in WV, the snow fall is being measured in feet, and is still pounding down. Good be some happy telemarkers this week. But things are going to be messed up, and There Will Be Flood. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] This is just a test, please ignore and delete.
Sorry for the inconvenience. --chipper ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] This is just a test, please ignore and delete.
Hey Dave; Yeah, pretty good presumption. :) - Original Message - From: Dave Hajoglou dhajog...@gmail.com To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 5:53:47 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] This is just a test, please ignore and delete. On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Chip Mefford c...@daviswv.net wrote: Sorry for the inconvenience. I feel so inconvenienced. I presume this is the new list? -dave hojo ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] This is just a test, please ignore and delete.
Okay, Another test. having some teething issues with the new list. - Original Message - From: Chip Mefford c...@well.com To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 5:58:10 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] This is just a test, please ignore and delete. Hey Dave; Yeah, pretty good presumption. :) - Original Message - From: Dave Hajoglou dhajog...@gmail.com To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 5:53:47 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] This is just a test, please ignore and delete. On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Chip Mefford c...@daviswv.net wrote: Sorry for the inconvenience. I feel so inconvenienced. I presume this is the new list? -dave hojo ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Re: [Biofuel] More list problems
I'm sorry everyone, I've found another typo in the list information (my fault) I'm going to dump and re-create the list. Please pardon all these administrative issues as I get the new list sorted. ___ Sustainablelorgbiofuel mailing list Sustainablelorgbiofuel@lists.sustainablelists.org http://lists.eruditium.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
[Biofuel] A compromise position in the food/farming dilemma ?
An interesting read: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/a-simple-fix-for-food/?src=recg Summary: Seems the folks at Iowa State Univ, at their Marsden Farm did a medium term experiment comparing short rotation chem intensive conventional industrial model ag with a hybrid long rotation, pasture grazing (ruminate based) plot management (old school) with a result of conventional like outputs and 'profits' with radically reduced chem and fertilizer inputs. Interesting aspects include how far afield the university had to go in order to publish their study, and how totally deaf Vilsack's USDA has been to it. On a personal note, a lot of it makes perfect sense to me, and while I am a great big fan of no chem, no how, no way, ever, wholly ruminate field and pasture management, etc I certainly won't dismiss this study out of hand, it's very interesting. I'm trying to get a copy of the study now. -- ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Dear all...
Hey Keith, I can host the list if you like, Just say'n. What will happen to the archives? (I'm only panicking mildly) - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 11:26:41 AM Subject: [Biofuel] Dear all... It's October, the list is going to run out of time soon and the host service will close it down. I'm not sure of the exact date, but suddenly the music will stop. The new community I mentioned previously is still some way down the road, but it will eventually happen. When it does, you'll be hearing from me. Meanwhile, the list will stop, but I won't. I'll keep harvesting the news, I do it anyway. If any list members would like to keep receiving these daily snippets, I don't mind sending them direct. Please let me know - offlist please. All best, and a very big thanks for everything, over the years. This list has taught me so much (deep bow). Regards to all. 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 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/
Re: [Biofuel] How the G.O.P. Became the Anti-Urban Party
- Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, October 8, 2012 2:54:04 PM Subject: [Biofuel] How the G.O.P. Became the Anti-Urban Party http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/07/opinion/sunday/republicans-to-cities-drop-dead.html?nl=todaysheadlinesemc=edit_th_20121007_r=0 How the G.O.P. Became the Anti-Urban Party I'm not so sure I follow. For the last 12 or so years, or in the general trend as the US population becomes more and more urbanized (as has been going on since WWII) the neo-republican party, as defined by Roger Ailes, Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, etc etc is no longer relevant to the urbanites. They are focused on electoral college issues for their wins. In a general election, the democrats own the country. They neo-republicans have been focused (rightfully so I might add) on winning the rural working class voter, and they do it quite effectively. I don't think they are anti-urban, so much as the urban is anti-republican. The republicans have no win there, why waste time/effort/money on it? They don't need the cities to win the electoral college. They'd like to have them, sure, but it won't happen, and they know it. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] 90 Million Americans Can't Be Wrong
Well, , , I can certainly say that the lack of civics education must be intentional. Even our elected leaders and our supreme court justices seem to have never taken a civics class in their lives, and they like it that way. - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2012 11:56:17 PM Subject: [Biofuel] 90 Million Americans Can't Be Wrong http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article32229.htm 90 Million Americans Can't Be Wrong By Joel Poindexter August 18, 2012 Information Clearing House -- Those who vote in presidential elections often describe the action as being part of their civic duty; it's something every good citizen must do. Others consider voting to be a right, and elections are something which every American should participate in. After all, they remind us, not everyone has this right in other countries. Still, there are others who see voting as both a duty and a right, as if it could be both at the same time. So when voter turnout was abysmally poor during last week's primaries in Kansas and Missouri, many were upset. Talk radio hosts, Internet pundits, and members of the media all commented on the low participation rate, and quite a few were disturbed by the numbers. Kansas City, Missouri for instance, had a voter turnout of only 15%. Now, it's generally understood that primaries and midterms have lower voter participation rates than presidential election years, so this ought not to surprise anyone, but there is some hope this year's elections will have the lowest turnout of the last fifty. When asked by USA Today and Suffolk University why they're not planning to vote this November, respondents answered that: They're too busy. They aren't excited about either candidate. Their vote doesn't really matter. And nothing ever gets done, anyway. All are excellent reasons, especially the last two, for they lay bare the great lie that elections solve anything. The results of the poll indicate that some 90 million Americans have no intention to vote in this year's presidential election; let's hope that number swells over the coming months. Curtis Gans, who is director of the Center for the Study of the American Electorate, had this to say regarding why so few are expected to vote: There's a lot of lack of trust in our leaders, a lack of positive feelings about political institutions, a lack of quality education for large segments of the public, a lack of civic education, the fragmenting effects of waves of communications technology, the cynicism of the coverage of politics - I could go on with a long litany. As far as a lack of civic education, this may be true, but it's not for a lack of trying on the part of the government school systems. In every election cycle students in government schools vote on the national candidates; being homeschooled I never participated in such conditioning, but I distinctly remember my second-grade friends voting in the 1992 election for Bill Clinton. Students even hold their own elections, to choose from within their own ranks politicians who're supposed to advocate for them with the administration, in order to get longer recess, treats in the cafeteria, and who knows what else. It's one of the more disturbing attempts to indoctrinate children in the civic religion of democracy. But it's not always successful. One of those polled, Jamie Palmer, 35, has never voted, and good for her; if only I had could have such a clear conscience. When asked why she hadn't, her reply was [politicians] say the same things; they make promises; they don't keep them. It's ridiculous. If I vote, nothing is going to come of it. It's just going to be like it is right now. Fortunately, she was never fooled by the teachers shilling for the state at her school. When discussing the issue of politics most people will argue that if you don't vote it's because you're lazy, unpatriotic, or part of the problem with society. These are people who were taught what to think, not how to think. As for the lazy charge, it may be true in many cases, but certainly not all of them. The USA Today poll indicated that at least some people didn't want to take the time to follow politics or go to the polls, so not voting was less a deliberate choice as opposed to simply being a low priority. But for the vast majority of non-voters that I know, it's a conscious choice they've made based on sound principles. They have clear and well thought out arguments against voting, but in no way could they be considered lazy. They are instead wrapped up in educating others, they are journalists, organizers, activists, and dedicated to fostering parallel institutions to compete with and hopefully replace those of the corporatist/statist system now in place. It is indeed true that many who vote are patriots, but sadly their priorities are
Re: [Biofuel] 'Clean Energy' Politics Take Energy Out of Wind Industry Sails
Hey Jason; Thanks for taking the time to read and respond. I do appreciate it. I worked long and hard on it, and I can certainly understand folks who wonder why on earth am I even bothering? Yes, I am saying that. but more than that. This is the only large scale wind power implementation that I have been up close and personal with. And from all the numbers i could research, and everything I could find, the wind power aspect itself was nothing more than a gigantic tax-dodging gilded lilly. The target was to tie the Mount Storm Power Station and a number of other coal power stations further to the west across the Alleghenys to the mid-atlantic grid. Mount Storm was put in place to send power down to Newport News Va/Va beach for the shipyards and military interests, like a lot of WV, it's about export. However, the I95 corridor, from Richmond, up through DC-Baltimore into Delaware/NJ/NY needs more more more and more power. Now, since NO ONE wanted yet still another highline feeding in from the west, much less to have to actually build it, an interesting plan was hatched. Oh, we'll go GREEN!!! and it worked. Folks signed off. All these coal plants are finding a practically bottomless market. The wind is there, sure, but what does it actually Do? No one can tell me, and I suspect, not very much. What I've heard is 3% of capacity of the installation is realized, which is less than 2% of the power out of Mount Storm all by itself, to say nothing of the plants coming online further to the west. The ecological footprint of this thing is HUGE. *if* it were replacing coal, that would be one thing, but it isn't. I am skeptical of ALL industrial-scale anything. - Original Message - From: Jason Mier [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2012 1:26:33 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] 'Clean Energy' Politics Take Energy Out of Wind Industry Sails if i'm reading this right, you're saying that all mo'power is doing is enabling the mo'power is good power idiots to continue being their idiotic selves? can't really argue with that... Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 07:21:08 -0700 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] 'Clean Energy' Politics Take Energy Out of Wind Industry Sails I'm pretty much deeply suspect of 'wind energy' on the commercial scale. I know how well it works on a homestead/farm scale, and that's pretty excellent stuff. But this big stuff? I ain't so sure. Here's my write up from a few years back: http://cubic-dog.blogspot.com/2010/06/wind-farms-some-considerations.html It won't be popular. But all the rebuttals I've gotten have been hyperbolic, not well reasoned. I welcome rational rebuttal/debate, but as we all know that's a tall order of folks. --me - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 8:43:16 PM Subject: [Biofuel] 'Clean Energy' Politics Take Energy Out of Wind Industry Sails http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/08/13-0 Published on Monday, August 13, 2012 by Common Dreams 'Clean Energy' Politics Take Energy Out of Wind Industry Sails US wind production soars, but politics threaten federal subsidies that have helped elevate industry - Common Dreams staff As the US wind energy industry hit a new milestone recently by reaching 50GW of power production, the industry trade group warns that 'the best of times' could become the 'worst of times' if a looming deadline to extend federal subsidies for clean energy investment is not met. The American Wind Energy Association, the lobbying arm of the wind industry, announced recently that the wind sector's 50GW (gigawatts) of capacity is enough to power nearly 13 million American homes, or as many as in Nevada, Colorado, Wisconsin, Virginia, Alabama, and Connecticut combined. In addition, the number of new operational wind projects across the US is enough to supplant 44 coal-fired power stations or 11 nuclear power plants, will result in emission reductions that would equate to taking 14 million cars off the road, and -- because wind energy demands almost no water use -- conserves 30 billion gallons of water a year compared to thermal electric power generation. The milestone, as reported by The Guardian, was achieved thanks to a surge in new wind farms coming online as developers rush to complete projects before the possible lapsing of the US government's crucial production tax credit (PTC) at the end of this year. According to AWEA, over 2.8GW of capacity has now been added during the year to date, while total US wind energy capacity has doubled since 2008. The potential good news for the industry, however, is balanced
Re: [Biofuel] 'Clean Energy' Politics Take Energy Out of Wind Industry Sails
I'm pretty much deeply suspect of 'wind energy' on the commercial scale. I know how well it works on a homestead/farm scale, and that's pretty excellent stuff. But this big stuff? I ain't so sure. Here's my write up from a few years back: http://cubic-dog.blogspot.com/2010/06/wind-farms-some-considerations.html It won't be popular. But all the rebuttals I've gotten have been hyperbolic, not well reasoned. I welcome rational rebuttal/debate, but as we all know that's a tall order of folks. --me - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 8:43:16 PM Subject: [Biofuel] 'Clean Energy' Politics Take Energy Out of Wind Industry Sails http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/08/13-0 Published on Monday, August 13, 2012 by Common Dreams 'Clean Energy' Politics Take Energy Out of Wind Industry Sails US wind production soars, but politics threaten federal subsidies that have helped elevate industry - Common Dreams staff As the US wind energy industry hit a new milestone recently by reaching 50GW of power production, the industry trade group warns that 'the best of times' could become the 'worst of times' if a looming deadline to extend federal subsidies for clean energy investment is not met. The American Wind Energy Association, the lobbying arm of the wind industry, announced recently that the wind sector's 50GW (gigawatts) of capacity is enough to power nearly 13 million American homes, or as many as in Nevada, Colorado, Wisconsin, Virginia, Alabama, and Connecticut combined. In addition, the number of new operational wind projects across the US is enough to supplant 44 coal-fired power stations or 11 nuclear power plants, will result in emission reductions that would equate to taking 14 million cars off the road, and -- because wind energy demands almost no water use -- conserves 30 billion gallons of water a year compared to thermal electric power generation. The milestone, as reported by The Guardian, was achieved thanks to a surge in new wind farms coming online as developers rush to complete projects before the possible lapsing of the US government's crucial production tax credit (PTC) at the end of this year. According to AWEA, over 2.8GW of capacity has now been added during the year to date, while total US wind energy capacity has doubled since 2008. The potential good news for the industry, however, is balanced by the politics of clean energy subsidies in the middle of election year politics. These truly are the best of times and could be the worst of times for American wind power, said Denise Bode, CEO of the AWEA. This month we shattered the 50-gigawatt mark, and we're on pace for one of our best years ever in terms of megawatts installed. But because of the uncertainty surrounding the extension of the Production Tax Credit, incoming orders are grinding to a halt. The 'Production Tax Credit' was created under the George H.W. Bush administration and has been extended by each president since. President Obama included the most recent extension of the provision when he signed the Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, and, as the Washington Post notes specifically extended the wind credit through 2012 to allow wind energy producers to collect 10 years' worth of credits up front as a form of stimulus. But Republican candidate Mitt Romney has vowed to end the subsidy once and the GOP House and Senate leadership have vowed to do the same. Romney's campaign has said it would allow the credit to end in order to create a level playing field on which all sources of energy can compete on their merits, the Des Moines Register reported. At a moment when home-grown energy, renewable energy, is creating new jobs in Colorado and Iowa, my opponent wants to end tax credits for wind energy producers, Obama told supporters in Pueblo, Colo. The wind industry, however, says that layoffs are already occurring due to the politic uncertainty. Layoffs have begun up and down our American manufacturing supply chain, which the industry has so proudly has built up in support of the U.S. economy and made-in-the USA manufacturing. And when incoming orders stop, so do factories. Congress must act now to give wind energy a stable business environment to keep producing all this homegrown power, and save 37,000 American jobs by the first quarter of next year, Bode said. # # # ___ 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 mailing list
