[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In a message dated 07/11/2008 18:22:02 GMT Standard Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > although I would like to move away from hydrocarbon > diesel, I have yet to be convinced that bio-diesel is better for the > environment over all. > > > > I agree. Many of the claims for greener living are based on emotional > rather > than practical reasons and many of the general perceptions don't bear > analysis when you look at the implementation of them.
I truly agree. Green is an ideal, trouble is sorting out the data from the *vast* amount of spin that interested parties add to it. The same can be said about so-called "free energy". There is no such thing as free energy, it's just an energy conversion - and take away some energy from a source and there is always a knock on result. e.g. It has been proved that wind farms cause massive turbulence and a loss of wind power, the result being that the land behind the wind farm (for quite some distance) experiences a warming of at least 0.8C - and this is to prevent "global warming". I known of several Professors that have written papers condemning both large wind and tide harnessing systems, calculating that the overall effect on the planet is a net negative benefit. Trouble is most people don't read scientific journals, and the press don't often report them. There is only one energy that can be a positive gain and that's nuclear - a modern plant will make much more energy than is used for its construction and decommissioning. Ron Jones Process Safety & Development Specialist Don't repeat history, unreported chemical lab/plant near misses at http://www.crhf.org.uk Only two things are certain: The universe and human stupidity; and I'm not certain about the universe. ~ Albert Einstein
