|
|
KnewEyes
Joined: 23 Apr 2001
Posts: 667
Location: under those cloud-like things |
WATER at top of 'To Do' list for Big Guys
 Mon Mar 11, 2002 4:23 pm
|
 |
|
GE says it will buy water firm
Wednesday, February 13, 2002
Bloomberg News
By Brett Chase
Fairfield — General Electric Co., the largest company by market value, agreed to buy Hercules Inc.'s industrial water-treatment business for $1.8 billion in cash, expanding GE's specialty-materials lines.
Adding the BetzDearborn unit will give GE the second-biggest water-treatment company with about $1 billion in revenue and a sales force of 2,000. The offer continues Chief Executive Officer Jeff Immelt's goal of pursuing acquisitions of businesses with as much as $100 billion in revenue to stem a decline in sales.
The sale is part of Hercules's plan to sell assets, reduce debt and boost the shares under pressure from its largest investor, Samuel Heyman. Hercules bought BetzDearborn for $3.1 billion in 1998. Debt and slowing sales in the water-treatment business have been a drag on earnings for Hercules, which will keep a third of BetzDearborn, its paper-chemicals business.
"What (Hercules) paid for it and what it's worth today are two different things," said David Begleiter, an analyst with ABN Amro Inc., who has an "add" rating on the shares and doesn't own them. "Eventually (Hercules) will all be liquidated. It will all be sold. This solves near-term liquidity pressures."
Chemical maker Hercules, based in Wilmington, Del., expects after-tax proceeds of about $1.67 billion, which will be used to pay down debt, the company said.
Begleiter estimated Hercules's debt at $2.83 billion at the end of 2001. What Hercules is getting for BetzDearborn is about the best it could have expected, the analyst said.
BetzDearborn is the second-largest maker of chemicals used to remove pollutants from water that flows out of refineries, manufacturing plants and power generators and helps prevent corrosion from water that flows into them. Suez SA in France is the largest company in this business, Begleiter said.
GE said it can take products, such as corrosion detection equipment developed at its other businesses such as power-systems, and sell it to BetzDearborn customers.
GE will instantly give BetzDearborn name recognition and more customers than the business had before, in part because of a customer base that already uses water treatment chemicals.
The chemicals can also be used at GE's research and development centers, GE said.
Shares of Hercules, the largest maker of papermaking chemicals, rose 62 cents, or 5.8 percent, to $11.17, after rising 12 percent yesterday. GE shares fell 30 cents, or less than 1 percent, to $37.50.
Materials Lines
The BetzDearborn unit will be the fifth business for Wilton, Connecticut-based GE Specialty Materials, said GE spokeswoman Milissa Rocker. The subsidiary also sells industrial diamonds, fused quartz, silicones and polymer additives used in industries that include oil drilling, construction and telecommunications.
GE split the specialty-materials unit off from its plastics unit in May 2001, in part because it expected to add the chemicals businesses of Honeywell International Inc. That purchase was blocked by European regulators.
Acquisitions may help Immelt stem a decline in sales over the past three quarters. Fourth-quarter profit rose 9.7 percent because Immelt cut costs and GE got more revenue from service contracts, which have higher margins than other products, analysts have said.
General Electric is a maker of aircraft engines and light bulbs, parent of NBC broadcasting and owner of the GE Capital financing business.
Hercules put itself up for sale in 2000 under pressure from Heyman, chairman of International Specialty Products Inc. Heyman's company owns 10 percent of Hercules. Heyman, now a Hercules director, has continued to press the chemical maker to sell itself. Heyman declined to comment through a spokesman.
The transaction will close in early 2002, both companies said.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http://www.rense.com/general21/mex.htm
Monsanto Buying Water Monopolies
In Mexico, India, Etc.
