Newsgroup sci.environment 111103

Directory

              From September 1996 Blazing Tattles*
                      All rights reserved.
                  GOATSUCKERS FROM OUTER SPACE?
                      By Claire W. Gilbert
     Goatsuckers, weird life on the ocean floor from outer space,
life on Mars, and the shifting magnetic field of Earth!  All of
that in recent news.
     It's really hard, sometimes, to stay within Blazing Tattles'
publishing parameters.  Recently, I published some interesting
items about goatsuckers or chupacabras.  The chupacabra is a
hypothetical vampire creature which has been killing animals in
Mexico and other countries.  Every once in a while, something
sounds so interesting, that my enthusiasm leads me to include it in
the newsletter.  The goatsucker story was that kind of thing.  I
fell for that because I'm a Dracula buff.  
     Lee Gerstad, of New York City, taped a three-hour program from
a recent WBAI broadcast on the subject of the chupacabras, and sent
it to me.  It goes way beyond anything I imagined when I read and
published stories of the vampire creature that's been killing goats
and other animals.
     Essentially the program was about unidentified flying objects
(UFOs) and entities from outer space.  It claimed that these ani-
mals deaths are "animal mutilations."  These dead animals have been
found in more countries than originally reported in Blazing
Tattles.  The WBAI speakers said that only specific tissues were
removed from the animals as if the outer space entities were
gathering genetic materials.  A lot of evidence was presented to
support the UFO view.
     Linda Howe, who was on WBAI, provided a contact phone number
for those interested in her books and documentaries, or who wish to
report unusual phenomena: (800)707-9993.
  ================================================================
  * For sample copy of Blazing Tattles, please send self-addressed,
stamped envelope to Blazing Tattles, P.O. Box 1073, Half Moon Bay,
CA 94019, USA.  For people outside the U.S., you need to go to your
post office and purchase a postal coupon which I can take to the
U.S. Postal Service and exchange for air postage.  --C. Gilbert

jmc@Steam.stanford.edu (John McCarthy) wrote:
>According to the FAO Web page, China grew 45 million tons of
>potatoes in 1995, which was the largest potato production in the
>world.  The Russian Federation was next with 39 million tons.  By the
>way, the Netherlands grew 7.3 million tons.
>
>The Chinese yield per hectare on potatoes was 1/2 that of the US and
>1/3 that of the UK, indicating that the Chinese can get a lot more
>potatoes if they treat their peasants better.
You have a knack for ignoring the point. Whatever they are growing,
they are not growing on US or UK cropland. Attempts to match these
yields are what is causing large areas of land to be rendered useless
by salinization due to over-irrigation and continuing depletion of
non-renewable aquifers, among other things. 
If the peasants had ownership of this land, and knew that they were
going to pass it on to their children, they would hopefully make every
effort to ensure that they passed it on in good shape - not to
increase yields whatever the cost. 
>     Huge increases in yields in the past and our belief that
>     they are neverending ...
>
>What's this phony "our"?  McGinnis clearly doesn't include himself.
This is kind of trivial isn't it? Since I believe in democracy, I
accept that beliefs are being put to practice on my behalf whether I
agree with them or not.
Jason McGinnis

On 27 Nov 1996 02:53:01 GMT, sync@inforamp.net (J McGinnis) wrote:
>As far as the predicted numbers are concerned, the FAO has set a goal
>of reducing the number by a _minimum_ of 50% by 2015. The baseline
>they will use for that goal is the current estimate of 840 million.
>Let us hope that it happens.
Well, uh, the higher the baseline you start with, the easier it is to
demonstrate your awesome success afterwards.  Of course once they get
there, I imagine there will be a whole lot of back patting -- and not
a hell of a lot of praise for the seed companies, the fertilizer
folks, and the great agricultural universities which are making it
possible quite outside the conference cocktail party circuit.
>Only about 1/3 of those facing famine are in Africa, most of the rest
>are in South and Southeast Asia. Africa is considered to be more of a
>problem because the population is still doubling with each generation.
True a few years ago, but no longer the case (even without the AIDS
epidemic).  Children per mother has dropped from over six to between
three and four in Kenya, Uganda and Nigeria, the fast growing
countries.  Everywhere else is lower still, and the number is dropping
rapidly everywhere.
                                                                -dlj.

In article <24NOV199613433374@elroy.uh.edu>,
	st26h@elroy.uh.edu (JAMES BENTHALL) writes:
>No, I focus on reality.  Anyone that thinks you can continue to acquire
>infinitely expandable material wealth in a closed, finite system is day-
>dreaming.
We don't live in a closed or a finite system.  Point in any direction and you
could technically move in that direction forever, provided you had the proper
transportation.
Of course, I guess I'm just a sci-fi moron (which is the charge usually posted
when someone suggests expansion beyond the Earth).  However, remember that
100 years ago the idea of supersonic air travel would have gotten you locked
in a rubber room-- and that's not a long time.  20 years ago if you would have
shown up with a PC that could hole 16 megabytes of memory, 1.2gigs of hard
disk space, and process 16 million instructions per second, people would think
you were an alien.  Technological growth is exponential.
>So whats your plan for the future?  Do you think the Earth will
>allow everyone on it to live the material affluent lifestyle of the West,
>or should we continue with our plans of a global totalitarian state?  At
>the rate we're going we can't have the first (structural impossibility)
>and the second is intolerable (but probably inevitable).
With current population, the Earth could probably support almost everyone at
the affluent level of the West.

