The environment thread

[Balta1701]

Okay, but... babies aren't on the phones all the time, right? Or are you trying to say adult autism?

Clearly babies aren't on the phones all the time but neither are bees.

 

Anyway, I'm not trying to allege a cell phone autism link, please don't misunderstand me here. I'm saying that if cell phones were causing a medical issue...that's what it should look like, a rapidly, almost exponential increase in whatever condition we're talking about, with increases starting in the early 80's and growing from there, and I can't think of any sort of brain condition (Other than autism) that fits that pattern.

[kapkomet]

Clearly babies aren't on the phones all the time but neither are bees.

 

Anyway, I'm not trying to allege a cell phone autism link, please don't misunderstand me here. I'm saying that if cell phones were causing a medical issue...that's what it should look like, a rapidly, almost exponential increase in whatever condition we're talking about, with increases starting in the early 80's and growing from there, and I can't think of any sort of brain condition (Other than autism) that fits that pattern.

 

 

But weren't these same radio frequencies and waves around in the 70s and now just used differently?

 

Spectums and bandwidths have been there for a while.

[Balta1701]

But weren't these same radio frequencies and waves around in the 70s and now just used differently?

 

Spectums and bandwidths have been there for a while.

Think "Intensity". Energy falls off by distance from the source cubed. The idea is that now we suddenly have a whole lot more transmitters increasing the intensity and dotting around everywhere, thus everything gets exposed more.

 

Of course, as I noted previously, that makes other predictions; like anything caused by the proliferation of these devices should be focused heavily around cities, esp. cities like NYC and San francisco.

[NorthSideSox72]

Thought this was interesting... CEO of GM says he'd rather see a $1/gallon increase in federal gas taxes, than the increases in fuel efficiency the government is pushing on US automakers. Says he feels it would be better for automakers, as well as do a better job pushing Americans to buy more efficient cars. Link to short story.

 

Thoughts? Anyone agree or disagree?

 

[bmags]

Thought this was interesting... CEO of GM says he'd rather see a $1/gallon increase in federal gas taxes, than the increases in fuel efficiency the government is pushing on US automakers. Says he feels it would be better for automakers, as well as do a better job pushing Americans to buy more efficient cars. Link to short story.

 

Thoughts? Anyone agree or disagree?

 

he's just saying that because he knows the carbon tax has no chance.

[NorthSideSox72]

he's just saying that because he knows the carbon tax has no chance.

Maybe.

 

Still begs the question... agree or disagree?

 

[Balta1701]

Maybe.

 

Still begs the question... agree or disagree?

It's a complicated question to answer. The biggest issue is that Americans appear to be really bad at evaluating how much they're actually spending on fuel. That's how the price spike from $1.50 to $3 gets less coverage than the price spike from $3 to $3.50 even though the former took more out of your wallet.

 

If you were to raise the gas tax as a method of pushing fuel discipline, then you're asking people to evaluate while standing at an auto dealership how much they'll save due to an extra flat dollar on top of the price of a variable commodity between vehicles that get say 28 and 33 mpg. That's an inhuman amount of planning to get done while auto-shopping.

 

On the other hand, if you accompish better mileage through mileage standards, then the consumer is paying up front the extra $10k it takes to get a Volt, but the consumer is also implicitly making a guess on fuel prices when calculating whether or not it is financially worth while.

 

Of course my answer is "we should do both", but following the hypothetical...I'm probably slightly in favor of his gas tax method, because that covers additional government financing and directly hits the heaviest fuel users more than the guy who has to bike home here in an hour or so. It's interesting though that if the CAFE standards were really, really cranked up and Detroit actually hit them that the CAFE standards probably will work across the board pretty well if they're implemented well.

 

Politically of course that tradeoff is dead on arrival.

[Balta1701]

This has been a pretty good day for power plant news.

 

GE has announced that they're going to build a hybrid power plant in Turkey...hybrid in the sense of "Wind/Concentrated Solar Thermal/Natural Gas backup" capable of running 600,000 homes.

 

A plant in NYC is also about to open using a new type of electricity storage technology that might well revolutionize electricity storage if its employed on a large scale...basically they're building giant turbines that work just as well as batteries of the same size and can react to changes in grid supply on a timescale of seconds (normal gas generators take minutes to fire up, coal plants take hours).

 

Of course, the bad news is that they've doubled the estimate of the quantity of radiation released by the Fukushima plant.

