HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cdm@pmafire.inel.gov (Dale Cook)
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 18:10:37 GMT
Organization: WINCO
Subject: Re: toxic spill remediation
Summary: 
Followup-To: 
Organization: WINCO
Keywords: 

In article <JMC.92Dec15191349@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>On the other hand, when I was in Junior High School we played with
>liquid mercury quite freely, and it was explained that only ionized
>mercury was harmful.  Perhaps many of those junior high school
>contemporaries who have since died, had their lives significantly shortened
>by the mercury, but I doubt it.

Well, John, what you were taught in Junior High School was wrong.  Elemental
mercury is a neurotoxin, and if you play with it enough, will eventually
cause quite serious effects.  While its boiling point is 356.6 deg.C, it 
does give off vapor at room temperature, which you can in turn breathe in.
While you are unlikely to have received enough mercury poisoning in your
Junior High classes to cause noticable symptoms, others who worked with 
the substance in the past are not so fortunate.  Mercury was used in the
making of hats in the not too distant past, and workers in this avocation
quite regularly suffered serious consequences.  Perhaps you've heard the
phrase "mad as a hatter"?  Its origin is from the observed behaviour of
veterans of the industry, who literally went mad as a result of their 
cummulative exposure to it.

If I were in the business of cleaning up mercury spills, I'd certainly
want protection from breathing any vapors that might be around.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
...Dale Cook    "I don't much care how a man prays -- there's plenty of
                 room in hell for all of us."  --- "Mad Jack" Duncan
The opinions are mine only (i.e., they are NOT my employer's)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.energy
From: berryh@huey.udel.edu (John Berryhill, Ph.D.)
Subject: Re: Yet Another Anti-Greenpeace Scenario From Thin Air
Organization: little scraps of paper, mostly
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 05:59:25 GMT

In article <JMC.92Dec9160906@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>The Japanese said Greenpeace harassed them.  Given Greenpeace's
>previous record, I choose to believe the Japanese.

And given Japan's previous record, I presume that you don't park
your battleships in small harbors in the Pacific, no?

;-)
-- 
                                                John Berryhill, Ph.D.
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: gj169883@alfred.carleton.ca ( gj student 169883)
Subject: REQUEST: grey water waste heat
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 21:19:48 GMT

  Has anyone heard of the Heatcatcher?  It was a product being
developed a couple of years ago to recover waste heat from residential
sources.  I've lost track of it but am very interested in that sort
of technology.  If anyone knows what's become of it or of any similar
products I'd love to hear of them.

  Colin Rowat
  gj169883@ccs.carleton.ca
  Carleton University
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: mjvande@pbhye.PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman)
Subject: Re: Chill out, and swim the waters near Victoria, B.C.
Reply-To: mjvande@PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 21:47:46 GMT

-  In fact, if a Washington-state mayor wants to take up my invitation,
-  we can start with a polar-bear swim at Ross Bay, which is right next
-  to the outfall, and is now safe for swimming.
-
-Greater Victoria has been under fire from federal, provincial and Washington-
-state officials since residents turned down sewage treatment in a non-binding
-referendum on November 21.  Currently, raw, screened, sewage is pumped through
-deep ocean outfalls in Juan de Fuca Strait.
-
-He questioned how much of Washington's coastline is safe for swimming.
-
-"Could it be as bad as Hawaii, where beaches were closed 106 times
-last year, attributed to sewage?  Let's see if a polar-bear swim
-can chill down the hype."

I wonder if "safe for swimming" is equivalent to "safe for all of the
environment"....
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: toxic spill remediation
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<JMC.92Dec15191349@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
	<1992Dec16.181037.12275@pmafire.inel.gov>
Date: 16 Dec 92 11:34:29

How was mercury used in making hats?  Was it heated?  Did it get
ionized?  Probably the answers to these questions are not easy to
obtain.  The Minimata disaster was caused by mercury that was
methylated.

I suppose it should be possible to make a realistic assessment
of the amount of poisoning produced by playing with the stuff
in junior high school.  Maybe it was trivial.  Maybe it was
harmful though not directly observable.

I would like an estimate of actual danger and not just panic.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
From: paul.burnett@pcs.sj.ca.us (Paul Burnett) 
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: E-Link: Ticket Americ
Date: 13 Dec 92 06:26:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: PCS-BBS - San Jose, CA - 408-270-4085
Reply-To: paul.burnett@pcs.sj.ca.us (Paul Burnett) 

TO: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU

JM>In the spirit of Carrie Nation who attacked saloons with an axe
  >and helped bring about prohibition.

...which ultimately didn't work.

JM>In the spirit of Anthony Comstock who banned books in Boston.

...which _also_ ultimately didn't work.

JM>In the spirit of Savonarola.

...who was burned at the stake.

JM>These spirits live today.