In article ,
	eqi@ritsec.com.eg (Bashar Safadi ) writes:
>I had the pleasure of being followed by about 12 skinheads 
>(or thereabout) who wanted to beat the hell out of me when 
>I was studying in England at Sheffiled University. That was 
>some years ago. I still remember to this date my feelings.
>I am good runner and that probably saved my life. Funny 
>enough, I am not even dark !!! They were shouting nigger
>nigger ....
>I will vote NO to any fanatic/fundamentalist group
>be it Nazi or otherwise. Life is too short for that kind of stuff.
>All this energy can be channelled into something more useful.
>and I can think of hundreds.
>Incidelntly a friend of mine was not lucky, He was beaten
>up and spent three month in hospital Broken jaw, face needed
>surgery  ...etc. He is Scottish !!!!! 
A perfect example of why this newsgroup should be created-- to bash Nazis.
Post this in the new Nazi newsgroup, while simultaniously crossposting it to
a few hundred other sensible newsgroups, and flood their group with anti-
Nazi postings.
In other words, an excellent place to show what idiots they are.  Kind of like
when alt.religion.scientology was created.. it became a place where ex-
scientology people would post their horror stories and skeptics would debunk
all the CoS postings.

Thomas H. Kunich wrote:
> 
> In article <57fs6s$bcs@wnnews1.netlink.net.nz>,
> Lawrence Boul  wrote:
> 
> >It's amazing with your firearm foreshortened lives that you manage to find the
> >time to think about the environment.
> 
> Another thing... I used to sell motorcycles and some of the people buying were
> a little, uh, not-quite-legitimate. One of these guys owned a car garage
> and while I was there getting some work done for my car I discovered that
> this guy sold all of the parts to make certain weapons fully automatic.
> (BTW it was perfectly legal to sell the parts as long as you didn't
> assemble them into a machine gun.)
> 
> Who were this guy's chief (almost total) customers? The cops. While I was
> there a cop bought a quite illegal bazooka. I didn't see the thing and
> so couldn't swear to it, but that was what he asked for and he received
> a box of the appropriate size.
> 
> I just remember that gun nuts like to collect these things for fun and
> the investment potential. If you use the parts/weapons you destroy their
> considerable value. (i.e. I sold one (1) Luger pistol, collector's version
> for $2,500 and this was considered to be one of the more common and
> cheap varieties. A friend sold a Sharp's baffalo gun for $25,000. I
> don't know much about this stuff and only invested on advise which obviously
> turned out to be quite QUITE correct.)
 just wondering.....
 what does this have to do with mountain BIKERS?????
oh, i see that it has been spammed acrss a whole bunch of 
newsgroups..... some people will never learn.

Harold Brashears wrote:
> 
> William Royea  wrote for all to see:
> 
> >Jeremy Whitlock wrote:
> >>
> >> William Royea (royea@cco.caltech.edu) writes:
> >>
> >> >> http://www.iaea.or.at/worldatom/thisweek/preview/chernobyl/concls17.html
> >>
> >> > Having visited the web site you gave me, the summary suggests approx 470
> >> > people have died from lukemia as a result of radiation exposure from
> >> > Chernobyl. That seems to contradict the statement that "There have been
> >> > no observed increases in any other disease."
> >>
> >> The number you're quoting is is the predicted number of excess leukaemia
> >> fatalities in the contaminated zones over the next 70 years, which would
> >> not be observed against the background of 25,000 leukaemia fatalities from
> >> other causes.  My statement stands correct.
> >
> >Your statement is correct in that there have been no OBSERVED increases
> >in any other disease, but its quite deceptive in that it suggests there
> >were no resulting increases in other diseases, when in fact there likely
> >was an unmeasurable increase.
> 
> I find that an interesting comment.  To paraphrase, it appears you are
> saying that, even though you cannot measure something, you remain
> confident it exists.
> 
> I would have to return that, if it cannot be measured, you do not know
> it, you simply have faith in it.
No. What I'm saying is that, in the event that something can't be
measured, I believe the value that is "theoretically" expected is a
better estimate than foolishly assuming that it doesn't exist.
The only thing that I would be puting faith in is that the value of 470
was arrived at sensibly.
William

