date:20021125


Hi Andrew,

I think that business case decisions are based on things like; people
employed, feedstock cost, chemicals cost, facility costs, equipment costs
and depreciation, etc.

It takes making up a business plan and proforma to find out at what level
of production and sales can be applied.  Here in California due to the
cost of living, a single producer (ie. one person) paying himself 45K/yr
(very low wages for area) would have to make 200-500g/d and sell the fuel
between $2.00 - $3.00 gal.  That is a rough estimate, but if you include
chemical, facility, local distribution, and tax issues, this is somewhat
in the ballpark. Someone please correct me if I am way off the mark.  If
the variables can be mucked with, ie. energy inputs, facilities costs,
feedstock cost, chemical costs, then there is some leaway.

Of course as the amount of fuel one produces/sells goes up == better
wages.  But then the economies of scale come into play.  At some point
though there will be a jump in things like energy inputs, amount of people
needed to process, more equipment capital, etc.

When I have run the numbers lightly there seems to be some magical numbers
such as above 500g/d more people and equipment are needed to keep
production sustainable.  Then again @ ~1000g/d the same thing happens.  
So I am wondering if there is a formula like Moore's Law coming into play
when yields are doubled.  I'm sure a proforma would point this out fairly
easy.  Has anyone done any work on coming up with a BD business formula
for inputs/employees/production/sales for small scale producers?

Todd has a very good understanding of a small scale processors needs when
it comes to this, so you might want to talk to him.  

James Slayden

On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Andrew Hoppin wrote:

 Hello again.  One charge that I have heard public policy folks levy at
 small
 producers is along the following lines:  Small producers can't make
 their
 production business really profitable, so they're not going to be able to
 contribute significantly to mass-market conversion from fossil fuels to
 biofuels... Therefore, since our policy goal is to  maximize the use of
 cleaner domestically produced fuels, when considering policy and public
 support for BD, we'll seek to support large producers first and
 foremost.
 
 I have also spoken with small producers who themselves say that they're
 not
 sure how they'd make a profit...
 
 So, I'd like to know have your thoughts, whether in agreement or in
 rebuttal, regarding whether there is truth in this assertion, and also
 regarding what the public policy relevance should or should not be if it
 were true.  And if it is not true, then what/who are the success stories
 in
 terms of profitable small-scale production and distribution?
 
 Thanks,
 
 Andrew Hoppin
 The Biofuel Business Development Project
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Biofuel-Business-Plan/
 Dedicated to Making An Immediate Impact
 On the Long-Range Future of Humanity
 
 N Space Labs, Inc.
 Vizualize Your Business
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 646.221.5602 (mobile)
 158 Lafayette St. 2nd Floor
 NY, NY 10013
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Andrew Hoppin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 3:34 PM
  To: biofuels-biz@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: big vs small: quality assurance
 
 
  Hi folks.  I'm learning a lot from the ongoing lively debate--
  thank you.
 
  Regarding the issue that has been at hand-- whether big producers
  deliver better quality and reliability than small producers or
  not, and whether any quality differences are cause for concern
  among potential consumers or not:  it seems to me that one way to
  nip this in the bud REGARDLESS of whether there are valid
  concerns or not would be to have a credible BD fuel quality
  testing service, perhaps with some public funding and perhaps
  with modest fees paid by producers, perhaps on a sliding-scale
  based on the size of their revenues.  If a producer wished to be
  certified that their fuel was top-notch, they could avail
  themselves of this service by sending fuel samples (each month?)
  and fleet managers, consumers, and anyone else who cares would
  have an objective answer to their quality concerns, whether or
  not those concerns are valid.  Has this ever been undertaken?
 
  If not, would such a service effectively serve the purpose I've
  outlined, and in what form (government, non-profit, or
  for-profit) would such a service be most effectively delivered?
 
  Andrew Hoppin
  The Biofuel Business Development Project
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Biofuel-Business-Plan/
  Dedicated to Making An Immediate Impact
  On the Long-Range Future of Humanity
  
  N Space Labs, Inc.
  Vizualize Your Business
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  646.221.5602 (mobile)
  158 Lafayette St. 2nd Floor
  NY, NY 10013
 
 
 
 Biofuels at Journey to Forever
 http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
 Biofuel at WebConX

[biofuels-biz] chrysler diesel and hybrid news

2002-11-25 Thread murdoch


http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/021125/autos_chrysler_1.html

Reuters
Chrysler to roll out diesel SUV, hybrid pickup
Monday November 25, 4:22 pm ET 
By Justin Hyde 


NEW YORK, Nov 25 (Reuters) - DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler arm
(NYSE:DCX - News; XETRA:DCXGn.DE - News) said on Monday it will roll
out a gasoline-electric hybrid pickup truck next year and a
diesel-powered sport utility vehicle in 2004, in a bid to test
consumers' willingness to pay for better fuel economy.
ADVERTISEMENT
 
 
But Chrysler said it had cancelled another hybrid vehicle that had
been planned for 2003 because it could not build a business case for
it. And Chrysler executives warned that hybrid- and diesel-powered
models would not be built in significant volume unless U.S. customers
accept their higher costs.

Chrysler President Dieter Zetsche said Chrysler would sell a Jeep
Liberty SUV powered by a Mercedes diesel engine in the second half of
2004 that will have up to 30 percent better fuel economy than a
gasoline-powered model.

Zetsche said Chrysler will build about 5,000 diesel Liberty models to
see how well American consumers accept diesels. Chrysler already sells
diesel-powered Jeeps in Europe, but has to tweak the Liberty slightly
to meet U.S. standards.

This diesel Liberty is an opportunity to test customer acceptance of
modern, clean-burning diesel technology, Zetsche said during a
conference in New York.

U.S. automakers, facing tougher government rules on fuel economy, have
been touting diesel engines as a way to improve efficiency, reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and cut U.S. dependence on imported oil.
While diesels get better fuel economy than gasoline engines, they also
produce more nitrous oxide, a component of smog, as well as
particulates that have been linked to lung disease.

In Europe, diesels account for roughly 40 percent of all new vehicle
sales, thanks to tax incentives and low-sulfur diesel fuel, which
allows automakers to better control emissions. The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency has ordered U.S. oil refiners to begin producing
low-sulfur diesel fuel in 2006, a regulation oil companies have been
fighting.

American automakers have also been loathe to roll out diesels in the
United States for fear of rejection by consumers who remember
Detroit's diesel experiments of the 1970s and 1980s, which were renown
for their noise, smell and lack of reliability.

Chrysler research found that only about 6 percent of buyers were
interested in diesels. Zetsche also said Chrysler would not be able to
raise the Liberty's prices to cover all the extra cost of the diesel.

Obviously, to change the image of diesels in the customer's mind is a
heroic challenge, and we don't know what is possible, Zetsche said.
We hope we'll have a positive surprise about the demand.

HYBRID SHUFFLE

Bernard Robertson, Chrysler's senior vice president of engineering
technology and regulatory affairs, said the company had cancelled a
hybrid vehicle slated to be built in 2003 that would have used
electric motors to provide all-wheel-drive.

Two years ago, Chrysler said it would offer its hybrid system as an
option on its Dodge Durango SUV that could provide a 20 percent boost
in fuel economy. But the Durango was delayed after testing found the
hybrid system did not perform as well as planned. While Chrysler
tested the system on other vehicles, Robertson said the fuel economy
and all-wheel-drive benefits were not enough to offset the extra cost.

We liked the idea, but the execution just got a bit more expensive
than we had intended, Robertson told Reuters.

To keep its pledge to build a hybrid in 2003, Chrysler accelerated the
Dodge Ram Contractor's Special hybrid pickup truck by a year. The Ram
hybrid uses a different system than the Durango, placing an electric
motor between the gasoline engine and the transmission. It also
features an electrical panel that drops down from the side of the
truck, allowing it to do double duty as a low-cost generator.

That model, and a similar proposal from General Motors Corp. (NYSE:GM
- News) ,have drawn the attention of the U.S. Army, which sees combat
versions of hybrid trucks helping to reduce its fuel demand. Chrysler
officials said while they had originally planned about 5,000 hybrid
Rams a year, an army contract could boost output substantially.

Ford Motor Co. (NYSE:F - News) is planning to introduce a hybrid
Escape SUV late next year and GM is planning on rolling out a hybrid
pickup in 2004. 


---

My opinions:

Nice to see Detroit bother to make more Diesel available to Joe
Consumer.  A little bit of cleaner-diesel or biodiesel and he might
really have something there.

As for the hybrid news, it would have been interesting to see
Chrysler's less conventional hybrid idea, just to see what would
happen, but it looks like higher efficiency was more difficult to
achieve than had been thought.  As for the conventional hybrid ideas,
obviously all three of the big three are

Re: [biofuels-biz] big vs small: quality assurance


Andrew,

Interesting that you mention this for when I did a search on ASTM testing
services here is what I got:

Searched the web for ASTM Testing Services.   Results 1 - 4 of about 6.  

I even modified the search and got worse results.  Someone had previously
sent a link for ~$700 ASTM testing which could be rolled into a business
cost.

The EPA only requires testing to be done on a per annum basis.  Please see
Girl Mark's previous posting on homebrew methods of quality testing.

James Slayden

On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Andrew Hoppin wrote:

 Hi folks.  I'm learning a lot from the ongoing lively debate-- thank you.
 
 Regarding the issue that has been at hand-- whether big producers deliver
 better quality and reliability than small producers or not, and whether
 any
 quality differences are cause for concern among potential consumers or
 not:
 it seems to me that one way to nip this in the bud REGARDLESS of whether
 there are valid concerns or not would be to have a credible BD fuel
 quality
 testing service, perhaps with some public funding and perhaps with modest
 fees paid by producers, perhaps on a sliding-scale based on the size of
 their revenues.  If a producer wished to be certified that their fuel
 was
 top-notch, they could avail themselves of this service by sending fuel
 samples (each month?) and fleet managers, consumers, and anyone else who
 cares would have an objective answer to their quality concerns, whether
 or
 not those concerns are valid.  Has this ever been undertaken?
 
 If not, would such a service effectively serve the purpose I've outlined,
 and in what form (government, non-profit, or for-profit) would such a
 service be most effectively delivered?
 
