Feb 11, 2008

OSHA failed to adopt dust rules in 2006.

Top federal safety officials urged the Labor Department in 2006 to adopt critical regulations to prevent deadly dust explosions "like the one suspected in the deadly blast in a Georgia sugar plant Thursday" but the government has failed to do so.

"This is an extremely dangerous component that is not regulated," former safety board chairwoman Carolyn Merritt told The Associated Press Friday. Dust explosion situations "are so dangerous that people have got to pay attention to this. There should be an outcry."

Minuscule dust particles "the smaller the more explosive" often form clouds in enclosed places like manufacturing plants or sugar mills. These clouds are the perfect fuel for a fire that can be set off by any spark or form of ignition. The first explosion kicks up more dust and even more and bigger explosions follow in rapid succession, said C. James Dahn, president of Safety Consulting Engineers of Schaumburg, Ill., and an expert on the topic.

"The biggest problems we have in plants is that people are not aware of the amount of dust that's in their plant," Dahn said. "I've walked into plants where dust is nearly half a foot deep and people are saying, 'It's just dust, we don't worry about it.' They did when it blew the plant apart. Dust can be an explosive hazard."

 
 

Sugar Explosion at the "Weekly Toll"

People Were In There (Thanks Tammy)

Yes people were in there and some actually came out. The New York Times took an aerial view of the Imperial Sugar plant in Port Wentworth, Ga.

"I saw people come running out burnt, screaming, hollering, their skin hanging off them," said Jason Perry, who hurried to the plant after the blast to search for an uncle who was working that night. "One lady hit the ground, and then the medical was on her so fast you couldn't see what was going on."

Gruesome details emerge not even 48hours later, a scene many will not soon forget.

At 10:46 PM last night I received the New Your Times article and I tried like hell to write about this once again, to give everyone a back ground of all the time and effort spent (the Times article say it all) by some to keep this from once again happening but somehow I just couldn't find the strength to do so this time.

I had written an article, One Death, Many Losses, and I know there are flaws in it but to be honest I haven't been able to rework it and I am not sure I ever will but it gives a brief over view of what one family experiences during this time. We are helpless while these events are happening but we are not now, we can do something to keep this from happing to another family. We don't have to be perfect or hard as nails; we just need to gather strength were we can, stand up and fight back and if we can't let someone else take over for a while.
 

Workers Comp for Waitress and Bartenders?

Death Of Waitress Linked To Environmental Tobacco Smoke, Case Study Shows A young asthmatic woman who collapsed and died shortly after arriving for her shift as a waitress at a bar may be the first reported death to be reported nationally from acute asthma associated with environmental tobacco smoke. The report states the woman arrived at the bar in Michigan and, according to co-workers, seemed happy and healthy. About 15 or 20 minutes later she collapsed and within a few minutes died.

Read full at: sciencedaily.com


More "stupid stick" from sciencedaily
Tobacco Could Kill One Billion By 2100, WHO Report Warns
WHO has released new data showing that while progress has been made, not a single country fully implements all key tobacco control measures, and outlined an approach that governments can adopt to prevent tens of millions of premature deaths by the middle of this century.

Director of NIH environmental institute resigns under fire

 

Choice Earth or Suburbia (From NYT Blog)

The NYTimes examines the environmental costs of suburban life, which evolved around the highway system, cheap oil, and the automobile and now typically consumes several times more energy per person (and thus fossil fuels) than urban living. There’s all that driving. There are the chugging mowers and fertilizers and pesticides used to keep all those lawns lovely. Lighting, heating and cooling those ballooning homes consumes vast amounts of energy compared to a city apartment — or a house half a century ago.

“The End of Suburbia,” an award-winning 2006 documentary, provides a fascinating overview of how the sprawled lifestyle evolved, the hidden — and not so hidden — costs, and what lies ahead.

The Sustainable Home Blog recently described just how much the American home has changed:

In 1946, when the American post war housing boom started, the average house was 1,100 square feet and housed 5 people. Fifty years latter, in 1996 the average house would grow to 2,200 square feet and house 2.6 people and by 2007, fueled by easy credit, the average American home would would become the equivalent of a Hummer, “weighing in” at super-sized 2,400 square feet.

