[ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind
Doug Aitken
jdaitken at sugar-land.oilfield.slb.com
Sat Oct 16 08:22:10 CDT 2010
Howard:
Try and tell that to the automobile industry. And especially the N American
consumer, who feels that a car is not a car unless it has an inefficient V-8
in it........
I am constantly amazed at the apparent resistance to diesel engines in cars
here. The car companies say it is the consumer, but I think it is lack of
will on their part and artificial barriers put in place by the government.
Anyone who travels to Europe will see that about 70% of all cars are small,
efficient diesels. Yet here, the government and media are pushing hybrids
and electrics. But if you look at the "cradle to grave" cost of a hybrid, it
does not make much sense (kinda like the mercury-filled "high efficiency"
light bulbs....).
Simply switching to small diesels would make a major impact on oil
consumption in the US. Take a VW Jetta as an example: 45 mpg easily, and
faster than the equivalent gas-powered Jetta. And room for 5 at a pinch (but
probably 75% of miles ridden in cars are with two or less passengers.....)
So, I am not in favor of switching transportation to an electric base (other
than efficient diesel electric power for heavy haulers), but am very much in
favor of reducing gas-guzzling.
Oh, and a change in attitude towards public transportation would be a good
thing, too, both from a government and public point of view.
As for nuclear power: 100% in agreement. It is a disgrace that the US has
fallen so far behind.
Doug
-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Howard Long
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 11:36 PM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind
Doug,
I like Franz argument that hydrocarbonds are better used for products and
nuclear for energy.
Howard Long
On Oct 15, 2010, at 9:00 PM, Doug Aitken
<jdaitken at sugar-land.oilfield.slb.com> wrote:
> Jerry:
> First, I am not a climatologist. And I made no claim of connection. I
> also said I am skeptical. But I keep an open mind. Which, as Mike
> mentioned, is a good idea.
> As for the global environment assimilating the "nasty stuff", I would
> say that perhaps it can, but to the detriment of all living creatures.
> Perhaps a walk along any shoreline will convince you? The amount of
> man-made garbage should help convince you we can do better. I suppose
> the Gulf of Mexico will recover eventually from the oil spill. But the
> "dead zone" caused by fertilizer runoff via the Mississippi should be
> seen as a fair indication that nature may have difficulty rebounding
> from man's detriment. And surely the health effects of industrial
> pollutants should give us reason to do better?
> And relying on the hope that the global environment can rebound from
> our detrimental activities is a pretty negative attitude.
>
> I have worked all my life in the oil industry. And seen first-hand the
> effects of the poor environmental practices of the past, where
> drilling waste was casually dumped, oil spills left to
> "self-remediate" and oil extraction causing massive subsidence (have a
> look at the East coast of Lake Maracaibo for a fine example). However,
> this industry currently has a very different attitude towards the
> environment and makes major efforts to limit pollution (BP's recent
> fiasco notwithstanding). But they are still seen as a dirty
> industry... But little is said of the pollution caused by
> agro-business's excessive use of fertilizers and pesticides? Most
> would agree that the net impact of nuclear power is far less than coal
power. But the lobbies keep that rolling along.
>
> I am not offering any solutions to the environmental problems of the
> world, as I am in no way qualified to do so. Nor can I offer any idea
> of what can be considered cost-effective. And any effective action on
> a large scale will be biased by political interests, with distortion of
priorities.
>
> But, as a relative layman, I do feel we can do better. And I am pretty
> sure that you do too.
>
> Regards
> Doug
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Jerry Cohen
> Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 6:06 PM
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
> List
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind
>
> Doug,
> Your comments raise 3 questions:
>
> 1- Is there reason to believe that "evidence of global climate
> change" is not attributable to the current phase of cyclical climate
change?
> 2- Is it possible that the global environment could assimilate
> whatever man-made "nasty stuff" is emitted without significant
> deterioration?,and 3-When you suggest that "we can do better", I
> wonder ,how can it be determined when things are good enough and any
> further improvement is simply not cost-effective? How do we know that
> we have not already reached that point?