It's good that wealthy rock star, noted scientist and environmental spokesperson Sting 
is so environmentally-sensitive. It's really important that Sting, who luvs the 
rainforest (not jungle!) and birds and wetlands (not swamps!) uses his private jet to 
flit between concerts. 
Gosh, we can't have Sting slumming it on commercial flights with the rest of us. He's 
worth that extra 20,000 gallons of jet fuel every day because, well, he's 
environmentally-sensitive.
Same with noted environmental scientist Woody Harrelson. We should all be so glad they 
care about the world we live in.
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
My World: http://www.concentric.net/~Slaroche/HOMEPAGE.HTM
Home of the Psychic Web Challenge and Fun With Bryant Gumbel!
"Absence of evidence is absence of evidence."
-----------------------------------------------------------------

In article <329B9AC2.1DDC@ix.netcom.com> mfriesel@ix.netcom.com writes:
 > 
 > scotterb@maine.maine.edu wrote:
 > > 
 > ....
 > 
 > > That's because markets are not perfect.  To claim they are would be to
 > > compare capitalism not to science, but to magic.  It's not a utopia, markets
 > > work better than planned economies,
 > 
 > I ask:
 > 
 > What makes you think that the economy we're calling capitalism isn't 
 > planned?  It always struck me as being planned quite well and for a long 
 > time.  The time came to implement it and it was implemented.  If so, I 
 > am very interested in finding out who in particular planned this 
 > economy, because I have a very long list of grievances to nail to their 
 > collective foreheads.
Please add a grievance for me.  It isn't even 7pm here, and it is
already dark.  It gets dark too soon in Winter.  I figure its the same
planner.
-- 
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.

In article <574l61$hqj@news.inforamp.net>, kevin kelly
 commented on save grocery:
> save@grocery.com wrote:
> > 
> > You begin by subscribing to our unique "Coupons-By-Choice" service. For
> > a subscription fee of just $20 per month you will  receive one of our
> 
> What a great idea. Do you have a money off coupon on your subscription. 
> 
> there's one born every minute.
Considering the amount of e-junk I get every day, I think Kevin is off in
his estimate of how many are born every minute. 
I have to admit that what I like about e-junk is that it is easy to get rid of.
Jim Scanlon
-- 

              From September 1996 Blazing Tattles*
                      All rights reserved.
              "HAZE" BY ANY OTHER NAME IS "SMOKE"**
     "Airline pilot Walter Guthrie calls on the National Weather
Service to stop saying that `dust, pollen and pollution' are the
`chief causes' of `haze.'  He feels that "[t]he dominant cause of
this obscuration is `industrial smoke or pollution' and that dust
and pollen play a very small part -- the Weather Service should
call it `smoke.'"~
     **"Hazy Weather Report [Letters]."  New York Times, 26 August
96, 14.  Provided by Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
(OPPT) Library, U.S. EPA OPPT NEWSBREAK Current Awareness Service.
  ================================================================
     *For sample copy of Blazing Tattles, please send self-addressed,
stamped envelope to Blazing Tattles, P.O. Box 1073, Half Moon Bay, CA
94019, USA.  For people outside the U.S., you need to go to your post
office and purchase a postal coupon which I can take to the U.S. Postal
Service and exchange for air postage.  --C. Gilbert

               From October 1996 Blazing Tattles*
                      All rights reserved.
                       ORGANIC SALES JUMP
            Pesticide Action Network North America**
     Sales of U.S. organic products in 1995 increased 22% over
1994, according to a survey conducted by Natural Foods Merchandiser
(NFM), an industry journal.  Organic sales increased from US$2.31
billion in 1994 to US$2.8 billion in 1995.  This is the sixth year
that the market for organic products has experienced greater than
20% growth. 
     The journal said that several factors contributed to the
continuing growth; including a widening consumer base, expansion by
natural products retailers, greater mainstream acceptance, and
increasing organic acreage.  In addition, natural food industry
members said that regional and national promotional campaigns, such
as the Organic Trade Association's Organic Harvest Month
promotions, have helped bring in new customers.
     Positive coverage by national magazines may have also
contributed to the growth.  NFM pointed out that U.S. News and
World Report, National Geographic and Food and Wine all ran
supportive articles on organics in 1995. 
     Natural product stores led the U.S. organic market with $1.87
billion in sales, followed by direct farm and export sales ($714.8
million combined) and mass-market outlets ($210 million). "Natural
product stores" refers to retailers specializing in natural,
organic and health food items.
     Organics accounted for 31% of retail sales in these stores in
1995.  Fresh organic produce represented approximately 25% of
organic sales in natural product retailers, bringing in $402
million in sales, up 21% from 1994.
     Other important organic products included bulk foods, frozen
foods, drinks and dairy products. According to NFM, short supplies
of organic milk in 1994 led to greater production last year, and
dairy sales climbed to $30 million.  Organic clothing accounted for
$2.5 million in sales from these stores.  Organic herbs, vitamins
and supplements led the organic market in terms of growth rate with
a 33% increase in sales. 
     Mainstream supermarkets have also become significant purveyors
of organic products.  According to the survey, mass-market organic
sales reached $210 million in 1995. NFM pointed out that a 1995
survey by The Packer, a mainstream produce trade journal, found
that 54% of respondents said their supermarkets sell organic
produce, and that some retailers estimate supermarkets can earn
10-15% more by selling organics.
     Statistics for direct farm and export sales ($714.8 million
combined) are based on conservative estimates, rather than hard
data, partly because the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) does
not track direct farm-to-consumer or export sales of organic prod-
ucts.  According to Bob Scowcroft of the Organic Farming Research
Foundation,  "USDA has not gained a firm grasp on organic exports,
even though they track exports for every other commodity. Their
commitment to do this is past due."
     Industry experts report that organic sales to Pacific Rim
countries, Japan in particular, have boomed in recent years. 
     USDA provides estimates of organic farm acreage in the U.S.,
placing total organic cropland at approximately 1,127,000 acres in
1996, up from an estimated 550,267 acres in 1991. The number of
organic farmers almost doubled between 1991 and 1994, increasing
from 2,841 to 4,060.
     Source: "Widening Market Carries Organic Sales to $2.8 Billion
in 1995," Natural Foods Merchandiser, June 1996.
     **PANNA, 116 New Montgomery, #810, San Francisco, CA 94105.
  ================================================================
  * For sample copy of Blazing Tattles, please send self-addressed,
stamped envelope to Blazing Tattles, P.O. Box 1073, Half Moon Bay,
CA 94019, USA.  For people outside the U.S., you need to go to your
post office and purchase a postal coupon which I can take to the
U.S. Postal Service and exchange for air postage.  --C. Gilbert

