Newsgroup sci.environment 110766

Directory

brshears@whale.st.usm.edu (Harold Brashears) wrote:
>>What power? How does one squeeze power out of people who have no
>>resources to spare? Maybe they can serve you for a month or two
>>while they starve, but it is an understatement to say that they
>>would do so grudgingly.
>You have power over your subjects.  You confuse wealth with power
>(didn't I mention that perception?).  If there is no drive for power
>without wealth, why did primitive fishers and hunters, in tribes of 20
>to 100, have rulers?  As best we can determine, stone age subsistence
>hunters had a nobility, of sorts anyway.
There is an assumed connection between leader and tyrant that I
do not share. I am the chair of the Libertarian Party of
Allegheny County (Pittsburgh). I suppose I have some power, but
the question I originally addressed on this thread was whether
wealth prevented or attracted tyranny. The fact that primative
people had rulers does not clearly show that they had tyrants.
Using my own situation as an example, I do not (think that I) act
tyrannically, because there would be no point to it. There is
nothing in the Libertarian Party worth my debasing myself for in
that way. Yet people just as moral as I, but in the Democratic
and Republican Parties, have fallen into weilding power in a most
dictatorial way, simply because there are great prizes that
attatch to offices in those parties.
>You appear to wish us to believe that the only motivation is one for
>wealth, I have argued that this is not the primary motive of most
>tyrants.  I think they want power and some measure of glory as their
>primary motive.  We will simply have to disagree.
I don't disagree with your assessment of what an individual
tyrant wants. I disagree with the contention that a marginal
society will support a tyrannical system. Tyranny is not merely
some person waving a gun, but a whole political and social
construct, with either one person or a whole class of people at
the top. It is enabled by many people, possibly excluding the
tyrant himself, wanting to reap where they have not sown.
Consider Mark Twains accounting of Cecil Rhodes' rise to tyranny:
"What is the secret of his formidable supremacy? One says it is
his prodigious wealth--a wealth whose drippings in salaries and
and in other ways support multitudes and make them his interested
and loyal vassels; another says it is his personal magnetism and
his persuasive tongue, and that these hypnotize and make happy
slaves of all that drift within the circle of their influence;
another says it is his majestic ideas, his vast schemes for the
territorial aggrandizement of England, his patriotic and
unselfish ambition to spread her beneficent protection and her
just rule over the pagan wastes of Africa and make luminous the
African darkness with the glory of her name; and another says he
wants the earth, wants it for his own, and that the secret belief
that he will get it and let his friends in on the ground floor is
*the* secret that rivets so many eyes on him and keeps him in the
zenith...
"I admire him, I frankly confess it; and when his time comes I
shall buy a piece of the rope as a keepsake..."
Now, whatever opinion you have about Cecil Rhode's own motives is
irrelevant to my contention that it is the opportunity for his
proteges to extract wealth that "rivets so many eyes on him and
keeps him in the zenith."  
Everywhere I look, I see politicians who are motivated by power
and glory, but they are funded and otherwise supported by
interests who are simply finding it more profitable to invest in
politics than in productivity. Without those investors, there
would be no Bill Clintons and Bob Doles.
                                         Dan Sullivan
The only time my education was interrupted was when I was in school.
                                         --George Bernard Shaw

In article <328fcc9c.14429346@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
Mason A. Clark  wrote:
>On Mon, 18 Nov 1996 01:33:04 GMT, George_Thomas@mindspring.com (George Thomas) wrote:
>
>> >As for "a number in the US, beginning with...", I reiterate, there have
>> >been no fatal accidents at commercial reactors.  The SL-1 accident is,
>> >according to the US DOE, the ONLY fatal accident at any type of reactor:
>> >commercial, military, or experimental.
>> >
>> >For good reason-- we're discussing commercial power generation. 
>> >Furthermore, I confined my remarks to North America, though I know of no
>> >fatalities in Europe or Asia.  Your objection is thus doubly inappropriate.
>> 
>There is a fatal (excuse the pun) misunderstanding about the nature of 
>radiation.  The reported exposure of the populace to radiation caused by
>the Three-Mile Island accident was well measured and by conservative 
>calculation killed at least three people.  We don't know who they are (or 
>were or will be) and we don't know when they died (or will die).
>
  I believe that the more accurate statement is that the range of
  fatalities is bounded by a maximum value of three, with the 
  most likely value being less than 1.
>Unlike a fall down a coal-mine shaft, radiation exposure kills later and
>the cause of death probably will not be attributed to radiation when it occurs.
>
>Nevertheless, the relation between exposure and fatal radiation-induced 
>illness has been the subject of much research and reasonable estimates
>can be made.
>
>It is simply erroneous and mis-leading to claim there have been no deaths
>caused by commercial nuclear power radiation.  
>
>The fact that there have been few deaths, less than in coal mines and 
>gas and oil fields, is beside the point here.
>
>To claim no deaths from commercial nuclear power radiation is like 
>claiming that no one dies from smoking cigarettes.  The death comes
>years later.
>
>
-- 
B. Alan Guthrie, III            |  When the going gets tough,
                                |  the tough hide under the table.
alan.guthrie@cnfd.pgh.wec.com   |
                                |                    E. Blackadder

