Newsgroup sci.environment 107208

Directory

Harold Brashears wrote, among other things:
'Regards, Harold
----
"It is astonishing to think that sensitive background
investigation files on individuals currently involved in
Republican activities and the campaign of presumptive GOP
nominee Bob Dole have been in the Clinton White House
vault under the control of Clinton political operatives
all this time."
     -- The Washington Post editorial, 6/17/96'
One might finish this quote in a number of ways:
'...and yet remained unused for political purposes.'
or
'Now, if it were only true!'
or
'..since they're right where they've been for decades, while 
everything else got lost'.
or
'...and no-one broke in and erased them!'
I'm starting to like you, Harold!

The Second Annual SOUTHEAST RECYCLING INVESTMENT FORUM is scheduled for:
CHARLESTON, SC
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 1997
The Forum is being hosted by the SC Recycling Market Development Advisory Council with support 
from US EPA Region IV.  Forum partners include KirkWorks, the NC Recycling Business Assistance 
Center and the Southern States Waste Management Coalition.
Recycling companies from the Southeastern region (including AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, LA, MO, NC, 
OK, SC, TN, TX, VA, WV, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands) seeking additional capital for 
expansion are invited to apply. Business presenter applications and BUSINESS PLANS MUST BE 
SUBMITTED TO THE SELECTION COMMITTEE BY NOVEMBER 30.  Attendees to the forum will include 
individual investors, venture capital firms, corporate investors, economic developers, 
recycling officials, and governmental financing program officials.
To request a business application form or registration brochure, contact:
Shelly Carson, SC Department of Commerce, (V) 803/737-0239 (Fax) 803/737-0418, (Email) "Shelly 
Carson c/o" 
Other upcoming regional forums include:
The NORTHEAST RECYCLING INVESTMENT FORUM, New York City, May 1997
Contact: Mary Ann Remolador, Northeast Recycling Council, (V)  802/254-3636, (Fax) 
802/254-5870, (Email) nerc@sover.net
The MIDWEST RECYCLING INVESTMENT FORUM, Omaha, Spring 1998
Contact: Ms. Kimberly Newell, (V) 402/471-3766, (Fax) 402/471-3778, (Email) 
kimberly@ded1.ded.state.ne.us
Please forward this message to appropriate persons or lists.  My apologies for duplicate 
postings.
-- 
David Kirkpatrick
----------------------
KirkWorks
Post Office Box 15062
Durham, NC  27704-0062
919/220-8065 (Voice)
919/220-9720 (Fax)
Dkirkwks@igc.apc.org

af329@james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca (Scott Nudds) writes:
|On average, the yearly cost of owning an automobile is $7,000 here in
|Canada.  This includes all costs, including depreciation, insurance,
|maintenance, gas, etc.
One thing to note is that there can be a significant difference
between the average cost per mile of a car, and the marginal cost
of driving a mile in a car.  If you own a car, a large portion of
the costs are fixed, so that they contribute to the average cost
per mile of the car, but do not make an impact on the marginal
cost of driving another mile in that car.  This can have an impact
on a person's decision to use a car versus bike versus mass transit.
For example, a given car driven a given number of miles per year by
a given driver may have an average cost of 30 cents per mile, but a
marginal cost of 15 cents per mile.  If the person who owns it has a
20 mile commute that costs $4.00 by mass transit, then s/he will still
find it cheaper to use the car, since 15 cents per mile to drive the
car on the commute is less than 20 cents per mile to take the mass
transit.  However, if taking mass transit to work allows selling the
car, then it becomes cheaper to take mass transit, since the commuter
no longer pays the fixed costs of owning the car.
So the economics of car ownership means that the optimal choice for
many people is either (a) own the car and use it as much as possible,
or (b) not own the car at all.  The "middle ground" of using an owned
car for just a few trips often ends up being more expensive to the
user, since the fixed costs of owning a car make the average cost
per mile very high.
One can also discuss external costs (i.e. those borne by people other
than the commuter) of each transportation mode, but it is probable
that most commuters will not consider such costs unless such costs
are internalized (i.e. borne by the user).
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee                                                   timlee@
Unsolicited advertising email is not welcome.                 netcom.com
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.

Thought i might throw my two cents in. Studies have been done in sweden
 and by the EPA in victoria in an attempt to assign $ values to damage
done by road transport.
The vic EPA study (1991) values car emissions for their environmental effect
giving a range of 3 to 6 cents per kilometre travelled
The swedish study went further looking at road damage, cost of accidents and
congestion as well as environmental/health costs. A value of around 10c/km for 
rural and 16c/km for urban travel was attained.
Obviously the older the car the greater the environmental damage so the less
it cost you to own the greater damage you are doing (within reason).
Remember that we pay for all these costs through the taxation system so they 
are real.
When it comes to how you get about it is really a life style choice. In australia
a lot of people feel they have to drive because its more conveniant, or there
is inadequate public transport. the solution is to try to locate yourself close
to public transport or within a easy ride of work. sure it may cost more but
think of the money saved on not owning a car.

mfriesel@unemployed.physics said:
>Not much to say, is there?
to which charliew responded:
No, there isn't.  Your earlier posting which gave very many
details about your former job sounded very familiar.  You
apparently have a trait that we have in common - you try to
base many of your actions on principle.  This is admirable,
even if your goals are not the same as mine.
Have a nice day.
To which I reply:
It's more stubborness than anything.  My interests are in performing 
top quality and imaginative research, and becoming increasingly 
competent in my field by accumulating knowlege and experience...having 
the freedom (that word again!) to investigate interesting questions.
Now gather 'round the camp computer folks whilst I hooks up a few more 
batt'ries...
It's not that I didn't try the political game - it's that I'm not any 
good at it.  But here's an example of the kind of situation I'd find 
myself in - note there's almost no research involved, but hey, I 
needed 100% of my time covered by program funding:  Two managers 
landed a program with NASA and Boeing/Huntsville to develop a leak and 
impact detection and location system for the space station.  Doug is 
one of them, and he's a bright guy with some knowlege in my field, but 
the program was landed without them consulting with me at all.  It may 
not have made any difference but I'm cautious about promises until 
I've seen experimental evidence.  Program management was given to a 
guy with (I think) a bachelor's in electronics who had been elevated 
to a staff scientist (level 4, 5 is the top) from what I heard on the 
basis of his managing an NRC program ealier.  No skin off my nose, I 
was in charge of developing the acoustic emission system (acoustic 
emission, or AE, detects ultrasonic noise produced in metal by air 
flow).  The first part of the program went well, and Boeing took over 
for development.  The method Boeing uses is to be reasonably generous 
with the money but place the program deadline so short that to get it 
done you have to work 24 hour days (sl. exaggeration) which minimizes 
costs.  The final program funding was less than I wanted, and I 
suggested a couple of times to the program manager (Wayne is his name) 
that if they wouldn't pay whatever, I forget the number now, Battelle 
should refuse the program.  The reason was that when costs and time 
are minimized the entire development process has to be seamless or 
there can be big trouble.
I got together with a good interface guy named Walt (a Mormon by the 
way, I don't know if it was important) who helped me get a data 
acquisition instrument together since the first test on the space 
station shell was three weeks after the start of the program, and no 
money or time had been allocated to develop the DA instrument.  Thanks 
to Walt we got the thing together and working in time, and he went 
down to Huntsville with a technician and myself to get data.
Wayne came into my office sometime later and told me that Walt wasn't 
any good.  All I could say was that he had done good work for me, and 
that was about the end of it.  Sometime after this Ed down at Boeing 
called me and asked if acoustic emission could detect leakage into 
vacuum, and I told him I didn't know.  It is critical, by the way, for 
one part of the application.  There was no data available that I knew 
of and I started wondering whether an experiment should have been done 
before starting the program (the answer is yes, but I doubt very much 
if it would have happened).  The program continued, and I started 
scanning the literature between development tasks while Ed would 
periodically call and ask me again, to which I replied the same, but 
the issue was warming up.  I found one interesting advertisement for a 
company which evaluated AE of gasses and liquid into vacuum where air 
leakage from 1 atm. was specifically not mentioned, and there was a 
guy in California who was using AE to detect fuel leakage from 
spacecraft but that was about it.
The issue started to heat up, and Boeing allocated some $60k for me to 
look into the matter.  With Battelle rates we weren't able to use a 
good vacuum machine so we got a fairly small volume vacuum jar that 
can get down to about 10(-2) or (-3) Torr (still significant) and 
rigged up an experiment.  The acoustic emission decreased somewhat 
from it's maximum but was still pretty strong, and I sent the 
description of the experiment and the results along to Boeing.  The 
matter rested for awhile, then Boeing got back and said they wanted to 
fund some further research (I like these guys - they are sharp).  We 
(Jack, my technician and I) went back and looked at everything we 
might have missed in the experiment, rebuilt some parts to remove any 
obstacles, and observed on a shorter time scale.  We drilled some tiny 
round holes in an aluminum plate and for lack of money to build a 
better mousetrap covered the holes with tape.  That was it.  For just 
an instant after removing the tape there was only tape emission and no 
leak emission at all.  We ran some more tests, then notified the 
management and Boeing.  Practically everyone on the program was in the 
lab playing around, sticking hairs in front of the holes, piling dust 
in it, etc.  I left the lab because it was turning into a madhouse.  
The program eventually closed down, not because of this since impacts, 
and probably leakage through cracks, could still be detected and it 
was considered important to detect and locate them, but because 
Congress cut the budget.  So everything was wasted, and frankly the 
leak tests were indicative but not conclusive.
The chief electrical technician wouldn't talk to me for weeks.  Now, I 
figure out how many weeks I'm funded for, give myself some room, and I 
can stay under budget, but right after these tests I heard a rumor 
that I had gone over budget.  I submitted a request for a cost run, 
but it wasn't delivered, nor was there any response to my next two 
requests so I never did see the cost runs.  When I was laid off I was 
told I had been written up for going some fairly large amount over 
budget.  Nothing I can say.  Wayne also talked to me when I later 
applied to take the program computer, which had been in the lab unused 
for two or three years, home to do some additional work.  Seems there 
was a guy in his group who was working on some out-of-date machine who 
really needed it so I said ok, go ahead.  Well, Wayne kept it for 
himself and sent his whole group right down to the secretary after me 
one at a time to hound me for some internal memory that I knew nothing 
about, and none of them would listen to a word I said.  The guy 
immediately over the program manager is the department manager who I 
talked about before, the guy with the ruler who left the group leader 
position open for two years despite three PhD's who volunteered to 
take the job, and who told me I had to see if anyone else needed the 
computer before I took it home (ha).
Life at Battelle.  The loss of income because of the economy is bad, 
but people told me I hadn't seemed as happy for years as when I heard 
I was laid off.  I went to hear N.D. Mermin give both his popular and 
his technical lectures at Reed College in Portland the other day, and 
I'm going to see Joshua Bell (the violin virtuoso) play if I'm still 
in Portland in the next few months.  It's like coming back from the 
dead.