Read More By Andrew C. Revkin Here

EPA Must Rewrite Utility Mercury Rule

 WASHINGTON federal court ruled Friday that the Environmental Protection Agency must fundamentally rework its mercury rules for utilities.

The US Court ruled that the EPA violated the Clean Air Act in 2005 when it exempted coal plants from the strictest emission controls for mercury and other toxic substances like arsenic, lead and nickel.

The EPA's "Clean Air Mercury Rule" would have created a "cap-and-trade" program to allow utilities to swap rights to emit mercury to comply with overall limits that would reduce nationwide emissions by 70 percent by 2018.
 
It could be years before the EPA can enact new rules on mercury. In the meantime, regulating mercury emissions will likely be left to states, which in many cases have set their own strict limits on utilities.
The nation's 1,100 coal-burning units emit about 48 tons of mercury each year, the largest unregulated US source. The EPA rule vacated by the court would have set the cap at 38 tons per year by 2010 and 15 tons per year in 2018.
Mercury contaminates water and fish and has been linked to neurological disorders in young children.
"The EPA recklessly ignored the law and the science," said Vickie Patton, an attorney for Environmental Defense. "Now, each coal plant in America must clean up its own toxic mercury pollution."
Environmental groups applauded the ruling.

Feb 9, 2008

Great Lakes health report withheld by agency

Federal officials are refusing to release a scientific study that contains "alarming evidence" that toxic pollutants threaten the health of residents in Detroit and other Great Lakes cities, a watchdog group alleged Thursday.
 
Labels: ,

Feb 8, 2008

Goole vs. Gore is Tax versus investment...

...a little bit of money, helping winners get funding. "In Silicon Valley, they do that for breakfast." To do that in Ghana, he says, would establish a community to keep this going.
 
Asked from the floor, by Time's Michael Elliott, about the theme of the day — environment versus poverty, emphasis on versus — Page says that he gets irritated when people do not realize that the way out of these problems is technology.
 
I think he's right: the discussion is too much about what we should not do rather than what we can do.
 
"You can't succeed just out of conservation because then you won't have economic development," Brilliant explains. "Find a way to make electricity — not to cut back on it but to have more of it than you ever dreamed of."
The other unspoken divide is about economics: Gore and Friedman favor raising the cost of carbon. Page and Brin see a victory in reducing the price of the clean energy. Tax versus investment.

Peak-Oilers Put Money Where Mouths Are

The peak-oil debate no longer is a matter just of the planet's future. Now it's the subject of a one-sided $100,000 bet.

cowboy_art_200_20080207075012.jpgReveling in the role of the fly tweaking the elephant, a group of peak-oil proponents has challenged prominent oil-industry consultancy Cambridge Energy Research Associates to a not-so-friendly wager.

If CERA proves correct in its prediction that global oil production will rise by 20 million barrels per day by 2017, then the challengers, the Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas, will hand CERA a check for $100,000 nine years hence. If oil production falls short of CERA's projection, as the group known as ASPO projects, ASPO will get the bragging rights and the check and donate the money to charity.

CERA, the Boston-based company headed by prominent consultant Daniel Yergin, forecasts that global oil-production capacity could rise to 112 million barrels per day in 2017. Today, according to CERA, capacity is about 91 million barrels.

That's a vision in search of reality, Steve Andrews, co-founder of ASPO's U.S. branch, said in a statement it sent out yesterday. Who knows whether ASPO's finances will peak before then. But along with its press release, ASPO sent a copy of what it said is a bank letter of credit guaranteeing its $100,000 bet.

By Jeffrey Ball on Global - WSj (Read full linked here)

Dahh...Daily Exercise Dramatically Lowers Men's Death Rates

How many more Billions do we need to spend on useless studies of predictable outcomes when we have soooo many unknowns with our current health issues?
 
It appears this study was conducted simply to make people who exercise "feel better about it" to put in health magazines they buy... otherwise useless.
 
Next time they need to check the local library for this kind of "radical content" ;-)
 
 
 
 
 

Gas $2.50 by spring?