Are you saying all this futility pertains to environmentalism?

---
 . QMPro 1.0 41-8688 . ...from San Jose, CA
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: What's Necessary?
Date: 21 Dec 1992 01:49:58 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <149180185@hpindda.cup.hp.com>, alanm@hpindda.cup.hp.com (Alan McGowen) writes:
>Is the Spotted owl species worth 1 (one) job? I think so. Is it worth 1 (one)
>human life? Probably. Is it worth 10 million jobs? Or ten million human lives?
>The answer isn't so clear. If I haven't reached your limit yet kick it up
>another magnitude or two, a hundred million human lives?

From all past indications, Alan would have to kick it up yet another magnitude,
to billions of lives.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
Xref: sparky sci.environment:13619 talk.environment:5076
From: 471-1@.arizona.edu (E. Shane Jimerfield)
Newsgroups: sci.environment,talk.environment
Subject: Re: Why do they hate us?
Date: 17 Dec 92 01:50:17 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson
Originator: 471-1@air.atmo.arizona.edu


>In article  constant@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Tino) writes:
>
>No, I think it's due to the irrationality of the environmentalists.

What is wrong with wanting a better future for this planet. In most of my
studies of 'humanity' the most appalling constant found is the destruction 
of nature. Men have been at war with this planet for as long as history
tells of their struggle to dominate all things, including other men. It
is time for humanity to be welcomed into the 20th century with
technology. Most problems can be solved if one question is answered
before every action taken. That question is .. Will it bring harm to 
another person or animal. If the answer is yes, then it's wrong, don't
do it.


-- 
Take 'er easy.... Shane
.watch out for the lightning (a large-scale high-tension natural electric
discharge in the atmosphere)......!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
..informal... a sudden usually improbable stroke of fortune.......
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: E-Link: Ticket Americ
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Date: 13 Dec 92 14:53:04

In article <426.38.uupcb@pcs.sj.ca.us> paul.burnett@pcs.sj.ca.us (Paul Burnett)  writes:

   TO: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU

   JM>In the spirit of Carrie Nation who attacked saloons with an axe
     >and helped bring about prohibition.

   ...which ultimately didn't work.

   JM>In the spirit of Anthony Comstock who banned books in Boston.

   ...which _also_ ultimately didn't work.

   JM>In the spirit of Savonarola.

   ...who was burned at the stake.

   JM>These spirits live today.

   Are you saying all this futility pertains to environmentalism?

   ---
    . QMPro 1.0 41-8688 . ...from San Jose, CA

It applies to "Ticket America".  I have other quarrels with other
environmentalists, some of them even purely about matters of fact.

I mentioned these previous "reformers" as an indication that the
same spirit recurs in society and almost always leads to no good.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.systems
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: free Beyond the Limits program
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<JMC.92Dec11002339@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
	<1992Dec11.205941.5990@vexcel.com>
Date: 12 Dec 92 11:58:54

In response to my question as to whether the _Beyond the Limits_ simulation
allows the user to assume that *any* desired chemical transformations
of pollution and other materials can be achieved Dingo includes:

     Whether or not its eventually possible to transform or move
     all troublesome pollution, it either isn't possible or
     economical to do so now, so the model represents the current
     reality, unless you believe that there is no troublesome
     pollution now.

There is a question of the time-scale of the simulation.  If a
simulation purports to cover a time longer than it takes technology
to change, then it is unrealistic not to take technology change into
account.

In response to my question of whether human reaction to nuisances
could be incorporated by a user and my grumble that the extreme
aggregation enforced by the model made this difficult, Dingo included

     Since impacts vary in type and cost, it seems that the
     aggregate approach would be more accurate since it can take
     advantage of a larger sample space of impacts.  Also, if the
     response to these nuisances is to attempt to develop
     technological solutions, then there is a common denominator
     in analyzing impacts since such development requires that
     both capital and labor be removed from other activities.

It is much more realistic to argue about whether CO2 in the
atmosphere can be adjusted to human convenience than to make
a general argument about aggregate pollution.  Indeed reducing
nuisances or avoiding them requires capital and labor.  Therefore,
estimating the costs of one or the other should be a decisive
consideration, and a realistic simulation model should permit
assumptions about these costs as well as assumptions about how
humans will react to nuisances.

Purely qualitative arguments saying "if this or that continues
long enough we will all die, and therefore we must take action
right away" are no good, because there are too many such
phenomena, and we have to sort them out.  Without quantitative
reasoning, what is done is determined merely by what lobby with
a particular hobby can shout the loudest.

