irja, talan az en megjegyzesemre (is?) reagalva:

>- tudomasom szerint a "globar warming" ma mar nem azt jelenti, hogy szep
>lassan elolvadunk a hosegtol, hanem a foldi idojarasi rendszer teljesen
>szetesik, egyre nagyobbak lesznek a szelsosegek. Igy hat az hogy tavaly
>rendkivuli tel volt az eszaki felteke tobb orszagaban, az egyaltalan nem


Egy hideg tel egy helyen nem meglepo, es nem cafolja a
felmelegedest (global!). De ugyanugy egy forro nyar
Meadows professzor farmjan nem bizonyit semmit. Csak azt
valoszinusiti, hogy a holgy nem mentes a prekoncepcioktol,
ami a temaban kifejtett megnyilatkozasainak tudomanyos
erteket megkerdojelezi. (Ha ugy irta, ahogy emlekszem.
Sajnos nincs meg az eredeti cikke, igy lehet, hogy nem
irta a sajat tapasztalatait a folmelegedes szamlajara,
mely esetben sajnalom, hogy felhoztam a temat.)

Zoli

Dear Colleagues,

The attached text will appear as an editorial in the next issue of  Budapest
Sun. Please help in distributing it.

Best regards: Bela Liptak
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

SAVE THE BLUE DANUBE
(B#233#la Lipt#225#k)

In February, the first international environmental lawsuit ever will open in
The Hague. Chances are good that the Court will defend the Danube and its
ancient wetlands, but a secret, out-of court deal is in the making, which
could destroy these chances.

In 1977, under Soviet pressure, Hungary and Czechoslovakia agreed to
construct an environmental nightmare, a white elephant of Stalinist
gigantomania: the Gabcikovo- Nagymaros hydroelectric system. After 1989,
Hungary quit the project, while the newly formed state of Slovakia proceeded
with it unilaterally. In 1992, Slovakia diverted a 20 mile section of
Hungary's border river, the Danube, onto her own territory, and thereby
appropriated both the water and the electricity which it generates. In
response, Hungary sued Slovakia at the International Court of Justice, which,
if its decision is not preempted by a secret deal, will deliver its verdict
next spring.

I, the editor of the Environmental Engineers' Handbook, got involved with
this in 1985, when a stranger called: "I am S#225#ndor Szalai, the chairman
of
the Danube committee of the Hungarian Academy of Science. I am calling,
because we need help to save the Danube wetlands, and I am calling you,
because I saw the accent marks on your name in your books."

For months, Szalai bombarded me with data on the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
monstrosity. I learned that the structure which holds the ten story  gigantic
artificial reservoir, can neither withstand seismic shock, nor winter ice,
that the lives of thousands are at risk. He explained that the project
destroys the drinking water supplies of many communities including that of
 Budapest, because the sealed canal "cuts out the lung of the river," and
because it creates a stagnant open sewer, which traps pollutants, viruses and
bacteria. I also learned from Szalai, that taking the Danube from its
riverbed destroys not only the agriculture in the area, but the habitat of
some 200 species of fauna and flora, some of which can not be found anywhere
else in the World and have survived in the Szigetkoz since the last Ice Age.
Today, in 1996, many residents of the villages, which the canal has cut off
from the outside world, have left the region. In the school of Bodiki
(Bodajk), there are only 14 students left. Only the old remain in these
isolated and dyeing settlements.
          
Than the news came, that Dr. Szalai died. On his dying bed, he was first
yelling out his last message, than his words got quieter and finally he was
only whispering: "Don't let it be! Stop it!" It was at this time that I
decided to try to obey his last wishes. I set up a foundation, organized
demonstrations, rented buses, printed posters, gave lectures, wrote petitions
and articles, in short, I spent the last decade and a small fortune of my own
money, to bring back the Danube where it belongs: into its riverbed.

