HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Subject: Re: Nuclear Power and Climate Change
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 16:44:50 GMT

In article <w6xr1_c@dixie.com> jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:
>dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) writes:
>
>>This is not at all what it was about.  It did not use any renewables
>>or "soft energy" sources
>>nor did it force any conservation - in fact conservation was not
>>mentioned.  Remember that conservation and efficiency are different.
>>No social changes were suggested, let alone forced.  _All_ it
>>recommended was capital investment in efficiency.  
>
>Yeah, I keep forgetting that "investment" is the new PC word for 
>"tax'n'spend" and "efficiency" is the word for forced conservation.
>
>As in "We're comitting the country to investing in energy efficiency."
>Translated that means "We're going to steal an ever larger chunk of
>your wealth in order to play around with social engineering."
>
>If they get to "invest", I get to propose the nuclear alternative under
>the best reasonable circumstances.
>
>John
>
John, it appears that you are not interested in an intelligent discussion
of the issue.  If you decide to stop stuffing people into convenient
little boxes that make your ideological beliefs easy to support, let us
know.

To others, note that efficiency means using less energy by using
more efficient technology and does not indicate _any_ decrease in
energy services, which is what conservation means.
>-- 
>John De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested in high performance mobility?  
>Performance Engineering Magazine(TM) | Interested in high tech and computers? 
>Marietta, Ga                         | Send ur snail-mail address to 
>jgd@dixie.com                        | perform@dixie.com for a free sample mag
>Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on Dixie.com.


-- 
==============================================================================
	Dean Myerson			dean@vexcel.com
==============================================================================
From: Ligon@macgw1.ge.com (Woody Ligon)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: "Sub-Species" (was: Mt. Graham: UPitt Protest)
Date: 11 Jan 93 13:04:06 GMT
Followup-To: sci.environment
Organization: GE-CRD

In article <Jym.8Jan1993.2247@naughty-peahen>, Jym Dyer
<jym@mica.berkeley.edu> wrote:
> 
> > For an explanation of what "sub-species" means in language
> > that lawyers might possibly be able to understand . . .
> 
> =+= I can put it in even simpler language:  a "sub-species"
> is a race.

For most of the "sub species" making headlines as "endangered species", I
rather think that "family" or "clan" would be more like.   Some of these
are about  equivalent to having  two or three families of humans isolated
in a mountain "hollow" for two or three centuries. Given the numbers of
individuals involved, "race" seems a bit grandiose.

> 
> > Sorry to break your bubble guys, but just because Jersey
> > cows or poodle dogs go extinct does not mean that cows or
> > dogs go extinct.
> 
> =+= Hitler's plans to exterminate Jews wouldn't have caused
> humankind to go extinct, but is that the point?  (Those who
> find the comparison extreme should realize that there are
> human "sub-species" being destroyed in rainforests around
> the world.)
>     <_Jym_>

Yep.  There are lots of good reasons to recognize and preserve "sub
species". There are also lots of good reasons for  environmental activists
to stop dealing in half-truths in order to garner enhanced public support.
It is high time we stopped calling tiny little clans "endanged species" and
started admitting that they are only "sub-species".  There are literally
thousands of issues that need to be addressed if we are going to preserve
the earth as a nice place for humans to live. How can we even begin to make
realistic priorities if we can't even get the facts straight. 

Woody Ligon
Standard disclaimer Applies
(ligon@macgw1.ge.com)
Newsgroups: sci.environment,ca.environment,ba.transportation
From: jmullison@ucsd.edu (Jerry Mullison)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: The Nature Conservancy
Date: 6 Jan 1993 17:57:14 GMT
Organization: Scripps Institution of Oceanography
Distribution: ca
NNTP-Posting-Host: drake.ucsd.edu

   Hello all.  I am interested in hearing opinions on the California
Chapter of The Nature Conservancy.  I have their official solicitation
which, of course, paints a very rosy picture.  I like what I see, for
many reasons which I will not enumerate here.  Before I contribute,
however, I would like to hear from any who would care to offer an opinion,
good or bad.
   Specifically, has anyone visited any of their preserves?  Are they
developed at all?  Are they, for example, building a Visitor's Center
on Gnatcatcher nesting grounds (this is actually happening, the last
I heard, here at a reserve run by ? in San Diego County)?  I am sending
for a copy of their financial statement, but any information from the
net would be greatly appreciated.
   Please respond via e-mail - no need to burn bandwidth with this.  If
there is sufficient interest I will post a summary.
   This is my first attempt at a California only post - if it distributes
beyond California I apologize.  
   Thanks in advance.

