[Terrapreta] Government funding for Aust TP trials.
Gerald Van Koeverden
vnkvrdn at yahoo.ca
Mon Dec 17 21:47:58 CST 2007
I keep wondering too why its so expensive to get the results of
publically-funded research like that TP book for over $200??
The writers can't argue that the 'limited circulation' numbers raises
the cost of publishing so exorbiantly. There are too many publish-on-
demand companies around like "lulu" who will do limited circulation
numbers for very cheap - for no more than what you would pay for a
regular book. Is it the photos? Just go into any bookstore and
check out all those beautiful all-colour coffee-table specials on
sale for peanuts...
Give'em hell, Lou!
Gerrit
On 17-Dec-07, at 7:17 PM, lou gold wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I would like elaborate on my questions to Adriana.
> Here is my predicament: as a would-be terra preta enthusiast/
> evangelist living in Brazil, I find that I often do not have access
> to publications that I would like to read. The two main terra preta
> books are now available through Amazon.com for a mere U$ 314 http://
> www.amazon.com/Amazonian-Dark-Earths-Properties-Management/dp/
> 1402018398/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b
> or I can read other papers for a fee through services such as
> JSTOR. In practical effect, this means that I do not have access.
> So, when I am told that there will be a new Biochar book and new
> papers in journals I wonder if I will ever gain access to them.
>
> My general understanding is that this is no small problem in regard
> to the intellectual property notions of modern science. Perhaps,
> some will think that this is a side issue but in my view it seems
> especially pertinent as we push for more global research and
> publication on terra preta applications.
>
> See the following piece about the work of James Boyle...
>
> A web without science …
>
> September 4th, 2007
> James Boyle's latest column in The Financial Times - "The irony of
> a web without science" - examines how the lessons learned from the
> world wide web can and should be applied to the sciences. From
> research funding to commercial publishing, Boyle posits that the
> capabilities made available through the advent of the Web and its
> design are not adequately being applied to scientific research.
>
> Boyle writes:
>
> "The greatest irony, though, is this. The world wide web was
> designed in a scientific laboratory to facilitate access to
> scientific knowledge. In every other area of life - commerce,
> social networking, pornography - it has been a smashing success.
> But in the world of science itself? With the virtues of an open web
> all around us, we have proceeded to build an endless set of walled
> gardens, something that looks a lot like Compuserv or Minitel and
> very little like a world wide web for science."
>
> The article notes a key element of Science Commons philosophy -
> the almost-mythical "e-research" world, where collaboration is the
> norm and we design our systems for the network. Meaningful e-
> research is going to require a fundamental redefinition of
> infrastructure. Infrastructure is more than just ethernet and
> fiberoptic cable. Content is part of the infrastructure, too, and
> likely the underlying ICT infrastructure content needs to be open
> by default and governed by open, standard protocols. We won't get
> to the e-research future any other way.
>
> Please see the Neurocommons pages for a sense of what an e-research
> project looks like. If only we had as much access to the literature
> online as we do to digital data …
>
> You can read Boyle's article in its entirety here. Boyle is a
> William Neal Reynolds professor at Duke Law School , and a co-
> founder of Science Commons. He also sits on the Creative Commons
> board.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 17, 2007 9:17 PM, lou gold <lou.gold at gmail.com> wrote:
> Adriana,
>
> I pleased that the final papers will be available to the general
> public.
>
> Perhaps your missed my question? Will the data bases and research
> be governed by open access protocols such as are being set in place
> at http://sciencecommons.org/weblog/ ?
>
> Thanks,
>
> lou
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 17, 2007 8:52 PM, Adriana Downie <
> adriana at bestenergies.com.au> wrote:
> Lou,
>
>
> We are in the process of publishing several research papers based
> on the work in a range of journals. Some of the finding are also to
> be included in the Biochar book which is being compiled by Johannes
> Lehmann . We will also be presenting some of the results at the
> upcoming IBI conference in Newcastle , UK for which the papers will
> be publicly available.
>
>
> It is not our intention to keep this work a secret. The more
> scientifically rigorous and peer reviewed results we can get out
> the better.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Adriana.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lou gold [mailto:lou.gold at gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, 18 December 2007 9:36 AM
> To: Adriana Downie
> Cc: Michael Bailes; Terrapreta
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] Government funding for Aust TP trials.