Re: [Biofuel] Solar, Wind other Alternatives
Hey Zeke; Interesting. I've pondered these things a lot over the last few years, and there seems to be some interesting points with them, mostly due to the internal resistance. Aside from the big pluses on their chemistry, which is gentle compared to most storage batteries out there, their seemingly limitless cycling ability, assuming you don't just abuse them to death, and such things: They really do seem to waste an awful lot of power, takes a lot to charge'em, and they don't give much back. If you have enough of them, I guess it's kinda a wash, but for a full duty cycle, it takes a lot of batteries and a lot of PV to do what can be done with less PV and fewer lead-acid batteries. Which is to say, I think I like the idea of nickle-iron more than the actual batteries themselves. Also, there is an outfit out your way (Lakewood) who is manufacturing nickel iron cells. They are called iron edison or something. - Original Message - From: Zeke Yewdall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, August 6, 2012 9:24:04 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Solar, Wind other Alternatives I'm not sure... but I am a big fan of the nickel iron cells (aside from the price of new ones... eek. The might be cheaper there, since they are only produced in china any more, and you're a little closer). Z On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 7:18 AM, Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wonder how big 2 x 200 amp/hour batteries would end up being? With a life span of about 50 years it would be worth giving them a go Homemade Edison Cell http://www.ehow.com/way_5993981_homemade-edison-cell.html Tony At 07:10 AM 6/08/2012 +0100, you wrote: Something I'd like to see is artisanal/homemade/cobbled Edison-cell batteries: perfectly viable but quite bulky, which shouldn't be a problem in a non-mobile application.-D -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20120806/e4b8b316/attachment.html ___ 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/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20120806/ec03d1f8/attachment.html ___ 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 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Solar, Wind other Alternatives
FWIW; Another vote for SMA inverters. Yeah, not cheap, but worth it. Solid technology. - Original Message - From: Zeke Yewdall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, August 6, 2012 10:10:37 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Solar, Wind other Alternatives For the grid-tie inverters, we have been using the SMA inverters quite a bit... not the cheapest ones out there, but they work reliably and do tell you what's going on -- we've used a lot of chinese made ones, and the failure rate has been less than desirable (30% or so on one brand). Z On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for the info on the Trimetric battery meter Zeke I did a quick Search and came up with http://www.bogartengineering.com/ for starters, will read up on it and will find out the best / cheapest way to get one, as we seem to be ripped off for everything here in AU Esp on Electrical Gadgets it probably will be cheaper to Import it from Anywhere other than AU ! No the Regulator doesn't have a meter just a few LEDs Being a bit of nerd that way I like to know more accurately what my figures are even though I am not that electronically Capable It drives me crazy for instance my 1kw Grid Inverter is a PVEdge it only has a very basic readout that only shows the units it has created since day one and for present readings it has 4 LEDS 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% and you don't know just exactly what you are collecting at any one given time I recently got my 86 year old mum into a 1.5 kw Grid solar setup ( $2200 installed Govt contributed 7000$ ) and her inverter tells you just about everything ! I am tempted to get it hooked to her computer and then I can monitor it Via TeamViewer from 100kms away from her place I have a new link for the Regulator MPPT60-2, 15V to 95V,3600w output Regulator Paid $300.00 Normally $649.00 http://www.gsl.com.au/mppt60.html Just as a point of interest as well When I put my system in just over 2 years ago the electricity Company ( Synergy) paid us 47cents per unit. They have since changed it to only 7 cents per unit. Tony At 07:06 AM 6/08/2012 -0600, you wrote: The link to your charge controller didn't work, so I'm not sure exactly what it has and does not have. But, usually, the meter for the solar panels is built into that. If not, a good all around meter is the trimetric battery meter -- it will measure battery voltage, and net amps (PV minus load -- so in a way it's measuring both your load and your PV, just not independently) as well as tracking amp hours in and out of the battery, to give you a battery state of charge (yes, you can also get that with a hydrometer, but it's way easier to look at a little display than to pop the battery caps off and take a hydrometer reading every few hours. It's about $185 here in the US... not sure if there are australian distributors or not. Z On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Folks I live in a small town 100km from Perth Western Australia and I have put ( on a very limited income ) up 1kw system ( subsidised by our Govt, my cost was 2500$ they contributed 8000$ ) I did this just over 2 years ago, and as the way the grid system works, if the grid power goes out, so does the solar system so we are still no better off . So the Alternative Energy Bug Bit harder ! I decided to set up a stand alone system and have been slowly getting together this ... System to date and costs so far 4 x Trojan 6V golf cart Batteries 205 amp/hour each ( this system is 24 volt ) These Batteries are 8 months old 4 for $200 as apposed to 175$ ex GST each new in Aust. ( Secondary lighting bank for led lighting and miscellaneous uses 2 x 12v 89amp/HR marine/Truck/4wd batteries ) http://www.supercheapauto.com.au/online-store/lights-electrical/automotive-batteries/4wd-truck-marine.aspx?id=5072 ( Am Still deciding if I will go 12v for lighting ) 2 x Monocrystalline Solar Panel 180W (24V) Paid $300.00 each . Normal price $669.00 EACH http://www.altronics.com.au/index.asp?area=itemid=N0180 MPPT60-2, 15V to 95V,3600w output Regulator Paid $300.00 Normally $649.00 http://www.gsl.com.au/products/solar_regulators.html#product3 4 x 6m lengths of 50 x 50 angle Iron for frame to mount solar panels on roof. with 10% Discount from Midalia Steel Welshpool Paid $148.00 Including cutting to 1.6m lengths (* I changed the design after buying the steel and could have saved buying 1 length of angle ! *) Calibre Battery Charger - 6/12/24V, 10 Amp, Smart Paid $144.00 normally $219.00
Re: [Biofuel] Solar, Wind other Alternatives
200 ah at what voltage? - Original Message - From: Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, August 6, 2012 9:18:37 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Solar, Wind other Alternatives I wonder how big 2 x 200 amp/hour batteries would end up being? With a life span of about 50 years it would be worth giving them a go Homemade Edison Cell http://www.ehow.com/way_5993981_homemade-edison-cell.html Tony At 07:10 AM 6/08/2012 +0100, you wrote: Something I'd like to see is artisanal/homemade/cobbled Edison-cell batteries: perfectly viable but quite bulky, which shouldn't be a problem in a non-mobile application.-D -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20120806/e4b8b316/attachment.html ___ 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 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] recovering an old stone lined septic,
Hey all; been /so/ long since i posted to this list. I miss ya'll, and hope some of you are still following it. we bought our forever place a year ago, and this coming weekend, we will christen/commission the first of our two composting toilets. after a LOT of deliberation, we decided to go the NSF certified route, in case we ever get into trouble with the local code officials (which is probably inevitable). We are planning the more simple/practical humanure approach for the privy in the woods, which we will not pull a permit on. :) At any rate, when we 'fire up' the composter this weekend, I can de-commission the old bathroom, and FINALLY stop using the toilet. When I went through the septic inspection (this place was originally built in 1835 or thereabouts) the inspector and I were pretty amazed to be staring down what was obviously the old stone-lined well. He explained that around these parts, when they brought in the water lines back in the 50s before the septic code requirements were in place, that some folks just trenched out to the old well and put in a pipe and capped it. Don't need that water no more, got that fancy city water now! I've -of course- had it pumped, and will likely have it pumped again. But that's not really going to do much when we are talking well over half a century of crapping down the well. The water table here is very close, within 10' and it's karst topography out here, but I'm at the base of the hollar and sitting on the old alluvial of the creek, and the ridges and rocks are mostly sandstone,and I've got PLENTY of that in the ground. Soo, what I want to do is introduce enzymes and bacteria that will start the long, slow work of undoing all the damage to the watertable. any ideas what bacteria and enzymes I'm looking for, and sources? thanx in advance, --chipper ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] China Benefits as US Solar Industry Withers
it's kinda crazy. SPI makes its panels in the US, But I *think* they actually ship the panels to china, to have them mounted, and then ship the finished panels back. This is what Evergreen was doing. This is just simply crazy. yes Zeke, I completely agree, this is what 'consumer demand' does. As i have stated on this list many times for many years, I have no problem with folks from China, et al, making this stuff for use there. It's the intercontinental transport aspect that makes me crazy. I just bought a dozen solarworld modules that were manufactured in the US, these were to replace the US manufactured Sharp modules that I just simply couldn't get. Oddly, it's kinda an aesthetic thing with me. I wanted the Sharps because they are polycrystalline. The SWs are mono, and the polys are beautiful to my eye, and monos are boring. :) - Original Message - From: Zeke Yewdall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, September 5, 2011 11:12:35 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] China Benefits as US Solar Industry Withers Yup China and SE asia is really taking over the solar panel business. Most distributors only sell chinese modules -- some have some japanese or american or european offerings, but not many. The two american companies mentioned -- first solar and Sunpower, are both made in southeast asia, not the US. And... modules coming out of Arizona, where alot of the US production is done, have had some quality issues recently. Part of this has been driven by US consumers themselves... by shopping only for the lowest cost solar power they can find, they push towards using cheaper chinese modules. Z On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/china-benefits-us-solar-industry-withers/1315063642 China Benefits as US Solar Industry Withers Saturday 3 September 2011 by: Keith Bradsher, The New York Times News Service | Report Hong Kong - The bankruptcies of three American solar power companies in the last month, including Solyndra of California on Wednesday, have left China's industry with a dominant sales position - almost three-fifths of the world's production capacity - and rapidly declining costs. Some American, Japanese and European solar companies still have a technological edge over Chinese rivals, but seldom a cost advantage, according to industry analysts. Loans at very low rates from state-owned banks in Beijing, cheap or free land from local and provincial governments across China, huge economies of scale and other cost advantages have transformed China from a minor player in the solar power industry just a few years ago into the main producer of an increasingly competitive source of electricity. The top-tier Chinese firms are kind of the benchmark now, said Shayle Kann, a managing director of solar power studies at GTM Research, a renewable energy market analysis firm based in Boston. Pricing of solar equipment is determined by the Chinese industry, he said, and everyone else prices at a premium or discount to them. Besides Solyndra, the other two American manufacturers that filed for bankruptcy in August were Evergreen Solar, of Massachusetts, and SpectraWatt, a New York company. Another company, BP Solar, halted manufacturing at its complex in Frederick, Md., last spring. Those bankruptcies and closings represent almost one-fifth of the solar panel manufacturing capacity in the United States, according to GTM Research. Solyndra and Evergreen in particular suffered because they pursued unusual technologies whose competitiveness depended on their using less polysilicon, the main material for solar panels. That has become less important because polysilicon prices have tumbled more than 80 percent in the last three years as output has caught up with demand. Analysts say that two American companies remain strongly placed. One is First Solar, the largest American manufacturer, which uses a different technology but has its biggest factory in Malaysia. The other, SunPower, is much smaller but is an industry leader in the efficiency with which its panels convert sunlight into electricity, so that they sell at a premium to Chinese panels. But with Beijing heavily supporting its industry, the Chinese companies are forging ahead. There is no question that renewable energy companies in the United States feel pressure from China, said David B. Sandalow, the assistant secretary for policy and international affairs at the United States Energy Department. Many of them say it is cheap capital, not cheap labor, that gives Chinese companies the main competitive advantage. China's three biggest solar power companies - Suntech Power, Yingli Green Energy and Trina Solar - have all in the last two weeks announced second-quarter sales increases of 33 to 63 percent from a year earlier. Yingli and Trina were also profitable in the quarter.
Re: [Biofuel] The Jobs Mirage: How Much More Work Do Humans Really Need?
Pretty funny, i was just ruminating on how the USDA has done an excellent job over the last 50 years of completely decimating the population of it's constituents. Furthermore, it's PROUD of it. The us Ag-Industry is PROUD of the fact that there are fewer folks involved in agriculture than ever before. Here in the US, we now have more people in prison than we have farmers. Now, that's progress! ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Time for U.S. to say yes to Canadian oil sands
on Thursday, September 1, 2011 1:48:16 PM Darryl McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Economically viable does not equal environmentally viable. Indeed. Economically viable has become nearly the antithesis of environmentally viable If 'nearly' applies. Some would say it IS the antithesis. http://ottawaaction.ca/join-us (Sept. 26th, 2011, Ottawa Parliament Hill re: Tar Sands mining) http://www.restco.ca/Inuvik_RT_Ottawa.shtml (Sept. 12-16, Ottawa, Canada Science and Technology Museum, Ottawa Forum concurrent with Inuvik Roundtable Review of Arctic Offshore Drilling - a more low-key affair). Darryl McMahon On 01/09/2011 1:30 PM, Keith Addison wrote: Really? http://search.japantimes.co.jp:80/mail/eo20110831rs.html Wednesday, Aug. 31, 2011 Time for U.S. to say yes to Canadian oil sands By ROBERT J. SAMUELSON The Washington Post WASHINGTON - When it comes to energy, America is lucky to be next to Canada, whose proven oil reserves are estimated by Oil and Gas Journal at 175 billion barrels. tar sands are NOT oil, they are an oil precursor. Like the marcellus shale, and all these 'bottom of the barrel' extraction schemes that are coming along these days, one expects there are investment scams at play here, rather than any actual measurable production. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Time for U.S. to say yes to Canadian oil sands
On Friday, September 2, 2011 10:04:50 AM Zeke Yewdall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Interesting that when you are addicted to coke, the problem does not seem to be the addition, but where to get more coke. Nowhere in the article did I see any discussion of reducing oil demand. Z Nor is it likely that you ever will. Where conservation is mentioned at all, it's always a footnote, an afterthought. There is NO MONEY to be made in conservation. You can't 'grow' the economy by spending LESS. Or, so they say. Personally i see huge opportunities from reducing economic growth, or rather in deliberate economic contraction. It's also pretty funny how google culture can't properly source 'you can't push the river' :) ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Bill Gates's Nuclear Miracle?
