<?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 for Inside Science</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 02:50:42 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Senate study on nuke power: RP still long way off by andy</title>
		<link>http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/2009/10/27/senate-study-on-nuke-power-rp-still-long-way-off/#comment-25954</link>
		<dc:creator>andy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2009 22:50:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/?p=293#comment-25954</guid>
		<description>I'm for nuclear power in the Philippines because it's one of the most and cheapest sources of energy. With this day and age, nuclear technology is extremely safe as compared to the past many years, for as long as maintenance procedure and the safe operation are strictly followed, there's nothing to worry about meltdown.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m for nuclear power in the Philippines because it&#8217;s one of the most and cheapest sources of energy. With this day and age, nuclear technology is extremely safe as compared to the past many years, for as long as maintenance procedure and the safe operation are strictly followed, there&#8217;s nothing to worry about meltdown.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Is the Philippines moving towards China? by julie</title>
		<link>http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/2009/10/12/is-the-philippines-moving-towards-china/#comment-25942</link>
		<dc:creator>julie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Oct 2009 17:35:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/?p=290#comment-25942</guid>
		<description>im a dost scholar as well.... i can sympathize with dost scholar... no stipends for september and october for me.. :(</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>im a dost scholar as well&#8230;. i can sympathize with dost scholar&#8230; no stipends for september and october for me.. <img src='http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':(' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Senate study on nuke power: RP still long way off by Miko Alino</title>
		<link>http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/2009/10/27/senate-study-on-nuke-power-rp-still-long-way-off/#comment-25941</link>
		<dc:creator>Miko Alino</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Oct 2009 16:32:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/?p=293#comment-25941</guid>
		<description>The costs of producing electricity from nuclear energy is expected to shoot up if investors would consider the expenses in disposing nuclear waste (or spent fuel), which unfortunately has been a major problem for countries like Germany and France. While there are facilities available for storing such waste, the existing storages have not been successful in keeping them safe from contaminating surrounding areas. I am even mentioning the external costs of nuclear energy, which ranges from the environmental damage caused by the extraction of raw materials to potential health costs of people at risk of contamination.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The costs of producing electricity from nuclear energy is expected to shoot up if investors would consider the expenses in disposing nuclear waste (or spent fuel), which unfortunately has been a major problem for countries like Germany and France. While there are facilities available for storing such waste, the existing storages have not been successful in keeping them safe from contaminating surrounding areas. I am even mentioning the external costs of nuclear energy, which ranges from the environmental damage caused by the extraction of raw materials to potential health costs of people at risk of contamination.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Innovation forum to address RP competitiveness by reonendar</title>
		<link>http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/2007/11/09/innovation-forum-to-address-rp-competitiveness/#comment-25909</link>
		<dc:creator>reonendar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:42:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://inquirerbloggers.net/insidescience/2007/11/09/innovation-forum-to-address-rp-competitiveness/#comment-25909</guid>
		<description>Potete consigliamo di visitare il sito dove ci sono molti articoli sul tema che vi interessa.  &lt;a href="http://identi.ca/levitracialis10mggenerico" rel="nofollow"&gt;levitra prezzo &lt;/a&gt; In it something is. I will know, many thanks for the information.  &lt;a href="http://identi.ca/levitracialis10mggenerico" rel="nofollow"&gt;vendita levitra &lt;/a&gt; Wacker, welche Phrase..., der prГ¤chtige Gedanke  http://identi.ca/levitracialis10mggenerico generico levitra online  Sei non erro, tutti i veri</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Potete consigliamo di visitare il sito dove ci sono molti articoli sul tema che vi interessa.  <a href="http://identi.ca/levitracialis10mggenerico" rel="nofollow">levitra prezzo </a> In it something is. I will know, many thanks for the information.  <a href="http://identi.ca/levitracialis10mggenerico" rel="nofollow">vendita levitra </a> Wacker, welche Phrase&#8230;, der prГ¤chtige Gedanke  <a href="http://identi.ca/levitracialis10mggenerico" rel="nofollow">http://identi.ca/levitracialis10mggenerico</a> generico levitra online  Sei non erro, tutti i veri</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Senate study on nuke power: RP still long way off by Sage</title>
		<link>http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/2009/10/27/senate-study-on-nuke-power-rp-still-long-way-off/#comment-25908</link>
		<dc:creator>Sage</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 21:27:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/?p=293#comment-25908</guid>
		<description>Correction on my comment above. I meant the rate of electricity in the Philippines is 3 times higher than the rate in Canada - Manitoba Hydro rate: $.06per kwh,  Phil rate $.175per kwh according to ASEAN Power Utilities/Authorities.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Correction on my comment above. I meant the rate of electricity in the Philippines is 3 times higher than the rate in Canada - Manitoba Hydro rate: $.06per kwh,  Phil rate $.175per kwh according to ASEAN Power Utilities/Authorities.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Senate study on nuke power: RP still long way off by Mark Cojuangco</title>
		<link>http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/2009/10/27/senate-study-on-nuke-power-rp-still-long-way-off/#comment-25903</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Cojuangco</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:35:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/?p=293#comment-25903</guid>
		<description>Di mo ba po alam na ang rate ngayon dito is 4.5+pesos per Kwh, wholesale.