Now, only a few months before our probable victory in The Hague, a secret,
out-of-court deal, endangers the fruit of all these efforts. Until this
point, it seemed that the International Court of Justice will set a precedent
by deciding, that nation states can not do as they please with their  rivers,
that rivers and their wetlands are the common treasure of all mankind. On
June 20, 1995, the Court even accepted the first "amicus curiae" (friends of
the court) filing on behalf of nine environmental and human rights NGOs,
which are demanding the restoration of the Danube ecosystem.

If the lawsuit proceeds, the Court will decide on four questions: 1) Was it
legal for Slovakia to divert of the Danube onto its territory? 2) Was it
legal for Slovakia to build the "C-variant" facility, which diverted the
river? 3) Did the cancellation of the 1977 contract by Hungary make the
contract invalid? 4) Did Hungary have the right to terminate the construction
at Nagymaros?

Of the above four questions, the critical one is 3). If Hungary can prove
that the 1977 contract was invalid from the outset, she will win the case
4:0. To prove her point, Hungary can quote the 1947 Paris Peace Treaty, which
requires that Hungary and her neighbors must obtain the approval of the Great
Powers prior to any changes, that would effect their borders. In this case,
no such approval was requested or given. Hungary can also cite the UN
Charter, which declares that international contracts or agreements are
automatically invalid, if they are obviously one-sided. The appropriation of
common property by one of the owners fulfills that criteria. Other favorable
arguments include that one of the parties to the contract (Czechoslovakia) no
longer exists and that the contract itself was signed under similar outside
pressure (by the Soviet Union) as was the Warsaw Pact, which since been
annulled.

If the lawsuit takes place and if the Court rules in Hungary's favor, the two
nations will have 6 months to come up with a detailed agreement, which will
implement the Court's ruling. A Compromise Plan for such a detailed agreement
has been submitted to the International Court and the paries by the
Foundation to Protect the Hungarian Environment and is outlined below.

The plan would return the Danube into its natural riverbed by eliminating the
temporary Cunovo (Dunacsun) dam, and by starting up a Dunakiliti-Gabcikovo
system, redesigned to withstand seismic shock and made safe by providing it
with ice handling capability. As a result, Hungary would regain her border
river, her wetlands in the Szigetkoz and her drinking water supplies.
Slovakia would retain her port at Bratislava, and would receive all the
electricity generated at Gabcikovo (Bos). When the river's flow rate is low,
Gabcikovo (Bos) would not generate electricity, but would still allow
shipping on the otherwise stagnant canal.

The European Community would benefit by having year-around shipping through
both the Gabcikovo (Bos) canal and through the natural Danube riverbed. The
United States would benefit by proving that the "new world order" works and
such a peaceful solution  costs less, than a few weeks of peace-keeping in
Bosnia. The World would save and return into its original state, one of the
planet's richest ecosystems and The Region would benefit, not only by the
restoration of its agriculture and drinking water supplies, but also by
obtaining thousands of jobs, both during the reconstruction, and later
through ecotourism. From Hainburg to G#246#ny#252#, the region would become
an
international nature preservation park, operated as an "European Free Zone",
where all residents (Austrians, Hungarians, and Slovaks), could freely travel
or take jobs. This sense of regional community and interdependence could
later become the catalyst for a wider reconciliation in all of Central
Europe.  

Yet, none of this will occur, if the secret out-of-court deal is allowed to
take place. We must remember S#225#ndor Szalai's last words. We must not be
spectators, but a participants at this critical moment. We must remember,
that the only things we lose are the ones which we give up, and the Danube we
can not, we will not give up!

Rovid osszefoglalo egy eloadasrol, amit a mult heten hallottam:
"Reaction kinetics of OH with polychlorinated biphenyls:Laboratory and field
studies", Ronald A.Hites

