SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: greenspirit who wrote (154819)6/21/2001 9:52:16 PM
From: ColtonGang  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769668
 
Didn't know you read or believed the NYTIMES. Better yet go to this site and learn the facts about global warming...........http://www.climatehotmap.org Arctic Ocean

Shrinking sea ice. The area covered by sea ice declined by about 6 percent from 1978 to 1995.

Reference: Bjorgo, E., O. Johannessen, and M. Miles. 1997. Analysis of merged SMMR-SSMI time series of Arctic and Antarctic sea ice parameters 1978-1995. Geophysical Research Letters 24: 413-416.



To: greenspirit who wrote (154819)6/21/2001 9:54:51 PM
From: Krowbar  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769668
 
Michael, I am sure that there is more that we don't know about what affects our climate than what we do know. So what's your point? Are we suddenly OK now with global warming because we found out that we didn't totally understand how clouds form? Do we have to wait until there is absolute certainty that the climate is out of control before we take action? BTW, did I argue that we DID totally understand cloud formation, or something? I don't recall such a statement.

What is certain is that CO2 levels are higher than they have been for thousands of years. What is also certain is that we have a president who has zilch for scientific training, and shows a total lack of ability to understand basic science, arrogantly thinking that he knows better than the vast majority of scientists that say that global warming is a problem. Curious that he would spend a trillion on a missile defense system that MIGHT work against an ICBM that he thinks MIGHT be lobbed at us, but doesn't want to take action against the threat of global warming that is very PROBABLE. He will not be re-elected, so he will only be in the way for 3 1/2 more years before progress will be made. I'm sure that you have seem the polls that says that only 33% of the people think that he is making the right decisions on the environment and energy. I predict that number will drop even more. Those same people vote.

You seem to have missed the summary at the end of the article. How come the clouds didn't make things all better in recent years?

"But Dr. Hansen, Dr. Seinfeld and other scientists say it is equally clear that the earth's surface is undergoing a sharp warming. How can the apparent paradox be reconciled?

Dr. Hansen said it might well be that, just as scientists appear to have underestimated the cooling effect of clouds, they might have underestimated the warming influence of substances that trap heat. "

Del



To: greenspirit who wrote (154819)6/21/2001 11:38:19 PM
From: Krowbar  Respond to of 769668
 
Manure Power! If only Dubya was forward thinking like this farmer instead of dreaming about his "1000 Points of Coal Power Plants"...

Wrightstown - Fourth-generation dairyman Carl Theunis can lay claim to the state's most productive herd - each of his Holsteins each year generates 26,000 pounds of milk, 9,855 pounds of manure and 417 watts of electricity.

After years of planning, borrowing and building, Theunis, his wife Sharon and their four sons on Wednesday watched Gov. Scott McCallum flip the switch that made their family farm into Wisconsin's first cow-powered electric plant.

Here's how it works:

The 1,800 Holsteins feeding, ambling around and lying down in the four curtain-walled barns at Tinedale Farm produce a pile of 48,600 pounds of manure every day.

Instead of being spread on Tinedale's 4,000 acres of cropland, all that waste is loaded into a huge on-site chamber, where it is digested by anaerobic bacteria at two different temperatures.

The result is 300,000 cubic feet of methane gas, collected at the top of the chamber and piped to an on-site electric generator, where it is burned. The burned methane produces a constant flow of 750 kilowatts of electricity, enough to power 250 houses.....

....McCallum not only praised the project, he also used the occasion to unveil major parts of his energy policy, due to be released next week. Three points in particular, he said, directly relate to manure-to-energy operations:

Seeking a possible expansion in the amount of renewable energy required of each electric utility in the state. Currently, the requirement is for less than 2%.
Setting up a renewable energy program showcasing new technologies.

Creating public-private partnerships to demonstrate and lower the costs of on-farm energy production. Citing the $400,000 low-cost loan from the state Commerce Department and a $100,000 grant from Brown County used to finance the digester, McCallum said: "Renewable energy provides a good return on investment and creates three times as many jobs, earnings and output than does investment in fossil fuels."