From Jane Jones
jane@npwa.freeserve.co.uk
From Betty Martini of Mission Possible
3-11-2
Over the past few years, Monsanto, a chemical firm, has positioned itself as an agricultural company through control over seed - the first link in the food chain. Monsanto now wants to control water, the very basis of life. In 1996, Monsanto bought the biotechnology assets of Agracetus, a subsidiary of W. R. Grace, for $150 million and Calgene, a California-based plant biotechnology company for $340 million. In 1997, Monsanto acquired Holden seeds, the Brazilian seed company, Sementes Agrocerus and Asgrow. In 1998, it purchased Cargill's seed operations for $1.4 billion and bought Delta and Pine land for $1.82 billion and Dekalb for $2.3 billion. In India, Monsanto has bought MAHYCO, Maharashtra Hybrid Company, EID Parry and Rallis. Mr. Jack Kennedy of Monsanto has said, "we propose to penetrate the Indian agricultural sector in a big way. MAHYCO is a good vehicle." According to Mr. Robert Farley of Monsanto, "what you are seeing is not just a consolidation of seed companies, it's really a consolidation of the entire food chain. Since water is as central to food production as seed is, and without water life is not possible, Monsanto is NOW TRYING TO ESTABLISH ITS CONTROL OVER WATER. During 1999, Monsanto plans to launch a new water business, starting with India and Mexico since both these countries are facing water shortages."
|
| |
|
|
BOB B
Joined: 19 Jan 2002
Posts: 307
Location: LINDEN ,TEXAS,CASS |
|
Mon Apr 01, 2002 5:11 pm
|
|
|
nEW EYES, THIS POST IS ONE OF THE MOST significant here, why nobody has replied is beyond my comprehension.Living in Texas like I do, I fully realize how important usable water is.Sources are literally being sucked dry, by the time most rivers reach the sea by now, thier waters are depleted or polluted.The black water syndrome in floriduh is a warning ,clean up your act or die like the pigs you are(we as the human race) |
| |
|
|
KnewEyes
Joined: 23 Apr 2001
Posts: 667
Location: under those cloud-like things |
|
Tue Apr 02, 2002 4:51 am
|
|
|
Yes Bob, I agree wholeheartedly that this is "one of those things" that should be seriously looked at, while they have our heads snapping in all kinds of directions, keeping us off guard. This is the major issue. Water is the biggie now. I don't watch TV, but I bet you dont hear much about the drought,not as much as you should be. Soon they will turn around and say "Well hey,, we "hinted" that there was a "problem" with the water supplies, and, sorry,,, we ran out of it all.... last night".
They are gonna hit you out of the blue with this one,,, more cash in it that way. I have been telling my friends who are still stubborn enough to stay in the market, to invest in water, for over a year now. Should have gotten it while the prices were low, and nobody suspected yet. Buttttttt, you know how that goes, and all I can say is, well, I tried to warn you. |
| |
|
|
KnewEyes
Joined: 23 Apr 2001
Posts: 667
Location: under those cloud-like things |
|
Tue Apr 02, 2002 5:15 am
|
|
|
Oh yeah, by the way,, where did I read that they are sucking tankers full of water from the Great Lakes and shipping it to Saudi? Where is all the water going that is being sucked up in these "trails"? Crazy as it sounds, here is what I think. I think they are making it rain where they want to , and where they want it to rain, is directly over an area, thats been gridded out just below the surface, and they are collecting all the the water in underground caverns in cisterns. Maybe the crazy sun is evaporating alot of the earths water,,, gotta get it off of the surface, protect it, and sell it for all its worth,,, and that's your life Buddy.
A link on water distilling: http://levity.com/alchemy/jfren_ar.html |
| |
|
|
Lulu
Joined: 22 Dec 2000
Posts: 2501
Location: right here |
|
Tue Apr 02, 2002 5:24 am
|
|
|
Oh yeah, by the way,, where did I read that they are sucking tankers full of water from the Great Lakes and shipping it to Saudi?