Ket benzolgyuru osszekapcsolva (nem kondenzalt!) a maradek hidrogenek
barmelyike (akar tobb is), ezek a PCB-k. A halmaznak zerus eleme is van,
csak a szepseg kedveert bevettek a tobbszorosen klorozott bifenilek klubjaba
a bifenilt is. Hajdanan kiterjedten hasznaltak oket transzformatorokban,
kondenzatorokban, muanyag-adalekkent es a fene tudja meg hol nem.
Alkalmazasuk egeszen a hetvenes evekig novekedett, a termeles csucsa olyan
tizezer tonna/ev korul volt. A hetvenes evek elejen aztan a fokozodo
kornyezetvedelmi aggalyok miatt ezeket a vegyuleteket kezdtek kivaltani
masokkal, ugyhogy mire 1976(?)-ban teljesen betiltottak a hasznalatukat (az
USA-rol beszelek), mar gyakorlatilag a termeles is megszunt. Azota eltelt
husz ev, a kondenzatorok, trafok egy jo resze meg ma is megvan, a muanyagok
tetemes hanyada alighanem a szemetdombokon hever. Az allitas szerint uj
tizezer tonnak mar nem kerulnek ki a kornyezetbe, a regiek egy resze azert
meg megvan.

 A hidroxil (OH) gyok, mint reakciopartner valasztas termeszetes volt,
kiemelkedoen ez a legfontosabb dogevo a troposzferaban.

 Az eloado nemileg mereszen, de atvagott egy gordiuszi csomot: az alacsony
goznyomasuk miatt  eleg nehez ezeknek a trutyiknak a gazfazisban lejatszodo
reakcioit vizsgalni. Egyszeruen alig van anyag a vizsgalt mintaban, nincs
mit nezni. Ok azt tettek, hogy 80-100 C-on mertek es extrapolaltak
szobahomersekletre.
 Rettentoen meglepodtem, mikor az OH + PCB sebessegi egyutthatokat lattam.
Nagyon gyorsak! A gyanut, hogy valami szorgalmasan reagalo koszt mert, azzal
oszlatta el, hogy tizennegy "klubtag" reakciosebesseget merte meg. Es a mert
ertekek teljesen konzisztensek voltak azzal, amit a szerkezetuktol el lehet
varni. (leteznek empirikus osszefuggesek, ami alapjan tippelni lehet, hogy
ket vegyulet kozul melyik fog gyorsabban reagalni) Szoval, lehet hogy
tevedett egy kettes faktort, de tizest nem.
 A mert reakciosebessegekbol a csalad tagjaira 2-40 napos elettartam
szamolhato. Peldaul a troposzferaban kovalygo bifenil koncentracioja 2 nap
alatt e-ed (2.718..) reszere csokken. Meg a 34 napos pentaklorobifenil sem
eri meg a nyugdijkorhatart.
 A meglevo adatokat tovabbgyurva maskent is lehetett fogalmazni: felteve,
hogy a troposzferaban mindenutt annyi PCB van, amennyi "belefer", azaz a
koncentraciot a goznyomas homersekletfuggese hatarozza meg, valami 8300
tonna/eves globalis fogyast szamitott.
 
 Kezenfekvo kerdes, hogy ha ez tenyleg igy van, hogy lehet, hogy megis itt
eszi meg a fene korulottunk a PCB-ket? Az egyik lehetseges valasz, hogy e
vilag egy-ket eldugott zugaban meg ma is kiterjedten hasznaljak, es onnan
terjed szejjelfele. (az eloado meg sem emlitette ezt a lehetoseget, bennem
merult fel, de el is vetem azon az alapon, hogy szennyezes es mocskolodas
teren senki nem tud versenyezni a "fejlettekkel")

 Az ur Indianabol jott, a Nagy-Tavak szomszedsagabol. Bemutatta, hogy 1970
ota hogyan valtozott a tavakban es a levegoben mert PCB koncentracio. A
skala logaritmikus volt, hatul is ultem, (ennyit a megbizhatosagomrol..) azt
vettem ki, hogy a vizbeli koncentracio joval gyorsasbban, olyan
otszazadreszere (ket es fel nagysagrend) csokkent husz ev alatt. Ugyanakkor
a troposzferaban eves atlagban mert koncentracio "alig" csokkent. Ugyanaz az
ellentmondas merul fel itt is, mint az elobb: a hidroxil-gyokkel mert
reakciosebessegbol nehany tiz napos elettartam jon ki, mig a terepen mert
legkori koncentraciok csokkenesebol 5.6 ev.
 Meg egy erdekes osszefuggest mutatott az eloado. Addig csocsalta a mert
legkori koncentraciokat es a levego homersekletet, mignem kihozott egy, az
evszakos koncentraciovaltozasnal sokkal erdekesebb dolgot. Mit sem torodve
azzal, hogy a terepen mert adatok igen tavol allnak a fiz-kem laborban mert
osszefuggesektol, feltette, hogy a Henry torveny kint is ervenyes,
akarmilyen mechanizmuson keresztul is valosul meg. A legkori koncentraciok
homersekletfuggesebol szamolt egy effektiv parolgashot. Ami erdekes az
eredmenyben, hogy a Nagy-Tavak korul mert parolgasho a fele volt a tipikus
tomentes Iowa-beli erteknek.