Jerry Mullison        jmullison@ucsd.edu
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown)
Subject: Re: Nuclear Power and Climate Change
Organization: I can't see any in the immediate vicinity...
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 20:04:21 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.194515.6373@nuchat.sccsi.com> kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown) writes:
>In article <58447@dime.cs.umass.edu> yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan7.093103.2732@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>>>Actually that's mostly incorrect. My father owned an "early industrial
>>>revolution" machine shop that was powered by a single 15 hp electric
>>>motor driving overhead jackshafts that turned the machines by way of
>>>flat belts. That type of power transmission is over 95% efficient.
>>>He ran 5 lathes, 2 milling machines, 3 drill presses, a shop compressor,
>>>the blower on the forge, and a fan off that 15 hp motor. Today the same
>>>lathes *each* require a 7 hp motor. That single motor could run everything
>>>because it didn't have to overcome startup inertia because it was always
>>>running.
>>
>>I admit defeat on this. What I should have said is that there was at
>>one time, a correlation between the use of water power 
>
>A type of energy...
>
>>and living
>>standard, just as there has been a correlation between the use of
>>electicicty 
>
>Another type of energy...
>
>>and living standard. 
>
>Could one, I wonder, successfully argue that there is a correlation between
>general energy usage and standard of living?  I would think so, but I have
>no proof of this.

Sigh.  I assume it is this very statement that Victor is admitting defeat
on, which makes my statement rather redundant.

I should elaborate on something here, though.  It seems to me that while
energy usage and GDP may track well, (energy usage * average efficiency)
and GDP probably track even better.  That is, it seems to me that your
standard of living goes up as you actually *do* more with energy, which
can result either from usage of more energy or better usage of energy.  A
case in point might be a comparison of a well-insulated house versus one
that is not well-insulated, where both houses are the same size.  The one
which is well-insulated should consume less energy than the one which isn't,
yet I think it would be unwise to argue that the well-insulated house
supports a smaller standard of living than the one which isn't.

So in a way, I think Victor did have a good point.  The problem is that
efficiency, too, has its costs (the efficient house in the above example
uses more construction material, e.g. in the windows, than the inefficient
one), and ultimately these things seem to come down to economic terms.



-- 
Kevin Brown					kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com
This is your .signature virus: < begin 644 .signature (9V]T8VAA(0K0z end >
	    This is your .signature virus on drugs: <>
			Any questions?
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.energy
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Subject: Re: Nuclear Power and Climate Change
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 16:25:36 GMT

In response to an issue relating to the coupling of economic growth to
the growth in energy demand I would recommend "Delinking energy consumption
and economic growth - the German experience" by Ulf Hansen, Professor
of Power Energy, University of Essen, in the 9-90 issue of _Energy
Policy_.  It discusses how the FR of Germany compiled a 33% growth in its
GDP between 1973 and 1988 while also increasing its energy consumption
by 3%.  Of the developed countries, Germany and Japan have two of the
three lowest energy intensities (along with Denmark).  Canada and the
US are the two highest.
-- 
==============================================================================
	Dean Myerson			dean@vexcel.com
==============================================================================
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.energy
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Nuclear Power and Climate Change
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 02:21:15 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.072712.21014@michael.apple.com> ems@michael.apple.com (E. Michael Smith) writes:
>
>This ignores the ability to build a 'stop gap' solution, like gas
>turbines, at a slightly higher cost, to buy the time to choose either
>a much improved nuclear or a much more efficient alternative energy
>source, such as solar in 20 years...

