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