HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Stratospheric O3, Human Factors
Keywords: research problem, O3, CO2, models, data, implications
Date: 15 Aug 92 17:01:34 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <1992Aug12.183850.2520@mont.cs.missouri.edu> bynum@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Frank Bynum) writes:
>
>         Trace gas concentration changes can be particularly important 
>in determining EM radiative transport through our atmosphere.  It works 
>at the level of spectral distribution of transmission and absorption of 
>solar input and thermal re-radiation.  
[deleted]
>         NO and Cl, photochemically released from various compounds, 
>undergo reactions which deplete O3 at stratospheric altitudes.  In 
>further steps, NO and Cl can be regenerated, able to catalase more O3 
>removal.  Factors of ~ 1E4 for moles O3 removed per mole of Cl supplied 
>(from sources including HCl and Freon) have been reported in the 
>technical literature about atmospheric chemistry of ozone.  (_Current 
>State of Knowledge of the Upper Atmosphere_, in various editions 
>released every few years since 1989, is a NASA publication with coverage 
>of recent studies.)  
>         Hence, atmospheric transparency to solar UVB light may be 
>increasing.  If so, the health of biological systems in general at 
>ground level could be degraded as a consequence.  
>         The majority science opinion now is that the suggestion of risk 
>merits cutback of CFC manufacturing and release from spray-can and 
>refrigerant products.  Such seems to be prudent caution, prior to 
>establishment of certainty of the hypothesis or its disprovel.  

Speaking of NASA publications, anyone interested in the ozone question
should read "Condensed Nitrate, Sulfate, and Chloride in Antarctic
Stratospheric Aerosols" by a large group of NASA scientists out of
Ames Reasearch Center and several universities. NASA TSP number is
ARC-12618. 

This publication highlights a very illuminating relationship between
condensed HNO3*3H2O and ozone depletion. There is a very strong inverse
correlation between condensed nitrate concentration and ozone levels.
Condensed nitric acid is not found above 200 degrees K in the stratosphere.
When it is not present, chloride levels have no statistical relationship
with ozone levels. Since the stratosphere at 18 km only drops below 200 K
above 64 degrees latitude, chlorides can only deplete ozone levels above
this latitude. So fear and panic about ozone depletion by beach dwellers
in Southern California is not warranted. This work seems to show that
banning CFCs is similar to the cyclamate ban of the sixties, a possible
over-reaction to poorly understood correlations.

Gary
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Different Transit Plans for Different Population Clusters
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Date: 16 Aug 92 20:39:21

In article <1992Aug16.173628.3657@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bl713@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Lev Tarasov) writes:


   The US has been a country run by businessmen for the last century,     
   its the biggest debtor nation in the world now. The rich have the
   choices, but what about the poor? With your wasting of water 
   resources, what are you future choices? Major diversion schemes
   of rivers from Canada? A state run by businessmen would I 
   presume base their policy on profit. When will that magic faith 
   that profit maximization guarantee quality of life and environment
   be seen as the modern equivalent of the belief that the rain gods
   determine when the rain will come.

Mr. Tarasov has been paying too much attention to people who
exaggerate.  There is plenty of water in almost all parts
of the U.S.  However, if every project to get more is blocked
by environmentalists, there will be problems till their objections
are overcome.  I suppose that the strange pricing situation for
water also has to be overcome.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
From: bg055@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Stewart Rowe)
Subject: Re: Recycling in the Workplace
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 21:18:53 GMT


US EPA runs a bulletin board system called SWICH  - Solid Waste Information
Clearing House. The modem number is 301-585-0204, settings 8-N-1 at 300 to
2400 baud. There is a voice inquiry number 800-677-9424. From the
descri[tion I have read, this would be a good place to browse for ideas
on "recycling in the workplace".
 -Stewart Rowe usr2210a@tso.uc.edu  srowe@igc.org
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: haralds@ifi.unit.no
Subject: Re: Whale rights - Science and sentimen
Organization: Ifi, University of Trondheim / AVH
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 08:37:47 GMT