Yikes, never heard about this KnewEyes! Heard that Lake Erie is highly polluted though and Lake Ontario isn't too far behind. |
| |
|
|
KnewEyes
Joined: 23 Apr 2001
Posts: 667
Location: under those cloud-like things |
|
Tue Apr 02, 2002 8:26 pm
|
|
|
Now that I think about it, it said it was Lake Michigan this was happening at. |
| |
|
|
Dan Rockwell
Joined: 10 Dec 2001
Posts: 1988
Location: Stamford, CT, USA |
|
Wed Apr 03, 2002 8:18 am
|
|
|
Here's another little report for this thread from December of 2001.
Private industry's gold rush on for water rights
By JOAN LOWY
Scripps Howard News Service
December 26, 2001- Water will be to the 21st century what oil was to the last - vast fortunes will be made by controlling it and nations will go to war to preserve access to it.In a world in which fresh water is increasingly scarce, that axiom is being taken to heart in the boardrooms of some of the globe's most powerful corporations.
In nearly every corner of the planet, international water conglomerates are vying to sign operating contracts, make deals, buy rights and acquire local water supply and treatment companies. It's a worldwide water rush.
Given that less than 1 percent of the Earth's water is drinkable, the corporate betting is that the price of water can only go up. After all, fresh water is a finite resource for which there is no substitute.
Estimates of the value of the annual global market for water range from $300 billion to $800 billion. Already, an estimated 300 million to 400 million people receive water through privately owned or operated water companies.And the biggest, most underexploited water market on Earth is the United States, with estimated annual revenues of $90 billion. About 86 percent of the municipal water in the U.S. is delivered by public utilities, while only 13 percent is delivered by private companies. But water companies are swiftly expanding their foothold in the U.S. through operations and maintenance contracts for water delivery and wastewater treatment services or by assuming temporary or permanent ownership of water utilities.
By comparison, 85 percent of French customers get their water through privately owned or operated water utilities. In the United Kingdom, nearly all water services have been privatized for more than a decade.
The two biggest global water companies are French - Vivendi Environment and Suez Lyonnaise des Eaux, with more than 100 million customers each. Over the past three years, both companies have made a major push to establish themselves in the U.S. market by acquiring American water companies. In 1999, Vivendi purchased U.S. Filter Corp. for $6 billion in cash. The same year, Suez - which built the Suez Canal in the 1860s - paid $1 billion for United Water Resources and bought two major U.S. water treatment chemical producers, Nalco and Calgon, for $4.5 billion.
The largest private water supplier in the U.S. is the giant German utility RWE, with 14 million customers. In September, RWE announced its purchase of American Water Works, headquartered in Voorhees, N.J., in a $7.6 billion deal. American, which itself had been gobbling up smaller water companies, was the largest publicly traded U.S. water company, supplying water and wastewater service to 1,400 communities in 23 states. RWE now has more than 50 million customers worldwide.The only U.S. company that has been a major player in the global water market is Enron, the Houston-based energy trading company. Since filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in October, Enron has been trying to sell its water subsidiary, Azurix, in an effort to raise cash. One of the companies that have expressed interest in buying Azurix is RWE.
Private water companies contend they can provide water services more cheaply and efficiently than governments or public utilities. Their services will be essential, the industry argues, if the world hopes to stave off the impending global freh-water crisis that's forecast to occur as water-scarce regions scramble to find new supplies to quench their growing populations.
Presently, at least 50 percent of municipal water is wasted through leakage in developing nations, according to the World Bank. In the Philippine capital of Manila, for example, 57 percent of municipal water is lost to theft and leakage. More than two-thirds of irrigation water never reaches crops in the Third World because of inefficiencies. The World Health Organization estimates that more than 1 billion people currently do not have access to clean water.In the United.
States, many cities are faced with modernizing an aging water infrastructure of pipes and pumps that dates back to the early and mid-20th century. New York City's leaky Delaware Aqueduct has been losing as much as 1 billion gallons a month.
