HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rsherme@nswc-wo.navy.mil (Russel Shermer)
Newsgroups: sci.research
Subject: FYI #96: FY 1993 ENERGY APPROPRIATIONS STATUS
Date: 24 Jul 92 17:56:16 GMT
Organization: Naval Surface Warfare Center - White Oak

Posted for:
Public Information Division
American Institute of Physics
Contact:  Audrey T. Leath
(202) 332-9662

Energy Funding Bill Gets Weighed Down in Senate; ITER Passes
Milestone

FYI No. 96, July 23, 1992

FY 1993 ENERGY APPROPRIATIONS STATUS:

On Tuesday, July 21, the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on
Energy and Water Development marked up their fiscal year 1993
spending bill, with a twist.  Subcommittee chairman J. Bennett
Johnston (D-Louisiana) tacked onto the appropriations bill much of
the texts of the House and Senate versions of a National Energy
Strategy bill.  Johnston, who is also the chair of the Energy and
Natural Resources Committee, reportedly took the action to ensure
that the controversial NES bills get to conference this year.

The Senate bill includes $550 million for the SSC.  While President
Bush requested $650 million, the House last month voted to
terminate funding for the project (see FYI #85.)  The bill next
goes to the full Senate Appropriations Committee.  The addition of
the NES bills will throw a monkey wrench into the process and could
delay passage of the legislation until after the Congress's August
recess.

ITER AGREEMENT SIGNED:

Also on Tuesday, Secretary of Energy James Watkins signed a 6-year
agreement pledging the US to continue working with Russia, Japan
and the European Community on ITER, the International Thermonuclear
Experimental Reactor.  Having completed three years of conceptual
design, the four partners will now proceed with the engineering
design for a magnetic fusion reactor test facility.  With
construction estimated at $5 billion, the project is considered too
costly for any one country to undertake.  The current phase is
expected to cost $1.2 billion over the six years, to be divided
equally among the participants.

One of the difficulties with an international project such as ITER
is balancing the geographic aspects: the project's director,
located in San Diego, is from France.  Three co-centers for
coordinating the R&D are to be located in Germany, Japan and San
Diego, while the seat of the oversight council is in Moscow.  If
ITER ever reaches its construction phase, bitter competition is
expected over selection of a site.
 
ITER, which is funded in the Energy and Water Development bill, is
considered an important step in the US's magnetic fusion program,
especially as reduced budgets have forced DOE to drop other
programs in the field.  ITER is also a component of the
Administration's proposed National Energy Strategy.  At the
Washington, D.C., signing ceremony, Watkins hailed the agreement as
"a milestone in the development of a safe, environmentally sound
energy source for the next century."


###############
Public Information Division
American Institute of Physics
Contact:  Audrey T. Leath
(202) 332-9662
##END##########
From: ggao@apee.ogi.edu (Gengying Gao)
Newsgroups: sci.research
Subject: What is Progress Program
Date: 27 Jul 92 03:57:53 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Oregon Graduate Institute, Applied Physics & Electrical Engineering, Beaverton

Is anybody here familiar with 'progress program' ?
Any information about books, papers, or discussion 
are very welcome. 
Thanks,
 
- Geny
ggao@apee.ogi.edu
Newsgroups: sci.research
From: flora@manfred.demon.co.uk ("<Full Name>")
Subject: ecai
Distribution: world
Organization: "The Captain"
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 04:54:59 +0000


Newsgroups: sci.research
From: flora@manfred.demon.co.uk ("<Full Name>")
Subject: ECAI
Distribution: world
Organization: "The Captain"
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 04:54:23 +0000


Newsgroups: sci.research,sci.math.stat,sci.math,sci.engr
From: packer@amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov (Charles Packer)
Subject: Re: Advice Needed : How to contain a net defamation campaign ?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Organization: Dept. of Independence
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 11:12:00 GMT

In article <92204.050230U53644@uicvm.uic.edu>, <U53644@uicvm.uic.edu> writes...
>All of which is almost the opposite of what I had actually said. Now, I
>immediately started getting volumes of fairly obscene hate mail, and found that
>I was being given a reputation that would be, to say the least, one that


Well, these newsgroups deal with quantifiable things, so how much
is "volumes"?

The point is, most of the world knows nothing about Usenet, let alone
cares, and I personally haven't seen any storm of abuse of any
kind last longer than, say, five days.
From: kohli@umbc1.umbc.edu
Newsgroups: sci.research
Subject: RE: Management Games/Simulation Packages: Info rqd
Date: 23 Jul 92 20:55:54 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland Baltimore County

Thanks for the information.  What does SMG stand for?  I tried calling
dir info, but they have no listing.  Sorry, I had to put this on the net, mail
to your account was undelivered.

