HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Harvesting a nit Re: Energy supplies  was (Re: Population)
Date: 26 Sep 92 15:37:49 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <1992Sep24.065559.3308@michael.apple.com> ems@michael.apple.com (E. Michael Smith) writes:
>In article <1992Sep22.170854.6311@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>>I would note, however, that
>>my power company, Jackson EMC, will run up to 10,000 feet of new line
>>for a drop at *no charge*, and up to 160 feet of underground service at
>>$395. 
>
>You are truely blessed with a friendly PUC!  I've been looking to buy
>and in both Oregon and California.  For both of these areas, i was quoted
>cost at about $1k/pole.  Slightly more in some parts of PG&E (my local
>utility company) range.  (i.e. $1.5k on 'remote' or 'hilly' spots...).

>>Now it costs them something, new poles run about $500, but
>>it doesn't cost the customer any extra. 
>
>It doesn't cost THAT customer any extra, instead the cost is spread
>over all the existing installed base.  That is part of why some PUCs
>allow charging for all new poles.  So that the installed base of customers
>don't get stuck paying for 10,000 ft of poles to someones cabin
>in the woods ...BTW, I've talked with one person (some years ago) 
>who was charged $5k for one pole.  They had a particularly rocky place 
>where it had to be placed and it was delivered by 'chopper.
>
>Is your $500/pole installed?

Note the EMC in Jackson EMC. They are an electric *membership* corporation.
They aren't supposed to turn a profit, just get power to their members,
their owners. The engineer who approved my drop told me that $500 was
their installed cost for a *new* pole. Since so much of the area is converting
to underground power, which they charge for, they have a large inventory
of *used* poles that the EPA won't let them dispose of because of their
cresote treatment. So they have to store them or use them. They figure that
a residential load will recoup their costs in a reasonable time for a
run up to 10,000 feet. I got my new shop treated as a residence because
it's *air conditioned*. (heh)

Gary
From: ems@gallant.apple.com (Mike Smith)
Subject: Re: SOLAR efficiency
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 10:03:05 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA

In article <1992Sep19.165204.10776@cs.rochester.edu> dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz) writes:

>I am almost sure the ZEV requirements will be scrapped, if the
>vehicles are too expensive (as they are almost sure to be for the rest
>of this century).  It's already possible to build internal-combustion
>engine powered cars in which the exhaust contains less pollution than
>the ambient air -- driving these things would actually reduce air
>pollution.  

Come again?  Can this be true?  Is the air in the typical city THAT bad,
so that cycling it through a combustion process cleans it up?

I'd be interested in a slightly better (text) sketch of this engine!

>In any case, it would be much more effective to just junk
>all the pre-1979 cars in S. California, even if you had to pay their
>owners for replacements.

Ah, but it's DAMNED hard to be a replacment for a Model T ... I'd hope
there would continue to be collectors exemptions ...

-- 

E. Michael Smith  ems@apple.COM

'Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it.  Boldness has
From: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith) 
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: --Early Turbine Still Ope
Date: 27 Sep 92 10:06:00 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: SPACE BBS - Menlo Park, CA - 10 Lines + 4gB - 415-323-4193
Reply-To: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith) 

TG>/* Written  5:12 am  Sep 24, 1992 by tgray in cdp:en.energy */
TG>/* ---------- "--Early Turbine Still Operates" ---------- */
TG>PIONEERING 200-KW TURBINE CONTINUES
TG>TO OPERATE ON CAPE BRETON ISLAND

TG>A 200-kW wind turbine installed on Cape Breton Island, Nova Scotia,
TG>in 1981 by the Nova Scotia Power Corp. (NSPC) is still generating
TG>power today, according to Eric Horton, a spokesman for the utility.

TG>The turbine, with a rotor diameter of 26 meters (85 feet), was one
TG>of the largest of its day, and is still larger than most of the
TG>wind machines now operating in California's wind power plants.

TG>It was manufactured by WTG Energy Systems, Inc., of Buffalo, N.Y.
TG>WTG, a firm which concentrated initially on large turbines for
TG>isolated locations, went out of business several years ago after
TG>most of its machines suffered structural failures.

TG>The mechanical problems the turbine has experienced, he said, have
TG>been similar to those encountered by early wind turbines in
TG>California over the years.  California windfarms had a poor
TG>performance record during the early 1980s, but have steadily
TG>improved in recent years as more operating experience has been
TG>gained.

