HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: b_nbca@icarus.lbl.gov (Bruce Nordman)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: ELECTRIC VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING AND DESIGN COMP.
Date: 7 Jan 1993 19:37:16 GMT
Organization: lbl
Distribution: world
Reply-To: b_nbca@icarus.lbl.gov (Bruce Nordman)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.12.154

In article <1993Jan7.002419.460@athena.mit.edu>, drela@athena.mit.edu (Mark
Drela) writes:
|> In article <1993Jan6.081331.9435@news.ysu.edu>, ah995@yfn.ysu.edu (T. Turner)
|> writes:
|> |> 
|> |>     ELECTRIC VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING AND DESIGN COMPETITION
|> |>        .
|> |>        .
|> |>     According to Baker, the electric vehicle presents an exciting new
|> |>     technology that will create jobs and improve the environment. "We
|> |>     have the technology to make a dependable, practical, environmentally
|> |>     sound electric vehicle," he said. "The challenge now is to prepare
|> |>     our infrastructure to support it."
|> 
|> Is the "environmentally sound" claim for real?
|> << rest deleted >>

Any sentence that brings cars and "environmentally sound" in close
proximity should be taken with several bucketfuls of salt.

There may well be many applications where electric technologies
in personal vehicles reduces environmental impacts from transportation,
but boosterism which exaggerates this does them a disservice.

Bruce Nordman
B_Nordman@lbl.gov
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.energy
From: jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond)
Subject: Re: Nuclear Power and Climate Change
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 93 06:42:37 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.

ems@michael.apple.com (E. Michael Smith) writes:

>>A demonstration and anything in production with a proven track record
>>is very different.

>There are also available commercial production conversion kits to
>convert a diesel to use propane and natural gas as well.  I didn't
>include this in the first post in the interests of brevity.  If you
>would like, I can post the stuff.  (I posted it once a few years ago...) 

Go ahead and post.  I hope this is something mainstream and not the 
diesel equivalent of some of these home-shop electric car conversions.
I'm very interested but dubious.  For the last year or so I've been 
researching diesels relative to power generation because I plan on 
co-generation for my house to get out from under our Plant-Vogtle inspired 
electric rates using our still relatively cheap natural gas supply.  

The scientific literature says basically that NG or propane can be 
burned via intake introduction but that starting, particularly
in adverse conditions still requires cylinder injection of a suitably
high cetane fuel.  I picked up some SAE papers in December on the
topic.  One paper describes some recent developments on electronically
controlled direct cylinder injection for NG but it is definitely
still in the experimental stage.

John
-- 
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.
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: tobis@meteor.wisc.edu (Michael Tobis)
Subject: Re: What is Climate?
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Meteorology and Space Science
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 21:16:18 GMT

In article <2B4DB967.6682@news.service.uci.edu> eapg137@orion.oac.uci.edu (Bryan Joseph Hannegan) writes:

>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.

"Average weather" is probably a weak concept, but the broader question of
the statistics of weather (broadly interpreted to include the upper atmosphere
and the ocean, if you wish) is certainly a useful one, and I see no problem
with calling it "climate". The coupling between those statistics, i.e., the
"climate" and other environmental and anthropogenic phenomena I would call
"climatology". 

mt

Newsgroups: sci.environment,talk.environment
From: russ@pmafire.inel.gov (Russ Brown)
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 15:11:31 GMT
Organization: WINCO
Subject: Re: Solar vs. Nuclear
Summary: 
Followup-To: 
Organization: WINCO
Keywords: 

In article <1993Jan3.013947.25856@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> 471-1@.arizona.edu (E. Shane Jimerfield) writes:
>Here are a few questions that went through my mind the other
>day ( so I thought I'd post them).
>
>Why isn't Solar Power getting the attention that it deserves? 
>
>  Is it because the Gov't. can't tax it?
>
>  Is it because the Oil companies aren't done selling us
>  petro?
>
>  Is it because people in Nuclear think they are doing a great
>  service to society?
>
>  Do the students of Nuclear power think that studying Nuclear
>  is the only real challenge for their brain?
>
>Why don't all you people working in Nuclear put your, obviously,
>brilliant minds to work on Solar Power.

This is an unpleasant way to start the new year.  How do we answer thee?
Let us count the ways.

The general answer to these inane questions is the same as that for
miracle spark plugs, aqueous additives to gasoline, and magnets for fuel
lines, none of the above.

In the spirit of charity, I suggest that the poster resume the study of
Freshman English to enhance his opportunity to reach the sophomoric
state.  "Obviously" (in the last strange sentence of the posting) should
not be bounded be commas.  





