Conference back40::soapbox

So what's the skinny on this new gasoline being mandated in the northeast?
I was just reading in another conference that contrary to the purported
aim of being less of a pollutant than standard gas, the stuff does absolutely
nothing to improve air quality, while it has several drawbacks including
loss of power, decreased mileage, higher price, higher stalling and poorer
cold starting capabilities, etc. Word has it that it's yet another try at
the gasahol trend.

Can Phil or anyone else enlighten us on what this stuff is and isn't?

    
    Probably developed and refined in Arkansas...
    

    I smells, makes your car harder to start, gets you worse mileage, costs 
    more and makes a greater percentage of the population sick from
    the additive.  Seems like a good deal to me.  Idiots.
    
    Brian 

    If its gas-a-ha.... there is some real frightning things. That there is
    no sign of a flame. And putting out a fire on such good stuff makes it
    a real tuff thing to do. And with those folks who drive the chevy
    trucks that have a gas tank outside the rails,,,, its going to make
    life allot more of a challenge!
    
    

    It's an additive (MBT or some such).  It's supposed to facilitate
    cleaner burning.  There was mention of this in the News Briefs note
    awhile back.  I think it was COVERT::COVERT that alluded to it possibly
    voiding warranties on some new cars as well.  
    
    Brian

    MTBE or ethonol.  We run our cars on it all winter on most of the front
    range in Colorado.  The big thing seems to be to be consistant with
    which additive you are running through your car.  BTW didn't void the
    warranty on mine.  This seems to be a rumor that pops up where ever
    oxygenated fuels do.
    
    meg

    As I'd mentioned somewhere, Taxachusetts volunteered to use this
    new gas even though they weren't required to do so (because their
    air quality was better than the EPA limit).  How about New Hampshire?
    Will N.H. also be volunteering to force their citizens to use this
    "new gas"?
    
    Chris

    Too late, it's already there I think. 
    
    Brian

    
    And already in Texas as well...in conjunction with Official State
    Emissions Inspection Centers (18 in DFW to service 1 million cars;
    can anyone say "stand-in-line").  Call me paranoid (I'm from Texas),
    but this appears to be the early stages of a ban-older-cars 
    movement on the government's part.
    
    Texans hate mass-transit...we'll just have to legislate them into it.
    
    Ain't Amerika great ?

RE: 175.1 by MOLAR::DELBALSO "I (spade) my (dogface)"

> I was just reading in another conference 

Care to tell the 'boxer world where this came from?


Phil

Sure - MORTAL::NEW_HAMPSHIRE. Note very near to LAST.

    
    i just use propane in my front range. actually mine is just a 
    two-burner. 
    
    

    bottie burps after a vindaloo and 15 pints of lager.

    I think it's a sad commentary on our times, when there are entire
    countries of starving people, and we turn our food (GRAIN) into a fuel
    for our cars.  The Environmentalists are gonna rot in hell for this
    one!
    
    
    
    Rod

    The "food" used for fuel is an inedible variety of corn.  It is NOT an
    environmentalist plot to turn food grade grains or in this case, corn,
    into fuels.  In actuality, it is better for the farmers that produce
    this to be farming (working) versus letting their farms sit idle at the 
    taxpayer's expense (on the dole) or worse yet, be foreclosed on at the 
    taxpayer's expense.  
    
    If you wish to solve world hunger, direct your ire to your government 
    and the protectionist attitudes of other nations.  It is not as though 
    we have not tried to market our grains internationally and in fact ship 
    many tons abroad, at your expense BTW each and every year.  Alcohol based
    fuels for cars may be many things, some bad but it does not promote the
    starvation of the third world.   
    
    Brian

    If you want to end world hunger, end the wars which are the biggest
    cause.
    
    Glenn

    re -.1
       -.2
    
    	I don't buy this cop out answer for one minute.  The farmers can
    grow legitimate crops, and the government can manage the distribution
    with a little willpower.  Unfortunately it has become the Politically
    correct norm to please the most annoying groups in society, instead of
    doing what is morally right!!!
    
    
    Rod

    Rod,
    
    Ethanol can be made by the non-edible parts of plants.  On top of it,
    right now the hunger problem is distribution.  This is disrupted by wars,
    skirmishes, ethnic uprisings and the like.  Solve that, and you solve a
    major part of the food crisis in much of the world.  
    
    Besides, I occaisionally like a nice, dripping slab of dead cow once in
    a while, should I feel guilty because the corn to fatten it up could
    feed a small family for the same number of months said beef was in the
    feedlot?

    I'm not picking on the use of food or foodstuffs or food production
    techniques.  What I'm basically against is the use of farmland to
    produce fuel for automobiles (remember these are the bain of modern
    civilization, and contribute immensely to the polution problem).  I put
    forward that this is not a solution, not even a step in the right
    direction, but a politically nice way to make the governing knee-jerks
    look green.
    
    
    Rod
      

    Stating that most world hunger is caused by wars is no cop out.

    You try and deliver food to people while a war is going on. Usually the
    food gets appropriated by those with the guns. Not to mention the
    corrupt governments who don't seem to care that millions of their own
    people are starving.

    Glenn

    /and the government can manage the distribution with a little willpower.
    
     That's not the sort of government we have. Go to China for your vision
    of a "morally" guided government distribution control system.

    No cop out at all.  Glenn pointed out a substantiated fact.  Witness
    the attrocites committed in Ethiopia and Somalia as well as countless
    other instances where food shipments were held hostage, or stolen
    outright by parties on the receiving end while thousands of their
    countrymen starved in festering camps.  Witness Rwanda where there was
    no real shortage of aid but the transportation and taxation of the
    imports by neighboring countries hampered distribution efforts. 
    Witness Biafra, Bangladesh and the horrible civil wars that scarred
    Africa during the post colonial era.  What were the root causes for 
    these disasters anyway?  Was it environmental zealousy that sparked 
    ethnic genocide or prompted marxist regimes and civil war leading to 
    death by disease and famine for millions?  Has environmental zealousy
    somehow contributed to the above disasters?  If so, prove it. 
    