PRESENTATION:
Ballast Water Exchange and the National Invasive Species Act, a
discussion by a panel of experts.
DESCRIPTION:
The majority of the living "biomass" in San Francisco Bay is composed
of introduced non-native organisms.  The Asian River Clam, which was
not seen here prior to 1986, is now the most abundant organism in our
Bay .  We have all heard about the Zebra Mussel problems in the Great
Lakes.  Mussels, crabs, fish and other marine organisms, as well as
nuisance vegetation, and possibly human pathogens, are routinely
introduced into bays, harbors, and rivers all over the world.  The
primary means of transporting these organisms is by ballast water
aboard ships.  The recently enacted National Invasive Species Act, as
well as IMO Resolution 774, recommend the use of ship ballast water
management plans and ballast water exchange practices to minimize
these species introductions.  The panel members and their general
discussion topics include:
Dr. James Carlton (Williams College and UC Bodega Marine Laboratory) -
An introduction to the ecological impacts of non-indigenous species
and ballast water management.
Allegra Cangelosi (Northeast Midwest Institute and aid to Senator John
Glen)  - Policy Initiatives, the National Invasive Species Act and the
current IMO Recommendations.
CMDR Richard Gaudiosi (U.S. Coast Guard) - Ballast Water Management,
the role of the United States Coast Guard.
Frederick Gorell (Pacific Maritime Shipping Association) -
Ramifications for the Shipping Community
This meeting is being held in the east bay during the 2nd week of Nov.
It is sponsored by the local section of the Society of Naval
Architects and Marine Engineers (SNAME).  
For futher information, please contact Patrick Goss at
pgoss@herbert.com or call (415) 296-9700

In article <54o5th$5bd@spool.cs.wisc.edu>,
Michael Tobis  wrote:
>Paul Farrar (farrar@datasync.com) wrote:
...
>: Very, very wrong. Ecological processes play an important role in the
>: climate system. Ecology, soil science, forestry, etc are necessary
>: elements of climate research.
>
>...
>
>Ummm, I guess it depends where you are sitting. People who play with 
>GCMs a lot consider biogeochemistry a boundary condition. As for land
>surface cover that's interactive in some models, but I think that as
>far as predicting the next few decades or centuries, as opposed to 
>understanding the climates of the past, these are also best treated as
>inputs to the climate system rather than participants in it. 
>
>You could equally consider the economy to be a player in the system,
>but that makes matters even worse. I think it's very useful to draw
>the boundary around atmosphere and hydrosphere, reducing the problem
>to pure physics and thus within the realm of plausible progress on
>the time scales of interest. 
>
>It's true enough that there are feedbacks between the climate system
>so defined and the biogeochemical, ecological, and economic systems.
>But at that point we end up with literally everything under the sun
>in the system, and it becomes difficult to make conclusions.
>
>Understanding of the atmosphere alone is a mature science, and of the
>ocean somewhat less so but still quite advanced. The next step is to
>work out how these interact with each other and the ice. I consider
>this to be the program of physical climatology. I would be the last
>to trivialize the importance of the neighboring systems or of the
>feedbacks between them and the climate system, nor of the sciences
>attempting to resolve them. But I think it's useful to think of them
>as separate systems and separate disciplines, certainly as far as
>understanding our present and future situation (on decadal to century
>time scales) is concerned. 
>
>This approach can be called "reductionist" by those who don't quite
>understand it, but it certainly has its advantages. If we had tried
>to understand the coupled ocean-atmosphere system before getting a grip
>on how each behaves when the other is specified, we would never have
>made as much progress. Trying to understand everything at once may be
>good philosophy or maybe not, but it certainly isn't good science.
>
>mt
>
I don't disagree with anything you say, although I must emphasize again
the importance of the biosciences, which will, I think, grow with time.
We do tend to split things up in to black boxes, with each regarding the
other boxes as merely a prescribed boundary condition, and that is the
proper way to carry out the research program at this time. The physical
climatology box seems to me to be in a mopping up phase now, with some
important exceptions, such as decadal and longer coupled ocean-atmosphere 
interactions and ice cap response.
The biosphere is in the climate feedback loops, and with time constants
comparable to the periods for which the physical climatologists are
willing to make predictions. Perhaps "predictions" is too strong a word.
Much of the work is just sensitivity analysis, such as the determination
of the canonical 2X response -- what we can't say is whether CO2 will
double, triple, or what. Within a few decades, it will be very important to
know the biospheric response much better than we do now, as the exact details
will make a big difference as to what our options will be. Right now the
biosphere seems to be a big CO2 sink, but that should change for a variety
of reasons. I hear the Global Climate and Terrestrial Ecosystems Project
of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme will be issuing an
IPCC-type report predicting that the biosphere will switch to source by
mid century. That, if it starts occurring, will obviously have huge
repercussions for energy use policy scenarios.
Paul Farrar
http://www.datasync.com/~farrar/

In article <01bbc174$2872cd40$89d0d6cc@masher>, "Mike Asher"
 wrote:
[snip]
>  
> Bad tactic, there.  Radiical environmentalists are rarely concerned with
> human life.   
> I'll forbear (unless you ask) to post any of the dozens of case where
> environmentalist scare tactics have claimed lives.  I'll simply post a
> couple comments from "respected" environmental leaders.
> 
OK, I'm asking.  Na me a few *documented* cases "where environmentalist
scare tactics have claimed lives."
> (after being asked about reincarnation)
> "I would wish...to return as a killer virus to lower human population
> levels"
>      - Prince Phillip, while leader of the World Wildlife Fund
> 
> "I got the impression that, instead of going out to shoot birds, I should
> shoot the kids that shoot birds"
>      - Paul Watson, founder of Greenpeace
> 
> "If environmentalists  were to invent a disease to bring human populations
> back to sanity, it would probably be something like AIDS."
>      - from the Earth First newsletter,  ref. December 1989
> 
> Yes, you radical environmentalists certainly do love life, don't you?
I prefer people who express their indignation by such statements with no
intention of following through to those tycoons who kill silently only to
increase profits by cutting costs on environmental controls.
-- 
Don McKenzie, Los Angeles, CA
"Liberal: 1. Favorable to progress or reform..."  
      Random House unabridged dictionary  

                         POST-DOCTORAL FELLOWSHIP
                                    in
                           ECOSYSTEM DIAGNOSTICS
                                 with the
        Tri-Council Eco-Research Chair Program in Ecosystem Health
                           University of Guelph
Applications are invited for a Post-Doctoral Fellowship in Ecosystem
Diagnostics with the Tri- Council Eco-Research Chair Program in Ecosystem
Health at the University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada.  The Chair Program is
sponsored by the three National Research Councils of Canada, in
partnership with federal and provincial agencies. 
The Chair Program fosters an integrative approach to assessing changes in
environment through an Ecosystem Health perspective.  Its goals are to
integrate the socioeconomic, biophysical and human health dimensions of
environmental change within an evolving framework for assessment and
management of the environment.  The Chair Program seeks to develop
transdisciplinary research, integrating the social, natural and health
sciences.  The candidate will be expected to develop an innovative
research program which draws upon methodologies in the health sciences in
application to evaluating ecosystem transformations.  The research group
comprises the Chairholder, three post-doctoral fellows and a farming
systems scientist and several graduate students. 
Potential areas of research include: 
    Human health implications of environmental change
    Application of diagnostic protocols from health sciences to ecosystem
    assessment
    Human health costs of environmental change
Education and experience in classification and diagnosis of disease is
pertinent. Salary: $30,000 per year. 
Letters of application, with a curriculum vitae and names and addresses of
three referees, should be sent by November 15, 1996 to: 
          David J. Rapport
          Tri-Council Eco-Research Chair in Ecosystem Health
          Room 205, Blackwood Hall
          University of Guelph
          Guelph, Ontario  Canada  N1G 2W1
          fax: (519) 763-4686
          email: drapport@envsci.uoguelph.ca

John Potter wrote:
> (snip)
> 
> OK, Charlie, go for it.  Since it is now clear that you have no respect for
> opinions other than your own, especially when they come from
> environmentalists, why bother writing to an environmental newsgroup?
> 
> John Potter
For my point of view, I do it:
1. For entertainment
2. To test my ideas (which is entertaining anyway)
3. To learn (which is also entertaining)
Since when have self-reinforcing diatribes been right?  From my 20 years' 
experience, both extremes complain that their world is about to end, it 
is the scientific, open-minded centre that comes up with the solutions by 
talking, analysing etc.  The newsgroups are just the latest, and possibly 
the best, way of increasing the links in the centre, and exposing the 
extremes.
I would suggest that if you are unwilling to be a constructive 
participant, then you are the one wasting our time.
By the way, I'm an environmentalist working for industry, and I have been 
a regulator.  I see no conflict in the role.
Let's move along.  Start with a whinge (a "bitch" would be the US 
equivalent); get some data; convert it to information; use it to increase 
knowledge; merge it into the collective wisdom; then formulate workable 
solutions.  It's hard, but very rewarding.
Regards, Martin

In article <54o7sd$5bd@spool.cs.wisc.edu>, tobis@scram.ssec.wisc.edu
(Michael Tobis) wrote:
> charliew (charliew@hal-pc.org) wrote:
> 
> : BTW, if you want to convince me that global warming is real, 
> : just show me three independent studies that give evidence of 
> : a substantial increase in global average temperature.  Tons 
> : of paperwork, with very many references that reference other 
> : references by many of the same people just prove to me that 
> : most of these people are of the same opinion - not that they 
> : are right.
> 
> Pleasure. 
Let's be clear.  NO ONE doubts that the measured climate has warmed over
the past century.  
The debate is about WHY.  Some say mankind.  Others say nature.  Others
say measurement bias.
Please distinguish.

