Newsgroup sci.environment 108415

Directory

sdef!  wrote:
> > 
> > I'm sure they said the same thing in the 12th century: "You really
think
> > the earth can support *billlions* when the few million we have today
are
> > all starving to death?"
> 
> You keep doing this Mike, setting up a false proposition then knocking it
> down and claiming to have won an argument...
Didn't claim anything; just made the observation that doomsaying has a long
history.  They haven't been right in 4000 years, but they're still trying.
> 
> > Of course, we do support billions today, and in far greater ease and
> >.comfort than those few million on the 12th century.   Why is that, A.J.
?
> 
> Like that 
> It was your proposition, not his.
> Have you any 12th century newspaper cuttings? 
> 
Silly boy.  They didn't HAVE newspapers in the 12th century. 
--
Mike Asher
masher@tusc.net

Should?  What good does that do? Who will make China listen?
B. Rateaver

ssusin@emily11.Berkeley.EDU (Scott Susin) wrote:
>
>Since world food production is steadily increasing (at a 2.1% annual
>rate from 1980-92, .4% faster than population growth), I'd say 
>that whatever we're doing now seems to be working pretty well.
>
>The laggard is Africa, the only part of the world where per capita
>food production is falling.  Stable governments would probably turn
>this around, but I unfortunately have no particular method of achieving
>this to offer.
Sudan alone could feed Africa's need for cereals and pulses.  All it
needs is peace.  Step one would be the jailing of the Achran, the
"Brotherhood" thugs running the government, on war crimes charges.
>Business week had a (lousy) cover story about the coming food shortage
>a few months ago.  One interesting fact mentioned in the article
>was that Chinese agricultural productivity is far below western
>standards.  One reason is that China has little in the way of
>protection for intellectual property rights, so western companies
>won't sell high tech seeds in China.  Seeds, after all, can
>be easily "pirated."  So here's a concrete proposal: China should
>more rigorously enforce copyright and patent laws.
If we stop feeding huge tonnages to corn and soybeans to cattle to
keep commercial hospitals in the heart bypass business, we'd jump our
life expectancy by a year or so right there.  The ability to feed a
billion or so people with the food saved would be gravy.
There's a further increase in life expectancy to be gained just by
eating less.  The majority of us are "obese," i.e. 20% over best
weight, and I would happily be 10% lighter.
                                 -dlj.

Leonard Evens  writes:
> Steinn Sigurdsson wrote:
> > Leonard Evens  writes:
> Let me summarize the point I was trying to make which somehow or other
> we strayed from entirely.   It was claimed that just because an idea was
> rejected by the scientific coummunity through the peer review process,
> it didn't mean the idea was false.  It was suggeested that the
As I recall the original contention was that when there
is consensus peer review becomes ineffective in that theories
that contradict the consensus are dismissed pre-emptorily.
You noted that this had (sort of) happened, and in fact been
corrected by the process, and hence even in such cases peer review
could work.
> scientific community might be biased,   This is of course possible, but
It is possible for the scientific community to be biased.
Sociologists of science would contend it always is, the claimed
strength of science is that the process works to make such biases
largely irrelevant.
> I tried to point out that it might be rejected simply because it was
> wrong.   I chose the example of relativity, by which I actual meant the
Most hypotheses are rejected because they are wrong.
> theory of special relativity.   This brought up what I consider an
> entirely irrelevant debate.  I still think it was an irrelevant debate
> after having participated in it.   The point is how we can possibly tell
Well, sorry, I thought the way you made the point was flawed,
relativity may be challenged, and challenges are taken more
seriously than outsiders appreciate.
However, there is a more subtle aspect - which is the difference
between the fundamental theory (eg special relativity or in IPCCs
case my instance of the continuity equation), a general theory
(say General relativity or in IPCCs case the full coupled
equations of hydrodynamics with radiative transfer), the application
of such theory (say GPS or in IPCCs case solving a GCM with 
a forcing term), the implication of such theory (say the twin paradox,
or the Aspect experiment; or in IPCCs case the pattern of regional
climate change) and the policy implications of the results
(eg Congress would hopefully not fund a proposal to fly a probe
to Alpha Centauri under continuous acceleration with flight time
justified by Newtonian dynamics; or in IPCCs case what to do about
CO2 emissions in the near term).
> one situation from the other.   The answer is we can't and only time
> will tell.  Other things being equal, we have to assume the peer review
> process is working properly unless there is evidence to the contary.  As
> you yourself said, we really have no other alternatives because all the
> other alternatives are worse. The other point of view seems to imply
> that scientific knowledge is simply a matter of opinion and all opinions
> have equal weight.
Scientific knowledge is not simply a matter of opinion,
public policy in the direct democracy limit is,
and even tempered by representative democracy opinion
still counts for a lot.
> > However, if you want _policy_ to be implemented and be
> > effective, you must understand how average people will
> > react to the suggestion and attempted implementation and
> > why. This is amongst other things, in part, a duty for economists,
> > and other social scientists. It also behooves people to
> > remember that Limbaugh, however obnoxious, has far more
> > devotees than the environmental organisations, and that
> > the Libertarians in the US consistently poll more than the
> > Green Party. Whether you like that or not, it is something
> > that must be taken account of when implementing policies.
> > Implementing policies people, even only a vocal minority,
> > strongly objects to, is worse than useless.
> > The question is not whether Limbaugh is more believable than
> > the IPCC on climate issues, the point is that so many do
> > believe him.
> Let me point out that the policy on CFCs has been implemented, in fact
> by the Reagan and Bush administrations.   This was done through the
> usual poltical processes.  One important factor was that the chemical
> industry itself was convinced of the validity of the science, so it did
> not use its influence to prevent the actions that were taken.   Rush
Well, the key moment seems to have been Thatcher listening to
her science advisor and then nobbling the US. The chemical
industry did indeed co-operate, see Asher's post on why, and
think why it was important that they did.
> Limbaugh's opposition has had so far little effect beyond confusing some
> people who insist of listening to him.   The fact that people fall for
> demogogues is no reason to treat them with respect.
You don't have to respect Limbaugh, you might note the Arizona
attempt to locally overrule CFC laws, and why (and remembering
the CFC case _is_ strong); or indeed that people will buy
smuggled CFCs for their car A/Cs because individually they are
not concerned enough, precisely because of Limbaugh and others
arguments.
> As to getting the general public to understand science and to adopt
> policies that are consistent with its predictions, I have no simple
> solutions.  One serious problem in this country for example is that
> large numbers of people think `creationism' is on the same level as
> `evolutions science'.   However, it would be utterly foolish for any
> biologist to agree that creationists might have some valid arguments in
> order to try to convince them of anything.  That strategy is bound to
> fail because creationists know the truth as they see it and are not
> going to be converted by rational argument.   This is a fact no matter
> how many creationists there are.
But abandoning the debate is even worse. The one thing you can't
do is throw your hands in the air and declare that people are beyond
convincing and should just be ignored. That is something many 
environmentalists already do in excess - writing off the opposition
as irredeemable or malicious. Counterproductive to say the least.
> Instead of lecturing me about how best to convince people that climate
> change is a real possibility and should be taken seriously, why don't
> you use your obvious superior debating techniques to convince all those
> libertarians out there (i.e., all 2 or 3% or them) that they should take
> the issue seriously.   You have been known to suggest that climate
> change is indeed a real possibility.   But you don't spend very much
> time arguing that point.
Heh. You want me to become evangelical on an issue where I think
there are significant caveats still? I happily argue with 
libertarians, even more so on other newsgroups where I have
sharper disagreements with some of their policies. Nor am I 
egotistical to think my debating techniques are "superior".
My actions and reactions on newsgroups are "local", not
motivated by a "global" concern (in the logical, not physical
sense).
> I hope I am not right since I consider the Green Party basically
> irrelevant to any effective political change tied to environmental
> issues of importance, but I fear you may be proved wrong in the current
> election.
Hmm, I think I predicted the US election quite accurately.
Nader got 3% in California I believe, might have been what
nudged Clinton below the 50% "mandate" mark. 
European Green Parties have had some impact, might have more
if the extreme right continues to co-opt them.
Like the libertarians their main impact though comes
from pulling the main stream parties policies in their
direction, even if only by a little bit, well, that and
getting their old-boys into the administrative network
where decisions actually get made.
> Finally, let me point out that it is not a matter of what I want.  I
> will be dead before any significant climate change occurs.   It is also
> not my personal responsibility to effect changes in public policy and if
> those changes don't get made, it won't be my fault.  Indeed, since you
> seem so much better at these things than I am, why don't you try to
> accomplish something along these lines?
How do you know I don't? I'm far more likely to affect
any serious change by personal contact with people who
make direct decisions.
As for my net.postings, I think I've been quite explicit
in my rationales for most of my positions and reasoning,
including when I'm less than wholeheartedly in favour
or against some policies.
*  Steinn Sigurdsson   			IoA, Cambridge        	          *
*  steinn@ast.cam.ac.uk 		"standard disclaimer"  	          *
*  "The worst thing you can say to a true revolutionary is that his 	  *
*  revolution is unnecessary, that the problems can be corrected without  *
*  radical change. Telling people that paradise can be attained without   *
*  revolution is treason of the vilest kind."  -- H.S. 1993		  * 

