Category Archives: Thinking

Just thinking and writing with words joined

When Sciences are Blindfolded

YouTube social application should share and promote knowledge—-but doesn’t by censorship practice—-people die and have died.

Just an example of suppressing knowledge discussion by knowledge people. YouTube get the opposing knowledge persons to post video discussion now. Forget these YouTube bullshit disclaimers overstamps!

Time for scientific discussion by all subject matter knowledge experts! Why wait, real discussion will reveal what truths that will help humanity health today and future. YouTube, your a roadblock.

Facebook is Not Supporting Knowledge

What are the “Community Standards on Spam”? Anybody know?

Seems like all my current Facebooks posts are related to doctors reports about success of IVM drug and why our health care medical providers test people for COVID-19—once positive test results do nothing for the person till they get vaccinated, arrive in hospital, or just die—/that’s the apparent treatment plan: do nothing.

///

Tariff money received by who

Apparent, tariff money was applied to value add goods and services entering the United States (US) because the differences between countries cost of living [wages] different; it follows, the tariff applied upon competing imports with US already manufactured goods or services here. But now tariff application appears as punishment upon the US consumers because government already allowed US manufacturing to move and operate within countries that have lower standards of living [wages & occupational safety & environmental safety] than mandatory within US.

Therefore, apparent these new US applied tariffs are political applied punishments applied upon foreign countries and not used to maintain the US living standards by protecting existing wages benefits; therefore, making the US at-will employee able to purchase health care and education with their own money earned from labor.

This application of political motivated tariffs applied; as s result, will cause US consumers products to cost more and government(s) will collect more taxes and fees levied upon these inflationary consumers products caused by tariffs applied.

The unanswered question is this: With this new tariff(s) money collection; it follows, who gets this money, when will consumers see this cash-back, or does government just think it will keep and spend it like another US Taxpayers tax without tell the public?

See, [Tariff – Wikipedia] (available at) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff?wprov=sfti1

[Walmart CEO worries what consumers will have to pay if trade war escalates] (available at) https://apple.news/AIAkgfSPcR1OlTOZX5ts2fQ

[‘I am a tariff man’: Trump warns China against raiding ‘great wealth’ of US as trade talks start — RT USA News] (available at) https://www.rt.com/usa/445551-i-am-tariff-man-trump/

Reading: Thinking: Writing: Why I Know?

Microsoft Word 2016 Great Application

I must say Microsoft Office.com applications have come a long way and are now quite capable to do things just a fast as one can think without loss of thought focus caused by the word processing package use problems created for users of early versions.

Good work Microsoft Corporation. I like the features of your Office.com Word 386 (2016) application.

////

Public Interest: What is the Public Interest?

Natural gas facilities and public apprehension

I see a number of the U.S. natural gas related projects progressing—presented, community involvement, permitting, engineering, construction, and process operation—but, as for public input, I fail to see or recognize where public input is considered—enabling or stopping these projects.

It’s a no-win game for public comments

Since, it is a no-win or just not-be considered Community peoples’ comments related to environmental concerns; as a result, a simple solution might simply be this:

  1. Request U.S. EPA to complete a potential hazards analysis for natural gas industrial process planned for community; it follows; under the Community Right-to-Know Act benefit to health and welfare of community and people;
  2. As a result, U.S. EPA publish (no peer review process here just the facts published as discovered) finding of potential hazard(s) as discovered and don’t waste U.S. EPA time and effort with curative action planning—just public publish the U.S. EPA hazard(s) findings absent conclusions. Because the public has the right to know hazards within their community as discovered!
  3. It follows, all other natural gas permit granting agency(s) can make their own decisions what does “public interest” means or not mean with no influence from U.S. EPA other than Community people have received notice about hazard(s) potentials within their community as created by proposed natural gas related facility.

Let the documents do the presentation

Let’s look at an actual permit process SIERRA CLUB, Petitioner, v. FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION, Respondent. No. 15-1133 – DC15-1133SierraClub.pdf, http://www.ferc.gov/legal/court-cases/briefs/2016/DC15-1133SierraClub.pdf (last visited Feb 14, 2016)

Apparent to me

With these natural gas projects within the U.S. the Community and Citizen’s input carry little weight for- or against-project permit granting; therefore, don’t waste your time arguing with any permit agency, but just public for all community public learning what are the hazard(s) that are introduced into their Community surround.

It’s the Community people right to know: Community Right-to-Know Act. Even if they can’t stop the permit process, construction, and natural gas facility processing.

Posted: 2/14/2016 1:36:24 PM

////

Who says, the Community counts?

Community listens

The Tacoma three proposed industries:

  1. Natural gas distribution pipe system;
  2. LNG Facility; and
  3. Methanol Facility.

Community speaks

Tacoma and surrounding Communities speak for- and against-arguments that relate to Tacoma proposed natural gas industries to be operated within Port of Tacoma Washington.