Actually this turbine has had a very sad history. Many turbines
installed in that period have been operating reliably since that time
with as little as one man-hour per year maintenance.

However, the report is correct in that windfarms of that period had poor
performance records mostly because they were designed by accountants
more interested in the mis-guided investment tax credit offered by the
government at the time. Many of the turbines did not work at all.
However, when the investment tax credit was terminated in 1985-86, there
were a little over 4000 wind turbines in California. Now there are over
17,000 turbines operating with over 90% availablity with more being
installed every day with even higher availability.

hhs
---
 . SLMR 2.1a . Nothing is so smiple that it can't get screwed up.
From: hnr@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Harvey Rutt)
Newsgroups: sci.energy,sci.optics
Subject: Re: Ref on Thermal IR Properties?
Keywords: Thermal infrared, properties of materials
Date: 5 Oct 92 08:09:47 GMT

I recently looked for plastics transparent at 3-5 and 8-14 microns.

There are large tomes of IR spectra, often held by Chemistry and
forensic Dpts which tabulated vast no.s of IR spectra, several of
these being on polymers, each with thousands of commercial plastics.
'Sadlers (possibly Sadtlers)' is one I recall.

The results were too poor to be worth filing the references!

Ithink some of these  are available in CD & other computer formats.

Some suppliers (eg 3M for Kel F) show IR transmission in their
commercial data.

In thin film form (few microns) they have highly structured spectra as
you'd expect (thin film polyethylene used to be used to calibrate low
res. IR specrophotometers.) For example in any plastic contaning C&H
you'll get a strong absorption just past 3 microns, C&F around 9-10.

Every plastic I looked at *in practical thicknesses of say>0.25 inch*
was essentially opaque right thro' the ranges that interested me. In
thin film form you would get some 'windows', see the ref.

Harvey Rutt
Southampton UK
From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz)
Subject: Re: Arguments
Organization: Computer Science Department University of Rochester
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 00:54:21 GMT


In article <1a4k79INNf10@gap.caltech.edu> carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU writes:
>In article <3211.1460.uupcb@spacebbs.com>, howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith)  writes:

>>JW>Fossil fuel plants are going to be built in large numbers throughout the
>>JW>world over the next 20-30 years, wherever baseload demand jumps and nuclear
>>JW>power cannot, by political, economic, or time constraint, provide the

>>You are correct in saying that a great number of fossil-fueled plants
>>will be built in the near future since the DOE says that by the year
>>2000 the average age of coal-fired plants in the United States will be
>>38 years, gas-fired - 42 years, and that of oil-fired - 47 years. But it

>That's OK, we just build our fossil-fueled plants in other states.


Other states?  Other *countries* is more like it.  Over the next
decade about 600 GW of new capacity will be needed worldwide; only
20-25% of that will be in North America.  Nearly 2/5 will be in Asia,
where economic growth rates are high.  China's GNP, for example, has
been growing 8%/year since 1979, and the growth could hit double
digits this year.  China has enormous quantities of coal, and
no compunctions about burning it.

Other Asian countries, like Korea and Japan, are buying more nuclear
reactors (CANDU HWRs in Korea, US Advanced BWRs in Japan).

	Paul F. Dietz
	dietz@cs.rochester.edu
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: ens@ccu.umanitoba.ca ()
Subject: Re: Arguments
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 08:41:37 GMT

In <3100.1460.uupcb@spacebbs.com> howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith)  writes:

>We renewable energy fanatics find the arguments over the safety of
>nuclear power versus fossil-fueled power so boringly moot.

This would be believable if you fanatics spent as much effort
denouncing fossil as you spend denouncing nuclear.
From: whitlock@dcss.mcmaster.ca (Jeremy Whitlock)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Radioactivity and Sup
Date: 30 Sep 92 13:27:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: mcshub.1992Sep30.132710.23007
Distribution: na
Organization: Department of Computer Science, McMaster University

In article <3235.1460.uupcb@spacebbs.com> howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith)  writes:

>Probably, Mr. Lovins biggest audience is the nuclear power industry
>itself. I had never heard of him until a few weeks ago when I purchased
>a copy of the "Alternative Energy Sourcebook" from Real Goods in which
>he wrote the foreword. His only mention of nuclear was that recently
>"renewables came to provide some 11-12% of the nation's total primary
>energy (about twice as much as nuclear power) and the fastest-growing
>part". Real fire brand talk.