Bruce Hamilton (B.Hamilton@irl.cri.nz) wrote:
: bsandle@southern.co.nz (Brian Sandle) wrote:
: 
: >Asthma is very prevalent in New Zealand and must be a big money spinner 
: >for the health sellers, with whom I presume you have connections. I wonder 
: >what the attitude of the government purchasers is?
: 
: Why not ask Pharmac?. They seem intent only purchasing the
: cheapest generic drug available worldwide, and wherever
: possible avoiding payment for medicines still on patent.
: Just this week, another pharmaceutical company announced
: it was closing down its NZ manufacturing operation, and put
: some of the blame otheman Pharmac - who immediately denied it.
: soom we'll be importing all our drugs from the asian nation whose
: factory provides the cheapest quote. Remember, the medication
: you take is from the lowest tender :-).
A lot of the so called `research' done by the brand name companies is 
aimed at holding a market position rather than developing new drugs. The 
question of true research needs to be addressed, in both scenarios.
Looking further, healthy life style/food/environment does not bring in 
profits to business, therefore is not promoted the same way. The 
psychology of looking to non-medical treatments is glowingly dimly as in 
the case of cot-death prevention, but I suspect the medication philosophy 
makes it hard, even for doctors to avoid the request for a prescription 
when none is valid.
So I hope that an approach to the care of asthma could be to looking at 
air quality.
Of course we know that not only asthma results from poor air quality.
: 
: Why would you presume the previous poster had connections 
: with health sellers?. nothing he posted indicated that?.
Admittedly he spoke of `preventive' medication, meaning daily steroids. 
But I suspect there can be problems there in trying to adjust to worse 
and worse environments. The inhalers can get an asthmatic worse than 
nothing eventually, if relied upon.
 I 
: suppose all those bus drivers could collect a few $ from the
: nasty, evil, multiinational drug companies for each time
: they blip the throttle to give unwary sidewalkers a facefull of
: carcinogenic and asthma-inducing particulates. 
It is possible to hold your breath for a while, but when in an enclosed 
space the emissions do not go away, unless there is much air exchange 
machinery.
What are the ventilation calculations?
Cost:
Air purity:
Vehicle numbers:
Are the any underground bus terminals which have air which is nice to 
breathe? 
Let's stay above ground?
Brian Sandle

Dale  wrote in article 
> >
> >                   I am a conservationist who supports the rights of all
> > sportsmen including hunters, 
> 
> I find it difficult to see the consistency between someone who claims to
> be a conservationist, yet they support hunting.  This suggests to me a
> lack of genuineness in these claims of being a conservationist.
> 
> Dale
> 
I am not sure what you have for a definition of conservation.  According to
the Department of Conservation in my state it is the wise use of limited
resources to preserve them for future generations.  This includes hunting
as a method of population control for species whose natural predators have
been limited by humans.
Having an overpopulation of herbivores running out of foliage to eat and
starving in droves isn't my idea of conservation.  Limited hunting is.
Ricin
Ride Safe-Wear a Helmet!