    The illusion you are supporting is that we will nourish the world by 
    turning on our full agricultural production capability AND it is the 
    enviros that are to blame for deviating the grains from going to a more
    noble cause.  They are completely unrelated.  U.S. agricultural capacity 
    even with the grain used for fuels (which is a small percentage) is far, 
    far greater than actual production.  
    
    If you wish to make an argument that we would be better off utilizing the 
    capacity that we pay farmers to not grow things on and shipping this 
    abroad, you may have a point.  I would counter that this is a useless 
    gesture at best and far more destructive to the environment in the long 
    run by virtue of increased use of fertilizers, pesticides, river silting 
    and water shed depletion than what we have today.  
    
    Fact of the matter is that providing direct aid is often more harmful to 
    the recipients in the long run as it does not actually do anything to 
    solve their initial problems be they political unrest, over population, 
    or whatever.  It still has nothing to do with environmentalists
    demanding anything especially using grain based fuels for our cars.  
    
    If you wish to rail at someone for not doing enough, rail at the U.N.
    for not providing transportation and efficient distribution for the
    grains we ship now.  Rail at the international community for not doing
    their part in the same.  Rail at the terrorist governments that would
    hold their own peoples hostage for the greedy, corrupt, and twisted
    ideologies of a few power hungry dictators.  
    
    BTW I am not a fan of alcohol laced fuels but it is a creative way in 
    which we can keep our farmers legitimately farming by providing a
    market for their crops.  Hopefully we will be able to further exploit
    agricultural products for other other industrial uses where petroleum
    based products were used before.  This is a good thing IMO.   
    
    Brian

    -.1 Nice Job!
    
     Chip

    I'm hearing the same arguments over an over...these are the same
    arguments that have been historically put forward in an effort to
    defend a position.  We can grow food and distribute it efficiently, but
    we do not have a government (Canada or U.S.) committed to doing this. 
    I'm not proposing a China mentality, I'm just proposing that we grow
    food for food and distribute it properly, a task that our governments,
    foreign governments, and the UN should be able to accomplish.  I
    honestly think the Political 'Will' is not there.  Let's face it, if
    your looking at the polls, and trying to shore up your parties chances
    for re-election/election/support, then you go for what's politically
    expedient (gives the most bang for the buck),  I really wish this
    wasn't so, but alas...  Think about one thing before you answer this. 
    If we can put our respective governments in charge of laws, commerce,
    business, trade, diplomacy, why is it that they cannot solve this
    problem?
    	The Titanic is sinking, and everyones blaming the IceBerg, and
    unfortunately the residents are caught up in the rhetoric, and do not
    see the danger.
    	Using foodstuff/farming resources to produce fuel is not an
    environmentally smart thing to do.  Curb automobile use, restrict core
    access times, increase the availability and usefullness of mass
    transit, eliminate the disposable nature of our automotive industries,
    hold business and individuals accountable for energy consumption; these
    are all valid avenues to pursue.  I'm sorry, but producing fuel from
    grain just strikes the wrong chord in me, and shows how arrogant a
    people we have become, when our need for greed, and the almighty use of
    the automobile exceeds common sense.
    
    
    Rod 

I think .-1 should just drop the "Pleasantly".

>            <<< Note 175.24 by CGOOA::MALONE "Pleasantly Obtuse" >>>
>                              -< I'm sorry, but! >-

>    defend a position.  We can grow food and distribute it efficiently, but
>    we do not have a government (Canada or U.S.) committed to doing this. 
>    I'm not proposing a China mentality, I'm just proposing that we grow
>    food for food and distribute it properly, a task that our governments,
>    foreign governments, and the UN should be able to accomplish.  I

You were obviously living on another planet during the Somalia/rwanda 
starvation shows we were "entertained" with on the nightly telly.
Can you say "Groups of thugs with guns stole food from the docks"?
try repeating that phrase a few times it may help.

The _ONLY_ way we could have distributed food in that situation would have 
been to haul it into the camps by M1-ABRAMS then distribute it at gun-point
and make sure it was consummed on the spot so it won't be black-marketed.
it would have required one million armed soldiers to feed the 5 million 
starving folks over there. and that is just one country.

Where were you in the last week? when TV has been reporting that _ALL_
UN relief convoys in Bosnia were being _STOPPED_ by the SERBS.
(or is it the Croats, or is it the muslims).

>    If we can put our respective governments in charge of laws, commerce,
>    business, trade, diplomacy, why is it that they cannot solve this
>    problem?

does the term armed-resistance ring a bell??

    re -.2
    
    
    			Done!
    
    
    Rod

    re -.2
    
    	I never said it was going to be easy.  In will take resolve and a
    committment unlike anything done before, it just makes a whole lot more
    sense to me than stewin up corn mash for cars!
    
    
    Rod

    -.1 so your position is that we should feed the world?

    Forget about the cars. Solve the wars and you solve the hunger, then
    you can start looking at ways to improve things. If you think that all
    crops should be for food you're going to have a glut and a crisis with
    the current state of affairs. You can't just force people to be
    peaceful so you can distribute food to the hungry thus preventing
    ethanol getting into your car.
    
    Glenn

    Is it we Can't do things that are right, or is it we won't do things
    that are right.  I cannot agree that the problems with the worlds
    starving populations is too complex to solve, only that there appears
    to be strong willingness to state this and assume we have done our bit.
    
    
    In response to the question asked regarding wanting to feed the world..
    
    My answer is a resounding YES!
    
    I consider this a far nobler objective than feeding my car!
    
    
    Rod

    Your p_name is very appropriate. Perhaps "deliberately" would be a good
    adjective.

    Well, obviously all of us would rather feed automobiles than people. I
    revel in the thought that for every liter of gas I pump in my car
    someone dies of starvation, yes I do.

    There's one thing you must learn about the world, the strong always
    have and always will victimize the weak.