Bill Toman wrote:
> > Even if you assume that our man-made reactors are engineered to operate very safely,
> > as many are, there is not much you can do to prevent earthquakes and
> > human error.
> >
> > I know the federal government requires extensive seismological data for
> > the sites that nuclear reactors are built on, but even the Northridge
> > earthquake that struck just 2 years ago was on an undiscovered fault. A
> > major quake near a nuclear plant is beyond anybody's control, and can
> > easily rip open a nuclear plant.
> >
> 
> I believe that the seismic risk of US nuclear plants is quite low.  In
> the Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) studies that I was involved in
> for Westinghouse, the frequency of an earthquake causing an accident
> which had at least one acute fatality from radiation exposure outside of
> the plant was no more than 1.0xE-8 (one in 100 million) per year.  This
> was for the Zion and Indian Point stations.
Taking a look at the hazard maps at the USGS web site, both these
stations are in very low risk areas of the country. I'm curious to see
what the collective probability of having extensive ground movement in
the vicinity of any one of the 109 reactors is. I am skeptical of the
assesment in terms of probabilities of fatalities since that naturally
assumes something about the integrity of the reactor and its containment
system. Engineers in Japan were convinced that the new codes applied in
the construction of several buildings which suffered severe damage could
withstand earthquakes larger than the Kobe earthquake.
>  For the California plants,
> Humbolt Bay 3 was shut down in 1977 because the NRC ordered seismic
> reinforcement backfits made the plant uneconomic.  Diablo Canyon and San
> Onofre are the most seismically resistant buildings in the world,
> designed to withstand ground motions of .4 and .6 g, respectively.  I
> would much rather be in those two structures during an earthquake than
> the building that I'm sitting in right now.
Again, I refer to the hazard maps, particularly the one which shows 10%
probability of exceeding peak accelerations in 50 years, which happen to
exceed ground motions of .6 g in the immediate vicinity of these plants.
I won't say that they aren't safe structures, but I would much rather be
in the building I'm in now than sitting in a open area just outside one
of those reactors during an earthquake.
> Regarding the issue of the "undiscovered" or "previously unknown"
> faults, the probability of the joint occurrence of a big earthquake on
> an "unknown" fault that is also close enough to an operating nuclear
> plant (not down for refueling) to exceed its rated seismic protection is
> vanishingly small.  Better to worry about buildings at Cal State
> Northridge which are not up to code.
I don't quite understand how you can assess such a probability unless
you assume you know the quantity, average size, and average stress/slip
rates of these "undiscovered" faults. I'm not saying you can't do it; I
just don't understand how you can get a meaningful number- at least
enough to say that it's vanishingly small.
It's one thing to assess the probability for a given plant, and its
another to assess the probability of having a large earthquake in the
vicinity of any reactor.
William

John McCarthy wrote:
> 
> Will Stewart includes:
> 
>      Yet 10,000s of homes rely on PVs as their main
>      source of electrical energy, and such dilemnas are unknown
>      in these environs.  What are you basing your premises on, if
>      not first hand experience?  Do you know anyone that does
>      have a PV system installed?
> 
> I would be surprised if there were tens of thousands of homes that
> rely on PVs as their main source of electric energy.
Why the surprise?
> Is there a source for this statistic?
I've seen many references in publications such as Home Power, and DOE
documents that put the figure around 50,000.  As this is not a hard
reference, I'm not claiming this to be the irrefutable truth.  I have
not reason to disbelieve it, however.
Cheers,
-- 
William R. Stewart
http://www.patriot.net/users/wstewart/first.htm
Member American Solar Energy Society
Member Electrical Vehicle Association of America
"The truth will set you free:  - J.C.

One expects a non herdsman titling himself "herdsman" to be a
sentimentalist - unless its us he wishes to herd.
-- 
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/
During the last years of the Second Millenium, the Earthmen complained
a lot.

mikememorella@aol.com wrote:
> 
> Sam McClintock  wrote:
> >e) if you have the test report, it would be great if you could
> >find a way to post that on the web (if the sponsoring agency has
> >not already done so).  There is a substantial amount of material,
> >but there are ALWAYS sections on objectives, test methods, actual
> >test plan (outline), the contract lab, isokinetic/measurement data
> >sheet, and laboratory analysis.
> 
> >Sam McClintock
> >sammcc@nando.net (now scmcclintock@ipass.net)
> 
> you know the earth sucks anyways so why contemplate the destruction of
> the earth when it is going to fail systemically in 10 years?
And this has what to do with Mr. Hanson's problem?
And the earth is beautiful; it is mankind's treatment of earth that
sucks.
Sam McClintock
scmcclintock@ipass.net

How about making the soft reference more precise, i.e. to a specific
article or document that one can look up?
-- 
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/
During the last years of the Second Millenium, the Earthmen complained
a lot.

How low must the probability of a reactor being damaged by an
earthquake to make a reactor a good bet?
-- 
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/
During the last years of the Second Millenium, the Earthmen complained
a lot.