Jeremy Whitlock  wrote in article
<55ic8u$kuj@freenet-news.carleton.ca>...
> 
> Scott Nudds (af329@james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca) writes:
> 
> >  "By comparing mortality rates before and after the accident, the
> > environmental organization Greenpeace Ukraine has estimated a total of
> > 32,000 deaths.  There are other estimates that are higher, and some
that
> > are lower, but I believe a figure in this range is defensible." - Dr.
> > Yuri M. Shcherbak - Ukranian ambassador to the U.S. - Dr. Shcherak as
> It has been already established that Ukranian officials are not to be
> trusted on this issue, since they are in a conflict of interest (ie, more
> global sympathy = more global economic aid).  Mr. Nudds is aware of this
> fact.
Jeremy Whitlock  added later> 
> "Nevertheless, the dose estimates generally accepted indicate that, with
the
> exception of thyroid disease, it is unlikely that the exposure would lead
> to discernible radiation effects in the general population. Many   
> predictions of the future impact of the accident on the health of
> populations have been made, all of which, apart from thyroid disease, 
> indicate that the overall effect will be small when compared with the   
> natural incidence and therefore not expected to be discernible (An88,
Be87,
> Hu87, Mo87, De87, Be87)."
> 
If you want the establishment view on fatalities from Chernobyl, the total
dose is  around 600 000 person Sv spread over 10 000 y (United Nations
Science Committee on the affects of atomic radiation 1993 report). If you
then apply the dose risk estimates from either the UN, Biological Effects
of Ionizing Radiations Committee, the International Committee on
Radiological Protection, The National Committee of Radiological Protection
etc. All these august bodies use the same prudent model, i.e. a relative
risk model (not absolute) with a linear quadratic extrapolation (not
linear) and no threshold for cancer (thresholds have not been used for the
last 30 years) and all would predict around 30 000 deaths about half of
which would be in the territory of the former USSR. 
However, this number of deaths will not be discernible as stated above
simply because so many people die of cancer. For example, over 144 000
people died of lung cancer in the US in 1987; compare this with 30 000
deaths spread over 10 000 years. This does not mean that you should ignore
these fatalities.
Dave

In article <327e71a8.3031447@agate>,
Craig Mohn  wrote:
>Kakadu National Park have long had strong proscriptions against living
>in certain areas near the the escarpment on the northeastern border of
>the park, although there are ceremonial sites there.  They went to
>these areas but did not linger.  These areas were believed to be
>unhealthy and cause illness.  Along the highway in this part of Kakadu
>there are a lot of yellowish rocks which are unbelievably heavy when
>you pick them up - they are rich in Uranium.  There is currently
>active Uranium mining near Jabiru, right in the middle of these
>"unhealthy" lands.
I'm very doubtful.  This sounds like semi-plausible just-so tourist
guide spiel to me.  I know there are beliefs similar to what you
describe regarding the sickness country at the opposite end of Kakadu.
But these beliefs may also be held regarding areas near Jabiru too.  My
guess would be these beliefs are not adaptive in any direct sense
rather they spring from the complex spiritual traditions of this area.
>My memory of the details is a bit fuzzy, but I could look things up
>if anyone gets too argumentative about things. 
Well I certainly like to see a reference.
Andrew Taylor

The engineering school of Winterthur is investigating the "social
aspects of waste management". The Project is supported by the swiss
priority programme environment.
In our proyect we are dealing with various interests around waste
management. Actually we prepare a delphi questionnaire to start in
future with democratical solution levels.
We are looking for research partners in Europe to participate in
concerted actions in the European Union.
Please contact us, if you have possibility to participate in an
EU-proyect related to upper themes.
The e-mail address is: cv@twi.ch
Thank you.

It has been published, and can be purchased in the United States from
ANSI.  ISO 14004 and the three environmental auditing standards are also
now in print.

Try the following:
www.stoller.com
www.rfweston.com
www.iso14000.com
www.ansi.org
www.astm.org
www.asqc.org
www.csa.ca
www.epa.gov
www.nsf.com
It is the "ISO 14000" series, made up of ISO 14001 and ISO 14004 to date. 
Both have been published and are available in the USA thru ANSI.

In article <3280043B.1CFE406A@math.nwu.edu>,
Leonard Evens   wrote:
[most of a reasonable post deleted]
>What we need is constant vigilance and a certain amount of skepticism.
>However, the skepticims should be general and not restricted to those
>results we don't like because they interfere with other beliefs we
>cherish.
We are in full agreement here.
>Leonard Evens       len@math.nwu.edu      491-5537
snark

sdef! (savage@easynet.co.uk) wrote:
: Mike Asher wrote:
: > 
: > I'm not sure what concerns you (and them).  An industry devoted to
: > disposing of weapsons-grade radionuclides seems to be a wonderful thing.
: > Do you think that this industry, once established, will begin creating
: > highly-enriched uranium for themselves to dispose us?  Seems farfetched.
: > 
: > Greenpeace has no stake in actually solving this problem.  Greenpeace would
: > rather keep the problem so they can use it to their benefit.  It reminds me
: > of an interview I saw with Greenpeace members, shortly after the Chernobyl
: > accident, in which they were all laughing and smiling...happy to have a new
: > issue to exploit.
: WOW i almosst agree with MIKE!!
: Only thing is there are a lot of genuinely concerned people within Greenpeace, 
: who do good work. Trouble is they don't run it.
The other trouble is that the anti-greens have it on both sides of the
fence.  On one, the firms paid to do corporate PR have become
contributors and even board members to some of the larger, more
"mainstream" organisations with little of what I would call citizen
input.  On the other, the anti-green shouters can use this
self-servility to smear the entire green movement.
    "One good thing about that [corporate cooptation of mainstream
    environmental organisations] is that while we're working with them,
    they don't have time to sue us."
    -- Frank Boren, former president of the Nature Conservancy and a
           board member of ARCO Petroleum, from "Winds of Change", by
           Howard Munson in _Across the Board_, June 1994, p 23
       quoted on p 127 of _Toxic Sludge is Good for You_ by J Stauber 
           and S Rampton (Common Courage Press, 1995), available at
           http://www.coolbooks.com/~outpost/pubs/comco/toxic.html
In my mind the German guy who just became the head of Greenpeace
international is a major sell-out.  He advocates just this coopting with
big firms -- removing the voice of the citizen in the process.
--
Mach's gut!
Bruce Scott, Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik, bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de
Remember John Hron:       http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/h/hron-john/
--
Mach's gut!
Bruce Scott, Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik, bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de
Remember John Hron:       http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/h/hron-john/

