HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wreck@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com (R. Cage)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: How to deal with salt in water
Summary: Use hydroxide salts.
Keywords: salt, electrolysis, solar power
Date: 14 Aug 92 20:34:46 GMT
Organization: Ford Motor Company Scientific Research Labs, Dearborn, MI

In article <josef.713804795@uranium> Josef Moellers <mollers.pad@sni.de> writes:
>While thinking about what do do with solare energy, I have considered
>using solar electricity to split water into H2 and O2.
>Apparently, in oder to have a current flow through water, there has to
>be some salt in the water to make it conductive.
>How do I deal with the effect of this salt on the elctrodes? Don't they
>get clogged with the remains of these salts?

You must remove all salts in the water except for hydroxides.
If you have any chlorides, they will be converted to chlorates.
This may or may not be desirable.

If you remove all salts by reverse osmosis and then add sodium
hydroxide, the oxygen will be emitted as a gas.  I assume this
is what you want to do.
From: benda@dove.egr.msu.edu (James Benda)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: General Recycling
Keywords: Life Cycle, Recycling
Date: 17 Aug 92 20:55:19 GMT
Organization: College of Engineering, Michigan State University

Are there any general databases dealing with the current recycling numbers (ie
what is being recycled, how much, where, how much energy to do so, etc)?

Or does anyone know where I could find the info?

Thanks, 
  moe.
From: orc@usite-next.uchicago.edu (David Parsons)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Different Transit Plans for Different Population Clusters
Date: 21 Aug 92 19:23:26 GMT
Organization: Ministry of Skritching

In article <STEINLY.92Aug20165744@topaz.ucsc.edu> steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu (Steinn Sigurdsson) writes some things to be said for dams:
|Why dingo! Damns tend to create beautiful, useful lakes,
|and severly reduce flooding downstream! While some mammals
|get displaced a few kilometers, and salmon can have difficulty
|unless helped by ladders, habitat opens for numerous birds, fish
|and insects, and the stabilisation of downstream flow alleviates
|ecological impact on downstream habitats due to drought/flood
|cycles... ;-)

   Unless,  of course, you put a dam on a river that carries a lot of
silt, then you get (within far too few years) barren downstream habitats
and slit buildup in the new lake.

|It all depends on how you look at it...

   ... as well as the consequences of it.
		 __
   david parsons \/ orc@pell.chi.il.us
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
	<JMC.92Aug16203921@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
	<1992Aug18.054745.21158@meteor.wisc.edu>
	<1992Aug19.074058.8060@techbook.com>
Distribution: na
Date: 19 Aug 92 18:47:38

California, the largest state in population and also in agricultural
production, uses 35 million acre-feet of water per year.  The Columbia
River flow is 180 million acre-feet per year.  There is no reason,
except environmentalist obstructionism, why Oregon and Washington
should have water shortages.  Environmental extremists adore
shortages, because they lend themselves to their "Repent, the world is
about to come to an end!" slogans.

The environmentalists today are the successors, and maybe even
descendants, of the religious enthusiasts in the U.S. of the
last century.  However, it doesn't seem as though they are having
quite the same success.  For example, many colleges, in response
to the religious enthusiasm, required that everyone attend chapel
at 7am.  It took a while to get rid of that.

I suppose some environmentalists and PC enthusiasts might develop
enthusiasm for the equivalent of compulsory chapel, but so far they
have only managed consciousness raising sessions in some college
dormitories.

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

Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: #sigurd@krill.ii.uib.no (Sigurd Tjelmeland)
Subject: Re: Whale rights - Science and sentimen
Reply-To: #sigurd@krill.ii.uib.no (Sigurd Tjelmeland)
Organization: Institute of Informatics, University of Bergen, Norway
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 06:03:32 GMT

I think this misses the point in the whale debate.