Di ba almost doble ito ng 2.5 pesos?

Ano ba po ang inirereclamo ninyo?

Hindi ba po mas mura ito?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Di mo ba po alam na ang rate ngayon dito is 4.5+pesos per Kwh, wholesale.</p>
<p>Di ba almost doble ito ng 2.5 pesos?</p>
<p>Ano ba po ang inirereclamo ninyo?</p>
<p>Hindi ba po mas mura ito?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Senate study on nuke power: RP still long way off by Clive</title>
		<link>http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/2009/10/27/senate-study-on-nuke-power-rp-still-long-way-off/#comment-25901</link>
		<dc:creator>Clive</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:58:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/?p=293#comment-25901</guid>
		<description>Such a shame that the role of CO2 is so gravely misunderstood, that this life-sustaining gas is being ignorantly demonised on the backof a purely political UNIPCC. This is the gas of life without which we would not be alive and neither would there be a world as we know it. As any chemistry student knows plants and the biosphere will only thrive with plenty of CO2 which should be greater than 200ppmv for active spread. CO2 is a trace gas which  can no way be effective on our climate, which is being affected by celestial dynamic and natural forces way beyond what puny man can effect.
So what does this tell us? 
It tells us that propaganda is alive and kicking for government control reasons, worldwide. 
It tells us there is a case for more truthful education education, divorced from fear generated untruths about a situation dreamed up in Europe in the 70's (Club of Rome) and used for unscrupulous reasons by unscrupulous people. Climate changes are natural, always have been, and is now in a cooling phase. 
Get the truth and wise-up. AGW is for suckers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Such a shame that the role of CO2 is so gravely misunderstood, that this life-sustaining gas is being ignorantly demonised on the backof a purely political UNIPCC. This is the gas of life without which we would not be alive and neither would there be a world as we know it. As any chemistry student knows plants and the biosphere will only thrive with plenty of CO2 which should be greater than 200ppmv for active spread. CO2 is a trace gas which  can no way be effective on our climate, which is being affected by celestial dynamic and natural forces way beyond what puny man can effect.<br />
So what does this tell us?<br />
It tells us that propaganda is alive and kicking for government control reasons, worldwide.<br />
It tells us there is a case for more truthful education education, divorced from fear generated untruths about a situation dreamed up in Europe in the 70&#8217;s (Club of Rome) and used for unscrupulous reasons by unscrupulous people. Climate changes are natural, always have been, and is now in a cooling phase.<br />
Get the truth and wise-up. AGW is for suckers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Wind energy blows strong in the Philippines by MIKE SIPE</title>
		<link>http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/2009/10/16/wind-energy-blows-strong-in-the-philippines/#comment-25900</link>
		<dc:creator>MIKE SIPE</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 12:57:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/?p=291#comment-25900</guid>
		<description>WHAT ARE TILAPIA TO OUR EARTH?

You be the judge:  
______________________________________________

Is TILAPIA culture a viable choice that can help everyone to live happier, healthier and better lives?,  

here are some of the things tilapia can make possible.
______________________________________________
1.   TILAPIA CAN ABOLISH WORLD HUNGER.  TILAPIA CAN FEED ALL THE HUNGRY CHILDREN. To A hungry child Tilapia CAN RESCUE THEN FROM THE PAIN OF HUNGER AND MALNUTRITION.  TILAPIA CAN PROVIDE a cure for his or here need for a balanced healthy meal. 