Xref: sparky sci.environment:14449 talk.environment:5423 alt.sources.wanted:2018
From: zaigi@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: sci.environment,talk.environment,alt.sources.wanted
Subject: EEA (European Environment Agency)
Date: 12 Jan 93 22:54:23 -0400
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada


Hi All,
Any of you knows EEA (European Environmental Agency) official estabilished  
in June 1990 according to the agreement issued by the Council of the
European Communities on June 7, 1990?
Where is it?
What the function is (like EPA)?
How can I access it online?
Any info please send to zaigi@ac.dal.ca
Thank you very much in advance.

Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Subject: Re: "User Friendly" Transit
Reply-To: whheydt@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 18:30:16 GMT

In article <1993Jan3.032950.13351@pbhye.PacBell.COM> mjvande@pbhye.PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman) writes:
>(Because we allow cars to compete on the same
>roadway with our buses, the buses cannot ever have an accurate,
>fast schedule.) 

An interesting perspective...

>Since I am on the Transportation Commission of the City of
>Berkeley, perhaps I can help find the funds to do that. 

Does this mean I should lobby you to fix particularly badly potholed
streets in Berkeley?

	--Hal

-- 
Hal Heydt                    |    
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |            You!
510-823-5447                 |    Out of the Gene Pool!
whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: zaigi@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: sci.environment,talk.environment,alt.sources.wanted
Subject: "Urgent warning"
Date: 12 Jan 93 11:18:39 -0400
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada



Dear all,

In The Chronicle-Herald : The Mail-Star Saturday, January 9, 1993 C2,
David Suzuki, a Canadian scientist and writer mentioned that at "The end
of November, the prestigious Union of Concerned Scientists released an
urgent warning tha the planet is undergoing catastrophic ecological change
that threatens all of humankind. Their global call to action was signed
by over 1500 senior scientists, including 101 Nobel laureates from around the 
world".

Any idea where can I get the documentation?

Nick 
email: zaigi@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown)
Subject: Re: Concern For Ozone Depletion Clear, Knowledge of CFCs Mostly
Organization: I can't see any in the immediate vicinity...
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 04:05:19 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.200115.24132@en.ecn.purdue.edu> ghg@en.ecn.purdue.edu (George Goble) writes:
>In article <1740@airgun.wg.waii.com> miller@hmsp04.wg3.waii.com (Griff Miller X7114) writes:
[...]
>>To me, the cons of R-134a far outweigh the pros. It's ONLY advantage
>>is that its ODF is 0. Why can't somebody use GHG12 or something similar
>>in new cars? It's ODF is practically nil, yes?
>
>GHG ODF is 0.04 (per car), DuPont SUVA MP52 is around the same, but it
>needs most of the oil and drier changed to new types. GHG needs no changes.
>Both are a lot less hassle than a R-134a conversion. R-12 ODF is 1.0

Since manufacturers are probably hell-bent on switching over to R-134a
(whether of their own free will or by government coercion), how well do
you think GHG will work in an R-134a setup?  How well will propane/isobutane
work?  I don't anticipate the current auto A/C designs being around much
longer, despite the obvious fact that they needn't be replaced...

>--ghg

P.S.: could you email me your information?  Sounds fascinating.


-- 
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?
From: alanm@hpindda.cup.hp.com (Alan McGowen)
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 19:22:40 GMT
Subject: McCarthy's Requested Challange
Organization: HP Information Networks, Cupertino, CA
Newsgroups: sci.environment

McCarthy says:

>As I have done in the past, I am willing to take any two resources
>Mr. Berry can mention and show how they are available or substitutable
>on a sufficient scale for the world to reach U.S. standards.

There is no reason why the US standard alone should be used, as the discussion
is about extending standards of the developed world to the entire world.
In any case, the US standard of living is in many areas inferior to that
of other nations, though John might be shocked to hear it.

Very well John, here are the two resources: show us how to extend German 
standards for meat consumption and Japanese standards for wood consumption
to 5+ billion humans -- or do you think it could be to 20+ billion?

Remember that not only per capita *quantity* but also the same *quality*
of the resources have to be extended to all, or the extension is bogus.
In the case of meat, that means that the cattle have to be grass-fed and
to follow German agricultural standards for the use of antibiotics and 
hormones. In the case of wood, the same per capita quantity of high-quality,
even-grained, large-piece, dense hardwoods which the Japanese use has to be 
maintained in the extension (hint: the trees have to be *old*). Show us how
everyone on the planet can have these things, at both the same quantity and
quality as the Germans and the Japanese have them.

For extra points, you can show us how everyone on earth could consume oceanic
seafoods at the same per captita quantity, quality and variety as the 
Japanese do, indefinitely.

We're waiting, John.
	