The people opposed to whale catch have to explain
why we should distinguish between whales and
other animals, like elk, reindeer etc. that are
hunted.

sigurd@imr.no
Sigurd Tjelmeland, Institute of Marine Research, Bergen, Norway
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: Andrew.Robinson@anu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Whale rights - Science and sentimen
Organization: Australian National University
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 03:09:31 GMT

Hi Kevin!

In article <1992Aug17.181809.13963@nuchat.sccsi.com> kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com
(Kevin Brown) writes:
[deletia]

>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.

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
Newsgroups: sci.environment,alt.politics.clinton
From: dean@vexcel.com (dean alaska)
Subject: Re: CLINTON SPEECH TEXT: EARTH DAY SPEECH
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder, CO
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 21:35:20 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:
>
>>>>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.

I know that some had predicted an ozone hole somewhere in the arctic
that didn't appear, supposedly because of a mild winter.  If such a
hole does appear, analogous to those in the south, they would occur
over an area with a stagnant air mass and the coldest temps, which
could be parts of north america, though not the U.S.  There is, however,
ozone depletion over the U.S., and it is strong over the New England
area, as documented by various different sensors.  So while there
may be no ozone "hole" over Kennebunkport, there is a little dip.
>
>>>>     I believe it is time ... to recognize that Adam Smith's
>>>> invisible hand can have a green thumb.
>>>Here (no sarcasm) is the best idea in the whole speech.  This should be
>>>put into practice immediately.  I think, however, that the Republicans
>>>are much more interested in taking this approach than the Democrats.
>>Has Bush talked about these proposals at all?
>
>I don't know about Bush in particular, but I've heard this approach
>being recommended in Republican circles for years, from Newt Gingrich
>in particular.  Such initiatives are never allowed out of committee in
>a Democrat-controlled congress, though.
>
Then maybe Clinton will bring the Congress in line.
>-- 
>Mike Van Pelt          | What happens if a big asteroid hits Earth?
>mvp@netcom.com         | Judging from realistic simulations involving a
>                       | sledge hammer and a common laboratory frog, we
>                       | can assume it will be pretty bad. -- Dave Barry


-- 

		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)
From: RMG3@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Science in Greenhouse Debate
Date: 12 Aug 92 16:08:27 GMT
Organization: Penn State University


  The December 31, 1991 issue of EOS (volume 72, no. 53, p. 593)
carried a series of comments and rebuttals between M.E. Schlesinger
and X. Jiang  and J. S. Rsibey, M. D. Handel, and P. H. Stone.
Schlesinger and Jiang were arguing (and giving testable reasons)
that a 10 year delay in beginning CO2 controls would have minimal
impact.  Risbey et al argued that the delay would have serious
effects (and named testable features as well).

  In the July 28, 1992 issue of EOS (vol. 73, no. 30, p. 321)
the debate is renewed from letters sent to the paper.  The editors
noted that most mail they received took issue with Schlesinger
and Jiang's position.  Three are reprinted in this edition, with
a rebuttal by Schlesinger.

  EOS is the American Geophysical Union's newpaper.  The membership
is international (come to think of it, all the printed letters
came from outside the US).  The Union's membership includes
atmospheric, oceanic, and space scientists in addition to the
narrower description of 'geophysical'.  I strongly recommend
looking into these articles (_all_ of them, not just those which
fit your preconceptions), and reading the paper regularly.

Bob Grumbine
rmg3@grebyn.com
Xref: sparky sci.environment:10704 sci.energy:4027
From: stead@skadi.CSS.GOV (Richard Stead)
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.energy
Subject: Re: Nature's Revenge (toll booths vs. cars)
Date: 17 Aug 92 13:45:12 GMT
Followup-To: sci.energy