Tilapia can provide a nutritious meal with a well balanced  proteins that has all (100%) of the amino acids and minerals needed to grow our children into  happy well balanced adults. 

100 grams of a tilapia fillet provides 100% of the daily needs for protein , vitamins, and minerals which will supply enough protein for normal development of the body and CREATE a sense of well being and happiness that only a nutritious diet can create.  

2. TILAPIA ARE THE IDEAL CROP.  
To a fish farmer  tilapia provides a fish that can produce more protein per acre than any other crop (animal or vegetable) in the world FOR LESS MONEY.  

3.  TILAPIA ARE INCREDIBLE ENERGY SAVERS; Tilapia can lower the energy cost of growing food. Tilapia can be grown using less energy, (human energy or electrical or mechanical) per pound of edible protein than any other crop (plant or animal) in the world and for less total cost.
.
4.  TILAPIA IS A SUPER HERO TO a hungry and ecologically bankrupt world  tilapia can provide crops that can be affordably be grown in any climate in the world and can replace the overfished and exhausted oceans and allow the reforestation of most of our planet.  

5. TILAPIA CAN CREATE WORLD PEACE: BY PREVENTING  WARS OVER THE AVAILABILITY OF FOOD AND LAND.  provide the affordable nutrition to be able to lower the tensions between people who are competing for the usable land create for the first time a happy and peaceful world.

6. Tilapia is now, this year become the fastest growing segment of the aquaculture industry and the aquaculture industry now as of this year delivering over half of the fish available as food.

7. TILAPIA IS going to become the most extensively grown fish in the world within the next ten years and will produce more revenue than all of the other species of fish put together.

In terms of revenue in U.S. dollars this will be over 10 billion dollars a year.

TILAPIA makes it possible to:

1.  Find World peace. By making possible the economical production of nutritionally complete food which will help feed the hungry.

2.  Feeding the hungry will help people to grow from happy children to happy,  nutritionally well balanced, psychologically balanced content adults that have have a feeling of well being that only a good diet can create.

TILAPIA WILL CREATE A BETTER ENVIRONMENT by reducing the cultivated land now needed to produce beef, pork, and poultry by 95 percent or more which will reduce the demolition of world forest to make room needed to make good pasture land and produce the grain crops now used for animal feed.  

TILAPIA will  reduce global warming by increasing the total number of trees and foliage which will allow 95% more co2 removal and conversion into carbohydrates

This replacement of the hundreds and thousands of acres of land needed to grow animals feeding on grasses and grains with a few square feet of water covered land needed to grow the same weight of meat.  These few square feet of water will feed and grow the  same quantity of tilapia on a tiny fraction of the space. and will free up 98% of the land now in use for the purpose of raising beef, and allow us to stop stripping out our forest to create new land suitable for raising beef, pork. and poultry.

Some numbers to contemplate:  The numbers are approximations based on information fro specialist in each area AND ARE BASED ON THE CONVERSION RATES OF EACH ANIMAL AND THE ACREAGE REQUIRED TO CULTIVATE THESE FEEDS

1.  IT TAKES FROM 3-12 ACRES OF LAND TO GROW THE FEED AND PRODUCE THE GRAINS AND OR GROW THE GRASS TO PRODUCE 100 POUNDS OF BEEF PER YEAR.
      
2.  IT TAKES 2.5 -10 ACRES OF LAND TO PRODUCE THE GRAINS AND OR GROW THE GRASS TO PRODUCE 100 POUNDS OF PORK PER YEAR.



3.  It takes 1.5 -7 acres of land to grow the grains and or the grass to produce 100 pounds of poultry per year.

4.  It takes as little as .01 acres to produce the feed (algae) used to raise 100 pounds of tilapia fillets.  this is because one acre fertilised with 10 pounds of triple super phosphate will grow enough algae to produce 10,000 pounds of whole pennyfish which will yield 5,000 pounds of skinless boneless fillets.
     





                                   



AMOUNT       ANIMAL        NUMBER OF POUNDS                                                        BONELESS FILLET    PER YEAR                                 
  
LAND 1 ACRE........................43,560 SQUARE FEET IN AN ACRE
------------------------------------------------------------------                              
1.  It takes 3-12 acres of land to grow 100 pounds of  skinless BEEF .......130,680 SQ. FT.	
PORK.......108,900 SQ. FT 
POULTRY ..65,340 SQ. FT
pennyfish .......435 SQ. FT


The conclusion that a careful reader will come to is that the cultivation of tilapia, is REALLY a good thing, because of the amount of protein that can be produced by the farmer, which is 10,000 pounds of whole fish per acre where as all of the other choices require at least 150 times more land to produce the same live weight of animals.