In article <32815dc3.255552471@nntp.st.usm.edu>,
Harold Brashears  wrote:
>This is not correct for a single person, since it is physically
>impossible to "process" a chicken a second.  They have to be killed
>strung up, gutted, feathers removed by one person in one second?
It is only necessary to feed the processing machine once per second.
These are chicken processing assembly lines we're speaking of, with
the bird moving automatically through each stage.
I'm sure you've heard that workers running an auto assembly line
can spit out a car every few minutes - do you believe that requires
them to perform the amazing task of assembling each car in a few
minutes?  Of course not, each car may spend hours in the assembly
line.
Chicken processing plants work in much the same way.
BTW, I don't know if the 3,000 per hour loading figure is accurate
or not, but it doesn't seem physically impossible for a worker to
perform to me.  Tedious and difficult, yes, but not impossible.
--
- Don Baccus, Portland OR 
  Nature photos, site guides, and other goodies at:
          http://www.xxxpdx.com/~dhogaza

Petro wrote:
> 
> In article <55l1p3$85v@falcon.le.ac.uk>, Dr E. Buxbaum  wrote:
> >Such systems do exist: In europe you can load your car on a train to go
> >to the holiday places in the mediteranian. People are transported on
> >the same train in sleeping wagons. Saves you some 1500 km car journey.
> 
>      Amtrak used to have such beasts on the East Coast of the US, I don't know
> if they still do. OTOH, Amtrack sucks.
The few times I actually tried to plan trips and priced Amtrak, it was
more expensive than flying.  It was a no brainer to take the plane. 
-- 
         _  ___
        / \/   \    Jack Dingler jr. | "You can disagree, 
##=========(=)[|     Irving, Tx      | but please don't hold no grudge."
        \_/\___/ JDingler@onramp.net | Clarence Gatemouth Brown

ssusin@emily11.Berkeley.EDU (Scott Susin) wrote:
>
>Since world food production is steadily increasing (at a 2.1% annual
>rate from 1980-92, .4% faster than population growth), I'd say 
>that whatever we're doing now seems to be working pretty well.
>
>The laggard is Africa, the only part of the world where per capita
>food production is falling.  Stable governments would probably turn
>this around, but I unfortunately have no particular method of achieving
>this to offer.
Sudan alone could feed Africa's need for cereals and pulses.  All it
needs is peace.  Step one would be the jailing of the Achran, the
"Brotherhood" thugs running the government, on war crimes charges.
>Business week had a (lousy) cover story about the coming food shortage
>a few months ago.  One interesting fact mentioned in the article
>was that Chinese agricultural productivity is far below western
>standards.  One reason is that China has little in the way of
>protection for intellectual property rights, so western companies
>won't sell high tech seeds in China.  Seeds, after all, can
>be easily "pirated."  So here's a concrete proposal: China should
>more rigorously enforce copyright and patent laws.
If we stop feeding huge tonnages to corn and soybeans to cattle to
keep commercial hospitals in the heart bypass business, we'd jump our
life expectancy by a year or so right there.  The ability to feed a
billion or so people with the food saved would be gravy.
There's a further increase in life expectancy to be gained just by
eating less.  The majority of us are "obese," i.e. 20% over best
weight, and I would happily be 10% lighter.
                                 -dlj.

On Tue, 05 Nov 1996 08:40:58 -0700, mfriesel@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>Science and engineering have had a very constructive, if somewhat 
>adversarial relationship - engineers are excellent builders as a rule, 
>using known laws and principles to build machines and devices.  
>Scientists use these devices to conduct research.  This is in essence 
>what you state below.  An idealization, but true I believe.  What's 
>missing more and more is the opportunity for either to do much 
>innovative work.
I disagree. There is tremendous opportunity for both. The rapid
developments in semiconductors, information technology and genetic
engineering provide a fertile ground for engineers - the rate of
innovations in these areas is very high. The existence of better and
better research technologies allows scientists to explore many more
areas.

"hanson"  wrote:
[political snip]
>Two Cadmium plating tanks (a & b) were analyzed for NaOH, NaCN and Cd.
>During plating operations the over-voltage on Anode and Cathode produces >O2 and H2 gas, and foam/bubbles from the air-agitation of=
 the solution. >These actions produce a fizzing, a mist, which carries material out of >the bath into the atmosphere, called emissio=
ns, which were >quantitatively determined per EPA protocol and methods. 
>
>a) The uncontrolled Cad tank analyzed to 1.5 oz/gal NaOH, 12.5 oz/gal >NaCN and 2.8 oz/gal Cadmium. In this "uncontrolled" experime=
nt the >emissions were measured via collection of the mist, 8" over the bath's >liquid surface and yielded 24.8 ugr (micrograms) Cad=
mium. Question 1: >How much total Sodium (ugr) must have accompanied this collected Cadmium amount (24.8 ugr)?
You don't know.  The cadmium concentration in the mist is changing as the 
tank is depleted during plating, and there may be surface segregation 
effects (e.g., Langmuir films enriched in cadmium-containing hydrophobic 
material).  It is similarly unclear that surface sodium reflects bulk 
sodium.
>b) The controlled Cad tank analyzed to 2.0 oz/gal NaOH, 13.3 oz/gal NaCN
>and 3.2 oz/gal Cadmium. In this (emission) "controlled" , analog >experiment a simple metal mesh pad was installed over the tank to=
 >capture most of the mist-droplet emissions passing through this emission >control device. The non-captured, passed thru particles =
were measured in >like fashion and yielded an amount of 4.5 ugr Cadmium in the collected >mist. 
You might do better (and much cheaper!) with a non-woven fiberglass 
furnace air filter.  I don't know of any metal mesh which sells for a few 
cents/square foot.
Question 2: How
>much total Sodium (ugr) must have accompanied the amount of collected Cad (4.5 ugr ) this time?
You still don't know.  It is not clear that differential Cd 
concentrations in the mist will be equally scrubbed by the filter.  One 
may even argue that the droplets with larger Na or Cd concentrations will 
preferentially make it through because high salt concentrations in water 
drastically change its properties (e.g., breaking emulsions in sep 
funnels).
It is also unclear what chemical species are in the mist.  You may add 
NaOH, NaCN, and Cd(something) to the tank.  You probably get NaCd(CN)2, 
Na3Cd(CN)4, and perhaps even polynuclear stuff strung together by 
hydroxide and cyanide.  If that stuff is hydrophobic it may 
preferentially accumulate at the liquid surface where mist formation 
occurs, or as electrode slime to be whisked away by gas production..  The 
mist may therefore show strange cation ratios compared to the bulk tank 
composition.
Stuff like Fluorad surfactants creates a stable foam layer whose mists 
are more controllable than the stuff belching out of a naked tank.  
Another approach is to float a few monolayers of small, hollow 
polyolefine balls.  The mist gets trapped in the interstices and mostly  
drains back into the tank.
Good engineering always obeys KISS.  A couple of buckets of balls beat a 
$250,000 EPA scrubber.
-- 
Alan "Uncle Al" Schwartz
UncleAl0@ix.netcom.com ("zero" before @)
http://www.ultra.net.au/~wisby/uncleal.htm  (lots of + new)
 (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children, Democrats, and most mammals)
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"  The Net!