In article <1992Aug14.185818.11788@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com>, c23st@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com (Spiros Triantafyllopoulos) writes:
> 
> a while back we discussed (too civil a word :-)) whether cars pay their
> fair share of using roads and other public facilities (bridges, police,
> environmental, etc). Tollways were considered a way in which to get cars
> to pay for some of that. 
...
> I can see the state getting a double homer on this. First tolls are
> collected, and second, lots more gasoline has to be burned in order to
> collect the tolls (while waiting, hence more state tax). The motorists
> get hit by a double homer also, paying for the tolls and getting
> crappy roads, wasting time (LOTS of IT), gasoline (Ditto), ...
> 
> And for the sci.environment crowd. Is the benefit from collecting what
> MAY amount to fair share of road cost worth the environmental cost of
> having 3 miles' worth of trafic jam every few miles? 
> 
> Please don't suggest bicycles or mass transit... Pedalling 20 miles thru
> the south side / south suburbs of Chicago (or using mass transit there :-)
> is not all that feasible in all cases.

I'd suggest a bigger gas tax.  If they're collecting the money anyway, might
as well collect it all at once.  Paying tax when you pay for gas certainly
doesn't take any time, doesn't hold up traffic, doesn't burn more gas.
If you're worried about varying tax rates - just have the Federal Gov't
mandate the tax rate, but have the states collect it and apply it to
transportation, environment and energy needs (none of the business where
all the taxes go to Washington and then they send 'em back to the states
after extracting massive overhead).  Tax would be designed so that most
states would produce a surplus that is then sent to Washington to address
truly national transportation, environment and energy needs.  And since
you pay the same tax everywhere, there's no unfairness problems.  And
don't use the money for anything that is not connected to the burning of
gas - people should be able to see some direct results for the cash
they put in and it should be related to what they're paying for.

You know - I've seen some self-described "transportation experts" claim
that toll booth delays were actually good for traffic flow.  By some
twisted logic they thought that traffic actually moves better with toll
obstacles than without.  And these people are paid from our taxes.


--
Richard Stead
Center for Seismic Studies
Arlington, VA
stead@seismo.css.gov
Xref: sparky sci.environment:10700 ba.transportation:2014 rec.railroad:6541
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Newsgroups: sci.environment,ba.transportation,rec.railroad
Subject: Re: The Rebuilding of the Wrecked West Oakland I-880 Segment
Date: 17 Aug 92 06:29:20 GMT
Organization: LLNL

In article <1992Aug16.222841.23030@news.arc.nasa.gov> mcmahon@tgv.com writes:
>
>In article <1992Aug15.032831.18159@s1.gov>, lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:

:(about the I-880 section along Cypress in Oakland...)

:=	Now, it will be rebuilt, as I have learned from recent
:=newspaper stories (for example, _The San Francisco Examiner_, Aug. 13,
:=1991, p. A4)

:=	The original 1.25 mi. stretch will be rebuilt for about $695
:=million. The job will be started in January 1994, and the rebuilt
:=freeway segment should open in 1998.

:I suspect those folks who were forced onto other routes because of the
:loss of I-880 will be happy to hear it's on the way back.  I doubt the
:folks in that Oakland neighborhood will be happy, I think the area
:looks and sounds a lot nicer without I-880 going through it.

	I agree. But there will be that replacement SP/Amtrak rail
line coming through, although it will certainly not be some
double-decker elevated structure. I'm sure that the trains, even with
their diesel engines and their horns, will be better neighbors than
that freeway.

:However, they called a smog alert for the Silicon Valley today and
:I begin to wonder whether or not that $700 million should have
:been used to improve public transit in that region and get
:more people out of their cars.

	I agree. That replacement freeway costs more than the BART
extension under construction to Dublin ($570 million for 11 miles),
and will be 8 times more expensive per unit length. For this money,
one could get a BART extension out to Livermore, or else build a new
light-rail system somewhere.

/Loren
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: Josef Moellers <mollers.pad@sni.de>
Subject: How to deal with salt in water
Summary: How do I deal with salt in water I want to split into H2 and O2?
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 15:06:35 GMT
Organization: Siemens Nixdorf Info.Sys. AG, Paderborn, Germany
Keywords: salt, electrolysis, solar power

Hi,

While thinking about what do do with solare energy, I have considered
using solar electricity to split water into H2 and O2.