These are by far and away the safest reactors ever designed. As long as they remain unbuilt, they will remain so. - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 8:12:08 AM Subject: [Biofuel] Bill Gates's Nuclear Miracle? Also: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/nov/09/miniature-nuclear-reactors-los-alamos Mini nuclear plants to power 20,000 homes £13m shed-size reactors will be delivered by lorry John Vidal and Nick Rosen The Observer, Sunday 9 November 2008 http://allafrica.com/stories/201009170031.html South African Govt Halts Pebble Bed Modular Reactor Project 16 September 2010 http://sites.google.com/site/rethinkingnuclearpower/aimhigh Aim High! Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor Hmph. --0-- http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2010/03/23/bill-gates%E2%80%99s-nuclear-miracle-john-gilleland-says-terrapower-needs-discipline-not-divine-intervention/ Bill Gates's Nuclear Miracle? John Gilleland Says TerraPower Needs Discipline, Not Divine Intervention Gregory T. Huang 3/23/10 John Gilleland's first day on the job was a little different from most people's. The nuclear physicist showed up at Intellectual Ventures in Bellevue, WA, and sat down at the conference table with his new boss, CEO Nathan Myhrvold, and another, shall we say prominent, techie. The guy on my left looked familiar, Gilleland says. It was Bill Gates. Gilleland had been on the job for all of three minutes when Myhrvold said jokingly, John, you're late on your deliverables. That was back in December 2006. Gilleland is now CEO of TerraPower, the spinoff from Intellectual Ventures that is focused on creating a fundamentally new kind of nuclear reactor. It's the invention firm's biggest research project to date, spinning out as a separate entity in the fall of 2008 with 30-some staff and untold amounts of funding from Gates and other investors. It is a project that Intellectual Ventures likes to cite as a potentially transformative, homegrown invention. The basic idea is to create a reactor that needs only a small amount of enriched uranium to get started, and then uses depleted uranium (spent fuel) or natural, unenriched uranium to produce the nuclear-fission reactions necessary to generate power for 60 years or more without refueling. The design is called a traveling wave reactor, and the idea dates back to the early 1990s. If it works, the key benefits would be cheaper power, much more plentiful fuel, more efficient nuclear waste disposal, and less risk of nuclear proliferation. Gates has been gushing about the project as of late. He mentioned TerraPower prominently in his talk at the TED conference in California last month, calling out the proposed reactor design as a possible miracle innovation in the effort to provide clean energy to more of the world's population without increasing carbon emissions in the atmosphere. (Nuclear power provides about 20 percent of the electricity in the U.S.) Gilleland (see photo, left) has been given the keys to Gates and Myhrvold's nuclear kingdom for good reason. Previously, he co-founded and led Archimedes Technology Group, which developed improved techniques for cleaning up nuclear weapons waste, among other things. Before that, he was chief scientist and vice president of energy programs at Bechtel, and U.S. managing director of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) program for fusion energy, and he spent 16 years at General Atomics doing fusion research. The traveling wave reactor is certainly an intriguing idea, and one that could be a true breakthrough. But the question, skeptics say, is whether it can be made to really work-and how long that will take. The idea is that the reactor makes its own fuel and uses it as it goes along: the neutrons emitted by a small amount of enriched uranium convert depleted uranium into plutonium, which splits to produce energy and also emits more neutrons that continue to breed new fuel. There is no precedent for TerraPower's particular design, and the project faces some major challenges-technical, business, and regulatory. So far the physics has only been tested in computer simulations, albeit using the most advanced supercomputers available. (It's worth mentioning that only someone like Gates could afford to fund this and risk having it not work-which is exactly why Myhrvold sees the need for an invention capital industry.) On the plus side, the environment for nuclear power development is more promising than it has been in years. President Obama recently called for a new generation of nuclear plants to be built in the U.S.; they would be the first new ones in 30 years. Companies including General Atomics, General Electric, NuScale Power, and Hyperion Power Generation have burgeoning nuclear efforts in the U.S., as does General Fusion in British Columbia, and Areva, Hitachi, and
Re: [Biofuel] How do you get WVO?
What little WVO I've used, I've bought. I'm glad it's out of the 'waste' stream. - Original Message - From: Zeke Yewdall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 11:42:37 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] How do you get WVO? That's what's happened around here in the last few years... it's no longer considered waste -- you have to pay to get it, and pick it up regularly on a schedule, and all. In the bigger picture, this is good, the economy realizing that there is no waste and it can be used for other things -- at least for this small bit. But, it's also annoying for trying to make biodiesel from WVO... Z On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Richard Slinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So far I have made a L of BD from pure VO. Then I made a L from WVO. I've moved up to the 5 gal bucket and have done the same. That is 5 gal and 1 L of Pure VO (not cheap btw) and 5 gal 1 L of WVO. It took a while to get all that WVO. I've gone to over 30 restaurants trying to get WVO and they aren't giving it up at all. They are all, emphasize ALL, using Valley Protein. It turns out that they are paying the restaurants $40 per barrel. How can I compete with that? Any ideas guys? Thanks to all Dick -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20110809/18248580/attachment.html ___ 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 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 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Seeking Help - Lister-Petter 1-cylinder diesel engine
As you are no doubt aware, diesels require a *lot* of compression to fire. You may not be able to get it spinning fast enough to build enough compression to get it to fire, esp since the engine hasn't run in many years, and was likely pretty worn when it was taken out of service. I'd shoot a 1/4 second shot of ether into the air intake. Not much more. just a bit. The ether will allow the engine to fire compression and it might take off and run. Worth a try. - Original Message - From: Darryl McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Sunday, August 7, 2011 3:36:44 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Seeking Help - Lister-Petter 1-cylinder diesel engine Background Neither my son or I are really heat engine kind of people. I'm more about electric drive stuff, and my son is an aviation electronics technician. So, where my ignorance of diesel engines shows through, my apologies in advance. I received this engine a few years ago, effectively for free. I figured a small diesel should be hard to really break, and it might come in useful someday. Now, I have 2 or 3 potential uses for it. The previous owner had it for several years, and never tried to start it. He delivered it to me covered with a cardboard box, saying it was a Lombardini. According to him, the owner before him had stored it for several years, and never tried to start it. The story is that the original application for the engine was to power highway information signs before the LED / photovoltaic panel age. In the past few days, my son and I have found ourselves with an unaccustomed amount of free garage floor space, and some time (mostly due to other projects not appearing, not having parts available, or dropping in priority). Our current objective is to get the engine running. If successful, we will then invest in upgrading/replacing all the consumables (filters, hoses). We took the cardboard off to find it is not a Lombardini, but a Lister-Petter. It has an electric starter - including solenoid - and what appears to be a heavy-duty alternator attached (driven by a V-belt. The latter would be consistent with the highway sign application. No fuel tank. At least one fuel-related hose was cut. No electrical wiring of any kind still attached. No keys or obvious keyholes. There is a Made in England sticker on the top of it. No documentation of any kind came with the engine. The name plate indicates it is a AC1 model, which means it likely dates from somewhere between 1970 and 1985. http://www.winget.co.uk/document/LISTER%20PETTER%20AC-AD%20OPERATORS%20MANUAL.pdf We have been consulting this documentation for information. Parts manual: http://www.stategen.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/stategen_lister-petter_ac1_ad1_parts.pdf Operations manual: http://www.winget.co.uk/document/LISTER%20PETTER%20AC-AD%20OPERATORS%20MANUAL.pdf Recent Activity We have changed the oil (2.7 litres of diesel oil put in, which agrees with just over full on the dipstick. The old oil was quite unattractive. We jury-rigged a fuel tank from a go-kart fuel tank (scavenged from another electric conversion project). We bought fresh fuel, cleaned out the tank with methanol, and put the fuel in the tank and pressurized the fuel side sufficiently to find a leak in one of the hoses that came with the engine, downstream from the fuel filter - so fuel is getting at least that far. Jury-rigged a repair for that - no further leaking. Exhaust system is in place. The air filter is filthy, so we have removed it for commissioning purposes. (Will definitely replace it if we can get the engine running, along with the fuel and oil filters). We tried rope-starting yesterday. About all we concluded from that exercise (and I mean that literally) was that the cylinder seems to have good compression, and the decompressor lever is effective. We have tried the stop/run lever in both positions, and that made no difference. Today we attached casters to the frame to make it easier to move around, and worked out the connections for the electric starter, replaced the missing wiring, attached a battery and proved up the solenoid and starter motor. At least I hope we can retire the starting rope as a result. We turned the engine over and proved the starter turns the cylinder in the same direction as the rope starter (given it is Lucas starter and solenoid, we weren't really sure if it would be positive or negative ground. We are using negative ground, and that appears to be working. Like I said, I'm more an electrics kind of guy.) We rolled the engine on electric power several times, for up to 30 seconds, but no evidence of ignition, no smoke, white or black. Looks like we might have some raw fuel coming out the exhaust pipe. Still Not Running However, it still is not running. We're looking for more information. A couple of possible clues from the Web. I've had this engine
Re: [Biofuel] A Manifesto for Earth
Just a couple of thoughts that are relevant. Bill Doer's 'Tenets of basic Foundational Forestry' http://cubic-dog.blogspot.com/2010/09/tenents-of-basic-foundational-forestry.html and of course: What is the prime product of the farm? The prime product of the farm is soil. any farming enterprise that cannot increase soil fertility is doomed. The soil is the principal and primary product of the farm. - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 10:26:37 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] A Manifesto for Earth Quite nice, but it's a bit weak on soil, nothing about fertility maintenance, without due attention to which all other efforts are considerably weakened. See Small Farms Library: http://journeytoforever.org/farm_library.html It covers ethics and philosophy. Best Keith I have been looking for a clear statement and vision on environmental ethics and philosophy. The best I have seen thus far is A Manifesto for Earth by Ted Mosquin and Stan Rowe. If you have not read it I highly recommend doing so. If you know of a better statement, or prefer others, please direct me to them. As this was published in 2004 I assume there have been more recent developments since. See below for the text of this paper: A Manifesto for Earth (HTML 42.6 Kb file) (Mosquin and Rowe) http://www.ecospherics.net/pages/EarthManifesto.html A Manifesto for Earth (PDF 2.5Mb file) (Mosquin and Rowe) http://www.ecospherics.net/pages/EarthManifesto.pdf ___ 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 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Bicycle and pedestrian funding in danger
Dawie Coetzee [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Wednesday, July 20, 2011 4:27:04 AM Dawie Coetzee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think the average American city can solve at least 50% of its transport problem simply by allowing shophouses in all its neighbourhoods. You'll find no argument with me. The idea of the shophouse/cottage industry is just pure common sense. it is the future. Ready or not, here it comes. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] The Market Is Lying: Why We Must Tax Carbon, Not Subsidize It
The only way to actually 'cap' in a meaningful way, is to cap it at the source. As in, cap it off. - Original Message - From: Thomas Irwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 7:12:20 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The Market Is Lying: Why We Must Tax Carbon, Not Subsidize It Why not cap and trade and tax carbon. Taxing carbon can give you the immediate benefit that the climate desperately needs. Taxing is something countries can do as individuals that benefits their economic balance sheets upon implementation. Cap and trade has many holes and needs to be ratified by each and every government. Waiting until an enforcable cap and trade system is in place world wide just lets the greenhouse gas pollution continue. The taxes can be phased out as each country wishes perhaps based on their participation and benefit from cap and trade. On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Chip Mefford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Keith Addison wrote: Sweden has been using a carbon tax since 1991. It works. See http://www.carbontax.org http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/25/0/2108273.pdf If markets are to deliver a least-cost economy then prices have to be corrected to include costs external to market transactions. Taxes are the simplest and most efficient way to do this. Alfred Pigou introduced the concept in the 1920s. We're a little slow catching on. :-) Funny, that. Thanks Doug - all best Keith I'm not sure of how well that would work on a planetary scale. For one thing, you'd need to get all affected governments to agree on some authority to tax. No, I think cap and trade is the best approach. Cap the carbon at the mine entrance, at the well head. Then trade stuff you have, for other stuff you want. ___ 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/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20110714/5665f64e/attachment.html ___ 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 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/
Re: [Biofuel] The Market Is Lying: Why We Must Tax Carbon, Not Subsidize It
Keith Addison wrote: Sweden has been using a carbon tax since 1991. It works. See http://www.carbontax.org http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/25/0/2108273.pdf If markets are to deliver a least-cost economy then prices have to be corrected to include costs external to market transactions. Taxes are the simplest and most efficient way to do this. Alfred Pigou introduced the concept in the 1920s. We're a little slow catching on. :-) Funny, that. Thanks Doug - all best Keith I'm not sure of how well that would work on a planetary scale. For one thing, you'd need to get all affected governments to agree on some authority to tax. No, I think cap and trade is the best approach. Cap the carbon at the mine entrance, at the well head. Then trade stuff you have, for other stuff you want. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Petroleum alternatives, yes; How about Nuclear?
Hey Zeke; Zeke Yewdall wrote On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 5:02 AM, Chip Mefford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about we just turn away from hard path energy all together and embrace the soft path? Soft path energy approaches lead us off into an uncertain future. The hard path leads us to oblivion. Isn't it interesting that the majority of people seem to prefer oblivion rather than uncertainty? It is interesting. So many folks will say (And I think they say it without thinking about what they are saying) I have no desire to live through $some_coming_big_change Or What does it matter, we'll all just die anyway? and stuff like this. Some of these folks are the gentle loving good neighbor types who are a joy to know. it's like somehow they are emotionally incapable to see anything other than cornucopian utopia and certain annihilation. it is very strange. There are so very many other approaches to every challenge we face, and such unwillingness to embrace them. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Petroleum alternatives, yes; How about Nuclear?