You idiots!  Roiling skies are part of the plan; emissions
are a GoodThing [tm].  The Holy Newsgroup has been 
eliminated from the followups and you will pave yourselves.
Welcome to the Pits.
Otto Bahn
Durham Atomic Project

What would be the greatest possible single strike against the CO2 problem? 
A house produceing much energy instead of useing much energy! 
Details on our homepage http://members.magnet.at/pege/ at GEMINI
We show also the magnitude of the problem and that all smaller
solutions are only jokes.
-- 
pege@magnet.at
http://members.magnet.at/pege/
Mösl Roland - founder of PEGE -
Planetary Engineering Group Earth
Fischer v.Erlachstr43/508 A-5020 Salzburg

Since years all are wailing: Photovoltaic is to expensive,world production
is to 
small. If world production would be 10*, prices would come down to the
half.
We have found a solution to end this wailing about Photovotaik and to
expand the market: SoCo or Solar Comfort for cars 
is the name of our strategic plan.
See the details and our new Photovoltaic world market prognoses on 
our homepage http://members.magnet.at/pege/ 
-- 
pege@magnet.at
http://members.magnet.at/pege/
Mösl Roland - founder of PEGE -
Planetary Engineering Group Earth
Fischer v.Erlachstr43/508 A-5020 Salzburg

Dear Sir,
        Anyone can tell me that the mass ratio of sea water in South
China Sea as follows.
        r = ( M / Na )
where M = K, Ca, Mg, Cl and SO4 in ppm
        Moreover, can anyone tell me the mass ratio of soil in territory
of China mainland (near south, especially, Hong Kong)
        r = ( M / Al )  or r = ( M / Ca )
where M as above but include some trace element such as Pb, Zn, Cd ...
Thank you for your attention,
Yours Sincerely
I ++
LO/\O
Lotto  Email: lotto@sky.com.hk