In article <326fd6b4.16734045@nntp.st.usm.edu>, brshears@whale.st.usm.edu
(Harold Brashears) wrote:
> What Mr. Tobias unfortunatly failed to mention, was the magnitude of
> the temperature increase, and that much of this increase is due to
> factors other than human activity.
> 
> The total world wide temperature increase since 1860 AD is 0.55 deg
> C.,  Since 1970, 0.36 deg C.  
> 
> In addition, Mr Tobis also failed to mention that of the variation in
> temperature from 1860 to today, 56% can be accounted for by variation
> in solar irradiance alone.
> 
> See Geophys. Res. Lett., Vol 22, no 23, p3195, Dec 1, 1995.
You imply that Mr. Harold precluded the possibilities you raise.  He
didn't.  His post was "cause-neutral."  He simply stated the same facts
you state.  You stain him with a zealousy he doesn't obviously share,

Western Australia has a serious shortage of experienced Geologists and 
Engineers with Environment, Mining and/or Exploration experience. If you 
have an interest in participating in a major resources boom you please 
contact Sean Lennon on 09 472 3113 or send your resume via email. Our 
jobs page can be found at http://www.vianet.net.au

Archive-name: fusion-faq/section0-intro/part1-overview
Last-modified: 26-Feb-1995
Posting-frequency: More-or-less-biweekly
Disclaimer:  While this section is still evolving, it should 
     be useful to many people, and I encourage you to distribute 
     it to anyone who might be interested (and willing to help!!!).
-----------------------------------------------------------------
### Answers to Frequently Asked Questions about Fusion Research
-----------------------------------------------------------------
# Written/Edited by:
     Robert F. Heeter
     
     Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory
# Last Revised February 26, 1995
-----------------------------------------------------------------
*** A.  Welcome to the Conventional Fusion FAQ!  
-----------------------------------------------------------------
* 1) Contents
  This file is intended to indicate 
     (A) that the Conventional Fusion FAQ exists, 
     (B) what it discusses, 
     (C) how to find it on the Internet, and
     (D) the status of the Fusion FAQ project
* 2) What is the Conventional Fusion FAQ?
  The Conventional Fusion FAQ is a comprehensive, relatively
  nontechnical set of answers to many of the frequently asked
  questions about fusion science, fusion energy, and fusion
  research.  Additionally, there is a Glossary of Frequently
  Used Terms In Plasma Physics and Fusion Energy Research, which 
  explains much of the jargon of the field.  The Conventional 
  Fusion FAQ originated as an attempt to provide 
  answers to many of the typical, basic, or introductory questions 
  about fusion research, and to provide a listing of references and 
  other resources for those interested in learning more.  The
  Glossary section containing Frequently Used Terms (FUT) also
  seeks to facilitate communication regarding fusion by providing
  brief explanations of the language of the field.
* 3) Scope of the Conventional Fusion FAQ:
  Note that this FAQ discusses only the conventional forms of fusion
  (primarily magnetic confinement, but also inertial and 
  muon-catalyzed), and not new/unconventional forms ("cold fusion",
  sonoluminescence-induced fusion, or ball-lightning fusion).  I 
  have tried to make this FAQ as uncontroversial and comprehensive
  as possible, while still covering everything I felt was 
  important / standard fare on the sci.physics.fusion newsgroup.
* 4) How to Use the FAQ:
  This is a rather large FAQ, and to make it easier to find what
  you want, I have outlined each section (including which questions
  are answered) in Section 0, Part 2 (posted separately).  Hopefully it 
  will not be too hard to use.  Part (C) below describes how to find
  the other parts of the FAQ via FTP or the World-Wide Web.
* 5) Claims and Disclaimers:  
  This is an evolving document, not a completed work.  As such, 
  it may not be correct or up-to-date in all respects.  
  This document should not be distributed for profit, especially 
  without my permission.  Individual sections may have additional 
  restrictions.  In no case should my name, the revision date, 
  or this paragraph be removed.  
                                             - Robert F. Heeter
--------------------------------------------------------------------
*** B. Contents (Section Listing) of the Conventional Fusion FAQ
--------------------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************************
                What This FAQ Discusses
*****************************************************************
(Each of these sections is posted periodically on sci.physics.fusion.
 Section 0.1 is posted biweekly, the other parts are posted quarterly.
 Each listed part is posted as a separate file.)
Section 0 - Introduction
     Part 1/3 - Title Page
                Table of Contents
                How to Find the FAQ
                Current Status of the FAQ project
     Part 2/3 - Detailed Outline with List of Questions
     Part 3/3 - Revision History
Section 1 - Fusion as a Physical Phenomenon
Section 2 - Fusion as an Energy Source
     Part 1/5 - Technical Characteristics
     Part 2/5 - Environmental Characteristics
     Part 3/5 - Safety Characteristics
     Part 4/5 - Economic Characteristics
     Part 5/5 - Fusion for Space-Based Power
Section 3 - Fusion as a Scientific Research Program
     Part 1/3 - Chronology of Events and Ideas
     Part 2/3 - Major Institutes and Policy Actors
     Part 3/3 - History of Achievements and Funding
Section 4 - Methods of Containment / Approaches to Fusion
     Part 1/2 - Toroidal Magnetic Confinement Approaches
     Part 2/2 - Other Approaches (ICF, muon-catalyzed, etc.)
Section 5 - Status of and Plans for Present Devices
Section 6 - Recent Results
Section 7 - Educational Opportunities
Section 8 - Internet Resources
Section 9 - Future Plans
Section 10 - Annotated Bibliography / Reading List
Section 11 - Citations and Acknowledgements
Glossary of Frequently Used Terms (FUT) in Plasma Physics & Fusion:
  Part 0/26 - Intro
  Part 1/26 - A
  Part 2/26 - B
  [ ... ]
  Part 26/26 - Z
---------------------------------------------------------------
*** C.  How to find the Conventional Fusion FAQ on the 'Net:
---------------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************************
###  The FAQ about the FAQ:
###          How can I obtain a copy of a part of the Fusion FAQ?
*****************************************************************
* 0) Quick Methods (for Experienced Net Users)
   (A) World-Wide Web:  http://lyman.pppl.gov/~rfheeter/fusion-faq.html
   (B) FTP:  rtfm.mit.edu in /pub/usenet-by-group/sci.answers/fusion-faq
* 1) Obtaining the Fusion FAQ from Newsgroups
  Those of you reading this on news.answers, sci.answers, 
  sci.energy, sci.physics, or sci.environment will be able to 
  find the numerous sections of the full FAQ by reading 
  sci.physics.fusion periodically.  (Please note that not 
  all sections are completed yet.)  Because the FAQ is quite
  large, most sections are posted only every three months, to avoid
  unnecessary consumption of bandwidth.
  All sections of the FAQ which are ready for "official" 
  distribution are posted to sci.physics.fusion, sci.answers, 
  and news.answers, so you can get them from these groups by 
  waiting long enough. 
* 2) World-Wide-Web (Mosaic, Netscape, Lynx, etc.):
   Several Web versions now exist.
   The "official" one is currently at
     
   We hope to have a version on the actual PPPL Web server 
      () soon.
   There are other sites which have made "unofficial" Web versions 
   from the newsgroup postings.  I haven't hunted all of these down 
   yet, but I know a major one is at this address:
 
 Note that the "official" one will include a number of features
 which cannot be found on the "unofficial" ones created by
 automated software from the newsgroup postings.  In particular
 we hope to have links through the outline directly to questions,
 and between vocabulary words and their entries in the Glossary, 
 so that readers unfamiliar with the terminology can get help fast.
 (Special acknowledgements to John Wright at PPPL, who is handling
  much of the WWW development.)
* 3) FAQ Archives at FTP Sites (Anonymous FTP) - Intro
  All completed sections can also be obtained by anonymous FTP 
  from various FAQ archive sites, such as rtfm.mit.edu.  The
  address for this archive is:
    