After all, if Dingo continues sitting in his chair at his terminal he
will surely fall off the chair and die in less than a month.  However,
we don't have to shout at him to get up, because we are confident that
he will get up as soon as sitting gets uncomfortable.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
From: EWALKER@utmmg.med.uth.tmc.edu (Eldon Walker)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Yet Another Anti-Greenpeace Scenario From Thin Air
Date: 16 Dec 1992 07:44:55 GMT
Organization: UT MEDICAL SCHOOL AT HOUSTON
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.23

In <JMC.92Dec15224205@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU writes: 
> What?  Is John Berryhill still mad about that?  I would consider it
> reasonable if he had been there on Dec 7, 1941, but I assume that if
> he had been, he wouldn't call Pearl Harbor small.
> --
 I called my father, who said Pearl Harbor seemed awfully small to him
when the trouble started. He also said that the entire country of
Vietnam seemed small during Tet (and he was in Hue when that started).
He won't even talk about Korea. (Apologies for wasted bandwidth; posted
for irony content only).

--Eldon Walker; ewalker@casper.med.uth.tmc.edu-------------------------- 
Persons attempting to find a motive in this narrative will be prosecuted;
persons attempting to find a moral in it will be banished;
persons attempting to find a plot in it will be shot. -S. Clemens                   
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: andrewt@watson.ibm.com (Andrew Taylor)
Subject: Zimbabwe's Campfire Program
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 05:52:06 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In article <724399427snx@tillage.DIALix.oz.au> gil@tillage.DIALix.oz.au (Gil Hardwick) writes:
>While I am at it, perhaps you might take a good hard look at the
>policies now in place in such countries as Zimbabwe and other East
>African states (I think it is called the Campfire Program, if someone
>would like to check) which have knocked down all the fences around
>the national parks and let the villagers back onto their land on the
>condition that the well being of the local environment and its stocks
>of wildlife underwrite the economic prosperity of the village.

>Of course it works very well indeed, since the program merely serves
>to reconstitute traditional management practices which had resulted
>in such an abundance and diversity of wildlife long before the stupid
>bloody Europeans arrived with their domestic stock and their colonial
>administration responsive only the religious morality of Europe.

Zimbabwe is in Southern Africa not East Africa.  Domestic stock was brought
there, not by Europeans, but by Bantu pastoralists over 1,000 years ago.
The country takes its name from the impressive stone towns these cattle-herders
built.  One theory is that environmental problems caused the failure and
abandonment of the largest of these towns.  

I was told (in Zimbabwe) that the Campfire Program involved communal lands,
not National Parks (and from memory the NPs are largely unfenced).  The
purpose is to encourage wildlife conservation and discourage poaching by
distributing to the locals some of the receipts from trophy hunting (and the
meat and skins).  Kenya has a similar program to distribute some of the
income from its national parks to people living nearby. Kenya's corruption 
probably results in much of these funds being diverted.

I don't know how successful the Campfire Program has been. I'd really like to
see a critical evaluation.  It certainly hasn't stop poaching.  Elephant
poaching continued in areas where the program was operating (until the CITES I
listing destroyed demand). Quite likely it was not locals doing the poaching.
Units from the Zimbabwe army have been more effective at repressing poaching.

Unfortunately the killing of Black Rhinos has continued at an alarming rate in
the last 3 years.  Zimbabwe is their last stronghold.  If a country with
reasonable infrastructure like Zimbabwe can't protect them, the only hope
is to destroy demand for Rhino horn by international pressure on countries
like Taiwan.

> ... Australian scientists themselves go overseas to work.

Some of them even post news articles whilst overseas.

Andrew Taylor
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: E-Link: Ticket America Campaign
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Date: 15 Dec 92 19:01:48

In article <7180@taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil> rovero@attu.oc.nps.navy.mil (Josh Rovero) writes:
  References: <0f_BK9y00iUz03IWV_@andrew.cmu.edu>
   Sender: news@taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil


   Thanks for the posting.  If I see even one of these stickers on
   a car or (heaven forbid) by the side of the road, I'll know who
   to name in the complaint.

   Here on the scenic Monterey Peninsula, there is a $1000 (yup, a kilobuck)
   fine for littering.

   -- 
   Josh Rovero   (rovero@oc.nps.navy.mil) | or Internet 5346p@cc.nps.navy.mil 
   Department of Oceanography, Code OC/Rv |      Bitnet 5346p@NAVPGS 
   Naval Postgraduate School              |              
   Monterey, CA  93943   (408) 646-2084   |

Neither you nor the Ticket America people will have to pay a littering
fine if their "ticket" ends up on the road.  The Supreme Court has
decided, correctly in my opinion, that free speech generally takes
priority over littering laws.  You'll just have to suffer it.  You
will get used to it, and they will get tired of pestering us.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: The Return of Nasty, Brutish and Sh
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 14:10:23 GMT

In article <1466601977@igc.apc.org> alanm@igc.apc.org (Alan McGowen) writes:
>
>would also like to offer the suggestion that this mode of life 
>persisted long enough that feedbacks of cultural adaptation onto 
>biological adaptation cannot be ruled out. While in general it is 
>quite difficult for an animal to evolve mechanisms to restrain 
>its own population growth except by strong coevolution, most of 
>the reasons for the difficulty may not apply to a species 
>evolving in small demes capable of transferring *acquired* traits 
>rapidly. 
>
>In my opinion, one of the most exciting areas of population 
>biology is the attempt to combine neoclassical evolutionary 
>theory based on population genetics with cultural inheritance. 
>I suspect that many surprises about ourselves will emerge from 
>this. For more about this very new field, see Robert Boyd and 
>Peter J. Richerson _Culture and the Evolutionary Process_, 
>University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1985.

