[Biofuel] FW: Important, Congress set to gut renewable energy programs
Title: Re: Important, Congress set to gut renewable energy programs Follow-up. David -Original Message-From: Bob Anderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 3:32 PMSubject: Re: Important, Congress set to gut renewable energy programsImportance: HighIve just returned from a meeting at NREL (where I am a small contractor). The lab expects a 40% cut in the Wind Powering America program.Bob AndersonOn 11/16/05 1:45 PM, "Van Jamison" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FYI- Original Message - From: Patrick Judge mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 7:50 AMSubject: Fwd: Important, Congress set to gut renewable energy programsCongress to Terminate National Bioenergy CenterCongress is getting ready this week to terminate the National BioenergyResearch Center and gut the Wind Research Program at the National RenewableEnergy Laboratory (NREL). NREL researchers who are CRES members sounded thealarm over the weekend after finding out on Friday that many of them may beout of work next month.Here is what I can piece together about what happened last week. On Tuesdaythe House of Representatives passed the House and Senate ConferenceCommittee markup of the Energy Water and Development Appropriation Bill for2006. The bill keeps federal funding for renewable energy research levelwith last year's spending.Unfortunately, it more than doubled the earmarks that take money out of theWind Energy and Bioenergy Research Programs and direct it elsewhere.Earmarks are when individual representatives direct funding to particularprojects in their districts. With passage of the Energy Bill earlier thisyear, these earmarks have been in the forefront of the news. In fact, theAmerican Solar Energy Society said the Energy Bill was so full of porkbarrel spending that ASES did not endorse it.Congressional leaders usually wait until the conference committee is meetingbehind closed doors to introduce earmarks. They emerge as part of a muchlarger bill that is hundreds of pages long.It appears that in this case, the House of Representatives voted on thisbill without many ofits members having had time to read it.It took NREL staff a couple of days of read through the pile of paper andfigure out what it will mean for the research programs. Some of the earmarkswere listed together to support state initiatives, and others were buried indifferent portions of the massive spending bill. This year these added to$62 million in total, more than two thirds of the entire "research anddevelopment" budget for bioenergy. Then the staff had to calculate DOE'scontractual obligations to its industry partnerships and the 10% cut thatthe agency takes from all programs to pay the salaries of its staff.Staff of the National Bioenergy Center, which number more than 90 people,were told Friday afternoon that all that the funding that would be left wassufficient only to cover their severance checks. The National WindTechnology Center is facing similar, severe cutbacks. It seems incredible,but Congress is getting ready to gut the two research programs in renewableenergy technologies that have enjoyed the most success and commercialdevelopment just at a time when fossil fuel prices are their highest levelin history. In the case of creating transportation fuels from biomass, thesetechnologies represent our greatest near-term hope ofreducing imports or fossil fuels.The Senate is scheduled to take up the appropriations bill today ortomorrow. Please call Senators Allard and Salazar today and ask them to voteno on the appropriations bill from the Energy and Water Committee. Tell themthat renewable energy RD is one of this country's best investments.- Wayne Allard: call the Colorado office at 303-220-7414 or the Washingtonoffice at 202-224-5941, or send an email message at:http://allard.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactHome- Ken Salazar: call the Colorado office at 303-455-7600 or the Washingtonoffice at 202-224-5852, or send an email message at:http://salazar.senate.gov/contact/email.cfmRuss Doty, CEONew World WindPower LLCPO Box 1734Billings, MT 59103-1734406-656-2763email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]web site: http://www.newworldwindpower.com ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
[Biofuel] Has anyone else heard anything about this???? Alert!!