  Please note that sections which are listed above as having
  multiple parts (such as the glossary, and section 2) are 
  stored in subdirectories, where each part has its own
  filename; e.g., /fusion-faq/glossary/part0-intro. 
  Please note also that there are other locations in the rtfm
  filespace where fusion FAQ files are stored, but the reference
  given above is the easiest to use.
  There are a large number of additional FAQ archive sites,
  many of which carry the fusion FAQ.  These are listed below.
* 4) Additional FAQ archives worldwide (partial list)
  There are other FAQ archive sites around the world
  which one can try if rtfm is busy; a list is appended
  at the bottom of this file.
* 5) Mail Server
   If you do not have direct access by WWW or FTP, the 
   rtfm.mit.edu site supports "ftp by mail": send a message 
   to mail-server@rtfm.mit.edu with the following 3 lines
   in it (cut-and-paste if you like): 
send usenet-by-group/sci.answers/fusion-faq/section0-intro/part1-overview
send usenet-by-group/sci.answers/fusion-faq/section0-intro/part2-outline
quit
   The mail server will send these two introductory 
   files to you.  You can then use the outline (part2)
   to determine which files you want.  You can receive
   any or all of the remaining files by sending another
   message with the same general format, if you substitute
   the file archive names you wish to receive, in place of the 
   part "fusion-faq/section0-intro/part1-overview", etc. used above.
* 6) Additional Note / Disclaimer: 
  Not all sections of the FAQ have been written
  yet, nor have they all been "officially" posted.
  Thus, you may not find what you're looking for right away.
  Sections which are still being drafted are only
  posted to sci.physics.fusion.  If there's a section 
  you can't find, send me email and I'll let you know 
  what's up with it. 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
*** D. Status of the Conventional Fusion FAQ Project
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* 1) Written FAQ Sections:
  Most sections have been at least drafted, but many sections are still
  being written.  Sections 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 4.1, 4.2, and 9
  remain to be completed.
  Those sections which have been written could use revising and improving.
  I am trying to obtain more information, especially on devices and 
  confinement approaches; I'm also looking for more information on 
  international fusion research, especially in Japan & Russia.
   *** I'd love any help you might be able to provide!! ***
* 2) Building a Web Version
  A "primitive" version (which has all the posted data, but isn't
  especially aesthetic) exists now.  Would like to add graphics and 
  cross-references to the Glossary, between FAQ sections, and 
  to other internet resources (like laboratory Web pages).  
* 3) Nuts & Bolts - 
  I'm looking for ways to enhance the distribution of the FAQ, and
  to get additional volunteer help for maintenance and updates.
  We are in the process of switching to automated posting via the 
  rtfm.mit.edu faq posting daemon.
* 4) Status of the Glossary:
 # Contains roughly 1000 entries, including acronyms, math terms, jargon, etc.
 # Just finished incorporating terms from the "Glossary of Fusion Energy"
   published in 1985 by the Dept. of Energy's Office of Scientific and
   Technical Information.
 # Also working to improve technical quality of entries (more formal.)
 # World Wide Web version exists, hope to cross-reference to FAQ.
 # Hope to have the Glossary "officially" added to PPPL Web pages.
 # Hope to distribute to students, policymakers, journalists, 
   scientists, i.e., to anyone who needs a quick reference to figure out 
   what we're really trying to say, or to decipher all the "alphabet 
   soup."  Scientists need to remember that not everyone knows those 
   "trivial" words we use every day.  The glossary and FAQ should be 
   useful in preparing for talks to lay audiences.  Students will 
   also find it useful to be able to look up unfamiliar technical jargon.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
*** E. Appendix: List of Additional FAQ Archive Sites Worldwide 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
(The following information was excerpted from the "Introduction to 
the *.answers newsgroups" posting on news.answers, from Sept. 9, 1994.)
Other news.answers/FAQ archives (which carry some or all of the FAQs
in the rtfm.mit.edu archive), sorted by country, are:
[ Note that the connection type is on the left.  I can't vouch
for the fusion FAQ being on all of these, but it should be
on some. - Bob Heeter ]
Belgium
-------
  gopher                cc1.kuleuven.ac.be port 70
  anonymous FTP         cc1.kuleuven.ac.be:/anonymous.202
  mail-server           listserv@cc1.kuleuven.ac.be  get avail faqs
Canada
------
  gopher                jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca port 70
Finland
-------
  anonymous ftp         ftp.funet.fi/pub/doc/rtfm
France
------
  anonymous FTP         grasp1.insa-lyon.fr:/pub/faq
                        grasp1.insa-lyon.fr:/pub/faq-by-newsgroup
  gopher                gopher.insa-lyon.fr, port 70
  mail server           listserver@grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr
Germany
-------
  anonymous ftp         ftp.Germany.EU.net:/pub/newsarchive/news.answers
                        ftp.informatik.uni-muenchen.de:/pub/comp/usenet/news.answers
                        ftp.uni-paderborn.de:/doc/FAQ
                        ftp.saar.de:/pub/usenet/news.answers (local access only)
  gopher                gopher.Germany.EU.net, port 70.
                        gopher.uni-paderborn.de
  mail server           archive-server@Germany.EU.net
                        ftp-mailer@informatik.tu-muenchen.de
                        ftp-mail@uni-paderborn.de
  World Wide Web        http://www.Germany.EU.net:80/
  FSP                   ftp.Germany.EU.net, port 2001
  gopher index          gopher://gopher.Germany.EU.net:70/1.archive
                        gopher://gopher.uni-paderborn.de:70/0/Service/FTP
Korea
-----
  anonymous ftp         hwarang.postech.ac.kr:/pub/usenet/news.answers
Mexico
------
  anonymous ftp         mtecv2.mty.itesm.mx:/pub/usenet/news.answers
The Netherlands
---------------
  anonymous ftp         ftp.cs.ruu.nl:/pub/NEWS.ANSWERS
  gopher                gopher.win.tue.nl, port 70
  mail server           mail-server@cs.ruu.nl
Sweden
------
  anonymous ftp         ftp.sunet.se:/pub/usenet
Switzerland
-----------
  anonymous ftp         ftp.switch.ch:/info_service/usenet/periodic-postings
  anonymous UUCP        chx400:ftp/info_service/Usenet/periodic-postings
  mail server           archiver-server@nic.switch.ch
  telnet                nic.switch.ch, log in as "info"
Taiwan
------
  anonymous ftp         ftp.edu.tw:/USENET/FAQ
  mail server           ftpmail@ftp.edu.tw
United Kingdon
--------------
  anonymous ftp         src.doc.ic.ac.uk:/usenet/news-faqs/
  FSP                   src.doc.ic.ac.uk port 21
  gopher                src.doc.ic.ac.uk port 70.
  mail server           ftpmail@doc.ic.ac.uk
  telnet                src.doc.ic.ac.uk login as sources
  World Wide Web        http://src.doc.ic.ac.uk/usenet/news-faqs/
United States
-------------
  anonymous ftp         ftp.uu.net:/usenet
  World Wide Web        http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu:80/hypertext/faq/usenet/top.html

Hi,
I would appreciate anyone pointing me in the right direction with this one:
I work at the SPNI, Israel's largest environmental organisation. We have 
received an offer from an Italian company making paper (quite cheaply), so 
they claim, from Algae from the Venice lagoon. 
The company is called "ALGA CARTA FAVINI", and their address is "Alga-Carta 
Enea, Instituto superior de Agronomia Adisa (Lisbon),Cartiera Favini 
(Venice).
Has anyone heard of this company before ?  Where could we check the 
environmental impact of their processes ?  (any Italian environmental 
organisations ?)
Thank you in advance...
Dan Diamant
International Coordinator

Subj:	It is with great sorrow that we have to inform everyone who has
tried so hard to
Date:	96-10-25 06:55:20 EDT
From:	100105.555@CompuServe.COM (Andy Highfield)
To:	ASalzberg@aol.com (Allen Salzberg)
It is with great sorrow that we have to inform everyone who has tried so
hard to
save the 1,000 Horsfield s tortoises in Sweden that they are now all dead.
A
special detail of the Ministry of Agriculture worked through the night to
freeze
the animals to death. This was done in an effort to outpace the world-wide
demands to save the animals which were pouring in by the hour.
Efforts to save the tortoises had been made by veterinarians,
conservationists,
herpetological societies and individuals world-wide. 
On a personal note, I have worked in animal welfare and conservation for
25
years, and never have I encountered such a cowardly and monstrously evil
act as
this.
A full report of exactly what took place will be posted here in a few
hours.
Please be assured that this matter is not over. We fully intend to seek
justice
for the tortoises which were murdered in the dead of night. The battle
over this
issue is only just beginning.
Andy C. Highfield
Jill Martin
Tortoise Trust (UK).

[Posted to sci.environment]
af329@james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca (Scott Nudds) wrote:
>(Patrick Reid) wrote:
>: My job includes doing safety analysis of CANDU nuclear power plants in
>: order to maintain their license to operate.
>
>Review by Ontario Hydro finds nuclear plants full of problems
>-------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, OH has been having many chronic problems with its plants. They
need to be addressed, and the AECB is doing it's job by applying
pressure on OH to fix its problems. But let's talk about some of the
specific examples cited here.
[snip]
>Examples cited in the report include an increase of 20% in the radiation
>doses received by workers, mainly because of extended repairs at the
>Bruce power plant on Lake Huron and the Pickering station just east of
>Toronto.
Note, however, that workers are still under the dose limits set for
Atomic Radiation Workers. This is a criticism of a failure to follow
the ALARA principle - to keep doses As Low As Reasonably Achievable. I
could argue very strenuously against the application of the ALARA
principle for doses below 5 rem per year (which is far above the
allowable worker dose) - the rules as they are are unnecessarily
punitive. However, OH must follow them -- and has.
The concern here is that the margin by which OH meets these rules
appears to be eroded. The Board is right to apply pressure on OH to
improve performance here; with a shutdown hanging over their heads, I
expect that OH will heed the Board.
>Performance of safety systems fell for the first time in five years and
>operating policies, designed to ensure nuclear plants are as safe as
>possible, were broken at double the rate of previous years.
Once again, while performance has dropped, it is still within the
performance levels for which the safety analysis is done. So, while
this is cause for concern in a company which has a good safety
culture, it does not yet constitute any danger to the public beyond
what is permitted by the regulatory body (the AECB). Note that every
electrical generation technology has associated danger to the public.
The post from which you quote here details why I think that nuclear
has the least danger, especially as it is currently regulated.
OP&P; (Operating Policies and Principles) violations are a real problem
and OH should be expending a lot of effort in eliminating them.
Violating OP&P; rules can mean a reduced margin of safety in operating
the plant. Note, however, that an OP&P; violation rarely lasts for more
that a few hours, or perhaps a day. Hence, increased time-at-risk here
is small. Also, be aware that the OP&P; rules are often set so that,
even if they are broken, there is still some margin of safety before
you get the plant in a state which is not accounted for in the safety
analysis.
>Hydro chief Allan Kupcis acknowledged in July that he was "absolutely
>disappointed" with nuclear operations, but the internal report is the
>first document to provide details.
IMHO, this (Kupcis' disappointment) is a good sign... provided that it
is followed up by remedial action on the part of OH.
>Hydro has since fired the general manager of its three nuclear power
>stations and hired an American consultant.
Another action taken to improve plant safety performance.
>The station has been threatened with a November shutdown by the Atomic
>Energy Control Board unless it improves its safety record, which
>includes botched repairs and at least one fire.
Another good sign. The AECB's mandate is to ensure that, if the rules
are broken, there are consequences. If the Boars feels that the safety
culture at Pickering is below acceptable levels, they are clearly
willing to shut the plant down. That's a good thing.
>Hydro has embarked on a program to improve the performance of its
>nuclear plants, which are shut down about 30% of the time.  It wants
>that reduced to 20% in three years, as much for safety reasons as for
>corporate survival.
Another good thing: the safest operating state for a CANDU is 100%
full power. It is during low power operation and during startups and
shutdowns that the station is most at risk of an accident.
BTW, Mr. Nudds, I notice that you did not address any of the main
points in my post, i.e., about:
- The "Extremely Safe" Nature of Nuclear Power
- The Human Health Effects of the Chernobyl Accident
- Radiation-Induced Cancer at Low Doses (the "Linear, No-Threshold"
  Model)
Am I to assume that you agree with me?
I though not.
Perhaps you will provide the newsgroup with your rationale for
disagreement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Patrick Reid                  | e-mail: pjreid@mi.net              |
| ALARA Research, Incorporated  | Voice:  (506) 674-9099             |
| Saint John, NB, Canada        | Fax:    (506) 674-9197             |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - - - - - Opinions expressed here are mine and mine alone: - - - - |
| - - - - - - - - - -don't blame them on anyone else - - - - - - - - |
----------------------------------------------------------------------

