<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Few Words on Climate Change</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.onwardoregon.org/a-few-words-on-climate-change/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.onwardoregon.org/a-few-words-on-climate-change/</link>
	<description>Here are snippets from the three most-recent postings. Click an article title below to read more.</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 22:41:30 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Lloyd Gordon</title>
		<link>http://blog.onwardoregon.org/a-few-words-on-climate-change/#comment-14251</link>
		<dc:creator>Lloyd Gordon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Nov 2006 20:25:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.onwardoregon.org/a-few-words-on-climate-change/#comment-14251</guid>
		<description>Re: Winnie Powell and processing waste into liquid fuel. I'm for anything that doesn't require additional uses of fossil fuel. That's been a problem with many proposals. Until the Energy Profit Ratio has been established, I'm not sure how useful somethng might be. I've seen a number ofpropsals that require more fossil fuel to produce than the product delivers in energy. Which all sounds very well, but the products tend to be more expensive because of the underlying cost of petroleum or natural gas. I'm thinking of an alternate 'green' fuel now available in my town. Costs a pretty good extra permium. The product has been found, at least arguably, to require more petroleum to produce that you can possibly get out of it.

If, one the other hand, methane is captured from waste, hooray. All you need to do is let biology do its think and collect the product.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: Winnie Powell and processing waste into liquid fuel. I&#8217;m for anything that doesn&#8217;t require additional uses of fossil fuel. That&#8217;s been a problem with many proposals. Until the Energy Profit Ratio has been established, I&#8217;m not sure how useful somethng might be. I&#8217;ve seen a number ofpropsals that require more fossil fuel to produce than the product delivers in energy. Which all sounds very well, but the products tend to be more expensive because of the underlying cost of petroleum or natural gas. I&#8217;m thinking of an alternate &#8216;green&#8217; fuel now available in my town. Costs a pretty good extra permium. The product has been found, at least arguably, to require more petroleum to produce that you can possibly get out of it.</p>
<p>If, one the other hand, methane is captured from waste, hooray. All you need to do is let biology do its think and collect the product.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Winnie Powell</title>
		<link>http://blog.onwardoregon.org/a-few-words-on-climate-change/#comment-14173</link>
		<dc:creator>Winnie Powell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Nov 2006 19:52:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.onwardoregon.org/a-few-words-on-climate-change/#comment-14173</guid>
		<description>I am amazed at the apparent need to invent energy alternatives. There is one now in place in Carthage Mo. That is processing turkey offal into oil. This process can turn ANY carbon based material into the same fuel we buy from the middle east and produce in Alaska or the lower forty eight. Any garbage dump in the world can produce clean fuel, and without any toxic by products. Toxic waste such as dioxin could br banished forever. Turned into clean fuel for consumtion. Mad cow prions cleaned up with the body of the infected animal. No longer a threat to future generations as it is now. This is the only known process to remove it. There are bacteria that are not denatured any other way. Dirty coal can be converted to the same c lean fuel. the equipment we have in place can use this fuel without any changes.The process has been in place for over ten years. It works! Investigate this for yourself at  www.changingworldtech.com  We have the opportunity to clean up the worst carbon based messes. We are drowning in gabage and thirsting for oil. There is a way to fix it. W. P.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am amazed at the apparent need to invent energy alternatives. There is one now in place in Carthage Mo. That is processing turkey offal into oil. This process can turn ANY carbon based material into the same fuel we buy from the middle east and produce in Alaska or the lower forty eight. Any garbage dump in the world can produce clean fuel, and without any toxic by products. Toxic waste such as dioxin could br banished forever. Turned into clean fuel for consumtion. Mad cow prions cleaned up with the body of the infected animal. No longer a threat to future generations as it is now. This is the only known process to remove it. There are bacteria that are not denatured any other way. Dirty coal can be converted to the same c lean fuel. the equipment we have in place can use this fuel without any changes.The process has been in place for over ten years. It works! Investigate this for yourself at  <a href="http://www.changingworldtech.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.changingworldtech.com</a>  We have the opportunity to clean up the worst carbon based messes. We are drowning in gabage and thirsting for oil. There is a way to fix it. W. P.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lloyd Gordon</title>
		<link>http://blog.onwardoregon.org/a-few-words-on-climate-change/#comment-10121</link>
		<dc:creator>Lloyd Gordon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Oct 2006 15:40:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.onwardoregon.org/a-few-words-on-climate-change/#comment-10121</guid>
		<description>Ron Saxton has pledged "No New Taxes", which leaves him out of the race in terms of  Jochem's proposals. The "No New Taxes" pledge was authored by Grover Norquist, sidekick of Jack Abramoff and host of the :Wednesday Meeting", in which right wing activists (talk show hosts, think tanks, etc) and politicians do their weekly strategy meetings, and to which the President and the Vice President each sent a representative  Whether the Norquist organization got a witnessed written pledge or not I do not know. But the majority of GOP Senators and Congressman have signed the pledge, and signatures have been sought at the state level.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ron Saxton has pledged &#8220;No New Taxes&#8221;, which leaves him out of the race in terms of  Jochem&#8217;s proposals. The &#8220;No New Taxes&#8221; pledge was authored by Grover Norquist, sidekick of Jack Abramoff and host of the :Wednesday Meeting&#8221;, in which right wing activists (talk show hosts, think tanks, etc) and politicians do their weekly strategy meetings, and to which the President and the Vice President each sent a representative  Whether the Norquist organization got a witnessed written pledge or not I do not know. But the majority of GOP Senators and Congressman have signed the pledge, and signatures have been sought at the state level.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jesse Jenkins</title>
		<link>http://blog.onwardoregon.org/a-few-words-on-climate-change/#comment-10071</link>
		<dc:creator>Jesse Jenkins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Oct 2006 17:41:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.onwardoregon.org/a-few-words-on-climate-change/#comment-10071</guid>
		<description>In a recent Oregonian article ("Hot issue in state race: global warming", by Jeff Mapes, Sept. 20, 2006), both gubernatorial candidates made it clear which candidate will work at the state level to combat global warming and promote clean, homegrown renewable energy, and which candidate will sit on his hands and wait for someone else to do the work.

Ron Saxton has made it clear he'll simply wait for the feds to do something about climate change.  But the folks in Washington D.C. have shown us that we can't count on them to tackle this critical issue, so it's up to us at the state level to take matters into our own hands and enact a range of policies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote a cleaner, cooler and healthier future for ourselves and our children.  Governor Ted Kulongoski is committed to doing just that by joining California and other proactive states in addressing global warming at the state level in the absence of any federal action.  This November, letâ€™s stand up and support Governor Kulongoski, a clean energy future, and the policies that will actually get us there.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a recent Oregonian article (&#8221;Hot issue in state race: global warming&#8221;, by Jeff Mapes, Sept. 20, 2006), both gubernatorial candidates made it clear which candidate will work at the state level to combat global warming and promote clean, homegrown renewable energy, and which candidate will sit on his hands and wait for someone else to do the work.</p>
<p>Ron Saxton has made it clear he&#8217;ll simply wait for the feds to do something about climate change.  But the folks in Washington D.C. have shown us that we can&#8217;t count on them to tackle this critical issue, so it&#8217;s up to us at the state level to take matters into our own hands and enact a range of policies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote a cleaner, cooler and healthier future for ourselves and our children.  Governor Ted Kulongoski is committed to doing just that by joining California and other proactive states in addressing global warming at the state level in the absence of any federal action.  This November, letâ€™s stand up and support Governor Kulongoski, a clean energy future, and the policies that will actually get us there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