Has anyone heard or seen anything about this?? Maybe time for some action if it is in fact true. David Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 7:50 AM Subject: Fwd: Important, Congress set to gut renewable energy programs Congress to Terminate National Bioenergy CenterCongress is getting ready this week to terminate the National BioenergyResearch Center and gut the Wind Research Program at the National RenewableEnergy Laboratory (NREL). NREL researchers who are CRES members sounded thealarm over the weekend after finding out on Friday that many of them may beout of work next month.Here is what I can piece together about what happened last week. On Tuesdaythe House of Representatives passed the House and Senate ConferenceCommittee markup of the Energy Water and Development Appropriation Bill for2006. The bill keeps federal funding for renewable energy research levelwith last year's spending.Unfortunately, it more than doubled the earmarks that take money out of theWind Energy and Bioenergy Research Programs and direct it elsewhere.Earmarks are when individual representatives direct funding to particularprojects in their districts. With passage of the Energy Bill earlier thisyear, these earmarks have been in the forefront of the news. In fact, theAmerican Solar Energy Society said the Energy Bill was so full of porkbarrel spending that ASES did not endorse it.Congressional leaders usually wait until the conference committee is meetingbehind closed doors to introduce earmarks. They emerge as part of a muchlarger bill that is hundreds of pages long.It appears that in this case, the House of Representatives voted on thisbill without many ofits members having had time to read it.It took NREL staff a couple of days of read through the pile of paper andfigure out what it will mean for the research programs. Some of the earmarkswere listed together to support state initiatives, and others were buried indifferent portions of the massive spending bill. This year these added to$62 million in total, more than two thirds of the entire "research anddevelopment" budget for bioenergy. Then the staff had to calculate DOE'scontractual obligations to its industry partnerships and the 10% cut thatthe agency takes from all programs to pay the salaries of its staff.Staff of the National Bioenergy Center, which number more than 90 people,were told Friday afternoon that all that the funding that would be left wassufficient only to cover their severance checks. The National WindTechnology Center is facing similar, severe cutbacks. It seems incredible,but Congress is getting ready to gut the two research programs in renewableenergy technologies that have enjoyed the most success and commercialdevelopment just at a time when fossil fuel prices are their highest levelin history. In the case of creating transportation fuels from biomass, thesetechnologies represent our greatest near-term hope ofreducing imports or fossil fuels.The Senate is scheduled to take up the appropriations bill today ortomorrow. Please call Senators Allard and Salazar today and ask them to voteno on the appropriations bill from the Energy and Water Committee. Tell themthat renewable energy RD is one of this country's best investments.- Wayne Allard: call the Colorado office at 303-220-7414 or the Washingtonoffice at 202-224-5941, or send an email message at:http://allard.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactHome- Ken Salazar: call the Colorado office at 303-455-7600 or the Washingtonoffice at 202-224-5852, or send an email message at:http://salazar.senate.gov/contact/email.cfmRuss Doty, CEONew World WindPower LLCPO Box 1734Billings, MT 59103-1734406-656-2763email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]web site: http://www.newworldwindpower.com-- --Patrick Judge, Energy Program DirectorMontana Environmental Information CenterP.O. Box 1184Helena, MT 59624406/443-2520406/443-2507 fax ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] New question on oil seed crops and ley farming
I keep getting people asking about the Energy required to produce Bio-Diesel, (or biofuel, Ethanol or Bio-Diesel); mainly thinking that it takes more energy to produce them than what you get in return or what it takes to make it. I know that with Ethanol the numbers indicate about 1.7-1 (or close to 2-1), but not sure what they are for Bio-Diesel. Can anyone help provide details or specific links to facts that will help set us all straight?? Thank youDave B. -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Tom IrwinSent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 10:54 AMTo: Biofuel@sustainablelists.orgSubject: Re: [Biofuel] New question on oil seed crops and ley farming Hi Andres, Castor beans grow wild here in Uruguay as well. I have some deep seated childhood memories of castor oil as an emetic. Just the smell makes me gag. I'll use it with a mask if I can find no other source but it is kind of a last resort material for me. The yields are good though and it's essentially free for the taking. I was looking at jojoba as a natural fence material but I think I'm a bit too wet here. I suspect I'd have lots of fungus problems than in drier climates. I may use raspberry or blackberries instead. The weather is is rather mild. We actually had a light frost day this winter. The summer's reach about 38 C. but you can expect rain in a day or so to bring those temps back down to 28. It's mostly flat grassland here with 38-78 cm of rainfall. This year we'll probably exceed the upper end. I'm hoping global warming will keep it there but I'm not sure. Lot's of people think it could shift to the dry end. I just haven't seen much evidence in that direction. I keep telling everyone who will listen that oil prices are going to change the nature of agriculture back to small organic farms. Now I'm going to show them. I'm a bit squimish in killing animals, too. I was raised as a city boy. I was giving thought to lethal injection with potassium chloride solution. Pigs and humans havelots of similarities. It's worth a question to the local vet. Tom Irwin From: Andres Yver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.orgSent: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 10:17:27 -0300Subject: Re: [Biofuel] New question on oil seed crops and ley farmingHello Tom, Hi Keith and all, You mentioned in a previous thread that you liked castor beans as an oil seed crop.You're in Uruguay, right? In Chile, castor bean is a serious weed. It grows extremely fast, reaching over two meters height and diameter within 8 months. If you have moisture, as near an irrigation canal, you can collect many hundreds of seeds, even perhaps a thousand or more from each plant. It thrives on no management or additional fertilization. Roadsides are a good place to find them. I considered them, together with jojoba, as an oil seed crop, before selling out and moving to Argentina. I crushed one, yes one, plant's worth in a primitive homemade press and got about a liter of oil. i haven't gone to purdue's newcrop site to see what average yields are. The area i was in was a mediterranean climate, 250mm annual rainfall, min temps down near the canal were around -2 or 3 C in the dead of winter. Summers got up to around 35C max. Bear in mind it was summer dry, winter wet. I think Uruguay, as is Argentina, tends to be more continental, ie summer wet and winter dry.I composted the seedcake and found you need to include lots of woody feedstock as well as cow manure (what was at hand) to avoid rancidity. In other words, don't try to compost it as a major component of your compost. If you heat your seeds first by spreading in the sun on top of shade cloth, you get higher yields.Sorry about the unscientific comments, your mileage may vary, etc. Weeds are an opportunity waiting to happen, they have lots of unexplored potential, on many levels. Right now, we have an area that is overrun with comfrey, which is here considered a noxious weed. Following Newman Turner's lead (see JTF small farms library for his and other invaluable books on farming the easy way), we have wilted it and are feeding it to rabbits. They LOVE it!!!Good luck with your future farm. Working for yourself can't be beat. Especially if what you are doing is not only pleasurable but gets other, local, people interested and heading down the path to sustainability. I've found that, here in South America -and probably everywhere, the best arguments for sustainability in general, and ley farming in particular, are economic ones. It's just way cheaper to farm this way. Farmers of other stripes sit up and notice when you get successfully through a season without having used any inputs labelled
Re: [Biofuel] BP loses money?? Yeah, right.
