HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: NEWS: Radioactive Sand Proves Nuclear Reprocessing Unlawful
Date: 9 Sep 92 14:59:52 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst

In article <1992Sep8.190417.29216@oracle.us.oracle.com> mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:
>Gotta love Greenpeace propaganda.  See below.
>
>In article <Greenpeace.1Sep1992.8am1@naughty-peahen.org> jym@mica.berkeley.edu (Greenpeace via Jym Dyer) writes:
>>[Greenpeace Press Release from Greenbase -- Redistribute Freely]
>
>>RADIOACTIVE SAND FROM SELLAFIELD PROVES NUCLEAR REPROCESSING IS 
>>UNLAWFUL 
>
>>GERMANY, August 18, 1992 (GP) In an old bunker in the free port 
>>of Hamburg Greenpeace is today presenting to the press 
>>radioactive sand contaminated with plutonium. 
>
>How contaminated is it?  There is a big defference between detectable
>levels of contamination and dangerous levels of contamination.

Really? What's the safe level of plutonomium contamination? Please
provide references.

>
>>Sand from the shore 
>>in the area around the Sellafield reprocessing plant in England.  
>>Sand in which children play and families have their picnics.  
>
>Note the brazen scare tactics.

If, in fact, public beaches are dangerously contaminated with plutonium,
then it would be rather wierd not be be alarmed.

>
>>Many people have become ill with cancer in this region.  
>
>Of course.  Many people have become ill with cancer in every region.
>Note how the carefully avoid saying that radiation is the cause -
>being caught in blatant lies is embarrassing.

It is a matter of controversy in the scientific literature right now.
Check some back issues of Nature for details on the Sellafield cancer
controversy.

>
>>With THORP the total emissions from 
>>plants at Sellafield will increase by 1,000 per cent.  
>
>1000 per cent is much scarier than 10 times, even though 10 times is
>clearer.  And so what?  If current levels are a million times less
>than regulatory limits who cares about a ten times increase?

Apparently you don't know anything at all about the Sellafield plant.
The plant features a pipe which has been pouring Pu wastes into the
Irish sea for some decades. "Regulatory limits" are not very strict.

>
>>Up to 27.5 million curies of radioactivity will then be 
>>released annually.  This may be compared with 
>>the approximately 50 million curies which, according to 
>>official data, were released at Chernobyl during the 
>>accident. 
>
>Now why do I think that something in that paragraph smells fishy?

Beats me. Got something more substantive to say?

-- 


yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu
From: rovero@oc.nps.navy.mil (Josh Rovero)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Gallup Poll on Global Warming
Date: 12 Sep 92 16:49:09 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey CA

Indeed, there is a great deal of investigation of all the feedback 
mechanisms in the climate system.  The feedback mechanisms are not
yet determined with any certainty.

If there are negative feeedback mechanisms of the same order of magnitude
as the climate response to CO2, the net result is a stable system that
tries to return to its initial state.  If the feedback mechanisms are
positive, they accelarate the change.

Paleoclimatology gives us some clues as to the limits of natural pertubations
of earth's climate.  
-- 
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   |
Xref: sparky sci.environment:11152 misc.consumers:16276
From: kim@.cs.umass.edu
Newsgroups: sci.environment,misc.consumers
Subject: "Paper Or Plastic?"
Date: 8 Sep 92 00:07:49 GMT
Reply-To: kim@.cs.umass.edu ()
Followup-To: sci.environment
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst

An FAQ?

Which is better for the environment, paper grocery bags or plastic ones?

I'm a novice environmentalist.