Ah, I see Alan is still preaching the new Lysenkoism here on Sci
Environment. 

Gary
From: ddeocamp@pearl.tufts.edu (DANIEL M. DEOCAMPO)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: What about this, doomsters?
Date: 20 Dec 92 04:06:00 GMT
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <JMC.92Dec10150952@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>, jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes...
>from Science, Dec. 4, p. 1574
> 
>excerpt from article entitled "How to Grow Oil in the Persian Gulf".
> 
>Halophyte Enterprises, a company in Tucson, Arizona, set up to
>commercialize technology developed at the nearby University
>of Arizona's Environmental Research Laboratory (ERL), has sent
>a team to Jubail, Saudi Arabia.  There, it is planting _Salicornia
>beglovii_.  The seeds of this salt marsh plant yield not only
>edible oil but even protein meal for animal feed. [...]

>..
>.. 
>The next revolution in agriculture is going to be seawater-based
>irrigation" predicts Carl Hodges, the retired
>director of ERL  He believs not only that the project will
>prove economically profitable, but that the strategy
>could also help control global warming by covering barren
>coastal desrt with food crops that would soak up carbon
>dioxide.

Does the article discuss the problem of stablizing the ground surface?  This
would be an interesting project to follow, because farming on
such a dynamic system would demand well-designed techniques to avoid having
crops buried or just blown away.  Any ideas?

> 
>[food crops won't help the CO2 problem unless some of the carbon
>fixed by the crops is buried rather than re-oxidized - jmc
>opinion]

I read somewhere that we would need to reforest an area the size of Australia
 to counter
deforestation.  Even then, it would need to be done with fast-growing trees
which were buried after growth to sequester the carbon.  Even then, I wonder
how much that would counter other sources of atmospheric CO2.

>--
>John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
>*
>He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

PS- I don't mean to be out of it, but what do you mean by "doomsters"?

Daniel Deocampo                          Undergrad (I have an excuse for    
ddeocamp@pearl.tufts.edu                            any silly comments.)
                                         Department of Geology
---------------------|                   Environmental Studies Program
"Show me someone     |                   Tufts University
 who likes rivers,   |
 and I'll show you   |
 an alluvial fan."   |                                 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Re: Greenpeace and the Gulf War Spill (was: Notch another one up . . .)
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 17:05:20 GMT

In article <Jym.9Dec1992.1236@naughty-peahen> Jym Dyer <jym@mica.berkeley.edu> writes:

>>> I still want to know where was Greenpeace when Saddam was
>>> dumping oil in the Gulf and setting the fields on fire?

>=o= Allen Sherzer has had his question answered for him already.
>Twice.  He has twice opined that Greenpeace was not critical of
>the oil spill(s), and he has twice been directed to Greenpeace
>sources which prove him wrong.

No Jym you have not answered that question. I called Greenpeace at the time
and they faxed me all their press releases on the subject. They did condemn
environmental dammage in general but refused to condemn Saddam specifically
for his deliberate actions.

You have yet to post the text of this alleged souce you speak of where
Saddam is condemned for his deliberate actions. Perhaps you would like to take
this opportunity to post it?

  Allen

-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves        |
|  aws@iti.org     |  nothing undone"                                       |
+----------------------132 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
From: jmullison@ucsd.edu (Jerry Mullison)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: toxic spill remediation
Date: 15 Dec 92 20:56:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: ucsd.jmullison.38.0
Organization: Scripps Institution of Oceanography
NNTP-Posting-Host: drake.ucsd.edu

In article <1992Dec15.195341.4090@head-cfa.harvard.edu> ce@head-cfa.harvard.edu (HRC Central Engineering) writes:

>I am looking for a ''handbook'' or some references for 
>toxic waste clean up; particularly for cleaning up
>spilled mercury. If anybody know of a reference or
>know of the particular techniques please let me know.
>Thanks in advance...

>                        --Almus

Um......What have you done?;-)

Jerry Mullison        jmullison@ucsd.edu | As a grad student I speak only
Physical Oceanographic Research Division | for myself - certainly not for 
Scripps Institution of Oceanography      | Scripps (And I may be wrong ;-)).
Newsgroups: sci.environment