 Andrew Hoppin
 The Biofuel Business Development Project
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Biofuel-Business-Plan/
 Dedicated to Making An Immediate Impact
 On the Long-Range Future of Humanity
 
 N Space Labs, Inc.
 Vizualize Your Business
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 646.221.5602 (mobile)
 158 Lafayette St. 2nd Floor
 NY, NY 10013
 
 
 
 Biofuels at Journey to Forever
 http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
 Biofuel at WebConX
 http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm
 List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech:
 http://archive.nnytech.net/
 To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 
 
 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
 


Biofuels at Journey to Forever
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel at WebConX
http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm
List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech:
http://archive.nnytech.net/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [biofuels-biz] information on combustion of used frying oils


Here is a link to another manufacture:

http://www.econoheat.com/

They even have AC's

James Slayden

On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Appal Energy wrote:

 Frank,
 
 Take a look at www.cleanburn.com
 
 They're just a few hours from here in Pennsylvania. We ran
 samples of Ohio crude straight out of the ground, straight
 vegetable oil and biodiesel in one of their units (one of their
 distributor's units in Ohio actually), all with fine results
 relative to the functional ability of the fuels in comparison to
 the waste motor oils they are designed to use.
 
 Granted, that's not the same as emissions results. However, these
 units are approved by the US EPA, which means that they have to
 have conducted some emissions testing using waste motor oil.
 
 Certainly WVO would be less toxic out of the chute than motor
 oil, or at least one would tend to believe so.
 
 Take a look. Perhaps e-mail them. If you need someone to make a
 call, it could be done from our end relatively easily.
 
 Todd Swearingen
 Appal Energy
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Frank Bergmans [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: biofuels-biz@yahoogroups.com
 Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 9:47 AM
 Subject: [biofuels-biz] information on combustion of used frying
 oils
 
 
  Hi everyone,
 
  At this moment I am writing a fact sheet about the use of used
 Waste Vegetable Oil from restaurants. Since the ban on animal
 feed WVO needs an alternative outlet. Because the Dutch
 government is against tax redemption on bio diesel the most
 relevant outlet at this moment is heating fuel in boilers to heat
 for example glass houses. The product board helps the Dutch
 collectors of WVO to maintain their quite successful collecting
 system. Goal is to prevent WVO to disappear into a general waste
 stream.
 
  Before issuing a permit, the government wants to know more
 about the possible emissions to the air. Problem is that I don't
 have this information. I have been searching the internet for
 reports on experimental data on combustion of WVO in boilers. But
 unfortunately I didn't find anything useful. Can anyone help me?
 
  Frank Bergmans
 
 
 
 
 
   Yahoo! Groups
 Sponsor -~--
  Share the magic of Harry Potter with Yahoo! Messenger
  http://us.click.yahoo.com/4Q_cgB/JmBFAA/46VHAA/9bTolB/TM
  ---
 --~-
 
  Biofuels at Journey to Forever
  http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
  Biofuel at WebConX
  http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm
  List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech:
  http://archive.nnytech.net/
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 
 
  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 
 
 
 
 
 Biofuels at Journey to Forever
 http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
 Biofuel at WebConX
 http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm
 List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech:
 http://archive.nnytech.net/
 To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 
 
 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
 


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--
·FREE Health Insurance Quotes-eHealthInsurance.com
http://us.click.yahoo.com/1.voSB/RnFFAA/46VHAA/9bTolB/TM
-~-

Biofuels at Journey to Forever
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel at WebConX
http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm
List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech:
http://archive.nnytech.net/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[biofuels-biz] Fwd: Re: pH questions, somewhat urgent


Hi all,

Keith asked me offlist for directions for the acid number determination.
Here's the info, forwarded from an offlist exchange I had with Todd
Swearingen a few weeks ago, about this and other quality standards stuff...
Mark


Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 00:55:01 -0400


Maria,

Looking at the ASTM standards as the benchmark for home brewers,
most of the standards can be met simply by preparing and washing
the fuel well.

A) Flash point (130*C minimum) will be relatively consistent for
all feedstocks, presuming reaction completion and the alcohol is
removed. If the alcohol is distilled or washed out this is a
non-problem.
B) Water and sediment (0.050 maximum % by volume) are
non-problems with adequate settling times, filtration and fuel
reheating to ~120*F. (I don't suggest adding any acid to clear
fuel haze, as this will increase the acid number.)
C) Free glycerin (0.020 maximum % by mass)  is removed and is a
non-problem with adequate settling time and washing.
D) Total glycerin (0.240 maximum % by mass) is reduced to nil and
is a non-problem if sufficient reaction time is permitted (mono-,
di- and tri-glycerides are all cracked), sufficient caustic is
used (not excess, as this can raise the acid number by cracking
methyl esters back to FFAs) and sufficient settling time is
given.
E) Kinematic viscosity (1.9 - 6.0 mm2/s at 40*C) will also be a
non-problem if the total glycerin content (Items C  D) has been
resolved and the acid number is not elevated by imprudent use of
caustic, causing back cracking of esters to FFAs (higher
viscosity than B-100).
F) Sulfated ash (0.020 % by mass) is a non-controllable when
using straight base, as the only sulfur in the equation is
derived from the parent feedstock. When using an acid/base
process the sulfuric acid used in the esterification step is
neutralized by the base. The resulting salt is soluble in the
water wash and should be a non-problem with proper washing.
G) Sulfur (0.05% maximum by mass) - see Item F.  B-100 is
essentially sulfur free.
H) Phosphorous content (0.001% maximum by mass) is a
non-controllable relative to the parent animal or plant feedstock
and is a non-problem beyond that as long as phosphoric acid is
not used to clear fuel haze. Phosphoric acid can also increase
the acid number (acid + FFAs). This is why either adequate
settling times, and slightly warmed fuel are the better options
for clearing fuel.
I) Acid number (0.80 maximum milligrams of KOH per gram of fuel)
will remain low if acids are not added to the fuel either pre,
post or during washes (either to ease washing(?) or clear fuel
haze) and if caustic is not used in excess, which causes higher
numbers of esters to break down to FFAs.

Other standards, such as distillation temperature, copper strip
corrosion, cetane number and cloud point are for all practical
intents and purposes properties that will fall within ASTM
standard if the fuel is prepared and washes are conducted
properly.

As for a poor person's method of checking acid numberIt can
be conducted in the exact same manner as the titration of the
original feedstock, save for the substitution of biodiesel for
oil. Keep in mind that the assay of the KOH being used will need
to be taken into consideration. If the assay is 90% for example,
the number of milligrams of KOH per gram of oil should be
multiplied by the % purity.

One can also assay the KOH themselves with an acid titration. But
that's a bit out of the realm of probability for most shadetree
biodieselers.

The in house chemist (Ph.D. in chemistry) suggests that a careful
titration using the same method as the original feedstock
titration should get you within + or - 10%, perhaps + or - 5% if
one is really precise.

You could also use other indicators such as phenophtalein to
titrate the fuel. This would reduce the margin for error from the
pH method, as pH is really designed for aqueous solutions.

Hope this helps.

Todd



Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--
·FREE Health Insurance Quotes-eHealthInsurance.com
http://us.click.yahoo.com/1.voSB/RnFFAA/46VHAA/9bTolB/TM
-~-

Biofuels at Journey to Forever
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel at WebConX
http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm
List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech:
http://archive.nnytech.net/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[biofuels-biz] Re: A response to ... eh-hem.... Big Industry? was Re: BIG


Hello again Thor

It's odd that there's so much talk of people being so easily put off, 
and the uncertainties of new fuels, or of anything new, of resistance 
to change. Most homebrewers and especially those who campaign at 
state fairs and so on report quite the opposite. Chuck just hinted at 
that in his confessional. :-) People seem to be most enthusiastic 
rather than sceptical and suspicious, quite happy to take a chance. 
I've found that too - but not once you hit big biz and govt.

I think there're two different things here. If you go to the NBB's 
and the large producers' sites, you'll see that their main target is 
fleets. I can well imagine that fleet managers might react like this 
(especially when they're not informed about crucial issues like 
initial filtration needs!!).

Maybe the two markets - commercial fleets and the general public - 
need a different approach. Maybe they're getting a different approach 
already. The NBB's and industry's corporate-type PR that they churn 
out hardly impacts on Joe Bloggs, and fleet managers might not spend 
too much time clustering round alt-energy booths at state fairs.

There's a thread going through the industry view, or that portion of 
it we've been seeing here, that seems to confirm this. They're so 
worried we'll somehow pollute their precious customers, or potential 
customers. When are homebrewers or small-scale producers ever going 
to sell to fleets? Look at what Chuck said - friends, not fleets. 
These things are more like local coops. (And there's definitely a 
place for them.)

Their concerns are out of place, as well as baseless, IMO.

The bit about initial filters is about the only thing you really need 
to tell first-time buyers by way of precaution. Very few vehicles now 
face the rubber problem. The huge benefit of biodiesel, as opposed to 
SVO, is that you just put it in and go, simple as that, any diesel. 
What Mr and Mrs Suburbia or whatever are used to doing anyway. 
There's massive evidence to support the truth of this, it's easy to 
convince people of it, and nearly everyone likes the idea of being 
squeaky-green if it's not too much hassle, and dislikes the idea of 
Big Oil and air-pollution. It's not much of a hard-sell. I'm talking 
about the stuff itself, not necessarily the price - but surveys have 
shown that most Americans would be prepared to pay extra for greener 
and more economical vehicles, so maybe the price isn't such a big 
deal either. Though it is an issue for fleets, once again.

Maybe if these people would get it into their heads that we don't 
deal with fleets and don't interfere with their dealings with fleets 
they might stop hassling us. They should be helping us, as we help 
them, whether inadvertently or not, but not hassling us would be a 
start.

Re standards, I'm cross-posting a message Mark posted to Biofuel 
yesterday, with some good information from Todd on standards. See 
Fwd: Re: pH questions, somewhat urgent.

Homebrewers can decry the evils of Big Soy, and the
NBB lament the perils of homebrew till the cows come
home, each side safe in its parochial domain, but it
aint gonna change nuthin.  If the two sides cannot
find a way to cooperate, the cause of biodiesel
suffers.  The ball is in both courts.  NBB needs to
clean up its act, for all the reasons mentioned in
this forum.  And homebrewers/small producers, IMO need
to organize to present a coherent voice.  Its
unrealistic to expect the NBB to treat with hundreds
of independent producers individually.

I don't agree with this. I don't think the ball is in both courts. 
I've several times mentioned what happened when I was approached by 
industry people wanting collaboration, and just mentioned it again in 
another post. I'm not the only one. We have the current example of 
Graham's idea of collaboration: support Big Biodiesel, join the NBB. 
That's bound to get biodieselers beating a path to his door.

I also don't think biodieselers should organize. This decentralized, 
diffused, highly individualistic model works very well. It's 
connected in many ways, via networks like this and many others, and 
other, real-world networks, with resources online and accessible, and 
also made available in print form in various ways, well distributed. 
It might look like chaos, but it's not - the rather spectacular 
technology development this model has achieved in the last few years 
is proof of that (like Open Source). And it will lead (is leading) to 
the kind of localization of energy supply that is the path to the 
future, and that industry and the NBB will not accomplish. This is a 
different model, a new model, it's a viable model, and I don't think 
it should be changed. Anyway I doubt it could be.