    Glenn

    Rod,
    
    Are you volunteering to be part of the UN "peacekeeping force" in
    somalia, Rawanda, Sudan, Bosnia, or any of the other places where
    warring factions are preventing distribution of food?  If not, who are
    you "volunteering" to take on this task for you, out of curiosity?  My
    oldest daughter or Jim's?  Your sons, daughters, nephews and nieces? 
    If resolve is what we need, I would suggest not working in a cozy
    building heated and cooled with fossil fuels, and driving a vehicle or
    taking busses, trains or much of anything else, and volunteering for a
    long stint in the Peace Corp, for starters.  
    
    meg

    Okay Rod... no onw will argue that your expression isn't noble,
    righteous, honorable, compassionate, etc...
    
    I think we're saying that you present a very simple solution to a very
    complicated issue (that might be impossible to solve on a global
    scale.)
    
    One interesting point I DO have to make is that fact that there is need
    to feed people in THIS country. Interesting the homefront was ignored.
    
    Chip

    Oh! One must be carefull....
    
    	I served my country in the Canadian Armed Forces in an East Coast 
    Search and Rescue Squadron.  I have done my part of direct
    participation from a career point.  I presently support and help
    organizations that work for the betterment of mankind.  I'm not going
    to cop out and say that I'm doing or have done or all that I physically 
    can, but I am always ready to help where I am able.  I believe the present
    mandate for the Canadian Armed Forces is direct UN support.  I support
    them in this through my taxes and by voting for individuals who will
    help with this effort, by providing cooperation on my part for the
    goals, and to refrain from hindering them by not supporting short sited 
    government policies aimed at political expediency at the sacrifice of
    the Armed Forces.  I'm not proposing that your sons and daughters
    have to give up living and join a missionary (a noble endeavor indeed),
    just realize that talking about the problem does not solve it, and
    smoke screening the issues by stating that it's too complex or it's the
    local government, or hit squads or whatever prevents us from actually
    being able to do something about it.
    
    
    
    Rod
    
    
    Rod

    <- so where political resistance reigns against aid, your response
       is armed intervention? It exists in places/is very real.
    
       Basically, you take the food or we'll kill ya.
    
       I'm not really making light of this (ok, maybe a little), but get
       past xanadu... it isn't that easy and it's not a cop out.
    
       Chip

Note 175.19 by CGOOA::MALONE
    
    >I'm not picking on the use of food or foodstuffs or food production
    >techniques.  What I'm basically against is the use of farmland to
    >produce fuel for automobiles (remember these are the bain of modern
    >civilization, and contribute immensely to the polution problem).  I put
    >forward that this is not a solution, not even a step in the right
    >direction, but a politically nice way to make the governing knee-jerks
    >look green.
    
    you obviously don't know much about american agriculture or global
    political realities. in a normal year enough food is produced in the
    midwestern part of the US ALONE to feed the world. that doesn't happen
    primarily because of government intervention and world political
    instability. farmers DON'T decide what to grow. they grow what the
    government rewards them to grow. or they go out of business pretty
    quick. i've long stated that the US government HAS NO BUSINESS
    manipulating the free market on such a massive scale. their day is
    coming. that monstrosity called the US Dept. of Ag. is long overdue for
    a big fall.
    

    It may not be Xanadu, but whatever way you look at it, the 'food to fuel' 
    issue just ain't right.  Someone mentioned the hungry and impoverished
    in our own countries....I'm sure these people fully support turning
    grain into fuel for our cars.  The situation is this is wrong...the
    concept is wrong...the value is wrong...
    
    
    Rod

    Not doing it is not going to help the starving millions. Doing it keeps
    people's livelihoods alive here and reduces a dependency on foreign energy.

    Glenn

    >>>I presently support ...... the betterment of mankind.
    
    most of us think we do. its called sex.
    

>                  <<< Note 175.35 by CGOOA::MALONE "Obtuse" >>>

    
>    	I served my country in the Canadian Armed Forces in an East Coast 
>    Search and Rescue Squadron.  I have done my part of direct

When you've served in a real military talk to us.


>    smoke screening the issues by stating that it's too complex or it's the
>    local government, or hit squads or whatever prevents us from actually
>    being able to do something about it.

You've blathered about this but have yet to propose a workable(or even an 
unworkable) plan of action.
How do you convince the armed thugs to let the relief columns through?

The only guarenteed way to overcome military(thug)resistance is more guns
more men(and women?) more planes, more tanks.

The UN could blast thru the Bosnia Serbs to get relief to outer-bumdung or
wherever but the return trip would be unquiet at best, and the next convoy
would need 5 times the firepower.

Anyone in this file or any part of the real-world that has dealt with
guerilla fighters or gov't supported gangs will tell you that even significant
firepower is not a sure-fire cure.

How many men did the U.S. lose in 'nam ?
How many did we have in there at the hieght?
did we win?
how many French died in Indo-china? 
how many were they facing?
How many Brit troops were bottled up by tiny bands of poorly armed Irish
   during the "Black and Tan" war?
Who were the Mau-Mau?
How many German divisions spent WWII chasing shadows(maquis) in France?
how many did they actually catch/kill?

When you can answer the above, come back and explain about it being a 
smoke-screen.

Amos    

    <- whew...

    Okey dokey Rod.  Let's play this out.  Let's fantasize for a moment
    that, tomorrow all grain based fuel production will stop.  What happens
    then?
    
    Brian

>                  <<< Note 175.38 by CGOOA::MALONE "Obtuse" >>>
Your P-N says it all!

>    in our own countries....I'm sure these people fully support turning
>    grain into fuel for our cars.  The situation is this is wrong...the
>    concept is wrong...the value is wrong...
    
You have the concept wrong. It was already explained it isn't edible food that 
is being used.

There have been long tales of why handouts in this country don't/didn't
work. to try it in other countries hasn't been anymore successful.