                            
   John Kim               Before you slip into unconsciousness 
                          I'd like to have another kiss...
                                                       (jm)
From: frazier@kona.cs.ucla.edu (Gregory Frazier)
Subject: Re: Gallup Poll on Global Warming
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 20:05:32 GMT

Ketil M. Malde (ketil@due.ii.uib.no) wrote:
: In article <1992Sep9.191832.18599@wega.rz.uni-ulm.de> SCHLOERER@rzmain.rz.uni-ulm.de (Jan Schloerer) writes:
: Remember we had ice ages (~7degC colder average temp than today, I
: seem to remember, but that may be local) and that was before any
: human-induced pollution.  Also, there used to be beech(?)-forests
: where I live a couple of hundred years ago, and now there's mostly
: pine and fir and the occasional oak.  So it has been warmer than it is
: now. 

Yes, but that isn't the point.  The deal here is that 1) we may be
accellerating the process to a frightening degree and 2) if this does
happen, it will cause a great deal of human suffering, *even if it is
completely "natural"*.  Of course, we may not be warming the Earth at
all, but if we are, dollars to doughnuts we're in deep doo-doo.

: Also, keep in mind that a moderate warming might *benefit* the earth and
: most living creatures.  At least, I'd be very cautious of screaming
: about armageddon, even if it can be shown that the earth *is* warming
: up.

There's only one Earth - don't bet anything you aren't willing to
lose, as my Dad always told me (actually, he said don't bring anything
to the poker table you're not willing to lose, but there it is).

--
"They thought to use and shame me but I win out by nature, because a true
freak cannot be made.  A true freak must be born." - Geek Love

Greg Frazier	frazier@CS.UCLA.EDU	!{ucbvax,rutgers}!ucla-cs!frazier
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: steinman@is.morgan.com (Jan Steinman)
Subject: Re: Are Your Light Bulbs Radioactive? (more data)
Organization: Morgan Stanley & Company
	<STEINMAN.92Aug24173740@hawk.is.morgan.com> <10503@sun13.scri.fsu.edu>
	<STEINMAN.92Sep2084440@hawk.is.morgan.com>
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 15:00:10 GMT

In article <STEINMAN.92Sep2084440@hawk.is.morgan.com> steinman@is.morgan.com (Jan Steinman) writes:
   In article <10503@sun13.scri.fsu.edu> jac@ds8.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr) writes:
      In article <STEINMAN.92Aug24173740@hawk.is.morgan.com> steinman@is.morgan.com (Jan Steinman) writes:

      >Teach your children how to use a geiger counter!

      Good idea.  But do not stop there.  Suggest that they put a
      bottle of GatorAde (sorry you folks at UF, any of the
      "replacement" sport drinks) next to it.  <quite a nice effect,
      BTW> Compare to CF bulb.  Look for any warning label on the
      respective packages.  A learning experience!  Also might compare
      to a banana and your own body.

   I didn't think Mr. Carr knew what he was talking about, but was
   unwilling to reply without some data...

I haven't yet purchased a CFB, or GatorAde, or a lantern mantle to
measure, but I wanted to calibrate some of the more preposterous
assertions flying around bananas and potassium. So I placed two
multi-vitimins containing a total of 20mg K about 1 cm from my Geiger
counter's alpha window. Heres the results, merged with the earlier
results I posted:

	20mg K	banana	normal	nuke	flight
day	15.23	15.71	15.69	56.11	404.1
night	15.09	15.39	15.36

Once again, no statistical significance. Since a banana has
considerably less that 20mg K, yet the vitimin reading was lower, we
can assume that daily variation in the background level is greater
than the influence of radioactive potassium found in ordinary foods.
In particular, I didn't note solar activity during either trial. (The
proper way to do this is to take the control reading simultaneously,
but I only have one of my counters with me.)

Someone wanna send me some plutonium and thorium laced beach sand to count? :-)
--
: : Jan Steinman	   steinman@is.morgan.com		 Bytesmiths : :
: : 2002 Parkside Court				   West Linn, OR 97068-2767 : :
: : 503/657-7703					       212/956-8722 : :
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Carburetors, gasoline, and why I don't recycle
Date: 10 Sep 92 09:09:09 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <18adv2INN9mn@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> bl713@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Lev Tarasov) writes:
>
>Conspiracy theories may be easy to generate, but within the 
>transportation sector, documented conspiracies have occured in the 
>past. The US used to have a large network of trolleys in its cities.
>To promote private transportation, GM bought many of these trolley
>systems and scrapped them. Now I would call this a criminal cons-
>piracy, though maybe others might just call it free enterprise.