Small-scale coops and other producers forming an association of some 
kind is a different matter, and no bad idea. There are such things in 
Australia I think, maybe elsewhere. If they weren't being treated as 
renegades in the US it might happen

Re: [biofuels-biz] BD Business and Ability to be Profitable-- does big vs small matter?


On the basis of this reasoning, it would then be best to eradicate 
small farms and small farmers, for instance, and have it all replaced 
by more efficient industrialized farming. Only it hasn't quite 
worked out that way. What you tend to get instead is less efficiency, 
or no efficiency, with large-scale externalizations, a poor product, 
and unhappy (or dead) consumers.

Exaggeration?

From the 1930's to the 1960's the free-range system was the popular 
way to raise poultry in the United states. It produced meaty, tender 
birds at a reasonable cost, using a reasonable amount of labor and 
providing valuable fertility to the land. Many farmers raised 
10,000-20,000 birds per year on short-grass pasture (range), both 
chickens and turkeys. With the rise of industrial agriculture and 
the development of the confinement broiler barn, this sustainable 
and profitable system was discontinued by means of withdrawing 
growers contracts. Left with no market or processing facilities the 
practice was abandoned within two or three years.

But the way it's been presented to the world is that the old ways 
were less efficient. Actually they were more efficient, in more ways 
than one, lacking, for instance, this current feature of the 
efficient industrialized poultry production systems:

 We don't need terrorists, we have industrial food suppliers.  Or is it
 possible that turkeys have become the weapon of choice for terrorists?
 How can we call a food system sustainable that sickens an estimated 1.3
 million Americans, hospitalizes 15,000, and kills 500 just from 
Salmonella every year?
 Maybe it would be a good time to switch to something besides a commercial
 turkey for Thanksgiving dinner.  http://www.cspinet.org/new/200211211.html

Let alone the manure lakes, groundwater pollution, etc etc etc. In 
France, for instance, in 2000, over 20% of all poultry (90 million 
birds) was profitably, cleanly and safely raised using the old 
free-range system.

Small-scale capitalism used to be the backbone of America. There's no 
evidence that its replacement by large-scale, centralized 
corporatization has brought any improvements, rather the contrary. 
Big ain't beautiful.

If you're looking for particular examples of small being both 
beautiful and profitable in the biodiesel field, you'd perhaps be 
finding rather more of them had not small producers been threatened 
with $25,000-per-day fines and told they had to pay $1 million-plus 
testing costs or else. Now quite a number of people are planning 
small-scale start-ups, seem to be happy with their business plans, 
and should soon be testing the waters at the EPA since they changed 
their tune.

It seems large producers, on the other hand, can't compete without 
continued soy subsidies, at the taxpayer's expense, and the 
continuance of a hopelessly uneconomic and unsustainable commodities 
overproduction system. The pricing structure of one such producer 
(?), examined here recently, would not seem to leave any 
justification for their support.

Of course public policy folks will not be rushing to support the 
decentralization of energy supply that is the only path to a 
sustainable energy future, regardless of the feedstock. That doesn't 
mean *only* small and local and *no* big and central, but it does 
mean an end to *only* big and central. There's room for both, and if 
there isn't then room will have to be made.

Best

Keith


Hello again.  One charge that I have heard public policy folks levy at small
producers is along the following lines:  Small producers can't make their
production business really profitable, so they're not going to be able to
contribute significantly to mass-market conversion from fossil fuels to
biofuels... Therefore, since our policy goal is to  maximize the use of
cleaner domestically produced fuels, when considering policy and public
support for BD, we'll seek to support large producers first and foremost.

I have also spoken with small producers who themselves say that they're not
sure how they'd make a profit...

So, I'd like to know have your thoughts, whether in agreement or in
rebuttal, regarding whether there is truth in this assertion, and also
regarding what the public policy relevance should or should not be if it
were true.  And if it is not true, then what/who are the success stories in
terms of profitable small-scale production and distribution?

Thanks,

Andrew Hoppin
The Biofuel Business Development Project
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Biofuel-Business-Plan/
Dedicated to Making An Immediate Impact
On the Long-Range Future of Humanity

N Space Labs, Inc.
Vizualize Your Business
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
646.221.5602 (mobile)
158 Lafayette St. 2nd Floor
NY, NY 10013

  -Original Message-
  From: Andrew Hoppin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 3:34 PM
  To: biofuels-biz@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: big vs small: quality assurance
 
 
  Hi folks.  I'm learning a

Re: [biofuels-biz] big vs small: quality assurance


Hello Andrew

There has been talk of setting up centralized labs on a sort of coop 
basis where small producers could send samples for testing at 
affordable rates. Several people have discussed this idea, in several 
countries, but I don't think anything has come of it yet.

After industry people approached us saying they wanted to collaborate 
with the grassroots biodiesel movement and were prepared to put 
resources and money into it, we proposed a model for technical input 
from industry that would have achieved this. This wasn't a one-way 
proposal - much of it dealt with how biofuelers could help industry's 
biodiesel promotional efforts. I was told the proposal was due for 
discussion next week - and never heard anything further. It was a 
good proposal. The whole exercise simply wasted a load of time and 
energy, and, I must admit, evaporated quite a lot of goodwill on my 
part.

So it remains undone. It should be done, but who among biofuelers has 
the resources or the time for such an effort? Certainly not me, 
having wasted that much time and more already, not being a producer 
nor interested in becoming one, and in fact not even being 
particularly interested in US developments - we're a 3rd World 
project after all.

Yet people like Mike Pelly do things like this, for nothing - this 
was on the front-page of a major newspaper, no easy feat.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/134545408_biodiesel30.html

Biodieselers do a great deal of this, very effective campaigning at 
every level, which most certainly helps industry. And they admit it. 
But they're apparently quite happy to accept it, for nothing given in 
exchange, beyond badmouthing us. And they're oh-so-shocked when we're 
sceptical of them.

Best

Keith Addison
Journey to Forever


Hi folks.  I'm learning a lot from the ongoing lively debate-- thank you.

Regarding the issue that has been at hand-- whether big producers deliver
better quality and reliability than small producers or not, and whether any
quality differences are cause for concern among potential consumers or not:
it seems to me that one way to nip this in the bud REGARDLESS of whether
there are valid concerns or not would be to have a credible BD fuel quality
testing service, perhaps with some public funding and perhaps with modest
fees paid by producers, perhaps on a sliding-scale based on the size of
their revenues.  If a producer wished to be certified that their fuel was
top-notch, they could avail themselves of this service by sending fuel
samples (each month?) and fleet managers, consumers, and anyone else who
cares would have an objective answer to their quality concerns, whether or
not those concerns are valid.  Has this ever been undertaken?

If not, would such a service effectively serve the purpose I've outlined,
and in what form (government, non-profit, or for-profit) would such a
service be most effectively delivered?

Andrew Hoppin
The Biofuel Business Development Project
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Biofuel-Business-Plan/
Dedicated to Making An Immediate Impact
On the Long-Range Future of Humanity

N Space Labs, Inc.
Vizualize Your Business
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
646.221.5602 (mobile)
158 Lafayette St. 2nd Floor
NY, NY 10013


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--
·FREE Health Insurance Quotes-eHealthInsurance.com
http://us.click.yahoo.com/1.voSB/RnFFAA/46VHAA/9bTolB/TM
-~-

Biofuels at Journey to Forever
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel at WebConX
http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm
List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech:
http://archive.nnytech.net/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Chuck's the culprit! - was Re: [biofuels-biz] Digest Number 410


LOL, Chuck!

Rest easy, somehow I don't think they're going to have you taken out 
and shot for it. On the other hand, thousands of people have visited 
your page at our site, which is surely a useful aid to making good 
fuel.

http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_processor4.html
Biodiesel processors:
Chuck Ranum's biodiesel processor

Flax oil's the same as linseed oil, what they make varnish out of. 
The BD's not as bad as flax oil SVO might have been though.

Regards

Keith


FOR THE RECORD:

Homebrew Biodiesel problems in the mid-west:

I am the homebrewer who is responsible for TWO failures in ND.

One:  a good friend, who was so anxious to try BD twisted my arm into
letting him have 45 gallons of unwashed BD, which clogged filters on his 6.5
turbo GM,  no other problems.  It was an early batch while I was still
learning.

Two:  another buddy, a farmer, wanted fuel, even off-road diesel was quite
high at the time, so I let him buy 165 gallons of BD for his tractor (making
hay for his horses)  There were no problems, UNTIL the fuel had sat in the
tank for a year.  The tractor wouldn't start.  The fuel pickup screen was
ruined, clogged with a varnish-like material, and the filter was the same.
They rebuilt the injector pump, but the rebuilder said he doubted the fuel
wrecked it, it just looked worn out.  The pump was the original, and the
tractor was pushing 25 years-old.  I checked my records, and found that the
fuel he got the last time, was from a batch made from Flax-seed oil.  The
test batches had been fine, but after setting for a week or so a varnish
formed on the surface that was not soluble in anything I tried.  I also had
a few teething problems when I started using BD in my diesel van, but didn't
report them to anyone, so I doubt they made it into popular myth.  I accept
full responsibility for these failures, and the other parties don't blame
me, understanding that we all got excited and a bit ahead of ourselves.
They also understood that teething-problems, as it were, are to be expected
when the neophyte starts down a new path.
As you all know, since then, many hundreds of gallons have passed through
the injectors with no trouble at all.

These are the only incidents I am aware of in my part of the country, and
have, in no way, set back the BD cause.

Chuck (missed my target production for the year, couldn't get enough WVO!)


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--
·FREE Health Insurance Quotes-eHealthInsurance.com
http://us.click.yahoo.com/1.voSB/RnFFAA/46VHAA/9bTolB/TM
-~-

Biofuels at Journey to Forever
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel at WebConX
http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm
List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech:
http://archive.nnytech.net/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [biofuels-biz] BD Business and Ability to be Profitable-- does big vs small matter?

2002-11-25 Thread girl mark



any idea on how many small producers we';re talking about in the us?

Mark


At 03:48 PM 11/25/2002 -0500, you wrote:
Hello again.  One charge that I have heard public policy folks levy at small
producers is along the following lines:  Small producers can't make their
production business really profitable, so they're not going to be able to
contribute significantly to mass-market conversion from fossil fuels to
biofuels... Therefore, since our policy goal is to  maximize the use of
cleaner domestically produced fuels, when considering policy and public
support for BD, we'll seek to support large producers first and foremost.