>
>
> Hi Adriana,
>
> Sounds like a wonderful thing to support. We need much char research.
>
> One question: how will the data, research findings, etc be licensed?
>
> Will they be under an Open Source protocol?
> http://creativecommons.org/
>
> Or, will they be governed by a conventional copyright?
>
> Thanks for all of you good work.
>
> lou
>
> On Dec 17, 2007 7:54 PM, Adriana Downie <
> adriana at bestenergies.com.au> wrote:
>
> Michael….and those who want to help via email,
>
>
> Your criticism (below) of lack of government support is not
> entirely justified. The trials that BEST has paid for at the NSW
> DPI has been done partly through funding we have through the NSW
> Department of Environment and Climate Change (DECC). BEST Energies
> (directly and through their clients) and the NSW DPI have also
> contributed cash and in-kind but it would have been a lot harder
> without the government support for which we are very grateful.
>
>
> I encourage those on the list with some time, to write an email of
> congratulations to the DECC for supporting this important work and
> to encourage them to continue and expand the funding that they have
> provided in this area. I have included the contacts below. All they
> ask out of this is to get some recognition so please feel free to
> give them some and hopefully this will help pave the way for more
> TP work in NSW.
>
>
> Elizabeth Lechlein
>
> Grants Administrator
>
> Department of Environment and Climate Change
>
> PO Box 644 Parramatta NSW 2124
>
> Level 2, 1 Fitzwilliam Street
>
> Parramatta NSW 2150
>
> elizabeth.lechlein at environment.nsw.gov.au
>
> Ph: (02) 8837 6038 Fax: (02) 8837 6099
>
>
> Lisa Corbyn
>
> Director General - DECC
>
> Lisa.corbyn at environment.nsw.gov.au
>
> 59-61 Goulburn Street, Sydney
> PO Box A290, Sydney South NSW 1232
> Phone: +61 2 9995 5000
>
>
> Mr Philip Koperberg,
>
> NSW Minister for Climate Change Environment and Water
> Level 35 Governor Macquarie Tower,
> 1 Farrer Place,
> SYDNEY NSW 2000
>
> Phone 9228 5488 Fax 9228 5766
>
> Email office at koperberg.minister.nsw.gov.au
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Adriana Downie
>
> BEST Energies Australia
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Bailes [mailto:michaelangelica at gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, 17 December 2007 1:49 PM
> To: naomi luckett; Terrapreta
> Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] NZ leading the way
>
>
> I buddied up with a lovely kiwi at the IAI Confrence at Terrigal.
> He was from NZ DEPT of Primary Industries. I have forgotten his
> name and unfortunately lost his details. He said the NZ Govt was
> very worried about GHGs especially methane from burping (He did say
> burping) cows.
> I only saw a couple of other 'PI' people from NSW and the ONLY
> Journalist was Kelpie Wilson.
> The Confrence got no running in the press at all.
>
> There have been some NSW pot studies done by NSW Agi Department -
> fully or partially funded by BEST Energies (You get nothing for
> free from the NSW Govt.-- and do they charge!).
> In my view BEST should be flogging their technology not researching
> and funding char experiments-The Government should be doing this!
> NSW DPI even has a "GHG" Executive.
> If nothing else Australian Governments should be funding studies on
> Char's water saving potential. It seems the "water saving" crystals/
> polymers are fairly useless and expensive.
> MA
>
> On 17/12/2007, naomi luckett <naomiluckett at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> News from New Zealand,
>
>
> Published today in the New Zealand Herald...
>
>
> RESEARCH
>
> Roles focus on charcoal's benefits
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Terrapreta mailing list
> Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> http://bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/
> terrapreta_bioenergylists.org
> http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
> http://info.bioenergylists.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> http://lougold.blogspot.com/
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/visionshare/sets/
>
> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.0/1137 - Release Date:
> 18/11/2007 5:15 PM
>
>
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.17.4/1188 - Release Date:
> 17/12/2007 2:13 PM
>
>
>
>
> --
> http://lougold.blogspot.com/
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/visionshare/sets/
>
>
>
> --
> http://lougold.blogspot.com/
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/visionshare/sets/
> _______________________________________________
> Terrapreta mailing list
> Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> http://bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/
> terrapreta_bioenergylists.org
> http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
> http://info.bioenergylists.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /attachments/20071217/143fa478/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Terrapreta
mailing list