The first of many?
Secretary of Agriculture Jim Harsdorf called the plant an "example of why Wisconsin is still the place for dairying."

He envisioned the spread of similar plants across the state, where rural electric cooperatives might be able to bring together groups of small dairy farmers in shared operations.

Dick Griggs, president of Wisconsin Electric Power Co., which will buy the 750 kilowatts of power produced at the farm, was on hand to congratulate Theunis for "having the vision and the drive to get this project done."

He reiterated the utility's commitment to alternative sources of energy, which already produce 140 megawatts of electricity for the company, and expressed his willingness to buy more manure-based power in the future.

According to calculations by Wisconsin Electric, if all the cow manure in the state were collected and processed in manure digesters, the resulting methane could produce 750 megawatts of electricity, 1,000 times as much as the Tinedale plant and three-fourths the amount produced by the Point Beach Nuclear Power Plant.

A positive focus
To the Iowa State University researchers who developed the process used here, the proper term is "manure management by temperature phased anaerobic digestion."

However, Theunis, 53, sees the technology as a just-in-time idea capable of transforming many negatives about his beloved dairy industry into positives, specifically:

Removing pathogens and pollutants from the manure;
Providing a reliable stream of extra income;
Producing a dependable alternative supply of electricity;
Controlling odors that bothered his neighbors; and
Keeping his four sons on the farm.
In a warm welcome to his visitors Wednesday, he described a conversation with his four sons that struck a responsive chord with every farm family in the audience.

His sons came to him and said that they loved dairying and wanted to stay on the farm, he said. But, they added, they also wanted a life a little more like that of their city-dwelling contemporaries, one in which they could have days off, could take vacations and could spend time off the farm with their children.

Now, his sons - Mike, 32, Scott, 31, Todd, 25, and Jim, 23 - can work the farm, each with separate responsibilities, and still count on those rare commodities on traditional dairy farms, time off and vacations. The farm's 16 full-time employees have similar benefits, said Mike Theunis, who runs the herd while Scott takes charge of the crops, Todd the computer operation and Jim the maintenance duties. jsonline.com

Del



To: greenspirit who wrote (154819)6/21/2001 11:51:26 PM
From: Krowbar  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769668
 
More people showing Dubya what leadership means. You don't solve energy problems by turning the clock back to 1955...

Washington, June 18, 2001---recent Republican defector U.S. Senator James Jeffords (I-Vt) joined Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) and 59 other Senators in sending a letter to key (6/21/2001)Senate Appropriations Committee members, asking for for increased funding for renewable energy programs in the fiscal year 2002 budget for the U.S. Department of Energy. The President's budget calls for a 36% reduction in funding for renewable energy research and development (R&D) overall and a 48% cut in spending on wind energy R&D.

Bingaman, recently appointed as Chairman of the Senate Energy Committee, said, "I believe the President's budget is taking our country in the wrong direction. We shouldn't be cutting funding for renewable research at the same time we are facing energy shortages. On the contrary, we should be taking full advantage of all of our energy resources. Solar, wind, geothermal, and biomass can all play an important role." "It is time to reduce our reliance on foreign oil and invest in renewable energy sources here at home," said Jeffords. "The cuts in the President's budget for renewable energy will not stand."

The letter was sent to U.S. Sens. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Pete Domenici (R-N.M.), the Chairman and the ranking member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development. Sen. Reid, a strong advocate of renewables programs, also signed the letter to show his support.

Advocates for renewable energy research funding were pleased with the strong support that the letter received. A similar letter sent last year garnered 56 signatures. There is also strong support in the House for raising renewable energy research funding above the levels requested by the Administration, where over 122 members signed a similar letter by Rep. Mark Udall (D-Colo.).

Author:EyeforEnergy Newsdesk

Del