I have also spoken with small producers who themselves say that they're not
sure how they'd make a profit...

So, I'd like to know have your thoughts, whether in agreement or in
rebuttal, regarding whether there is truth in this assertion, and also
regarding what the public policy relevance should or should not be if it
were true.  And if it is not true, then what/who are the success stories in
terms of profitable small-scale production and distribution?

Thanks,

Andrew Hoppin
The Biofuel Business Development Project
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Biofuel-Business-Plan/
Dedicated to Making An Immediate Impact
On the Long-Range Future of Humanity

N Space Labs, Inc.
Vizualize Your Business
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
646.221.5602 (mobile)
158 Lafayette St. 2nd Floor
NY, NY 10013

  -Original Message-
  From: Andrew Hoppin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 3:34 PM
  To: biofuels-biz@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: big vs small: quality assurance
 
 
  Hi folks.  I'm learning a lot from the ongoing lively debate--
  thank you.
 
  Regarding the issue that has been at hand-- whether big producers
  deliver better quality and reliability than small producers or
  not, and whether any quality differences are cause for concern
  among potential consumers or not:  it seems to me that one way to
  nip this in the bud REGARDLESS of whether there are valid
  concerns or not would be to have a credible BD fuel quality
  testing service, perhaps with some public funding and perhaps
  with modest fees paid by producers, perhaps on a sliding-scale
  based on the size of their revenues.  If a producer wished to be
  certified that their fuel was top-notch, they could avail
  themselves of this service by sending fuel samples (each month?)
  and fleet managers, consumers, and anyone else who cares would
  have an objective answer to their quality concerns, whether or
  not those concerns are valid.  Has this ever been undertaken?
 
  If not, would such a service effectively serve the purpose I've
  outlined, and in what form (government, non-profit, or
  for-profit) would such a service be most effectively delivered?
 
  Andrew Hoppin
  The Biofuel Business Development Project
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Biofuel-Business-Plan/
  Dedicated to Making An Immediate Impact
  On the Long-Range Future of Humanity
  
  N Space Labs, Inc.
  Vizualize Your Business
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  646.221.5602 (mobile)
  158 Lafayette St. 2nd Floor
  NY, NY 10013



Biofuels at Journey to Forever
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel at WebConX
http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm
List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech:
http://archive.nnytech.net/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--
·FREE Health Insurance Quotes-eHealthInsurance.com
http://us.click.yahoo.com/1.voSB/RnFFAA/46VHAA/9bTolB/TM
-~-

Biofuels at Journey to Forever
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel at WebConX
http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm
List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech:
http://archive.nnytech.net/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [biofuels-biz] Fwd: Re: pH questions, somewhat urgent

2002-11-25 Thread Sam Jai-In


Hi Keith,
What about the European standards such as DIN or
Austrian ? they require at least 96.5% metylester
content; is this beyond homebrew?

 --- Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Hi all,
 
 Keith asked me offlist for directions for the acid
 number determination.
 Here's the info, forwarded from an offlist exchange
 I had with Todd
 Swearingen a few weeks ago, about this and other
 quality standards stuff...
 Mark
 
 
 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 00:55:01 -0400
 
 
 Maria,
 
 Looking at the ASTM standards as the benchmark for
 home brewers,
 most of the standards can be met simply by
 preparing and washing
 the fuel well.
 
 A) Flash point (130*C minimum) will be relatively
 consistent for
 all feedstocks, presuming reaction completion and
 the alcohol is
 removed. If the alcohol is distilled or washed out
 this is a
 non-problem.
 B) Water and sediment (0.050 maximum % by volume)
 are
 non-problems with adequate settling times,
 filtration and fuel
 reheating to ~120*F. (I don't suggest adding any
 acid to clear
 fuel haze, as this will increase the acid number.)
 C) Free glycerin (0.020 maximum % by mass)  is
 removed and is a
 non-problem with adequate settling time and
 washing.
 D) Total glycerin (0.240 maximum % by mass) is
 reduced to nil and
 is a non-problem if sufficient reaction time is
 permitted (mono-,
 di- and tri-glycerides are all cracked), sufficient
 caustic is
 used (not excess, as this can raise the acid number
 by cracking
 methyl esters back to FFAs) and sufficient settling
 time is
 given.
 E) Kinematic viscosity (1.9 - 6.0 mm2/s at 40*C)
 will also be a
 non-problem if the total glycerin content (Items C
  D) has been
 resolved and the acid number is not elevated by
 imprudent use of
 caustic, causing back cracking of esters to FFAs
 (higher
 viscosity than B-100).
 F) Sulfated ash (0.020 % by mass) is a
 non-controllable when
 using straight base, as the only sulfur in the
 equation is
 derived from the parent feedstock. When using an
 acid/base
 process the sulfuric acid used in the
 esterification step is
 neutralized by the base. The resulting salt is
 soluble in the
 water wash and should be a non-problem with proper
 washing.
 G) Sulfur (0.05% maximum by mass) - see Item F. 
 B-100 is
 essentially sulfur free.
 H) Phosphorous content (0.001% maximum by mass) is
 a
 non-controllable relative to the parent animal or
 plant feedstock
 and is a non-problem beyond that as long as
 phosphoric acid is
 not used to clear fuel haze. Phosphoric acid can
 also increase
 the acid number (acid + FFAs). This is why either
 adequate
 settling times, and slightly warmed fuel are the
 better options
 for clearing fuel.
 I) Acid number (0.80 maximum milligrams of KOH per
 gram of fuel)
 will remain low if acids are not added to the fuel
 either pre,
 post or during washes (either to ease washing(?)
 or clear fuel
 haze) and if caustic is not used in excess, which
 causes higher
 numbers of esters to break down to FFAs.
 
 Other standards, such as distillation temperature,
 copper strip
 corrosion, cetane number and cloud point are for
 all practical
 intents and purposes properties that will fall
 within ASTM
 standard if the fuel is prepared and washes are
 conducted
 properly.
 
 As for a poor person's method of checking acid
 numberIt can
 be conducted in the exact same manner as the
 titration of the
 original feedstock, save for the substitution of
 biodiesel for
 oil. Keep in mind that the assay of the KOH being
 used will need
 to be taken into consideration. If the assay is 90%
 for example,
 the number of milligrams of KOH per gram of oil
 should be
 multiplied by the % purity.
 
 One can also assay the KOH themselves with an acid
 titration. But
 that's a bit out of the realm of probability for
 most shadetree
 biodieselers.
 
 The in house chemist (Ph.D. in chemistry) suggests
 that a careful
 titration using the same method as the original
 feedstock
 titration should get you within + or - 10%, perhaps
 + or - 5% if
 one is really precise.
 
 You could also use other indicators such as
 phenophtalein to
 titrate the fuel. This would reduce the margin for
 error from the
 pH method, as pH is really designed for aqueous
 solutions.
 
 Hope this helps.
 
 Todd
 
 
 
 Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
 http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
 
 Biofuels list archives:
 http://archive.nnytech.net/
 
 Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list
 address.
 To unsubscribe, send an email to:
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
  

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--
áFREE Health Insurance Quotes-eHealthInsurance.com
http://us.click.yahoo.com/1.voSB/RnFFAA/46VHAA/9bTolB/TM

Re: [biofuel] Back Online

2002-11-25 Thread Doug Foskey


On Sun, 24 Nov 2002 17:24, you wrote:
 Hello Everyone!

 There's a lot of ignorance about energy issues out there.  I suppose
 people in forums like this one have a LOT of educating to do. . .

 robert luis rabello


Totally agree. I built my own house (with the help of contractors) from 
dry 
stacked Hebel blocks (Autoclaved Aerated Concrete) My house is designed on 
solar principles: correct orientation, extra roof insulation, but in our 
climate cooling is more important than heating.
The dry stack system uses threaded rod to hold the blocks together - 
there 
is about 2Km of threaded rod in our house (7500 sq foot house on 4 levels)
regards Doug

 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--
áFREE Health Insurance Quotes-eHealthInsurance.com
http://us.click.yahoo.com/1.voSB/RnFFAA/46VHAA/FGYolB/TM
-~-

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[biofuel] Re: Back Online


--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Shawn Zenor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  

   As far as Americans being concerned about deforestation- 
clearly they 
 are not.  Look who 'we' voted into the white house
 
 Shawn (waiting for Hawai`i to secede)
 



 Shawn,
 There is much more to the story than you are getting from the 'News' 
services. I live in a National Forest, and have a pretty good 
perspective of what is going on.
 To use an easier to understand analogy, suppose you had a beautiful 
flower garden. You spend all your free time maintaining it in a 
pristine condition, and further developing it. Soon you cannot keep 
up the maintainance,a nd have to quit your job to devote more time to 
your flowers. Now you have no income, so you sell a few of your 
beautiful flowers, picked in their prime, and use the income to 
further improve your garden, which you can now expand, because you 
have more time to do so. Soon, you have expanded your garden to the 
maximum extent of your time to maintain it. It is now a full-time job 
to keep this huge garden pristine.
 One day a group of Tourists come by, and admire your beautiful 
garden. On finding out that you are selling some of your Flowers, 
they become outraged that you would cut those beautiful Flowers, and 
get a Judge to issue a restraining order to prevent you from cutting 
your flowers. Now you again have no income to maintain the garden and 
have to take a job. You haven't enough free-time or money to continue 
to maintain the garden in it's pristine condition, and it starts to 
look shabby, with a few weeds cropping up, and some dead blossoms 
hanging, because they weren't picked in their prime. In a few more 
weeks, your beautiful garden looks terrible, with dead blossoms 
hanging from every bush, and weeds coming up all over. You try to get 
permission from the Judge to allow you to cut the dead blossoms and 
trim the weeds. He contacts the Tourist group, who have never 
returned after their initial visit, and they vigorously extort him to 
deny you permission to destroy that beautiful garden by cutting any 
of the plants. You now have a yard full of dead weeds and dried up 
flower blossoms. Then one late afternoon, there is a thunderstorm, 
and a bolt of lightning..




Motie

I prefer my home in a beautiful forest, over a homeless shelter in 
town looking over a blackened wasteland.


Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

I am not arguing that in some parts of the US, pallets may be a one time
use, but in my part of Texas, there is a $10 deposit per pallet on
hardwood pallets. You can still scrounge good pallets, but it is
getting harder.

I have a floor made of OSB on pallets, works great. [temporary living
quarters due to tornado damage.] I did not think of the idea myself, but
read about it in a straw bale building book. HAHSAs were designed to
burn pallets whole without having to take them apart, and make real good
use of the heat generated. I also know of a man who make really nice
furniture from hardwood pallets, so at least some Americans are trying
to use the wood, not landfill it.