GOLEM (odin@netline.net) wrote:
[snip]
: Peter Montague, "Study Of Dioxin-Exposed Humans Reveals Cancer,
: Birth Defects, Liver And Cardiovascular Damage." RACHEL'S
: HAZARDOUS WASTE NEWS #73 (April 18, 1988), pg. 1. [From:
: Environmental Research Foundation, P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD
: 21403; phone: (410) 263-1584; internet: erf@igc.apc.org.]
: 
: A new study of Vietnam veterans, conducted by Air Force
: physicians, links dioxin exposure to increases in cancer, birth
: defects, psychological damage, liver damage, cardiovascular
: deterioration, and degeneration of the endocrine system.  The new
: work stops short of saying dioxin exposures CAUSED the observable
: health damage among dioxin-exposed vets, but it explicitly
: reverses the conclusions of a 1984 Air Force study which said
: dioxin exposures had been shown to be harmless.
[snip]
: The study compares two groups of Vietnam veterans--one group of
: 1045 Ranch Hands who definitely had dioxin exposures and another
: group of 773 veterans not known to have been exposed to dioxin.
: In addition, 2708 wives and former wives of veterans in the two
: groups participated in the study.
: 
[snip]: 
: The study found that 4.59% of the Ranch Hands have some kind of
: cancer, compared to 2.33% of the unexposed group.  Thus the
: overall risk of cancer among the dioxin-exposed group is doubled
: (risk increased by a factor of 1.97).  The greatest risk increase
: is for skin cancers (where the risk is increased by a factor of
: 2.6)
It's customary, indeed vital, to specify the so-called confidence limits 
for these figures.  If the risk ratio is an average of 1.97 but with 
a range of, say, 0.9 to 3.1, then it is not significant.
More importantly, the use of a 95% confidence level says that even if 
there are no "real" effects, one in every twenty comparisons will show up 
as "significant".    Thus you also have to tell us how many comparisons 
were made between possibly-exposed and probably-not-exposed vets.  If 
there were, say, 100 diseases or symptoms considered, then there could be 
roughly five "positive" findings even in totally random data.  
There could well be some worrying facts in this data, but you have to 
give us enough information to evaluate the study properly. 
Jay D Mann  
Christchurch, New Zealand

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_01BBD9FD.10FD2740
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hello,
I'm currently working at a case study about the relationship between hotels
and the environment and I would like to know:
	> What YOU think about this subject: Is there a relationship, is the
hotelworld a polluter or does it try to me environmental friendly ? (NO
JUNKMAIL PLEASE)
	> If you have seen already some good examples how you can combine hotels
and a green policy ?
	> if you have some good ideas for a "green" hotel
Thank you very much
Pipo on Line
for: Hans Smellinckx
visit my site: http://www.tornado.be/~pipo/index.html
------=_NextPart_000_01BBD9FD.10FD2740
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

	
Hello,

I'm currently working at =
a case study about the relationship between hotels and the environment =
and I would like to know:
	> What YOU think about this =
subject: Is there a relationship, is the hotelworld a polluter or does =
it try to me environmental friendly ? (NO JUNKMAIL PLEASE)
	> =
If you have seen already some good examples how you can combine hotels =
and a green policy ?
	> if you have some good ideas for a =
"green" hotel

Thank you very much

Pipo on =
Line
for: Hans Smellinckx
visit my site: =
http://www.tornado.be/~pipo/index.html



------=_NextPart_000_01BBD9FD.10FD2740--

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_01BBD9FD.461ED680
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hello,
I'm currently working at a case study about the relationship between hotels
and the environment and I would like to know:
	> What YOU think about this subject: Is there a relationship, is the
hotelworld a polluter or does it try to me environmental friendly ? (NO
JUNKMAIL PLEASE)
	> If you have seen already some good examples how you can combine hotels
and a green policy ?
	> if you have some good ideas for a "green" hotel
Thank you very much
Pipo on Line
for: Hans Smellinckx
visit my site: http://www.tornado.be/~pipo/index.html
------=_NextPart_000_01BBD9FD.461ED680
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

	
Hello,

I'm currently working at =
a case study about the relationship between hotels and the environment =
and I would like to know:
	> What YOU think about this =
subject: Is there a relationship, is the hotelworld a polluter or does =
it try to me environmental friendly ? (NO JUNKMAIL PLEASE)
	> =
If you have seen already some good examples how you can combine hotels =
and a green policy ?
	> if you have some good ideas for a =
"green" hotel

Thank you very much

Pipo on =
Line
for: Hans Smellinckx
visit my site: =
http://www.tornado.be/~pipo/index.html



------=_NextPart_000_01BBD9FD.461ED680--

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_01BBD9FD.6F88A500
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hello,
I'm currently working at a case study about the relationship between hotels
and the environment and I would like to know:
	> What YOU think about this subject: Is there a relationship, is the
hotelworld a polluter or does it try to me environmental friendly ? (NO
JUNKMAIL PLEASE)
	> If you have seen already some good examples how you can combine hotels
and a green policy ?
	> if you have some good ideas for a "green" hotel
Thank you very much
Pipo on Line
for: Hans Smellinckx
visit my site: http://www.tornado.be/~pipo/index.html
------=_NextPart_000_01BBD9FD.6F88A500
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

	
Hello,

I'm currently working at =
a case study about the relationship between hotels and the environment =
and I would like to know:
	> What YOU think about this =
subject: Is there a relationship, is the hotelworld a polluter or does =
it try to me environmental friendly ? (NO JUNKMAIL PLEASE)
	> =
If you have seen already some good examples how you can combine hotels =
and a green policy ?
	> if you have some good ideas for a =
"green" hotel

Thank you very much

Pipo on =
Line
for: Hans Smellinckx
visit my site: =
http://www.tornado.be/~pipo/index.html



------=_NextPart_000_01BBD9FD.6F88A500--

In <572bh7$aq5@scooby.beloit.edu> odenkirk@stu.beloit.edu (Crystal Odenkirk) writes:
>Not entirely without notice.  There was a party to celebrate the birthday of
>the world on campus.
Is the US education system this bad ?   I would have thought it
was obvious that the 6000 years ended in 1997, not 1996, as there
was no year 0.
-frisk
-- 
Fridrik Skulason      Frisk Software International     phone: +354-5-617273
Author of F-PROT      E-mail: frisk@complex.is         fax:   +354-5-617274