By Lascelles Linton autobloggreen.com
Ah. Spring. Astronomically, it ... wait a minute. Spring, EIA forecast ...? I just wrote about this Jan. 9. As you can see here, the EIA predicted $3.50 for a gallon of gas by June, the end of Spring. Are they changing their forecasts already? YES! According to Reuters demand for gas has dropped a lot (2.4 percent last week) and EIA analyst Doug MacIntyre "said he 'certainly' expects that his agency next month will publish lower spring gasoline price forecasts." So it worked? Did higher gas prices actually change behavior, cause demand to go down and the sink the price of gas with it?

So, what does all this mean? New forecasts, oil below $90, BP's lower profits? I will tell you exactly what it means: The U.S. government is really bad at predicting the future. A possible $1 swing for a forecast, a month after making it, for something just a few months away? Come on, EIA, you can do better than that. What will the price of oil and gas be? I don't know and I don't think anyone knows.

[Source: Reuters, CNN, Telegraph, NewsHour]

Lakes cleanup would give $50B lift to economy

Read the full story in the Ann Arbor Business Review.

Cleaning up the Great Lakes wouldn't just help the environment. It would also be good for the economy.

Restoring the Great Lakes - controlling invasive species, addressing sewage contamination, cleaning up toxic waste and restoring shoreline - would create $50 billion in economic benefit from a $26 billion cleanup investment.

That's according to a recent report commissioned by a coalition of business and environmental organizations and conducted by the Brookings Institution Metropolitan Policy Program.   VIA  Laura B. lib.wmrc.uiuc.edu

Labels: ,

New law would ban water removal on environmental grounds

Globe and Mail: The issue of how well protected Canada's water is from bulk exports has always been hotly contested. The federal government has insisted in recent years that foreigners won't be able to get their hands on a resource some have called "blue gold," while environmentalists have been just as adamant that large-scale diversions pose an ever-present threat. The uncertainty over whether Canada's water is at risk could be ended by tough new federal legislation prohibiting on ... Link from ecologicalinternet.org

Feb 7, 2008

Be Ready for PPE Regulation Change, Effective Feb. 13

Personal Protective EquipmentOSHA has issued its final rule on employer payment for personal protective equipment (PPE). Under the new rule, all required PPE, with a few exceptions, must be provided at no cost to the employee.

The new rule goes into effect on Feb. 13, 2008, and employers must implement its provisions by May 15, 2008.

Examples under the new rule
Employers do NOT have to pay for:

  • Non-specialty safety-toe protective footwear (e.g., steel-toe shoes/ boots)
  • Non-specialty prescription safety eyewear / Sunglasses/sunscreen
  • Sturdy work shoes / Lineman's boots /Logging boots required under Sec. 1910.266(d)(1)(v)
  • Ordinary cold weather gear (coats, parkas, cold weather gloves, winter boots)
  • Back belts
  • Long sleeve shirts / pants
  • Dust mask/respirators used under the voluntary use provisions in Sec.1910.134.
  • More at  J. J. Keller
 

Employers DO have to pay for:

  • Foot protection
  • Non-prescription eye protection
  • Prescription eyewear inserts
  • Goggles / Face shields
  • Fire fighting PPE (helmet, gloves, boots, proximity suits, full gear)
  • Hard hats / Hearing protection / Welding PPE
  • Items used in medical/laboratory settings to protect from exposure to infectious agents
  • Rubber sleeves / Aluminized gloves
  • Chemical resistant gloves/aprons/clothing / Barrier creams
  • More at  J. J. Keller

oowch...Great Lakes programs, a reduction of $56 million,

From David Dempsey that was then, this is now...

Now:

The Bush Administration's proposed fiscal year 2009 budget calls for $295 million for Great Lakes programs, a reduction of $56 million, or 16%, from current enacted levels.

http://www.healthylakes.org/great-lakes-congressional-watch/heard-on-the-hill/2008/02/06/white-house-budget-leaves-great-lakes-on-thin-ice

 

Then:

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and to help establish a regional collaboration of national significance for the Great Lakes, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1.  Policy.  The Great Lakes are a national treasure constituting the largest freshwater system in the world.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/05/20040518-3.html

ETHANOL is not the answer future fuel needs... AU

Ethanol Fuel is not so Green to The Australian Department of Parliamentary Services who has released a research paper on "The economic effects of an ethanol mandate". Published on 22 January 2008, it is available from the Parliamentary Library website.