This is why we need a Flat Tax system in this country for both Individual and Business. 8% to 12% would provide a tax base much more robust than what we have todayand most of us would probably pay less, but certainly everyone would pay a fair share.and think of all the savings there would be from all the extra costs currently related to our Tax system!! Just IMHO!! Dave -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 9:51 AM To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] BP loses money?? Yeah, right. It's all part of the standard multinational corporation planning to move the profits to the jurisdiction in which they are taxed least (preferably not at all). Doug Woodard St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, Jerry Eyers wrote: Funny tidbit. BP says they loose money on their gas stations, $100mil last year. You refine it, you transport it, you store it, you delivery it, and you sell it. How do you loose money when you control all aspects of it. Just by vertues of econmies of scale you have to make money. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
RE: [Biofuel] ASTM, was ... Diesel Won't Solve...
Doesn't sound like you have worked in Government either.and should be fired!! Most FTE's are very dedicated to doing a good job for the people served (which includes themselves, who are also taxpayers)but of course there always are those few afraid of their own shadow or who get put into positions of responsibility when they shouldn't bejust like real people in real jobs. Okay, a little over reactivebut then I think we should still have a Draft for the military in this country (or something that includes it). DB -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Mike Weaver Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 7:41 AM To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] ASTM, was ... Diesel Won't Solve... That's what a lot of people don't understand. If you haven't worked in the Gov't it doesn't make much sense. I was just telling someone that the latest IRS IT fiasco is actually not a failure in the eyes of the Gov't workers - only one person got fired, the FTE's got paid and the contractors got paid. Whether or not it worked was pretty incidental to the process. The rules are: 1. Don't get fired - still pretty hard to fire someone in the US. 2. Don't make more work for anyone. 3. Don't make your boss look bad. 4. Don't get bad press. 5. Inertia is better than doing something. Inertia won't get you fired, but doing something might. 6. That's the way we've always done it. Appal Energy wrote: Tom, Government is business. But not necessarily or precisely going about the same business of any specific special interest businesses. More to the tune of going about the business of all business. How many times have you found yourself in the middle of a Freudian slip, such as In this company (country)...? Think about it. The structure is precisely the same, with labor, middle and upper level management and the occassional stock holder's meeting (elections). In the interim, seldom does management change anything to the liking or needs of labor unless mandatory to prevent a serious disruption of production flow. Even then, as in the case of oil, they hold out to the last possible moment rather than seizing available opportunities. Call it poor leadership. Call it an attempt to maximize current infrastructure and investment dollar. Call it whatever you wish. But government is business, with one of its goals to insure its own existance to the best of its capabilities. Todd Swearingen The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government. Tom Irwin wrote: Hi Todd, You are such a hairsplitter. Big government or big corporate agribusinesses they ane now synonyms at least in the G8 world. I know your just endeavoring to be accurate. Big Smile, Tom Irwin *From:* Appal Energy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *To:* Biofuel@sustainablelists.org *Sent:* Tue, 09 Aug 2005 19:57:35 -0300 *Subject:* Re: [Biofuel] ASTM, was ... Diesel Won't Solve... Not necessarily. More like the big hand(s) of soybean interest(s) manipulating a set of controls to as best as possible guarantee that they get their research, testing and investment monies back. Forget that the monies they used are from a per bushel tax on beans, designated for use to advance the production and consumption of soy, which biodiesel does. What they want is the tax money to operate off of and then after they spend it they want it replenished. The government just went along in the processing of incorporating biodiesel as an EPA registered fuel. Then again, on the other hand, the soybean interests could have kept the Tier I II health effects studies for their use only as well as applicable only to soybean oil. But that's not how it ended up, as fuel from all oil and fat feedstocks fall under the rubric of biodiesel. One could say that the EPA lobbied to keep the gate open a little wider than strictly soy, which in turn served the public's interest rather than specifically the special interest. Nobody is talking. Todd Swearingen Tom Irwin wrote: Hi All, Do I detect the big hand of government squeezing the small business owner for corporate America here? Tom *From:* Ric Cuchetto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] javascript:kh6k0(new,[EMAIL PROTECTED])] *To:* Biofuel@sustainablelists.org javascript:kh6k0(new,Biofuel@sustainablelists.org) *Sent:* Tue, 09 Aug 2005 12:50:42 -0300 *Subject:* RE: [Biofuel] ASTM, was ... Diesel Won't Solve... ASTM testing is at the end of the process. We are also struggling with taxes and licensing and posting bond related to transporting the