I'm clearing shelf space at home, and I have an interesting book for
sale, called Autumn Journey.  It's an American naturalist's journey
20,000 miles through the North American fall in the 1950s, describing
mainly the natural life he sees.  380 pages.  It is quite a long
detailed book, interestingly written and someone who is a bit of a
naturalist themself would enjoy it.  It is illustrated with very nice
b & w photos.  The surface of the cover is slightly damaged but
otherwise the book is in good condition.  The author is Edwin Way
Teale and it is a hardback.  Price is $10 plus postage.  Pleae email
me if you want any more information.  Kerry

Herdsman wrote:
> 
> B.Hamilton@irl.cri.nz (Bruce Hamilton) wrote:
> 
> >There have been some interesting discussions on the IronEx II
> >results reported in the 10 October 1996 Nature, but it's worth
> 
> No disagreement with any of your points but several posters seem to
> have missed that dimethyl sulfide generation may have increased by a
> factor of three as well.  If DMS is a biologically generated precursor
> to atmospheric sulfate, the net reult might be to cool the earth thorh
> increased albedo.
> 
> Interesting series of articles but Man has such a piss-poor record of
> "managing" the earth . . . except for "managed to mess this up" and
> "managed to mess that up."
> 
> http://home.sprynet.com/sprynet/herdsman/hazwaste.htm
Sulfates in the atmosphere are certaainly not necessarily an entirely
benign influence.  It would depend a lot on where in the atmosphere
said sulfates ended up.    Can anyone who studied the Nature articles
comment on that?
In addition, a considerable amount of sophisticated and reliable
modeling would be required to make such a scheme work.   Martin's
supposed quote that he could produce an ice age through iron
fertilization was presumably much overstated given the numbers that are
quoted in the recent article.  But it is conceivable that sulfate
aerosols could change the balance.   We certainly don't want to go from
the frying panner into the freezer.  Of course in principle iron
fertilization could be managed on a year by year basis, but there would
always be the possibility of unexpected nonlinear effects.
Still, from the best I can understand this, ON THE BASIS OF WHAT IS NOW
KNOWN, the total effect of iron fertilization would be small compared to
the expected forcing from increased concentration of greenhouse gases.
One should remember for example that human activities are primarily
responsible for the increased concentration of the other greenhouse
gases.   On a short time scale, methane can have climate effects of the
same order of magnitude as CO_2.   Remember also that since the primary
CO_2 bands are saturated, relatively small variations in CO_2
concentration should not have as dramatic effects as those from other
greenhouse gases.  The IPCC Reports analyze all the greenhouse gases in
great detail, but sometimes too much emphasis is placed on CO_2 alone.
This is understandable because the major perturbation will come from
doubling or more the concentration of this trace gas, but it is not the
whole story.
As it now stands, it seems to me iron fertilization is an interesting
idea with lots of research yet to be done and a lot of questions to be
answered.
-- 
Leonard Evens       len@math.nwu.edu      491-5537
Department of Mathematics, Norwthwestern University
Evanston Illinois

David Lloyd-Jones (dlj@inforamp.net) wrote:
: The way many Americans live, the world is overpopulated at a million,
: not because of the resources they use but because of the level of
: obnoxity.  The way Japanese live, the world can handle half a trillion
: iwthout too much trouble.
Bunk, as usual. The Japanese are sucking dry the resorces of half-the-
world. Japanese logging companies are destroying the rainforests of SE
Asia faster than you can say "libertarian". Now they moved into Siberia to
continue the same. 
Ecologically,
Yuri.
--
           **    Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto   **
  -- a webpage like any other...  http://www.io.org/~yuku  --
Most of the evils of life arise from man's being 
unable to sit still in a room    ||    B. Pascal

Mike Asher (masher@tusc.net) wrote:
: Yuri Kuchinsky  wrote:
: > Socialism is working in China very nicely right now.
: Yuri, have you ever been close to China?  
Yes. Have been all around China.
Yuri.
-- 
Yuri Kuchinsky          | "Where there is the Tree of Knowledge, there
------------------------| is always Paradise: so say the most ancient 
Toronto ... the Earth	| and the most modern serpents."  F. Nietzsche
-------- A WEBPAGE LIKE ANY OTHER: http://www.io.org/~yuku -----------

John McCarthy (jmc@Steam.stanford.edu) wrote:
: 6. As the Netherlands, it is the second largest food exporter in the
: world (after the U.S.).  This is in dollars.  It is also a large food
: importer.
What year is this statistic for? I wonder if it's correct... Also I'd be
curious to know if Netherlands' food imports were not bigger than its food
exports that year. 
Yuri.
--
           **    Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto   **
  -- a webpage like any other...  http://www.io.org/~yuku  --
Most of the evils of life arise from man's being 
unable to sit still in a room    ||    B. Pascal

John McCarthy (jmc@Steam.stanford.edu) wrote:
: 4. Japan is quite another matter.  It was cut off during WWII and
: heavily bombed, and its population was not starving - yet. 
???
The civilian population of Japan wasn't starving? I can't think of a
bigger idiocy. I'm not surprised John M. fails to see the obvious
absurdity of this.
Yuri.
--
           **    Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto   **
  -- a webpage like any other...  http://www.io.org/~yuku  --
Most of the evils of life arise from man's being 
unable to sit still in a room    ||    B. Pascal

Mike Asher (masher@tusc.net) wrote:
: With cheap abundant energy, we could easily maintain US
: living standards undefinitely for a world population of twenty billion or
: more. 
Were you drooling all over the keyboard as you wrote this, Mike?
Yuri.
--
           **    Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto   **
  -- a webpage like any other...  http://www.io.org/~yuku  --
Most of the evils of life arise from man's being 
unable to sit still in a room    ||    B. Pascal