GM, Firestone, and Standard Oil bought the Red Line trolley system
in Los Angles and replaced it with modern buses. The bus line went
broke a few years later as more people took to automobiles as the
WWII shortages eased in the post-war period. The companies were
taken to court and accused of restraint of trade, they were fined
$1 and costs. That's the *one* case brought against the transport
giants versus the obsolete trolley. In other cities, trolleys were
discontinued for other reasons. In Atlanta the trolley system was
replaced by buses when citizen complaints about the system being
a hazard to traffic reached epic proportions in the post war period. 
The bus line went broke a decade later. Now, decades later, there 
is a bus system again, MARTA, that survives on Federal, State, and 
local tax subsidy. Citizen outcries continue against the balky slow 
buses tying up traffic, but since it's a major pork barrel, the 
politicians defend it.

Gary
From: steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu (Steinn Sigurdsson)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: --Warming Threat to Economy
Date: 10 Sep 92 15:14:31
Organization: Lick Observatory/UCO
	<1992Sep10.211840.14872@vexcel.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: topaz.ucsc.edu
In-reply-to: dean@vexcel.com's message of Thu, 10 Sep 1992 21:18:40 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.211840.14872@vexcel.com> dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) writes:


   In article <STEINLY.92Sep10140417@topaz.ucsc.edu> steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu (Steinn Sigurdsson) writes:
   >In article <1466601760@igc.apc.org> tgray@igc.apc.org (Tom Gray) writes:

   >   According to IIE's William Cline, global warming by a predicted 2.5
   >   degrees Celsius (C) by the year 2050 will reduce U.S. gross
   >   domestic product (GDP) by about one percent, or $60 billion. 
   >   However, Cline noted, global warming is cumulative and irreversible
   >   and is projected to reach 5.7 degrees C by the year 2100 and 10-18
   >   degrees C by 2300.  The impact of the latter figure would be a drop
   >   of six to 20 percent of GDP.

   >Ignoring the ludicrous 10-18 K warming figure (what _did_ they
   >do to get that? Do a linear extrapolation of 2.5K/50years and add
   >nominal error bars? ) it could be noted that 1% variations in GDP
   >are economic noise, and US growth rates are 2-3% per year long term
   >average. Anyway, isn't the whole problem excess economic growth
   >by the "North"? ;-)

   I would assume they used an exponential growth extrapolation, which
   would be more reasonable than linear _assuming_ no actions are
   taken to limit CO2 and equivalents.

Actually, the numbers are precisely the linear extrapolation that
I postulated - unless someone provides a citation I think it can
be assumed that is precisely what was done - IPCC figures it ain't.

	  The growth that some
   environmentalists (ala Club of Rome) complain about is not GNP
   (money) growth, it is the growth in _physical_ throughput, which
   may or may not correlate to GNP growth in the future.  

Sure, just switch to a paperless service economy - you can
generate almost arbitary growth by paying enough lawyers and ad agents ;-)

	And while a
   1% variation in economic growth for 1 year might be noise, it
   wouldn't be when accumulated over many years. In any case,
   if the temp increased by over 10 degrees C, a decreasing GDP might
   not be our most pressing concern.

If they mean a 1% drag _per_year_ than the economic loss is
much higher than $60G - more like $3T - and it's still economic noise,
growth fluctuates by 2-4% per year for completely mystifying reasons
 - BTW I'd WAG $3T as being equivalent to replacing Chicago over the
next 50 years - again minor in national economic terms.
	I do agree though that a 10-18K warming in 300 years would
make GDP considerations somewhat irrelevant.