How about we just turn away from hard path energy all together and embrace the soft path? Soft path energy approaches lead us off into an uncertain future. The hard path leads us to oblivion. Rather than arguing over what car to drive, why not take a hard look at not driving cars at all. it's not really a question of how will we energize our global infrastructure, but rather of what value is that global infrastructure in the first place if it leads where it is headed? The future, as I've heard it expressed here before, is small settlements, towns, hamlets and maybe even a small city just a few days ride, all supported by their immediate landbase. This model has worked for tens of thousands of years into the past, it will work for tens of thousands of years into the future. It scales up into the billions across the globe, and scales down to a few hundred thousand, or even less. But is scales. We can embrace it, or resist it, but it IS the future. If not by intention then by consolation. Paul Landis wrote; If someone complains about the toxic use of Petroleum/Gas, they can be informed that there are reliable, available alternatives: SVO and or Biodiesel. And people on this list have done volumes to make this important alternative reality. How about Nuclear? A friend of mine, a scientist, pointed out that all the nuclear plant does is to create steam which power the turbine which drives the generator. Alternatives: Steam created from natural gas obtained without fracking; and how about large commercial diesel engines running on SVO or Biodiesel. Here there is not need to even have the costly equipment to handle the steam and run the turbines. Paul Landis [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Trees not cure for global warming
Hey Lee; that's a negative. Of the solar energy that hits the tree canopy, much of it gets used, which cuts down on the reflectivity. Further, by the usual way in which we think about stuff, this could be considered excess or waste heat. Lots of stuff go on in photosynthesis, not the least of which is transpiration, which in turn, has a cooling effect on the low-thermal-mass 'air' surrounding the forest. Compare a walk in the forest to a walk in the desert at the same latitudes. The same energy has arrived, but the plethora of processes involved in the growing of trees, vegetative materials, etc make a lot of direct use of that energy. Furthermore, these processes involve utilizing solar energy to make use of atmospheric carbon to make living stuff. This living stuff stores this atmospheric carbon over a very long period of time. No, the energy arrives and does NOT leave by the same means. This is one of the unique aspects of life. - Original Message - From: Lee Dyson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 7:58:29 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Trees not cure for global warming I would have thought that the solar gain on bare earth would have been the same as the solar gain when the trees are heated. The same sun and solar intensity has entered the same atmosphere. The same energy has arrived and must leave our planet by the same means, no matter where/what it hits. Nay sayers want us to over think things and get confused. Lee On 24/06/2011, at 12:39 AM, Zeke Yewdall wrote: On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Thomas Irwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would also think that is the ground is covered in reflective snow would not the trees also be covered. That would be with evergreen treees. Not necesarily -- here in high country in Colorado, the trees are not covered for the majority of the winter (mostly from wind blowing the snow off of them, but sometimes also it melts off the trees), but the ground is covered for 6 months except on the sunniest south facing slopes. Generally, there is more snow where the trees are, because they catch it from the wind and cause drifts, instead of letting it just all blow away, plus they shade the snow and allow it to last longer into the spring and summer. But, anyway, it's still much cooler with trees than without -- all the sun being caught by zillions of needles instead of just one flat surface near the ground. Deciduous trees would have no leaves so the snow effect would be the same. Also the initial absorbtion of sunlight on leaf surfaces would occur 30 meters in the air causing a more gradual heating. The leaves are performing transpiration which causes evaporative cooling. The comparison is wrong as well. The comparison should be between forest heating vs desert heating. Life and systems are a lot more complex than even most scientists and modelers can see. On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Bruno M. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FYI: ~~ www.leaderpost.com/technology/Study%20trees%20cure%20global%20warming/4967756/story.html By Margaret Munro, Postmedia News June 18, 2011 Study: trees not cure for global warming Planting trees may help appease travellers' guilt about pumping carbon into the atmosphere. But new research suggests it will do little to cool the planet, especially when trees are planted in Canada and other northern countries, says climatologist Alvaro Montenegro, at St. Francis Xavier University in Nova Scotia. There is no magic bullet for global warming, says Montenegro, and trees are certainly not going to be providing it. He assessed the impact of replanting forests on crop and marginal lands with Environment Canada researcher Vivek Arora. Their study, published Sunday in Nature Geoscience, concludes afforestation is not a substitute for reduced greenhouse-gas emissions. The United Nations, environmental groups and carbon-offset companies are invested heavily in the idea that planting trees will help slow climate change and global warming. International authorities have long described afforestation as a key climate-change mitigation strategy. But the study says the benefits of tree planting are marginal when it comes to stopping the planet from overheating. Trees do suck carbon out of the air, but the study highlights that their dark leaves and needles also decrease the amount of solar radiation that gets reflected by the landscape, which has a warming effect. Cropland - especially snow-covered cropland - has a cooling effect because it reflects a lot more solar energy than forests, the scientists say. This so-called albedo effect is important and needs to be incorporated into assessments of tree planting programs and projects, the researchers say. Montenegro and Arora stress that planting forests has many benefits -
Re: [Biofuel] Are We on the Brink of Burying Nuke Power Forever?
Just wanted to say, I keep reading this thread subject as Are We on the Brink of Buying Nuke Power Forever? And I'd have to say, yes. Forever and ever, in any human-scaled timeline. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Trees not cure for global warming
Trees do a whole lot more than 'just' sink carbon. and 'we' are losing forests, not gaining forests. Net LOSS Not Net Gain. - Original Message - From: Bruno M. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 9:24:07 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Trees not cure for global warming FYI: ~~ www.leaderpost.com/technology/Study%20trees%20cure%20global%20warming/4967756/story.html By Margaret Munro, Postmedia News June 18, 2011 Study: trees not cure for global warming Planting trees may help appease travellers' guilt about pumping carbon into the atmosphere. But new research suggests it will do little to cool the planet, especially when trees are planted in Canada and other northern countries, says climatologist Alvaro Montenegro, at St. Francis Xavier University in Nova Scotia. There is no magic bullet for global warming, says Montenegro, and trees are certainly not going to be providing it. He assessed the impact of replanting forests on crop and marginal lands with Environment Canada researcher Vivek Arora. Their study, published Sunday in Nature Geoscience, concludes afforestation is not a substitute for reduced greenhouse-gas emissions. The United Nations, environmental groups and carbon-offset companies are invested heavily in the idea that planting trees will help slow climate change and global warming. International authorities have long described afforestation as a key climate-change mitigation strategy. But the study says the benefits of tree planting are marginal when it comes to stopping the planet from overheating. Trees do suck carbon out of the air, but the study highlights that their dark leaves and needles also decrease the amount of solar radiation that gets reflected by the landscape, which has a warming effect. Cropland - especially snow-covered cropland - has a cooling effect because it reflects a lot more solar energy than forests, the scientists say. This so-called albedo effect is important and needs to be incorporated into assessments of tree planting programs and projects, the researchers say. Montenegro and Arora stress that planting forests has many benefits - trees provide habitat for wildlife and prevent soil erosion. And planting forests does help reduce atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide because carbon is locked into wood as trees grow. But planting trees will have only a modest effect on the global temperature, according to their study, which used a sophisticated climate modelling system developed by Environment Canada. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20110621/6c11ec05/attachment.html ___ 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 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Trees not cure for global warming
Sorry, I don't know much, but this is something I actually do know about. And this article really got my goat, as it were. - Original Message - From: Chip Mefford [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 2:41:08 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Trees not cure for global warming Trees do a whole lot more than 'just' sink carbon. and 'we' are losing forests, not gaining forests. Net LOSS Not Net Gain. - Original Message - From: Bruno M. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 9:24:07 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Trees not cure for global warming FYI: ~~ www.leaderpost.com/technology/Study%20trees%20cure%20global%20warming/4967756/story.html By Margaret Munro, Postmedia News June 18, 2011 Study: trees not cure for global warming Planting trees may help appease travellers' guilt about pumping carbon into the atmosphere. But new research suggests it will do little to cool the planet, especially when trees are planted in Canada and other northern countries, says climatologist Alvaro Montenegro, at St. Francis Xavier University in Nova Scotia. There is no magic bullet for global warming, says Montenegro, and trees are certainly not going to be providing it. He assessed the impact of replanting forests on crop and marginal lands with Environment Canada researcher Vivek Arora. Their study, published Sunday in Nature Geoscience, concludes afforestation is not a substitute for reduced greenhouse-gas emissions. The United Nations, environmental groups and carbon-offset companies are invested heavily in the idea that planting trees will help slow climate change and global warming. International authorities have long described afforestation as a key climate-change mitigation strategy. But the study says the benefits of tree planting are marginal when it comes to stopping the planet from overheating. Trees do suck carbon out of the air, but the study highlights that their dark leaves and needles also decrease the amount of solar radiation that gets reflected by the landscape, which has a warming effect. Cropland - especially snow-covered cropland - has a cooling effect because it reflects a lot more solar energy than forests, the scientists say. This so-called albedo effect is important and needs to be incorporated into assessments of tree planting programs and projects, the researchers say. Montenegro and Arora stress that planting forests has many benefits - trees provide habitat for wildlife and prevent soil erosion. And planting forests does help reduce atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide because carbon is locked into wood as trees grow. But planting trees will have only a modest effect on the global temperature, according to their study, which used a sophisticated climate modelling system developed by Environment Canada. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20110621/6c11ec05/attachment.html ___ 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 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Andrea Rossi and his approach to Cold Fussion
Alex Rodriguez wrote: Hello everyone! I'm just wondering if any of you has looked into Andrea Rossi and his approach to Cold Fussion. According to reports I've found over the net, they are about to go commercial in Greece with a 1MW power plant by October. I found the following web site to contain the most detailed information about this approach to Cold Fussion: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/ I found the information rather stunning but then again, I'm not an expert on the subject. Nonetheless, this technology is worth a look. Regards,Alex Been following this since '89, first with a lot of interest, a bit of healthy skeptical doubt, but mostly hopeful. In very short order, the skeptical side starting winning. Was even subscribed to Cold Fusion magazine for a while. What I've learned from these decades can be summed up here: Here's a quick and simple checklist: 1) Principal inventor has no education in the field? Check 2) Actual operation would require a rewriting of the science of the field? Check 3) Demonstrations geared towards 'infotainment' rather than accurate measurement? Check 4) Claims to have a patent? Check 5) Paranoid secrecy despite claim of patent protection? Check 6) Appeals to authority rather than science? Check 7) Claims of large yet uncompleted business deals/investments? Check ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Fwd: New Engine 100 MPG
- Original Message - From: Darryl McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2011 9:43:14 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Fwd: New Engine 100 MPG I expect to be picking up my 'new' ride this coming Sunday. BIG SNIP He does appreciate the irony that his job is about the use and maintenance of aircraft, any one of which will burn more petro fuel in an hour than he is saving in a season of e-commuting. Darryl Small steps, that's how we do it, small steps matter. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Fwd: New Engine 100 MPG
Hey Fritz; Even though I grew up and live in the states, I remember isettas/500s/hillman hunters/austin 1000s and all those fun things. I even know where there is about 85% of a messerschmitt in a barn not too far away. I loved those cars, all of them. My dad, back in '62, opted for a large car, a VW kaefer, and never looked back, had VDubs until he died. The new 500 could carry a *real* 500 in it's boot. And yes, it is all a rip off. Wanna make the roads really safer, rather than politically safer? Pull those driver's side airbags and replace them with a sharpened 6 steel spike pointing at the drivers chest. Fixed! No more 'accidents'. Now folks can drive tiny and seriously stingy-on-the-fuel vehicles again. - Original Message - From: Fritz Friesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, June 3, 2011 12:57:48 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Fwd: New Engine 100 MPG Hello Chip, when I startet out with my first car,a Lloyd Alexander Ts , 19hp the consumption was not that a big of a deal (1966) but just the same one did not drive just to burn fuel. I dont recall how much that yellow streetsinger burnt at the time,but there have been cars around then with less than 3liters consumption per 100km witch comes closed to the 100Mper Gallon thing. some Vehicles like the Messerschmitt cabinscooter or the little Gogomobil,and than the Renaults or the500Fiat. Big enough to get your But around,but not to impress lotsa girls! And there we go: A man and his symbols The Americans startet with the oversize Bathtops,lately I saw a 500 Fiat in Montreal ,shorter that little thing as a Chevy wide! My Brothers BMW Isetta, The one who opened the door to the front parked cross as well as long! You came a long a parking spot pulled the Handbrake and the thing jumped in the spot (Cross) and it never failed to do so The are all gone and I really dont know why Fiat shoud get the Price they ask for the new 500! Its all a rip off! Fritz -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20110603/35fd92f2/attachment.html ___ 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 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Fwd: New Engine 100 MPG
Oh, and as a follow-up, here's an incomplete list of cars I have owned in my life, I know I've left some out. http://cubic-dog.blogspot.com/2010/07/cars-i-have-owned.html - Original Message - From: Chip Mefford [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, June 3, 2011 1:52:52 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Fwd: New Engine 100 MPG Hey Fritz; Even though I grew up and live in the states, I remember isettas/500s/hillman hunters/austin 1000s and all those fun things. I even know where there is about 85% of a messerschmitt in a barn not too far away. I loved those cars, all of them. My dad, back in '62, opted for a large car, a VW kaefer, and never looked back, had VDubs until he died. The new 500 could carry a *real* 500 in it's boot. And yes, it is all a rip off. Wanna make the roads really safer, rather than politically safer? Pull those driver's side airbags and replace them with a sharpened 6 steel spike pointing at the drivers chest. Fixed! No more 'accidents'. Now folks can drive tiny and seriously stingy-on-the-fuel vehicles again. - Original Message - From: Fritz Friesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, June 3, 2011 12:57:48 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Fwd: New Engine 100 MPG Hello Chip, when I startet out with my first car,a Lloyd Alexander Ts , 19hp the consumption was not that a big of a deal (1966) but just the same one did not drive just to burn fuel. I dont recall how much that yellow streetsinger burnt at the time,but there have been cars around then with less than 3liters consumption per 100km witch comes closed to the 100Mper Gallon thing. some Vehicles like the Messerschmitt cabinscooter or the little Gogomobil,and than the Renaults or the500Fiat. Big enough to get your But around,but not to impress lotsa girls! And there we go: A man and his symbols The Americans startet with the oversize Bathtops,lately I saw a 500 Fiat in Montreal ,shorter that little thing as a Chevy wide! My Brothers BMW Isetta, The one who opened the door to the front parked cross as well as long! You came a long a parking spot pulled the Handbrake and the thing jumped in the spot (Cross) and it never failed to do so The are all gone and I really dont know why Fiat shoud get the Price they ask for the new 500! Its all a rip off! Fritz -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20110603/35fd92f2/attachment.html ___ 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 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 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Safe nuclear does exist, and China is leading the way with thorium - Telegraph
Yes, safe nuclear does exist. Any plant that hasn't been built is much safer than any one that is. Besides, we already have fusion, right up there, about 93 million or so miles away, and since we are already forced to deal with it's safety issues regardless of our use of the power, we may as well focus on that. - Original Message - From: bmolloy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, June 1, 2011 7:08:05 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Safe nuclear does exist, and China is leading the way with thorium - Telegraph According to the Telegraph, safe nuclear does exist, and China is leading the way with thorium. Link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/8393984/Sa fe-nuclear-does-exist-and-China-is-leading-the-way-with-thorium.html (via shareaholic.com) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20110602/2a086a90/attachment.html ___ 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 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Human Intelligence and the Environment
Interesting discussion; I've heard it postulated that having a significant prefrontal cortex allows us humans to -if we work really really hard at it- achieve something that isn't pure evil. That said, we -as a species- don't really like to use our prefrontal cortex all that much. We prefer to act based on emotion, action-re-action. That's much easier. We have a pretty strong evolutionary precedent for acting on what serves us in the short term, the long term nearly always can only be considered to beneficial to others, not us, not directly. But what about yeast? How intelligent is yeast? Are there yeast cells that become aware of the walls of the petri dish? Do they tell their neighbors? Do the neighbors shout them down, calling them unpatriotic, traitors, communists, etc? No, yeast cells probably don't ever become aware of the walls of the petri dish, probably never become aware of the depletion of the agar. But then again, neither do we. So, as an experiment goes, this is a pretty good one, and the empirical results are pretty telling. Intelligence? Where? ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough.