Apparently, in oder to have a current flow through water, there has to
be some salt in the water to make it conductive.

How do I deal with the effect of this salt on the elctrodes? Don't they
get clogged with the remains of these salts?

-- 
| Josef Moellers		| c/o Siemens Nixdorf Informationssysteme AG  |
|  USA: mollers.pad@sni-usa.com	| Abt. STO-XS 113	   | Riemekestrasse   |
| !USA: mollers.pad@sni.de	| Phone: (+49) 5251 835124 | D-4790 Paderborn |
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.energy
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Nature's Revenge (toll booths vs. cars)
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<1992Aug14.212852.10235@csrd.uiuc.edu>
	<JMC.92Aug14165324@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> <1992Aug15.035111.18518@s1.gov>
Date: 14 Aug 92 21:13:06

But they promised the bridges would be free and the Bridge authority
dissolved once the bonds were paid off.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: sci.environment,ba.transportation,rec.railroad
From: whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Subject: Re: The Rebuilding of the Wrecked West Oakland I-880 Segment
Reply-To: whheydt@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 21:30:36 GMT

In article <610ms0f.loren@netcom.com> loren@netcom.com (Loren Hart) writes:
>whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt) writes:
>: On the general topic . . .  Am I the only one that noticed that the
>: predictions of air quality data were consistnely worse that the actual
>: measurements?  Last week the Chron was prediciting worse air quality
>: than actually happened.
>
>Actually the BAAQMB is claiming that the pollution was lower than
>predictions because they got the word out to people to pollute less
>(e.g. drive less, not have BBQs, etc) and they did.  I don't know what
>evidence they had to support this claim, but it is what they claim.

Talk aboout a no-lose situation.

If it's better than predicted, they get to claim their warning system
worked.

If it's the same, then their predictions are accurate.

If it's worse, then they can claim that nobody heeded the warnings and
that the expected values were based on folks heeding the warning.

I wish my job worked like that.

	--Hal
-- 
Hal Heydt                    |    "Boycott Time-Warner"
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |         --J. Danforth Quayle
510-823-5447                 |    "... kill all the lawyers."
whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |         --William Shakespeare
Xref: sparky sci.environment:10788 sci.engr.civil:386
From: shaw@s119.es.llnl.gov (Henry Shaw 510 423-4645)
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.engr.civil
Subject: Re: DYNTOX program (U.S. EPA)
Date: 21 Aug 92 18:37:26 GMT
Followup-To: sci.environment
Distribution: na
Organization: Earth_Sciences_Dept.,_LLNL

In article <1992Aug20.194248.3000@csx.cciw.ca>, u020@csx.cciw.ca (I. Wong) writes:
|> I like to find out anybody out there have a source and executable code
|> on DYNTOX (by US EPA). If you do have this, can you send it to me
|> by e-mail. I like to have it ASAP. Thank you.
|> 
|> I. Wong
|> e-mail address: u020@csx.cciw.ca 


All the EPA models, including DYNTOX, are available for download from the EPA's Center for 
Exposure Assessment Modeling BBS in Athens GA.  Call 404-546-3402, 8-N-1, 1200-9600bps with 
your modem.