At the same time, water utilities are being asked to meet tighter environmental regulations to protect water quality. The cost to repair, replace and improve the nation's water infrastructure is estimated at nearly $1 trillion over the next 20 years, creating a looming economic crisis for many cities.Over the past few years, dozens of cities ranging from Atlanta to Indianapolis to Jersey City have signed long-term contracts with large water companies to operate and maintain their water services or even to assume ownership of local water utilities on a temporary but long-term basis.
One of the attractions of privatizing water services is that private companies are often willing to make tough decisions that elected officials would rather forgo, such as raising water rates or cutting workforces. "There is a price to be paid for clean, safe water,'' said Kathy Shandling, vice president of International Private Water Association, an industry trade group. "This is going on in this country now, where people who are suddenly getting water bills who didn't get them before are saying, 'Water is an act of God. I shouldn't have to pay for it.'
"At a March 1998 conference in Paris, the United Nations' Economic and Social Council Commission on Sustainable Development proposed that governments turn to "large multinational companies'' for capital and expertise and called for an "open market'' in water rights and an enlarged role for the private sector.
But some environmentalists and labor and human rights advocates sharply question the wisdom of giving multinational corporations control over a critical resource. They doubt that private companies will ensure that water is affordable for the poor, that water quality is protected and that enough water is left behind for the environment. Access to clean fresh water should be treated as a human right, they argue, rather than a commodity bought by the highest bidder.Other environmentalists, despairing that governments are up to the challenge of dealing with water scarcity, are taking a middle-ground approach. "We do not think the trend toward globalization and privatization of fresh water can be stopped, nor do we think it has to be,'' global water expert Peter Gleick writes in a report on privatization to be released next month by the Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment and Security, located in Oakland, Calif.
"In some places and in some circumstances, letting private companies take responsibility for some aspects of water provision or management may help millions of poor receive access to basic water services,'' the report says. "However, there is little doubt that the headlong rush toward private markets has failed to address some of the most important issues and concerns about water. In particular, water has vital social, cultural and ecological roles to play that cannot be protected by purely market forces.''
There have been striking examples of private sector failures. When Cochabama, Bolivia, turned over its water system to a private consortium led by engineering giant Bechtel, water prices increased so dramatically that riots broke out. A 17-year-old boy was killed and thousands were injured in clashes with police. Water services were returned to public control.After water was privatized in Puerto Rico in 1995, poor communities complained that they had no water while water giant Vivendi supplied tourist resorts and U.S. military bases with as much water as they could consume.In Argentina, when the French company Generale de Eaux got a contract for water delivery, prices doubled and quality deteriorated. The company was forced to pull out when people refused to pay their bills.
"We think people ought to pay a fair price for a resource that is scarce and valuable,'' said Jane Kelley of the U.S. consumer group Public Citizen, "but we don't want to see them paying amounts that encourage significant profit margins and CEO salaries that are astronomical.'' http://www.knoxstudio.com/shns/story.cfm?pk=WATERCOMPANIES-12-26-01&cat=AN
[Edited 2 times, lastly by Dan Rockwell on 04-03-2002] |
| |
|
|
afraidofsunlight
Joined: 14 Jan 2001
Posts: 98
Location: Balto.,Md. |
|
Wed Apr 03, 2002 12:20 pm
|
|
|
Hi,
Here in Merryland the govt. has grabed some land not far from me and they plan on building underground water storage tank's.First time I've heard of such a thing for these part's.
Odd,after all these year's,suddenly they must build underground water tank's.
Gettin' ready.......... |
| |
|
|
Dan Rockwell
Joined: 10 Dec 2001
Posts: 1988
Location: Stamford, CT, USA |
|
Thu Apr 04, 2002 4:03 am
|
|
|
Hello afraidofsunlight.