[Posted to sci.environment]
af329@james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca (Scott Nudds) wrote:
>  Of course new nuclear technology should be developed.  This is not the
>issue.  When such technology is demonstrated and available, the situation
>can be re-evaluated.  At this point, the nuclear industry is stagnant.
>Their existing technology has proven to be less reliable and more
>dangerous than advertised.  And the problem of waste disposal has not
>been solved anywhere in the world.
I disagree with a lot in this paragraph, with the exception of the
first two sentences.
The nuclear industry is not stagnant. New reactor designs and new fuel
designs are beng worked on for CANDU as we speak, let alone the PIUS
design which Mr. Redlin has told us so much about. There is the
possibility of selling one new design, the CANDU 9, to Korea. A new
fuel design, CANFLEX, is being developed which will improve the margin
of safety, especially for existing CANDU plants.
Existing nuclear is not more dangerous than advertised. In over 7000
reactor-years of operation of commercial nuclear power plants, there
has been one accident which has resulted in _any_ deaths to members of
the general public. That accident was 10 years ago and the death toll
in the general public thus far is 3 (admittedly, that death toll will
continue to grow, but based on current data, it will certainly not
exceed 100, assuming that another form of cancer does not show up in
the affected populations, which is very unlikely). Nuclear is
"advertised" as the safest large-scale energy production technology
yet. I would say that experience has proven this out.
As far as reliability goes, nuclear does very well, thank you. CANDU's
hold 7 of the top 15 positions in lifetime performance for nuclear
reactors. All of these reactors have capacity factors over 80%. Most
of the unavailability for these units is due to planned outages.
Sounds pretty reliable to me. Obviously, the other 8 spots in the top
15, held by PWRs and one BWR, also have excellent availability, in the
same range as these CANDU units.
The problem of waste disposal _has_ been solved (for about 2 billion
years -- see below). I assume here that you mean what most people mean
when they talk about waste disposal problems: spent fuel. The real
solution here is to hold onto the fuel for about 100 years while
extraction technology improves and becomes cheaper; then we can
re-process the spent fuel to remove the actinides, "burn" them in a
CANDU (for example), and store the non-actinide fission products for
another couple hundred years until the radioactivity has fallen to the
level of the negligible levels. If you insist on permanent disposal,
AECL has designed a permanent disposal concept which is currently
undergoing environmental review. It involves underground storage in
the Canadian Shield.
If you don't think that will work, I suggest you learn a little bit
about the Oklo natural reactor. I quote from "Introductory Nuclear
Physics", by Kenneth S. Krane, copyright 1988, published by John Wiley
& Sons:
"In 1972, a sample of uranium, mined at Oklo in what is now the
Republic of Gabon on the west coast of Africa, was analyzed by the
French Atomic Energy Commission and showed a 235-U abundance of only
0.00717, about 3 standard deviations below the accepted value. This
small deviation was enough to excite their curiosity, and analysis of
additional samples showed even smaller 235-U abundances, as low as
0.00440... the French workers theorized that a natural nuclear reactor
operated in the Oklo site about 2 x 10^9 y ago, when the 235-U
abundance was high enough (~ 3%) to permit the operation of a reactor
moderated by groundwater... it is estimated that about 5 _tons_ of
235-U were fissioned... the reactor may have operated for 10^10 h, or
10^6 y!
"Confirmation of the remarkable hypothesis of the natural reactor was
found in the observation of the abundances of fission products in the
Oklo minerals...
"One final interesting feature of the Oklo reactor should be mentioned
- the fission products were still in place in the reactor zone and had
migrated very little. Despite climactic changes, no substantial
movement of these fission products has taken place over the past 2 x
10^9 y. This suggests that there may be merit in the present schemes
for burying waste products of power reactors in geologically stable
formations."
Here we are talking about fission products sitting in the _ore_!!! The
reactor was moderated by _groundwater_, which was therefore throughout
the reactor zone!!! I think that, with an engineered system in place,
we should be able to replicate this sort of spent fuel storage system.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Patrick Reid                  | e-mail: pjreid@mi.net              |
| ALARA Research, Incorporated  | Voice:  (506) 674-9099             |
| Saint John, NB, Canada        | Fax:    (506) 674-9197             |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - - - - - Opinions expressed here are mine and mine alone: - - - - |
| - - - - - - - - - -don't blame them on anyone else - - - - - - - - |
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Jennifer Mills wrote:
> 
>  am a high school student trying to figure out what to do with my
> life, eduacation and career wise.
> 
> I am very concerned about the environment and I am looking for
> information on environmental careers and universities where I can get
> the needed education.
> 
> I am especially interested in the engineering field (Environmental
> engineer?)
> 
> I feel that the environment is an increasingly important topic and I
> feel that the environment would be a good career path for me to
> choose.
> 
> Any information or suggestions regarding the above is appreciated!
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Jennifer Mills
Jennifer, I am impressed! There is certainly reason for your concern,
and I applaud you for being willing to devote your career to this
noble and necessary cause.
I would recommend searching the Web for environmental job postings.
Here are a few that I've stumbled across:
http://www.webdirectory.com/
   This is a huge index into Environmental pages. Employment is one
   of them
http://www.careermag.com/
   One of many job search sites. Do a search on "environment" to
   get an idea what skills are in demand.
http://www.ajb.dni.us/
http://www1.monster.com:80/jobseek/home/jobhome.htm
   Two more job banks that you can do a search on.
Good luck!
Regards,
Bud

                        * Environmental Quotes * Daily...
          "We need to live in harmony with mother earth, a harmony that
is based on
co-existence and respect. She owns us...we don't own her. It is through
respect for the 
land and taking care not to abuse the land that we are able to survive."
                         -Mandawuy Yunupingu
            Thanks for reading.
             I love to get feedback...
Jonathan Layburn
Founder  - * Environmental Quotes * Daily...

Subj:	It is with great sorrow that we have to inform everyone who has
tried so hard to
Date:	96-10-25 06:55:20 EDT
From:	100105.555@CompuServe.COM (Andy Highfield)
To:	ASalzberg@aol.com (Allen Salzberg)
It is with great sorrow that we have to inform everyone who has tried so
hard to
save the 1,000 Horsfield s tortoises in Sweden that they are now all dead.
A
special detail of the Ministry of Agriculture worked through the night to
freeze
the animals to death. This was done in an effort to outpace the world-wide
demands to save the animals which were pouring in by the hour.
Efforts to save the tortoises had been made by veterinarians,
conservationists,
herpetological societies and individuals world-wide. 
On a personal note, I have worked in animal welfare and conservation for
25
years, and never have I encountered such a cowardly and monstrously evil
act as
this.
A full report of exactly what took place will be posted here in a few
hours.
Please be assured that this matter is not over. We fully intend to seek
justice
for the tortoises which were murdered in the dead of night. The battle
over this
issue is only just beginning.
Andy C. Highfield
Jill Martin
Tortoise Trust (UK).

masonc@ix.netcom.com (Mason A. Clark) wrote:
>On 24 Oct 1996 17:09:08 GMT, dlj@inforamp.net (David Lloyd-Jones) wrote:
>> Some, no doubt, may kill as many people as that molasses tank
>> that collapsed in Cincinatti in the last century.  Somebody should
>> have told them to keep that particular million barrels of molasses
>> underground for "hundreds of thousands of years."
>>  
>Boston, you ignorant capitalist country bumpkin.
I stand corrected.  I am relieved, however, that Mason Clark is
reading my material to the end, and is thus exposed to the larger
truths contained therein.
                            -dlj.

Richard A. Schumacher wrote:
> 
> Why are we working this guy's homework/takehome quiz
> problem for him?
Becouse this is the right thing to do. 
We all benifit from the common discourse that a specific 
application generates. It really dosn't matter what the problem is.
It is fun to do the mental activity. Sometimes this leads
to a solution of our own problems.
-- 
CUL8ER
Stupid is Forever
Ignorance can be Fixed
Duane C. Johnson
Ziggy
WA0VBE
Red Rock Energy
1825 Florence St.
White Bear Lake, MN, USA 55110-3364
(612)635-5065 w
(612)426-4766 h
redrok@pclink.com
dcj2@PO8.RV.unisys.com
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/3027/