In <5784o3$fbg@news.inforamp.net> sync@inforamp.net (J McGinnis)
writes: 
>>1. The Chinese agriculture minister insisted that China was a net
>>exporter of food this year and denies that China will become a net
>>importer in the next century.
>
>I am familiar with the comments made by the Chinese minister in Rome
>and elsewhere, and the fact is they are 100% rhetoric. Only those who
>weren't concerned in the first place took them as fact. 
"Concern" as a criterion of what is "fact"?
And smug assertion as a criterion of who has "concern"?
The Chinese approach to boosting food production is
credible - even aside from the high-tech studies. 
What was lacking  was mostly the incentive
for the farmers to introduce well-known, 
well-proved improvements.
The lots they use are only temporarily theirs.
The solution is obviously to move towards full ownership
of land - at least towards much longer
lease terms and better guarantees for the farmer.
That in the first place, in the post-Mao
reforms since 1978.
Now further steps in the same direction are needed -
and some are being taken.
This is all that is necessary. 
Of course *further* technical progress is 
occurring - and it all adds up. 
Not that China *needs* to be a net exporter of food;
the same increase in food production can be achieved
elsewhere; and China is certainly generating the income
to buy the food.
From a global perspective, this is probably 
the *better* solution: China has less arable
land per capita than the world at large. It
would do better to specialize in industry.
For strategic reasons, she may prefer to be 
self-sufficient in food - that's her own concern; 
and if, as a result, her industry grows a little slower,
she can afford that. China is fortunate to
have the choice - but of course this "fortune"
is well-earned.
>I notice that McCarthy forgot about my call to admit he doesn't care
>that people are starving in our times of 'plenty'.
Once more, *concern* (or rather supposed unconcern by the 
less-holy others) used as a criterion of truth...
Whoever is *concerned* about the hungry must want more food
production. The way to do it is known and tested: 
free the markets, deregulate food prices, hoarding, 
profiteering; pesticides, herbicides, 
fertilizers, wetlands, wildlife -
and everything else.
Then step aside and watch the bottom line drive production up
and prices down. This is all that is needed: St. Market 
will do his habitual miracle and take care of the hungry. 
>>Perhaps McGinnis was just saying what would fit his moralistic pose.
>
>I'm ashamed.
Probably not... see above.

In <01bbd9ab$03898600$89d0d6cc@micron-p133> "Mike Asher"
 writes: 
>Many cancer rates are dropping.  Some are rising.  This is hardly
>surprising, as we steadily cure new diseases and reduce accidental
death
>rates.  Since we all die sometime, it follows that other death rates
*must*
>rise to compensate.
There is a hidden assumption here: that progress in curing
or preventing cancer is less rapid than the progress in 
preventing death from other causes. For some forms of
cancer, this is of course true. But logically, it
need not be true.
There is another hidden assumption: that the total
decrease in mortality is either zero or at least
insufficient to reduce mortality from all
causes simultaneously. Yet mortality could,
in principle, be falling fast enough for
that - even though we all die sometime, 
we can postpone deah longer and longer.
Longevity *is* mounting. This is one
reason, however, for the increase in some
cancer rates - cancer afflicts older people
more than it does the young...

On Wed, 13 Nov 1996 06:33:36 -1000, Jay Hanson posted:
>
>Here is another review from Publisher's Weekly:
>
> "The time has come to write a book about efforts being made
> to minimize the seriousness of environmental problems."
> With that opening sentence, the authors (The Stork and
> the Plow) take on what they see as the purveyors of
> environmental disinformation. In a lively style, they
> systematically dismantle claims allegedly made in recent
                                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> books-by the likes of Gregg Easterbrook, Stephen Budiansky,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Rush Limbaugh, Dixy Lee Ray and Julian Simon-that global
> warming is fiction, ozone depletion should be of no concern
> and that the earth can support many times its current
> population. 
The underlined part is the nub of things: the Ehrlichs, like Hanson,
spend their time in two ways, partly making up fictitious problems,
partly attacking positions, typically "no problems exist", which
nobody in fact holds.
                                              -dlj.

A new recycling item that can help community recycling
development is described in the page
http://www.wallbagger.com
Please note this page.
Thank you.

If anyone wants info on Marine mammals, e-mail me.
--
Brian Kuhl
d039664c@dcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us
seacow@juno.com

I'm happy to accept the award, seeing where it's coming from. I would have
considered anything less for an "endorsement" from Mike as a
disappointment. 
The haters of both Nature and the humanity can expect more of the same
from me in the future.
Ecologically,
Yuri.
Mike Asher (masher@tusc.net) wrote:
: Brian Carnell  wrote:
: >yuku@io.org (Yuri Kuchinsky) wrote:
: > 
: > .. There must be a way to disagree with 
: > >someone and yet respect them as an individual.
: > 		^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: > Ah...like your rants against the Pope! No demonizing there, eh Yuri?
: Yuri's hypocrisy is far deeper than this.  I went back over 22 of his posts
: after reading this.  18 included an insult, or some sort of attack on a
: person's intelligence, education, upbringing, or moral stance.   He is the
: most consistently offensive individual we have here today.  I'm amazed he
: has the intellectual dishonesty to even post the above statement.  
: Some Yuri quotes:
: "your hypocrisy in this discussion is obvious. "
: "Brian, You sound like a broken record"
: "The arrogant ass obviously has no idea what the real life in the 3 world
: is like"
: "Get informed."
: "What is it...just plain ignorance?
: "Get on with your education."
: "I suppose your political education hasn't yet progressed to the point when
: you'd learn this?"
: --
: Mike Asher
: masher@tusc.net
--
           **    Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto   **
  -- a webpage like any other...  http://www.io.org/~yuku  --
Most of the evils of life arise from man's being 
unable to sit still in a room    ||    B. Pascal