Will Stewart  wrote:
>Bruce Hamilton wrote:
>> Really?. I've referred you to the data before... From the Gasoline FAQ...
>
>Bruce assumes that once he tells people his opinion, they should
>immediately drop theirs.
Wrong Will, I don't assume or expect others to believe *my* opinion, 
that is  why I posted a reference to ...
>>    6a. How Technology has Confounded US Gas Resource Estimators
>>        W.L.Fisher
>>        Oil & Gas J. 24 October 1994
>
>An unbiased source if I ever saw one....
I'm no longer surprised at your continued wilful ignorance, as I've posted 
many times before in response to your innuendos, that paper was authored by
W.L.Fisher of the University of Texas in Austin, and is a condensed version of
a presentation to the Gulf Coast Geological Societies annual meeting October
5-7 1994 in Austin. I suppose the societies could have an Anti-EV agenda,
although I'm not sure why they would bother, common sense is enough...
You have read it, haven't you?. After all, I've I read the Calstart drivel you
posted as science, and noted some obvious discrepancies, and yet you 
still post references to it as quality science...If you like you could also
read "Enviropnmental Conservation" , I have a copy of a brief note from
E.Krippl and C.Schneider on p182 ( of a 1995 issue - I think, no volume or
date number appears on the pages I have ) called " World Oil Supply
- More than Enough? - they estimate oil supplies ( in bblx10^6/day ) 
at 11 in 1993, 13.2 in 2000, and 15.2 in 2010 ).  
 Which data in the paper do you dispute.. Let's see...
>Perhaps you could provide some information on oil resources and
>production from this journal, because a large percentage of the readers
>aren't going to go out and buy it. Simply referring to a person's
>opinion in a fossil fuel rag doesn't give us a reason to give your
>thesis serious consideration.
Will, the term you are seeking to describe your position is
wilful ignorance...I've posted data from this paper previously,
including an ascii drawing of the table showing the estimates
of remaining US Natural Gas, a search of may archives shows
I posted this first around August 1995, and the graph may get
a little messed up  posting via this news reader. I've referred
to it several times in response to you, yet you *still* wilfully
pretend that the author is biased, and the data may be suspect.
Which of his data are *wrong*.
[ begin extract ]
" How technology has confounded U.S. gas resource estimators "
  W.L.Fisher
  Oil & Gas Journal. 24 Oct. 1994
I'll cover reserves, but there are additional extra graphs that show
the successful application of technology, eg:-
Yield per effort            Significant Field Discovery Trend
(bcf reserves/completion)  (significant discoveries/100 new field wildcats) 
1980  0.4                   1960  2.7
1982  0.5                   1965  2.9
1984  0.45                  1970  3.1
1986  1.4                   1975  3.5
1988  2.2                   1980  4.0
1990  1.4                   1985  4.7
1992  1.7                   1990  5.7
His final figure (12 " Changed view of resource depletions ") has two 
graphs, plotting cumulative drilling against relative addition rate.
One is headed "Exponential decline - 1970s view"  ( Ultimate gas 
recovery 870+-30tcf (Hubbert 1982), and the other " Technological
Stretch - current view" ( Ultimate gas recovery 2,017tcf ( EIA 1990))  
[ From the article ]
Estimating Natural Gas Resources"
"With the exception of high estimates made by the USGS in the early 1970s,
average estimates of remaining gas ( adjusted downwards for production 
since the date of estimate through 1993 ) ran about 260tcf (Fig.7). The
higher range of these estimates, chiefly by the PGC, ran a little under 
500tcf on the average. The low estimates by certain independent analysts,
the USGS, the National Research Council, and several major oil companies,
averaged less than 100tcf.; some were actually negative when adjusted for
actual subsequent production. 
In 1987, with a draft estimate by DOI of 595tcf (467tcf adjusted) in wide
circulation, the DOE convened a panel of gas resource estimators from
industry, academia, and government, including the DOI to provide a 
consensus estimate of remaining natural gas resources. By that time,
improvements in yield per effort in gas drilling were under way although
widely unappreciated because they were coming from revisions; activity
and yield in the noncomventionals- coalbed methane and especially tight
gas - were becoming strong.
The panel extrapolated experience in oil reserve growth to calculated
gas growth (the data on gas reserve growth were terminated in 1979),
yielding a figure nearly 3 times the DOE estimate of 111tcf. Additionally,
nonconventionals were included explicitly in the resource base. As a
result the DOE estimates published in 1988 were twice the DOI estimates
(both adjusted). The DOE estimate became the turning point as subsequent
estimates of the remaining resources from a variety of industry,
professional, and governmental entities increased substantially (Fig.7).
Estimates of the past three years, excepting one, have averaged just
under 1400tcf, five times the level of just a decade ago and nearly 50%
greater that the optimistic estimate of the DOE panel in 1988.
The lone exception is an estimate made by updating the Hubbert symetrical
life cycle model, which still yields a bare 200tcf remaining."
Figure 7 "Estimates of remaining U.S. natural gas"
( ascii approximation, not all data included )
1800| x USGS
tcf |                                                    xGRI   
1600|                                                      /x
    |                                               Enron / GRI
1400|                                                   x/   x EIA
    |                                                   /x NPC
1200|                                            NRC   /
    |    x USGS                                   x   /x Enron
1000|                                                /     x PGC
    |                                        Enron x/
 800|                                             /
    |                             x PGC         /  x PGC 
 600|   PGC           x PGC x PGC            /x PGC
    |PGC x                           PGCx / x DDI
 400|x                     xUSGS   ___---
    |__________________________----
 200|     Mobil                           x Shell           x S&L;  
    |       x x NRC                  x Exxon
   0|     * Hub    Exxon       x Hub
-100|___________|__x________|___________|___________|___________|
               1975        1980        1985        1990        1995     
Hub = Hubbert    ____ Trend Line
S&L; = Smith and Lidsky ( King Hubbert's analysis revisited: update of
the lower 48 oil and gas resource base. The Leading Edge, November 
1993 p.1082-1086 )
[ end extract ]
>> The downward trend for production of oil is because the USA
>> imported oil that was cheaper to recover rather than continue
>> with more expensive local oil.
>
>Now you are making excuses for why Hubbert's observations are generally
>correct.
No. Hubbert was *wrong* because he claimed the US would
run out of resource. The US, even without the recently discovered
free methane  and methane, has resources far in excess than he
claimed, as given in the numbers I posted. If you count the free 
methane and gas hydrate, there's a huge resource ( 540Gt of
carbon off the Arctic Margin of Alaska has been estimated from
measurements - but recent research indicates that there could 
be "only"  one third of that, and 40Gt  off the south east US Atlantic
margin ( Science v.273 p.1842 ))- more than enough to ensure the
fossil fuel link global warming  experiment can be rigorously and 
extensively performed - if we choose to.  
>> Entropy is irrelevant :-)
>
>Talk to an engineer about the relevance of entropy.  
An engineer is the *last* person I would talk to about
the relevance of entropy. They spend most of their time 
unsuccessfully fighting entropy.
>And leave a note stating your legacy for your grandchildren 
> that states that you believed it was appropriate for you to 
>wastefully consume the valuable energy resources that they 
> will possibly have a hard time finding and affording, if they 
>choose to continue climate disruption.
This exemplies your dishonesty. You have read sufficient of
my posts to know that I strongly support more efficient use of 
all viable fuels, and have predicted here ( for far longer than 
you have been around ) that we will move from fossil fuels for
sound environmental and economic reasons. I have strongly
supported is more efficient usage of fossil fuels ( including
more efficient ICVs and energy conservation ) until economically
viable alternatives  are available. For you to pervert my stance
clearly demonstrates the intellectual dishonestly you are prepared
to deliver in your stident support of transportation options that 
aren't currently economically viable competitors to fossil fuels.
              Bruce Hamilton

Dear Sir,
        Anyone can tell me that the mass ratio of sea water in South
China Sea as follows.
        r = ( M / Na )
where M = K, Ca, Mg, Cl and SO4 in ppm
        Moreover, can anyone tell me the mass ratio of soil in territory
of China mainland (near south, especially, Hong Kong)
        r = ( M / Al )  or r = ( M / Ca )
where M as above but include some trace element such as Pb, Zn, Cd ...
Thank you for your attention,
Yours Sincerely
I ++
LO/\O
Lotto  Email: lotto@sky.com.hk

In article <01bbcaa8$1401cf40$89d0d6cc@masher>, "Mike Asher"  says:
>One of the most pressing modern day concerns is what to do with
>weapons-grade plutonium from superpower stockpiles. Typically a dangerous
>and expensive undertaking, some have proposed to 'burn' the plutonium in
>CANDU power reactors, and derive energy while disposing of the plutonium. 
>Enter Greenpeace, though.
>In a press release, Greenpeace has stated that the idea "must be stopped as
>it will only stimulate those countries which are exploring the civilian use
>of weapons-usable plutonium."
>Greenpeace proving once again that it puts grandstanding above serious
>efforts to improve the environment.
Yet again Mike Asher is able to turn everything upsidedown...
CANDU power reactors don't DISPOSE plutonium !
They just use it as a fuel in a fission process where dangerous isotopes are turned
into other dangerous isotopes. Actually the process produces more radioactive
material because the plutonium has to be enriched first and after the fission there will
be hundreds or even thousends (if you count the low-radiactive material) times more
radiactive material then in the first place...
- Miikka Raninen - Earth First! Finland 