Dear Peter
We have written the folowing request and would appreciate it if you would
pass it on to as many people as possible:
Rgds
Ron
SA COMMISSION OF ENQUIRY INTO SULPHUR FIRE - REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
OUR REQUEST IN BRIEF
A community, which was affected by an industrial environmental disaster,
requires information to assist it in preparations for a commission of
enquiry into the incident. An unprotected Sulphur dump was ignited by a run
away grass fire which resulted in a cloud of Sulphur Di-oxide moving over
the community causing death and injury. In order to establish whether the
fire should have been prevented and to assist the commission in making
recommendations for the prevention of future incidents, the following is needed:
1) Governmental regulations or industry standards on the conditions under
which large quantities of Sulphur should be stored.
2) Governmental regulations or industry standards on measures required to
protect such a dump from fires.
3) Records of similar experiences elsewhere in the world.
The Commission sits from 28 October 1996, so this request is very urgent! 
WHO WE ARE
The Legal Resources Centre (LRC) is an NGO and a public interest law firm in
South Africa which gives free legal assistance to persons who can't
otherwise afford a lawyer. We work in a range of Human Rights fields such as
gender and race discrimination, labour matters, constitutional cases, land
cases and environmental justice work. During the apartheid era we were
active in opposing oppressive and discriminatory laws.
BACKGROUND
The LRC is currently representing the community of Macassar in a judicial
commission of enquiry, appointed by President Mandela, which will
investigate the causes and effects of an environmental disaster which struck
in December 1995. Macassar was created under apartheid to accommodate mixed
race ("coloured") people, many of whom had been forcibly removed from white
areas. The community is made up of mainly working class people and it has a
high unemployment rate. Macassar is situated near a chemical factory owned
by a large company called AECI. 
The AECI factory had a very large (15 700 ton) stockpile of elemental
Sulphur on its grounds.  The chemical was stockpiled by the SA government
during the 1970's in an attempt to thwart the sanctions campaign against the
country at the time. Sulphur is used, amongst other things in the
manufacture of explosives.
THE INCIDENT
The Sulphur was simply dumped on the ground and was not stored in any
enclosure. The stockpile is surrounded by bush/veld/grass. No special
precautions were taken to protect the Sulphur against fire. A grass fire was
started from an, as yet, undetermined cause. AECI's own fire brigade
responded to the fire and attempted to put it out but they did not fully
extinguish the fire and it flared again the next day. They again attended to
it but did not put it our properly. This went on a over a number of days
when about 4 or 5 fires were not completely put out and the smoldering ashes
lit up each time. Eventually one of the fires got out of hand and ignited
the Sulphur dump. 
By the time that the Sulphur fire was put out, about 7 000 t of Sulphur had
burnt off resulting in about 14 000 t of toxic Sulphur Di-oxide (SO2) being
released into the atmosphere. Part of the SO2 cloud moved over to the nearby
community of Macassar. Although, the authorities evacuated the area, two
people died as a result of the incident and hundreds now complain about
respiratory diseases, particularly asthma.
INFORMATION NEEDED
There are many aspects to this case such as the individual damages claims,
studies on the health/ psychological impact of the fire and the broader
environmental impact, etc. Theses areas are being attended to and our need
for information does _not_ directly relate to these issues. While any
information would be welcome, our critical needs are focused on the following:
1) Governmental regulations or industry standards on the conditions under
which large quantities of Sulphur should be stored.
2) Governmental regulations or industry standards on measures required to
protect such a dump from fires.
3) Records of similar experiences elsewhere in the world.
HOW TO CONTACT US
The community of Macassar would be most appreciative for assistance in
urgently locating the above  material. (Electronic documents sent via email
would be the most efficient way of getting the information to us.)
Information can be sent to:
E-mail:	ron@lrc.org.za	(it is preferable to send stuff directly to me rather
than a post to this group)
Fax:		++27 21 23 0935
Phone:	++27 21 23 8285
Snail Mail (only if absolutely necessary):
		Ron Paschke
		Legal Resources Centre
		5th Floor Greenmarket Place
		54 Shortmarket Street
		Cape Town, 8001
		South Africa
--
"...stuff like modeling how a 20000 foot 100 foot wide cable would sound 
if plucked..." justin in <52iv19$bpg@epcot.pomona.edu> on r.m.i
******************************************************************************
Peter van Heusden    |   UCT ITS/TSS       | REMEMBER KEN SARO WIWA
pvh@ucthpx.uct.ac.za | standard disclaimer | BOYCOTT SHELL TODAY
+27 21 650 3018      |       applies       | http://www.gem.co.za/ELA/ken.html

You continue to post this announcement, for which I am partially
apprecative.  Hoevever, your web site, the last I looked has no TELEPHONE
number or other method save USMail for ordering the documentation.  Go
figure, web site, usenet, and then crippled document acquisition.  How
about at least posting the PRICE and TAX and such so that TWO mailings are
not required!
In article <54fpcj$e80@service-2.agate.net>,
ersoftwr@ersoftwr.sdi.agate.net (William Schecher) wrote:
>Reposting of software availability:
>-----------------------------------------------------
>This is a notice to anyone interested in chemical equilibrium
>software for educational and research use. MINEQL+ is now available
>on our web site at :
>
>http://www.agate.net/~ersoftwr/mineql.html
>
>MINEQL+ uses the same numerical engine and thermodynamic database
>as EPA'S MINETEQA2, but it is much easier to use and understand.
>The user interface is a cursor-driven, spatial motif that is
>similar to the tableau's used in Morel and Hering's "Principles of
>Aquatic Chemistry." This motif also parallels the underlying ideas
>within the numerical engine. The program is a DOS/PC program.
>
>This software was designed as a research tool, but it has primarily
>been used as an aid to teach chemical equilibrium modeling at the
>graduate level. It is currently used in over 400 colleges and
>universities.
>
>The software is distributed in a freeware manner, so students can
>each have a copy. The manual must be ordered and purchased
>separately, but it too can be copied for student use.
>
>Check out our web site for more information or e-mail us at
>ersoftwr@agate.net
-- 
Jim

.and a doctor who cares for the sick...and a farmer who cares for his 
corn..what's your point? You sound like a school teacher who has done only 
one thing in his life, starting at 5 years old, that being GOING TO 
SCHOOL. 

Martin Taylor wrote:
> 
> John Potter wrote:
> > (snip)
> >
> > OK, Charlie, go for it.  Since it is now clear that you have no respect for
> > opinions other than your own, especially when they come from
> > environmentalists, why bother writing to an environmental newsgroup?
> >
> > John Potter
> 
> For my point of view, I do it:
> 1. For entertainment
> 2. To test my ideas (which is entertaining anyway)
> 3. To learn (which is also entertaining)
> 
> Since when have self-reinforcing diatribes been right?  From my 20 years'
> experience, both extremes complain that their world is about to end, it
> is the scientific, open-minded centre that comes up with the solutions by
> talking, analysing etc.  The newsgroups are just the latest, and possibly
> the best, way of increasing the links in the centre, and exposing the
> extremes.
> 
> I would suggest that if you are unwilling to be a constructive
> participant, then you are the one wasting our time.
> 
> By the way, I'm an environmentalist working for industry, and I have been
> a regulator.  I see no conflict in the role.
> 
> Let's move along.  Start with a whinge (a "bitch" would be the US
> equivalent); get some data; convert it to information; use it to increase
> knowledge; merge it into the collective wisdom; then formulate workable
> solutions.  It's hard, but very rewarding.
> 
> Regards, Martin
The real question is not why post to an environmental news 
group.  The real question is why post to a science news 
group.  Most of this discussion has belonged properly to 
"talk.environment" not "sci.environment".  
Here are some scientific questions that actually have 
something to do with the subject of this thread (population 
control) and with the subject of the news group 
(environment).
Predictors of Life Expectancy
The "limits to growth" model developed in 1971 by Meadows et 
al. at MIT contains an equation for life expectancy, which 
depends on four factors:  density, food, pollution, and 
health services.
Assuming infinite resources, the model projects life 
expectancy to level off at about 100 years in 2020, and 
population to level off at 15 Billion after 2100.  Under the 
original "limits to growth" assumptions, environmental and 
natural resource constraints restrict the expansion of 
industrial capital, which drags down food and health services 
production, and as a result, life expectancy peaks at about 
90 in 2020 then declines to 1900 levels by 2100, population 
peaks at 8 B in 2020 and declines to 4 B by 2100.
Doubling available resources delays the crash by 20 years and 
makes it steeper (more pollution).  Adding pollution control 
slows the rate of decline.  Adding land yield enhancement, 
erosion control, and resource efficient technologies within 
the next 20 years is sufficient to level off life expectancy 
at 90 and level off population at 12.5 B - getting the world 
"safely" through the next century (and delaying the crash at 
least until after 2100).
The major criticism of the "limits to growth" has been the
assumptions about available resources (e.g. Simon and Kahn 
_The Resourceful Earth_).  If you assume there are only 
enough resources to last until 2050, the model will project a 
crash in 2050.  The counter argument is that ingenious 
technology (and market competion) will drive substitution of 
the resource in shortest supply, effectively making resources 
infinite.  But setting aside the critical assumptions about 
inputs - I'm interested in the structural assumptions in the 
model itself.  Is their model of mortality reasonably 
complete, and if not, what difference does it make?
How adequate is the Meadows' model of life expectancy?  Is 
there any evidence that death rates depend on density, food, 
pollution, and health services (i.e. do these factors have 
non-zero coefficients?).  What other factors have non-zero 
effects?  Are the empiric effect sizes close to the Meadows' 
assumed effect sizes? Does sub-global structure (i.e. 
international/intranational social stratification) influence 
global life expectancy (i.e. do equal resource distributions 
imply higher global life expectancy than unequal resource 
distributions)?  I'd like to pursue these questions.
-dl

Forgive me, but I always considered humanity a part of mother Earth.  We
are not distinct from Earth.  We are part of Earth, just like the trees,
soil, birds, sky ....
Thus, when we hurt Earth - we hurt ourselves.  It is sorta like shooting
yourself in the foot everyday.  (like the way we are hurting the Earth
everyday) You can also equate polluting like smoking or drinking
hevaily.  There is only so much your body can take before it dies.
-- 
Kamal Agrawal
University of Pennsylvania
Box 0339
3465 Sansom Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104 - 6185
kamal30@wharton.upenn.edu
(215) - 417 - 7280
http://futures.wharton.upenn.edu/~kamal30/

charliew (charliew@hal-pc.org) wrote:
: In article <54o7sd$5bd@spool.cs.wisc.edu>,
:    tobis@scram.ssec.wisc.edu (Michael Tobis) wrote:
: >charliew (charliew@hal-pc.org) wrote:
: >
: >: BTW, if you want to convince me that global warming is 
: real, 
: >: just show me three independent studies that give evidence 
: of 
: >: a substantial increase in global average temperature.  
	Done.  Realize that regardless of the determination of
anthropogenic influence, global warming is currently taking 
place.  Even if the current trend is entirely natural (which is unlikely, 
given the definite human influences demonstrated, such as 
increasing CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere, sulphate 
aerosol shadowing, and ozone depletion), global warming 
might still constitute a problem, particularly if it might
affect deep-water formation and ocean circulation.
: >Hansen, J. and S. Lebedeff, 1988: Global Surface 
: Temperatures: Update
: >Through 1987. _Geophys. Res. Lett._ v 15 pp 323 ff.
: >
: >Jones, P.D., 1994: Recent Warming in Global Temperature 
: Series.
: >_Geophys. Res. Lett._, v 21, pp 1149 ff.
: >
: >Vinnikov, K.Ya., P.Ya. Groissman, and K.M. Liguna, 1990: 
: Empirical
: >Data on Contemporary Global Climate Changes (Temperature and 
: Precipitation).
: >_J. Clim._ v 3, pp 662 ff.
: How much of an upward trend?  Also, how big is "normal" 
: variability?  I hate to ask the same tired questions, but 
: they are in fact relevant to the statistical nature of 
: "proof".
	Classic debate tactic.  When your question has 
been definitively answered, come up with more difficult
questions and don't acknowledge the definitive answer!
	But in answer to these queries, look at the Hadley Centre
web site (I provided a link to a figure).   That will 
give you some idea of the range and variability.
===============================================
|  James G. Acker                             |
|  REPLY TO:   jgacker@neptune.gsfc.nasa.gov  |
===============================================
"Science moves, but slowly slowly,
Creeping on from point to point."  -- Alfred Lord Tennyson,
"Locksley Hall"
All comments are the personal opinion of the writer
and do not constitute policy and/or opinion of government
or corporate entities.