The problem with this approach is that gas turbine plants, fuel cells,
and the like are a lot more than "slightly higher cost" alternatives. 
That's why they are restricted to peaking needs today. Replacing base 
load plants with peaking technology is economic suicide for a utility
and it's customers.

Gary

-- 
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary      
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     | emory!ke4zv!gary@gatech.edu
From: gil@tillage.DIALix.oz.au (Gil Hardwick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Keep It Simple (was objective environment)
Distribution: world
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 14:51:43 GMT
Organization: STAFF STRATEGIES - Anthropologists & Training Agents

Perhaps all this confusion really *is* my fault, being so taken
aback by the incredible arrogance inherent in the idea of a single
objective environment perhaps I have simply failed to communicate
the mapping of limits as effectively as I might.

Maybe I am still learning to use this medium effectively, yes?

There is no reason to challenge them into coming all the way down
here to Australia to try their luck in the Pilbara, is there? I mean,
their environmental limits can be mapped there where they are, right?

(Relax, Gil. They are really nice people, acting in good faith as far
as they know. Assume they just don't understand what you are trying to
say, and KEEP IT SIMPLE. Deep breath, here goes . . . )
         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Ahem!

*GENTLE* persons,

I wonder if Messrs Taylor, Tobis, McGowen, et al would please do me
the honour of answering the following questions "Yes" or "No". If you
answer "Yes", go on to the next question. If you answer "No", briefly
give your reason.

For reasons I shall give later a response that the specific question
is irrelevant will be accepted as a "No" answer. Similarly, then,
briefly give your reason.

There may be other questions forthcoming in a continuing series.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Begin questions.

1. Do you regularly sit at the President's desk in the Oval Office?

2. Do you habitually sit in your neighbour's bedroom watching them
   make love?

3. Do you eat the brains of your dead relatives?

4. Do you run in a pack with Alaska's reportedly lice-ridden wolves?

5. Do you use the public street to urinate and defaecate?

6. Do you make love with polar bears as part of your studies in
   ecology?

7. Do you operate an emu farm?

8. As part of your taking field observations, do you swim underwater
   with green sea turtles for an hour unaided by breathing apparatus?

9. Do you dine regularly with Professor John McCarthy?

10. Do you participate in the annual Kulama Ceremony on Bathurst
    Island?

End questions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you. I look forward to your answers.


Gil

Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: len@schur.math.nwu.edu (Len Evens)
Subject: Re: plutonium arrives in Japan
Organization: Dept of Math, Northwestern Univ
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 15:02:10 GMT


John McCarthy and others continue to discuss this issue in terms
of a dichotomy between the good guys (brave Japanese going ahead
with what's right in fact of powerful opposition) versus the bad
guys (a band of malcontents like Greenpeace and Japanese anti-nuclear
activists cheered on by biased media).   In fact the issue is much
more complicated.   For example, other countries in Asia have
expressed suspiciion about Japanese intentions about nuclear weapons.
Given the history of the past hundred years, this is not entirely a
silly concern.  Secondly, Japanese utilities apparently are not
entirely happy about this program because it will cost more than
other nuclear power technologies.

To those who insist on seeing the issue the same way but with the
polarities reversed, let me add that the Japanese gvoernment has
prusued this program in the interests of energy self sufficiency.
Given the nature of the Japanese economy and its present strong
dependence on energy imports, this is a valid concern.  In the
end breeder reactors may prove to be the best choice the Japanese
could have made, despite present difficulties.

By the way, I find all this out by reading all those `biased' media
reports.