The newest thing we are seeing here is plastic pallets. These are made
from recycled plastic bags. Perhaps a glimmer of hope.

Bright Blessings,
Kim

Hakan Falk wrote:

Only in America!!!

I was not aware of that US made pallets of hardwood and did not think that
it could ever be a stupid luxury consumption like this. I can see reason
for some pallets to be made of hardwood, but they should be guarded and
reused. But this irresponsible behavior cannot be excused. Six pallets of
hardwood per American in land fills, give me a break!

I am of the opinion that it is almost a sin to use hardwood for pallets in
the first place. How can you use types of trees that take 50 to 100 years
to mature for purposes like this. Hardwood is also very stupid to put in
landfills, because of the long time it takes to disintegrate. If you really
need to waste hardwood, effective burning is probably the best. Compared to
the pallets we mostly use in Europe, made of pine tree, hardwood take 4-8
times longer to mature. Even the fast growing teak, developed mainly in
central and south America, takes at least 2-4 the time to mature as pine
trees and it is questionable if it is still hardwood. The fast growing teak
is softer, but still have the natural defense against humidity and insects.

Hardwood is mostly a tropical or sub tropical tree and how can US use this
for pallets and at the same time be upset about the deforestation of the
remaining oxygen suppliers of the world. The hardwood of Europe was by
tradition the property of the Kings, wherever it was rooted, because of its
value for building ships and as structural building material. In this case
oak was a strategic defense material. Oak used as structure for buildings,
was inherited and reused for new buildings. The value of oak was almost
comparable to gold a few hundred years ago.

Hakan

At 07:25 AM 11/24/2002 -0800, you wrote:

Keith Addison wrote:

Re wasted wood, I picked this up somewhere or other, for the US, not
Canada: In 1999, for instance, 7.5 million tons of wooden pallets -
platforms associated with shipping - went into the solid waste
stream, accounting for over 60 percent of all wood waste. And:
There are an estimated 6 hardwood palletts in landfill for every
resident of the US.

snip

Indeed! I used to collect hardwood pallets, cut them up and burn
them. Over the course of the average winter, my family burned 8 tons
of wood like this. We hadn't paid for heat in years! Making the leap
back into fossil fueled residential heating was a hard decision for me.
I like the automaticity of our natural gas boiler, but we haven't
received a bill yet . . .

I just posted this somewhere else:

... the United States is now far from being a sustainable society,
and in many respects is further away than it was at the time of the
Earth Summit in 1992. Unlike many other developed countries, the
United States has not used a strategic process to move the country
toward a sustainable future and has not educated the American people
about the opportunities and challenges of sustainable development.

snip

I've been lamenting about this for at least 30 years. That's one of
the reasons I'm here.

robert luis rabello

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
http://rd.yahoo.com/M=234081.2677558.4057087.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=1705083269:HM/A=1327985/R=0/*http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;4870024;7586687;x?http://www.ameriquestmortgage.com/welcome.html?ad=Yahoo01

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/.

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [biofuel] Re: Back Online

2002-11-25 Thread Kim Garth Travis


Not only is Mother Nature in deep s___t, but we as a society are.  I 
often wish we could put back the old wood cutters cottages, in the 
National forests, for the people that just don't fit our modern society. 
  They could be very useful to the rest of us and be much happier, 
themselves.
Bright Blessings,
Kim

Hakan Falk wrote:

 
 Dear Motie,
 
 You are very right in what you are saying and it is applicable to both
 National Parks and commercial forests. Ignorance and harvesting methods are
 a major cause of the intensifying forest fires. On one hand you save in
 maintenance, but on the other you lose a lot more in fire fighting and loss
 of values. It is mainly a political, economical and ignorance problem and I
 am tired of always have to blame them for their stupidity, I get the image
 of being politician basher and that is not what I really want.
 
 The problems are,
 
 1. The ignorance and emotional interests by the so called green activist,
 who does not have the slightest idea of what responsible forest management
 is. Not all of them, but a sufficient majority of them. For nature to exist
 by itself on this planet, it is important to keep a balance between plants
 and species. With the unnatural expansion of Humanus Erectus, this balance
 is severely disturbed and the balance must be managed in a responsible
 way.  Many of the same activist who would go to great length to resist the
 cutting of a nearly dead tree, would not hesitate to kill a rat, a spider
 etc. and doing harm to nature by this. As long as we do not want to weed
 out Humanus Erectus, we have to do our best in responsible management of
 the balance in nature.
 
 I am of the opinion that the green activists are a very important part of
 our society to balance the ignorant or irresponsible behavior of the
 commercial and political interests, but in some cases they are doing more
 harm than good and they are for sure a part of the problem, not a solution.
 Making responsible forest management is one of those cases. The green
 activists do not protest against natural disasters, caused by not cutting
 trees. In some cases it is the same people that causes the fire by camp
 fires and they do not connect the magnitude of the fires to their actions
 to resist responsible forest management.
 
 2. The ignorant or self serving attitudes of the political leadership, who
 is failing to take responsible positions on many issues. The costs of
 forest fires due to lack of management must be larger than the costs of
 responsible forest management. Allowing forest harvesting by ludicrous
 methods is partly a political problem. The cost of forest fires comes from
 an other budget than forest management and it is less politically
 controversial than allocating more money to proper forest management.
 
 3. The ignorance and/or greed with many commercial interests. The lack of
 forest management by cleaning/maintaining and selective harvesting and its
 replacement by clean cutting, is ludicrous and only govern by profits and
 the development of efficient machines to do so. I am sure that it is
 possible to do better, even with the help of smarter machines. But as long
 as we allow simple big machines and adopt the nature to accommodate the to
 fit the specs. of the machines, we are causing unnecessary forest fires and
 hamper the development of better methods/machines. The commercial interests
 get their profits from the budget of fire fighting.
 
 4. Irresponsible farming and irrigation that destroy and tilt natures
 traditional defense systems. This is a subject that is too long for me in
 this posting and I am not comfortable to deal with details on this issues.
 Keith have very enlightened views on this and understand the consequences
 much better than I do.
 
 Between the groups above, the nature is in deep sh - t.
 
 Hakan
 
 
 At 09:49 AM 11/25/2002 +, you wrote:
  --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Shawn Zenor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   

  
  As far as Americans being concerned about deforestation-
  clearly they
are not.  Look who 'we' voted into the white house
   
Shawn (waiting for Hawai`i to secede)
   
  
  
  
Shawn,
There is much more to the story than you are getting from the 'News'
  services. I live in a National Forest, and have a pretty good
  perspective of what is going on.
To use an easier to understand analogy, suppose you had a beautiful
  flower garden. You spend all your free time maintaining it in a
  pristine condition, and further developing it. Soon you cannot keep
  up the maintainance,a nd have to quit your job to devote more time to
  your flowers. Now you have no income, so you sell a few of your
  beautiful flowers, picked in their prime, and use the income to
  further improve your garden, which you can now expand, because you
  have more time to do so. Soon, you have expanded your garden to the
  maximum extent of your time to maintain it. It is now a full-time

[biofuel] Question about yield

2002-11-25 Thread Stanley Baer


Hi

I am interested in making biodiesel from waste oil and have a couple 
questions:

1) Methanol seems to be the most expensive ingredient in the process.  I 
have read in some places that 20% by volume of methanol is required, in 
other places I have read 25% is required.  How little can I get away with?

2) What is the overall yield of the process.  If I start with a 100 
litres of waste oil and I add 20 litres of methanol how many litres of 
fuel do I end up with?

Stan





Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [biofuel] Re: Back Online

2002-11-25 Thread Hakan Falk



Dear Kim,

You are expanding the issue with several potentials, but you
are very right. A lot of good could be done by a solution that
you indicate.

Hakan


At 08:19 AM 11/25/2002 -0600, you wrote:
Not only is Mother Nature in deep s___t, but we as a society are.  I
often wish we could put back the old wood cutters cottages, in the
National forests, for the people that just don't fit our modern society.
   They could be very useful to the rest of us and be much happier,
themselves.
Bright Blessings,
Kim

Hakan Falk wrote:

 
  Dear Motie,
 
  You are very right in what you are saying and it is applicable to both
  National Parks and commercial forests. Ignorance and harvesting methods are
  a major cause of the intensifying forest fires. On one hand you save in
  maintenance, but on the other you lose a lot more in fire fighting and loss
  of values. It is mainly a political, economical and ignorance problem and I
  am tired of always have to blame them for their stupidity, I get the image
  of being politician basher and that is not what I really want.
 
  The problems are,
 
  1. The ignorance and emotional interests by the so called green activist,
  who does not have the slightest idea of what responsible forest management
  is. Not all of them, but a sufficient majority of them. For nature to exist
  by itself on this planet, it is important to keep a balance between plants
  and species. With the unnatural expansion of Humanus Erectus, this balance
  is severely disturbed and the balance must be managed in a responsible
  way.  Many of the same activist who would go to great length to resist the
  cutting of a nearly dead tree, would not hesitate to kill a rat, a spider
  etc. and doing harm to nature by this. As long as we do not want to weed
  out Humanus Erectus, we have to do our best in responsible management of
  the balance in nature.
 
  I am of the opinion that the green activists are a very important part of
  our society to balance the ignorant or irresponsible behavior of the
  commercial and political interests, but in some cases they are doing more
  harm than good and they are for sure a part of the problem, not a solution.
  Making responsible forest management is one of those cases. The green
  activists do not protest against natural disasters, caused by not cutting
  trees. In some cases it is the same people that causes the fire by camp
  fires and they do not connect the magnitude of the fires to their actions
  to resist responsible forest management.
 
  2. The ignorant or self serving attitudes of the political leadership, who
  is failing to take responsible positions on many issues. The costs of
  forest fires due to lack of management must be larger than the costs of
  responsible forest management. Allowing forest harvesting by ludicrous
  methods is partly a political problem. The cost of forest fires comes from
  an other budget than forest management and it is less politically
  controversial than allocating more money to proper forest management.
 
  3. The ignorance and/or greed with many commercial interests. The lack of
  forest management by cleaning/maintaining and selective harvesting and its
  replacement by clean cutting, is ludicrous and only govern by profits and
  the development of efficient machines to do so. I am sure that it is
  possible to do better, even with the help of smarter machines. But as long
  as we allow simple big machines and adopt the nature to accommodate the to
  fit the specs. of the machines, we are causing unnecessary forest fires and
  hamper the development of better methods/machines. The commercial interests
  get their profits from the budget of fire fighting.
 