*  Steinn Sigurdsson   			Lick Observatory      	*
*  steinly@lick.ucsc.edu		"standard disclaimer"  	*
*  If you ever have to go to Shoeburyness			*
*  Take the A-road, the ok road, that's the best!		*
*  Go motoring on The A13!	- BB 1983			*
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: andrewt@watson.ibm.com (Andrew Taylor)
Subject: Re: Neutralizing hurricanes
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 18:01:09 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In article <1992Sep11.134106@zippy.gso.uri.edu> shipman@zippy.gso.uri.edu
(Scott Lindstrom) writes:
>What nonsense.  Hurricanes are NOT `integral parts of local ecosystems'. 
>Hurricanes are rare events (lt's been 25 years since one hit Miami!) ...
> ... but any local ecosystem that depends on hurricanes is destined for
>extinction just as surely as weather patterns change.

25 years is a short time in the growth of a forest. I don't know
about Florida but there are tropical rainforest species which depend
on clearings in forest created by storm damage.

Given that we know fires, which may be similarly infrequent, can be
potent forces in shaping an eco-system it would not be surprising
if hurricances were a significant in force in shaping ecosystems.

Andrew Taylor
From: rovero@oc.nps.navy.mil (Josh Rovero)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Deaths from Uranium Mine
Date: 15 Sep 92 19:28:51 GMT
Organization: Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey CA

Gee, any chances they are mining something more conventional, like gold,
or silver, and using the standard (in the old days) cyanide compounds?

That would be more in line with the reported symptoms.....

-- 
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   |
From: ware@ee.ualberta.ca (Philip Andrew Ware)
Subject: Scrubbing alcohol from fermentation CO2
Summary: Any ideas on removing C2H5OH from fermentation gases
Keywords: CO2, removal
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 05:40:08 GMT



I've been trying the "au naturel" CO2 fertilization with
some success.  Three things I have noticed though are

1. I have a film, for lack of a better term, accumilating
   on the water surface.  I would guess that it is either
   the CO2 de-'whatever gas coming of solution is called'
   or a buildup of fermentation by products (whatever those
   might be).

2. I've also noticed a change in behavior in most of my fish.
   Some for the worse, some for the better.  I'm about to
   attribute this to the change in pH from 6.8 when the 
   fermentation is really humming along, to 7.8-8.0 when it's
   beginning to trail off.  They're used to the higher range. 

3. The magnum is accumilating alot of gas (presumably CO2, but
   I can't be sure), although it does disappear when the 
   fermentation begins to trail off.

   The setup:

   20gal freshwater
   moderately planted
   4 inches Montana pea gravel
   2 20watt daylights
   2 20watt PL/AQ growlights
   magnum 350
   aquaclear 300
   
   2 bronze corys
   5 black tetras
   2 clown loaches (3 inch)
   2 celebes tetras

Does anyone have any suggestions for scrubbing the gases other 
than CO2 from the fermentation products.  I have yet to try
bubbling the raw gas through a bubbling jar, but it is in the
works.  I figured any obvious additive to the water would either
be detrimental to the fish - like I must be worried; pumping moonshine
into my favorite tank :-() - or remove the CO2.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Thanks, 

-- 
Phil Ware
ware@bode.ee.ualberta.ca
From: grenus@pasture.ecn.purdue.edu (Karen M Grenus)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: newt's age
Summary: How old do newts get
Keywords: newt lifespan
Date: 4 Sep 92 21:45:14 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

Hi ,
	I've had a red-spotted newt for a pet that I got 9 years ago and
it's still living. How old do newts get in nature/captivity?

Karen
Organization: Graduate School of Industrial Administr., Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 08:51:05 -0400 
From: Christian David Lehr <cl2s+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: [F] Frogs


Is there anyone out there in netland who knows anything about frogs?  My
brother was given two frogs about a year ago, and has kept them in a 10g
tank.  The tank wasn't heated, and he only had an undergravel filter
running.
The frogs are a dark green on top, with a greenish-yellow belly.  One is
approx. 5 1/2" (mouth to foot), and the other is about 3".  I don't know
what they are at all, but I was told that they could be African frogs. 
I'm asking because I want to move them into my 55g tank, and I don't
want to kill them.
If there is anyone who could tell me what they are, or a better idea of
what they are, I would appreciate it.  Also, I would like to know what
other fish I could keep in the tank with them, and what temperature they
would be best suited for.  Thanks in advance.