It ended, we're in the anthropocene. - Original Message - From: Joe Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, May 4, 2011 10:38:49 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough. Yep. Like it or not the earth is going to warm up, the Holocene is coming to an end. Even filling the deserts with panels will only hurry it along. J On 04/05/2011 10:12 AM, Zeke Yewdall wrote: Well... it just goes to prove that you cannot supply side yourself out of the problem... if houses are going to use 1000 or 5000kWh per month, switching to solar will be better than coal... but not really a solution. ___ 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 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough.
Well, that mindset, as strange as it seems, is actually backed by a couple of centuries of historical precedent. Note, historical precedent, not scientific precedent. No, not the same. Statistical precedents are used to come up with all kinds of whacky stuff. Take a look at the IEA's projections, as a for instance. this will happen, because it always has in the past. I often ponder, if a few yeast cells became aware of the walls of the petri dish, would they then get shouted down by their fellow yeast cells for being gloomy and depressing and told repeatedly that everything will be fine because things have always been fine. Are we actually smarter than yeast? Empirical evidence suggests, , , , - Original Message - From: Zeke Yewdall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, May 3, 2011 11:53:04 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough. I just love the people who don't think they need to do anything to prevent global warming or pollution or whatever, because technolgy will come to the rescue... then refuse to use the technology that could actually help alleviate the issue...I don't need to worry about the emissions from all the electrical loads in my house because technology will find a way to keep the pollution from that from being a problem... uh... there already IS this technology that can make electricity from nothing else than the sun that already falls on your roof -- oh, and it also has no moving parts and will last about 30 or 40 years. What more technology are you freaking waiting for. You want your cake and to eat it too... but even that's not good enough... you want a robot to chew it for you, and then to not get fat from eating cake all day. On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Chip Mefford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brilliant! yet still another reason to not deploy PV solar! Seems like every time PV solar gets legs, an announcement of a breakthrough technology (was in NanoSolar last time?) comes along explaining how PV solar is now 'Obsolete' and this emerging technology will make solar power ubiquitous and too cheap to meter. Great, where can I buy it? Oh, I can't buy it? But I'd be stupid to buy anything else right? So I should wait, right? Exactly. Well done. - Original Message - From: bmolloy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Sunday, May 1, 2011 6:21:54 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough. Solar Power Breakthrough Could Render Photovoltaic Cells Obsolete Link: http://www.activistpost.com/2011/04/solar-power-breakthrough-could-render.ht ml (via shareaholic.com) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20110502/7edcd967/attachment.html ___ 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 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/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20110503/1d757ad4/attachment.html ___ 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 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough.
Yes, you're correct. Much better to use that power to run furnaces to make beer and coke cans. That's a better use of the power. - Original Message - From: Joe Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, May 3, 2011 3:08:00 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough. I thought Chip was being sarcastic, not that he was actually proposing that people wait, but that many stupid people will perceive it as a reason to wait. On the other hand until the day comes that silicon foundries are using solar energy to do the job of making cells, and indeed panels, the environmental influence of solar energy is actually nothing to brag about. Take a look at the amount of dirty energy it takes to make your nice clean green solar panels. I have a small czochralski furnace here capable of growing only about 20kg silicon crystals, half of which will be wasted in the wafering process. It alone uses about 45kw for about 12 hrs to grow one crystal and that is not even the very beginning of the story. Not even close. Many of the EROEI claims for solar PV assume purified silicon as a starting point. Some even assume starting from silicon wafers and tell you the break even point is just a few years. This is a big deception. One day I'd like to see a foundry running on solar energy. That is the first need. Joe On 03/05/2011 11:53 AM, Zeke Yewdall wrote: I just love the people who don't think they need to do anything to prevent global warming or pollution or whatever, because technolgy will come to the rescue... then refuse to use the technology that could actually help alleviate the issue...I don't need to worry about the emissions from all the electrical loads in my house because technology will find a way to keep the pollution from that from being a problem... uh... there already IS this technology that can make electricity from nothing else than the sun that already falls on your roof -- oh, and it also has no moving parts and will last about 30 or 40 years. What more technology are you freaking waiting for. You want your cake and to eat it too... but even that's not good enough... you want a robot to chew it for you, and then to not get fat from eating cake all day. On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Chip Mefford[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brilliant! yet still another reason to not deploy PV solar! Seems like every time PV solar gets legs, an announcement of a breakthrough technology (was in NanoSolar last time?) comes along explaining how PV solar is now 'Obsolete' and this emerging technology will make solar power ubiquitous and too cheap to meter. Great, where can I buy it? Oh, I can't buy it? But I'd be stupid to buy anything else right? So I should wait, right? Exactly. Well done. - Original Message - From: bmolloy[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Sunday, May 1, 2011 6:21:54 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough. Solar Power Breakthrough Could Render Photovoltaic Cells Obsolete Link: http://www.activistpost.com/2011/04/solar-power-breakthrough-could-render.ht ml (via shareaholic.com) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20110502/7edcd967/attachment.html ___ 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 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/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20110503/1d757ad4/attachment.html ___ 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 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
Re: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough.
Sorry, I'm just pretty sick of 30+ years of folks coming up with every single reason on earth to avoid PV solar like the plague, and I think, after a lot of years of careful study, , that it's all bullshit. All of it. Here's your solar foundry/breeder, http://cpm01.smugmug.com/Other/solar-stuff/16662355_zWC5F2#1256330469_zWL85tR-XL-LB It was built back in the late 80s, decommissioned recently. was never 'cost effective' whatever the hell that means. But it did work. http://cpm01.smugmug.com/Other/solar-stuff/16662355_zWC5F2#1256336745_m9CKmgV-XL-LB - Original Message - From: Chip Mefford [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, May 3, 2011 4:46:43 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough. Yes, you're correct. Much better to use that power to run furnaces to make beer and coke cans. That's a better use of the power. - Original Message - From: Joe Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, May 3, 2011 3:08:00 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough. I thought Chip was being sarcastic, not that he was actually proposing that people wait, but that many stupid people will perceive it as a reason to wait. On the other hand until the day comes that silicon foundries are using solar energy to do the job of making cells, and indeed panels, the environmental influence of solar energy is actually nothing to brag about. Take a look at the amount of dirty energy it takes to make your nice clean green solar panels. I have a small czochralski furnace here capable of growing only about 20kg silicon crystals, half of which will be wasted in the wafering process. It alone uses about 45kw for about 12 hrs to grow one crystal and that is not even the very beginning of the story. Not even close. Many of the EROEI claims for solar PV assume purified silicon as a starting point. Some even assume starting from silicon wafers and tell you the break even point is just a few years. This is a big deception. One day I'd like to see a foundry running on solar energy. That is the first need. Joe On 03/05/2011 11:53 AM, Zeke Yewdall wrote: I just love the people who don't think they need to do anything to prevent global warming or pollution or whatever, because technolgy will come to the rescue... then refuse to use the technology that could actually help alleviate the issue...I don't need to worry about the emissions from all the electrical loads in my house because technology will find a way to keep the pollution from that from being a problem... uh... there already IS this technology that can make electricity from nothing else than the sun that already falls on your roof -- oh, and it also has no moving parts and will last about 30 or 40 years. What more technology are you freaking waiting for. You want your cake and to eat it too... but even that's not good enough... you want a robot to chew it for you, and then to not get fat from eating cake all day. On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Chip Mefford[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brilliant! yet still another reason to not deploy PV solar! Seems like every time PV solar gets legs, an announcement of a breakthrough technology (was in NanoSolar last time?) comes along explaining how PV solar is now 'Obsolete' and this emerging technology will make solar power ubiquitous and too cheap to meter. Great, where can I buy it? Oh, I can't buy it? But I'd be stupid to buy anything else right? So I should wait, right? Exactly. Well done. - Original Message - From: bmolloy[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Sunday, May 1, 2011 6:21:54 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough. Solar Power Breakthrough Could Render Photovoltaic Cells Obsolete Link: http://www.activistpost.com/2011/04/solar-power-breakthrough-could-render.ht ml (via shareaholic.com) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20110502/7edcd967/attachment.html ___ 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 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/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail
Re: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough.
In a grossly oversimplified nutshell, Some folks figured the work they were doing at Comsat was a waste of time, split off, opened their own shop with a little help from their friends, made some PV cells, figured their process was cool, went looking for venture capital, comsat filed suit for patent infringement, venture capitalists headed for the hills, but a few stayed, they started Solarex, and made some more cells, then made a few panels, government did find it interested, ordered some, they got some money, and then an angel in the form of Amoco came along, promising the moon, allowed the breeder to get built, and panels to get churned out, but it wasn't 'cost effective' and Amoco put them in a cash stranglehold, and managed to assume ownership of the company. Then Amoco 'merged' with BP, and the marginalization was a fait accompli. Solarex ceased to be, and the panels ceased to be manufactured, everything gone to the pacific rim. Why BP hasn't torn the building down is a mystery to me. Guess they figure it's rotting husk, right outside the DC Beltway (frederick md) is a good reminder not to play your game on their turf (energy). - Original Message - From: Joe Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, May 3, 2011 5:02:13 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough. LOL! BP Solar. Mobil Solar. OIL Solar. Think about it. What a laugh. J On 03/05/2011 4:51 PM, Chip Mefford wrote: Sorry, I'm just pretty sick of 30+ years of folks coming up with every single reason on earth to avoid PV solar like the plague, and I think, after a lot of years of careful study, , that it's all bullshit. All of it. Here's your solar foundry/breeder, http://cpm01.smugmug.com/Other/solar-stuff/16662355_zWC5F2#1256330469_zWL85tR-XL-LB It was built back in the late 80s, decommissioned recently. was never 'cost effective' whatever the hell that means. But it did work. http://cpm01.smugmug.com/Other/solar-stuff/16662355_zWC5F2#1256336745_m9CKmgV-XL-LB - Original Message - From: Chip Mefford[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, May 3, 2011 4:46:43 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough. Yes, you're correct. Much better to use that power to run furnaces to make beer and coke cans. That's a better use of the power. - Original Message - From: Joe Street[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, May 3, 2011 3:08:00 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough. I thought Chip was being sarcastic, not that he was actually proposing that people wait, but that many stupid people will perceive it as a reason to wait. On the other hand until the day comes that silicon foundries are using solar energy to do the job of making cells, and indeed panels, the environmental influence of solar energy is actually nothing to brag about. Take a look at the amount of dirty energy it takes to make your nice clean green solar panels. I have a small czochralski furnace here capable of growing only about 20kg silicon crystals, half of which will be wasted in the wafering process. It alone uses about 45kw for about 12 hrs to grow one crystal and that is not even the very beginning of the story. Not even close. Many of the EROEI claims for solar PV assume purified silicon as a starting point. Some even assume starting from silicon wafers and tell you the break even point is just a few years. This is a big deception. One day I'd like to see a foundry running on solar energy. That is the first need. Joe On 03/05/2011 11:53 AM, Zeke Yewdall wrote: I just love the people who don't think they need to do anything to prevent global warming or pollution or whatever, because technolgy will come to the rescue... then refuse to use the technology that could actually help alleviate the issue...I don't need to worry about the emissions from all the electrical loads in my house because technology will find a way to keep the pollution from that from being a problem... uh... there already IS this technology that can make electricity from nothing else than the sun that already falls on your roof -- oh, and it also has no moving parts and will last about 30 or 40 years. What more technology are you freaking waiting for. You want your cake and to eat it too... but even that's not good enough... you want a robot to chew it for you, and then to not get fat from eating cake all day. On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Chip Mefford[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brilliant! yet still another reason to not deploy PV solar! Seems like every time PV solar gets legs, an announcement of a breakthrough technology (was in NanoSolar last time?) comes along explaining how PV solar is now 'Obsolete' and this emerging technology will make solar power ubiquitous and too cheap to meter. Great, where can I buy
Re: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough.
Brilliant! yet still another reason to not deploy PV solar! Seems like every time PV solar gets legs, an announcement of a breakthrough technology (was in NanoSolar last time?) comes along explaining how PV solar is now 'Obsolete' and this emerging technology will make solar power ubiquitous and too cheap to meter. Great, where can I buy it? Oh, I can't buy it? But I'd be stupid to buy anything else right? So I should wait, right? Exactly. Well done. - Original Message - From: bmolloy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Sunday, May 1, 2011 6:21:54 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Solar Power Breakthrough. Solar Power Breakthrough Could Render Photovoltaic Cells Obsolete Link: http://www.activistpost.com/2011/04/solar-power-breakthrough-could-render.ht ml (via shareaholic.com) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20110502/7edcd967/attachment.html ___ 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 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Saskatchewan government announces $1.24 billion carbon storage project
Wait a sec, I thought the Weyburn project was running into a few 'issues'. http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Sask+family+claims+carbon+capture+storage+site+captured+spewed+dead/4093755/story.html Guess that doesn't count. - Original Message - From: Darryl McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 12:17:49 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Saskatchewan government announces $1.24 billion carbon storage project Sigh. If you want to put the carbon in the ground, so it will actually stay there, why not just leave it (coal) in the ground to start with? Yep, that's $1.24 Billion, with a B. Darryl http://www.newstalk980.com/story/20110426/50246 Includes $204 million contribution from federal government Story Tools ShareThis Reported By Natalie Geddes Posted April 26, 2011 - 11:03am Saskatchewan's southeast will be home to one of the world's first commercial-sized carbon capture and storage facilities, according to an announcement by the government Tuesday morning. The province is announcing a $1.24 billion dollar project will see the Boundary Dam Power Station upgraded. The coal plant there will incorporate a steam turbine to help the coal-fired power plant integrate with a new carbon capture and storage system. Saskatchewan has been at the forefront of carbon sequestration in the last several years and this announced project will be one of the biggest in the world. It involves carbon dioxide gas being injected deep into the earth to store the greenhouse gases indefinitely. The Minister responsible for SaskPower Rob Norris adds the province is currently in talks with the oil industry, who could than purchase the captured chemicals. In many ways Saskatchewan is counting on this so called “clean coal”. The current power grid gets 60 percent of its power from burning coal. We also know that the need for power in Saskatchewan is expected to double in the next 10 years. If proven successful this carbon capture project could become an industry standard for efficient and cleaner coal. CEO of SaskPower Robert Watson adds that power rates are bound to rise, but the addition of carbon capture could ensure coal’s future and help keep customer costs down. Tuesday’s announcement has been in the works for months, Watson says it was his reason for so many recent trips to Ottawa. Saskatchewan has been in close talks with the federal government ensuring that this carbon capture project falls into industry and emission guidelines. In fact they had hoped Ottawa would have new emission guidelines ready, but that was put off by the federal election. Minister Norris says the decision to start now was after telling Ottawa they want to get out in front and help set where those guidelines should be. They were also dealing with the aging Boundary Dam Power Station, and construction price estimates that could expire. The mayor of Estevan Gary St.Onge admits he was getting worried that the power station might close. Now the already booming oil town will host another influx of workers. A proposed 600 employees will be needed during the height of the renovation. Work should start immediately with completion by 2012. Photo of Boundary Dam taken by News Talk Radio's Natalie Geddes on Apr. 26, 2011. -- Darryl McMahon ___ 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 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Rush to Use Crops as Fuel Raises Food Prices and Hunger Fears
Well, despite what 'we all know', viz the growing of crops in a way that doesn't destroy the earth, but rather sustains, even improves the fertility of the soil, and all that. Contemporary 'agribusiness' style agriculture being what it is, I'm still completely unclear on the EROEI of fuel-crops. Some folks I know grew 7 acres of sunflower last year, and had a marvelous harvest. They managed to scrape together with some neighbors enough money to buy a 40 yr/o small (by modern standards) harvester and a similar vintage oil press. I don't know the numbers, but they were quite pleased with yields. This spring, the sunflowers are going into a different field, according to their plan for soil management and all that. I'm unclear on their science, but I'll know more as I become more familiar with their operation in the coming years. They are pretty sharp folks. The number folks keep kicking around is by modern agricultural practices it takes 10 calories of energy to produce 1 calorie of fuel(food). I often get lost and bogged down in the vast maze of details surrounding all this. Anyone help? ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Has BP Really Cleaned Up the Gulf Oil Spill?
- Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 1:40:20 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Has BP Really Cleaned Up the Gulf Oil Spill? BP Is Messing With the Wrong Woman Tuesday 19 April 2011 by: David Swanson, War is a Crime A year ago BP began filling the Gulf of Mexico with oil. Last week BP blocked a woman from entering its annual meeting. Which will prove the bigger mistake? http://www.truthout.org/bp-messing-wrong-woman/1303196400 Oh that was indeed a mistake. I've met Diane, she's a handful. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power (George Monbiot)
A general response to the response to the responses to the responses: Note: I'm sooo glad to finally see some discussion on this list. Once vibrant, thanks so kindly to all for playing :) And I'm going to try to avoid getting into that trap where we are all talking past one another, rather than to one another. But also keep it flushed out for those of us on the list who are lurking. Robert wrote |(Major snippage here.) I (robert) asked a question about declines in |industrial output and comfort, to which Chip replied: | Yes, the 'all or none by tomorrow' is a false dichotomy. It's stating | that since it cannot happen by tomorrow, then it should be dismissed | right now. I don't think this is deliberate, or even slopping logic, | I think it's intentional, and meant to argue a point without making | a competent rebuttal. | | Yet, this is often a show-stopper for people who can't imagine |living in a world economy that differs from the one we have now. If we |can't replace one energy source with another, then nothing can be done . |. . This mentality clings to the status quo. It is very difficult to |argue an alternative path, without having a plan on how to get there |from here. Agreed. yes. Faulty logic is often a show-stopper. *most* folks do exactly what they are expected to do when appeals to emotion and appeals to authority are thrown at them. Folks (to whom this matter is directed) have been convinced, and reinforced in that belief that their collective way of life is not just good, it's the best, that 'it is not negotiable' and there is the veiled threat that if the commies and socialists have their way, they will be stripped of their worldly possessions, turned out into the salt mines, blah blah blah. So this way of life must be defended at all costs. Sure, there's hyperbole there, but I think you know what I mean. I read it here years ago, posted by Keith, and I'll paraphrase because I can't find a reference in the archives. The future is towns and villages supported by their immediate landbase. This model has worked for thousands of years in the past, and will continue to work for thousands of years into the future. It's a model that can work with billions of people, or with just a few hundred thousand, but it is the future. I've read this same sentiment elsewhere. If one actually takes into account what is actually going on, it's the only path forward that makes any sense whatsoever. Once this eventual reality crosses one's threshold of cognition, then all the rest of the options sorta get greyed out. In his keynote address at the Pennsylvania Assoc for Sustainable Agriculture a number of year back, James Kunstler made one of his typical quips concerning the 'status quo' in response to then President Bush's remark about 'our way of life is not negotiable'. As Kunstler put it. If you refuse to negotiate, then you get assigned a negotiating partner, in this case, Reality. If we, here in the west, the US in particular do not consider our way of life negotiable, then that way of life gets negotiated without our willing cooperation. It doesn't matter if the general population doesn't like it. The fact is, the 'american way of life' is coming off the menu. We as a people, can embrace this irrefutable inevitability willingly and with a sense of bold adventure (which I like to think defines the heart of the actual american spirit) or we can hide behind our big screen TVs, clutching bags of cheetos and 2 litre jugs of hfcs soda. But the future will come, ready or not. I suppose my overarching point here is, It doesn't matter that folks won't accept it. I'm in a transition, essentially back to things I thought were so as a much younger man in the 70s. I'm pretty much over attempting to tell anyone else how to live. Was never that keen on it in the first place. I am in process of demonstrating how one may live if one wishes. it's getting better every day. It's my opinion that the best way to say something, is to do something. | There are some things I've thought about, with respect to the |question of energy use for manufacturing. The first is, while we don't |have a viable process for making decent steel without coke, why does so |much of what we build HAVE to be made of steel? Can't we use aluminum |(which is stronger, anyway), or some other material--like |carbon--instead? (Aluminum smelting is still energy intensive, but |aluminum doesn't require carbon input.) A lot of steel is recycled, |which doesn't require additional carbon either, so if we began to reduce |our use of steel, that, in turn, would reduce the need to make virgin |steel from iron ore and metallurgical coal, because recycled steel could |fill the transitional gap. Couple of things, 'We' can make decent steel without coke. In point of fact, some of the best examples of steel are made with charcoal, at a small scale, in 'backyard' foundries. To me, this isn't the
Re: [Biofuel] Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power (George Monbiot)
No, it wasn't satire. - Original Message - From: GEORGE PAGE [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 1:31:45 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power (George Monbiot) Did everyone else catch that the title to Monbiot's article references Dr. Strangelove, and I'm just finally getting it? Was the article a satire, or what? Maybe I'm a little slow... George Page ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power (George Monbiot)
I started on this response days ago, and at Keith's prompting, I figure I'll try to wrap it up: Hey Robert: |- Original Message - |From: robert and benita rabello [EMAIL PROTECTED] |To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org |Sent: Friday, March 25, 2011 3:01:00 PM |Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power (George Monbiot) | |On 3/25/2011 10:38 AM, Dawie Coetzee wrote: | I fear that, despite Keith's occasional promptings to the contrary, I still had | no great love for George Monbiot anyway. The latest merely confirms my earlier | misgivings. | | My own position, in which the Green is rather overshadowed by the Black, | represents one of the few angles from which George's cloven hoof is really | visible. To me he has always been far too much the eco-authoritarian, for whom | ecological survival could never really, thoroughly, consummately co-exist with | personal liberty. His localism seems thin and superficial, his centralism runs | much deeper. | | An appreciation for obscure local apple cultivars gave George Monbiot a chance. | He has blown it now. | | Ok, it's one thing to dismiss the article offhand because it |doesn't harmonize with the overall theme of local energy and food |production, but I would like to ask the list what I believe is an |important question. Mr. Monibot mentioned that pre-industrial England |did not support a very comfortable lifestyle for most of its |inhabitants, and that full reliance on solar, wind and biomass would |move English society backward without nuclear power. I think when folks talk about pre-industrial, they are actually talking about pre-easy-coal, aka 17th century. There was plenty of industry in the 1600s and before. Granted, charcoal foundries were pretty hard on their resources, but they were also self-limiting. Feedback loops and all. |Does it follow |that a reduction in energy use and reliance on renewables would |necessarily result in massive declines in both industrial output and |citizen comfort? (I'm also thinking of that article Keith posted a few |weeks ago, in which analysis of coal consumption in Industrial |Revolution England actually INCREASED with improvements in efficiency.) |Can we support large populations in the industrialized nations without |fossil and nuclear power? It follows that a reduction in energy use and reliance on renewables would necessarily result in massive, and I mean MASSIVE declines in industrial output, and a reduction in the waste of the lives of the citizenry. Industrial output is about putting more cars, trucks, ships, aircraft and the equipment for producing, loading, and unloading of those same things out there (and arms of course). The big question is, do we really NEED or even WANT more and more and more cars, trucks, ships, aircraft and equipment for producing, loading and unloading of those same things? Simply put, the ability to sit back and be a George Monbiot (and pontificate about how Nuclear is good and useful, because it allows George Monbiot to be George Monbiot, and not just another neighbor farmer/blacksmith/shopsmith/ cooper/wheelbuilder/schoolteacher/framer/teamster/etc, (IE, someone who actually does something)) just isn't all that useful, or even necessary, In a world made by hand. Am I romanticizing? Sure. However, this romance allows for a lot more 'room' or 'slack' in the system, than the romance of Growth Without End, Amen. Which doesn't allow for much slack. In fairness, it has created some slack despite itself. (anecdote warning!) Back in Feb, I was a farming conference keynoted by Wes Jackson of the Land Institute, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wes_Jackson In his keynote, he gave a quick and interesting history of the 'industrial age' in particular, the early 'industrial age'. He explained that the industrial age did in fact, create some very useful slack. To wit: Of the folks born on 12 February 1809 (exactly 202 years before the keynote) There were 2 men men in particular. One went on to become a great emancipator, the other went on to become a notable president of the United States. Charles Darwin and Abraham Lincoln. Darwin stepped out there, building on the work of those who came before, he came up with a model of existence that was testable, an experience that could be experimented upon. A great unshackling from dogmatic belief. And in another example, the other -building on the slack created by the heavily industrialized northern states- was able to entertain seriously the concept of the removal of the state of slavery from the moral and ethical code of law for a nation, as a model to the rest of the world. The wealth of the so-called southern states was still tied to up-to-16th century agrarian economic models, hence slavery. So, there was a conflict. Further, he also went into (as did Keith earlier) William Stanley Jevon's work, in particular the yet-to-be refuted work
Re: [Biofuel] Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power (George Monbiot)
Snipped for clarity, Just responding to the points with which I have issue: |Dave Hajoglou wrote: | |On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 3:01 PM, robert and benita rabello |[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: |... Does it follow | that a reduction in energy use and reliance on renewables would | necessarily result in massive declines in both industrial output and | citizen comfort? | |Articles like these tend to suggest changes in an |all-or-none-right-now!! frame of reference. If we decided to switch |whole sale to only renewable energy right now then yes, we would not |be able to maintain our lifestyles. A sensible approach would suggest |that changes will be slow and our complex systems will adapt. It's |tantamount to cave men saying that switching from wood to oil in a |month, without the necessary infrastructure, is impossible and |therefore we cannot sustain our life style in a non-wood energy |economy. Yes, the 'all or none by tomorrow' is a false dichotomy. It's stating that since it cannot happen by tomorrow, then it should be dismissed right now. I don't think this is deliberate, or even slopping logic, I think it's intentional, and meant to argue a point without making a competent rebuttal. Further, Again, as I stated earlier, assuming the entire world wakes up tomorrow and decides, Okay, Nukes are a bad idea, let's get rid of them first and foremost, someone needs to come up with a way to do that. This has not been done. Key Point, there isn't any way to get rid of the damned machines. So, even given that folks start working on ways to safely deactivate these plants tomorrow, (and they aren't going to) it will likely take decades before any real momentum builds. And Rockefeller/Standard oil did a very nice job of getting 'cave men' to switch from wood to oil in very short order. As to maintaining our lifestyle: What does that even mean? Which lifestyle is that? Folks I know who are messing and suffering their way through various airport security horrors, just to enjoy the dubious pleasure of modern cattle carrier experience of flying in these modern times, to end up sitting in front of a box filled with colored light poking at a flat slab of buttons (aka, doing computer consulting work) while their health fails, just to get up tomorrow and do it again, because they are glad for the work. This is a lifestyle? Sure, some even enjoy it, but the buried costs are ENORMOUS, and at the end of the day (and many of you know this) it was all pointless. Not one single square meter of compost was turned as as result. Lifestyle, This? http://eoimages.gsfc.nasa.gov/ve/1438/earth_lights_lrg.jpg Sorry, I don't see lighting up parking lots as a lifestyle that deserves the resultant destruction and depletion of resources. We can do so much better than this. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power (George Monbiot)
Well, I have a lot of respect for George Monbiot. However, I think the nuclear business folks haven't just been sitting on their hands these last few decades, they've been working very hard on winning support from their own enemies. They are anything but stupid. - Original Message - From: Dave Hajoglou [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, March 25, 2011 12:30:15 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power (George Monbiot) So, was that George guy serious? I mean, calling a disaster all tidied up with negligible impact while citing a chart from a comic writer (albeit a very scientifically inclined author) as evidence that this whole thing really sheds a good light on nuclear boarders on unethical. We here in the US have a good appetite for unethical journalism, mind, but did I miss something? Was he serious? -hoj ___ 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 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power (George Monbiot)
- Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 7:25:52 AM Subject: [Biofuel] Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power (George Monbiot) http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/mar/21/pro-nuclear-japan-fukushima Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power -ARTICLE SNIPPED- An interesting read, however it seems to have fallen on deaf ears with me. (deaf eyes?) While folks are hailing the lack of damage that has resulted in this still-on-going-with-no-end-yet-in-sight battle with a basically unchecked nuclear power station, I'm not exactly reassured. Yes, the pro nuclear industry, -which just a week ago was saying this is a non issue, and a week before that would have said that this couldn't even happen, and a month before that, and so on- has done an admirable job pointing out that everything is fine, no problems here, nothing to see, move along, move along. In the mean time, the heroic actions of the folks on the ground trying their very best to stave off yet still another earth killing mistake, are yet again, going unheralded. The articles harping on how this isn't an issue, and even so, the newer plants couldn't have this problem, and the very newest technology is completely safe. On that last point, I must agree. yes, the plants that have not been built are indeed much much safer than those that have been built. Touche` A few points stand out in this, that I believe are being completely ignored. 1) There is no way to handle the waste 2) There is no way to handle the waste 3) There is no way to handle the waste a very distant 4) Only the nuclear industry claims an actual reduction in carbon emissions. Others who have studied the lifecycle of nuclear power state that at it's very best, it's a wash, and it's difficult to crunch the numbers in such a way to even get that rosy a result. The raw numbers, including the mining and refining of uranium, the land destruction, the water waste, the massive industrial process of gathering, refining and transporting the fuel, the construction and maintenance of the plants themselves, before getting into the maintenance and disposal of waste and the decommissioning of the plants make it look like a net negative, all the way around. My personal pet peeve, There Is No Difference Between Nuclear Power and Nuclear Weapons. If there is a difference, then please explain why whenever a country 'out of favor' with the 'west' displays an interest in developing this much touted clean and green power, the west gets very very upset, claiming that there is no difference between nuclear power and nuclear weapons when 'they' do it. Only when 'we' do it? I'm confused. When I hear a Monbiot make such a pronouncement absent caveats to the effect of nuclear weapons cannot be entrusted to governments. Therefore nuclear power cannot be entrusted to governments, nor can they be entrusted to private enterprise. Therefore they cannot be entrusted to human institutions as we currently understand them (institutions). Maybe, just a distant and pretty hollow maybe; Were someone such as Monbiot to suggest that this technology is just too sketchy to be handled by any agency with an agenda, and that a world wide body might be required to find a few places on this planet that were well suited to the long term storage of nuclear materials, and be empowered to construct some massive 'safe' reactors where ALL the nuclear materials from every single last atomic weapon and power plant could be dealt with, outside the influence of any government or business, IE, some hitherto unexplored authority paradigm, akin to the initial UN, Then, maybe then, I'd perk up and pay attention. Simply put, were we as a species to decide to turn away from this little shop of horrors, it would likely take 50 plus years of intense international effort and cooperation to achieve anything like gains towards that end. By way of qualification; I like techie stuff like this, I confess my sin of giggly excitement over technological wizardry. When i was just a kid, running around after school, I got to walk around the Neely reactor at Ga Tech, see the blue glow, and all that. Very cool stuff. That reactor was shut down in '88, and defueled in '96. Folks who are claiming that everything is fine in Fukushima, take note. Shutdown in '88, defueled in '96. Couple of points, You can't turn off a nuclear reactor The life cycle of nuclear power is incompatible with the life cycle of our kids. The End. ___ 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):