In article <1992Aug21.030931.3837@newshost.anu.edu.au>
Andrew.Robinson@anu.edu.au writes:
>Hi Kevin!
>
>In article <1992Aug17.181809.13963@nuchat.sccsi.com> kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com
>(Kevin Brown) writes:
>[deletia]
>
>
>I find it hard to accept that the (to choose a well known example) forced
>injection of shampoo products into rabbit's eyes is justified, or even
>addressed, by an answer to your question above.  Likewise those reported
>recently at the 9th International Bat Congress in India in which the
>temperature of the environment in which several bats were housed was
>deliberately raised until "they breathed their last" (the touching little
quote
>coming from the abstract).  The researcher's justification?  "Sometimes we
have
>to kill animals in science."  Or the rats force-fed supposed carcinogens,
>proving that over feeding rats with [insert-your-fad-here] gives them cancer? 
>What _does_ that have to do with us and our physiology?  Now if we could
>establish that human life _is_ improved by _some_ animal experiments, then
>perhaps this would justify that subset, or an acceptably similar subset of
>them.  But this is begging the questions :
>
>1) how do we prove it?
>2) what is acceptable?
>3) how much improvement justifies a set amount of suffering?
>...
>
>regardless,
>Andrew
>
>now hit d
>

I'm sorry - where is the connection to Whale hunting?

harald
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: ledwards@leland.Stanford.EDU (Laurence James Edwards)
Subject: Re: Nature's Revenge (toll booths vs. cars)
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 06:48:05 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.095857@zippy.gso.uri.edu>, shipman@zippy.gso.uri.edu (Scott Lindstrom) writes:
|> [...]
|> 
|> I've always thought it would be a good idea for the toll people to time-stamp
|> the cards they give out.  It would be a simple matter, then, to determine who
|> has been speeding on the road.  Perhaps then the fees for usage could change for
|> time spent on the roadway (an inverse relationship, I hope).  Doesn't the speed
|> at which a car/truck/bus travel influence the rate of road wear and tear?  And
|> the police could dispense with radars.
|> 
|> Scott

I believe that they do this on some toll roads.

Larry Edwards
From: red_trek@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Short Environmental Tips
Date: 13 Aug 92 08:33:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: drycas.1992Aug13.133340.1787
Organization: Carnegie Mellon Computer Club

A while back, I posted an announcement  that I had available
a file called "Short Environmental Tips", heavily though not
exclusively based on "50 Simple Things You Can do to Save the Earth".

If you contacted me by e-mail to request a copy of this 300-line
file and have not yet received a copy, then please contact me again.

e-mail to:  Red_Trek@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu
From: pgravel@nap.amoco.com (Philip L. Gravel)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Paper v. Plastic (Petroleum ties)
Date: 13 Aug 92 18:14:28 GMT
Reply-To: pgravel@nap.amoco.com (Philip L. Gravel)
Organization: Amoco Corporation

In article <65734@hydra.gatech.EDU>, gt3791a@prism.gatech.EDU (gt3791a 
Johnson, Mark R.) writes:

>                                 In fact, the PE or material for making the
> PE is very likely to be a byproduct of the manufacture of the fuels.

Not strictly true.  Olefins units (steam cracking) exist for the sole purpose
of making ethylene (primarily) and propylene (secondarily).  Ethylene goes
into a lot of products other than polyethylene -- ethylene oxide, ethylene
glycol, styrene to name just a few.

> In other words, the companies use petroleum to make fuels and then use
> the byproducts of that to make PE.

True to some degree.

>                                     The result is that even if you stop
> using PE bags at the supermarket, the PE material will still be 
> manufactured, as long as fuels are being made from petroleum.

The real issue, some would argue, is whether petroleum is more valuable as a
feedstock for the petrochemical industry or as a fuel.


Phil

-----
Philip L. Gravel                      Internet: pgravel@nap.amoco.com
Amoco Corporation, Chicago, IL        Phone:    (312)856-3553
----------
These opinions aren't worth the paper they're written on and
certainly don't reflect those of my employer.
Newsgroups: sci.environment,alt.politics.clinton
From: steinman@is.morgan.com (Jan Steinman)
Subject: Re: CLINTON SPEECH TEXT: EARTH DAY SPEECH
Organization: Morgan Stanley & Company
	<1992Aug21.172023.23768@vexcel.com> <=3_n9kd.mvp@netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 23:18:29 GMT

In article <=3_n9kd.mvp@netcom.com> mvp@netcom.com (Mike Van Pelt) writes:
   In article <1992Aug21.172023.23768@vexcel.com> dean@vexcel.com (dean alaska) writes:
   >In article <1992Aug20.194012.18473@hsv3.lsil.com> mvp@hsv3.lsil.com (Mike Van Pelt) writes:

   >>>An ozone hole is growing over Kennebunkport. 
   >>This is utterly silly, and has been quite thoroughly debunked.
   >This is obviously political sarcasm.