I may be stating the obvious, but it seems to me that if you've never heard
of Lovins before then you're unqualified to participate in a discussion on 
him.


-- 
Jeremy Whitlock                 "My thoughts are mine, not Mac's"
Dept. Engineering Physics
McMaster University
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
From: ems@michael.apple.com (E. Michael Smith)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Another NUKE bites the dust ...
Date: 5 Oct 92 06:24:40 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc.

From the Oct 1 San Jose Murkey News, page 14A, dateline TOKYO (AP)

Quoted without permission:

*** BEGIN EXCERPTED QUOTE ***  (elipsis ... denote deletions)

JAPANESE PLANT BARELY AVERTS CORE MELTDOWN

Backup system cools reactor after switch is flipped by mistake

TOKYO (AP) -- A mistaken flip of a switch by a nuclear power plant
worker caused a reactor's cooling pumps to fail, a government official
said Wednesday, but an emergency system took over and prevented a
nuclear meltdown.

The automatic activation of the emergency cooling system prevented
radiation from being released by the plant in the Fukushima district,
70 miles northeast of Tokyo.

Local officials sharply criticized the Tokyo Electric Power Co., the 
plants owner, for not notifying residents for hours about the 
emergency shutdown of the 18-year-old reactor.

"The case is very serious because it triggered (the emergency 
core-cooling system)," said Jinzaburo Takagi, a physicist who
heads the Citizens' Nuclear Information Center, an anti-nuclear group.

It was the first shutdown using the emergency system since Japan's
worst nuclear accident, at Mihama in western Japan in February 1991,
when a small amount of radioactivity was released into the atmosphere.

Tuesday's accident, at the number 2 reactor of Fukushima Nuclear
Plant No. 1, involved a 784-megawatt light-water rector, the most
widely used reactor design in the world.

[...]

The emergency system that went into effect at the plant is the last
reliable defense against a core meltdown.  The system pours cooling
water onto a reactor's nuclear fuel rods to prevent them from 
reaching dangerously high temperatures.

[...]

Tuesdays accident was caused when a plant operator reportedly flipped a
switch by mistake.  That informed the control computer that a backup
water pump was operating when it actually was not, said Ryuko Fujii,
chief of the Ministry of International Trade and Industry's nuclear
safety division.

*** END QUOTED MATERIAL ***

There you have it.  All the things that cause one pause about
a nuclear plant in the back yard.

One guy makes a mistake, and per the article, the plant is one system
away from a meltdown.  Then the folks who are in charge don't bother
to tell the public for the better part of a day...

The article may be wrong, but that type of article is why the non-nukers
take a bit of a circumspect view of a nuke in every village ...

-- 

E. Michael Smith  ems@apple.COM

'Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it.  Boldness has
 genius, power and magic in it.'  -  Goethe

I am not responsible nor is anyone else.  Everything is disclaimed.
From: yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Yack's daemons (was Re: Nuke Stupidity Rebuttal)
Date: 29 Sep 92 11:35:44 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst

In article <w++pn!n@dixie.com> jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:
>yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:
>
>>Your point is nonsense, despite the
>>long words you seem so proud of. Anyone wanting technical information
>>on this issue could consult the record of the NRC hearings which closed
>>Yankee Rowe precisely because of concerns about loss of ductility.
>
>I performance-tested the coolant heating system at TMI-1 and my employees
>did the same at several other plants.  But what do I know?  

Not at much as you apparently believe, by a long shot.

>
>Now yack, I know that being there and doing things does not in your book 
>qualify one next to words printed on paper but maybe, just maybe this time 
>you'll listen.  NOT!
>
>BTW, Yankee Rowe was closed because it was deemed not economically
>practical to bring the plant up to current standards.  Since it is a tiny

Guess again. Of course, I just attended the public hearings on closing
the plant, and listened to a debate between NRC engineers, UCS engineers,
and plant engineers on whether or not the reactor vessel had become too
brittle to allow operation. Maybe all these folks didn't realize that
you had solved the problem, but the NRC shut the plant, and the utility
decided not to attempt the expensive experiment of in situ annealing. 