Rajiv
Newsgroups: sci.research
Subject: Re: Repost of The '92 Election
From: ostrer@icbr.ufl.edu
Date: 21 Jul 92 20:52:59 -0500
Organization: ICBR


GB has not cut the NIH budget as suggested by the crass statement
of the original poster.  IN FACT his proposed budget was cut by
Congress.  Check it out.  Allan Bromley, dir of OSTP, has called
for an increase of 7 percent in Biotek over the current year. 
There is the Bush proposal.  I do not known about Clinton.  But as
he promises everthing to everyone I'm sure he's for increased spending
in biotek.
  
     Al Gore is another story.

At the Earth summit biotek was viewed as a preserve of the rich
countries which could only creat more problems for the developing
countries.  UNCED wanted to impose restrictions, essentially creating
an environment where American Biotek is not reviewed and regulated by
Americans but by an international agency.  It is worth noting that
Al Gore supported this.
     This is consistent with his history of conflict with this area of
science.  In the 1970s he was one of the Congressmen terrified, in
a Rifkenesqe manner, by the possible unimaginable dangers of 
recombinat DNA.  Luckly cooler heads pervailed.  In his book,Earth in
the Balance, he calls for "the rigorous and sophisticated technology 
assessment" panal to pay close attention to the costs and risks
associated with new technology.  Code words for bureaucratic super-
structure.
Al Gore's fundamentalist Christian philiosphy may be the underlying
reason for his mistrust of Biology.  I doubt that Human Gene Therapy
will proceed at its current rate under his appointees.


Newsgroups: sci.research
From: tchamov@sunran1.cern.ch (Nikolay Tchamov)
Subject: NEW-Projects 
Keywords: Electronics, Computers, Education, Research, Design
Organization: CERN European Lab for Particle Physics
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 09:21:46 GMT

***************************************************************************

                                 July 24th, 1992, CERN
                                 Geneve, Suisse/Switzerland


Dear Sirs,

I didn`t find a news-group(s) dealing with European Projects like
TEMPUS in example, except ESPRIT & EUROCHIP which is not much 
supplied by news and discusions. 

Do such News-groups exist, where someone can get up-to-date information
about European projects in the fields of :

  Electronics & Computers & Education & Research & Design ?

If not, please give a hint how to get Up-to-date E-mail information 
about projects like those handled by Brussels etc. 

It is too bad to get those informations by ordinary mail 
quite late (sometimes about 2 weeks before the time to apply).

Having such networks and losing some chances is too sad fact.

Thank you very much in advance for your help.

Sincerely,

Nick

--------------------------------------------------------- 
  P.S. Please reply either here (in this News-group) or
  directly to my E-mail address:

                    tchamovn@cernvm.cern.ch

****************************************************************************              

Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.physics
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Cost of public vs. private transportation
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<JMC.92Jul20201524@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
	<1992Jul22.121657.11970@aoa.aoa.utc.com>
Date: 22 Jul 92 09:15:22

The Interstate system is financed by the gasoline tax, more than 100
percent, I believe.  In fact the lawyers want to tap the gasoline
tax to finance their public transit boondoggles.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.physics
From: snyder@henry.ece.cmu.edu (John Snyder)
Subject: Re: Cost of public vs. private transportation
Organization: Physics Department, Carnegie Mellon University
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 08:01:16 GMT

In article <JMC.92Jul20215203@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>Except for putting a dollar value on accidents, I'm quite sure the
                                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>comparison has been made and it comes out in favor of private
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>transportation - taking into account the actual ridership of BART.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>--
>John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
>*
>He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

It appears that you are refusing to do the arithmetic and stating
belief instead.  According to your .sig, is your post therefore 
nonsense? (:^))

Sorry, but the curious combination of your post and your .sig
just had to be commented upon.

Have a nice day.

Woody
snyder@henry.ece.cmu.edu




Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.physics,sci.energy
From: scott@hpcvccl.cv.hp.com (Scott Linn)
Subject: Re: ZERO Nuclear impact (was: Is car pooling for real? etc)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 00:34:03 GMT

jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy) writes:
: 
: I dunno about Greenpeace, but Ralph Nader did try to ban microwave
: ovens for that reason.  If Nader is responsible for the slower
: penetration of microwave ovens in the U.S. as compared to Japan,
: he killed a lot of children.  No-one has been injured by a microwave
: oven, but the conventional cooking that might have been displaced
: partly by microwave cooking has proabably killed a few hundred
: children in the last 20 years.

How do the children die from conventional cooking, which could be
absolutely 100% eliminated by microwave cooking?