I recently received an article from the Staten Island Advance dated
Thursday October 24, 1996 concerning the Fresh Kills Sanitary Landfill,
the site where more than 13,000 metric tons a day of New York City's
garbage is dumped. This is the biggest dump in the history of the world
which, I understand is visable from the moon.
AVALANCHE OF TRASH
3 LANDFILL HILLS WERE CLOSE TO COLLAPSE.
Dumping moved elsewhere to allow those sites to settle.
By Craig Schneider
"Several slopes at the Fresh Kills landfill recently came 'perilously
close' to collapsing and potentially sending an avalanche of trash into
the West Shore Expressway, Muldoon Avenue and Richmond Creek, officials
said"
"There was no collapse. But it was getting perilously close to falling
below the factor of safety"
The article goes on to state that three slopes had been unstable for the
past year and officials moved the dumping site. It speculated on how the
collapse might play out and how stability is monitored.
There was a description of the collapse of a large dump in the village of
O Portino in Spain [this name uses the Portuguese definite article "O" and
might be in Portugal J.S.] Apparently one person was killed and it was
called "an environmental nightmare."
Getting back to Staten Island, the article said the Fresh Kills dump is
3,000 acres and ..."is big enough to hold "25 Yankee Stadiums" and it,
"spews 600 tons of hazardous air pollutants a year, 10 % of which are
recovered... and spills over a million gallons a day of polluted water
into surrounding waterways" [the Arthur Kill which forms the border with
New Jersey from Bayonne to Elizabeth to Perth Amboy. J.S.]
Recently the Borough President of Richmond (Staten Island) Guy Molinari, a
Republican and father of Representative Susan ( who with her infant in her
arms, led off the Republican Convention this year) recently released a
local study which concluded that the dump could be closed in 2002 as
Republican Mayor Rudolph Guiliani promised. Molinary  said closing the
dump, "is doable and affordable but transportation will take a lot of
cooperation"
Saying that something is "doable" but "will take a lot of cooperation" in
New York, is saying it will never happen. In the unlikely event that it is
closed, it will sit there slowly subsiding for...who knows?
New York City produces 26,000 metric tons of garbage a day. 12,000 are
hauled away by private firms, 1,000 are recycled and the remaining 13,000
are barged to Staten Island (with the smallest number of voters) where the
highest point on the Eastern Coast of our country is slowly rising (and
apparently slipping)
What to do with the "avalanche of trash", visable and invisable, that is
produced, consumed and discarded is a major unsolved burdeming the future.
Regards, Jim Scanlon
-- 

andrewt@cs.su.oz.au (Andrew Taylor) wrote:
>Alas, I've no knowledge of thermodynamics so I can't evaluate the
>relevance of the second law to energy transfer between trophic levels.
For some reason this did not prevent you from presenting your opinion
on the issue, and concluding Prof. McCarthy was incorrect.  I wonder
how you reached this conclusion (meditation? flipping a coin? simply
from personal dislike?)
Perhaps you should refrain from criticizing others on issues about
which you admit you have no knowledge.
	Paul

McGinnis says that China doesn't grow potatoes, and I say the FAO says
that China grows the most potatoes in the world, and McGinnis says I
have a knack for ignoring the point.  He has a knack for ignoring the
facts.
It seems to me that earlier in the thread there was a statement that
the number of malnourished had doubled.  At least we are now not so
far apart on the number of malnourished.
     Note that the figures for 69-71 were before the last
     international food conference in '74, at which time mass
     famine was being faced in many areas. This resulted in
     substantial efforts by the world community and hence 'the
     green revolution'. These efforts didn't last, and my
     original point that things have been getting worse for the
     past decade or so stands.
As for the Green Revolution, it was certainly not the result of a
conference in 1974.  It is referred to in Ehrlich's 1968 _Population
Bomb_.  In fact the Rice Research Center was established in 1962 and
continues its work.  I don't think McGinnis's original point stands.
-- 
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.

