I know your amendment well, Wally. We tweaked--and I filed-- it more than
once, when I was in the House. In the wake of the Citizens United decision,
the SCPC tasked me and a couple of others to comment on proposed amendments
filed in Congress, and to draft alternatives to them: our proposals
addressed corporate non-citizenship and campaign finance. Our Political
Director scuttled one and effectively sidetracked the other. And found
common ground with the NRA.
Bill
Attached is a copy of the Policy proposal that we drafted for BoD
consideration.
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Wally Taylor <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Bill:
>
> You have the outline for a "Dystopia" novel.
>
> Regarding corporate "rights," there is a movement to amend the U.S.
> Constitution. More locally, I have drafted a proposed amendment to the Iowa
> Constitution (attached). I have introduced this as a platform plank at
> Democratic caucuses, but it has gone nowhere. It is apparently more than the
> Democrats can handle.
>
> Wally Taylor
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: William Witt <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Fri, Dec 10, 2010 9:46 am
> Subject: Re: biomass, corn stover, and the new wave of synthetic biology
>
> World-wide demand for petroleum is steadily increasing, most notably in
> the two most populous countries, India and China, while production increases
> cannot keep pace. Barring a global economic depression, these trends will
> continue. In consequence, baseline (not speculative) crude oil prices are
> reaching a new plateau in the $80/bbl range. Within a very few years, the
> steady base price will hit $100/bbl. The true economics of ethanol--no
> masking, no externalizing, of costs--will become sharply clearer. The big
> corporate interests (aka "persons" with unlimited "rights" according to
> the Roberts Gang of Five) will continue trying to brainwash us on the status
> quo. Unless we non-corporate, natural persons reestablish "Of...by...and
> for the People," as the central principle of governance, we are going to be
> trapped in a country hell-bent on waste and war... until it all collapses,
> and the rich retreat to their Swiss estates and their select US enclaves,
> where they'll be guarded by private armies...and the rest of us battle to
> survive.
>
> BW
>
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Donna Buell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Isn't this looking at ethanol in a vacuum?
>>
>> The issue with biofuels is rarely the carbon burned in the fuel. The
>> issue with biofuels is the carbon emissions in the process of growing the
>> feedstocks, in the conversion of our land from carbon sinks to carbon
>> emitters, in the inappropriately located, poorly regulated or excessively
>> large biofuels facilities, etc. We need to take a full life cycle view of
>> bio-energy.
>>
>> And on the bigger scale: This isn't about ethanol v. crude for autos.
>> This is about more of the same v. transitioning our energy to truly
>> renewable. This is about refusing to upgrade our cars because we can claim
>> to use "renewable" ethanol instead of making more efficient cars. This is
>> about Big Ag and Big Oil vying for their next big grab on our natural
>> resources.
>>
>> If anybody opposes perennials for on-the-farm energy using pyrolsis or
>> some other highly-efficient method of producing energy, please let me
>> know.... But FYI, directly from the new policy statement: "Sierra Club
>> opposes further deployment of corn-based ethanol based on its extremely
>> dubious net carbon benefits and its unresolved direct and indirect
>> environmental impacts. The Club also opposes proposals to overuse
>> agricultural waste and residue products (e.g., corn stover) without rigorous
>> evidence that the material being used is surplus to the needs of soil health
>> and fertility."
>>
>> Donna
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 9, 2010, at 5:23 PM, Ed Woolsey wrote:
>>
>> > Lee:
>> > No worries. I always enjoy some discussion on the subject. This
>> is
>> > one of those topics where you’ve always needed to follow WHO pays for
>> these
>> > studies, and, the strings that come attached, attached to so many of our
>> > academics today. With most of these AQ tests there were always
>> “agendas”.
>> > I fear that this is one of the main reasons that the enviro community is
>> so
>> > skeptical of ethanol.
>> > Ethanol does not have the energy (btu’s) per gallon of gasoline.
>> > 73,000 vs 115,000. or about 30% less…so Gerald…I’m not sure how you
>> would
>> > drop 10% or Lee…you would drop…30-40%. 9X115,000 plus 1x73,000 for
>> > E10 and 10x115,000 for straight gasoline. I’m calling BS….ok…a little
>> BS.
>> > Gasoline is REFORMULATED for cold weather conditions. The use of
>> lighter
>> > components (volatile that start easier) would lower the total btu’s in
>> your
>> > winter blend. Or, gasoline companies would have an economic incentive
>> to
>> > dump lower grade gasoline and boost it more than 10%vol. Perhaps we
>> need
>> > to monitor the blends more.
>> > Other related issue is the use of ethanol octane…110 vs gasoline’s 85 or
>> a
>> > little higher. Octane is an indicator of how efficiently the fuel
>> combusts.
>> > Because ethanol has a higher octane you can use it in the higher
>> efficiency
>> > engines. (diesel) Ethanol likes 16 to 1 and the current engines are
>> about 8.5
>> > to 1. Ethanol is short shifted big time. Boosting the compression
>> ratio for the
>> > fuel results is something like 25% greater fuel efficiency. (If anyone’s
>> > interested they can look it up or I can find it somewhere) Oh, and the
>> > reduced efficiency leads to what???? yes...more pollutants.
>> > Short story long….what we should be using is about 80%ethanol 20% water
>> > mixture in a higher compression engine…tuned for the fuel. Then lets
>> see that
>> > AQ study….ethanol will smoke any fossil. (pun intended) e
>> >
>> > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>> > To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
>> > [log in to unmask]
>> >
>> > Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
>> > http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp
>> >
>> > Sign up to receive Sierra Club Insider, the flagship
>> > e-newsletter. Sent out twice a month, it features the Club's
>> > latest news and activities. Subscribe and view recent
>> > editions at http://www.sierraclub.org/insider/
>>
>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>> To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>> Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
>> http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp
>>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To
> unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
> [log in to unmask] Check out our Listserv
> Lists support site for more information:
> http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To
> unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
> [log in to unmask] Check out our Listserv
> Lists support site for more information:
> http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]
Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp
|