In article <327EF8C0.51FC@ise.canberra.edu.au>, Dale
 writes
>Mike Edgar wrote:
>> >"Like all parts of our technology, bicycles have appropriate and
>> >inappropriate uses (e.g. the appropriate use for cars is as housing
>> >for the homeless, or flowerpots for geraniums). The purpose of the
>> >bicycle is to replace the automobile, not extend its reach into our
>> >precious wilderness."
>
>> Excellent quote, and correct in both conclusions.
>
>Very useful response Mike, NOT.  Are you saying this is correct from
>just your perspective (if so, why did you bother?) or from a general
>point of view.  If it is from a general perspective you need to do much
>more to substantiate this (or once again, why did you bother?).
>
The quotes are correct from all points of view, that is for those that
possess any vision and concern for the global future. You obviously are
not included in either category.
>I might add that discussing one's purpose tends to be fairly subjective,
>as an appropriate use of something for someone may be inappropriate for
>another.  So it seems as if you are just saying it is correct from your
>perspective.  Why do you think we would be interested in that?
>
Who cares what *you* are interested in... ?
>Also, as always, you have abused netiquette with a one line response
>follwoing a lengthy quote.  Doesn't your computer have a delete key so
>that you can trim your posts down to the relevant parts?
>
Oh dear...dear, ... ruined your knitting again have you... Daisy... ? or
is your world always that pathetically small.. ?
>Dale
-------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Mike Edgar  "the line between human and nonhuman is, like all lines,one
that should be drawn in pencil, so that it can be moved to accommodate
moral evolution and the realization of moral reality." Prof Gary L Francione
--------------------------------------------------------------------

In article <327EFBC9.6CA6@ise.canberra.edu.au>, Dale
 writes
>Rob Gray wrote:
>> 
>> Mike, I disagree with you on this point. I do not believe that Mr.
>> Vandeman is extreme in his beliefs regarding mountain biking. 
>
>MikeV is presenting a view about mountain biking which is quite
>different from the views of most in this forum, and also different from
>most in society.  By definition, this makes his beliefs extreme.  Since
>you also agree with many of his beliefs about mountain biking then your
>beliefs would also have to be seen as extreme.
>
Absolute self-centred rubbish,. just because these views are *different*
to *yours*,  you define them as "extreme". When were you elected
spokesman for "most in society".... ?
>>                                                               The use of
>> wheeled vehicles off of paved or gravel-covered surfaces is extremely
>> damaging to the land. I have observed this myself, and I am not a crazed
>> environmentalist.
>
>We have been through most of this before - you have observed the
>possible impacts of mountain biking in what is essentially the one
>situation in what appears to be an uncontrolled study.  The limited
>scientific evidence presented here previously just does not back up this
>observation - it suggests a similar level of impact to hiking, and
>significantly less damage when compared to horses or motorised vehicles.
>
Semantics and prevarication, ... the point is damage is unnecessarily
and selfishly done.
>>                   I am a conservationist who supports the rights of all
>> sportsmen including hunters, 
>
>I find it difficult to see the consistency between someone who claims to
>be a conservationist, yet they support hunting.  This suggests to me a
>lack of genuineness in these claims of being a conservationist.
>
>Dale
-------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Mike Edgar  "the line between human and nonhuman is, like all lines,one
that should be drawn in pencil, so that it can be moved to accommodate
moral evolution and the realization of moral reality." Prof Gary L Francione
--------------------------------------------------------------------

ANNOUNCING:
1997 International Ash Utilization Symposium
Oct. 20-22, 1997
Lexington, Kentucky (USA)
Sponsors:
University of Kentucky Center for Applied Energy Research
and
Elsevier Science, Ltd. / the journal FUEL
Scope:
all aspects of coal combustion by-product utilization
For more information, go to our Worldwide Web Page:
http://www.caer.uky.edu/ASH/ashhome.htm
Questions?  Please contact:
Gretchen Tremoulet
University of Kentucky
Center for Applied Energy Research
3572 Iron Works Pike
Lexington, KY 40511-8433
USA
e-mail gtremoulet@alpha.caer.uky.edu
phone (606) 257-0355, fax (606) 257-0360

John McCarthy (jmc@Steam.stanford.edu) wrote:
: Andy might be right that some of what he identifies as irrationalities
: in the food packing and distribution business really are.  In this
: case, he could make money buying potatoes from farmers locally and
: selling it to supermarkets locally.
: My late father-in-law was a farmer growing fruit.  Most of his fruit
: was sold to buyers who shipped it to the East Cosast.  However, every
: so often he would load his truck with fruit and sell it to supermarkets
: in the vicinity.  I presume he and they made a greater profit on
: cutting out the middleman in this case, whenever the demand for the fruit
: substantially coincided with its availability.
Very good, John.  Green can, and often does, pay.  And "progress" is not
always progress even if in many cases it really is.
Trust those monks in those monasteries here in Europe.  I count on
getting organic yoghurt from Kloster Andechs, since they make it the way
they always have.  And they make a profit, too.
--
Mach's gut!
Bruce Scott, Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik, bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de
Remember John Hron:       http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/h/hron-john/

Having exceeded the carrying capacity and suffering
years of slow, painful death of starvation and
malnutrition, Rwandans choose quick death of war.
The western press called it "tragedy." If we are
not hypocrites and we really care, we should invite
Rwandans to USA and let them live here.
The endless disputes between environmentalists and
cornucopians remind me of theological disputes
between Christian and Muslim fundamentalists. I
don’t believe that a middle of the road compromise
between them will solve the environmental crisis.
The only long-term solution is a massive
colonization of outer space. It can be done on
a shoestring budget in 50 years. Unfortunately,
environmentalists and cornucopians are total
ignorants when it comes to space technology.

[FORWARDED ANNOUNCEMENT]
This will probably be of considerable interest to many....
Good news....
--------------------------- cut/fwd ----------------------------------
RE:  Project Directors & Volunteers
     Online Applications - Summer Program
     Open to All
The Reverend Jesse Jackson
National Rainbow Coalition
Jackson@RAINBOW.ORG
Dear Reverend Jackson,
By this letter (and forwarded carbon copies), we are announcing our 1997 
Summer Program in Africa and Brazil, on the occasion of our 40th 
Anniversary.
It is with pleasure that we again send you an update on our program. 
Online brochures and applications, for Project Director and Volunteer 
positions, are now available by sending an E-Mail request to: 
                        