In article <57g3k1$ba5@van1s03.cyberion.com>,
Rodolfo V. Moreno  wrote:
>
>From the desk of Wyoming Instruments/ Victory Marketing:
>
>
>This fuel vaporizer converts liquid gas into a vapor before 
>entering the carburator and spark chamber.
>This means less fuel is needed, since a spark ignites only fuel vapor and 
>often leaves much liquid fuel uncombusted.
Um. Two words: "fuel injection".
Sheesh. Do modern cars even have carburetors anymore?
-- 
    ********** DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@netcom.com) **********
    *               Daly City California                  *
    *   Between San Francisco and South San Francisco     *
    *******************************************************

John McCarthy wrote:
> 
> What Len misses is the importance of invention as an active
> intellectual process and not just a byproduct of science.  Len's
> babble about "an engineering miracle" shows a disdain for engineering.
>
What appears as disdain to one man may appear as prudence to another.  
> In case of Antarctica, the size of the icecap is regulated by a
> balance between an extremely small amount of snowfall and its
> evaporation and flow into the sea.  If humanity needs to change that
> balance, then pumping water onto the icecap to freeze can do it.  It
> would be very expensive, but a technologically progressive humanity
> could do it.  It would be beyond the capability of the cringing
> humanity advocated by those who want to shrink human society.
> 
This is a straw man. 
> Quite apart from global warming, sea level has been high before and
> could rise again.  The rate of change is slow enough now, so we can
> afford to wait.
> 
Sea level rise is only one potential harmful effect of climate change.
Also, what exactly are we supposed to be waiting for?  There aren't
likely to be any sudden catastrophic events which will tip the balance
inevnitably in favor of action.   Of if they are, they will probably be
due to misunderstandings of the causes of the actual events.   I agree
that as far as sea level rise is concerned, we can afford to wait before
taking drastic measures.  I don't see why we have to wait before taking
any measures, no matter how moderate, particularly if they make sense in
their own right.
>I once calculated the cost of moving the Greenland icecap to
> Antarctica by melting it in place with coal dust and pumping a
> corresponding amount of water onto Antarctica.  I figure humanity will
> be ready for such large projects in one or two hundred years.
>
Well, I guess that settles it then.   We can all rest easy about the
matter because of your calculations which of course must be right.
-- 
Leonard Evens       len@math.nwu.edu      491-5537
Department of Mathematics, Norwthwestern University
Evanston Illinois

Hi!  I am doing a survey for a project for my English class.  This
survey will have enviromental subjects related to my surveys!  The
survey(s) are:  Do you think that electronics will be better for the
future, or worse?  Yes or No.
Do you think that electronics has "power" over us?  A simple yes or no
would be fine.
Please e-mail your results to: harmyd@wco.com
Thank You For Your Time,
Harminder Dhesi
harmyd@wco.com

Hi!  I am doing a survey for a project for my English class.  This
survey will have enviromental subjects related to my surveys!  The
survey(s) are:  Do you think that electronics will be better for the
future, or worse?  Yes or No.
Do you think that electronics has "power" over us?  A simple yes or no
would be fine.
Please e-mail your results to: harmyd@wco.com
Thank You For Your Time,
Harminder Dhesi
harmyd@wco.com

Ron Schmitz wrote:
> 
> I am interested in getting info related to stack emission standards
> for waste incinerators in Canada and the U.S., specifically for
> benzene, toluene (methyl benzene), furan (oxole) and thiophene
> (thiofuran).  Can anyone help?
None of the United States standards, either existing or proposed,
contain any numerical emission limitations for the compounds 
named.
There are proposed and existing standards for chlorinated
dibenzo furans, stated as TCDD toxic equivalents.
The volatile organic compounds are only regulated as total
hydrocarbon emissions and not specifically by compound.
Alex Sagady
Environmental Consultant
asagady@sojourn.com