Re: [Biofuel] Gun Crazy
Here was one thread: http://www.mail-archive.com/sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg66127.html there have been others. - Original Message - From: MH [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 1:22:12 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Gun Crazy That's fine Keith but motor vehicles here in the USA cause far higher deaths. How did that discussion pan out? -Mark Hoagy ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Gun Crazy
Hey Mark Please read up on False Analogy. It's a type of informal fallacy. an easy thing to fall into, we all do it. All the best :wq |- Original Message - |From: MH [EMAIL PROTECTED] |To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org |Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 2:01:31 PM |Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Gun Crazy | |When 9 thousand Americans kill each other with guns that's terrible. |45 thousand die on US roads each year. I suppose most just fall asleep |reading this. -Mark Hoagy ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] More on Bees and CCD - EPA Knew of CCD issue with Clothianidin
- Original Message - From: Darryl McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 9:24:33 AM Subject: [Biofuel] More on Bees and CCD - EPA Knew of CCD issue with Clothianidin BIG SNIP Is it just me, or does it seem that whistle-blowers and 'leaks' are the only way left to us to hold our governments to account? -- Darryl McMahon Our governments are being held to account? Really? ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] greenhouse farming
Hey Keith; - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks very much Chip. Those are good. Compost 'tea' distillery, though? No need for a distillery. Take a 5-gallon pail, add 2 double handfuls of worm casts or finely sifted compost (aerobic, thermophilic compost, ie it got hot), a bottle cap of liquid seaweed emulsion and a tablespoonful of molasses to give the bugs something to eat, plus a little less than 4 gallons of water (preferably rainwater if the local tap water is chlorinated), stir it up with a paint-stirrer in a drill, then use a fishtank aerator pump with a bubblestone on the end to keep it aerated. Leave for at least 24 hours, stirring occasionally with a stick. Filter through an old pair of pantyhose and use. Neat. yeah, She did do a cursory explanation of what they were doing there with all that muck, but I didn't follow it, was paying attention to the soil warming system at the time, I just snapped a few pics. There are some folks (like Elaine Ingham for one) who've figured out a response to the difficult problem that it's hard to make any money out of organic growers because they don't need anything, and overcomplicated compost tea brewers accompanied by overspecialised lab tests is one such response. Lol! Yeah, true enough. This farm is a lab. They are doing a lot of stuff that looks completely counter intuitive to me. But they are also growing a lot of food and feeding a lot of people. This farm belongs to a university, and it stocks their kitchens, as well as acts as a faculty CSA. The way they are handling their mountains of compost goes against everything I've read, in that ALL of the kitchen waste, and I mean ALL of it goes in there. Scares the willies out of me. However, it's their farm, not mine. And I like these folks a lot, and they are wonderful neighbors. It's all a grand experiment. Personally, I think they'd do well to read more Howard and Price; But it's most certainly not my call. They are a school, and schools are, well, schools. :) And I'll be well pleased if I can come close to feeding as many people in my life, as they do in a year. All best And you, --chipper ___ 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] I'm just
downright excited to see all this activity on this list after all this time. Keep it up! ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] greenhouse farming
- Original Message - From: David Penfold [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org These chaps do geodesic greenhouses: http://www.geodesic-greenhouse-kits.com/features.php If you like that kinda thing, I've loved these people for many years. Nice folks, cool structures, works good. Spendy, but robust. Friend of mine has a 20' shelter system that he's had, Sheesh, well over 20 years. http://www.shelter-systems.com/greenhouses.html ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] greenhouse farming
- Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thursday, December 2, 2010 10:40:18 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] greenhouse farming Anyone willing to send me photos of their greenhouses? Plus whatever information you think might be relevant (if you haven't already said it onlist)? Hey Keith: Here are some pics that I sent along in a previous thread on biofuel oil heater for radiant heat. This is on a neighboring farm. This is the solar collector and it shows one of the two 'high tunnel greenhouses. The other greenhouse is to the right, out of frame, but it's a twin: http://cpm01.smugmug.com/Bicycles/buy-fresh-bike-local-2010/IMG0751/963631204_narY5-XL.jpg This is the backup for the radiant soil-warming system, it runs on biodiesel. http://cpm01.smugmug.com/Bicycles/buy-fresh-bike-local-2010/IMG0749/963631153_nZVUP-XL.jpg This is the dehydrater, it's a prototype, runs off the same heating circuit. http://cpm01.smugmug.com/Bicycles/buy-fresh-bike-local-2010/IMG0750/963631184_kr738-XL.jpg This is the compost 'tea' distillery, (it's in that tent-thing behind the solar collector) I don't fully grock this (yet). http://cpm01.smugmug.com/Bicycles/buy-fresh-bike-local-2010/IMG0753/963631267_g7bCZ-XL.jpg ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] greenhouse farming
And this is another picture that shows the greenhouses http://cpm01.smugmug.com/Bicycles/buy-fresh-bike-local-2010/IMG0747/963630486_GKPoV-XL.jpg The woman in the white shirt is the farm manager. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] The 'Transition Town' Movement's Initial Genius
- Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 12:40:54 PM Subject: [Biofuel] The 'Transition Town' Movement's Initial Genius http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/11/29-7 Published on Monday, November 29, 2010 by CommonDreams.org The 'Transition Town' Movement's Initial Genius Very interesting Keith, and quite timely. With the change in wind here in the US, particularly in my home state of WV (a third world country inside the US) I decided that my home state was no longer as viable a place to live out my years as I had hoped, the very few progressive gains made, having just been pretty much wiped out with, , well, enough of that. Anyway, I started casting about for another place to live. One of the first things i did was order Rob Hopkin's Transition Handbook, and read it cover to cover. And since I am already involved in PASA (pennsylvania assoc for sustainable agriculture) and getting more and more involved with each passing year, Started digging around for transitions initiatives in Pa. Am now searching for land. I'm tired of trying to explain myself all of the time, over and over again. I have a lot I can teach, and I have a lot to learn, and I'm really looking forward to real people doing real stuff, on a daily basis, instead of just every now and again. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] 8 Electric-Car Myths Busted
- Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 8:40:00 AM Subject: [Biofuel] 8 Electric-Car Myths Busted http://motherjones.com/environment/2011/01/electric-car-myths 8 Electric-Car Myths Busted I enjoyed this article, and coupled with this bit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSdnycHfLnQ makes it all look like EV's are the best thing since the 'taming' of fire. While all this tasty cornucopian goodness looks good to the last drop, I just remain unconvinced that cars are the answer to any problem at all. I don't care how the car is powered. I see them as the problem. Fun, yes, handy, yes (in the absence of some sensible transporation, like walking to the train station), and certainly enjoyable, but I just don't think the pros outweigh the cons. i just don't. But that's me. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Fighting Doom: The New Politics of Climate Change
- Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, November 26, 2010 8:37:33 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Fighting Doom: The New Politics of Climate Change Well Joe. Derrick Jensen really got the best of me. A sad admission. What a lightweight - the problem of civilization?? Actually, civilisation somewhat predates neo-liberal corporatism, and even the Industrial Revolution. Why don't you write to him, suggest a very long reading list, starting perhaps with Arnold Toynbee, and Weston Price? As much as I like Derrick, and I do like Derrick, this is a pretty classic case of it's hard to pour a drink for a man when his glass is already full. Reexamining his position would mean, well, , , reexamining his position, and he's pretty much fully invested himself in his own world view, (as do we all to some extent). Again, I like Derrick, and think he's a fine person. But I think his views are so skewed (worth a read, yes, but that's all) that trying to debate them is pointless. Life is short. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] World Energy Outlook, 2010
Oh I have no doubt that DEMAND will continue to rise, but the report says that PRODUCTION will continue to rise right along with it. This, i just cannot buy. I've yet to hear one geologist credibly back this up. OTOH, I've heard plenty say quite the opposite. - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 2:17:30 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] World Energy Outlook, 2010 Maybe you'll find AFP's take on it a little less chokesome: http://www.grist.org/article/2010-11-09-oil-demand-to-rise-for-25-years-despite-green-push Actually it's just as chokesome. China China China, hm. I'm a bit sceptical. GDP growth - ah yes, that's what really counts. More from AFP: Climate change and consumerism are biggest threats to future, U.N. warns http://www.grist.org/article/2010-11-04-climate-change-and-consumerism-are-biggest-threats-to-future Best Keith http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/ Any clueful commentary welcome. I choked at paragraph 10 of the 'Fact Sheet' The eventual peak in oil will be determined by factors affecting both demand and supply. In the New Policies Scenario, production in total does not peak before 2035, though it comes close to doing so. By contrast, in the 450 Scenario, production does peak, at 86 mb/d, just before 2020, as a result of weaker demand, falling briskly thereafter. Oil prices are much lower as a result. And was unable to read any further. ___ 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 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 Energy Outlook, 2010
http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/ Any clueful commentary welcome. I choked at paragraph 10 of the 'Fact Sheet' The eventual peak in oil will be determined by factors affecting both demand and supply. In the New Policies Scenario, production in total does not peak before 2035, though it comes close to doing so. By contrast, in the 450 Scenario, production does peak, at 86 mb/d, just before 2020, as a result of weaker demand, falling briskly thereafter. Oil prices are much lower as a result. And was unable to read any further. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] A gem (and it's nuclear-powered)
Wow, I don't know what to say. This is a timely and important news story if ever there was one. :) Interesting read, thanks for passing it along. - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, November 2, 2010 5:02:01 AM Subject: [Biofuel] A gem (and it's nuclear-powered) http://search.japantimes.co.jp/mail/nn20101102i1.html Tuesday, Nov. 2, 2010 FYI TOILETS Toilets: Japan power behind throne By MASAMI ITO Staff writer Japan, the state-of-the-art high-tech powerhouse that gave the world manga and sushi, has also achieved prowess in a more fundamental feature of daily life: the toilet. Once the nation began installing more and more Western-style toilets after the tried and true squat-type variety fell from favor, the basic pot for sitting has been transformed by gadgetry ranging from heated seats to full-service bidets, and even artificial sounds to disguise what otherwise is heard. In their evolution, toilets have become the lap of luxury. A key feature of the Japan Pavilion at Shanghai Expo 2010, which closed Sunday, was the world's No. 1 toilets, which visitors were welcomed to try out. From June, the venue even included one gold-plated toilet each in the men's and women's bathrooms. Following are questions and answers regarding Japan's rise to prominence in the high-tech toilet industry: Who are the key players in high-tech toilets? There are several companies in the sanitary ware business, but 90 percent of the market is dominated by two companies - Toto Ltd., which commands a 60 percent share, and Inax Corp., which has 30 percent. According to a Toto survey, Asian- or Japanese-style squat-type toilets were king of the hill until 1976, when Japan began shipping an equal amount of Western-style alternatives. As of September 2009, however, Western-style toilets accounted for 98 percent of new shipments, according to data gleaned by the Japan Sanitary Equipment Industry Association, an industry group to which Toto and Inax belong. What prompted the shift to Western-style toilets? Several factors were involved, but Japan's hosting of international events, including the Tokyo Olympics and World Exposition, attracted throngs of foreigners, particularly those mainly inclined to use Western-style toilets, according to Toto. In addition, the rapid graying of society has meant seniors are less able to squat and more comfortable using seated toilets. But squat-type toilets are regarded as more sanitary by some because the body never comes in contact with them. What is the history of flush toilets? According to the children's book Toire no Daijoshikii (Common Sense about Toilets) published in 2006 by Poplar Publishing Co., flush toilets of sorts date back at least to 2,200 B.C. Found in the ruins of a palace in the ancient Mesopotamian city of Tell Asmar in modern-day Iraq were the remains of Akkad period toilets made of brick that drained into a river. Rome also came up with public flush toilets around 600 B.C. as conduits and drainage technology improved. Japan's oldest flush toilets appear to date to the Nara Period (710-784). Found at the site of the ancient capital of Fujiwara are the remains of latrine ditches that drained. Hole-in-the-ground toilets were also discovered, the book said. What are the roots of the modern Western-style toilet? London watchmaker Alexander Cummings is credited with creating the first self-contained flush toilet in 1775. The toilet bowl held water that was stopped by a sliding valve. By pulling a lever, the valve would slide and the contents in the bowl would be flushed down the drain. Japan's first sewerage system was introduced in Tokyo's Kanda district in 1884, but generally speaking, such systems did not spread nationwide until after World War II. Even at the end of the Showa Era, many households still had cesspits that were cleaned out regularly by septic service trucks, according to Toire no Daijoshikii. Most places now have flush toilets, but hole-in-the-ground ones are still used at construction sites or in makeshift facilities in disaster areas. When did bidets become popular in Japan? Japan originally began importing bidets in the 1960s from Western countries for medical purposes. In 1967, Inax developed the first Japan-made bidet. That was followed in 1980 by Toto's Washlet series, which boasted heated seats and a warm water wash. The brand is celebrating its 30th anniversary this year. According to a Cabinet Office survey, only 14.2 percent of households had bidet-style toilets in 1992, but as of last March, 71.6 percent did. The Washlet, a widespread household feature nowadays, was the product of a great deal of hard work, Toto spokeswoman Akiko Yamasaki said. There were no data - we didn't know where a person's buttocks would be located (on the seat), Yamasaki said. We began to develop (the Washlet) without