Scott Linn
scott@hpcvccl.cv.hp.com
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.physics,sci.energy
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: ZERO Nuclear impact (was: Is car pooling for real? etc)
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Date: 27 Jul 92 18:21:52

In article <1992Jul28.003403.5781@hpcvca.cv.hp.com> scott@hpcvccl.cv.hp.com (Scott Linn) writes:

   jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy) writes:
   : 
   : I dunno about Greenpeace, but Ralph Nader did try to ban microwave
   : ovens for that reason.  If Nader is responsible for the slower
   : penetration of microwave ovens in the U.S. as compared to Japan,
   : he killed a lot of children.  No-one has been injured by a microwave
   : oven, but the conventional cooking that might have been displaced
   : partly by microwave cooking has proabably killed a few hundred
   : children in the last 20 years.

   How do the children die from conventional cooking, which could be
   absolutely 100% eliminated by microwave cooking?

   Scott Linn
   scott@hpcvccl.cv.hp.com

Flames set fire to their houses, their clothing catches on fire,
they are poisoned by carbon monoxide, they pull pots of boiling
water off the stove on top of them, and they burn themselves (hardly
ever fatally) by touching the insides of ovens and electric burners
that are still hot.

Such accidents are not absolutel 100% eliminated by microwave cooking,
but what has that to do with my complaint about Nader?  Is his
responsibility for the consequences of his actions eliminated if
microwave ovens aren't absolutely 100% safe.

Consider his last gasp effort: a demand, I suppose a petition
to the consumer products safety people, that microwave ovens
be required to have a placard saying they may not be operated
by children.  That would have further reduced the sales of
microwave ovens and would have diverted some children to more
dangerous forms of cooking.

As a lawyer, Nader decides on his goals, and then looks for
evidence to support them.  In this case, he followed a New
York doctor whose theory that low level microwave radiation
caused illness was never confirmed by anyone else.  As a lawyer,
Nader looks only at phenomena that support his case, considering
it the responsibility of the opposing lawyer to find any
contrary evidence.

That's lawyers' science.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Electricity Efficiency
Date: 30 Jul 92 06:54:52 GMT
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
Distribution: usa
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera

In article <1992Jul28.215840.2753@vexcel.com>, dean@vexcel.com (dean alaska) writes:
>In article <1992Jul28.192405.837@cco.caltech.edu> carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU writes:
>>In article <1992Jul28.145630.1530@vexcel.com>, dean@vexcel.com (dean alaska) writes:
>>>I assume you support the one-step processing plan that appears likely
>>>to get federal approval.  Do you believe that this post-construction
>>>review process is not needed?  Are there no issues to examine after
>>>construction?  Are there no examples of falsified x-ray safety
>>>inspections?
>>
>>Can you provide a reference for your claim that the proposed one-step licensing
>>procedure does away with post-construction review?  Every newspaper reference
>>I've seen that went into any detail at all seemed to indicate that the proposed
>>procedure would still have the post-construction review.
>
>Isn't this what 1-step licensing means?  I have read about it in many
>places, usually blurbs in the press.  I will see if I have anything
>more substantial.

Everything I've read about the proposal in the newspapers appears to indicate
that one-step licensing means you submit your plans, they go through a review
process, and, if accepted, you then build your plant, and, if a
post-construction review shows that the plant was built to the approved
specification, you get to run it.  This is as opposed to the current process
where challenges to the design can be (and frequently are) made throughout the
process, and where a favorite tactic seems to be to bring up one objection at a
time, thus delaying construction by years, instead of making all challenges at
the outset.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.physics
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Cost of public vs. private transportation
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<1992Jul23.214040.18975@s1.gov>
Date: 23 Jul 92 16:49:10

I think I have crossed the Bay by BART at least once, and it was ok.
However, once I was going to Berkeley to be interviewed for some
radio show, so I asked the interviewer should I take BART from
South San Francisco or should I drive.  He said that he often takes
BART, but he wanted me to be sure to be on time, so I had better
drive.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Electricity Efficiency
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<JMC.92Jul24101907@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
	<1992Jul24.210145.5002@vexcel.com>
Distribution: usa
Date: 24 Jul 92 23:04:37

The only question of Dean Alaska's latest about which I want to comment
further is the question of why I don't give full credence to the
statements of The Union of Concerned Scientists.

They are a minority among scientists and engineers, and what brought
them together was more their opposition to the nuclear aspect of
American defense policy than opposition to nuclear energy, although
that also plays a role.  Their leader, Henry Kendall, is now
beginning to waffle a bit in his opposition to nuclear energy.

Back in the days when the nuclear energy debate was more active,
we lined up a lot more physics Nobel Prize winners than they did.