An acre of land will grow enough algae to grow 10,000 pounds of whole tilapia per year/
All other tilapia can be produced at the same ratio if algae per pound of live fish.
If the farmer is growing tilapia nilotica or any of its form will get at most 3,200 pounds of skinless boneless fillet, where as a pennyfish grower will produce 5,000 pounds. in the same growing area.

Wait!  it still gets better: the cost per pound of fillet produced each year will only be $1.00 FOR PENNYFISH compared with a cost of $3.00 per pound of skinless boneless fillet .
So
Pennyfish grow to 2,2 pounds each in 34 weeks at 85 degrees f. and yield 50% skinless boneless fillets.  That is 34 weeks from 52 weeks in a year is a time ratio of 34/52 which means the pennyfish farmer is starting a second crop where the aurea grower is still waiting the 43 weeks it takes to get the aurea to the same harvest weight of 2.2 pounds each. 

If this ratio is converted to days then the pennyfish crop takes 238 days and the aurea farmer is taking 301 days so the pennyfish tilapia grower has produced his 500 pounds of fillet in 238
days whereas the aurea farmer take 301 days to get 310 pounds of
skinless boneless fillets.

The pennyfish produce 2.1 pounds per day (IN THE SAME SPACE AND THE SAME AMOUNT OF FEED.,) while the t. nilotica is only producing one pound per day of skinless boneless fillets.

So on a year round operation you can grow 60% more for each dollar spent.
   NILE                                                         PENNYFISH
$0.02  SORTING           .........                                 $ .02    $0.02 ..CHILLING..... $.05                        CHILLING..... $.05

$0.60 ..PROSSESING                           PROSSESING ......$30                
$0.90 ....  feed.                                  feed..............$0.30
$0.10 .......packing                                                     packing$.10 $ 0.30 ..................cage or tank cost per year.......................$0.10
Estimated TOTAl cost to grow... nilotica....$1.04 per pound of fillet Estimated TOTAl cost to grow... pennyfish.$0.77 per pound of fillet