-- 
Henry Shaw, Earth Sciences Dept., LLNL |    All opinions are my own.
Internet: shaw4@llnl.gov               |  
CIS: 76347,2523                        |
Fidonet: Henry Shaw at 1:161/55        |
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.energy
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Nature's Revenge (toll booths vs. cars)
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<1992Aug14.212852.10235@csrd.uiuc.edu>
	<JMC.92Aug14165324@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> <1992Aug15.035111.18518@s1.gov>
	<JMC.92Aug14211306@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 14 Aug 92 21:19:37

They really did promise.  Doesn't it destroy the citizens' faith
in government when it breaks a promise?  How can we trust anyone
at s1.gov when the government breaks a promise?
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: houle@nmt.edu (Paul Houle)
Subject: Re: O3 or Climate chng. grant sources? (pub./priv.)
Keywords: R&D, Openings sought, O3, CO2, Atm.Comp. Modeling, data
Organization: New Mexico Tech
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 20:12:01 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.183907.2641@mont.cs.missouri.edu> bynum@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu writes:

>                  Greetings: 
>          There is an accompanying item to this one which I composed and 
>posted at the same time, (Subject: Stratospheric O3, Human Factors) That
>one may serve as a lead-in, framing questions asked in this posting. 
>         I have interests, academic background, and skills, which could 
>be relevant to studies investigating certain problems connected to O3 
>layer & UVB transparency, green-house gases & climate change trends.  
>         Equilibrium plus finite rate chemical kinetics processes 
>modeling, global circulation models, are among the tools to be built, 
>verified, modified, to fit accumulated data.  Abatement schemes, if 
>found to be needed, are to be crafted then evaluated pending 
>implementation.  

	Quite a bit of this is already being done...  Our knowledge of the
chemical kinetics of the stratosphere has developed quite rapidly in the
last few years.  Quite a bit of literature is availible about the mechanisms
of ozone loss at the south pole;  both interesting chemistry and dynamics
are going on there.

>         Furthermore, there may be, in storage, substantial amounts of 
>possibly relevant new and archived data (from sensors at ground level, 
>airborne, or spaceborne) collected by current and past projects.  
>Various news reports suggest that, although the bulk gets stored, often 
>only a fraction might be evaluated and published, due to limited person-
>power, limited scope or extent of routine computer assisted archiving 
>practice.  

	Yes,  this kind of research is going on quite a bit.  My present
project at work is doing some of the last data analysis on data gotten from
the SME satellite.  Hopefully this is going to lead to the first halfway
decent observed climatology of atomic oxygen in the upper mesosphere/
lower thermosphere.  It is amazing how much people have forgotten about the
data archives...  The calibration constants for one data set I am using have
been,  for all intents and purposes,  lost.

>    # What are the programs, entity conducting them, contact person 
>name, (address, e-mail address of available, phone no.)?  Entities in 
>the US or abroad, public or private sector, foundations and the like, 
>are relevant.  
>    # What may be the grant-issuing sources for this topic area? 

	NASA and the NSF seem to have a deal of money earmarked for this sort
of thing.


--
Organization: TECHNION - Israel Institute of Technology.
Date: Tuesday, 18 Aug 1992 11:26:47 IST
From: <CCASUZI@TECHNION.BITNET>
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: whale hunting

I sent this message to Sigurd, but I thought I'd send it to the list
as well. --Susan

======================================================================== 26
Date:         Tue, 18 Aug 92 10:32:03 IST
From:         Susan <CCASUZI@TECHNION>
Subject:      Re:Re:whale hunting
To:           Sigurd <sigurd@imr.no>



>The people opposed to whale catch have to explain
>why we should distinguish between whales and
>other animals, like elk, reindeer etc. that are
>hunted.

>sigurd@imr.no
>Sigurd Tjelmeland, Institute of Marine Research, Bergen, Norway


I think one important difference is that the whale is likely to be hunted
to extinction, whereas the elk, caribou, reindeer etc aren't. In North
America, there are controlls (albeit not so perfect ones) on the amount
of ungulate killing. With whales we are talking about big business and a
situation in which the hunters to be controlled have a lot more power
than the controlling organizations. Take Norway's decision to go whaling
regardless of any decision of the International Whaling Commission 1992.
Is that enough for starters?

ccasuzi@technion.technion.ac.il
Susan Feingold, Computer Centre, Technion, Haifa, Israel