 Az, hogy a laborbeli meresek szazadakkora elettartamot adnak, mint a
terepen tapasztaltak szarmazhat abbol, hogy nem ugyanazt mertuk a ket
helyen. Jelen esetben peldaul ugy, hogy a troposzferabeli PCB-k porhoz
ragadva kovalyognak, nem pedig a gazfazisban. Kerdesemre az ur azt
valaszolta, hogy amit terepen mertek az NEM a porhoz ragadt trutyi, szurok
utan mertek a koncentraciot. El kell hinni.

 Ekkor viszont egyetlen magyarazatot tudok elkepzelni, azt, hogy szep
lassacskan szabadul fel onnan, ahol van: vizek fenekerol, szemettelepekrol.
A globalis lepteku fogyas sebesseget nem a kemiai eltunes sebessege, hanem
az hatarozza meg, hogy milyen gyorsan szabadul fel a trutyi onnan, ahol
elfekszik. A vizkozeli es a szaraz fold feletti effektiv parolgashok
kulonbsege pedig azt sugallja, hogy a vizbol konnyebben kijon a PCB, nagyobb
melegek (kavargo por?) kell ahhoz, hogy a szarazfoldrol felemelkedjen.
 De ez a bekezdes mar csak az en szarnyalasom. Kivancsi vagyok, Nektek
vannak-e hasonlok.

Laszlo Barna

NOT SO FAST!

Those of us who think the world needs saving -- from environmental
destruction,
rapacious greed, decaying morals, drugs, crime, racism, whatever -- keep very
busy crusading for our favorite remedies.  School vouchers.  Carbon taxes.
Campaign reform.  The Endangered Species Act.  A lower capital gains tax.
Strong regulation.  No regulation.

You know.  That long list of mutually inconsistent Holy Grails with which we
like to hit each other over the head.

There's one solution to the world's problems, however, that I never hear the
frenzied activists suggest.

Slowing down.

Yes, that's what I said.

Slowing down.

Slowing down could be the single most effective solution to the particular
save-the-world struggle I immerse myself in -- the struggle for
sustainability,
for living harmoniously and well within the limits and laws of the earth.

Suppose we weren't in such a hurry.  We could take time to walk instead of
drive, to sail instead of fly.  To clean up our messes.  To discuss our plans
throughout the whole community before we send in bulldozers to make
irreversible changes.  To figure out how many fish the ocean can produce
before
boats race out to beat other boats to whatever fish are left.

Suppose we went at a slow enough pace not only to smell the flowers, but to
feel our bodies, play with children, look openly, without agenda or timetable
into the faces of loved ones.  Suppose we stopped gulping fast food and
started
savoring slow food, grown, cooked, served, and eaten with care.  Suppose we
took time each day to sit in silence.

I think, if we did those things, the world wouldn't need much saving.

We could cut our energy and material use drastically, because we would get
the
full good out of what we use.

We wouldn't have to buy so many things to save time.  (Have you ever
wondered,
with all our time-saving paraphernalia, what happens to the time we save?)

We wouldn't make so many mistakes.  We could listen more and hurt each other
less.  Maybe we could even take time to reason through our favorite
solutions,
test them, and learn what their actual effects are.