>
> Jerry Cohen
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Doug Aitken <jdaitken at sugar-land.oilfield.slb.com>
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
> List <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> Sent: Fri, October 15, 2010 3:32:07 PM
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind
>
> Every so often, we seem to get into this "discussion" where some
> members make rather strong statements about the "global warming" issue
> (note I don't say "scam", phony science, etc).
>
> I am skeptical regarding the actual cause being man-made, although it
> would seem reasonable to say that (1) evidence of global climate
> change cannot be reasonably denied - from retreating glaciers to
> regional temperature changes, rainfall, etc... and (2) man is spewing
> larger than ever quantities of nasty stuff into the atmosphere and
> water (to the obvious detriment to all living creatures , cutting vast
> swathes of forest and using our natural resources with little thought to
the future.
>
> So it would seem to me that any effort to control these human excesses
> would benefit all of us. I am not a fanatical green, but certainly do
> think that we can do better, whether or not it would impact climate....
>
> Regards
>
> Doug Aitken
> QHSE Advisor, D&M Operations Support
> Schlumberger,
> Drilling & Measurements HQ,
> 300 Schlumberger Drive, MD15,
> Sugar Land, Texas 77478
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Edmond
> Baratta
> Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 8:15 PM
> To: Jerry Cohen; The International Radiation Protection (Health
> Physics) Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind
>
> Those who are for the new 'religion' of Global Warming are using it to
> make a profit, i.e. Gore, and the Governments who wishes to make our
> lives miserable. I can't believe that the Government is sponsoring
> the mercury
> (Hg) laden light bulbs. Previously, they forbade the fluorescent
> lights that contained beryllium (Be).
>
> Ed Baratta
>
> edmond0033 at comcast.net
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Jerry Cohen" <jjc105 at yahoo.com>
> Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 2:56 PM
> To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List"
> <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Keeping an open mind
>
>> Mike,
>> Of course, you are correct. The climate is changing, but hasn't that
>> always been the case? Historic evidence shows that the climate is
>> cyclical in nature and the earth has continually alternated between
>> "ice ages" and tropical periods.
>> Dr.
>> Fred Singer, has estimated that these cycles last about 1500 years,
>> and currently increasing global temperatures simply indicate that we
>> are predictably in an upward phase. In time, this trend will reverse,
>> and we can start to worry about global cooling again, if we live that
>> long.
>> To attribute "global warming" to anthropic (man-made) causes is
>> somewhat silly.
>> Socialists believe it is due to capitalistic greed. "third world"
>> nations may believe it is caused by developed counties squandering
>> our limited resources; and some may think that witchcraft is to
>> blame. I never liked witches, so I tend to blame them for everything
thats bad.
>> In all likelihood, global climate change is controlled by cosmic
>> forces (sunspots, etc) over which man has no control, so maybe we
>> should just sit back and enjoy it.
>> Jerry Cohen
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Mike Quastel <maay100 at bgu.ac.il>
>> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
>> List <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
>> Sent: Fri, October 15, 2010 1:13:31 PM
>> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Climate Change a fraud?
>>
>> I have been concerned to hear during the past year or so, even from
>> this otherwise informative and properly skeptical group, statements
>> that findings of climate warming- or more properly climate change- is
>> some sort of fraud, scam or conspiracy. The geologic and
>> oceanographic evidence so far really does seem to support that
>> climate change is taking place in our own lifetime. Whether it will
>> turn out to be man made, a natural cycle, some sort of solar
>> phenomenon, temporary or cumulative in the long run remains to be
>> seen. There is nothing wrong with being skeptical - indeed, that is
>> the proper scientific approach
>> - but in view of the potentially very serious global consequences, it
>> would be wise to keep an open mind on the subject and most definitely
>> not rule out the possibility of human causation.
>>
>> Mike Quastel
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>>
>> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and
>> understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
>> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>>
>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
>> visit:
>> http://health.phys.iit.edu
>> _______________________________________________
>> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>>
>> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and
>> understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
>> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>>
>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
>> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
>>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and
> understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu
>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and
> understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit:
>
> http://health.phys.iit.edu
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and
> understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu
>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and
> understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://health.phys.iit.edu
More information about the RadSafe
mailing list