Here is some information published by the American
Lung Association concerning the need for new, more 
stringent ozone/smog National health-related air quality
standards.
--------------
Why EPA Must Set a Tight Ozone Standard
Background
According to the Clean Air Act, the National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS) for ozone must be set at a level adequate to protect health
with a *margin of safety*.  This margin is intended to compensate for
what Congress recognized as the incomplete state of our knowledge
about the adverse effects of air pollution and the long-term effects of
chronic exposure to air pollutants. This standard is also intended to
protect sensitive groups, such as people with asthma or emphysema,
children, and elderly people, who are adversely affected by ambient
levels of air pollution at lower concentrations than will adversely 
affect
the average healthy adult. Nearly one third of our citizens are among
these sensitive groups that  react to ozone at low concentrations. 
Ozone also affects healthy exercising adults at relatively low
concentrations.  
Ozone is an invisible gas so toxic at high concentrations that it was 
once
widely used to sterilize laboratory instruments and is still employed by
many cities to disinfect drinking water.  At levels routinely encountered 
in
most cities, ozone damages the  lungs and airways causing them to
redden and swell.  This can cause coughing and burning sensation and
shortness of breath.  Prolonged ozone exposure increases susceptibility
to bacterial infections.  Over time, scars and lesions form in the 
airways. 
In lab animals, exposure to ozone causes premature aging of the lungs
and, at high exposure levels, may promote the developments of some
cancers.
Numerous epidemiological studies have documented that as ozone levels
rise, so to do emergency room visits and hospital admissions.  At ozone
levels 33 percent  below the current NAAQS standard children at
summer camp and healthy exercising adults can not breathe normally,
suffering from shortness of breath, coughing, painful breathing and loss
of lung function.   
EPA first set a NAAQS for photochemical oxidants, of which ozone is a
major component, in 1971 at 0.08 parts per million(ppm) averaged over
one hour.  EPA revised this standard in 1979 to an ozone-only standard
at 0.12 ppm, weakening the standard by 50 percent.  In 1993, in
response to a court- ordered review schedule,  EPA decided not to
change the ozone NAAQS in any way.  Since EPA*s decision was based
on scientific information that was at least five years out of date, EPA
volunteered to undertake an *expeditious* review of the ozone NAAQS
again, to include the most recent studies available, with a final 
decision
by mid-1997. 
The Current Ozone NAAQS Does Not Protect Healthy or
Vulnerable People from Adverse Effects of Ozone
Ozone effects on lung function, acute respiratory function and
medication use, and emergency room visits and hospital admissions have
been documented in numerous studies among people exposed to ozone
levels one third below the current NAAQS .  The results of lab animal and
clinical studies of humans are consistent with the findings in
epidemiological studies.  Much of research indicates that long term
exposure to high levels of ozone may result in permanent lung damage,
not just periodic temporary acute effects.
Delay In Setting a Tighter Ozone NAAQS Will Delay Needed
Strategies To Reduce Many Tens of Thousand of Emergency
Room Visits and Hospitalizations Linked to Ozone 
An ALA study of 13 cities linked ozone pollution to seven percent of all
respiratory hospital admissions, approximately 10,000 to 15,000 each
year.  Between 30,000 and 50,000 emergency room visits were
attributable to exposure to ozone during the summer months.  These
hospitalization rates were found even in cities that rarely violated the
current NAAQS for ozone.  If these findings are representative of urban
areas nationwide, many tens of thousands of hospitalizations and
emergency room visists can be linked to summertime ozone levels.
The Body of Data Showing Harmful Effects of Ozone Is Larger
Than Data Used For Setting NAAQS Standards In The Past
This body of research includes over 350 studies involving a wide variety
of laboratory animal, controlled human exposure, and epidemiological
studies. Some of the more recent research has prompted great concern
over human exposure to lower levels of ozone over longer periods.  The
Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) endorsed the
establishment of an ozone NAAQS measured over eight hours to
respond to concerns over the public health threat posed by prolonged
ozone episodes. 
Industry*s Claim That Adopting An 8-Hour NAAQS For Ozone
Would Not Provide Greater Public Health Protection Is Not
Supported By Scientist Reviewers
The Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) unanimously
supported replacing the current ozone NAAQS with an eight-hour
standard.  CASAC also found the range of concentrations (0.07-0.09)
and number of allowable exceedances(1-5) proposed for review by EPA
to be  *appropriate* for the protection of public health and that the
selection of a specific level and number of allowable exceedances is an
EPA policy judgment.   
The ALA Recommends that EPA set a NAAQS standard for
ozone of 0.070 parts per million, measured over an eight hour
average.  EPA should retain the current one exceedance per
year averaged over three years as the system for enforcing the
standard.