Paul Syvret, in the Brisbane Courier Mail article Ethanol fuel is not so green, expressed his view on ethanol and summed up the paper by saying:

ETHANOL is not the answer for Australia's future fuel needs.

Labels:

NYT article Compares failures in the 70's to today... I have to give it a "Dahh factor".

This NYT article Compares failures in the 70's to today... I have to give it a "Dahh factor".
As we run out of resources and populations exceed renewable capacities more extreme renewable actions are required.

Have the guys at "Cambridge Energy Research Associates" been to a library?
 
We were just given the "serious" warning since the 70's. The impact of mans industrialization (popular term global warming) was presented in the 1930's with the U.S. investing into prevention regulations and monitoring programs following its progression to the tipping point of "resources and populations" (a few decades away).
 
Even worse, "Cambridge Energy Research Associates" noted serious limitations for clean energy development. It estimated that "meaningful deployment" of technology to capture and store carbon dioxide emissions is at least two decades away. It acknowledged the challenges for nuclear power "with regard to policy, capital costs, waste management — and public opinion."
 
Just the words people were looking for to push it off three more decades...

Feb 6, 2008

Voting for the best candidate for "Sustainability"

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
-- Albert Einstein

I was recently asked, "What I thought of our countries list of candidates" and "Who I will vote for"

I replied that I will vote, campaign and endorse a ANY leader of ANY American party who has our freedom, future, health, environment, prosperity in mind. In that order, as the path to our "future, health, environment and prosperity" are the same... freedom is first. Because if we are not free to enjoy the rest, nothing matters.


That being said, I will not be voting again this election...
Four years ago I began "shopping" candidates that could pull the U.S. out of our upcoming environmental and economic disasters which coincide with my vote determination.

After the same imbalance of power and money during the election process, any and all potential for positive results or respectable candidates were lost to politics.


... because if it's on the internet , it must be true.
Worsened yet on the web by propaganda campaigns were advertising is apparently exempt from the legal category of promotions.

Now Millions of new "googled" minds can be harvested like lemmings to "skew the vote" symbolizing grossly emotional, symbolic, cynical and vacuous politics. Knowing as little about the future policies of the candidates they cheer as they do about the true foundation of "change".

Viral videos are now "viral politics" with indifference to, and contempt for, real issues - including ones that may determine the fate of our democracy, economy and environment. Leaving us in the end nothing to of which to be certain.


It isn't the politicians fault; it is in their nature.
Nobody wants to admit it that nearly every campaign ad you see follows the principles outlined by Leonard Doob in the book "Public Opinion and Propaganda":

- To be perceived, propaganda must evoke the interest of an audience and must be transmitted through an attention-getting communications medium.
- Credibility alone must determine whether propaganda output should be true or false.
- A propaganda theme must be repeated, but not beyond some point of diminishing effectiveness
- [Slogans] must evoke desired responses which the audience previously possesses
- They must be capable of being easily learned
- They must be utilized again and again, but only in appropriate situations.

Our current candidates have entered dangerous territory in a campaign that has relied excessively on effective but ultimately indefinable abstractions of "hope and change" while giving only hyper technical explanations of what actions they might actually conduct.

We are under the assumption of what they might do in the future, even if they don't want to tell us in more than evasive terms.

But we, as citizens, should not be quiet servants of the pitiful choices set before us. Our future and freedom depend on us understanding when we are being duped.

And while there is no hope for my vote,
I would implore to go out and vote IF you feel as strongly for candidate as I do for a "lack there of".

Quote of the day- "$50 million, not even a decimal point on BP's scale."

cal-osha.com Quote of the day:

"The $50 million being talked about, it's not even a decimal point on BP's scale."

David Senko, former construction manager and supervisor of contractors who died in the March 2005 BP Texas City refinery disaster, about a possible agreement between BP and the Justice Department

Go to the full story in the Houston Chronicle

Feb 5, 2008

This month from GLRPPR web site

GLRPPR web site (www.glrppr.org) update:
Here are a few recently added items to check out:
Other great resources:

VIA - Joy Scrogum
Labels:

Solar City to Rise in Persian Gulf; Why Not Arizona?