                        
following the instructions below.  Also, printed brochures and applications 
can be obtained by mail.
In all, we anticipate a need for 200 - 300 Volunteers for approximately 25 
projects.  
The tremendous enthusiasm for this year's program was not anticipated.  We 
are grateful.
We will follow up with a phone call next week.
                               Kind regards,
                               Cecil R. Washington, Jr.
                               Director of Research
                               UC Berkeley
                               Oberlin College
                                                           
cc: LaVerne Brown
    Operation Crossroads
    Head, Executive Offices
    212-870-2106
    oca@igc.apc.org
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                      [plz forward / post]
   A P P L Y    N O W    O N L I N E
RE: Project DIRECTORS & VOLUNTEERS
    _____________________________________________________
    Applications now due
_____________________________________________________________________
Rainforest, Ecology and the Environment: Africa & Brazil
    B r a z i l i a n    R a i n F o r e s t    P r o j e c t s
                    << B   A   H   I   A >>
One of the sites under consideration is the Mata Atlantica (Coastal Forest) 
area in the Southern Cone of the State of Bahia. This is a place where local 
poor communities are struggling to gain access to land via articulated 
political effort. There are over a dozen officially recognized Land Reform 
Settlemnts in this region, and the former landless peasants are willing now 
to promote efforts to save the remnants of this unique patch of rich, 
bio-diverse forest, as well as to secure their access to land by changing 
the situation of Land Tenure in that area.
We have been recently contacted by leaders of these communities seeking help 
with the various projects they deem vital. These projects will include 
programs concerning Reforestation, Youth Development, Education and 
Training, as well as Ecological Projects.  
       [Dr. Edmundo Freitas Lopes-Researcher/Project Developer]
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
[I N T'L  S T U D I E S]  [W O R K-T R A V E L]  [I N T E R N S H I P S]
PROJECTS / RESEARCH / AREAS OF STUDY & INTEREST
------------------------------------------------
Ecology & Environment..Conservation..Traditional Medicine..Oral
History..Primary Care..Archaeology..Community Dev..Reforestation..Media
Distance Learning..Art..Ethnomusicology..Public Health..Construction  
Wildlife..Humanities..Computer Literacy..Agriculture/Farming..Nursing
Teaching/Tutoring..Business Dev..African/Brazilian Language Study
Youth Programs..Recreation..Traditional Religion..Anthropology..Dance
************************************************************************
    [Also, campaigns addressing Female Genital Mutilation (FGM)]
C O U N T R I E S: Botswana, The Gambia, Ghana, Eritrea, Ivory Coast,
Kenya, Senegal, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, Zimbabwe and Brazil
(in South America). Additional countries & projects to be announced
    C E L E B R A T I N G    C U L T U R E    A N D    H I S T O R Y
   ___________________________________________________________________
       GLOBAL VOLUNTEERS :    A f r i c a    &    B r a z i l 
 * This year's theme: "Africa & Brazil, marching into the 21st Century"
  "...Promoting economic development, ecological wisdom, social justice, 
           grassroots democracy and non-violent solutions..."
                           Summer 1997
                     Living/Working/Traveling 
                Internships/Field Work/Group Projects
                        Independent Study
                    The Forgotten Human FACE
V o l u n t e e r   I n f o    b y    E - M a i l :
           1] include your full street address, in case our
                    equipment malfunctions
           2] E-Mail your request to   <>   addresses:
  =>             "Brochure\Application"          <=
    =>        "Summer Prog: Africa\Brazil"     <=
            Include  " --V O L U N T E E R-- "  in the SUBJECT field
                ...or contact our office directly 
                        by letter or phone
A L L   A R E   W E L C O M E
......................................................................
Project  D I R E C T O R S / Group  L E A D E R S  go thru a separate
     application process with earlier deadlines (min. age, 26 - with
     relevant expertise, experience directing group projects, living
     and/or travel experience in Africa or similar setting), experience
     leading multi-racial/ethnic work projects or groups  
     To receive the application and job description, snail mail us, 
     or send an E-Mail request to :
    =>        "Proj Dir: Info" ,          <=
       =>    "Proj Dir: Packet"        <=
     1) with a brief description of your interests & background
           [send us your snail mail address, phone & E-Mail]
     2) include   "  --L E A D E R--  "    in the SUBJECT field 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-Since 1957, 10,000 Crossroads participants (students, professionals,
     persons with skills, persons of goodwill, etc.) representing
     over 500 universities, colleges & organizations, have come
     together to work for a better world
-Students usually arrange with their schools to receive credit for their
     summer experience (typically 7 to 15 units)
-Cited by President Kennedy for providing the example that "inspired" the
     creation of the Peace Corps, and on which the Peace Corps was
     modeled
APPLICATION DEADLINE:  Due now & during the coming weeks->cut off has not
                          yet been announced
                       Late applications will be accepted
                          only as space and time permit
                =>     It's important to submit the application ASAP to
                          reserve a place
                       Crossroads assists Volunteers in raising funds
                          for their travel/living expenses; early
                          application is essential
PROGRAM DATES:         End of June/early July through mid-August
                          (approx dates)
ORIENTATION:           There will be a several-day Orientation in New
                          York prior to leaving. The program starts from 
                          & ends in New York
-This is an INTENSE living, work and learning experience at the grassroots
     level in Africa & Brazil where some of the modern conveniences taken 
     for granted in Western countries, will not be present
-Crossroads Volunteers go to Africa & Brazil NOT to impose their own
     Western values, but to seek comprehension of counterpart
     values; they are challenged to adjust to local ways of doing many
     things
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
    O P E R A T I O N   C R O S S R O A D S   A F R I C A ,   I n c .
          475 Riverside Dr., N.Y., N.Y. 10115-0050, Suite 831
             Tel: 212-870-2106    E-Mail:  oca@igc.apc.org
             _________________________________________ 
                  Dr. James H. Robinson - Founder
             LaVerne Brown - Head, Executive Offices
                __________________________________
   Dr. Osei Darkwa - Distance Learning/Computer Literacy Program
    Dr. Edmundo Freitas Lopes - Rainforest/Ecology/Conservation
  Edmund Browne, MD - Medicine/Computer-Aided Medical Instruction
           ___________________________________________
               ...a non-profit org: IRS 501(c)(3)
************************************************************************
  "...You will experience Africa from the inside out..
                                 ...This is NOT an African tour."
                              Cynthia Archie, Crossroads Alumna
                                 State Dept/Foreign Service
                             Former Peace Corps Country Director
______________
Any help in sharing, posting or forwarding this information to campuses and 
community organizations, would be much appreciated.
To receive by E-Mail the UPDATE on the Computer Literacy/Distance Learning 
Program, please send me an E-Mail message with "GHANA: LEAPS FORWARD" in the 
Subject: field.
Thanks in advance!  
Cecil  

212-870-2106