Closing the Loop in Brewing
Recent Posts from This Journal
-
Community Building Tip: Outdoor Movies
For my current set of tips, I'm using the list " 101 Small Ways You Can Improve Your City. 79. Screen a movie outdoors. An impromptu movie…
-
Photographs
I took some pictures of my yard today. Read about what makes a good wildlife yard and Fieldhaven as habitat. The larger brush pile is still…
-
Birdfeeding
Today is partly sunny and delightfully mild. I fed the birds. I've seen a small flock of house finches and a few sparrows. I walked around the yard…
February 14 2011, 00:22:15 UTC 10 years ago
If you look at industrial processes, you'll see that very very little industrial byproduct goes into the waste stream. Could it be done better? Sure. Are they already amazingly good? Absolutely. That old bottom line drives a heckofalot of really high end efficiency improvements.
Thoughts
February 14 2011, 00:26:55 UTC 10 years ago
Yes, but that doesn't do the brewers any good. As the article states, most of them just give the stuff away. Turning the spent grain to natural gas actually saves them money on buying natural gas. That's a definite improvement.
>>If you look at industrial processes, you'll see that very very little industrial byproduct goes into the waste stream. <<
Dude. I am an activist. I assure you I've read a very great deal about what companies do with their copious waste products, and almost none of it meets my standards for safety and sanity. Thanks to people hacking away at the Clean Water Act, we're lucky if we can keep them from dumping crud into the actual streams until the waterways catch on fire.
Re: Thoughts
February 14 2011, 01:12:46 UTC 10 years ago
http://www.beeflinks.com/distillers.htm
Again, the all-important "bottom line" guarantees that.
I know that you are an activist, I know that you read a fair amount of stuff. The problem is that you don't read science on some subjects, you read activism. You listen to anecdotal "information" by other activists and ignore industry/government data like this:
http://www.ecomii.com/waste/sources
"So what makes up the waste? Interestingly, nearly 65% of total Municipal Solid Waste generated is made of organic materials, including paper and paperboard (like cardboard) products, yard trimmings, food scraps, and wood. Paper and paperboard alone make up over one-third of the American waste stream, with yard trimmings and food scraps running a distant second and third place at around 12% to 13% percent each. Plastics account for 11.7% of American waste, and the list is rounded off—in order—by metals (7.6%), rubber, leather and textiles (7.3%), wood (5.5%), glass (5.3%), and that ever-mysterious category of “other,” which totals about 3.3%"
Will you address that? Will you comment on it? Will you change your position based on the facts? No, you will continue to repeat the same thing that you said here today, despite the clearly demonstrable fact that it is untrue. I base this on the fact that it is exactly what you have done on several other topics we have discussed. If the facts are irrelevant, how can we engineer?
Furthermore, you frequently make statements like "Thanks to people hacking away at the Clean Water Act", This is much like when you commented something about "people hacking away at the safety net" but never once have you provided a single example of *any* reduction in waste disposal safety standards/safety net. In fact, you have repeatedly ignored unequivocal proof from me that the things you are claiming *did not take place* (the welfare spending graph), and in fact, that the regulations have been getting consistently *more* stringent. This is becoming such a pattern with you that simple misinformation has ceased to be a viable explanation. You repeat demonstrated untruths despite the repeated proofs of the falsity without bothering to explain the basis for your statements. That's tough to work with.
I don't know how to have a conversation when that is the case. This isn't a matter of differing opinions. If it were, then we could talk about things, I could present my sources, you could present yours. We could leave respecting the other. But you don't do that. You totally ignore reputable citations about specific facts and respond with hate-filled passive aggressive blog posts. Why?
Look, I came here looking for the logic of the other side of the equation. I got tired of simply being shouted down, and wanted to have a conversation about the facts, because I do think that the left must have facts to support the position. You seemed like there was some hope that you were someone capable of explaining what the rational position of the leftist *is*. Was I wrong? Is there *truly* no factual basis behind all the vitriol that gets so often applied? Because that'd be really disappointing.
I have enjoyed my conversations with Siege, because, however misinformed, however wrong, he at least presented a position with some flesh to it, some facts behind it. There was room there for a conversation. It's hard to debate religion with a fanatic. Are you one?
February 14 2011, 01:18:40 UTC 10 years ago
Yes...
February 14 2011, 01:20:32 UTC 10 years ago
Re: Yes...
February 14 2011, 01:33:31 UTC 10 years ago
Re: Yes...
February 17 2011, 22:14:50 UTC 10 years ago
One of the reasons I'm seriously considering chickens is to get the manure- our soil is DREADFUL, and we simply can't make enough compost to do much of anything.
Re: Yes...
February 17 2011, 22:21:15 UTC 10 years ago
Chicken Tractor
http://www.chickentractor.org/
Rabbit Tractor
http://www.comradesimba.com/blog/?p=940