They haven't started building any water tanks here yet, but a few years ago they did increase the size of one of the reservoirs. It's hard to tell what's going on there now. The last time I heard, it was being patrolled by the National Guard and it's about a 10th of a mile hike through the woods to reach it. The extra security there is a little odd because the water from the reservoir travels almost 8 miles down river to the water plant with a number of bridges that cross it before it gets there. |
| |
|
|
Oregon
Joined: 04 Apr 2002
Posts: 24
|
|
Sun Apr 07, 2002 4:13 pm
|
|
|
There is no question that water is a precious commodity on this planet.
It always HAS been.
Many civilizations have not treated their water supply with much understanding...probably because of great abundance of potable water.Others have done better in arid regions.
I spend alot of time hiking remote wilderness, often bivvy camping for days.
One gets a new appreciation for potable water when he cannot just turn the faucett on and have it flow..
There is no question that water will become more expensive for consumers, industry process, agriculture and power production as droughts lengthen in duration or become more widespread.
Companies will position themselves to capitalize on this with technologies & acquisitions just as the petroleum industry saw it's huge growth over 100 years ago..
Now, aside from treating water sources with far greater care than in the past,the questions we can ask are these:
IS the climate being manipulated by H.A.A.R.P. and chemspraying of the atmosphere etc to create shortages for economic gain, political control, genocides?
( BAD USES by BAD MEN for BAD REASONS)
Or are these things tools that are being developed/used to control moisture precipitation and send it where it will be of greatest value?
(Attempt at GOOD USES by SINCERE MEN with unforseen or unintended consequences)
OR MAYBE BOTH?
Yesterday (SAT)here near Portland Oregon, the skies were heavily cloud-covered all day long as numerous fronts blew through..
THEY HAD EVERY APPEARANCE OF RAIN CLOUDS.
Normally, we might have received constant drizzly rain to the tune of 1/4" or so as the fronts moved thru.
I doubt we received more than 1/100" tho..
Late in the afternoon, there were a few cloud breaks which showed bright blue sky..
The cloud breaks were not long, maybe an hour, before the next part of the fronts again brought the low hanging ominous clouds..
I saw only one chemtrail, which was apparently laid down above the clouds..It was at least two miles wide by the time I saw it( and photographed it) and went from north to south horizon.
I think it is important to try to discern between those who might capitalize on droughts, storms, natural disasters, wars by providing goods, services etc and those who ENGINEER the disasters so they can be first in position to take the power and make the money.
Huge difference between a construction company that might make huge profits rebuilding after a fire or natural disaster, and that company setting the fire so they can take their previously poised company and 'go to the rescue'..
Huge difference between a company supplying goods and munitions for their nation to use in fighting a legitimate war to protect the country and those companies who are fomenting wars behind the scenes so they can then capitalize on the miseries caused.
We must try to determine the difference, whether it's Monsanto, PG&E power,the Corp of Engineers with all their hydro electric power producing sites out west or what..
I have studied dendrochronology as an amateur for thirty years..The Pacific yew is a great tree to use, as it grows so slowly..A tree growing at 3000' elevation that is 15" in diameter has over 500 years captured in it's growth rings.
I have a small section of such a tree that I polished up for the children, to help them understand the longevity of some living things as compared to man.
In some places( FAR predating the industrial age) the growth rings are so close together that one must use a good magnifying glass and a sharp needle to count them..
This slow growth continued for over 100 years..a drought that far exceeded the lives of most single generations of men.
This planet has had BAD droughts and BAD wet weather many times before in it's history..
It is certain that they were not all 'man caused' even in the indirect sense..
Volcanic eruptions,sunspots,meteors..perhaps even a change in the dim past of the polar axis of the earth thru some cataclysm..
Keeping a balanced and objective perspective as we investigate will help us to get the truth and then best deal with it..jim |
| |
|
|
Lulu
Joined: 22 Dec 2000
Posts: 2501
Location: right here |
|
Sun Apr 07, 2002 6:15 pm
|
|
|
Yesterday (SAT)here near Portland Oregon, the skies were heavily cloud-covered all day long as numerous fronts blew through..