-- 
Davis Chen
 ____              _        ____ _
|  _ \  __ ___   _(_)___   / ___| |__   ___ _ __  
| | | |/ _` \ \ / / / __| | |   | '_ \ / _ \ '_ \ 
| |_| | (_| |\ V /| \__ \ | |___| | | |  __/ | | |
|____/ \__,_| \_/ |_|___/  \____|_| |_|\___|_| |_|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Man is still the most extraordinary computer of all."
John F. Kennedy

from Global Change Electronic Edition,
on the World Wide Web at http://www.globalchange.org/
RECENT RELEASES
October 1996 (Part II, F through N)
Note: Inclusion of any item on this list does not constitute an
endorsement of any kind. Items have not necessarily been
carefully reviewed by Global Change.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Federal/North Carolina
Hurricane Fran Recovery Wrap-Up (Washington, DC: FEMA, 27
September 1996). Available on the World Wide Web at
http://www.fema.gov/hu96/frncn46.htm.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, National Mitigation
Strategy: Partnerships for Building Safer Communities
(Washington, DC: FEMA, 1996). "In response to the unacceptable
loss of life and property from recent disasters, and the prospect
of even greater catastrophic loss in the future, the National
Mitigation Strategy has been developed to provide a conceptual
framework to reduce these losses." Available from FEMA, PO Box
2012, Jessup, MD 20794-2012. Tel: +1 800 480 2520 or +1 202 646
3484. Fax: +1 301 497 6378. Available on the World Wide Web at
http://www.fema.gov/mit/ntmstrat.htm.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, President Declares Major
Disaster for Florida: Sixteen Counties Designated for Federal Aid
(Washington, DC: FEMA, 15 October 1996). Press Release. Available
on the World Wide Web at http://www.fema.gov/NWZ96/jofldec1.htm.
Fell, Nolan, "Outcasts from Eden," New Scientist, 151 (2045): 24-
27 (31 August 1996). "The ranks of refugees fleeing floods,
drought, desertification and other assaults on the environment
could swell to 200 million by 2050. Is there any hope of fending
off global catastrophe?" New Scientist's Web site:
http://www.newscientist.com.
Flanagan, Ruth, "Fixing Global Warming: Engineering a Cooler
Planet," Earth: 34-39 (October 1996). ["Whether it's reforesting
vast tracts of land or sending thousands of mirrors into space,
scientists are considering a number of ways to help slow the pace
of global warming."]
Fleagle, Robert G., "The Course of US Responses to Global Change:
Can't We Do Better? An Editorial Essay," Climatic Change, 33 (4):
447-452 (August 1996).
Forrest, Betsy and Stuart Nishenko, "Losses Due to Natural
Hazards," Natural Hazards Observer, XXI (1): 16-17 (September
1996). Available on the World Wide Web at
http://adder.colorado.edu/hazctr/o/septo.htm#Hazard Assessment
Update. From the Introduction: 
"Over a 20-year period from 1975 to 1994, the US spent
approximately one quarter of a billion dollars per week on
meteorological natural disasters. Worse, some 6,000 people were
killed and over 50,000 injured by meteorological natural
disasters in this period. These figures are from a preliminary
compilation of looses due to natural disasters in the United
States and its territories by the Natural Hazards Research and
Applications Information Center (NHRAIC) as part of the Second
Assessment of Research and Applications on Natural Hazards. By
gathering property and crop loss data as well as death and injury
statistics, the center is striving to assess more accurately the
cost of natural disasters to the nation." 
French, Hilary and Ed Ayres, "A Refrigerator Revolution," World
Watch, 9 (5): 14-21 (Sept/Oct 1996). Worldwatch Institute Web
site: http://www.worldwatch.org/. According to World Watch: 
"This is a saga of how a simple, new technology threw the best-
laid plans of the chemical and refrigerator industries into
disarray--and provided a new perspective on how future
environmental agreements can be reached. It's a compelling
reminder that in an age of sophisticated technologies that have
produced unacceptable dangers along with their touted benefits,
simple alternatives can sometimes work remarkably well. Moreover,
those solutions do not always come from the most high-profile
dealmakers and industrial insiders. Convinced that HFCs were a
mistake, Wolfgang Lohbeck, a German environmentalists began
urging major European companies to consider leapfrogging directly
from CFCs to hydrocarbon technology. French and Ayres chronicle
Lohbeck's efforts and the Greenfreeze deal." 
Friends of the Earth, Climate Threat to Water Supply: Leaked
Government Plan (London, UK: Friends of the Earth, 15 October
1996), press release. "Climate change threat to water supply:
leaked report describes government action plan." Available on the
World Wide Web at
http://www.foe.co.uk/pubsinfo/infoteam/pressrel/1996/199610151503
18.html.
Friends of the Earth, Local Authorities Reject Solutions to
Climate Disaster (London, UK: Friends of the Earth, 23 September
1996). Press Release. Available on the World Wide Web at
http://www.foe.co.uk/pubsinfo/infoteam/pressrel/1996/199609231110
00.html.
Frost, Bruce W., "Phytoplankton Bloom on Iron Rations," Nature,
383 (6600): 475-476 (10 October 1996). "An iron-enrichment
experiment in the equatorial Pacific Ocean shows that increased
availability of this trace nutrient induces dramatic biological
and biogeochemical changes in the surface waters." Nature's Web
Site: http://www.america.nature.com and http://www.nature.com.
Global Environment Facility (GEF), Joint Summary of the Chairs,
GEF Council Meeting, October 8-10, 1996 (Washington, DC: GEF, 15
October 1996). GEF/C 8/13. Available on the World Wide Web at
http://www.worldbank.org/html/gef/meetings/council8/joint.htm
Green, Tony, "Letters: Fizzy Sea," New Scientist, 151 (2044): 48
(24 August 1996). Cautions against unforeseen consequences of
burying CO2 at sea. New Scientist's Web site:
http://www.newscientist.com.
Greenpeace International, Antarctic Warming - Early Signs of
Global Climate Change (Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Greenpeace,
1996). Available on the World Wide Web at
http://www.greenpeace.org/climate/polar/antarc_report/index.html.
Greenpeace, Forward in Climate Negotiations as Signs of Climate
Change Become Evident (Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Greenpeace,
1996). Statement issued after the Second Conference of the
Parties of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC)
closed on 19 July 1996. Available on the World Wide Web at
http://www.greenpeace.org/climate/cop-2/index.html.
Hamer, Mick, "Urban Nightmare Drives Americans out of Control,"
New Scientist, 151 (2047): 5 (14 September 1996). Discusses
research which attributes heavy US motor vehicle use to urban
sprawl. New Scientist's Web site: http://www.newscientist.com.
Henderson-Sellers, A., "Enhancing Climatic-Change Information
Sharing. An Editorial Essay," Climatic Change, 33 (4): 453-457
(August 1996).
Hertsgaard, Mark, "The Cost of Climate Change," Greenpeace
Quarterly, 1 (1): 28-31 (Summer 1996). ["Rising tides and
temperature raise the banking and insurance industries' concerns
over The Cost of Climate Change"]
Houghton, R.A., "Converting Terrestrial Ecosystems from Sources
to Sinks of Carbon," Ambio, 25 (4): (July 1996). Ambio's Web
site: http://www.kva.se/ambio.html.
Hughes, Peter, "Failing the Comprehension Test," New Scientist,
151 (2046): 45 (7 September 1996). Discussion of poor
understanding of science among students. Specifically cites poor
understanding of relationship between greenhouse gas emissions
and energy use. New Scientist's Web site:
http://www.newscientist.com.
IEA Greenhouse R & D Programme, 
IEA Greenhouse R & D Programme, 
Annual Report 1995
(Cheltenham, Gloucestershir, UK: CRE Group Ltd, 1996). 
Available on the World Wide Web at 
http://www.ieagreen.org.uk/doc1.htm
"Impact of the Drought in the Southwestern United States, Part
One," Living on Earth (National Public Radio), 12 July 1996.
Transcript available on the World Wide Web at
http://www.loe.org/html/transcripts/960712.html. Audio tape
available for $12.00 from Living on Earth, PO Box 380639,
Cambridge, MA 02238-0639.
"Impact of the Drought in the Southwestern United States, Part
Two," Living on Earth (National Public Radio), 19 July 1996.
Transcript available on the World Wide Web at
http://www.loe.org/html/transcripts/960719.html. Audio tape
available for $12.00 from Living on Earth, PO Box 380639,
Cambridge, MA 02238-0639.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), IPCC Second
Assessment, Climate Change 1995 (Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC,
1996). Includes IPCC Second Assessment Synthesis of Scientific-
Technical Information Relevant to Interpreting Article 2 of the
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change; Summary for
Policymakers: The Science of Climate Change -- IPCC Working Group
I; Summary for Policymakers: Scientific-Technical Analyses of
Impacts, Adaptations and Mitigation of Climate Change -- IPCC
Working Group II; and Summary for Policymakers: The Economic and
Social Dimensions of Climate Change -- IPCC Working Group III.
Available from the IPCC Secretariat, World Meteorological
Organization, 41 Av. Giuseppe-Motta, Case postale No. 2300, 1211
Geneva 2, Switzerland. Fax: +41 22 7331 270. The individual
sections of this volume are available separately on the World
Wide Web at http://www.unep.ch/ipcc/ipcc95.html.
International Energy Agency, Competition and New Technology in
the Electric Power Sector (Paris, France: Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development, 1996). Details available on
the World Wide Web at
http://www.iea.org/pubs/studies/files/compnt.htm.
International Energy Agency, Energy Policies of IEA Countries
(Paris, France: Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development, 1996). Includes 16 page section on "Climate Change
Responses: The Energy Dimension." Details available on the World
Wide Web at http://www.iea.org/pubs/reviews/files/enepoiea.htm
International Energy Agency, Energy Policies of IEA Countries.
Sweden 1996 Review (Paris, France: Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development, 1996). Details available on the
World Wide Web at http://www.iea.org/new/releases/sweden.htm
International Energy Agency, The Strategic Value of Fossil Fuels:
Challenges and Responses (Paris, France: Organization For