Re: [Biofuel] Biodiesel powered radiant heat (was Nigera)
Hey Seth: - Original Message - From: Seth Macdonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 9:57:16 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Biodiesel powered radiant heat (was Nigera) Thanks for the tip Chip! The only reason I would want to be heating the floor with Bio-diesel instead of water or Glycol heated by solar and/or a wood fired boiler, is because I have to dry the fuel anyways. I'd rather not waste that energy so to speak so I may as well pump the fuel throough the floor while I'm heating it and heat the building... When I need to heat the next batch, my thought was to have a hopper above the heating system which is allways full and I would recharge the system with exactly the amount I remove.. Eventually I'd love to run the system on solar or another renewable heat source... Seth(Dredneck) Ah, this is very cool. yer thinking! Yeah, they call this 'co-generation'. Not wasting the heat. Very very forward thinking. Okay, things to keep in mind, Yer gonna want some kind of major liquid thermal mass storage. What I've seen in some very well engineered house systems, was stuff like a 2500 gallon storage tank buried beneath a part of the slab, as a place to store excess heat. You could use this for a lot of things, like preheating your inputs to your biodiesel system to save on the fuel load when running the process. You might want to put some long thought into this part of the engineering. Further, the slab itself. There is actually a lot of tricky engineering and physics involved in all this. For a conventional radiant slab system, folks put in the pipes, pour the slab, and 'buy' the pre-engineered heating system for the slab size/tempzone. There are a lot of considerations, not the least of which is that the actual amount of heat for the slab is relatively low, you are looking for a slab temp of 22-25c (72-77) and NO MORE. Believe it or not, a slab at a temp higher than 25 is actually uncomfortable, and further, you can CRACK THE SLAB. Adding too much heat can break the slab, adding the right amount of heat too quickly can break the slab. Once the slab cracks, then you have major problems with the system, as the tubing *will* fail, blah blah blah. Essentially, you are going to want to maintain the slab at or near the temp at which the concrete cured. Since this is getting pretty late in the year, this means you are going to be using a lot of additional heat to cure the slab at or near the optimal temp. I hope you are documenting this as you go, this is a very cool project, and I wish you all the luck in the world, keep up the good work! -- ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Nigeria: Shell Oil's 'License to Kill'
- Original Message - From: Seth Macdonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 11:11:35 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Nigeria: Shell Oil's 'License to Kill' |SNIP |I am also madly trying to pour a floor in my shop complete with in-floor heating |pipes before freeze-up(which is happening SOON!) | |I am curious if anyone out there has ever tried to run Bio-Diesel in a hydronic |in-floor heating system. It seems to me to be the perfect solution to using |energy already consumed by the drying process to heat the facility. My biggest |question is wether or not plastic pex water pipe is compatible with bio-diesel. | |Any leads on this subject would be greatly appreciated, | |Sincerely, |The Dred Neck | |Dunster BC |Canada |V0J 1J0 http://cpm01.smugmug.com/Bicycles/buy-fresh-bike-local-2010/IMG0749/963631153_nZVUP-XL.jpg Hey Seth; What you see in this picture, is an experimental greenhouse soil bed heating system, which is based on the same concept as radiant floor heating. This system uses an oil burner converted to run biodiesel. It works. This system is installed at the Dickenson College Farm CSA, which grows the food for Dickenson College in Carlisle Pa, US. This is the website: http://www.dickinson.edu/about/sustainability/college-farm/ Jen Halpin is the farmer/farm manager, and her partner, Matt is the whacko who comes up with stuff like this. You can find her contact info on the website, and they may be able to share some clues with you. Good luck! Sounds like a fun project. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Biodiesel powered radiant heat (was Nigera)
I should clarify; The oil burner system shown, is a BACKUP to the solar collector system shown here: http://cpm01.smugmug.com/Bicycles/buy-fresh-bike-local-2010/IMG0751/963631204_narY5-XL.jpg When planning stuff like this, one of the key points to keep in mind, is the order of energy, as Amory Lovins puts it. Second law of thermodynamics. While an oil burner is in the same order of magnitude as the work in this case, heating the floor, it's still a higher quality of energy. A closer match is solar power. The closer the match, the more efficient, taking the long view. esp when you factor in the cracking of the biofuel in the first place. Biofuels, like fossilfuels are just too danged convenient for their own good. :) Using your ingenuity and some more of your food powered energy (IE doing work) you could probably front load your heating needs by dreaming up and implementing a solar heat collection/distribution system, which would drop the biofuel requirements for your heating needs radically. I know you are trying to get this done on a short timeline, but please plan for migrating the main energy source from the oil burner to solar collection, I think you'll be happy you did. You don't have time to do it this year, but maybe next summer. Again, neat project, keep us posted! cheers --chipper - Original Message - From: Chip Mefford [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 6:06:16 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Nigeria: Shell Oil's 'License to Kill' - Original Message - From: Seth Macdonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 11:11:35 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Nigeria: Shell Oil's 'License to Kill' |SNIP |I am also madly trying to pour a floor in my shop complete with in-floor heating |pipes before freeze-up(which is happening SOON!) | |I am curious if anyone out there has ever tried to run Bio-Diesel in a hydronic |in-floor heating system. It seems to me to be the perfect solution to using |energy already consumed by the drying process to heat the facility. My biggest |question is wether or not plastic pex water pipe is compatible with bio-diesel. | |Any leads on this subject would be greatly appreciated, | |Sincerely, |The Dred Neck | |Dunster BC |Canada |V0J 1J0 http://cpm01.smugmug.com/Bicycles/buy-fresh-bike-local-2010/IMG0749/963631153_nZVUP-XL.jpg Hey Seth; What you see in this picture, is an experimental greenhouse soil bed heating system, which is based on the same concept as radiant floor heating. This system uses an oil burner converted to run biodiesel. It works. This system is installed at the Dickenson College Farm CSA, which grows the food for Dickenson College in Carlisle Pa, US. This is the website: http://www.dickinson.edu/about/sustainability/college-farm/ Jen Halpin is the farmer/farm manager, and her partner, Matt is the whacko who comes up with stuff like this. You can find her contact info on the website, and they may be able to share some clues with you. Good luck! Sounds like a fun project. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Nigeria: Shell Oil's 'License to Kill'
|- Original Message - |From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] |To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org |Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2010 5:22:20 AM |Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Nigeria: Shell Oil's 'License to Kill' | |Keith, thanks for the link to the Gutenberg 'Wealth of Nations'. |Curiously, I don't think I have yet read the entire piece, although I do |have a copy in my ever-expanding reading pile. | |:-) I think the whole of Wall Street joins you in never having read |the guy they quote so often to justify their corporate crime spree. |He's a nice read, is Adam Smith. Yeah, I personally *love* the way folks spout off Smith, having, if they payed any actual attention to him at all, payed attention ONLY to the Wealth of Nations work, completely ignoring ALL of Smith's other companion work. That Wealth of Nations is so widely considered, and Theory of Moral Sentiments is so wholly ignored, says pretty much everything there is to say about *most* folks who will use Smith to cite or argue. You haven't even read the half of it is my only rejoinder. Of course, those that are actually familiar with both works, often hold different views than those who have only read the one. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Honeybee Colony Collapse Disorder Update
Yeah, I've been watching this news break and spread (like a virus) for a few months now. While I have no doubts that there are in fact contributing factors, I remain a bit skeptical as to this being the smoking gun, esp in view that these stories make no mention of the correlation (though not necessarily causation, but sure could be) of the rising use of neonicotinoid pesticides. google about for that. - Original Message - From: Darryl McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 3:48:33 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Honeybee Colony Collapse Disorder Update Article from New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/science/07bees.html?_r=1emc=eta1 The paper: Iridovirus and Microsporidia Linked to Honey Bee Colony Decline http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0013181 Seems to me, the underlying causes might include the trucking of 'portable' colonies around the country, importation of non-native bees to bolster the commercial population, and other environmental factors that might be weakening the immune defences of the bees. I don't think there are any honey bee colonies on my property, although I have recently removed some abandoned paper wasp nests from my greenhouse. I'll have to try to seal it better for next year to encourage them to nest elsewhere. I've just become aware of the mason and leaf-cutter bees as pollinators. Perhaps I can build something to encourage them for next spring. http://www.seeds.ca/proj/poll/index.php?n=Mason+Bee+Profile (Learning never ends.) -- Darryl McMahon The Emperor's New Hydrogen Economy - in eBook and tradepaper http://www.econogics.com/TENHE/ ___ 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 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Honeybee Colony Collapse Disorder Update
Hey Darryl; Yer certainly welcome. Couple of salient points, the now nearly intractable use of neonicotinoid pesticides (nicotine bug killers) came out of the labs into the environment around 1996. A few years later, honey bee (and other) populations began to decline. A few years later, they began to collapse. *Some* places -employing the cautionary principal-, banned the use of these pesticides and the populations began to recover. Go figure. Yeah, there is a lot more to it than that. The preponderance of GMO crops follows a similar timeline, but it's difficult to tie colony collapse in the EU to GMO/Transgenic crops, when such things aren't yet in broad use. The use of oversized artificial combs sure isn't helping. Some beekeepers who allow the bees to make their own homes aren't seeing the same level of problems as those who are going the full industrial route. Those who don't move their hives around commercially aren't AS affected as those that are, but are affected never the less. It's a multifaceted problem, pretty much like all things in this modern life. - Original Message - From: Darryl McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 9:19:57 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Honeybee Colony Collapse Disorder Update Thanks Chip, that Web search was informative. Darryl On 22/10/2010 5:46 AM, Chip Mefford wrote: Yeah, I've been watching this news break and spread (like a virus) for a few months now. While I have no doubts that there are in fact contributing factors, I remain a bit skeptical as to this being the smoking gun, esp in view that these stories make no mention of the correlation (though not necessarily causation, but sure could be) of the rising use of neonicotinoid pesticides. google about for that. - Original Message - From: Darryl McMahon[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 3:48:33 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Honeybee Colony Collapse Disorder Update Article from New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/science/07bees.html?_r=1emc=eta1 The paper: Iridovirus and Microsporidia Linked to Honey Bee Colony Decline http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0013181 Seems to me, the underlying causes might include the trucking of 'portable' colonies around the country, importation of non-native bees to bolster the commercial population, and other environmental factors that might be weakening the immune defences of the bees. I don't think there are any honey bee colonies on my property, although I have recently removed some abandoned paper wasp nests from my greenhouse. I'll have to try to seal it better for next year to encourage them to nest elsewhere. I've just become aware of the mason and leaf-cutter bees as pollinators. Perhaps I can build something to encourage them for next spring. http://www.seeds.ca/proj/poll/index.php?n=Mason+Bee+Profile (Learning never ends.) -- Darryl McMahon Project Manager, Common Assessment and Referral for Enhanced Support Services (CARESS) ___ 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 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/
Re: [Biofuel] UN to Confront Sci-fi Climate Solutions at Biodiversity Meeting
The way I've explained my reticence towards all this stuff has been; When we come up with computer modeling that is able to accurately predict the weather years into the future, THEN our models will be good enough that we can think about fiddling about with altering the genetics of 'stuff' with some degree of confidence what the medium term outcomes will be. at that time, we can make these choices. Until them, we are guessing in the darkness of ignorance. Sensitive Dependence on initial conditions. Google it sometime. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] japanese facility aimed at creating sun on earth
Hey I'm all for fusion. Fortunately, we've already got a fine fusion reactor already, and it delivers all the power we need in about 8 minutes. It's called the sun. - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Thursday, October 7, 2010 2:17:58 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] japanese facility aimed at creating sun on earth Hi Fritz Clean energy for all in 20 years sounds very nice, but I wonder how much of the biosphere will be left by then, let alone the climate. :-( For what it's worth, there's this: http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4081892/Cold-fusion-experimentally-confirmed Cold fusion experimentally confirmed As well as all this: http://www.mail-archive.com/search?q=cold+fusionl=sustainablelorgbiofuel%40sustainablelists.org 183 matches for cold fusion Hello Keith, your post remindes me on a rumor of an french physicist who develloped topoint cero eregie (not to shure of the rigth name anymore) Zero-point energy - see: http://www.mail-archive.com/search?q=Zero-point+energyl=sustainablelorgbiofuel%40sustainablelists.org The general consensus on this generally sceptical list being that it's a scam. Then there's Viktor Schauberger, great stuff for conspiracy theories, free energy and all: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Schauberger I guess cold fusion's the best bet. All you need is two 2-litre PET bottles, one female firefly, one male firefly, some wiring and stuff, and Jason Bourne for a bodyguard. Best Keith Hes Shop blow up on very dubious circumstances,the paperwork disappeared and anything about it was like suppressed! There is an other rumor,that Wernher von Braun was working on the project also.My dad worked with him,before he died very quick on Lucemia and the familiy always suspected a massive dose of radiation was the cause of it! Maybe there are related technologies? To say the same rumors say that the oilindustrie was behind the disapearance of the technologie!? Fritz ___ 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 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] looking forward, looking back - Wind Farms
A recent blog posting of mine. Just thought I'd share, to stir the pot. Things are pretty quiet. http://cubic-dog.blogspot.com/2010/06/wind-farms-some-considerations.html ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] Legality of WVO in commercial application
Just a quick note, as I'm new to the game. couple of years ago, I acquired 50 gals of wvo from a local renderer, for use as fuel in my pickup. I dug around, ascertained that the road tax in my home state for diesel was .56/gal, so I wrote the revenue division a check for $28, enclosing a letter explaining what it was for. They deposited the check. As I revisit this project, I'll probably continue to write these checks. ___ 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/
Re: [Biofuel] FDA documents showing GMO hazards
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FDA documents showing GMO hazards _http://biointegrity.org/list.html_ (http://biointegrity.org/list.html) Nice Catch! Thanks for passing it along. --- Chip Mefford Before Enlightenment; chop wood carry water After Enlightenment; chop wood carry water - Public Key http://www.well.com/user/cpm ___ 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/