  4. Irresponsible farming and irrigation that destroy and tilt natures
  traditional defense systems. This is a subject that is too long for me in
  this posting and I am not comfortable to deal with details on this issues.
  Keith have very enlightened views on this and understand the consequences
  much better than I do.
 
  Between the groups above, the nature is in deep sh - t.
 
  Hakan
 
 
  At 09:49 AM 11/25/2002 +, you wrote:
   --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Shawn Zenor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 
   
   As far as Americans being concerned about deforestation-
   clearly they
 are not.  Look who 'we' voted into the white house

 Shawn (waiting for Hawai`i to secede)

   
   
   
 Shawn,
 There is much more to the story than you are getting from the 'News'
   services. I live in a National Forest, and have a pretty good
   perspective of what is going on.
 To use an easier to understand analogy, suppose you had a beautiful
   flower garden. You spend all your free time maintaining it in a
   pristine condition, and further developing it. Soon you cannot keep
   up the maintainance,a nd have to quit your job to devote more time to
   your flowers. Now you have no income, so you sell a few of your

Re: [biofuel] fuel haze questions

2002-11-25 Thread Ken Provost


Mark:


I've read some stuff on Maui about Neutral talking about post-wash
settling in an open container exposed to open air being some important
part of the picture for him..any ideas?

Nope!  (ask him)...

is this what you mean by 'letting it sit outside'?

I leave it out where it will get dewed on, but in covered buckets of course.
The idea is to expose it to the same sort of low temperatures it will have
to tolerate in your tank, so the crap drops out beforehand. The fancy term
is winterization (I prefer weatherization, since I do it in summer too).

also what  effect does temperature, either heat or cold (I've heard that
cold has an effect) have on clearing biodiesel?

Cold causes stearate, palmitate, and myristate ester to crystallize out of
solution as waxy white fluff. As this settles, the biodiesel above begins to
clear. Heating will also cause clearing, by redissolving the precipitate,
but then it will just reprecipitate in your fuel tank.


Ken, are you talking about 18 hours of bubbling as the total time for the
wash, or something like 18 hours for a final wash?


I do 2 or 3 bulk washes where I mix the biodiesel with half its volume of
hot water and stir gently. The bubbling is a polishing step after the bulk
washes.

also, Ken, you've talked about clumping catlitter being a water scavenger
for drying oil (for use in ethanol biodiesel). Any ideas on using this in
the same application?


The clay has plenty of opportunities to settle out after using it on oil.
If you used it on the biodiesel, you'd just have to be very sure to get it all
out. -K



Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [biofuel] Question about yield

2002-11-25 Thread Ken Provost


Stan writes:


1) Methanol seems to be the most expensive ingredient in the process.  I
have read in some places that 20% by volume of methanol is required, in
other places I have read 25% is required.  How little can I get away with?

Experiments by Neutral (infopop forum) indicate that viscosity of the fuel
(a measure of conversion extent) continues to fall up to 30% methanol.
If you use less, you just end up with more mono- and diglycerides in your
fuel, and a higher viscosity. Whether that matters probably depends on your
climate, your engine, your source of waste oil, and a lot of other unknowns.


2) What is the overall yield of the process.  If I start with a 100
litres of waste oil and I add 20 litres of methanol how many litres of
fuel do I end up with?



About 100, provided you don't lose any in emulsion, precipitated tallow
esters, etc. Again, many variables in this question. -K

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [biofuel] Re: Back Online


Motie,

I bless you for that link!  :)

It's just what I was looking for.  

James Slayden

On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, motie_d wrote:

 --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  Only in America!!!
 
  I was not aware of that US made pallets of hardwood and did not
 think that
  it could ever be a stupid luxury consumption like this. I can see
 reason
  for some pallets to be made of hardwood, but they should be guarded
 and
  reused. But this irresponsible behavior cannot be excused. Six
 pallets of
  hardwood per American in land fills, give me a break!
 
 
 Hi Hakan,
 I suspect the actual number may be even higher. Truckers seem to get
 stuck with many of them. The problem is that so much stuff gets
 shipped on pallets, and receivers have huge piles of them on hand.
 They don't want any more, and require delivery trucks to take the
 pallets away when a delivery is made. Truckers have no need for them,
 and for a time were dumping them in the back lots of Truckstops, to
 such an extent that Truckstop Owenrs now hire Security Guards to
 prevent it.
 The cost to ship pallets back to the shipper is higher than the cost
 to produce new pallets.
 There is some effort in the Trucking industry to attempt to
 standardize the size of pallets to make them more reusable. Too many
 shippers have their own unique size and shape requirements.
 
 
 http://www.banditchippers.com/model_grinder3680.asp
 The solution for now, if a market can be found for the chips.
 
 Motie
 
 
 Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
 http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
 
 Biofuels list archives:
 http://archive.nnytech.net/
 
 Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
 To unsubscribe, send an email to:
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
 


Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [biofuel] Question about yield


Hello Stan

Hi

I am interested in making biodiesel from waste oil and have a couple
questions:

1) Methanol seems to be the most expensive ingredient in the process.  I
have read in some places that 20% by volume of methanol is required, in
other places I have read 25% is required.  How little can I get away with?

Don't skimp on the methanol, but don't waste any either! You have to 
use an excess to drive the process towards completion, but the excess 
is recoverable (mostly). All is explained here:
http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_meth.html
How much methanol?

2) What is the overall yield of the process.  If I start with a 100
litres of waste oil and I add 20 litres of methanol how many litres of
fuel do I end up with?

About 100 litres, if you do everything perfectly and it's pretty good 
oil. The more used the oil, the higher the levels of free fatty 
acids and the lower the conversion rate, unless you use the acid-base 
method:
http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_aleksnew.html
Foolproof biodiesel process

That method will give you high production even with high FFA levels 
(up to a point). Otherwise, using a single-stage process with average 
used oil, you should get more than 90%. Start with single-stage and 
move on to two-stage processes if you like when you've gained some 
experience. Lots of info here:
http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make.html
Make your own biodiesel

Best

Keith

Stan


Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [biofuel] Excise tax on Biodiesel

2002-11-25 Thread Greg and April


Ok people, lets take it with a large grain of salt until we can get the
specific law about it directly from the IRS. When I say specific law, I mean
right down the page, paragraph, and sentence number.  I say this because
even the IRS will admit, that anything that their agents tell you, is not
law if another agent says otherwise, and they go further to say that the
agents who gave you the information, can not be held responsible if they are
wrong and it results in you not paying the proper tax, and you end up having
to pay fines or worse.

Greg H.


- Original Message -
From: Ken Provost [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2002 17:10
Subject: [biofuel] Excise tax on Biodiesel


In case anyone hasn't been to the greascar site lately, they have
an interesting blurb that the IRS wrote back to a California
co-op about US Federal taxes. Here it is:

No Federal Excise tax on biodiesel or SVO if you use less than
400 gallons per quarter.

State of California has no policy. No taxes due at this time.
Suggests you keep records :-).

Details here:

http://www.greasecar.com/


Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[biofuel] 'Direct Democracy'

2002-11-25 Thread milliontc


Being  keen on 'Direct Democracy' via internet voting, I was 
interested in this clip from a Reuters report relating the failure of 
NGOs to have had any impact at the Johannesburg summit...

The real issue is between governments and public opinion.
Public opinion in some countries is obviously not requiring
leaders to come here and do the right thing, said Friends
of the Earth International Deputy Director Tony Juniper.

The question is how NGOs (non-governmental
organisations) can engage better with the public to the point
where the public is saying in a very clear way to the
politicians that they have to come to these things and
deliver, he added. 

Perhaps all the NGOs should issue their members with a PIN and 
password.
James


 

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [biofuel] Excise tax on Biodiesel

2002-11-25 Thread Ken Provost


Greg writes:

Ok people, lets take it with a large grain of salt until we can get
the specific law about it directly from the IRS. When I say specific
law, I mean right down the page, paragraph, and sentence number.


OK, what the hell...I'm on vacation this week anyway, so I did some
poking around. Here it is:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/get-cfr.cgi?
TITLE=26PART=48SECTION=4081-1YEAR=2001TYPE=PDF

don't forget -- you can't click on the first line above and hope to
get there. Anyway, download the PDF file for 48.4081-1 Taxable
fuel; definitions. See paragraph (c)(1)(ii):

Exclusion; minor blending. A mixture described in paragraph
(c)(1)(i) of this section is not blended taxable fuel if, during
a calendar quarter in which the blender removes or sells the
mixture, all such mixtures removed or sold by the blender
contain, in the aggregate, less than 400 gallons of liquid
described in paragraph (c)(1)(i)(B) of this section.


Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [biofuel] WVO for heat, preliminary results

2002-11-25 Thread studio53


Stephen,
How is that home heating oil/WVO project coming along. Haven't heard from
you in quite some time. You still filtering SVO?
---
Jesse Parris  |  studio53  |  53 maitland rd  |  stamford, ct  06906
203.324.4371www.jesseparris.com/

- Original Message -
From: sbosco9 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2002 9:36 PM
Subject: [biofuel] WVO for heat, preliminary results


 Hello from the newbie on the list

 I have been having some success with burning WVO in a traditional oil
 burner.


Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[biofuel] Methane Digestor

2002-11-25 Thread Jack Kenworthy


  Hello,
We have a constructed wetland at our school that processes our sewage from 
roughly 70 people.  The system has a settling tank where solids are seperated 
out before sending the fluid waste into the wetland gardens.  Every year or 
so, the solids build up and need to be pumped out.  I am wondering if anyone 
knows if there is a way to build a digestor to be able to extract methane from 
the solid waste?  I have seen systems in Cuba using cow manure, but never with 
human waste.  Any ideas?
thanks,
jk
Jack Kenworthy
Sustainable Systems Director
The Cape Eleuthera Island School
242-359-7625 ph. 242-359-7697 fax
www.islandschool.org


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--
·FREE Health Insurance Quotes-eHealthInsurance.com
http://us.click.yahoo.com/1.voSB/RnFFAA/46VHAA/FGYolB/TM
-~-

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[biofuel] chrysler diesel and hybrid news

2002-11-25 Thread murdoch


http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/021125/autos_chrysler_1.html

Reuters
Chrysler to roll out diesel SUV, hybrid pickup
Monday November 25, 4:22 pm ET 
By Justin Hyde 


NEW YORK, Nov 25 (Reuters) - DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler arm
(NYSE:DCX - News; XETRA:DCXGn.DE - News) said on Monday it will roll
out a gasoline-electric hybrid pickup truck next year and a
diesel-powered sport utility vehicle in 2004, in a bid to test
consumers' willingness to pay for better fuel economy.
ADVERTISEMENT
 
 
But Chrysler said it had cancelled another hybrid vehicle that had
been planned for 2003 because it could not build a business case for
it. And Chrysler executives warned that hybrid- and diesel-powered
models would not be built in significant volume unless U.S. customers
accept their higher costs.