   The "Over Kennebunkport" part is obvious political sarcasm.  It's an
   allusion, though, to an alleged ozone hole over North America.  That
   turned out to be completely spurious, and had more to do with whose
   budget was coming up for debate in the Appropriations committee than
   with anything happening in the Earth's atmosphere.  NASA took quite a
   black eye from that one.

Not exactly true. The ozone level over North America has declined
roughly 5% in the past 20 years. I don't have references handy, but
I'm sure the data came from Schneider and the NCAR folks, *not* NASA.

Hardly a hole, but more than a completely spurious allegation, also.
--
: : Jan Steinman	   steinman@is.morgan.com		 Bytesmiths : :
: : 2002 Parkside Court				   West Linn, OR 97068-2767 : :
: : 503/657-7703					       212/956-8722 : :
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown)
Subject: Re: Whale rights - Science and sentimen
Organization: I can't see any in the immediate vicinity...
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 18:18:09 GMT

In article <1992Aug16.174922.4096@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bl713@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Lev Tarasov) writes:
>
>Back to the usual animal rights debate. On what basis do we have
>the right to discriminate between humans and other life forms?

On what basis do other life forms have the "right" to discriminate between
themselves and us?

What "right" does a microbe have to enter my body and cause it damage?
Even if it must do so in order to survive or reproduce?

>Intelligence, display of emotion, response to the environment?
>If these were our criteria, then there would be some biological
>humans (severely mentally retarded or in coma) who would rate 
>lower on the criteria than say a chimpanzee. Should we start 
>killing or experimenting on these humans? Continuing, no
>matter what rational criteria you choose, some humans are going
>to fall through the cracks. If we want to chooses religious 
>arguments, than the pantheist and monotheist are going to
>be stuck in an irresolvable stalemate. But then who said 
>ethics was supposed to be a resolvable system of thought?
>
>Point is that the issue is a question of values, and 
>we use science to try to justify our values.

Some people might use science to justify their values, but science is
just a way of obtaining information about the universe we live in and
a method of arriving at explanations for what we see.  Nothing more.

Humans ultimately place value on things, since "value" is a subjective
term.

But then, it's pretty obvious that humans aren't the *only* creatures
that "value" things, if one can derive "value" from observation.  Just
watch animals fight each other over food, and it's pretty easy to see
that they value that food.

So which do you value more?  Human life, or animal life?  This is the
question you must ultimately answer in order to decide whether or not
experiments on animals are justified.

-- 
				Kevin Brown

			    kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com
			    kevin@taronga.taronga.com
Newsgroups: sci.environment,alt.politics.clinton
From: len@math.nwu.edu (Len Evens)
Subject: Re: CLINTON SPEECH TEXT: EARTH DAY SPEECH
Organization: Dept of Math, Northwestern Univ
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 15:04:01 GMT

In article <1992Aug20.194012.18473@hsv3.lsil.com>, mvp@hsv3.lsil.com (Mike Van Pelt) writes:
> In article <92232.000454U45301@uicvm.uic.edu> U45301@uicvm.uic.edu
> (Mary Jacobs) posts Clinton's Earth Day speech:  Quoted text is
> Clinton's.  (Or, at least, his speechwriter's.)
> 
> 
> Out of one side of his mouth, Slick Willie says
> 
> Mike Van Pelt                       When the fog came in on little cat feet
> Headland Technology/Video 7         last night, it left these little muddy
> sun!indetech!hsv3!mvp               paw prints on the hood of my car.
> mvp@hsv3.lsil.com

-- 
Might I suggest that for the sake of civilized discourse, we refrain
from name calling.   Use of the term `Slick Willie' adds nothing
to the discussion.   Mr Van Pelt raises several interesting points,
which I don't happen to agree with, but I certainly recognize that
they have merit and demand discussion.  However, his way of putting
them makes it rather unlikely that I at least am likely to be
convinced by them.