------------
Alan McGowen



Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder)
Subject: Re: Save the Planet and the Economy at the Same time!
Organization: Quake Public Access
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 10:21:03 GMT

In article <72137@cup.portal.com> gb@cup.portal.com (Greg A Buechler) writes:

>If we were to charge the full economic cost to ALL items used, mined,
>manufactured, etc. we wouldn't be in the present condition at all.

I agree that a free-market unmuddled by government interference would 
be a solution for a great many problems, environmental and otherwise.
Oh...you don't think that free markets reflect full economic costs?
Pray tell us how this is.

Tell me, what do you think the price of a commodity ought to be if it
doesn't damage the environment?  Should it merely be the cost of
labor, capital, and profit (or are you opposed to that?) or should it
be the artificially high prices casued by high taxes on everything?
Far from being too cheap, most things in this economy are more expensive
than they ought to be...a result of government interference in the
economy.
 
>Not just autos, everything is to some degree paid for at costs far 
>below their tru economic cost if you factor in the environmental cost/
>damage.  

Costs according to whom?  If I own a bit of land with trees on it, part
of the the price you charge for the lumber will be from the decreased
value of the land without the trees.  This is the case with any
freely owned and traded resource.

How would you propose that these things be evaluated other than just "more than
now"?

>Let's use another example, lets say homes.

>The cost of lumber should include the full cost of extraction, reforest-
>ation, the polution by the trucks moving the lumber, the waste from the
>mills, etc.  

Surprise...violations of property rights aside, they already do!

>Nails should cost far more.  

More than what?  Why don't you mind your own business and stop telling
people what prices they ought to set on the property THEY own?  Didn't your
mother ever teach you not to boss others around?  Not to take things which
do not belong to you?

More than what?  I'm sure you just mean "More than now"...and when that's
done you'll still want "more than now" until there are no more nails.

>Wallboard, wiring, (do you get
>the point yet?)

Yes, I do.  You don't like housing to be affordable, and you can't stand the
idea that some people do not want to take your advice about how to
live their lives and use their property.  

The bottom line:  Mind your own business, not mine.

--Brian
From: gil@tillage.DIALix.oz.au (Gil Hardwick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Save the Planet and the Economy at the Same time!
Distribution: world
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 05:08:36 GMT
Organization: STAFF STRATEGIES - Anthropologists & Training Agents


In article <1993Jan6.170329.5528@megatek.com> max@megatek.com writes:

 >   How can we share technology with the 'more heavily populated of the
 >   poorer countries' ?  I agree that it doesn't hurt to share knowledge,
 >   but how do you successfully do that?  It goes against the cultural
 >   traditions of thousands of years in those places. There is no base
 >   infrastructure to support this technology. We have to start at the
 >   very bottom and teach the first things first, like 'how to dig a well,
 >   and check that the water is good'.  Only much later can we teach them
 >   'how to hybridize rice' (IMHO).  How can we teach population control
 >   from *our* perspective?  Population control from *their* perspective 
 >   is that of the natural god, i.e. force of nature, i.e. famine etc.

Just a small problem here with the idea that a society which has
managed to maintain its cultural traditions for thousands of years
suddenly need to be taught by Americans how to dig a well and check
that the water is good, or how to cross rice varieties, or indeed now
need to change such cultures.

Who wants to learn anything at all from the American perspective?
Surely the Australian perspective is most appropriate for Australia,
and the Somali perspective for Somalia (and so on), yes?

It is *not* up to the US to "share technology" with anyone else at all.
It is only up to anyone to shop around for whatever technology they may
want from time to time on the world market.

 >   I'm not convinced that attempting *either* population control *or*
 >   technology advancement in those countries is 1) possible, or 2)
 >   appropriate. Maybe those societies need *cultural* change before any
 >   of this other stuff?  Are we really a good enough example of a 
 >   'successful' modern society to assume that 'we have' what 'they need'?
 >   Please elaborate.

Regardless of what you find convincing, there is nothing inherently
difficult to understand about such processes.

If people are dysfunctional their society will no longer be viable,
will it?

If a society is not viable it will die out, won't it?

If such dysfunction is of their own making we can't do much to help
them, can we?

But if such dysfunction is demonstrably due to foreign interference we
can do something about it by merely ceasing to interfere, can't we?

Else life's a bitch, and then you die.

Gil
From: yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Sheep in Organizations
Date: 4 Jan 93 15:26:03 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst

In article <726139725snx@tillage.DIALix.oz.au> gil@tillage.DIALix.oz.au (Gil Hardwick) writes:
>You may find it of interest that we in Australia have no declaration
>of human or citizen's rights in our Constitution? We have the choice
>of getting on with one another or coming apart at the seems, without
>recourse to some "higher authority" enshrined on paper somewhere for
>the lawyers to be bludgeoning us with.
>

The benefits of living in a former penal colony. Congratulations.