John Moore (ozone@primenet.com) wrote:
: On 22 Nov 1996 22:33:42 GMT, jbh@ILP.Physik.Uni-Essen.DE (Joshua B.
: Halpern) wrote:
: >Nope, you have the cart before the horse here.  The science
: >indicates that continuing as we are will most probably 
: POSSIBLY, not probably.
Ah yes, but the possibility/probability is well over 10 
or 20% in the near future, and much higher than that in
100 years or so (based on current understanding).  
: 
: >lead
: >to trouble, thus one should consider taking action, and might
: >be well advised to take no regrets types of actions now.
: 
: What are "no regrets" actions?
Things you would want to do anyhow, for other reasons
which also have the effect of reducing greenhouse 
emissions.
: >In particular, you should recognize that there will never
: >be a definitive answer before it is too late, only a set
: >of probabilities and predictions, which can only be checked
: >against past data.
: >
: >A major difficulty is that the modeling and data are only 
: >recently good enough to start putting trust into (no
: >more than five years ago), so there must be a shift
: >in the way we think about the situation.  
: 
: The future is likely to provide:
: 	-better predictions
: 	-better, less disruptive technology to provide amelioration,
: should it become necessary.
:
The future may also be too late.  Smaller actions taken today
will have the same effect as much larger one's taken later on.
These smaller actions, in net, will also be less disruptive.
NIP...
--
josh halpern

Dear Euthanist,
I hope this letter finds you well.  We have entered that difficult time
of year known as the "holiday season," beginning with the obscene and
historically inaccurate ritual of Thanksgiving, followed by rampant
consumerism and the hideous spectacle of Christmas.  For many of us the
enforced proximity to "family members" will only serve to remind us of
what is missing, and what has been lost.  To be American or European
today is to be rootless, and without connection to the land: few of us
have any tradition to return to, oral or otherwise.
    Nowhere is the celebration of Thanksgiving more inappropriate than
here, in Massachusetts.  I hope that after reading what Russell Means
has to say, you will be inspired to join me in a Thanksgiving day of
fasting, prayer, and mourning.  I also hope that you will join me in
boycotting Christmas, by celebrating the Winter Solstice instead, in the
traditional manner, without false sentiment, disposable dead trees,
wrapping paper, plastic trinkets or gadgets, but with reverence, and in
good company.
Yours,
Rev. Chris Korda
------------------------------------------------------------------------
When we met with the Wampanoag people, they told us that in researching
the history of Thanksgiving, they had confirmed the oral history passed
down through their generations.  Most Americans know that Massasoit,
chief of the Wampanoag, had welcomed the so-called Pilgrim Fathers--and
the seldom mentioned Pilgrim Mothers--to the shores where his people had
lived for millennia.  The Wampanoag taught the European colonists how to
live in our hemisphere by showing them what wild foods they could
gather, how, where, and what crops to plant, and how to harvest, dry,
and preserve them.
    The Wampanoag now wanted to remind white America of what had
happened after Massasoit's death.  He was succeeded by his son,
Metacomet, whom the colonists called "King" Philip.  In 1675-1676, to
show "gratitude" for what Massasoit's people had done for their father
and grandfathers, the Pilgrims manufactured an incident as a pretext to
justify disarming the Wampanoag.  The whites went after the Wampanoag
with guns, swords, cannons, and torches.  Most, including Metacomet,
were butchered.  His wife and son were sold into slavery in the West
Indies.  His body was hideously drawn and quartered.  For twenty-five
years afterward, Metacomet's skull was displayed on a pike above the
white's village.  The real legacy of the Pilgrim fathers is treachery.
    Most Americans today believe that Thanksgiving celebrates a
bountiful harvest, but that is not so.  By 1970, the Wampanoag had
turned up a copy of a Thanksgiving proclamation made by the governor of
the colony.  The text revealed the ugly truth: After a colonial militia
had returned from murdering the men, women, and children of an Indian
village, the governor proclaimed a holiday and feast to give thanks for
the massacre.  He also encouraged other colonies to do likewise--in
other words, every autumn after the crops are in, go kill Indians and
celebrate your murders with a feast.
    The Wampanoag we met at Plymouth came from everywhere in
Massachusetts.  Like many other eastern nations, theirs had been all but
wiped out.  The survivors found refuge in other Indian nations that had
not yet succumbed to European diseases or to violence.  The Wampanoag
went into hiding or joined the Six Nations or found homes among the
Delaware or Shawnee nations, to name a few.  Some also sought refuge in
one of the two hundred eastern-seaboard nations that were later
exterminated.  Nothing remains of those nations but their names, and
even some of those have been lost.  Other Wampanoag, who couldn't reach
another Indian nation, survived by intermarriage with black slaves or
freedmen.  It is hard to imagine a life so terrible that people would
choose instead, with all their progeny, to become slaves, but that is
exactly what they did.
--Russell Means, Where White Men Fear to Tread
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Church of Euthanasia           http://www.envirolink.org/orgs/coe/      
P.O.Box 261                         ftp.etext.org /pub/Zines/Snuffit
Somerville, MA 02143                        coe@netcom.com    

Nickname from the Vietnam War.
173d Airborne Brigade was known as the Herd.
All us paratrooper infantry types were sensitive guys as a casual
reading of history would show . . . 
jmc@Steam.stanford.edu (John McCarthy) wrote:
>One expects a non herdsman titling himself "herdsman" to be a
>sentimentalist - unless its us he wishes to herd.
>-- 
>John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
>http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/
>During the last years of the Second Millenium, the Earthmen complained
>a lot.
http://home.sprynet.com/sprynet/herdsman/hazwaste.htm

The increase in cancer that was reversed between 1990 and 1996 was in
age adjusted mortality rates, i.e. the fact that older people get more
cancer was taken into account.
-- 
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/
During the last years of the Second Millenium, the Earthmen complained
a lot.