-- 


yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu
From: steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu (Steinn Sigurdsson)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Another NUKE bites the dust ...
Date: 6 Oct 92 12:29:39
Organization: Lick Observatory/UCO
NNTP-Posting-Host: topaz.ucsc.edu
In-reply-to: ems@michael.apple.com's message of 5 Oct 92 06:24:40 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.062440.3437@michael.apple.com> ems@michael.apple.com (E. Michael Smith) writes:


   From the Oct 1 San Jose Murkey News, page 14A, dateline TOKYO (AP)

   Quoted without permission:

   *** BEGIN EXCERPTED QUOTE ***  (elipsis ... denote deletions)

   JAPANESE PLANT BARELY AVERTS CORE MELTDOWN

   Backup system cools reactor after switch is flipped by mistake

 ...

   The article may be wrong, but that type of article is why the non-nukers
   take a bit of a circumspect view of a nuke in every village ...

Fascinating choice of deletions, the Sentinel also published the AP
story along with the 18 worst nuclear accidents, what it boiled down
to is that nothing happened, nobody was hurt, the core remained
covered and cooled and 16 of the 18 other incidents listed were
non-events as far as harm to the public goes (exceptions were
Chernobyl and Windscale). You are right though, this sort of article
is precisely why people are afraid of things nuclear.

*  Steinn Sigurdsson   			Lick Observatory      	*
*  steinly@lick.ucsc.edu		"standard disclaimer"  	*
*  Just because there's a reason          			*
*  Doesn't mean it's understood              Specials, 1979	*
From: ems@michael.apple.com (E. Michael Smith)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Irrational vs. subjective (was Re: Nuke Stupidity Rebuttal)
Date: 29 Sep 92 02:33:40 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA

In article <1992Sep24.215502.9213@nuchat.sccsi.com> kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown) writes:
>In article <53843@dime.cs.umass.edu> yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:

>>No. Please excuse me if I opt out of further elaboration of this issue with
>>you, as you seem to lack a committment to rational discussion.
>
>Inasmuch as you've admitted yourself that the risk analysis is basically a
>subjective thing, I find it rather humourous that you're bailing out
>because the discussion isn't "rational"...

Excuse me, but irrational .NE. subjective.  One can be both subjective
and rational.  Infact, much of lifes problems are solved by subjective
rational thought...  and most of it's creativity.  

Or were you proposing that Leonardo Da Vinci's designs were totally
objective?  That Bach was totally objective?  Or that both were
irrational?

Please lose this notion that to be subjective is to be irrational ...


-- 

E. Michael Smith  ems@apple.COM

'Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it.  Boldness has
 genius, power and magic in it.'  -  Goethe

I am not responsible nor is anyone else.  Everything is disclaimed.
From: loeb@ai.mit.edu (Eric Loeb)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: (none)
Date: 26 Sep 92 22:39:09 GMT

Subject:  AUTOMATED CLINTON/GORE MAIL SERVICE
 
 Bill Clinton and Al Gore are committed to bringing all Americans 
 into the American political process -- for the good of our country.  
 At this critical time in our country's history it is imperative that 
 we all do everything in our power to make our system work.  
 
 We are happy to announce a new step forward in 21st century 
 democracy: We now have a mail server that will allow you, the 
 internet citizen, to receive on-line campaign documents and send 
 your comments and ideas back to us.
 

 To learn more, send mail to the automated Clinton/Gore mail server 
 
    clinton-wins@mail.clinton-gore.org



 RECEIVE THE LATEST SPEECHES:
 
 If you send the Subject line "info speeches" to the mail server, 
 you will receive all the latest Clinton/Gore speeches as soon as 
 they come on-line.


 RECEIVE ALL AVAILABLE POSITION PAPERS:
 
 If you send the Subject line "info all" to the mail server at, 
 you will receive the full set of Clinton/Gore position papers.


 QUERY THE CANIDATES -- INTERNET POLL:
 
 If you have a question for Bill Clinton or Al Gore, then send your
 question to the mail server ("clinton-wins@mail.clinton-gore.org")
 with the Subject line "question propose".  

 Send the Subject line "question get" to get the current numbered 
 list of questions.  

 Send the Subject line "question vote <X Y>" to vote for questions 
 number <X> and <Y>.  For example, you would send the SUBJECT line 
 "question vote 3" to vote for question number 3.

 Each week the questions with the most votes will be forwarded to 
 Little Rock.