Said Thomas Merton, who spent his time in a Trappist monastery: "There is a
pervasive form of contemporary violence to which the idealist ... most easily
succumbs: activism and over-work....  To allow oneself to be carried away by
a
multitude of conflicting concerns, to surrender to too many demands, to
commit
oneself to too many people, to want to help everyone in everything, is to
succumb to violence.  The frenzy of the activist neutralizes his work for
peace.  It destroys the fruitfulness of his own work, because it kills the
root
of inner wisdom which makes work fruitful."

A friend in India tells me that the onslaught of Western advertising in his
country is a cultural blow, not so much because of the messages of the ads,
but
because of their pace.  The stun-the-senses barrage of all TV programming,
especially ads, is antithetical to a thousands-year-old tradition of
contemplation.  I can imagine that.  I have been driven crazy by the
somnolent
pace at which things get done in India.  Don't these people know that time is
money?

What they know, actually, is that time is life, and to go zooming through it
is
to miss living.  Psychologist Arno Gruen says our busyness is addictive: "In
order to be able to feel alive, we ... need more and more external
excitation.
The stimuli themselves ... force us into an addictive mode.  Since we think
that all we require is more of them in order to fill up the emptiness, our
need
will grow for what actually increases the void.  There are numerous stimuli
of
this sort: loud music, large cars, glittering colors, gleaming machines. 
What
we finally seek for our feeling of aliveness is simply the speed with which a
change in stimuli takes place.  The form or content of the stimulus will have
scarcely any significance.  In fact empty forms will be preferred, since
those
with content and meaning slow down the tempo of change.  To find meaning in
an
experience requires, after all, an act of mental organization, and that takes
time."

Slow.  Down.  Do that first.  Then, quietly, carefully, think about what else
might need to be done.

The only problem with this cure is that I can't prescribe it for others,
because I have such trouble following it myself.  It's so easy to get swept
up
in the hurtling pace of the world.  Like most of the other world-savers I
know,
I'm way too busy to eat well, sit quietly, take a vacation, or even, some
days,
think.

Edward Abbey, the great curmudgeon of environmentalism, knew better: "It is
not
enough to fight for the land; it is even more important to enjoy it.  While
you
can.  While it's still here.  So get out there and hunt and fish and mess
around with your friends, ramble out yonder and explore the forests, climb
the
mountains, run the rivers, breathe deep of that yet sweet and lucid air, sit
quietly for awhile and contemplate the precious stillness, that lovely,
mysterious and awesome space.  Enjoy yourselves, keep your brain in your head
and your head firmly attached to the body, the body active and alive, and I
promise you this much: I promise you this one sweet victory over ... those
desk-bound people with their hearts in a safe deposit box and their eyes
hypnotized by desk calculators.  I promise you this: You will outlive the
bastards."

Good advice.  Too bad I don't have time to take it.  I have to go save the
world.

(Donella H. Meadows is an adjunct professor of environmental studies at
Dartmouth College.)

> hanem a foldi idojarasi rendszer teljesen
> szetesik, egyre nagyobbak lesznek a szelsosegek
Azert ez tulzas, szetesni nem fog (nincs hova), inkabb csak leng. De az
atlaghomerseklet emelkedik, tehat a jegsapkak biztosan fognak olvadni.
A globalis felmelegedest tenyleg nem szabad pillanatnyi helyi jelensegek
alapjan megitelni, mint egyszeri kollegam, aki julius vegen(!) egy szeles
napon megjegyezte: "Nyakunkon a tel, mar most is huvos van..."
Udv/Laci

(tudom, az otthon levoknek ez nem ujsag...... de talan van nehany magamfajta
(eppen) kuldolfre szakadt, akinek minden vicc uj.)