I will not send my son to force at gun-point food distribution, he is a 
soldier and I am extremely proud of that. If national interests are threatened
then by all means he picks up his M16 and marches off. To convince some 
two-bit dictator to let food convoys thru is not in our national interest.
If the people in those countries were properly armed they would overthrow 
the gangs themselves. Look at gun-control and food control as deliberate 
policies of genocide by one group against another.

>I will not send my son to force at gun-point food distribution, he is a 
>soldier and I am extremely proud of that.

Of course you won't.  You're not his commander.  If the president says he
goes, he goes.

>   <<< Note 175.45 by NOTIME::SACKS "Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085" >>>

>>I will not send my son to force at gun-point food distribution, he is a 
>>soldier and I am extremely proud of that.

>Of course you won't.  You're not his commander.  If the president says he
>goes, he goes.

If I said something like "niether he nor I consider the current prez to be a 
real commander who may not have to be obeyed" I'd get in too much trouble.
So I won't say it. :-}

I wasn't specifically talking about the current president.

    Amos, I'm surprised you even responded to the remark.
    
    Chip

>                    <<< Note 175.48 by WMOIS::GIROUARD_C >>>

>    Amos, I'm surprised you even responded to the remark.
    
>    Chip

Someone has to keep the looney-left in check :-} :-} :-}

    Earth Day 1995 is coming up soon.  Anyone going to do anything to
    recognize the event?  Plant a tree?  Help clean up a river?  Start a
    compost pile?  Just brush it off as a hippie hold over event which only
    granola crunching liberals participate?  
    
    Brian

I'm starting about 100 black walnut trees this weekend, but at the rate
that those things grow, I don't think that they'll contribute much to the
environment before I buy the farm.

 I'm going to take a bunch of recyclable diet coke bottles to the dump,
 burn a bunch of old tires, and take all the smog control devices off of
 my car.




 
Jim

    re: .51
    
    RE: before I buy the farm.
    
     You that dirt poor Jack?? ;) ;)
    

    Speaking of buying the farm, you can tell when someone's
    been in the real estate business too long...

    The road we used to live on was notorious for accidents;
    I'd guess there were at least a dozen accidents near our
    house in the 3 years we lived there.

    One day, I was telling my father about the guy who "bought
    the farm" the night before. My father responded "Did he
    pay a lot for it?"

    No Dad... he didn't BUY the farm, he BOUGHT it...

    -b

    
    <--- then you should also give up noting for the day... :-)
    

re .51:

I'm not so sure that black walnut trees contribute to the environment.
They produce some kind of chemical that prevents anything from growing
nearby.

just for the day???? 

    You can't hold your breath for a whole day.

    
    Joe will explode.
    
    Anyway, will be opening our community garden on Earth Day.  Another
    serious gardening effort begins for the year.  wonder how many novices
    are in the new members?
    
    meg

| <<< Note 175.60 by CSC32::M_EVANS "proud counter-culture McGovernik" >>>


| Joe will explode.


	meg, is this a bad thing?

re: .57, Gerald


Black Walnuts are rather odd "creatures".

The ones I'm planting come from a tree growing on my Dad's place back in
Madison County, NY. That tree, in turn, was planted from nuts brought to
that area by the original owner of his place, when they traveled there by
buckboard from Chicopee, MA  in the 1800's.

That tree is about 2.5 to 3 feet in diameter - not much for a tree that's
a century and a half old. My dad has other trees that he transplanted as
seedlings almost 40 years ago which are now only about 12 feet in height
having trunks about 2 to 3 inches in diameter. The trees just grow exceedingly
slow.

In the area where my sisters live (Chester County, PA), the black walnuts
are quite prevalent, although they've been heavily hit by tent caterpillers
in the last few years and are suffering as a result.

I'll be starting these things in pots. In the fall, they get brought into
the shed to winter over, and then, hopefully, next spring they'll be
set into the ground.

It wouldn't surprise me that the Black Walnut is less than friendly to its
neighbors. The only thing that grows under them at Dad's place is the grass.
Although, he does frequently harvest a good sized puffball or two in the
fall. And that's nothing to scoff at, whether sauteed in garlic butter,
or just done up ala parmagiana.

    I'm going to wear a catalytic converter on Earth Day.

What's Onondaga going to do to celebrate Earth Day?  Use cloth diapers?

    It's usually April 22nd, I think.  A Saturday this year.  
    
    Brian

    That's the thing about multiple personality disorder, you learn quickly
    because there are so many tutors. Onondaga is already potty trained.
    
    
    Franny

    I'm going to change all of the fluids in my car and bury them in the
    back yard.
    
    ...Tom

    Oh my, I almost forgot to do that.  I still have the winter air in my
    tires and I need to replace it with Summer air now that the temps have
    warmed up.  This is a must do before May 1st.  
    
    Brian

 I'm going to burn a pile of leaves in my yard

    
    RE: .70
    
    You learned that from a Polish mechanic.. didn't you...
    
    

    >Change the air in your tires too, Tom.
    
    I think that everyone should do it on earth day day. Then we can
    measure the pollution effect.
    
    ...Tom

    
    EHS is sponsoring Earth Day activities.  Internal activities will be on
    Friday, April 21st.  
    
    Coming soon to a facility near you!
    

EHS?  Is that some kind of Canadian thing?

    The Digital cafeteria is getting envolved with earth day. They will be 
    closed that day. :)
    
    ...Tom

    For moi, I am going to write WBOS in Boston and let them know their
    EarthWatch snippets are full o' caca.  
    
    Brian

    That's nice o' you.

    Sorry Andy, I'm afraid not.  I did learn about speed wrenches from one 
    though if that helps. :-)

    
    left-handed or righ-handed ones??
    
     :)
    

    Um, reversible I think.  I'll have to check when I get home.

    
    EHS = Environment, Health & Safety.  That's where I work.

    I'll fill my tank with reformulated Earth Gasoline, and drive the
    same distance that I always do, but since my Earth Gas MPG is lower,
    I'll burn more gallons of Earth Gas, thus releasing even more
    pollutants into Earth Air, and buy even more gallons of Earth Gas,
    thus releasing more of my Earth Dollars into the pockets of
    Earth Oil Companies.
    