Leonard Evens      len@math.nwu.edu      708-491-5537
Dept. of Mathematics, Northwestern Univ., Evanston, IL 60208
Xref: sparky sci.environment:10743 rec.railroad:6676
From: ed@wente.llnl.gov (Ed Suranyi)
Newsgroups: sci.environment,rec.railroad
Subject: Re: The Rebuilding of the Wrecked West Oakland I-880 Segment
Date: 19 Aug 92 16:38:51 GMT
Followup-To: sci.environment
Organization: UC Davis Dept of Applied Science at LLNL

In article <l92ie6INN9un@news.bbn.com> rnewman@bbn.com (Ron Newman) writes:
>I don't understand why they're rebuilding I-880 at all.
>When I visited the Bay Area about a year ago, all the
>traffic southbound from Oakland seemed quite happy using
>the parallel freeway I-380(?) a couple of miles away.

It's true that I-580 parallels I-880 from Oakland to San Leandro.  But
there are a couple of things to consider:  I-580 is closer to the 
East Bay Hills, and much farther from the most densely populated parts
of the East Bay.  I-880 goes through industrial areas, while I-580
is several miles away.  I-880 goes south all the way to San Jose;
I-580 doesn't.  Trucks are not allowed on most of I-580.  In fact,
the only part of I-580 on which trucks are permitted is the section 
used to bypass the cypress structure.  

Thus, all trucks, and all cars who want to get to places served better
by I-880 (this includes the Oakland International Airport, by the way),
must take I-580 to I-980 to I-880.

"Quite happy" is not a phrase I would use to describe motorists who
have to do this during rush hour (and even outside of rush hour this
bypass takes several minutes longer to travel).  Rather, I'd say
they are "grudgingly accepting the reality of the situation."

Ed
ed@wente.llnl.gov


Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: ibbotson@rtsg.mot.com (Craig Ibbotson, x2343)
Subject: Re: Valuing the health benefits of clean air
Keywords: Stop the Orygun Chainsaw Massacre, etc, etc.
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 17:55:14 GMT

mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson) writes:

>>increased risk of death due to PM10 (particulate matter, 10 microns) exposure 
>>is 1/10,000.  (For contrast, the risk of dying in a car accident is 2 in 10,000,
>>and the risk of job related death is 0.5 in 10,000) 

>>They estimate the annual economic value of avoiding these effects at 9.8
>>billion dollars, and that attaining air pollution standards may save 1600 
>>lives a year.

>How many lives could be saved if that 9.8 million would be applied to say
>cancer or aids research.  And *please* don't tell me that we should have
>enough money to spend on both.

I agree with your point about maximizing the return on investment.  But
hey, if we have billions of dollars to bail out the S & L's, we SHOULD have
plenty of money to do both.  I know you didn't want to hear that, but if we
can break the bank to bail out all the S & L crooks, we should be able to fund
disease prevention (e.g. clean air) and disease cure (e.g. AIDS) at a MUCH
higher level.
-- 
| "Mars is essentially in the same orbit... somewhat the same distance from the Sun,|
| which is very important. We have seen pictures where there are canals, we believe,|
| and water. If there is water, that means there is oxygen. If oxygen, that means we|
| can breathe."  - Dan Quayle					    		    |
Xref: sparky sci.environment:10709 sci.energy:4029
From: mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson)
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.energy
Subject: Re: Nature's Revenge (toll booths vs. cars)
Date: 17 Aug 92 15:31:06 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

>c23st@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com (Spiros Triantafyllopoulos) writes:

>>On a trip to Chicago a couple of weeks ago, I noticed the following while
>>on 294 north, A 3+3 lane highway. Traffic would flow quite well, and then,
>>every few miles, a TOLL PLAZA... 

>>We had to go thru four of these each way. Each time, before the TOLL
>>PLAZA we'd be driving along quite well. Then, a 15 - 20 minute stop'n'go
>>session to pay tolls. A few miles of faster driving, and ad nauseaum.

Down in Florida they have also built some new tollways recently.

In Florida you pick up a stub from a booth as you enter the tollway.  The
stub indicates where you entered the tollway.  When you exit the tollway
you present the stub to the attendent (machine on some of the newer
systems).  Your bill is determined by the number of miles between your
on ramp and off ramp.  As long as you stay on the tollway, you keep
moving.