NY-Times: A solar-powered city is about to rise in the Persian Gulf. Why not in the United States?

...a story in this week's Science Times on Abu Dhabi's Masdar City — a 2.3-square-mile complex that by 2016 should, if plans hold, house nearly 50,000 people working on next-generation energy technologies. No cars. Solar cells for electricity and solar-thermal arrays for the energy needed for air conditioning. Local agriculture. Waste fully recycled.

Ellen Dunham-Jones, the director of the architecture program at the Georgia Institute of Technology, told me the project potentially signaled a real shift in the Persian Gulf, which until recently has been focused more on architectural flamboyance than energy efficiency and the like.

It's notable to see someone somewhere looking beyond fossil fuels, just as Thomas Edison recommended in 1931 when he told Henry Ford and Harvey Firestone: "I'd put my money on the sun and solar energy. What a source of power! I hope we don't have to wait until oil and coal run out before we tackle that."

Perhaps Abu Dhabi, at least, isn't waiting.

In the meantime, where's Nevada, or Arizona?

Read full at NY-Times blog

Warning sticker for low sulfur diesel

...a sticker on the diesel pump warning about the damage the low sulfur fuel might do to new engines that I wanted to know a bit more about. If you're a regular diesel-fueler, you might be used to this warning, but I'm not and wasn't. Since I was curious, I thought some of our readers might be, too.

The text of the sticker is as follows:
Low Sulfur Highway Diesel Fuel (500 ppm Sulfur maximum). Warning. Federal law prohibits use in model year 2007 and later highway vehicles and engines. Its use may damage these vehicles and engines.

The station I was at was still selling the older, non-Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD) fuel. ULSD has a maximum sulfur content of 15 ppm and was introduced in late 2006, but isn't universal yet. According to a downloadable PDF of the regulation from OPISnet,

From June 1, 2006 through September 30, 2010, any retailer or wholesale purchaser-consumer who sells, dispenses, or offers for sale or dispensing, motor vehicle diesel fuel subject to the 500 ppm sulfur standard of §80.520(c), must prominently and conspicuously display in the immediate area of each pump stand from which motor vehicle fuel subject to the 500 ppm sulfur standard is offered for sale or dispensing, the following legible label, in block letters of no less than 24-point bold type, printed in a color contrasting with the background: [sticker text]

There's an enlargement of the warning sticker after the jump. What's it look like in your neck of the woods? Are the stations selling ULSD or not?

Sustainable 2022 bio-fuel harvest is too optimistic...

The new U.S. Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS), signed into law last month as part of the revised Energy Bill, sets high goals for the U.S. biofuels industry. It calls for the production of 36 billion gallons of biofuels—mainly ethanol and biodiesel—annually by 2022, with 21 billion gallons coming from so-called "advanced biofuels," which can be produced using a variety of new feedstocks and technologies. Of this, roughly 16 billion gallons is expected to be from "cellulosic biofuels," derived from plant sources such as trees and grasses.

But are these biofuels targets realistic, and can they be met without serious impacts on the nation's farmlands, forests, waterways, and rural communities? The answer is complicated, but fortunately the RFS bill contains a few key caveats that can be used to "stop the buildup" if things go wrong.  Read full here  by Raya Widenoja, a research associate at the Worldwatch Institute, is the lead author of the joint Worldwatch/Sierra Club report Destination Iowa: Getting to a Sustainable Biofuels Future.

The American Denial of Global Warming-Free Video

It's free for a reason...
 
The American Denial of Global Warming, 12/12/07, free on-line, 58 min. 
Video linked here

Feb 4, 2008

myth-busting cancer causes of MOBILE phones, deodorants and coffee

MOBILE phones, deodorants and coffee are extremely unlikely to cause cancer, according to a new risk report designed to combat urban myths about what causes the disease.
 
But Australian cancer specialist Professor Brendan Stewart put smoking, drinking alcohol and deliberate exposure to sunlight in the highest risk bracket.
 
His report is published today in the academic journal Mutation Research Reviews, coinciding with World Cancer Day.
 