Jeremy Whitlock (cz725@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) wrote:
: 
: William Royea (royea@cco.caltech.edu) writes:
: 
: [snip]
: >> Don't believe this estimate; it is a lie.  The internationally-accepted
: >> estimate for deaths due to Chernobyl since the accident is three (thyroid
: >> cancer cases).  There have been no observed increases in any other disease.
What was the immediate death toll, how much of it was radiation
related? and what are you taking as the date for after the
accident?  (release of radioactive materials went on for
a fairly long time). There were many fatalities among those who 
were involved in sealing the unit and since they got very
high doses, I imagine that the health of the survivors is
being followed closely.  ir hea, and does foue personelaf
: > 
Thanks for the other sources
josh halpern
-- 

Paul F. Dietz (dietz@interaccess.com) wrote:
: TL ADAMS  wrote:
: >gdy52150@prairie.lakes.com (gdy52150@prairie.lakes.com) wrote:
: 
NIP....: 
: Let's see: Pu239 has roughly 200,000x the alpha activity of U238.
: (Some other isotopes more, in particular Pu238.) The top meter of the
: earth's crust contains about 4 billion tons of uranium, as does the
The penetration depth (the average distance that the particle
will travel through something) for an alpha is a hell of a lot
less than 1 meter of dirt or rock.  Time to redo the calculation.
josh halpern
: 

On 23 Nov 1996 23:27:47 GMT, jmc@Steam.stanford.edu (John McCarthy)
wrote:
>1. The Eastern U.S. has a substantial fraction of the amount of forest
>it had 200 years ago.  Most likely, considerably more than half.  A
>good part of that is second growth on abandoned farmland, but that
>isn't pure enough for extremists to count.  They consider it
>contaminated by human activity.
When the Pilgrims first arrived, it is estimated that there were 1.1
billion acres of forested land in this country.  There are now about
730 million acres (a third less), and this is not a stable figure,
since population pressures demand more logging.  Recent gains in the
East have occurred only because the logging industry has shifted to
the Northwest - repeating the same process that decimated southeastern
forests by the 1930's.  
>2. "Thousands" is an exaggeration.  New York City occupies 308.9 square
>miles.  (Most environmentalists are two lazy to look anything up.)
>http://www.census.gov/statab/freq/95s0046.txt.  "Thousands" suggests
>at least 3,000.  This gives a million square miles, 1/3 the area of
>the U.S., but New York City has about 3 percent of the
>U.S. population, and much of the land area of the U.S. can't be
>regarded as supporting anything.
My "thousands" referred to the total scope of land acreage, transport
routes and other activity required to sustain an international city
like New York.  It was a gut-level remark, but the general principle
of land-use is quite valid. 
According to the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, in 1992 the 1.39 billion
acres of rural land in the lower 48 states, were comprised of:   27%
cropland, 29% rangeland, 29% forested land, 9% pasture-land and 6%
miscellaneous cover.  You cannot portray this as a trivial impact, nor
can you claim that it won't become greater as the population grows.
If you _don't care_ that Man is converting nature to a giant factory,
my aesthetic arguments are wasted.
>6. As the Netherlands, it is the second largest food exporter in the
>world (after the U.S.).  This is in dollars.  It is also a large food
>importer.
That can't be true.  How do you define "food?"  In bulk commodities
like wheat, rice and corn, the Netherlands doesn't even come close to
most European countries.  It simply doesn't have the land acreage to
achieve such status (it's only a third the size of New York state).
If the Netherlands holds an export record, it's only because they
import materials, convert them, and ship them back out again.  They
are not actually creating true wealth; only rearranging it and making
a paper profit as middlemen.  If every nation generated "wealth" like
the Netherlands, the entire world economy would be a pyramid scheme.  
And that's exactly what "The Netherlands Fallacy" referred to in the
first place.
- A.J.