    Chris

    
      What would be appropriate Earth Day songs ?
    
      The Eagles did one that went "They call it Paradise..."
    
      bb

    The one about the burning of the Cuyahoga River through Cleveland.

 "Smoke on the Water"

    
    Joni Mitchell, "Big Yellow Taxi"

    I always hated that song.

    The Eagles song was "The Last Resort".

    
    Hey farmer farmer
    Put away the DDT now
    Gimme spots on my apples,
    but leave me the birds and the bees
    Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease
    
    Don't it always seem to go
    That you don't know what you got til it's gone
    They paved paradise and put up a parking lot
    (ooh, park park park park, ooh, park park park park!)

    {SCOWL} {GRRRRR} {FROWN} :-pPppppPPppp

    take o' pill man.

    
    late last night
    I heard the screen door slam
    and a big yellow taxi 
    took away my old man
    
    Woooaooah
    
    don't it always seem to go
    that you don't know what you got till its gone
    They paved paradise
    and put up a parking lot
    
    
    

    
    They paved paradise 
    and put up a parking lot
    with a pink hotel, a boutique, 
    and a swinging hot spot
    
    Don't it always seem to go
    That you don't know what you got til it's gone?
    They paved paradise and put up a parking lot.

    You're driving that poor guy to his carton o' cab. 8^)

    
    Or his packet'o'pinot 8^).

    Wow, they have wine crystal packets too?
    
    How about a sachet'o'sangria?

    WOuld you like a mug'o'merlot?

    they took all the trees
    and put them in a tree museum
    and they charged the people
    a dollar and a half just to see them.
    
    Whoahwhoooooah!
    
    Don't it lways seem to go
    that you don't know what you got till its gone
    They paved paradise and
    put up a parking lot
    

    
    Howzabout a baggie'o'beaujolais?
    
    

    
    No no!  Pinot.  Pinot Noir.

 That was so bad, I deleted it..I knew it didn't look right, but its been
 a while since I've been a consumer of wine :-/





 Jim

    Relax and have a pouch'o'pape.

    
    hey brian, i am with you...i *hate* that song, too...and they play it
    a lot that the eagle...think she should go into that worst vocalist
    note???
    
    

    shot of shiraz
    barrique of bordeaux
    cask of chianti
    bag of barolo
    flask of fume
    sack of sancerre
    container of corton-charlemagne
    tin of zin
    pipe of porto
    solera of sherry
    barrel of beerenauslese

    RE: .109 they aren't the same with out the o'.  "Of" lends far too much 
    class to Box o' <swill>.  
    
    The rest of you, I'm not listening anymore, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not. 
    
      

    valpolicella, mercurey, gevrey-chambertin, NNTTM

Whassamatter with -

	a carbuoy of Carlo Rossi?

    if you don't know, there's no point in trying to tell you. ;-)

    mark,
    
    don't share the information with him anyway, we don't need more
    competition for the truly fine things in life.  (even if I do put
    icecubes in reds, I don't follow my grandmother and put them in beer)
    
    meg

    >>>> 					    (even if I do put 
    icecubes in reds, I don't follow my grandmother and put them in beer)
    
    GASP!!!! How uncouth, how foul, how unutterably horrifying that you
    don't add ice to your beer.  

| <<< Note 175.117 by CONSLT::MCBRIDE "Reformatted to fit your screen" >>>


| GASP!!!! How uncouth, how foul, how unutterably horrifying that you don't add 
| ice to your beer.

	Hey, at least she doesn't drink her beer out of a carton!

    >even if I do put icecubes in reds
    
    murderer.

    Doc,
    
    at least I know longer regrigerate them.
    
    ;-)

    Now that's what I call progress :-)

    >at least I know longer regrigerate them.
    
     Leave them in the cellar until you're ready to pour, and they'll be
    plenty cold enough. By the way, stop buying Carlo Rossi and you'll no
    longer feel the need to regurgitate them. /hth

    re: .120
    
    re- what??

    She used to put them in the Gridgidaire, Andy.  

    Wow, imagine getting drunk on a carbuoy o' cab.

    Ick!
    
    Doc,
    
    I did refrigerate Aussie Cabernet's for years.  I don't drink wine out
    of boxes.  
    
    I don't drink enough to regurgitate the stuff since I was a teen.  
    
    However for the ultimate horror, I have a partner who adds WATER to
    good single malt scotch.  ( is obviously not a scotsman)
    
    meg

     No, the ultimate horror is ginger-ale. :-)

    you mean diet cranberry gingerale?
    
    fortunately he doesn't ruin the scotch or the gingerale quite that
    badly.
    
    What a horrible thought Doc.
    
    meg

    What's all this got to do with Earth Day?  8^)
    
    I plan on changing the oil in my heap, then dumping the old oil in the
    nearest pond.  Just like the old days.  8^) 
    
    
    -steve

    A chunk of antarctic ice cap calved recently and began drifting
    northward where it is expected to eventually melt.  This along with
    several other sizeable ice bergs are being tracked by the U.S.N. Ice
    Tracking Service (?) in Washington as a hazard to navigation.  The ice
    berg is reported to be up to 600 feet thick and 1/10th the size of
    Rhode Island or about 100 square miles.  It is drifting at a rate of
    about 1 nautical mile per day.  The implication is that the southern
    ice cap is melting and breaking up leading scientists and researchers to 
    conclude that the temperatures are increasing and there is a real threat 
    to ice caps.    
    
    Brian

    
    I'm opposed to that sort of thing.
    

    Not only that, he's against it too!

    Ban ice bergs.

    In light of the scotus ruling:
    
    I saw a bumper sticker on a pickup, who's owner was obviously a
    logger...
    
    "When you run out of toilet paper, try using a woodpecker".

What's all this stuff about wiping your bum?

Chris.