The aim of the myth-busting exercise was to calm public fears and prevent pointless hysteria, focusing instead on the real causes of cancer. Endless media articles had left the public confused and alarmed, said Professor Stewart from the University of NSW.
 
His article, titled "Banding carcinogenic risks in developed countries: A procedural basis for qualitative assessment", looks at all the available research to determine not just which chemicals or activities are most likely to cause cancer, but also which are of greatest threat to the public.
 

The Chinese word for crisis - Global Warming Con Job?

The Chinese word for crisis

In the past several months, a new "crisis" has heated up the controversy over man-made global warming.

A few major-media writers and TV personalities are actually reporting statements by credible scientists who are challenging the assumption that carbon dioxide is the primary force causing global warming.
A Contrary View :
But on the first day of 2008, a very significant contrarian voice emerged in an astonishing place: The New York Times.

Science writer John Tierney's editorial slashed deep:
"Today's interpreters of the weather are what social scientists call availability entrepreneurs: the activists, journalists and publicity-savvy scientists who selectively monitor the globe looking for newsworthy evidence of a new form of sinfulness, burning fossil fuels."
DRIVEN by a story. Not a solution.
Sea ice cover had shrunk to the lowest level ever recorded. But for some reason the warmists are less keen on the latest satellite findings, reported by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) on the website Cryosphere Today by the University of Illinois.
This body is committed to warmest orthodoxy and contributes to the work of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Yet its graph of northern hemisphere sea ice area, which shows the ice shrinking from 13,000 million sq km to just 4 million from the start of 2007 to October, also shows it now almost back to 13 million sq km.

A second graph, "Global Ice Area", shows a similar pattern repeated every year since satellite records began in 1979; while a third, "Southern Hemisphere Ice", shows that sea ice has actually expanded in recent years, well above its 30-year mean.

Compare side-by-side images of Northern Hemisphere sea ice extent for any two dates in the satellite record (1979-present).
Still more inconvenient was the truth about an image that has been relentlessly exploited to promote this panic over the "vanishing" Arctic ice. It is the photograph of two polar bears standing forlornly on the fast-melting remains of an iceberg which has been reproduced thousands of times to show that there will soon be no bears left (ignoring evidence that their numbers have risen recently).
As the old joke has it, seems those famous bears were not drowning after all, they were just waving. But the BBC is no more likely to tell us that than it was to lead the news with last week's snow in Jerusalem. Read more here

hormone-altering chemicals in Infants Using Baby Cosmetics

"Infants and toddlers exposed to baby lotions, shampoos and powders carry high concentrations of hormone-altering chemicals in their bodies that might have reproductive effects, according to a new scientific study of babies born in Los Angeles and two other U.S. cities. The research, to be published today in the medical journal Pediatrics, found that as the use of baby care products rose, so did the concentration of phthalates, which are used in many fragrances. The lead scientist in the study, Dr. Sheela Sathyanarayana of the University of Washington's Department of Pediatrics, said the findings suggested that many baby care products contain a variety of phthalates that enter children's bodies through their skin. Manufacturers do not list phthalates as ingredients on labels, so it is unknown which products contain them. The researchers at the University of Washington and the University of Rochester stressed that the potential effects on babies were uncertain. But previous animal and human research suggests that early exposure to some phthalates could reduce testosterone and alter reproductive organs, particularly in males." Read more from Marla Cone, the Los Angeles Times
 
Source: www.sej.org

South Africa radioactive water-contamination crisis

In an alarming report, the National Nuclear Regulator (NNR) has confirmed evidence of contaminated crops and water, and has acted to protect people and livestock, the newspaper said.

The report is the latest of several recent indicators that the government is no longer able to monitor effectively and manage its vast infrastructure of dams, pipes, pumps and treatment facilities.
 
Among the alarming findings contained in a series of reports are the following:
 
  • forty-three percent of dams managed by the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry have safety problems and require urgent repair;
  • an estimated R180-billion is necessary to replace old water-service infrastructure countrywide, including in the major metro areas;
  • waste water from mining operations appears to have seeped into the country's groundwater system -- a process known as acid mine drainage -- raising concerns about future water supply;
  • vegetables and fish collected in the Wonderfonteinspruit catchment area west of Johannesburg have been contaminated with radioactive uranium -- and the NNR is testing milk and meat from cows grazing in the area; and
  • water in the Wonderfonteinspruit area has also been contaminated by radioactive material, as well as by heavy metals and salts.
 
