Also a Mother Jones article a little while ago citing this - fertilizer being used as a carrier for cheap disposal of toxics. Spread it all over our farmlands in small concentrations instead of paying to have it properly disposed of. (Yikes!)
I think it's time to start looking seriously at the role of seedcake pellets that emerge from cold presses as hard pellets, with probably twice the oil content of those from solvent extraction facilities, ready for use as organic fertilizer. All the organic folks that are running diesels in their operations should, as a matter of principle, be integrating these biofuels and biolubricants and organic seedcake pellets ideas into their work. As for the pellets, I tried some on my lawn in the fall, and we are having a bit of a January thaw here right now... well, today I noticed the test patch is nice and green, and starting to actually grow (January in Canada, and my lawn is greeening...gee, d'ya think there might be something to this climate change stuff?), while the rest of the lawn is still a bit brownish and mushy/matted, as it emerges from under the recently (until only a few days ago) melted snow. If I can keep the dog, the birds, and the deer from eating them all off the lawn and gardens in the early spring before they break down after a few rains/waterings, it'll be fine. (Ah, let the animals have some, who cares?). A nice slow release replacement, and a great use for the pellets, while the oil goes for fuel and lubricants and other higher value markets (depending on type pressed). It makes me smile. Especially since I can still remember the taste of nitric or phos. acid, in the air from a nearby fertilizer plant, when we went our for recess in elementary school. I grew up on a farm near a major petrochemical producing region. One of my environmental studies profs. once joked that was why my hair's almost gone on top...I didn't find it all that funny, given the cancer rates and other illnesses in the region, and the fact that my wife was hospitalized for asthma, could've died actually, and one of my kids had allergies big time...until we moved as far away from it as we could go. Just packed up and moved. I had had enough. And the doctors in the ole home area did not say to move, they said that it would probably be just a temporary improvement if anything, and put her on lots of puffers and stuff. Every year "bronchitis", coughing for weeks on end. It was terrible. That was six years ago. She has zero problems now. no more puffers, pills, and side effects. My kids have no problems, very healthy. My allergies went away (after years of shots). None of us take medication for these things, and we rarely even get a cold. Meanwhile, relatives in that area, half the kids or more seem to be on puffers for asthma, and the adults always seem to have a "cold" or the "flu". Uh huh. Right. So why am I interested in all this biofuels stuff? Now you know. There are tons of good reasons to stay on it and push for change. Literally tons. They are currently spread on our fields, dumped in our water, and spewed into the air (where they travel sometimes thousands of kilometers, polluting our so-called "pristine" areas), precipitating out and ending up in the water again, in the food chain, and concentrating within us...by one pathway or another. And we see the results in terms of our health. Sooner - or later. But I digress... Edward Beggs www.biofuels.ca > From: Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com > Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 13:48:24 +0900 > To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [biofuel] Solid catalyst, > > "goat industries" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Yes, Dana, there are people interested in finding greener recipes for making >> biodiesel. They do seem to exist but are generally highly guarded industrial >> secrets. I got a bit disallusioned by the polluting effect of the basic >> methanol/lye method as it produces a lot of mirky water in the refining >> process which is a problem to serious biodiesel producers as the local >> environment agency (UK) is highly officious and very fond of imposing large >> fines on businesses that cause pollution. I am currently researching other >> methods. > > Sounds like it's your highly officious local UK environment agency > you should be getting a bit disillusioned with rather than the > polluting effect of the method, which was discussed here a month or > two ago and would seem to be more of a molehill than a mountain. Is > it really worse than soapy residues etc from dishwasher, laundry > detergents, bathwater? Aleks detailed the contents of the waste water > (pretty innocuous) and said there's no need to be saintlier than the > Pope. Keep 2nd and 3rd wash water for next-batch first wash; dilute > first-wash water and offer it to your lawn - try a small patch first, > but prolly neither lawn nor moles will mind, might even appreciate > it. Nothing you don't find in fertiliser bags. You can find a helluva > lot worse in fertiliser bags: 6.2 million pounds of lead compounds, > 1.3 million pounds of chromium compounds, 233,000 pounds of cadmium > compounds, 212,000 pounds of nickel compounds, 16,000 pounds of > mercury compounds and 223 pounds of arsenic compounds (dioxins not > measured) supplied in US fertilizer bags in 2000. Plenty of real > problems with water pollution in the UK to be concerned about. > > "UK's polluted rivers named" - "WWF says the relevant government > agencies do not have the money to monitor fresh water properly, and > are often powerless to act even when they find problems." > http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1285000/1285883.stm > > Should add this: > > "Aerosol Pollution Could Drain Earth's Water Cycle", San Diego, > California, December 7, 2001 (ENS) -- Pollution may be seriously > weakening the Earth's water cycle, reducing rainfall and threatening > fresh water supplies. A new study by researchers at the Scripps > Institution of Oceanography suggests that tiny particles of soot and > other pollutants are having a far greater effect on the planet's > hydrological cycle than previously realized, directly affecting fresh > water availability and quality. The aerosols are a mixture of > sulfates, nitrates, organic particles, fly ash, and mineral dust, > formed by fossil fuel combustion and burning of forests and other > biomass. > http://ens-news.com/ens/dec2001/2001L-12-07-06.html > > Using biodiesel gives substantial reductions of unburned hydrocarbons > (-93%), carbon monoxide (-50%), and particulate matter (-30%), ie > soot - NBB. So is using biodiesel rather than dinodiesel helping the > water situation more or less than your washwater is polluting it, > d'you think? > > Keith Addison > Journey to Forever > Handmade Projects > Tokyo > http://journeytoforever.org/ > > > > > > Biofuel at Journey to Forever: > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address. > To unsubscribe, send an email to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Tiny Wireless Camera under $80! Order Now! FREE VCR Commander! Click Here - Only 1 Day Left! http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