Who listens to Community speak?

The issue, who listens to Community concerns and just what are those persons willing to do that address the Community concerns? At what cost to Community health and welfare expense?

Apparently, Federal Way Washington listens and has created a Community action plan related to Tacoma proposed Methanol Facility.

Just a bump-in-the-road

Just a simple citizens of Community have had their opportunity to voice concerns but now it is time to move forward with natural gas industries, construction, and processing begins.

Time to stop these industries

The question remains, just who, name the decision making individual(s) that has the authority and responsibility to halt industry construction and operation; as a result, industrial facility operations that could potentially harm Tacoma and surrounding Communities.

////

Tacoma Water: Methanol: Consumption

The methanol facility use

Specifically, presented, “7.1 Water Supply The methanol plant will require significant quantities of water to function. Estimated usage amounts identify the facility as requiring about 10.4 million gallons of water per day (enough to supply 26,000 homes, assuming average use of 400 gallons per day). . . .” See, Methanol EIS Draft Scope of Work 02052016.pdf (p. 8, § 7.1) (emphasis added)., http://cms.cityoftacoma.org/planning/Methanol%20Plant/Methanol%20EIS%20Draft%20Scope%20of%20Work%2002052016.pdf (last visited Feb 13, 2016)

The water customers use forecast 2014

So, we are informed about the Tacoma Water Utility ability to supply water to all customers March 2014:

Just over a century ago, 42 million gallons-a-day of Green River water began flowing through a 43-mile pipeline into the City of Tacoma. Today, the Green River is still the city’s primary water source, and one of the nation’s last remaining unfiltered surface water supplies. To comply with the federal Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT2), Tacoma Water and its Second Supply Project (SSP) partners expect to start up a new filtration facility late this year with final completion by May 2015.

Tacoma Water provides direct drinking water service to about 316,000 people in the City of Tacoma, and parts of King and Pierce counties. The utility also supplies water to a number of wholesale customers as well as its SSP partners, Covington Water District, the City of Kent, and Lakehaven Utility District.

In 2005, the SSP partners completed a transmission pipeline from the Green River, increasing the capacity of the Green River supply to about 167 million gallons per day. Including the SSP partners, about 500,000 customers receive water from Tacoma’s system. If all wholesale and partner utilities are counted, about 1 million customers could receive water from Tacoma’s system. See, Water Tap, March 2014 – wt0314.pdf Washington’s Drinking Water Newsletter, http://www.doh.wa.gov/Portals/1/Documents/4200/wt0314.pdf (last visited Feb 13, 2016)

Let’s calculate just a little

For example, methanol facility presents every home uses 400-GD (gallons per day) therefore the Year 2014 forecast for water customers might reach 1-million; as a result, 1-million × 400-GD = 400-MGD water production required from Tacoma Water. But, were not considering the 10.4-MGD water methanol facility requires.

Tacoma Water Utility filtration production capability

Nevertheless, we now have an operating new drinking water Tacoma Water filtration plant, “The facility will be able to treat up to 168 million gallons of drinking water per day, and will be the largest filtration treatment plant in Washington.” See, Tacoma Water Green River Filtration Project, http://www.doh.wa.gov/Portals/1/Documents/Pubs/331-490-Tacoma.pdf (last visited Feb 13, 2016).

I would say were a little water short right now.

On the other hand, maybe Tacoma Water Utility has new and revised water consumption forecasts for years 2015 and years future? I don’t know because I have not seen the current water consumption data forecast done Tacoma Water and population (housing) growth considering the SSP partners.

Still, if this new Tacoma Water filtration plant has capability of 168-MGD and using the methanol house water consumption fact; as a result, we will need, in future years, 400-MGD filtered water but we only have 168-MGD available as filtered drinking water. Seems-to-me the filtered drinking water supplies are just a little short for future years availability and that is excluding the Tacoma Methanol Facility water consumption.

Ultimately, might we consider the methanol comparison water usage by homes is wrong? 400-GD : 1 home.

As an alternative source of water

Instead, maybe the Methanol Facility might draw its process water from Puyallup River and condition this water as necessary for its methanol process needs. Condition the water need at its own expense and to the filtration necessary for methanol process supply water quality.

Maybe the devil is in the financial water details?

Who knows? I would not like to consider the Tacoma Water Utility is playing a financial immediate benefit gain for today and placing all residential ratepayers at risk for their future drinking water availability in future years; for example, if Tacoma Water Utility needed to make more revenue for customers soon the Methanol Facility might be the cash-cow it needs instead of increasing ratepayers’ rates even more? Tacoma Water Utility needs to publish fact data about Tacoma Water current and forecast future years drinking water consumption including all water use impacts related to Second Supply Project (SSP) partners considered.

////