 
 SEND YOUR SUGGESTIONS & COMMENTS

 If you have a suggestion for Bill Clinton or Al Gore, then send your
 suggestion to the mail server ("clinton-wins@mail.clinton-gore.org")
 with the Subject line "suggest propose".  

 Send the Subject line "suggest get" to get the current numbered 
 list of suggestions.  

 Send the Subject line "suggest vote <a b c>" to vote for suggestions 
 number <a>, <b>, and <c>.  For example, you would send the Subject 
 line "suggest vote 18 4" to vote for suggestions 18 and 4.
 

 The questions, suggestions, and the campaign's responses will be 
 posted to the network.  You can help redistribute this and other 
 information by sending the Subject line "volunteer email distr" 
 to the mail server at

 clinton-wins@mail.clinton-gore.org
 


 Clinton/Gore '92
 Volunteer Email Effort


Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Subject: Re: Radioactivity and Sup
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 15:45:16 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.090821.3561@ccu.umanitoba.ca> ens@ccu.umanitoba.ca () writes:
>In <3234.1460.uupcb@spacebbs.com> howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith)  writes:
>
>>JW>It appears to be spoon-feeding time.  Okay, since A.Lovins has been been
>>JW>mentioned here recently, let's consider him.  In the mid-80's he made about
>>JW>$600/day as a consultant and speaker.  "Energy consultant" label aside,
>>JW>Lovins is anti-nuclear at the heart.  He has made big money from the
>>JW>movement, and he has tremendous power.  Need I go on?  (Please don't come
>>JW>back with "Okay, that's one.  Who else...?")
>
>>$600/day is chicken feed. A great number of lawyers in that period
>>charged $600/hr. A lot more do today. My ex-boss, a PH/D physicist,
>>charges $160/hr for consulting and he charged $95/hr for my time.
>
>And can he fill his ledger as easily as Lovins?
>
>A lot of people have the expertise and ability required to earn > $600/day. 
>The argument goes, much less expertise and ability are required to earn it
>by environmental alarmism.
>

Please give an example of environmental alarmism from Lovins.
Most of Lovins money today comes from industry.  While some of his
numbers may still be considered optimistic within the establishment,
there is great demand for his expertise on efficiency issues.
-- 

		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)
From: aldridge@netcom.com (Jacquelyn Aldridge)
Subject: Re: Radioactivity and Superstition (and the *Real* Problems)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 06:57:32 GMT

whitlock@dcss.mcmaster.ca (Jeremy Whitlock) writes:

>In article <1992Sep24.215507.3581@vexcel.com> dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) writes:

>>If A. Lovins is a fine example of what you are talking about, then I
>>think you may be talking about something different from the rest of us.

>From the comments I've had to respond to, I'd say this is the case, and since 
>I believe I began this thread, allow me to recapitulate:

>The anti-nuclear movement is not entirely comprised of volunteers without
>significant financial incentive for doing what they do.  At the core of the
>movement is a well-networked industry whose leaders, like those of any 
>industry, receive considerable money and power from their position.  Failure
>of the nuclear industry to recognize this early enough is probably
>contributing to its public reception woes today.


>-- 
>Jeremy Whitlock                 "My thoughts are mine, not Mac's"

	Where would you get the impression that the nuclear industry failed
to understand what they were facing? 
	Why would you think that people (the
citizenry) must use inefficient systems to oppose the highly capitalized
and well organized efforts of the nuclear industry. There is no law that
states that I have to send my money to an ineffective organization and most
volunteer organizations are going to suffer from a lack of ongoing
commitment by individuals. People have thier own work to do, lives to lead.
	Contributing money to environmental organizations allows them to
build and maintain the staff (of scientists, lawyers, information workers,
and media professionals) necessary to counter the well organized efforts of
the nuclear industry.
	 

Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: ens@ccu.umanitoba.ca ()
Subject: Re: Radioactivity and Superstition
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 07:32:05 GMT

In <1992Sep25.192358.148@aston.ac.uk> foxp@cs.aston.ac.uk (Pete Fox,,,,universe(ucb)) writes:

>I used to be a fan of nuclear power - then I got a degree in physics and 
>know a bit more about it.

If you consider this to be a persuasive argument against nuclear
power, then you're arguing in favor of it: upwards of 90% of physics
and engineering graduates support nuclear power, and the higher the
degree, the stronger the support.
Newsgroups: sci.energy