Leonard Evens      len@math.nwu.edu      708-491-5537
Dept. of Mathematics, Northwestern Univ., Evanston, IL 60208
From: eapg137@orion.oac.uci.edu (Bryan Joseph Hannegan)
Subject: Re: What is Climate?
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 8 Jan 93 17:27:03 GMT

In article <dhalliwe.726454465@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca> userDHAL@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (David Halliwell) writes:
>   I would be interested in hearing from more people in terms of their
>backgound: from what discipline have they derived their "working definition"
>of climatology. I come from a physical geography background, and was
>taught about climatology from the perspective of the global environment:
>linkages between the atmosphere, biosphere, etc. Here at the University
>of Alberta we also have a Division of Meteorology. One or two of the
>meteorology people here with a strictly meteorological background seem
>to have more of a "climatology is statistics applied to meteorology"
>viewpoint.
>

I was exposed to both schools of thought as a meteorological undergrad, and
I prefer the perspective of the global environment as well. (This is fortunate
since my next two years will be in class studying this very concept!) However,
there are still throwbacks who define climate in its most basic terms as I 
mentioned in the previous post. I think that the latest findings in global
change science and earth science in general are rendering this "climate is
just average weather" thought obsolete.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bryan Hannegan                              eapg137@orion.oac.uci.edu
Dept of Geosciences, UC-Irvine              hannegan@halo.ps.uci.edu
If you fall on your face, at least take heart in making forward progress.
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: "Michael Smith" <p00004@psilink.com>
Subject: Re: Education and the Environment by Gregory A. Smith
Organization: Performance Systems Int'l
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 20:15:31 GMT
X-Mailer: PSILink-DOS (3.3)

>DATE:   Fri, 01 Jan 93 07:51:27 GMT
>FROM:   Gil Hardwick <gil@tillage.DIALix.oz.au>
>
>In article <2934908985.1.p00004@psilink.com> p00004@psilink.com writes:
>
> > ... people who are trying to change values will try to get 
> > theirs into the schools, and the people who like the old ones will try 
> > to keep them out. There just isn't any Archimedean point outside the 
> > struggle from which one can decide, in a value-free way, what's 
> > legitimate value transmission and what's indoctrination. ....

>Something to be said for respecting *all* points of view, yes?
>
>The benefit of being exposed to "the bad" is that it gives some real
>texture and substance to "the good", perhaps finally enabling you to
>*think* about what is really good and bad out there in the big world.
[....]

"Respecting all points of view...": In practice, this seems impossible. 
Not all points of view can even be taught *about*, much less taught -- 
there are just too many; surely nobody would advocate even teaching 
*about*, say, Scientology (except Scientologists, of course). Waste 
of time. Further, lots of things will be taught *about* in a context of 
disapproval -- slavery or genocide, for example; this seems an inescapable 
consequence of attempting to pass on the values of contemporary 
democratic society.

In this latter sense, I agree with you (if I've taken your meaning 
correctly) about "exposure to the bad" -- people certainly should learn 
about the Nazis, say, and preferably from primary sources (so they'll 
recognize the note when they hear it again from, say, the White House). 

--Michael Smith
From: bane@vtx.ma.man.ac.uk (Michael!)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Shetland Oil Spill
Date: 10 Jan 93 20:12:40 GMT
Reply-To: bane@vtx.ma.man.ac.uk
Organization: Magic Michael's Mushroom Factory.

In article <15339@cis.rand.org>, rodger@rand.ORG (Rodger Madison) writes:
|> John McCarthy says:
|> 
|> As disasters go, tankers running aground have been minor compared to
|> earthquakes, tornados, hurricanes, city-wide fires, big forest fires,
|> outbreaks of cholera, munition ship explosions and big socker riots.
|> 
|> 
|> Mr. McCarthy in his eagernss to trivialize the devastation of an
|> ecosystem has apparently forsaken his roots and philisophically joined his
|> archenemy, the media, is completely ignoring the fact that there are human beings
|> on the Shetland Islands whose entire way of life may have been completely
|> destroyed by this trifling shipwreak.  It is repulsive to imagine that the
|> impact of criminal stupidity must be measured only by its cost in HUMAN life 
|> or dollars and cents. 
|> 
|> Rodger Madison
|> 
|> He who does only arithmetic is inhumane and doomed to madness.  


I heard on the news (may be biassed - just passing this on) that the
Islanders were warned to stay inside due to possible toxic effects 
related to benzene.