Despite the NNR's latest report -- a follow-up to an earlier, detailed report of contamination in the area -- cattle farming continues and environmental activists are concerned that radioactive meat may be entering the food cycle.
 

E10 Ethanol, it ruins your gas mileage...

"As far as I'm concerned, they may as well put water in the gas," Atkeson said.

When Atkeson first purchased his car, which uses gasoline and then electric power harnessed from the car's brake system to increase fuel mileage, he said he routinely got in excess of 50 miles per gallon. Recently he said his fuel economy has dropped to approximately 40 mpg on the highway and 35 mpg in the city.

"It just doesn't burn the same. I know Honda does not recommend burning that type of fuel in their vehicles, simply because they know it's going to drop the gas mileage. It doesn't combust the same," Guadagnino said.

 

How much energy?

Most automobiles and trucks in the United States are able to run on E10 fuel, but the fuel contains less energy than gasoline. According to the EIA, a gallon of gasoline has approximately 122,169 British thermal units of energy, compared with 83,333 Btu per gallon of ethanol.

Using EIA numbers, an approximate gallon of E10 gasoline should have about 118,285 Btu, 3.2 percent less than regular unleaded gasoline. How that affects fuel mileage in various model cars is disputed by proponents and opponents of ethanol production and consumers of the product.

According to the Renewable Fuels Association, the trade association for the U.S. ethanol industry, fuel injected cars may experience a decrease of approximately 2 percent in fuel economy using E10.

Read more from The Daily Gazette

 

Also see more posts on the

 

Labels:

OBAMA's connection to nuclear energy

Exelon, the country's largest nuclear plant operator and one of Mr. Obama's largest sources of campaign money.
Obama introduced a bill to require all nuke plant owners to notify state and local authorities immediately of even small leaks. He has boasted of it on the campaign trail, telling a crowd in Iowa in December that it was "the only nuclear legislation that I've passed." "I just did that last year," he said, to murmurs of approval.
In reality the bill never passed...
Nuclear safety advocates are divided on whether Mr. Obama's efforts yielded any lasting benefits. David A. Lochbaum of the Union of Concerned Scientists agreed that "it took the introduction of the bill in the first place to get a reaction from the industry."
"But of course because it is all voluntary," Mr. Lochbaum said, "who's to say where things will be a few years from now?"
VIA-NYT



DALLAS NEWS - Barack Obama says nuclear power should be explored as an energy option. Hillary Rodham Clinton says she's "agnostic" on whether more nuclear plants should be built. . .

John Edwards opposes nuclear power. He has said there's no safe way to dispose of the waste, and reactors take a long time – and a lot of money – to build.

Mr. Obama is in the opposite camp. "We should explore nuclear power as part of the energy mix," he said during last summer's CNN-YouTube debate. Nuclear plants can cut greenhouse gas emissions, he says.

Mrs. Clinton articulates both views. She worries about climate change, as well as nuclear waste spills. But American technology can address those worries, she said during the debate last summer. She doesn't state explicitly whether she supports building new plants...

My guess is she does ;-)

OSHA - Tips Offered on Protecting Employees During Cold Weather

FROM OSHA - Winter is upon us, and some areas of the nation have already experienced its severe consequences. For those employees who work outside - such as in construction, commercial fishing, maritime and agriculture - OSHA offers tips to protect against cold weather-related illnesses and injuries. Printed copies of OSHA's Cold Stress QuickCard™ (English/Spanish) are available for free by contacting OSHA's publications office at 202-693-1888. Visit OSHA's Web site at www.osha.gov for more information.

OSHA - Small Business Assistance Web Page Receives a New Look, New Link and Updated eTool

The redesigned Small Business Assistance Web Page now features categorical tabs for easier navigation and access to data. The new format highlights focal points, new products and links. The page introduces a link which provides small businesses with Spanish-language safety cards, booklets and posters. Additionally, the updated "Safety Pays" eTool allows employers to estimate the costs of work-related injuries and illnesses and the estimated impact on a company's bottom line. It also computes the projected sales growth that would be needed to cover the costs associated with those injuries and illnesses.