Here is information from the American Lung Association 
concerning the need for a new, more stringent health-
related air quality standard to control human exposure
to particulate matter.   A prior message discussed 
the need for a stronger ozone standard.
=================
Why EPA Must Set a Tight Particulate Standard
Background
According to the Clean Air Act, the National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM) must be set at a level adequate to
protect public health with a "margin of safety". This margin is intended 
to
compensate for what Congress recognized as the incomplete state of
our knowledge about the adverse effects of air pollution and the
long-term effects of chronic exposure to air pollutants. This standard is
also intended to protect sensitive groups, such as people with asthma or
emphysema, children, and elderly people, who are adversely affected by
ambient levels of air pollution at lower concentrations than will 
adversely
affect the average healthy adult.  It is believed that nearly one third 
of our
citizens are among these sensitive groups that react to PM at lower
concentrations than health adults.
The health effects of PM are determined by the size and composition of
the particles. Larger particles are trapped in the nose and throat and 
are
expelled.  Particulates formed by burning coal, gasoline, oil and diesel 
are
so microscopically small that they can penetrate to the deepest recesses
of the lung where they lodge for months or even years.  EPA issued a
NAAQS for PM10 in 1987, but a large and growing body of evidence
links smaller particles to premature death has lead to the effort to
establish in NAAQS for PM2.5.  EPA's Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee overwhelmingly supported the establishment of a PM2.5
NAAQS.
Epidemiological studies have found that as particulate levels increase,
bronchitis and chronic cough increase in school children, acute
respiratory systems and illness increases among adults and emergency
room visits and hospital admissions increase.  Most alarmingly, recent
studies in 17 cities on three continents have found an association
between PM and increases in premature daily mortality.
The Current PM10 NAAQS Does Not Protect Healthy or
Vulnerable People From Fine Particle Air Pollutants
PM effects on lung function, acute respiratory function and medication
use, mortality and hospital admissions have been documented in
numerous studies at levels well below the current 24-hour NAAQS for
PM10.  These effects have been observed in widely differing locations,
seasons, weather conditions and using a variety of methodologies.  The
consistency of the findings suggest
other factors such as climate, other pollutants or unknown factors are
not causing these effects.  
Delay In Setting a PM2.5 NAAQS Will Delay Needed Strategies To
Reduce Over 60,000 Premature Deaths and Hundreds of
Thousands of Hospital Visits Linked to PM Each Year
Currently, only 25 areas have monitored particulate levels that exceed
the  standard for PM10 (24-hour standard).  Using average mortality
rates found in one of the largest epidemiological studies, the Natural
Resources Defense Council estimated total annual premature mortality
attributable to particulate pollution to be  about 64,000, nationally.  
The Body Of Data Showing Harmful Effects Of Particulate
Pollution Is Larger Than That Available For Setting  Standards In
The Past.
The body of research documenting the adverse impact particulate
pollution has on acute respiratory symptoms, illness and death is greater
today than the body of information available any time in the history of 
the
Clean Air Act when previous  standards were set for particulate
pollution. Some of many dozens of these studies were very broad and
extensive.  One study linked ambient air pollution data with information
from an American Cancer Society data base of 550,000 adults from all
50 states whose health histories were followed for seven years.  The
study, after accounting for smoking, obesity, age, alcohol use and other
potentially confounding factors, found people living in the most polluted
city had a 17 percent greater risk of premature mortality due to PM
exposure than the people living in the least polluted city.    
Industry Calls for Proving Causation is a Smoke Screen - Just
As in Cigarette Smoke, We Do Not Need To Know How PM
Causes Harm to Know That Reducing Exposure Will Save Lives
The establishment of the  standard for PM2.5 acknowledges that fine
particle pollution at levels commonly found in areas nation-wide is
threatening public health.  This is simply the first step in a multi-year
process which will result in the development and implementation of
strategies to reduce fine particle pollution and protect our citizens.
Industry would delay moving more aggressively to save lives pending a
search for the biological explanation of how particulates contribute to
premature death which could take years. The call for elucidating
*causation* is simply a prescription for delay.
The ALA recommends that EPA set a NAAQS  standard for PM2.5
of 18 micrograms/cubic meter averaged over 24 hours, and 10
micrograms/cubic meter annually.  EPA should retain the
current and strengthen PM10 standards.  The ALA
recommends the current one exceedance per year averaged
over three years be retained as the system for enforcing the
standards.

Jim Scanlon (jscanlon@linex.com) wrote:
: I recently received an article from the Staten Island Advance dated
: Thursday October 24, 1996 concerning the Fresh Kills Sanitary Landfill,
: the site where more than 13,000 metric tons a day of New York City's
: garbage is dumped. This is the biggest dump in the history of the world
: which, I understand is visable from the moon.
Of course the world is visible from the moon!
Since you posted this to a journalism newsgroup, I took the liberty of
commenting on your awkward sentence construction!

======================================================================
*  David H. Citron  *  Tech Writer/Journalist/Copywriter/Web Author  *
            * a/k/a the CyberCurmudgeon syndicated columnist *
                      * e-mail: dcitron@univox.com *
 CyberCurmudgeon Archive ** http://www.univox.com/writer/archive.html
======================================================================
   "A word can have many meanings, but means nothing 
    until it is shared."                    ...BellSouth TV Commercial
======================================================================

Paul F. Dietz wrote:
> 
> Perhaps you should refrain from criticizing others on issues about
> which you admit you have no knowledge.
> 
I note:
Since Mr. McCarthy knows effectively no thermodynamics, perhaps you 
should steer your criticism towards him as well.