    
    Latest craze from the US Chris.  Like power rangers and pogs - shgould
    sweep the UK in a few months.  Start now and be extra-trendy.

    
    Has *any* cause-and-effect relationship been demostrated between
    EMF and cancer, or is the correlation simply statistical?
    

    Yes and no.  It has been proven and disproven.  It was recently
    disproven or more accurately shown their is little correlation between
    high tension lines and cancer in nearby neighborhoods.  

RE: 175.140 by TROOA::COLLINS "Gone ballistic. Back in 5 minutes."

> Has *any* cause-and-effect relationship been demostrated between
> EMF and cancer, or is the correlation simply statistical?

No.  The statistical evidence is pretty weak as well.


Phil

    
    .141, .142:
    
    That's what I thought.  There was an article in the paper this week
    about a suspected relationship between industrial sewing machines and 
    cancer.  I keep hearing about these links, but I've yet to see anyone
    explain how EMF would actually cause genetic mutation.
    

    <--- There might be a thread of truth to that story though.

    
    <--- I dunno, I think the environmental lobby may be weaving lies.
    

    
    It does seam kind of far-fetched.

    
    
    Why are you people making such blanket statements???
    

    Such a sudden serge [sic] of opinion on this topic that touches the
    very fabric of our daily lives...

    I see a pattern developing here...

    
    Oh, quit knit-picking.
    

    Come on, people, let's get this sewn up!

    hem. ha.

    Kwitcher bobbin' 'n' weavin', it's time for some shuttle diplomacy.
    
    Or are you too warped to stand all this needling?  
    
    /s/ Dan "Don't Treadle on Me" K.
    

    What I wish is that the media would stop making blanket statements and
    the like!
    
    -Jack

    .154
    
    Get with the program and iron out your problems.  See .147.

    see .147 & weep....
    
    

    Well, I say the problem still looms over us.

    
    I don't cotton to pun threads.
    

    So you expect us to tailor our discourse to your fashion?

    
    Let's just say I'm not amused by off-the-rack humour.
    

    Just the warped stuff, eh?

    
    You should all be taken in a bit.
    

    
     I see people are bobbin into this note to make comments...
    

    Darn, I've run out of ideas.

   ZZ     Get with the program and iron out your problems.  See .147.
    
    Uhhhh.....sorry

    
    <-------
    
    Good!!!
    
    Quilt while you're ahead!!!
    
    :) :)
    

    Well, maybe this is a good time for us to patch things up.

    
    I sense a bias against sewing machine manufacturers, but perhaps their
    reputations can be selvaged.  

    Well, you're a singer so you know best.

    
    re: .168
    
    I doubt it.. what will happen, mostly likely, is someone will take them
    to court and sew...
    

    
    What do we have for Mr. Richardson, Dan?
    

    Tell Messrs et mlles Richardson that they've got us all in stitches.

    A cement hat with a propeller I would guess.
    
    8^)

    
    ...and complimentary laser surgery?
    

    I'm sure Dan could give a few pointers.

    Naw, he's getting crochety in his old age, is all.

    You really *do* have a memory like an elephant's, don't you, Mr_Topaz?

    Drat, I missed this pun thread.

    Now you face the wrath of the Trilateral Commission!
    
    But, in a way, don't we all?

    
    
    Been the 5th driest August for us here in the DC area.  Only .88 inches
    of rain as of yesterday.  I wonder if this is because of the greenhouse
    effect.

    
    
    Here in New England, there is serious talk of banning BBQ's 
    for the Labor Day Weekend because of lack of rainfall also. :(
    
    
    What's Labor Day without a back yard BBQ????
    
    
    
    Terrie
    

It's Marion Barry's fault.

    
    Have you heard of the new slogan for Washington DC?
    
    
    
    "SCHOOL FREE DRUG ZONE"
    

    The BBQ ban is for open fires as in a pit, at a park.  Grills are okay
    to use for BBQng, gas grills are better for this as there is less of a
    chance of sparks or hot ashes falling through the bottom.  If you are
    going camping, to a park for the day etc., take a grill along and you
    should be okay.  Camp fires may require permitting as was the rumor in
    NH.  Be careful though in any case.  
    
    Brian

    
    
    Well, I guess it ain't the GH effect.  Driest August was in 1962@ .55",
    then 1943@ .57", then 1930@ .62" and then 1995@ .88".

    
      .60" of gin would be insufficient.  bb

No rain in Sydney at all last month - over 45 days with no rain so far.  Dams 
are down to about 50% capacity for the Sydney area.

Send water!



Chele

    
    	but yer surrounded by water......;*)
    
    

and not a drop to drink....


\C

    

    
    	good point...
    
    

    No rain here either.  Most outdoor burning is banned for the weekend at
    least (in Maine - dunno bout the others).

    
    
    Yup, here in MA too.
    
    
    Terrie
    

 Since I don't recall where the original discussion on this issue was...
    
    RTw  09/06 1033  Greenpeace misled public on Brent Spar - Eggar

    ABERDEEN, Sept 6 (Reuter) - British energy minister Tim Eggar said the
    environmental group Greenpeace had deliberately misled the public on
    the ecological impact of deep water disposal of the Brent Spar oil
    platform.

    "They were trying to con the public, politicians in Europe and the
    U.K.," he told an oil conference in Aberdeen.

    He said the group's apology on Tuesday to operator Shell U.K. was no
    surprise. "I said their claims were wild at the time and their apology
    has proved me right."

    Eggar also reiterated the British government's stance on deep water
    disposal of offshore oil installations.

    "We will certainly not be ruling out any options for the disposal of
    abandoned offshore installations. To do so would be entirely
    irresponsible," he said.

    Eggar said Shell would be submitting a new proposal to the British
    Department of Trade and Industry for the disposal of the Brent Spar,
    which is currently moored at Erfjord in Norway.

    "We have explained that any new proposal must address those issues
    which up to now have led us to agree that deep sea disposal was the
    best environmental option," he said.