-- 
--Mark

Xref: sparky sci.environment:10627 talk.environment:3224 alt.society.futures:236
From: louis@cs.athabascau.ca (Louis Schmittroth)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Plastic or Paper...which is environmentally correct?
Date: 15 Aug 92 15:57:18 GMT
Organization: Athabasca University

In article <1992Aug10.194053.8900@nap.amoco.com>, pgravel@nap.amoco.com (Philip L. Gravel) writes:
> In article <JYM.92Aug7161413@remarque.berkeley.edu>, jym@mica.berkeley.edu 
> (Jym Dyer) writes:
>  
> > =o= Mind you, I am aware of toxic wastes involved in the making
> > of paper bags, but these are far less endemic to the process
> > than those involved in the making of plastic bags.
> 
> Excuse me???  Do you know how polyethylene is manufactured?  The

	...Excellent summary of on polyethelene manufacturing deleted...


> Contrast this with the paper pulp industry.  So how are the toxic wastes in
> making paper paper bags "far less endemic to the process than those involved
> in making plastic bags"?  What are the "endemic" toxic wastes to which you
> are referring?

If you are talking the brown paper bags, these are made from unbleached
kraft process pulp -- no toxic wastes involved.  The effluent has
"biochemical oxygen demand" (BOD) which when discharged into a stream
will deplete the dissolved oxygen, and hance could be considered
"toxic."  If the receiving stream is big enough and the pulp mill has
been required to treat the effluent, this does not *have* to be a
concern, although in the past, and in some cases now, it has been
serious.

Producing white paper bags is another thing.  Usually the bleach is
either CL2 or CLO2, or both, and hence produces organochlorines in the
effluent.  These are "toxic", although there is the argument that at
the level permitted they are not a threat.  BUT, acceptably white
paper for bags can be produced without using chlorine compounds in the
bleaching process, and some mills the world are doing just that.  In
a June issue of Der Spiegel there was a two page ad from Soedra Cell,
the largest producer/distributor of pulp in Europe stating that they 
are offering now TCF pulp -- Total Chlorine Free -- no CL2, no CLO2,
and that their stated aim is to eliminate chlorine compounds from 
their bleaching processes.
-- 
Louis Schmittroth louis@cs.athabascau.ca
========================================
Not everything that counts can be counted.  Not everything that can be
counted counts.   - Charles Garfield
From: gerry@seq1.keele.ac.uk (G.D.Pratt)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: The NIMBY and his LULU
Date: 18 Aug 92 16:31:07 GMT
Organization: University of Keele, England

bj368@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mike E. Romano) writes:
> NIMBY = not in my backyard'er    LULU = locally unwanted land use

Perhaps the eternal triangle with a BANANA:-

    !!!!!!! Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone !!!!!! :-)
-- 
gerry pratt  --  workstation support  --  university of keele
email:  gerry@seq1.keele.ac.uk   *   telephone :  0782 583072
"these opinions are mine, mine, Mine.....ALL MINE I TELL YOU!"
Xref: sparky sci.environment:10733 rec.railroad:6646
From: rnewman@bbn.com (Ron Newman)
Newsgroups: sci.environment,rec.railroad
Subject: Re: The Rebuilding of the Wrecked West Oakland I-880 Segment
Date: 18 Aug 92 19:04:38 GMT
Organization: Bolt, Beranek & Newman, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: spcsun25.bbn.com

I don't understand why they're rebuilding I-880 at all.
When I visited the Bay Area about a year ago, all the
traffic southbound from Oakland seemed quite happy using
the parallel freeway I-380(?) a couple of miles away.

-- 
Ron Newman		rnewman@bbn.com
From: loftis@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Kirk Loftis)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 20:02:33 GMT
Subject: Re: Mary Jane has a great Biomass
Organization: the HP Corporate notes server
Newsgroups: sci.environment


|What we need and right away is to start growing the nonpotent strains
|of hemp in commercial farming.
|Hemp produces tremendous biomass in practically any climate and on
|any soil.
|Its industrial uses are almost limitless, including oil and paper.
|Would help reduce logging almost immediately.
|It is one of the most efficiently growing plants in the world.
|Actually a similar situation exists with farm produced alcohol.
|Only 8 acres of corn or similar crop is sufficient to produce 
|enough alcohol to power a car for a year of average use.
|Same problem though...alcohol is also an inebriant, etc....and if
|a thousand farms each have their own stills---er processing plants...
|such a perfect fuel could be misused.
|-- 
|----------

I thought hemp was used to produce rope.  Isn't is already in some
production farming???  Perhaps not in the US but in other countries.  

Kirk
Newsgroups: sci.environment