Chrysler President Dieter Zetsche said Chrysler would sell a Jeep
Liberty SUV powered by a Mercedes diesel engine in the second half of
2004 that will have up to 30 percent better fuel economy than a
gasoline-powered model.

Zetsche said Chrysler will build about 5,000 diesel Liberty models to
see how well American consumers accept diesels. Chrysler already sells
diesel-powered Jeeps in Europe, but has to tweak the Liberty slightly
to meet U.S. standards.

This diesel Liberty is an opportunity to test customer acceptance of
modern, clean-burning diesel technology, Zetsche said during a
conference in New York.

U.S. automakers, facing tougher government rules on fuel economy, have
been touting diesel engines as a way to improve efficiency, reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and cut U.S. dependence on imported oil.
While diesels get better fuel economy than gasoline engines, they also
produce more nitrous oxide, a component of smog, as well as
particulates that have been linked to lung disease.

In Europe, diesels account for roughly 40 percent of all new vehicle
sales, thanks to tax incentives and low-sulfur diesel fuel, which
allows automakers to better control emissions. The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency has ordered U.S. oil refiners to begin producing
low-sulfur diesel fuel in 2006, a regulation oil companies have been
fighting.

American automakers have also been loathe to roll out diesels in the
United States for fear of rejection by consumers who remember
Detroit's diesel experiments of the 1970s and 1980s, which were renown
for their noise, smell and lack of reliability.

Chrysler research found that only about 6 percent of buyers were
interested in diesels. Zetsche also said Chrysler would not be able to
raise the Liberty's prices to cover all the extra cost of the diesel.

Obviously, to change the image of diesels in the customer's mind is a
heroic challenge, and we don't know what is possible, Zetsche said.
We hope we'll have a positive surprise about the demand.

HYBRID SHUFFLE

Bernard Robertson, Chrysler's senior vice president of engineering
technology and regulatory affairs, said the company had cancelled a
hybrid vehicle slated to be built in 2003 that would have used
electric motors to provide all-wheel-drive.

Two years ago, Chrysler said it would offer its hybrid system as an
option on its Dodge Durango SUV that could provide a 20 percent boost
in fuel economy. But the Durango was delayed after testing found the
hybrid system did not perform as well as planned. While Chrysler
tested the system on other vehicles, Robertson said the fuel economy
and all-wheel-drive benefits were not enough to offset the extra cost.

We liked the idea, but the execution just got a bit more expensive
than we had intended, Robertson told Reuters.

To keep its pledge to build a hybrid in 2003, Chrysler accelerated the
Dodge Ram Contractor's Special hybrid pickup truck by a year. The Ram
hybrid uses a different system than the Durango, placing an electric
motor between the gasoline engine and the transmission. It also
features an electrical panel that drops down from the side of the
truck, allowing it to do double duty as a low-cost generator.

That model, and a similar proposal from General Motors Corp. (NYSE:GM
- News) ,have drawn the attention of the U.S. Army, which sees combat
versions of hybrid trucks helping to reduce its fuel demand. Chrysler
officials said while they had originally planned about 5,000 hybrid
Rams a year, an army contract could boost output substantially.

Ford Motor Co. (NYSE:F - News) is planning to introduce a hybrid
Escape SUV late next year and GM is planning on rolling out a hybrid
pickup in 2004. 


---

My opinions:

Nice to see Detroit bother to make more Diesel available to Joe
Consumer.  A little bit of cleaner-diesel or biodiesel and he might
really have something there.

As for the hybrid news, it would have been interesting to see
Chrysler's less conventional hybrid idea, just to see what would
happen, but it looks like higher efficiency was more difficult to
achieve than had been thought.  As for the conventional hybrid ideas,
obviously all three of the big three are

[biofuel] Re: Back Online


--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Kim  Garth Travis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Not only is Mother Nature in deep s___t, but we as a society are.  
I 
 often wish we could put back the old wood cutters cottages, in the 
 National forests, for the people that just don't fit our modern 
society. 
   They could be very useful to the rest of us and be much happier, 
 themselves.
 Bright Blessings,
 Kim
 


Kim,
I don't think that was a serious proposal, but I'll comment anyway.
In order to comply with all the environmental regulations concerning 
our National Forests, we would need to spend many thousands of 
dollars on Environmental Impact Studies, being sure to include the 
needed access road for the heavy trucks to get in to do soil-boring 
samples before allowing a Septic system or Well to be drilled. 
Outhouses and hand-dug Wells are not acceptable anymore. Then to 
build a 'cottage' to current building standards.
Top of the head estimate...10 years time and $200,000 for a 10X12 
foot shack. LOL

Motie


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--
áFREE Health Insurance Quotes-eHealthInsurance.com
http://us.click.yahoo.com/1.voSB/RnFFAA/46VHAA/FGYolB/TM
-~-

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [biofuel] Methane Digestor


Standard procedure in many countries to process human wastes in 
biogas digesters. In fact it's standard procedure at very many sewage 
treatment plants in the West, if on a more industrialized scale.

Hakan's links are great. So are Steve's (big page):
http://ww2.green-trust.org:8383/Methane.htm
Methane Digesters

Biogas digestion does NOT kill pathogens, as often claimed. Also the 
resultant sludge is said to be a good fertilizer, based on its levels 
of N, P and K. But there's a lot m, to fertilization than N, P and 
K - it is a biological matter, not merely a chemical one. Biogas 
sludge is loaded with VFAs and other contaminants that kill the soil 
life, including the worms and mycorrhizal fungi. For both these 
reasons, it is best to compost the sludge before use, processing it 
thoroughly as one component in an aerobic, thermophyllic composting 
operation where it will be exposed to prolonged temperatures above 60 
deg C. It is too wet for hot composting by itself and must be mixed 
with dry matter to attain the desired moisture content.
 
Best

Keith


  Hello,
We have a constructed wetland at our school that processes our 
sewage from roughly 70 people.  The system has a settling tank where 
solids are seperated out before sending the fluid waste into the 
wetland gardens.  Every year or so, the solids build up and need to 
be pumped out.  I am wondering if anyone knows if there is a way to 
build a digestor to be able to extract methane from the solid waste? 
I have seen systems in Cuba using cow manure, but never with human 
waste.  Any ideas?
thanks,
jk
Jack Kenworthy
Sustainable Systems Director
The Cape Eleuthera Island School
242-359-7625 ph. 242-359-7697 fax
www.islandschool.org


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--
·FREE Health Insurance Quotes-eHealthInsurance.com
http://us.click.yahoo.com/1.voSB/RnFFAA/46VHAA/FGYolB/TM
-~-

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[biofuel] Re: [biofuels-biz] BD Business and Ability to be Profitable-- does big vs small matter?


On the basis of this reasoning, it would then be best to eradicate 
small farms and small farmers, for instance, and have it all replaced 
by more efficient industrialized farming. Only it hasn't quite 
worked out that way. What you tend to get instead is less efficiency, 
or no efficiency, with large-scale externalizations, a poor product, 
and unhappy (or dead) consumers.

Exaggeration?

From the 1930's to the 1960's the free-range system was the popular 
way to raise poultry in the United states. It produced meaty, tender 
birds at a reasonable cost, using a reasonable amount of labor and 
providing valuable fertility to the land. Many farmers raised 
10,000-20,000 birds per year on short-grass pasture (range), both 
chickens and turkeys. With the rise of industrial agriculture and 
the development of the confinement broiler barn, this sustainable 
and profitable system was discontinued by means of withdrawing 
growers contracts. Left with no market or processing facilities the 
practice was abandoned within two or three years.

But the way it's been presented to the world is that the old ways 
were less efficient. Actually they were more efficient, in more ways 
than one, lacking, for instance, this current feature of the 
efficient industrialized poultry production systems:

 We don't need terrorists, we have industrial food suppliers.  Or is it
 possible that turkeys have become the weapon of choice for terrorists?
 How can we call a food system sustainable that sickens an estimated 1.3
 million Americans, hospitalizes 15,000, and kills 500 just from 
Salmonella every year?
 Maybe it would be a good time to switch to something besides a commercial
 turkey for Thanksgiving dinner.  http://www.cspinet.org/new/200211211.html

Let alone the manure lakes, groundwater pollution, etc etc etc. In 
France, for instance, in 2000, over 20% of all poultry (90 million 
birds) was profitably, cleanly and safely raised using the old 
free-range system.

Small-scale capitalism used to be the backbone of America. There's no 
evidence that its replacement by large-scale, centralized 
corporatization has brought any improvements, rather the contrary. 
Big ain't beautiful.

If you're looking for particular examples of small being both 
beautiful and profitable in the biodiesel field, you'd perhaps be 
finding rather more of them had not small producers been threatened 
with $25,000-per-day fines and told they had to pay $1 million-plus 
testing costs or else. Now quite a number of people are planning 
small-scale start-ups, seem to be happy with their business plans, 
and should soon be testing the waters at the EPA since they changed 
their tune.

It seems large producers, on the other hand, can't compete without 
continued soy subsidies, at the taxpayer's expense, and the 
continuance of a hopelessly uneconomic and unsustainable commodities 
overproduction system. The pricing structure of one such producer 
(?), examined here recently, would not seem to leave any 
justification for their support.

Of course public policy folks will not be rushing to support the 
decentralization of energy supply that is the only path to a 
sustainable energy future, regardless of the feedstock. That doesn't 
mean *only* small and local and *no* big and central, but it does 
mean an end to *only* big and central. There's room for both, and if 
there isn't then room will have to be made.

Best

Keith


Hello again.  One charge that I have heard public policy folks levy at small
producers is along the following lines:  Small producers can't make their
production business really profitable, so they're not going to be able to
contribute significantly to mass-market conversion from fossil fuels to
biofuels... Therefore, since our policy goal is to  maximize the use of
cleaner domestically produced fuels, when considering policy and public
support for BD, we'll seek to support large producers first and foremost.

I have also spoken with small producers who themselves say that they're not
sure how they'd make a profit...

So, I'd like to know have your thoughts, whether in agreement or in
rebuttal, regarding whether there is truth in this assertion, and also
regarding what the public policy relevance should or should not be if it
were true.  And if it is not true, then what/who are the success stories in
terms of profitable small-scale production and distribution?