    Eggar said Greenpeace had only admitted their error "because they knew
    they were going to be found out by an independent enquiry by the DNV"
    (Norwegian inspection agency Det Norske Veritas).

    Eggar, brandishing a copy of a June 19 Greenpeace press release on
    Brent Spar, said the group had been very specific in its claims on
    pollutants in the platform.

    In a briefing that day, the group said they had found oil and oil
    sludge in tanks two and four.

    "Yesterday they admitted they had not done any of this," Eggar said.

    "Greenpeace's credibility has been totally undermined."

    REUTER

    Not me.  I saw it as quite an overreaction.  They certainly did a good
    job of bringing public pressure to bear on the Brit. gov't. though. 
    I wonder if Shell will attempt to recoup their losses as a result, and
    rightfully so if the new information is correct.

    
    TTWA:
    
    Why am I recycling pop cans when Shell wants to dispose of this
    thing by dropping it in the sea?  Naval vessels are often sold
    for scrap metal; why couldn't this item have been?
    

    Because you are a responsible consumer John.  Good question regardless.  

    >Why am I recycling pop cans when Shell wants to dispose of this
    >thing by dropping it in the sea? 
    
     Cost effectiveness. Recycling a pop can requires lots less energy.
    
    >Naval vessels are often sold for scrap metal; 
    
     More often than not they are stripped of anything useful/classified
    and turned into an "artificial reef." Artificial reefs are excellent
    habitat for fish and other sea creatures.

    He's a responsible consumer, but not an innocent one.

    Yep, forgot about the artificial reef thing, ships are sold as scrap to
    foreign countries to be turned into new Kias, Toyotas, and Hyundais or
    they get scuttled.  Often this is target practice for new weapons and
    live fire exercises.  The trendy thing is to sink them in areas where
    there is little sea life to add new spawning grounds.  So far it seems
    to be a good trend.  Florida has several new artifical reef areas mad
    up of surlpus tanks and armored vehicles.  Does something good for the
    environment and avoids costly disposal charges being incurred by the
    U.S. gov't/taxpayers.  So, recycle those pop cans jc in full knowledge
    that you are pitching in so to speak.  BTW the electricity required to
    resmelt a pop can is a fraction of what is needed to make new aluminum
    from raw materials.  Good for the environment and helps to keep prices
    down.  
    
    Brian 

    
    <------
    
    And it helps to buy bird food!!
    

    
    I was under the impression that aluminum cans were melted down to
    make socket sets, screwdrivers, hammers, and wrenches in China.
    
    ;^)
    

    Wrenches out of china made from aluminum?
    
    Amazing what they can do nowadays, but I really wonder how long one of
    those babies would last.

    
    >...how long one of those babies would last.
    
    They don't; thus, my theory that they are made from aluminum
    (and whatever else might be lying around).
    

    Are those Royal Dalton wrenches?

    
    No, Hedgewood.
    

    I prefer Royal Albert wrenches myself and so do my Hummel figurines.

    RE: .204
    
    Does it Andy?  Why?

    
    re: .211
    
    >Does it Andy?  Why?
    
     See what you miss when you NEXT UNSEEN past my notes?? :) :)
    
    
     I collect many cans here in MKO and turn them in to a local Bud
    recycling plant down the road...  I use the money to buy bird food for
    the little buggers. We have three feeders outside and enjoy watching
    them all winter...
    

    Hmmmm, nice cause.  And no, I don't do anything like.....
    
    Set/seen/author=kraw* 1-* :-)

    >We have three feeders outside and enjoy watching them all winter...
    
    I have five feeders and it has become a hobby of mine. It is such fun
    to watch the finches in the winter. These little birds are the ones
    that hang around in Colorado during the cold months, if they have a food 
    supply. Spring comes and the bluebirds drive the finches away. Blubirds 
    are fun too, except that they eat a lot more food. Also, hummingbirds in 
    the summer are great.

    
    
    Did I mention I had the chickadees eating sunflower seeds from my hand
    last winter??
    
    :) :)
    

    >Did I mention I had the chickadees eating sunflower seeds from my hand
    >last winter??
    
     Chicks eating from your hand is good in the summer as well.  :)

    
    
    I should be so lucky!!!
    

    
    Clinton says he will veto the environmental bill (allowing oil and gas
    drilling in Alaska) currently before Congress.
    

    Why don't they just use diamond bits like everyone else?

    Once again, the economy of Alaska is sacrificed so some arse can pick
    up a couple of greenie votes.
    
    And I did grow up there, schooled there, worked there.  Although the
    majority of Alaskans are REAL environmentalists (i.e., they care more
    about the environment than politics) it is sickening when power people
    who blatantly don't care at all about either the people or the
    environment dictate the fate of a great land with a swipe of the pen.
    
    Knowing that the economic fate of my friends and family are under the
    pen of Bill Clinton pretty much wrecks my day.  It really sucks.
    
    End of diatribe.

    Your tax dollars at work...
    
    Any fool can go into an auto parts store and buy oil in any quanity, no
    questions asked, no bond required, no nothin'
    
    Owning antiques, I have found that newer gear oil (GO) used in
    transmissions and rear ends tends to cause leaks, bad leaks. Two years
    ago I bought some new military specification surplus (our of date) GO from
    a mil surplus dealer. A leak that was getting worse in the rear rear end of
    my big truck stopped almost completely with this mil spec GO. I was
    truely amazed. I immediately bought up as much as I could get.
    
    Two weeks ago, I asked the surplus dealer if he had any more or could
    get any more. He told me that the the US Army has so many restrictions
    (I have seen some on other items) on him buying this NOS GO that it is
    not worth it for him to even bid on it.
    
    So the question is: Is this a great environmental policy? I think not.
    Something that causes less pollution is more difficult if not
    impossible to get. Were it sold in a normal store, it would require
    nothing except money to buy it. Oh by the way, since the Army makes it
    so hard to buy this, they either don't get much money back for it (your
    tax $$) or they may not even be able to sell it and then must incinerate it.
    