THEY HAD EVERY APPEARANCE OF RAIN CLOUDS.
Oregon, same thing here in Kelowna...the weather people called for rain, my body could feel the rain (up there), my nose could smell the rain (up there), but my eyes could see NO RAIN FALL!!! because none did. Not the first time nor the last. The sun is just attempting to come out now, and all chance of rain has passed once again.
|
| |
|
|
Oregon
Joined: 04 Apr 2002
Posts: 24
|
|
Sun Apr 07, 2002 10:40 pm
|
|
|
Lulu..Well, Third day of rain clouds rolling west to east from the Pacific over western Oregon, and just a drip and a drop of rain..
So, what is the purpose behind keeping moisture from falling where it naturally might?
Best I can tell, whatever is happening does not keep the moisture pent up in the clouds to drop rain or snow eastward either..It's as if the moisture is sucked out of the clouds..evaporated, dessicated..
What's your opinion about what is going on an what the purpose is?
I could maybe understand if the government or some other big brother entity was restraining normal moisture drop so it might fall in an area where it was more needed, but that does not seem to be the case..or it's not working in my very limited observations.
Considering how much money it would cost to put as many chemsprayewrs into the air across this nation alone as are being reported, just WHO could fund such an endeavor, and what is their agenda and hoped-for "payback" on that hige investment.?
IF those who are concerned about chemtrails are having difficulty funding a single aircraft with air sampling equipment to fly up and into a single obvious chemtrail, how in the world is this program to disperse chemtrails across so many major cities with numbers of flight approaching the numbers registered by the FAA for commercial aircraft being funded?
Bear with me, for I am not a highly educated man, nor a meteorologist, nor one who works for Boeing or McDonell Douglas or a commercial pilot or Air Force fly-boy..
I do have some decent observation powers, a sense in the spirit that something is going on and it's not right, and MANY unanswered questions.
I'm over 50 with MUCH experience in many areas of life tho,and not much given to hysteria or mass hypnosis either..
What is the consensus to date concerning chemtrails here on this forum..and what evidence has been gathered by reliable sources to go toward proving that their IS something sinister going on?..jim
|
| |
|
|
3T3L1
Joined: 08 Mar 2001
Posts: 1344
Location: Lubbock, Texas |
|
Sun Apr 07, 2002 11:11 pm
|
|
|
Jim, there are lots of us here, and there are lots of different opinions about chemtrails. Here are my thoughts:
I used to think that every big, fluffy trail in the sky was intentionally sprayed. Since I got a subscription to Flight Explorer, I've realized that I was overreacting. Many of the trails you see can be connected with regular commercial airline flights, and they are probably just a normal phenomenon. http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/fe.shtml
However, Thermit's Trail Report showed that some trails last a very long time, like four to eight hours. http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/report.shtml Satellite pictures show that some trails stay intact as they move across several states, and that they last longer than the cirrus clouds surrounding them.
A couple of months ago I did some internet research and learned that military and commercial pilots occasionally dump jet fuel in order to land safely in emergency situations. The dumped fuel looks very much like a conventional contrail, and certain components of it actually reach the ground. The FAA allows airlines to report such events on a voluntary basis, and the military keeps any dumping records it has to itself. We know there are at least 127 such incidents in a year; there may be many more, but the public has no way of getting that information. http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum14/HTML/000030.html
So what is happening in our skies? "Nothing," say the folks who believe that people from the government are here to help. "We're keeping an eye on it," says the chemtrail crowd. I wish I could give you a better answer.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by 3T3L1 on 04-07-2002] |
| |
|
|
Oregon
Joined: 04 Apr 2002
Posts: 24
|
|
Sun Apr 07, 2002 11:36 pm
|
|
|
Appreciate the response..Military fuel dumping in anticipation of an emergency landing absolutely cannot account for the chemtrails I have seen over Portland in just a year's time.