[Balta1701]

I read this as a Washington Post op-ed a week or so ago and thought it was good but harder than I can make myself go as a standard issue science-guy. But man, add in the video with narration and it goes to a whole 'nother level.

 

[Balta1701]

Sen. Tom Coburn has pulled the trigger and is forcing a long-sought vote on an amendment repealing billions in annual tax incentives for ethanol.

 

The Senate will vote Tuesday afternoon on Coburn’s motion limiting debate on his amendment that would do away with the 45 cent blender tax credit for ethanol — worth about $6 billion this year — and the 54 cent tariff on imported ethanol.

 

Coburn didn’t inform either Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid or Minority Leader Mitch McConnell before he made his move, appearing to catch both completely off guard.

 

“He was not able to give a heads up to either Reid or McConnell,” Coburn spokesman John Hart said. “There was no agreement. Coburn just did this.”

 

It is the prerogative of any senator to file a cloture motion to file a vote on an amendment as long as there are 16 signatures. But it is more customary for senators to force a vote by filing a motion to suspend the rules — which requires a higher 67-vote threshold than the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster.

 

The Oklahoma Republican has had exactly 16 signatures — all Republican — lined up for a cloture vote on his amendment in his back pocket for a while and thought of using it earlier.

 

He had considered filing such a motion to suspend the rules during the small-business bill debate. “He felt like that was unfair,” Hart said.

 

He instead decided to pull the trigger on pending economic development legislation on the floor as a way to get around multiple holds on his amendment by members in both parties and bypass both Reid and McConnell, who are required to respect objections by their party colleagues.

 

“It’s a very direct usurping of their authority,” Hart said. “It was actually very well executed by our guys.”

 

"He definitely was laying in wait," said Chris Thorne, a spokesman for the pro-ethanol Growth Energy. "It was an ambush."

 

Thorne said ethanol backers will be pointing out that the vote comes as Venezuela and Iran this week helped OPEC vote to keep production where it is, despite a move by Saudi Arabia and others to increase production.

 

Coburn has claimed he has 60 votes. “We’re cautiously optimistic,” Hart said.

 

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/...l#ixzz1OsvsyI4y

[Balta1701]

Well, crap. That wasn't supposed to have happened.

The nuclear fuel in three of the reactors at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant has melted through the base of the pressure vessels and is pooling in the outer containment vessels, according to a report by the Japanese government.

 

The findings of the report, which has been given to the International Atomic Energy Agency, were revealed by the Yomiuri newspaper, which described a "melt-through" as being "far worse than a core meltdown" and "the worst possibility in a nuclear accident."

[kapkomet]

Think "Intensity". Energy falls off by distance from the source cubed. The idea is that now we suddenly have a whole lot more transmitters increasing the intensity and dotting around everywhere, thus everything gets exposed more.

 

Of course, as I noted previously, that makes other predictions; like anything caused by the proliferation of these devices should be focused heavily around cities, esp. cities like NYC and San francisco.

 

 

So is there more autism (not because of population, but maybe per capita) in these more dense signal areas?

[Balta1701]

So is there more autism (not because of population, but maybe per capita) in these more dense signal areas?

Actually yes...but at present, the current guess is that its just better diagnosed in dense signal areas because the people are better educated/able to afford to take their kids to the doctor and realize something is wrong.

[kapkomet]

Yea, it didn't appear that they linked this to radio signals from cell phones or the like. I just am wondering if there really is any cause and effect here.

 

[Balta1701]

Yea, it didn't appear that they linked this to radio signals from cell phones or the like. I just am wondering if there really is any cause and effect here.

The answer is probably no, but I'm still hoping the point was understood.

[kapkomet]

The answer is probably no, but I'm still hoping the point was understood.

 

 

That I understood the point, or that the person writing the article understood?

[Balta1701]

That I understood the point, or that the person writing the article understood?

My point...that if cell phone transmissions were causing serious harm, then there should be geographic localization of that particular problem. Or economic localization, or age-based localization, etc. If Cell Phones were causing a ton of damage, then given that they've been around for a couple decades now, the trends should be pretty darn obvious.

[kapkomet]

My point...that if cell phone transmissions were causing serious harm, then there should be geographic localization of that particular problem. Or economic localization, or age-based localization, etc. If Cell Phones were causing a ton of damage, then given that they've been around for a couple decades now, the trends should be pretty darn obvious.