skg@asis.com (Steve Gill) wrote:
>On Wed, 20 Nov 1996 B.Hamilton@irl.cri.nz (Bruce Hamilton) wrote:
>>Brian K Petroski  wrote:
>>>On 18 Nov 1996, John Spevacek wrote:
>>>> Wood burning stoves are notoriously bad for producing clean emissions. 
>>...
>>>  Where in the burning of wood is there any negative impact that is 
>>>not involed in the buring of coal or oil?  
>>
>>Firstly, organochlorine compounds - such as dioxins
>> ,....Wood burning of low ( not zero) environmental impact requires 
>>well-designed, high technology, stoves/furnaces.
..
>Bruce - what is the halogen source? It takes lots of chlorine to form
>dioxins, and wood is relatively halogen free.
>As long as you're not burning lots of PVC there's no dioxin production
>from woodstoves.....maybe PAH's, but not TCDD's.....
Such a positive statement :-).
From " The U.S.Dioxin Inventory: Are there missing sources?."
V.M.Thomas and T.G.Spiro
Environmental Science and Technology v.30 n.2 p82A-85A (1996 )
Figure 1 gives their estimate of dioxins ( g TEQ/year ) from 
residential wood burning as approx 200,  the fifth largest source, 
after Medical Waste Incineration ( 900 )
Municipal Waste Incineration ( 3000 ), Forest Fires ( 300 ) , and
Cement Kiln and Boilers ( 200 ), and well above petroleum combustion
( 50), and coal combustion (10). 
The EPA  reported a much lower value foir residential wood combustion
of 30, and a higher value for miost other sources, making it seventh
on their list, the data of which is included on the same figure. The 
authors report they expect the estimates to converge as more data
appears. Note that some people use their wood-fired systems to 
dispose of residential waste, and it is the estimates from such activities
that contribute to the variations, as the known emission from wood 
combustion by itseft don't disagree as much. The emission factors 
from wood stoves reported in the above range from 0.32ng/kg  ( for natural
beech ) to 1.9 ng/kg for a mixture of natural beech, birch and spruce ).
Household waste buring in a wood stove can have an emission of 
1400ng/kg, so small differences in that can have significant effects on the
variability.
The halogen source?, probably mainly chloride ions from salt-containing 
sap, but also could be some manmade organochlorinecompounds on the bark.
Note that the emission factors for forest fires are expected to be different,
because the combustion is not complete, and the bark and foliage will contain
more sap.
          Bruce Hamilton

Mike Asher (masher@tusc.net) wrote:
: TL ADAMS  wrote:
: > 
: > OOH ammonia, so dangerous.  Fish piss.  (End product of amine metab
: > is ammonia).  You better go out and warn the world of the fact that
: > ammonia is still a major player in industrial refrigs materials.  Ooh
: > scare stuff.
: 
: Actually, yes.  CFC's were introduced in the USA began in 1930, a year
: after an ammonia leak in a refrigerant system in a Cleveland hospital
: killed more than 100 people.
Ammonia is no fun at high concentrations, but as the man
said in large installations, where you can take safety
precautions, it is still in use as a refrigerant.  (Another
reason why firemen hate to fight fires at large meat freezing
plants besides the mega barbecue problem)  
OTOH, emitting a bit more ammonia into 
the air might be a good thing for a lot of reasons, including
increasing the average pH of rain.
: And you call yourself a good engineer?
Good chemical engineers play with dangerous stuff all the
time.  The bad ones tend to stop suddenly.
josh halpern
: 
: --
: Mike Asher
: masher@tusc.net
: 
: "In my own country, the UK, I like to point out that the average
: Englishman's garden occupies 1/10 of an acre.  By digging down 1 meter, we
: can extract six kilograms of thorium, two kilograms of uranium, and 7,000
: kilograms of potassium, all of them radioactive.  In a sense, all of that
: is radioactive waste, not man-made, but the residue left over when God
: created the planet."
:    - Walter, Lord Marshall of Goring, head of CEGB.
: 
-- 

Dangerous Animals
                               For Sale in City 
                               Turtles with salmonella sell,
                               despite federal ban 
                               By K.C. BAKER
                               Daily News Staff Writer
                                   M iniature turtles, banned by federal
authorities
                                    because they carry salmonella, are
being sold
                               openly on the streets of Chinatown and
elsewhere in
                               the city. 
                                                   The Daily News easily
                                                   bought two turtles in
the
                                                   Mott St. area and found
                                                   dozens of others just
by
                                                   asking. 
                                                   "The problem died down
                               about three years ago and is starting up
again," said
                               Mark MacDonald, a special investigator for
the
                               ASPCA Humane Law Enforcement Department. 
                               The turtles have been banned by the Food
and Drug
                               Administration since 1975 as a public
health threat
                               after thousands of children contracted
salmonella.
                               The small green creatures carry the
bacteria. 
                               When transmitted to humans, salmonella can
cause
                               vomiting, high fever and diarrhea. It can
even lead to
                               death in the elderly, people with weakened
immune
                               systems and those most likely to own the
turtles,
                               children. 
                               But the FDA ban spawned a black market for
the
                               turtles that has recently grown. 
                               "It wasn't a big black market until the
Teenage
                               Mutant Ninja Turtle craze in the early '90s
put turtles
                               back in the public eye," said Allen
Salzberg of the
                               New York Turtle and Tortoise Society. 
                               Law-breaking peddlers began appearing on
                               sidewalks to meet the new demand. 
                               In 1993, the ASPCA swept through Chinatown
and
                               other parts of the city, confiscating
hundreds of illegal
                               turtles. But they're now easily available
again. 
                               Some street vendors and shopkeepers in
Chinatown
                               sell the turtles openly. 
                               Like most sellers in Chinatown, a vendor
outside
                               Dynasty Clothing on Mott St. displayed his
40-plus
                               turtles in a plastic bowl. 
                               But customers in a gift shop on Mott St.
must
                               request the turtles, which are kept out of
sight. 
                               Prices range from $4 for one turtle to $15
for two,
                               including a case and food. 
                               Those vendors who spoke English gave
differing  
                               and erroneous   tips on how to care for the
turtles. 
                               None of the vendors warned customers to
wash their
                               hands with hot water and soap to prevent
the spread
                               of salmonella from hand to mouth. 
                               The ASPCA believes the turtles come from
farms in
                               Louisiana and Mississippi. 
                               In New York, police and ASPCA agents can
arrest
                               peddlers and slap them with summonses. 
                               Turtle sales can be reported to the ASPCA
Humane
                               Law Enforcement Department at (212)
876-7700,
                               extension 4452.