I also have observations of aircraft flying at very similar (apparent from the ground) altitudes and virtually the same time in the same section of overhead sky where one will leave a trail from horizon to horizon that lasts two to three hours and the other with a contrail that dissipates within minutes less than five miles astern of the jet's fligh makes me feel that either we are very much novices in our observational abilities, or that there are alot of chemtails being laid down.
Admittedly,from the ground, it can be impossible for one such as myself to ascertain whether the aircraft seen simultaneously in the same section of sky are at the same altitude.
Can a persistent contrail be left IF one aircraft is at 35000 feet and one following moments later whose contrail dissipates in five miles and one minute is at 33000 feet?
I don't know.I am a very trained observer, but not in the estimating of altitudes at such distances from the earth.
I have decent combat tech mil experience and law enforcement experience which have aided me in being a good reliable observer..
I am also a father of five and a life-long hunter and one who works with and manages people.., but the quantifying of what I am seeing/observing is difficult or impossible for me.
For those who might know, COULD a converted commercial aircraft or military aircraft even load up and carry sufficient aquaeous chemicals to lay down such a trail that might extend for 300 miles, horizon to horizon?
I have worked as smoke jumper and firefighter and ten thousand gallons of water, released and dumped over a wildfire from a low-flying doesn't go very far....jim
|
| |
|
|
3T3L1
Joined: 08 Mar 2001
Posts: 1344
Location: Lubbock, Texas |
|
Sun Apr 07, 2002 11:56 pm
|
|
|
I am a very trained observer, but not in the estimating of altitudes at such distances from the earth.
If the plane shows up on Flight Explorer, you will be given the exact altitude. If you need to estimate altitude, you're in luck. For the cost of one round of ammunition and two protractors you can build yourself a homemade clinometer and use it to make your estimate:
To make an inexpensive clinometer, take two clear plastic protractors and align them back-to-back. Attach them at both ends of the straightedge using doublesided sticky tape. Attach a weight to the hole in the center of the straightedge using thread or fishing line. Be sure the weight will swing freely when you insert a fingernail between the protractors. Re-number the protractor such that 90° is now 0°, 80° is now 10°, etc. You want the horizon to read as 0° and straight overhead to read as 90°.
To use the clinometer, insert your fingernail between the protractors, so that the weight swings freely. Sight along the straightedge, so that it points directly from your eye to a distinctive portion of the c-trail in question. Without changing the alignment, slide your fingernail out from between the protractors, and pinch them together on the fishing line. You can now read the elevation of that portion of the c-trail by looking at the position of the line on the degree scale of the protractors.
To measure the altitude of a trail, you will need the clinometer and a motor vehicle.
1. Pick out a distinctive feature of the trail and site in on it with the clinometer. Call this angle #1.
2. Record the exact mileage on your vehicle's odometer. Drive about 2-5 miles (in a straight line--no curves or turns) in the direction of the distinctive feature. When you reach a place where it's safe to take the second clinometer reading, record the exact mileage on your vehicle's odometer.
3. Measure the elevation of the distinctive feature at the second location and call it angle #2.
4. Put in a call to me and I will calculate the elevation of the trail for you. (Lots of math involved, but I have an Excel program, so I can just plug in the numbers.)
Further instructions: I am assuming you are driving directly toward the trail. If the distinctive feature of the trail is off at a slight angle from your direction of travel, use the clinometer as a protractor to measure that angle (call it angle #3) at your first location and measure it again (call it angle #4) at your second location. My Excel program can handle it.
I'm serious about having you call me. If you plan to do this, use the Message feature of this board and ask me for my phone number. If you'd rather have me send you a copy of the Excel calculation matrix, I can send it to you on a floppy. |
| |
|
|
 
|
|
 Goto page
1, 2 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat May 26, 2012 5:39 am
|
|
|
|
|
Login