On 26 Nov 1996 20:19:03 GMT, jmc@Steam.stanford.edu (John McCarthy) wrote:
> S. P. Browne wails about nuclear powered aircraft:
> 
>      How would you cool the rods on a such a plane? Would you
>      need a water cooling tank and would this not weigh a
>      considerable amount ?  What would happen if something where
>      to go wrong ?  We have seen what has happened with Nuclear
>      submarines such as the recent reports about an ex-Soviet
>      sub. Would it just not be a flying Nuclear bomb.And how
>      would you discard the plane when it's life ran out ? Encase
>      it in concrete and bury it for the downfall of future
>      generations ?
> 
> Which of the above questions would S. P. Browne suppose were not
> considered even before the first experiments aimed at nuclear powered
> aircraft were made?
All were considered, then ignored. The project was silly on its face.
And how would you discard a nuclear power plant when it's life
ran out?  I dunno. That's the next generation's problem.
John's profound confidence in governments continues to astonish.
---------------------------------------
Mason A Clark      masonc@ix.netcom.com
  www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/3210    
or:    www.netcom.com/~masonc (maybe)
Political-Economics, Comets, Weather
The Healing Wisdom of Dr. P.P.Quimby
---------------------------------

On 26 Nov 1996 20:19:03 GMT, jmc@Steam.stanford.edu (John McCarthy) wrote:
> S. P. Browne wails about nuclear powered aircraft:
> 
>      How would you cool the rods on a such a plane? Would you
>      need a water cooling tank and would this not weigh a
>      considerable amount ?  What would happen if something where
>      to go wrong ?  We have seen what has happened with Nuclear
>      submarines such as the recent reports about an ex-Soviet
>      sub. Would it just not be a flying Nuclear bomb.And how
>      would you discard the plane when it's life ran out ? Encase
>      it in concrete and bury it for the downfall of future
>      generations ?
> 
> Which of the above questions would S. P. Browne suppose were not
> considered even before the first experiments aimed at nuclear powered
> aircraft were made?
All were considered, then ignored. The project was silly on its face.
And how would you discard a nuclear power plant when it's life
ran out?  I dunno. That's the next generation's problem.
John's profound confidence in governments continues to astonish.
---------------------------------------
Mason A Clark      masonc@ix.netcom.com
  www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/3210    
or:    www.netcom.com/~masonc (maybe)
Political-Economics, Comets, Weather
The Healing Wisdom of Dr. P.P.Quimby
---------------------------------

Alex J. Sagady  wrote:
> >Ron Schmitz wrote:
> > 
> > I am interested in getting info related to stack emission standards
> > for waste incinerators in Canada and the U.S., specifically for
> > benzene, toluene (methyl benzene), furan (oxole) and thiophene
> > (thiofuran).  Can anyone help?
> 
> None of the United States standards, either existing or proposed,
> contain any numerical emission limitations for the compounds 
> named.
This is a incorrect to some extent.  Benzene and toluene are both
regulated at the level of permissable exposure at the fenceline of the
facility (a set amount).  The facilities compliance with this criteria is
determined by air dispersion modeling in conjunction with emission
test results under the maximum firing/waste feed rates.  Benzene is
further limited under aggregate risk impacts for carcinogenic 
compounds.   Do not know if the furan and thiophene are on the list.
-- 
Sam McClintock                   scmcclintock@ipass.net
Director, En-Vision Inc.         Raleigh, North Carolina
(919) 847-3688                     (919) 847-6339 (fax)

Dear Reader:
In a letter to the editor (The Globe and Mail, Toronto, Canada) on the
topic of Stakeholders' Capitalism, the writer referred to Peter Drucker to
have written: " a successful company maximizes the organization's
wealth-producing capacity".
Could some one please tell me the Drucker book from which this quote came?
Thank you.
Peter R. Downing
--
TG INTERNATIONAL LTD.
Corporate Sustainable Development, Management Consultants
P.O. Box 38120, 1430 Prince of Wales Drive
Ottawa, Ontario Canada K2C 1N0   Tel/Fax: (613) 225-7204

Steve Shelton wrote:
> 
> Josh Olaf wrote:
> >
> > John McCarthy wrote:
> > >
> > > I unsuccessfully tried the recommended site on two successive days.
> > > --
> > > 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.
> >
> > Interesting.  I just read your message and then tried the address
> > again.  For some reason or another, that site is now down.  This was
> > not the case when I posted the URL, which was correct AFAIK.
> >
> > Josh
> 
> I just got into the site , some great info that looks like it deserves
> some looking into.
Great!  I'll post the URL again for those who want to visit the link
but missed the original post:
Energy Info
http://www.digitalnation.com/byronw/
Josh

Amazing, I post an honest question and apart from some nice folks who 
e-mailed me I get attacked????!!!
I am amazed by the sheer miserable, negative and vicious elements in 
cyberland. 
Bollox to technology if this is what it leads to.