    Steve

    Meg and I had a discussion of unleaded gas and its cost to owners of
    older vehicles. I just got the bill for my 6 cyl head to be rebuilt
    to run on unleaded gas: 
    
    
    			$684.00
    
    
    Steve

RE: 175.222 by 43GMC::KEITH "Dr. Deuce"

> The cost of unleaded gas

Sub-clinical lead poisoning shows up in several interesting ways.  Know
what they are?


Phil

    I know one of them.
    
    Do you know what Benzene does? Hint, it is quite well known...

I had a neighbor named Ben Zine once. He didn't do much of anything.

    $684?
    
    Last time I checked that is one heck of a lot cheaper than a new car,
    or even a used one with a reasonable engine that runs on unleaded gas.  
    
    Low-level lead poisoning:  Kidney problems, hypertension, ADD, nerve
    damage,.......
    
    High level:  Severe ADD, nerve damage, brain damgae, mental
    retardation, sterility......
    
    nice stuff that lead.
    
    

    Benzene is _KNOWN_ to cause _CANCER_ It is not something that 'damages'
    you, it KILLS you.
    
    MMT which was used between lead and benzene for a couple of years in
    gasoline was removed quickly because (speculation) it was worse than
    benzene. It, MMT also causes cancer.
    
    The point is that the long term affects of lead are well known. The
    short term affects of benzene/MMT are well known. In our society, you
    must live with one. Which one is less bad?
    
    Steve
    
    PS: If the givmint was serious about auto air pollution, they would
    reinstate the tax deduction for auto loan interest to get more people
    to buy new/newer cars. 

I'm not trying to find fault with the reasoning, but would like some
additional info.

All of the lead from the additive which is used in gasoline (except for 
whatever clings to the inside of the cylinders)is expelled in the exhaust. 
Much of the benzene additive which was added to gasoline (being a relatively
simple hydrocarbon) was oxidized in the combustion process and expelled
as carbon oxides and water.

From a quantitative standpoint, which is/was really worse?

    Does benzene really come out as something harmless after being burned? 
    I seriously doubt it. Why the warning label on the pumps?
    
    Steve

I expect it doesn't _all_ oxidize in the combustion process, but certainly
most of it does - it's a relatively volatile/flammable compound. On the
other hand, except for the lead atoms which cling to the interior of the 
cylinders, _all_ of the lead is expelled as lead.

The warning on the pumps could very well be due to the fact that you shouldn't
breathe or bathe in the benzene prior to combustion.

    	re: .228
    
    	Gasoline and Lead
    
    	http://pantheon.cis.yale.edu/~dnewman/wargopap.htm
    
    	hth a little bit.
    
    	Kurt

    Government is the ultimate cause of all pollution. Pollution is a natural
    aspect of development and advancement, just as is crayon coloring outside 
    of the lines when a child is just learning. But government, as an entity,
    is like a parent who would systematically break his child's fingers so
    that the child never gets to the point where he colors inside the lines.
    
    The solution is to establish a proper moral structure of individual
    property rights, get the government out of the way, and allow business
    and industry to once again advance technologically at an increasing rate.
                                                                             

 ZZ    Government is the ultimate cause of all pollution.
    
    So if somebody breaks wind it's all Clinton's fault!!!:-)

    
    > So if somebody breaks wind it's all Clinton's fault!!!:-)
    
    Nope. We'll blame that on you. ;^)
    

    bloody ghett (Look of Benny Hill uttering something under his
    breath!)...

                    Ban Dihydrogen Monoxide!


THE INVISIBLE KILLER

    Dihydrogen monoxide is colorless, odorless, tasteless, and kills uncounted
    thousands of people every year.  Most of these deaths are caused by
    accidental inhalation of DHMO, but the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide do
    not end there.  Prolonged exposure to its solid form causes sever tissue
    damage.  Symptoms of DHMO ingestion can include excessive sweating and
    urination, and possibly a bloated feeling, nausea, vomiting, and body
    electrolyte imbalance.  For those who have become dependent, DHMO
    withdrawal means certain death.


Dihydrogen monoxide:

    * is also known as hydroxl acid, and is the major component of acid rain.
    * contributes to the "greenhouse effect."
    * may cause severe burns.
    * contributes to the erosion of our natural landscape.
    * accelerates corrosion and rusting of many metals.
    * may cause electrical failures and decreased effectiveness of automobile
      brakes.
    * has been found in excised tumors of terminal cancer patients.


CONTAMINATION IS REACHING EPIDEMIC PROPORTIONS! 

    Quantities of dihydrogen monoxide have been found in almost every stream,
    lake, and reservoir in America today.  But the pollution is global, and the
    contaminant has even been found in Antarctic ice.  DHMO has caused millions
    of dollars of property damage in the midwest, and recently California.

    Despite the danger, dihydrogen monoxide is often used:
        * as an industrial solvent and coolant.
        * in nuclear power plants.
        * in the production of styrofoam.
        * as a fire retardant.
        * in many forms of cruel animal research.
        * in the distribution of pesticides.  Even after washing, produce
          remains contaminated by this chemical!
        * as an additive in certain "junk-foods" and other food products.

    Companies dump waste DHMO into rivers and the ocean, and nothing can be
    done to stop them because this practice is still legal.  The impact on
    wildlife is extreme, and we cannot afford to ignore it any longer!


THE HORROR MUST BE STOPPED!

    The American government has refused to ban the production, distribution, or
    use of this damaging chemical due to its "importance to the economic health
    of this nation."  In fact, the navy and other military organizations are
    conducting experiments with DHMO, and designing multi-billion dollar
    devices to control and utilize it during warfare situations.  Hundreds of
    military research facilities receive tons of it through a highly
    sophisticated underground distribution network.  Many store large
    quantities for later use.


IT'S NOT TOO LATE!

    Act NOW to prevent further contamination.  Find out more about this
    dangerous chemical.  What you don't know can hurt you and others throughout
    the world.

you mean yuk yuk??