Thanks,

Andrew Hoppin
The Biofuel Business Development Project
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Biofuel-Business-Plan/
Dedicated to Making An Immediate Impact
On the Long-Range Future of Humanity

N Space Labs, Inc.
Vizualize Your Business
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
646.221.5602 (mobile)
158 Lafayette St. 2nd Floor
NY, NY 10013

  -Original Message-
  From: Andrew Hoppin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 3:34 PM
  To: biofuels-biz@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: big vs small: quality assurance
 
 
  Hi folks.  I'm learning a

[biofuel] Re: [biofuels-biz] big vs small: quality assurance


Hello Andrew

There has been talk of setting up centralized labs on a sort of coop 
basis where small producers could send samples for testing at 
affordable rates. Several people have discussed this idea, in several 
countries, but I don't think anything has come of it yet.

After industry people approached us saying they wanted to collaborate 
with the grassroots biodiesel movement and were prepared to put 
resources and money into it, we proposed a model for technical input 
from industry that would have achieved this. This wasn't a one-way 
proposal - much of it dealt with how biofuelers could help industry's 
biodiesel promotional efforts. I was told the proposal was due for 
discussion next week - and never heard anything further. It was a 
good proposal. The whole exercise simply wasted a load of time and 
energy, and, I must admit, evaporated quite a lot of goodwill on my 
part.

So it remains undone. It should be done, but who among biofuelers has 
the resources or the time for such an effort? Certainly not me, 
having wasted that much time and more already, not being a producer 
nor interested in becoming one, and in fact not even being 
particularly interested in US developments - we're a 3rd World 
project after all.

Yet people like Mike Pelly do things like this, for nothing - this 
was on the front-page of a major newspaper, no easy feat.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/134545408_biodiesel30.html

Biodieselers do a great deal of this, very effective campaigning at 
every level, which most certainly helps industry. And they admit it. 
But they're apparently quite happy to accept it, for nothing given in 
exchange, beyond badmouthing us. And they're oh-so-shocked when we're 
sceptical of them.

Best

Keith Addison
Journey to Forever


Hi folks.  I'm learning a lot from the ongoing lively debate-- thank you.

Regarding the issue that has been at hand-- whether big producers deliver
better quality and reliability than small producers or not, and whether any
quality differences are cause for concern among potential consumers or not:
it seems to me that one way to nip this in the bud REGARDLESS of whether
there are valid concerns or not would be to have a credible BD fuel quality
testing service, perhaps with some public funding and perhaps with modest
fees paid by producers, perhaps on a sliding-scale based on the size of
their revenues.  If a producer wished to be certified that their fuel was
top-notch, they could avail themselves of this service by sending fuel
samples (each month?) and fleet managers, consumers, and anyone else who
cares would have an objective answer to their quality concerns, whether or
not those concerns are valid.  Has this ever been undertaken?

If not, would such a service effectively serve the purpose I've outlined,
and in what form (government, non-profit, or for-profit) would such a
service be most effectively delivered?

Andrew Hoppin
The Biofuel Business Development Project
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Biofuel-Business-Plan/
Dedicated to Making An Immediate Impact
On the Long-Range Future of Humanity

N Space Labs, Inc.
Vizualize Your Business
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
646.221.5602 (mobile)
158 Lafayette St. 2nd Floor
NY, NY 10013


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--
·FREE Health Insurance Quotes-eHealthInsurance.com
http://us.click.yahoo.com/1.voSB/RnFFAA/46VHAA/FGYolB/TM
-~-

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[biofuel] Chuck's the culprit! - was Re: [biofuels-biz] Digest Number 410


LOL, Chuck!

Rest easy, somehow I don't think they're going to have you taken out 
and shot for it. On the other hand, thousands of people have visited 
your page at our site, which is surely a useful aid to making good 
fuel.

http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_processor4.html
Biodiesel processors:
Chuck Ranum's biodiesel processor

Flax oil's the same as linseed oil, what they make varnish out of. 
The BD's not as bad as flax oil SVO might have been though.

Regards

Keith


FOR THE RECORD:

Homebrew Biodiesel problems in the mid-west:

I am the homebrewer who is responsible for TWO failures in ND.

One:  a good friend, who was so anxious to try BD twisted my arm into
letting him have 45 gallons of unwashed BD, which clogged filters on his 6.5
turbo GM,  no other problems.  It was an early batch while I was still
learning.

Two:  another buddy, a farmer, wanted fuel, even off-road diesel was quite
high at the time, so I let him buy 165 gallons of BD for his tractor (making
hay for his horses)  There were no problems, UNTIL the fuel had sat in the
tank for a year.  The tractor wouldn't start.  The fuel pickup screen was
ruined, clogged with a varnish-like material, and the filter was the same.
They rebuilt the injector pump, but the rebuilder said he doubted the fuel
wrecked it, it just looked worn out.  The pump was the original, and the
tractor was pushing 25 years-old.  I checked my records, and found that the
fuel he got the last time, was from a batch made from Flax-seed oil.  The
test batches had been fine, but after setting for a week or so a varnish
formed on the surface that was not soluble in anything I tried.  I also had
a few teething problems when I started using BD in my diesel van, but didn't
report them to anyone, so I doubt they made it into popular myth.  I accept
full responsibility for these failures, and the other parties don't blame
me, understanding that we all got excited and a bit ahead of ourselves.
They also understood that teething-problems, as it were, are to be expected
when the neophyte starts down a new path.
As you all know, since then, many hundreds of gallons have passed through
the injectors with no trouble at all.

These are the only incidents I am aware of in my part of the country, and
have, in no way, set back the BD cause.

Chuck (missed my target production for the year, couldn't get enough WVO!)


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--
·FREE Health Insurance Quotes-eHealthInsurance.com
http://us.click.yahoo.com/1.voSB/RnFFAA/46VHAA/FGYolB/TM
-~-

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[biofuel] Re: Back Online


--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 Dear Kim,
 
 You are expanding the issue with several potentials, but you
 are very right. A lot of good could be done by a solution that
 you indicate.
 
 Hakan
 
 
 At 08:19 AM 11/25/2002 -0600, you wrote:
 Not only is Mother Nature in deep s___t, but we as a society are.  
I
 often wish we could put back the old wood cutters cottages, in the
 National forests, for the people that just don't fit our modern 
society.
They could be very useful to the rest of us and be much happier,
 themselves.
 Bright Blessings,
 Kim
 



 Kim and Hakan,
 The solution you propose would be an example of Good Stewardship, 
and common sense, and under our current legal system will not be 
tolerated. It is more politically-correct to let a whole forest burn 
to ashes, than to allow someone to harvest a dead tree for profit. If 
an area is heavily damaged in a windstorm, instead of allowing 
loggers to salvage some of the broken trees, the paperwork for 
regulatory compliance takes several years, by which time the wood has 
deteriorated beyond salvage, and is then left as a fire hazard for 
lack of funding to hire someone to remove it.
 Only a few years ago, much of the employment is this area was small 
self-employed loggers doing salvage and selective harvesting. It was 
a comfortable Niche for many of them who didn't have the Capital to 
buy the huge equipment needed to be economically efficient in clear-
cut operations. The big loggers, with their huge equipment, can't 
waste their time to clean up a few dozen trees, if they could even 
get their big equipment to a tree that needed removal without 
destroying several healthy trees.
 A couple of comparisons would be trying to garden with a 300 HP 
tractor and 30 foot disc versus farming 1000 acres with a handheld 
rototiller and a hoe.
 Or cutting the grass on a Golf course with a push lawn mower versus 
trimming between your flower beds with a 12 foot gangmower.

 The 'environmentalists' with either pseudo-science or total 
ignorance are destroying our forests through political activism. I 
would like to see their ideas implemented first in City Parks, where 
they can be eyewitnesses to their foolishness. If a tree is struck by 
lightning, or a huge branch gets broken in a windstorm, don't let 
them clean it up. Let them practice in their own yard at home. Quit 
clear-cutting that beautiful lawn. Let nature take it's course. 
Continue the practice for 10 years as an evaluation period before 
distributing their 'expertise' to the rest of us.

Ranting again, (sorry)
Motie


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--
áFREE Health Insurance Quotes-eHealthInsurance.com
http://us.click.yahoo.com/1.voSB/RnFFAA/46VHAA/FGYolB/TM
-~-

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [biofuel] Methane Digestor

2002-11-25 Thread Pagandai Pannirselvam


   Yes we have experience in Brasil

 --- Jack Kenworthy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
escreveu:Hello,
 We have a constructed wetland at our school that
 processes our sewage from roughly 70 people.  The
 system has a settling tank where solids are
 seperated out before sending the fluid waste into
 the wetland gardens.  Every year or so, the solids
 build up and need to be pumped out.  I am wondering
 if anyone knows if there is a way to build a
 digestor to be able to extract methane from the
 solid waste?  I have seen systems in Cuba using cow
 manure, but never with human waste.  Any ideas?
 thanks,
 jk
 Jack Kenworthy
 Sustainable Systems Director
 The Cape Eleuthera Island School
 242-359-7625 ph. 242-359-7697 fax
 www.islandschool.org
 
 
 [Non-text portions of this message have been
 removed]
 
 
  

=
Dr.PAGANDAI.V.PANNIRSELVAM  Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
COORDINATOR RESEARCH BASE   Phone: 55 84 2153769 or 217 1557 - 207.7278
UFRN/CENTRO DE TECNOLOGIA   Fax  : 55 84 2153770 or Fax(phone) 217.1557
Chemical EngineeringCEP  : 59.072-970  
CAMPUS - UFRN/NATAL/RN  Brazil
--

___
Yahoo! Acesso Grtis
Internet rpida, grtis e fcil. Faa o download do discador agora mesmo.
http://br.acesso.yahoo.com/


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--
áFREE Health Insurance Quotes-eHealthInsurance.com
http://us.click.yahoo.com/1.voSB/RnFFAA/46VHAA/FGYolB/TM
-~-

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[biofuel] Re: Back Online


--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], James Slayden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Motie,
 
 I bless you for that link!  :)
 
 It's just what I was looking for.  
 
 James Slayden
 


 James,
 Glad to be of service, but I must humbly admit my intention was to 
be a smart-aleck!
 If you have a serious interest, I have many links to various wood 
processing/handling equipment. The 'Project' I have worked on for 
several years was to use 1000 tons/day of waste-wood products.
 Depending on your intended use, either a chipper or tub grinder may 
be more in line with your needs. They are more specialized and 
efficient for their respective uses. The link I provided was for a 
compromise between the 2 main uses.
Motie
PS: My grandkids love to watch the Demo Videos of these machines in 
action. The self-propelled Tracked version is controlled by radio 
Remote Control. BIG BOY TOY!!!


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--
áFREE Health Insurance Quotes-eHealthInsurance.com
http://us.click.yahoo.com/1.voSB/RnFFAA/46VHAA/FGYolB/TM
-~-

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Forests - was [biofuel] Re: Back Online