"Recycling is Garbage," New York Times

(CNN) -- In a controversial article entitled "Recycling is Garbage," New York Times Magazine journalist John Tierney argued that recycling was only benefiting a select group of politicians, environmental activists and waste handling companies while creating more harm to the environment by increasing energy consumption and pollution.

He wrote, "Rinsing out tuna cans and tying up newspapers may make you feel virtuous, but recycling could be America's most wasteful activity."

The article, published in 1996, continues to divide opinion on mandatory recycling in local communities.

Read more from "Recycling is Garbage," VIA-NRDC

Feb 1, 2008

Clinton quote: "We Just Have to Slow Down Our Economy" to Fight Global Warming

What Did Bill Clinton Mean By "We Just Have to Slow Down Our Economy" to Fight Global Warming?

Clinton characterized what the U.S. and other industrialized nations need to do to combat global warming this way: "We just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions 'cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren."

At a time that the nation is worried about a recession is that really the characterization his wife would want him making? "Slow down our economy"?

I don't really think there's much debate that, at least initially, a full commitment to reduce greenhouse gases would slow down the economy….So was this a moment of candor?

You can watch that one clip HERE or you can watch the whole speech at the website of ABC News' great Denver affiliate KMGH by clicking HERE.

It's worth watching -- he also pushed back against a 9/11 conspiracy theorist heckling him.

"Everybody knows that global warming is real," Mr. Clinton said, giving a shout-out to Al Gore's Nobel Peace Prize, "but we cannot solve it alone."

"And maybe America, and Europe, and Japan, and Canada -- the rich counties -- would say, 'OK, we just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions 'cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren.' We could do that.

"But if we did that, you know as well as I do, China and India and Indonesia and Vietnam and Mexico and Brazil and the Ukraine, and all the other countries will never agree to stay poor to save the planet for our grandchildren. The only way we can do this is if we get back in the world's fight against global warming and prove it is good economics that we will create more jobs to build a sustainable economy that saves the planet for our children and grandchildren. It is the only way it will work.

Read more from Jake Tapper is ABC

Clinton goes nuke and so will Hillary

Former president of the United States, Bill Clinton. work on agreements,  giving it the right to buy into three uranium projects controlled by Kazakhstan's state-owned uranium agency, Kazatomprom.
 
The monster deal stunned the mining industry, turning an unknown shell company into one of the world's largest uranium producers in a transaction ultimately worth tens of millions of dollars to Mr. Giustra, analysts said.

Just months after the Kazakh pact was finalized, Mr. Clinton's charitable foundation received its own windfall: a $31.3 million donation from Mr. Giustra that had remained a secret until he acknowledged it last month. The gift, combined with Mr. Giustra's more recent and public pledge to give the William J. Clinton Foundation an additional $100 million, secured Mr. Giustra a place in Mr. Clinton's inner circle, an exclusive club of wealthy entrepreneurs in which friendship with the former president has its privileges.

Mr. Giustra was invited to accompany the former president to Almaty just as the financier was trying to seal a deal he had been negotiating for months.

 

Mr. Clinton's praise was odd, given that the United States did not support Mr. Nazarbayev's bid. (Late last year, Kazakhstan finally won the chance to lead the security organization for one year, despite concerns raised by the Bush administration.) Moreover, Mr. Clinton's wife, who sits on a Congressional commission with oversight of such matters, had also voiced skepticism.

 
Eleven months before Mr. Clinton's statement, Mrs. Clinton co-signed a commission letter to the State Department that sounded "alarm bells" about the prospect that Kazakhstan might head the group. The letter stated that Kazakhstan's bid "would not be acceptable," citing "serious corruption," canceled elections and government control of the news media.
 
QUOTE: Mr. Giustra said that while his friendship with the former president "may have elevated my profile in the news media, it has not directly affected any of my business transactions."
 
Read more from Wednesday's New York Times:
 
 
Haase:
All the worlds power, resources and Shell in the deal... Clearly if Hillary is elected, we will see the "revival of nuke power" in the U.S.
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)