A Fidesz Baja Ferenc meneszteset koveteli (MN)

Katasztrofakozeli helyzet alakult ki a Baranya megyei Gare tersegeben,
mert az egyik legveszelyesebb hulladek, dioxin van a kozseg
hulladektarozojaban es annak kornyeken - jelentette be Illes Zoltan, a
Fidesz alelnoke keddi budapesti sajtotajekoztatojan.  A 62 ezer hordo
hulladekot meg a hetvenes evekben szallitotta Garera a Budapesti
Vegyimuvek.  Az anyag veszelyessegerol mar a '90-es evek elejen pontosan
tudott a kornyezetvedelmi tarca, mivel felmeresek keszultek.  Az utobbi
idoben pedig - mondta Illes Zoltan -, mivel a hordok ennyi ido alatt
elrohadtak, Kovacs Arpad, a KTM helyettes allamtitkara es Baja Ferenc
miniszter konkretan is ertesult a dioxin leterol es mennyisegerol.
Ezert a Fidesz a ket felelos politikus azonnali meneszteset koveteli.  A
dioxin a taplalekba kerulve magzati karosodasokat, rakot es
idegrendszeri megbetegedeseket okoz.  Gare tersegeben a mereg mar elerte
a talajvizszintet, igy az ott elok komoly veszelyben vannak - adta hirul
az MTI.

Fidusz irja:

"- tudomasom szerint a "globar warming" ma mar nem azt jelenti, 
hogy szep lassan elolvadunk a hosegtol, hanem a foldi idojarasi 
rendszer teljesen szetesik, egyre nagyobbak lesznek a szelsosegek. 
Igy hat az hogy tavaly rendkivuli tel volt az eszaki felteke tobb 
orszagaban, az egyaltalan nem meglepo."

1. Tudomasom szerint soha nem is jelentette azt, hogy elolvadunk. A 
meteorologiai modellek szerint nem ott no(ne) tovabb a homerseklet, 
ahol mar most is meleg van (=tropusokon), hanem a legnagyobb 
felmelegedes a sarkokon kovetkezne be, ahol ezentul sem kene 
elolvadni. (Nem az utcasarokra gondoltam!)
2. Mit jelent az, hogy az idojarasi rendszer szetesik?? Egy auto 
szeteshet, de egy sztochasztikus rendszernel nem tudom ezt 
ertelmezni. Ugy lehet fogalmazni, hogy atrendezodes kovetkezhet be 
az idojarasi zonakban es eltolodas lephet felbizonyos jellemzokben 
(pl. valoszinusitheto az atlagos szelsebessegek 5-10 %-os 
novekedese). Persze ez nem hangzik olyan katartikusan. De legalabb 
igaz.
3. Az utobbi evekben egyre tobbet hallunk a vilag kulonbozo reszein 
fellepo "rendkivuli idojarasi esemenyek"-rol. Igaz. Ezenkivul egyre 
tobb gyilkossagrol. Es balesetrol is. Szerintem a hangsuly a 
"hallunk"-on van. A 15. szazadban pl. egyetlen eszak-amerikai 
meteorologiai anomaliarol sem kaptunk hirt. A mult szazadban is eleg 
kevesrol. Mostansag naponta halljuk, sot a tv-ben latjuk, ha kiont 
valamelyik eszak-amerikai folyo. Vagy szokoar van Bangladesben. 
Vagy vihar Okinavan. Ilyen az iparosodas kora elott, amikor 275 ppm 
volt a CO2, tenyleg nem volt. Biztos, hogy az eghajlat valtozott? A 
Fold kozephomerseklete 100 ev alatt kb. 0.7 fokkal nott. Ez akar 
okozhatna is ezeket a valtozasokat. De akkor miert nem okozta az  
1940-es evekig? Pedig a felmelegedesbol 0.5 fok - vagyis a zome  - 
addig jatszodott le. Lehet, hogy megis a hirkozles fejlodik jobban?

Mas:

Erdekes jelenseg, amikor a KORNYESZ-ben egy zpok betiltott 
Freon-12-t keres.

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Kedves Ivan!
Koszonom a kritikat (ha annak szantad.)
Pontosan ezert hagytam benne  a Kornyeszben az irast:  a valaszok igen joizu
nyulakat ugraszthatnak ki a bokorbol...... (lasd DDT-vita; kornyezetileg
betiltott termekek fekete piaca, stb.).

Vorsatz Diana
Kornyesz Moderator
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Udvozlettel
Gacs Ivan