The space, labor and feed all cost three times more for nilotica than for pennyfish which is what makes the nilotica so much less profitable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WHAT ARE TILAPIA TO OUR EARTH?</p>
<p>You be the judge:  <br />
______________________________________________</p>
<p>Is TILAPIA culture a viable choice that can help everyone to live happier, healthier and better lives?,  </p>
<p>here are some of the things tilapia can make possible.<br />
______________________________________________<br />
1.   TILAPIA CAN ABOLISH WORLD HUNGER.  TILAPIA CAN FEED ALL THE HUNGRY CHILDREN. To A hungry child Tilapia CAN RESCUE THEN FROM THE PAIN OF HUNGER AND MALNUTRITION.  TILAPIA CAN PROVIDE a cure for his or here need for a balanced healthy meal. </p>
<p>Tilapia can provide a nutritious meal with a well balanced  proteins that has all (100%) of the amino acids and minerals needed to grow our children into  happy well balanced adults. </p>
<p>100 grams of a tilapia fillet provides 100% of the daily needs for protein , vitamins, and minerals which will supply enough protein for normal development of the body and CREATE a sense of well being and happiness that only a nutritious diet can create.  </p>
<p>2. TILAPIA ARE THE IDEAL CROP.<br />
To a fish farmer  tilapia provides a fish that can produce more protein per acre than any other crop (animal or vegetable) in the world FOR LESS MONEY.  </p>
<p>3.  TILAPIA ARE INCREDIBLE ENERGY SAVERS; Tilapia can lower the energy cost of growing food. Tilapia can be grown using less energy, (human energy or electrical or mechanical) per pound of edible protein than any other crop (plant or animal) in the world and for less total cost.<br />
.<br />
4.  TILAPIA IS A SUPER HERO TO a hungry and ecologically bankrupt world  tilapia can provide crops that can be affordably be grown in any climate in the world and can replace the overfished and exhausted oceans and allow the reforestation of most of our planet.  </p>
<p>5. TILAPIA CAN CREATE WORLD PEACE: BY PREVENTING  WARS OVER THE AVAILABILITY OF FOOD AND LAND.  provide the affordable nutrition to be able to lower the tensions between people who are competing for the usable land create for the first time a happy and peaceful world.</p>
<p>6. Tilapia is now, this year become the fastest growing segment of the aquaculture industry and the aquaculture industry now as of this year delivering over half of the fish available as food.</p>
<p>7. TILAPIA IS going to become the most extensively grown fish in the world within the next ten years and will produce more revenue than all of the other species of fish put together.</p>
<p>In terms of revenue in U.S. dollars this will be over 10 billion dollars a year.</p>
<p>TILAPIA makes it possible to:</p>
<p>1.  Find World peace. By making possible the economical production of nutritionally complete food which will help feed the hungry.</p>
<p>2.  Feeding the hungry will help people to grow from happy children to happy,  nutritionally well balanced, psychologically balanced content adults that have have a feeling of well being that only a good diet can create.</p>
<p>TILAPIA WILL CREATE A BETTER ENVIRONMENT by reducing the cultivated land now needed to produce beef, pork, and poultry by 95 percent or more which will reduce the demolition of world forest to make room needed to make good pasture land and produce the grain crops now used for animal feed.  </p>
<p>TILAPIA will  reduce global warming by increasing the total number of trees and foliage which will allow 95% more co2 removal and conversion into carbohydrates</p>
<p>This replacement of the hundreds and thousands of acres of land needed to grow animals feeding on grasses and grains with a few square feet of water covered land needed to grow the same weight of meat.  These few square feet of water will feed and grow the  same quantity of tilapia on a tiny fraction of the space. and will free up 98% of the land now in use for the purpose of raising beef, and allow us to stop stripping out our forest to create new land suitable for raising beef, pork. and poultry.</p>
<p>Some numbers to contemplate:  The numbers are approximations based on information fro specialist in each area AND ARE BASED ON THE CONVERSION RATES OF EACH ANIMAL AND THE ACREAGE REQUIRED TO CULTIVATE THESE FEEDS</p>
<p>1.  IT TAKES FROM 3-12 ACRES OF LAND TO GROW THE FEED AND PRODUCE THE GRAINS AND OR GROW THE GRASS TO PRODUCE 100 POUNDS OF BEEF PER YEAR.<br />
      <br />
2.  IT TAKES 2.5 -10 ACRES OF LAND TO PRODUCE THE GRAINS AND OR GROW THE GRASS TO PRODUCE 100 POUNDS OF PORK PER YEAR.</p>
<p>3.  It takes 1.5 -7 acres of land to grow the grains and or the grass to produce 100 pounds of poultry per year.</p>
<p>4.  It takes as little as .01 acres to produce the feed (algae) used to raise 100 pounds of tilapia fillets.  this is because one acre fertilised with 10 pounds of triple super phosphate will grow enough algae to produce 10,000 pounds of whole pennyfish which will yield 5,000 pounds of skinless boneless fillets.<br />
     </p>
<p>                                   </p>
<p>AMOUNT       ANIMAL        NUMBER OF POUNDS                                                        BONELESS FILLET    PER YEAR                                 <br />
  <br />
LAND 1 ACRE&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;43,560 SQUARE FEET IN AN ACRE<br />
&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;                              <br />
1.  It takes 3-12 acres of land to grow 100 pounds of  skinless BEEF &#8230;&#8230;.130,680 SQ. FT.<br />
PORK&#8230;&#8230;.108,900 SQ. FT<br />
POULTRY ..65,340 SQ. FT<br />
pennyfish &#8230;&#8230;.435 SQ. FT</p>
<p>The conclusion that a careful reader will come to is that the cultivation of tilapia, is REALLY a good thing, because of the amount of protein that can be produced by the farmer, which is 10,000 pounds of whole fish per acre where as all of the other choices require at least 150 times more land to produce the same live weight of animals.</p>