>If our Constitution is open to interpretation, that empowers me to
>interpret it myself, as anyone else has a prerogative to exercise that
>together we can get things done we want done (including managing our
>natural environment).

Yes, I know that you folks are also clearcuting your remaining forests
and are digging uranium mines on other people's land, but that hardly
seems boastworthy.


-- 


yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu

Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee)
Subject: Re: Education and the Environment by Gregory A. Smith
Organization: Johns Hopkins University CS Dept.
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 20:05:46 GMT

In article <726746966snx@tillage.DIALix.oz.au> gil@tillage.DIALix.oz.au (Gil Hardwick) writes:
> > >Let's see what sort of momentum can now be maintained . . .
> > Except you forgot something.
> > What about the argument that you bolstered with the bad etymology?  Do you
> > now admit your position is weaker than you had thought, since one of the
> > pieces of evidence for it is bogus?
>No, I have not forgotten anything. My position has been clearly (and
>repeatedly) stated as seeking to bolster the level of discussion here,
>within the wider context of a persistently polarised, petty, sniping,
>zero-sum type of game among the American contingent here.

Sidetracking the discussion by presenting fake evidence does not bolster the
level of discussion.

>Throwing a real howler periodically into a thread (whose author had in
>fact begun to explain himself as it all appeared to get out of hand)
>with which I had no previous involvement at all, is quite a legitimate
>device. Indeed it got you all sitting up suddenly worrying about it.

Ah.  "Oh, I didn't _really_ believe it.  I _meant_ to do it."  Suuuuuure.
--
"On the first day after Christmas my truelove served to me...  Leftover Turkey!
On the second day after Christmas my truelove served to me...  Turkey Casserole
    that she made from Leftover Turkey.
[days 3-4 deleted] ...  Flaming Turkey Wings! ...
   -- Pizza Hut commercial (and M*tlu/A*gic bait)

Ken Arromdee (arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu, arromdee@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: rodger@ray.uct.ac.za (Duffett, RV, Rodger, Radiobiology (RAY Supervisoor))
Subject: Shetland Oil Spill
Summary: Ban the Supertanker
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 07:46:09 GMT
Organization: University of Cape Town
Keywords: Supertanker, Oil

It is ironic to see people chaining themselves to embassies in protest over 
isolated Plutonium shipments while daily hundreds of giant, fragile 
motorised balloons, filled with millions of litres of oil, sail the oceans 
of OUR world. The catastrophes like the Valdez and now the Baer are only 
the tip of the iceberg in a series of daily disasters which escape world 
headlines. 

Try this for a recipe for disaster - Take one enormous single-skinned ship, 
fill it with oil, give it only one means of propulsion, don't allow access 
to latest pinpoint coastal navigational aids and set it free on the oceans 
of OUR world where it will have to contend with the power of wind and sea 
and sun.

It is time somebodies arm got twisted. Safer tanker technology is available!
Supertanker = super disaster
Newsgroups: sci.environment,talk.politics.misc,alt.activism
From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: Idiotic Japan Bashing
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 09:30:08 GMT

In<1993Jan1.21807.27515@ms.uky.edu> miles@ms.uky.edu (Stephen D. Grant) writes:

>A resolution:
>Having been a long-time fan of many Japanese products for my entire life
>(I'm 32) I have decided to make a commitment to NOT buy anything Japanese
>if possible. I own a Toyota (my second bought new). I have owned 8 Japanese
>motorcycles. I have/do own/owned Japanese electronics, cameras etc. But no
>more. After becomming aware of the Japanese prejudice towards "outsiders" and
>their illegal and under-handed tactics used in their economic war of the world,
>I am one lost consumer of Japanese products. I also believe we should legally
>prosecute our political leaders that screwed the American people for the
>Japanese. This is only how I feel.                                

Ah, gotta love those Ross Perot supporters...

Legally prosecute ... for what crime?  For what reason?

As to the Japanese, which of their tactics are illegal?  (And of those,
which does it make sense to call illegal?)

And what, pray tell, is "an economic war of the world?" 

Well, the rest of us will enjoy watching rented videos from Columbia
Pictures on our Sony VCRs and TVs.  You have fun doing whatever it is
you're going to do without any Japanese-made consumer electronics.

-- 
David M. Nieporent   | Is it too early to start making predictions for 1993?
niepornt@phoenix.    | Probably, but that never stopped me before.
   princeton.edu     | ALE: Baltimore ALW: Chicago NLE: Montreal NLW: Atlanta
Baltimore Orioles 93 | AL MVP: Cal Ripken  AL Cy Young: Mike Mussina
Xref: sparky sci.environment:14383 ca.environment:1154 ba.transportation:3083