Michael.
From: rajesh@juniper (Rajesh Raman)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Help wanted
Date: 7 Jan 1993 19:34:24 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: juniper.wpi.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Rajesh Raman (rajesh@ivy) wrote:

Sorry guys. I goofed up.


A friend of mine is very interested in environmental issues and has
taken up a correspondence course in environmental science. He lives in
India and has no access to the internet. As a student in India he doesn't
have much money too. He has taken up a course in environmental science
and as a part of the course he has to do a project of sorts.

I thought that there might be students and professors or other concerned
folks out there who could suggest things to do. Please bear in mind that
an Indian student has little money. An Indian rupee is one-thirtieth of
a dollar. He is very much interested in forest conservation and the
effect of large-scale projects like dams on the lives of the people. Of
course, environmental issues of any kind in general have always been near 
to his heart.

Could you please send me suggestions as to what he could do ? 'Cos I don't
really know what would be feasible and what wouldn't be.

My e-mail address is rajesh@cs.wpi.edu. 


--

Rajesh Raman

--
From: olavs@Lise.Unit.NO (Olav S|yseth)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Shetland Oil Spill
Date: 10 Jan 93 01:29:59 GMT
Organization: Norwegian Institute of Technology

In article <JMC.93Jan8160310@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>, jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy) writes:
 > As disasters go, tankers running aground have been minor compared to
 > earthquakes, tornados, hurricanes, city-wide fires, big forest fires,
 > outbreaks of cholera, munition ship explosions and big socker riots.
 > 
 > --
 > John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
 > *
 > He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
 > 

but then its not much to do about earthquakes, tornados, hurricanes etc. ?
It is possible to avoid tanker disasters.
From: fbp@igc.apc.org (Foreign Bases Project)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Help Needed on Mil. & Env. Curricu
Date: 12 Jan 93 00:48:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1466602033:000:1317
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!fbp    Jan 11 16:48:00 1993


From: Foreign Bases Project <fbp>
Subject: Help Needed on Mil. & Env. Curricu

/* Written  4:47 pm  Jan 11, 1993 by fbp@igc.apc.org in igc:peace.studies */
/* ---------- "Help Needed on Mil. & Env. Curricu" ---------- */

We are helping to prepare a model curriculum on military impacts on
the environment for the Commission on Arms Control Education, a
joint project of the International Association of University
Professors and the United Nations Office of Disarmament Affairs. 
To assist us in this work, we would like copies of articles,
publications, and bibliographies on such topics as environmental
impacts of war, environmental causes of conflicts, environmental
impacts of peacetime military activity, etc. We are looking for
materials from a variety of perspectives. Sample course outlines
would also be welcome. 

Than you in advance for your assistance.

To send or for further information:
************************************************************
JOHN M. MILLER                *  Int'l Clearinghouse on the 
Internet:fbp@igc.org          *   Military & the Environment
Bitnet:fbp%igc.org@stanford   *  PO Box 150753 
UUCP:uunet!pyramid!cdp!fbp    *  Brooklyn, NY 11215-0014 USA
PeaceNet/EcoNet:fbp           *  Phone/Fax: (718)788-6071
*************************************************************.
From: alanm@hpindda.cup.hp.com (Alan McGowen)
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 01:45:29 GMT
Subject: True Exploitation
Organization: HP Information Networks, Cupertino, CA
From: gil@tillage.DIALix.oz.au (Gil Hardwick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: A simple solution (was: Save the Planet and the Economy 
Distribution: world
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 11:29:12 GMT
Organization: STAFF STRATEGIES - Anthropologists & Training Agents


In article <7314@ucsbcsl.ucsb.edu> 6500axel@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu writes:

 > Is it more important to reduce consumption in the first world or to
 > reduce population growth in the third world?
 >  
 > Don't know.
 >  
 > But here's a measure which would achieve both at the same time:

                                .
                [bizarre plan mercifully deleted]
                                .

Want a *REAL* howler, guys? How about this one for good measure?

How on earth do you Americans manage to graduate scientists of such
breathtaking calibre? Or do you simply get them to line up at the
photocopier, agog with mortar-board and gown, while you hand out
their certificates?

Gil