<p>An acre of land will grow enough algae to grow 10,000 pounds of whole tilapia per year/<br />
All other tilapia can be produced at the same ratio if algae per pound of live fish.<br />
If the farmer is growing tilapia nilotica or any of its form will get at most 3,200 pounds of skinless boneless fillet, where as a pennyfish grower will produce 5,000 pounds. in the same growing area.</p>
<p>Wait!  it still gets better: the cost per pound of fillet produced each year will only be $1.00 FOR PENNYFISH compared with a cost of $3.00 per pound of skinless boneless fillet .<br />
So<br />
Pennyfish grow to 2,2 pounds each in 34 weeks at 85 degrees f. and yield 50% skinless boneless fillets.  That is 34 weeks from 52 weeks in a year is a time ratio of 34/52 which means the pennyfish farmer is starting a second crop where the aurea grower is still waiting the 43 weeks it takes to get the aurea to the same harvest weight of 2.2 pounds each. </p>
<p>If this ratio is converted to days then the pennyfish crop takes 238 days and the aurea farmer is taking 301 days so the pennyfish tilapia grower has produced his 500 pounds of fillet in 238<br />
days whereas the aurea farmer take 301 days to get 310 pounds of<br />
skinless boneless fillets.</p>
<p>The pennyfish produce 2.1 pounds per day (IN THE SAME SPACE AND THE SAME AMOUNT OF FEED.,) while the t. nilotica is only producing one pound per day of skinless boneless fillets.</p>
<p>So on a year round operation you can grow 60% more for each dollar spent.<br />
   NILE                                                         PENNYFISH<br />
$0.02  SORTING           &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;                                 $ .02    $0.02 ..CHILLING&#8230;.. $.05                        CHILLING&#8230;.. $.05</p>
<p>$0.60 ..PROSSESING                           PROSSESING &#8230;&#8230;$30<br />
$0.90 &#8230;.  feed.                                  feed&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..$0.30<br />
$0.10 &#8230;&#8230;.packing                                                     packing$.10 $ 0.30 &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;cage or tank cost per year&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..$0.10<br />
Estimated TOTAl cost to grow&#8230; nilotica&#8230;.$1.04 per pound of fillet Estimated TOTAl cost to grow&#8230; pennyfish.$0.77 per pound of fillet</p>
<p>The space, labor and feed all cost three times more for nilotica than for pennyfish which is what makes the nilotica so much less profitable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Senate study on nuke power: RP still long way off by Hitech</title>
		<link>http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/2009/10/27/senate-study-on-nuke-power-rp-still-long-way-off/#comment-25894</link>
		<dc:creator>Hitech</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 01:08:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/?p=293#comment-25894</guid>
		<description>We dont want to deny, suppress or deprive Filipinos of Nuclear technology...at least we must learn it... nukes are already in medicine, various industries, ships, satellites, etc.. soon it may be on cars. It would be a big shame if our country and people are ignorant of this technology.
Dont be like the early church who condemned Galileo because he said the earth is round and revolves around the sun!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We dont want to deny, suppress or deprive Filipinos of Nuclear technology&#8230;at least we must learn it&#8230; nukes are already in medicine, various industries, ships, satellites, etc.. soon it may be on cars. It would be a big shame if our country and people are ignorant of this technology.<br />
Dont be like the early church who condemned Galileo because he said the earth is round and revolves around the sun!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Senate study on nuke power: RP still long way off by cpulimit</title>
		<link>http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/2009/10/27/senate-study-on-nuke-power-rp-still-long-way-off/#comment-25887</link>
		<dc:creator>cpulimit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 15:00:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.inquirer.net/insidescience/?p=293#comment-25887</guid>
		<description>@sage:

is that the generation cost? or the total per kwh cost charged on consumers?  You're missing the fact that there are higher costs of operation in Canada.  Taxes are higher, distribution costs are higher (canada has a much larger land-mass), wages and salaries are higher...

You can't make a direct apples to oranges comparison involving costs where canada and the philippines are concerned.  

It is a fact however, that where per unit mass of fuel is concerned, nuke just wins out by far over coal and oil in terms of power production.  Nobody is disputing the average costs.  What's in question is the whether the country has the necessary prerequisites for the safe and sustainable adoption of nuclear power.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@sage:</p>
<p>is that the generation cost? or the total per kwh cost charged on consumers?  You&#8217;re missing the fact that there are higher costs of operation in Canada.  Taxes are higher, distribution costs are higher (canada has a much larger land-mass), wages and salaries are higher&#8230;</p>
<p>You can&#8217;t make a direct apples to oranges comparison involving costs where canada and the philippines are concerned.  </p>
<p>It is a fact however, that where per unit mass of fuel is concerned, nuke just wins out by far over coal and oil in terms of power production.  Nobody is disputing the average costs.  What&#8217;s in question is the whether the country has the necessary prerequisites for the safe and sustainable adoption of nuclear power.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