Economic Cooperation and Development, 1996). Proceedings of
Conference held in Houston, Texas, 8-11 May 1995. Includes papers
and reports related to global climate change. Limited additional
information available on the World Wide Web at
http://www.iea.org/pubs/proc/files/strava.htm 
International Institute for Sustainable Development (Winnipeg,
Manitoba), Audio Excerpts from statements made at the Second
Conference of the Parties (COP-2) of the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (FCCC), held from 8-19 July 1996 in
Geneva, Switzerland. Available on the World Wide Web at
http://www.iisd.ca/linkages/climate/cop2ra.html. RealAudio
snippits include statements from Mohammed El Ashry (Chair and CEO
of the Global Environment Fund), Bert Bolin (Chairman of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), Elizabeth Dowdeswell
(United Nations Environment Program Executive Director), Chen
Chimutengwende (COP-2 Chairman), Michael Zammit Cutajar
(Executive Secretary of the FCCC), representatives from many key
countries, and others.
"Into the Forest," New Scientist, 151 (2048): 26-43 (21 September
1996). "How did the rainforest become the most complex ecosystem
on Earth? What conditions are needed to ensure the survival of
its species?" Special issue includes four articles: "Slash &
Grow," "How did Paradise Begin?," "Life on the Edge," and "Kinder
Cuts." New Scientist's Web site: http://www.newscientist.com.
Jiankun, He, Zhang Aling and Ye Yong, "Technology Options for CO2
Mitigation in China," Ambio, 25 (4): (July 1996). Ambio's Web
site: http://www.kva.se/ambio.html.
Jin, F.-F., "Tropical Ocean-Atmosphere Interaction, the Pacific
Cold Tongue, and the El Niqo-Southern Oscillation," Science, 274
(5284): 76-78 (4 October 1996). Available on the World Wide Web
at http://www.sciencemag.org.
Jung, Yonghun, "Scenarios of Future Energy Demand and Carbon
Dioxide Emissions in the Republic of Korea," Ambio, 25 (4): (July
1996). Ambio's Web site: http://www.kva.se/ambio.html. 
"Just add iron and stir...", New Scientist, 152 (2051): 3 (12
October 1996). Editorial regarding the large-scale fertilization
of ocean waters with iron to stimulate algal blooms which remove
CO2 from the atmosphere. New Scientist's Web site:
http://www.newscientist.com.
Kates, Robert W., "Ending Hunger: Current Status and Future
Prospects" Consequences, 2 (2): (1996). Available on the World
Wide Web at
http://www.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/vol2no2/article1.html.
Kerr, Richard A., "Weather Forecasting; Budgets Stall but
Forecasts Jump Forward," Science, 273 (5282): 1658-1659 (20
September 1996). The US Weather Service plans to improve its
forecasts by extending them further into the future. While this
"should benefit everyone from natural-gas suppliers estimating
heating needs to forest firefighters looking for relief," the
plans may be scaled back "by federal cost-cutting that would take
human forecasters out of the picture and delay the arrival of the
next powerful forecasting computer." Available on the World Wide
Web at http://www.sciencemag.org.
Kerr, Richard, "Ice-Age Rain Forest Found Moist, Cooler,"
Science, 274 (5284): 35 (4 October 1996). Available on the World
Wide Web at http://www.sciencemag.org.
Kirchman, David L., "Microbial Ferrous Wheel" Nature, 383 (6598):
303-304 (26 September 1996). Nature's Web Site:
http://www.america.nature.com and http://www.nature.com.
Kley, D. et al., "Observations of Near-Zero Ozone Concentrations
Over the Convective Pacific: Effects on Air Chemistry," Science,
274 (5285): 230-233 (11 October 1996). Available on the World
Wide Web at http://www.sciencemag.org
Kondo,Y., Y. Moriguchi and H. Shimizu, "Creating an Inventory of
Carbon Dioxide Emissions for Japan: Comparison of Two Methods,"
Ambio, 25 (4): (July 1996). Ambio's Web site:
http://www.kva.se/ambio.html.
Krankina, O.N., M.E. Hamon and J.K. Winjun, "Carbon Storage and
Sequestration in the Russian Forest Sector," Ambio, 25 (4): (July
1996). Ambio's Web site: http://www.kva.se/ambio.html.
Laine, J., J. Silvola, K. Tolonen, J. Alm, H. Nykdnen, H.
Vasander, T., Sallantaus, I. Savolainen, J. Sinisalo and P.J.
Marikainen, "Effect of Water-level Drawdown in Northern Peatlands
on the Global Climatic Warming," Ambio, 25 (3): (May 1996).
Ambio's Web site: http://www.kva.se/ambio.html.
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Energy and Environment
Division, Energy Analysis Program 1995 Annual Report (Berkeley,
California: LBL, 1996), LBL-38353, UC-1600. Excellent summary of
energy and environment research. A list of the division's
publications is available at
http://eande.lbl.gov/EAP/PUBS/pubs.html.
Lawrence, E.Norman, "A Weather Eye on the Sunspots," New
Scientist, 151 (2044): 46 (24 August 1996). "E. Norman Lawrence
believes the 11-year solar cycle is a guide to long-range
forecasting." New Scientist's Web site:
http://www.newscientist.com.
Lee, Hoesung, Dadi Zhou, Yonghun Jung, J. Wisniewski and J.
Sathaye, "Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory and Mitigation
Strategies for Asian and Pacific Countries: Summary of Workshop
Presentations and Working Group Discussions," Ambio, 25 (4):
(July 1996). Ambio's Web site: http://www.kva.se/ambio.html.
Linden, Eugene, "Global Fever," Time: 56-57 (8 July 1996).
["Climate change threatens more than megastorms, floods and
droughts. The real peril may be disease."]
Macilwain, Colin, "Republicans Challenge Evidence of Man-Made
Climate Change," Nature, 383 (6598): 287 (26 September 1996).
Available in Nature's Web Site: http://www.america.nature.com and
http://www.nature.com. To access the article, locate it by
searching backissues in the "News" section of Nature's Web site.
Maddox, John, "By any other name...," [correspondence] Nature,
383 (6595): 17 (6595). Response to: Houghton, John (Co-Chairman,
Working Group I, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
[IPCC]), "Justification of Chapter 8," Nature, 382 (6593): 665
(22 August 1996). Nature's Web Site:
http://www.america.nature.com and http://www.nature.com.
Mantua, Nathan J. et al., "A Pacific Interdecadal Climate
Oscillation with Impacts on Salmon Production," submitted to
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, August 1996.
Abstract available on the World Wide Web at
http://www.atmos.washington.edu/mantua/abst.PDO.html.
Mark E. Harmon, Janice M. Harmon, William K. Ferrell and David
Brooks, "Modeling Carbon Stores in Oregon and Washington Forest
Products: 1900-1992," Climatic Change, 33 (4): 521-550 (August
1996).
Masood, Ehsan, "Companies Cool to Tactics of Global Warming
Lobby," Nature, 383 (6600): 470 (10 October 1996). According to
the article: "The Global Climate Coalition (GCC), the US energy
lobby group that has challenged some of the main conclusions of
United Nations climate scientists about the severity of manmade
global warming, has suffered a setback to its lobbying efforts
with the resignation of two member companies and the possibility
of further withdrawals." Nature's Web Site:
http://www.america.nature.com and http://www.nature.com. To
access the article, locate it by searching backissues in the
"News" section of Nature's Web site.
Matthews, Robert, "Britain's Sea Walls Too Low to Stop Floods",
New Scientist, 152 (2051): 5 (12 October 1996). New Scientist's
Web site: http://www.newscientist.com.
Minnesotans for an Energy-Efficient Economy and Institute for
Local Self Reliance, Costs of Global Climate Change to be
Considered in Minnesota: New Report Focuses on Minnesota Impacts
(St Paul, Minnesota: Minnesotans for an Energy-Efficient Economy
and Institute for Local Self Reliance, 13 September 1996).
Available on the World Wide Web at
http://www.me3.org/projects/costs/091396pr.html.
Nadel, Steven and Miriam Pye, Appliance and Equipment Efficiency
Standards: Impacts by State (Washington, DC: ACEEE, 1996). See
Press Release on the World Wide Web at
http://solstice.crest.org/efficiency/aceee/press/a-pubpr1.htm.
National Mining Association, Facts About Coal, 1996-97
(Washington, DC: National Mining Association, 1996). National
Mining Association Web site: http://www.nma.org.
National Public Radio (NPR), Talk of the Nation, Hour 1,
discussion of Emerging Diseases with Fran Carr (Senior Science
Advisor, US Agency for International Development, Washington,
DC), Steven Ostroff (Associate Director, National Center for
Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control, Atlanta,
Georgia) and Carl Merrill (Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics,
National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, Maryland), 13 June
1996 (Washington, DC: National Public Radio, 1996), sound
cassette, 1 hour. Audio tape available for $12.95 + $2.50
(domestic postage) from NPR Audience Services, 635 Massachusetts,
NW, Washington, DC 20001. Tel: +1 202 414 3232. Fax: +1 202 414
3046. According to NPR: "This week, Vice President Al Gore
announced the Administration's plans for expanding their program
for tracking and treating emerging infections, here and abroad.
In this hour of Science Friday, a look at the biology and policy
of these new and dangerous diseases. RealAudio version available
on the World Wide Web at
http://www.realaudio.com/contentp/npr/nf6J14.html.
Natural Resources Defense Council, Risky Business. Hidden
Environmental Liabilities of Power Plant Ownership (Washington,
DC: NRDC, September 1996). Printed copies available for $5.45
(includes $1.45 shipping) to NRDC Publications Department, 40
West 20 Street, New York, NY 10011. Full report is available on
the World Wide Web at
http://www.nrdc.org/nrdcpro/rbr/rbtinx.html.
*****************
Published in Global Change (Electronic Edition), October 1996.
Copyright 1996 by Pacific Institute for Studies in Development,
Environment, and Security. For more information, contact Global
Change, Editorial Office, 1347 Massachusetts Ave., SE,
Washington, D.C. 20003-1540. Tel/Fax: +1 202 547 0850. Send e-
mail to nsundt@igc.apc.org.  "Global Change Electronic Edition"
is available in its entirety on the World Wide Web at
http://www.globalchange.org/.  
Portions of the Electronic Edition also are available as simple
text files at several locations on the Internet.  For more
information, contact the Editorial Office, Global Change, 1347
Massachusetts Ave., SE, Washington, D.C.  20003-1540.  Tel/Fax:
+1 202 547 0850.  Email (Internet): nsundt@igc.apc.org.