Chris Lehr  cl2s@andrew.cmu.edu
From: z_mcwestkj@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: scorpion info needed & available
Date: 9 Sep 92 20:13:22 CST
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

hey there, scorps-fans!!!

i need a little assistance in some scorpion research!

anything you'd like to share, just holler!

i've been studying scorpions for over a decade now, so i also
know quite a bit about 'em, if you want to ask anything, i'll try 
to excavate an answer.

see also posting under   *sci.bio  scorpion info needed and available*.


Kari
SFA Box 15543
Nacogdoches, Texas
75962

tanks
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
From: fernando@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu (Fernando Pineda)
Subject: seasonal and daily variations
Reply-To: fernando@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu (Fernando Pineda)
Organization: Johns Hopkins University/Applied Physics Labs
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 17:15:27 GMT

All these coral spawning reports are interesting to me because they all seem to
confirm the importance of seasonal fluctuations of light cylces and 
temperatures. I'm curious to know how necessary it is to be very precise about 
these things. For example, are people having good success with simple schedules 
or are you all taking schedules from the nautrical almanac or some such 
reference?

The Naval Observatory has several nice publications for sun/moon cycles, but 
can anyone recommend a reference for seasonal and daily temperature 
fluctuations on specific reefs?

I always thought having seasons in my tank would be cool so my current project 
is to build  a microprocessor controller to automate my tank. I don't have much 
time to work on it just now, so currently it only controls fixed day/night 
cycles and a dosing pump. This is just as well since I'm still shaking it down 
and making sure that it is robust with respect to power failures and operator 
errors! (I'd be interested in communicating with other people who might have 
automated their tanks with microcontrollers.)

Anyway, I expect that I'll soon have the seasonal day/night cycles simulated. 
My thoughts were to use a simplified version of the Naval Observatory's 
computer model, but in the meantime I'd just assume code up a trivial seasonal 
model if that works well for other peoples tanks.


Finally, in previous postings I reported terrible high temperature problems. 
These were solved by dumping my Silent-One pump and replacing with with an 
Iwaki. Temperatures are now easily controllable in the 72-78 degree range. 
Everything in the tank looks much happier, I've found that automating the 
additives has also helped the look of the tank. This was a cheap improvement: I 
just connected some tubing to a powerhead, dumped it in a 1 gallon wide mouth 
jar with the proper concentration of additives and then plugged it into the 
controller. The controller turns on the powerhead/a.k.a. doser for one minute 
when the lights come on in the morning. Does anyone think that the time of day 
that the additives are added might be significant?

Fernando Pineda (fernando@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
From: Kathleen Bedard <mistress@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Re: Wound on Purple Paradise Fish
X-To: CARTER J WHITE
Organization: The Zoo of Ids
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 20:36:00 GMT

CJW>        I got a pair of purple paradise fish about two weeks ago and the mal
CJW>developed a sore near the tail (caudal) fin.  I've read in a few books that
CJW>gouramies get these but no cures are given.  Has anyone had this problem and
CJW>did you cure the fish?
CJW>         My worst fear is that I will have to "put the fish down" because th
CJW>REALLY LIKEs these fish and got them for me (read her).
CJW>        Please email me as soon as possible.

CJW>                Thanks,

CJW>                        CW

I have two blue paradise - male and female.  I have no troubles as far
as conflicts/fighting.  What other fish do you have with them?  I have
mine in a community tank with angels, swords, tetras (4 types).  I've
never had an occurance of aggressiveness with the paradise fish.  Maybe
its a fungus?  Can you describe the sore?

Kathleen

---
 * SLMR 2.1a *