Now nobody is actively lining up anybody.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Breeder reactors (was Re: Is nuclear energy "polluting"? )
Date: 26 Jul 92 09:32:46 GMT

In article <JMC.92Jul25193152@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>, jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy) writes:

|> Well, I didn't think I would be in agreement with Victor Yodaiken
|> for very long.  According to what I read in _Nuclear News_, the
|> French breeder program is not considered by them an abysmal failure,
|> although it has had many more difficulties than expected.
|> 
|> Anyway, what's the point.  Does Victor Yodaiken think that breeder
|> reactors cannot be made to work?
|> 
|> Carter made two bad decisions.  The first was to cancel the American
|> Clinch River Breeder Project, which was obsolete because of the
|> delays imposed by legal guerrilla warfare.  (The antis found a judge
|> who said that an environmental impact statement for building the
|> reactor was inadequate.  Since one thing might lead to another, the
|> environmental impact statement had to cover a whole economy based
|> on breeder reactors.)  His other bad decision was to cancel reprocessing
|> of spent fuel rods to separate the uranium, plutonium, etc. from
|> the fission products.


I think you are both partially wrong.  The problems with the French program
don't show breeder reactors aren't feasible.  Indeed, it would be
surprising if none of the breeder reactor programs in the world were
trouble free.  What it shows is that the specific design used by the French
has had problems.

In the same sense, the fact that the Solar-1 power station in Barstow
produced electricity for > $.20/kWh, and had a major explosion and
fire in its thermal storage unit, doesn't show that solar thermal power
is infeasible.

However, I can't fault Carter for terminating Clinch River.  The breeder
program was predicated on the assumption that there would be an aggressive,
world-wide nuclear program that would lead to a shortage of uranium in the
near term.  That hasn't happened, and likely won't happen soon.  Breeder
reactors make little sense in a world of $20/lb uranium.  Similarly, reprocessing
makes little sense as a fuel source at current uranium prices (although
you could argue for it as a means of reducing interim spent fuel storage costs).
Fast breeders would require plutonium to start them off, but if one
is not planning to build fast breeders soon, that motivation for reprocessing
doesn't apply.

Note that Carter did *not* terminate US work on breeder reactors.  EBR-II
has been in operation for over 20 years, and has accumulated an impressive
record of reliability and low personel radiation exposure, as well as
demonstrating impressive passive safety features in the face of serious
accident tests.  This experience, along with work at Argonne on electrochemical
refining techniques for metallic spent fuel elements, has led to a design,
the Integral Fast Breeder, that is in many ways superior to the Clinch River
design.

	Paul F. Dietz
	dietz@cs.rochester.edu
From: Claire Gilbert <cgilbert@igc.org>
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Date: 20 Jul 92 20:25 PDT
Subject: Letters to the Editor:  Blazing Ta
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1466601724:000:2324
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!cgilbert    Jul 20 20:25:00 1992


                      Material herein from
         _Blazing Tattles_, Vol. 1, Issue 12, July 1992.
                 Published by Claire W. Gilbert

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:  KUDOS, GRATITUDE, and TECHNICAL COMMENTARY

                              KUDOS

     "Congratulations on your heroic one-woman publishing
operation."  --Geoffrey Fox, Author, New York, New York

     "Loved the newsletter on ozone....Keep up the good work."
--Hank Brandli, Author, Satellite Meteorology

     "The content of the Bellringer Issue of Blazing Tattles was
fascinating!"  --Joe Vialls, Australian Journalist

                            GRATITUDE

     "Many thanks for running our petition for The Rights of Future
Generations....This petition is now circulating in 27 counties."
--Mary Batten, Editor, Calypso Log,  The Cousteau Society

                      TECHNICAL COMMENTARY

     "Regards Kuwait and its smoke -- no significant fraction of
the smoke from Kuwait ever reached the jet stream.  Nobody thinks
differently to my knowledge.  The only argument is whether the
amount is minuscule or only very small.  In any event, the amounts
are far too small to have a climate effect.
--Lawrence F. Radke, Manager, Research Aviation Facility
  National Center for Atmospheric Research

     "Doug (Lowenthal) and I are convinced we did measure Kuwait
oil smoke in Hawaii....We show in our paper that it (detection) can
happen with the appropriate meteorology.  (Our work) suggests that
long range transport (of smoke) may even be possible at low
elevations, something completely ignored by other researchers...
     "...we take a definite aversion to all of the comments which
were made early on that the smoke could not travel far.  That was
nonsense.  The question which should have been asked was how far it
is transported and in what concentrations.  Did anyone argue about
the fact that debris from Chernobyl was detected virtually all over
the globe?  No.  In fact there is a layer of that debris in
glaciers all over the globe which scientists have and will use as
a date marker for years to come."  (See "Evidence for Long-Range
Transport of Aerosol from the Kuwaiti Oil Fires to Hawaii, Journal
of Geophysical Research, Special Issue, in press.)
--Randolph D. Borys, Associate Research Professor
  Desert Research Institute

Newsgroups: sci.environment