 

Yea, I got that, and I agree.

[Balta1701]

Holy Hell. I would have thought a nuclear meltdown was more likely than this.

The Senate voted 73-27 Thursday to kill a major tax break that benefits the ethanol industry, handing a political win to a bipartisan group of lawmakers that call the incentive needless and expensive.



 

The vote also could have ramifications on future votes to reduce the deficit. Much of the GOP conference supported Feinstein's bill even though it does not include another tax break to offset the elimination of the ethanol tax credit.

 

As such, the vote could also represent a setback for influential conservative Grover Norquist, head of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), who said a vote for the plan would violate the anti-tax pledge most Republicans have signed unless paired with a separate tax-cutting amendment.

 

Thirty-three Republicans and 38 Democrats supported the measure along with both of the chamber's Independents, who caucus with Democrats.

 

Fourteen Republicans and 13 Democrats voted against it.

 

Sen. Dianne Feinstein's (D-Calif.) measure – which mirrors a bill she offered with Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) – was approved despite opposition from Corn Belt lawmakers who are seeing political support for ethanol wane.



 

Coburn said the vote sends "a good signal" to ongoing talks to raise the nation's debt ceiling while reducing deficits. He also said he was sure it would be on the table in the deficit-reduction talks led by Vice President Biden.

 

Feinstein's amendment to an economic development bill would quickly end the credit of 45 cents for each gallon of ethanol that fuel blenders mix into gasoline.
The credit led to $5.4 billion in foregone revenue last year, according to the Government Accountability Office.

 

The amendment also ends the 54-cent per gallon import tariff that protects the domestic ethanol industry.



This will mostly shut down the domestic ethanol industry but will probably put a decent dent in grain prices.

[StrangeSox]

Awesomeness. Terrible policy, glad to have it gone.

[Balta1701]

Awesomeness. Terrible policy, glad to have it gone.

Still has to pass the House, FWIW. But that's an overwhelming vote in this Senate.

[NorthSideSox72]

Awesomeness. Terrible policy, glad to have it gone.

^

 

[Balta1701]

Also worth pointing out this clause from Politico which says this current bill is unlikely to become law, since we have all the economic development we need.

The vote was mostly symbolic as the underlining economic development bill is not likely to make it into law, but it’s the latest sign that lawmakers are ready to kick ethanol subsidies to the curb.

[StrangeSox]

SCOTUS rules unanimously that the Clear Air Act displaces climate change "nuisance" lawsuits

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/10-174.pdf

[Balta1701]

Time after time, officials at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission have decided that original regulations were too strict, arguing that safety margins could be eased without peril, according to records and interviews.

 

The result? Rising fears that these accommodations by the NRC are significantly undermining safety — and inching the reactors closer to an accident that could harm the public and jeopardize the future of nuclear power in the United States.

 

Examples abound. When valves leaked, more leakage was allowed — up to 20 times the original limit. When rampant cracking caused radioactive leaks from steam generator tubing, an easier test of the tubes was devised, so plants could meet standards.

 

Failed cables. Busted seals. Broken nozzles, clogged screens, cracked concrete, dented containers, corroded metals and rusty underground pipes — all of these and thousands of other problems linked to aging were uncovered in the AP's yearlong investigation. And all of them could escalate dangers in the event of an accident.

 

Yet despite the many problems linked to aging, not a single official body in government or industry has studied the overall frequency and potential impact on safety of such breakdowns in recent years, even as the NRC has extended the licenses of dozens of reactors.

 

Industry and government officials defend their actions, and insist that no chances are being taken. But the AP investigation found that with billions of dollars and 19 percent of America's electricity supply at stake, a cozy relationship prevails between the industry and its regulator, the NRC.

 

Records show a recurring pattern: Reactor parts or systems fall out of compliance with the rules. Studies are conducted by the industry and government, and all agree that existing standards are "unnecessarily conservative."

 

Regulations are loosened, and the reactors are back in compliance.

 

"That's what they say for everything, whether that's the case or not," said Demetrios Basdekas, an engineer retired from the NRC. "Every time you turn around, they say `We have all this built-in conservatism.'"

Nothing to see here.

 

Edit: Just a comment. This is a real impressive, detailed, thorough bludgeoning of the NRC by the AP. I'd consider contributing to them if they had a "paypal" link on the side for this one.