Fw: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
I wrote; - Original Message - From: Henri Naths [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 01 April, 2005 12:37 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come Keith, I think it is quite irrelevant who sold what to whom, Hypothetically,I have the all the means at my disposal to kill a very large amount of people, does it mean the people that educated me are responsible? how about my bank? The money will come from them.!? The supply source is irrelevant. I could use anything in my hypothetical backyard and I'm no genius.Anybody can. The world history is full of these people that murder millions. The right person will be in the right place at the right time to take them out. That's a given. Hopefully political b.s. that man orchestrates won't impede the job that has be done before these people go on their murderous rampage. War has it's casualties let's not be one of them. We live in free democratic countries where we can make biodiesel. How cool is that... H. - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 01 April, 2005 7:54 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come Henri Naths wrote: Hakan, I would like to give a humble option here, ( Hakan wrote;...Criminal, established by the fact that we now know that Iraq were no WMD threat to US. ) We took out Hitler for the same reason, Him and Suddam Hussein were weapons of mass destruction. H. Judging from past posts, I think Hakan and many others here are a little sceptical about claims that the US took out Hitler. As for Saddam, as is very well known and widely established beyond any possibility of doubt or controversy... http://www.progressive.org/0901/anth0498.html The Progressive magazine April 1998 Issue Anthrax for Export U.S. companies sold Iraq the ingredients for a witch's brew by William Blum The United States almost went to war against Iraq in February because of Saddam Hussein's weapons program. In his State of the Union address, President Clinton castigated Hussein for developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. You cannot defy the will of the world, the President proclaimed. You have used weapons of mass destruction before. We are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again. Most Americans listening to the President did not know that the United States supplied Iraq with much of the raw material for creating a chemical and biological warfare program. Nor did the media report that U.S. companies sold Iraq more than $1 billion worth of the components needed to build nuclear weapons and diverse types of missiles, including the infamous Scud. When Iraq engaged in chemical and biological warfare in the 1980s, barely a peep of moral outrage could be heard from Washington, as it kept supplying Saddam with the materials he needed to build weapons. From 1980 to 1988, Iraq and Iran waged a terrible war against each other, a war that might not have begun if President Jimmy Carter had not given the Iraqis a green light to attack Iran, in response to repeated provocations. Throughout much of the war, the United States provided military aid and intelligence information to both sides, hoping that each would inflict severe damage on the other. Noam Chomsky suggests that this strategy is a way for America to keep control of its oil supply: It's been a leading, driving doctrine of U.S. foreign policy since the 1940s that the vast and unparalleled energy resources of the Gulf region will be effectively dominated by the United States and its clients, and, crucially, that no independent indigenous force will be permitted to have a substantial influence on the administration of oil production and price. During the Iran-Iraq war, Iraq received the lion's share of American support because at the time Iran was regarded as the greater threat to U.S. interests. According to a 1994 Senate report, private American suppliers, licensed by the U.S. Department of Commerce, exported a witch's brew of biological and chemical materials to Iraq from 1985 through 1989. Among the biological materials, which often produce slow, agonizing death, were: * Bacillus Anthracis, cause of anthrax. * Clostridium Botulinum, a source of botulinum toxin. * Histoplasma Capsulatam, cause of a disease attacking lungs, brain, spinal cord, and heart. * Brucella Melitensis, a bacteria that can damage major organs. * Clostridium Perfringens, a highly toxic bacteria causing systemic illness. * Clostridium tetani, a highly toxigenic substance. Also on the list: Escherichia coli (E. coli), genetic materials, human and bacterial DNA, and dozens of other pathogenic biological agents. These biological materials were not attenuated or weakened and were capable of reproduction, the Senate report stated. It was later learned that these microorganisms exported by the United States
Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device
Keith, I'll take two! Ah heck, make it a six pack. - Original Message - From: Keith Addisonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 12:42 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device Hi Craig Keith, I haven't laughed that hard in the past 74 3/8 hours! Oh well I put a stop payment on my $1,000 check just to get in line to order the 15:1 energy unit! Still looking for that cold fusion guy from RONCO! :-) Great, isn't it? Humans, you gotta love 'em! While you've got your checkbook handy... Never mind the guy from RONCO, I've developed this wonderful technique of producing cold fusion in a Dr Pepper bottle, just add the secret ingredients and shake it 3.5 times... Interested? Keith - Original Message - From: Keith Addisonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 8:11 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device I see why they call it down under now.Perpetural motion isn't possible on this planet. I think not in this universe.This guy has slid over into another dimension or what? JD2005 Eric Krieg lists 78 free energy scams here, doesn't seem to get into the zero-point stuff and instant cold fusion, so there's all that besides: http://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.htmlhttp://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.htmlhttp://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.htmlhttp://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.html Eric's history of Perpetual Motion and Free Energy Machines Plus: How to become a Free Energy con man http://www.phact.org/e/con_man.htmhttp://www.phact.org/e/con_man.htmhttp://www.phact.org/e/con_man.htmhttp://www.phact.org/e/con_man.htm And: The Museum of Unworkable Devices http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htmhttp://www.lhup.edu/~dhttp://www.lhup.edu/~d simanek/museum/unwork.htm Enjoy! Keith - Original Message - From: D. Mindock To: Undisclosed-Recipient:; Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 12:45 AM Subject: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device This device (see attached pic) is due for release, starting in Australia where Lutec Pty Ltd is located... ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuelhttp://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.htmlhttp://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Biofuel and Oil Burning Furnaces
Greetings Gustl, I was under the impression from my reading that viton rubber would be ok in contact with biodiesel. If I«m wrong about this someone please say so. All metal is definitely better as I imagine even viton will degrade in a 5 or 10 year time span just due to the heat. As far as the burner is concerned I think if it can run diesel heating oil it should be fine with Bio D. Unless it«s really cold the Bio D should flow even better. Anyone else have comments? Tom Irwin -Original Message- From: Gustl Steiner-Zehender To: Biofuel Sent: 1/04/05 9:00 Subject: [Biofuel] Biofuel and Oil Burning Furnaces Hallo Folks, We have run out of wood and I am not fit to cut and split it at this time so we had to use our fuel oil furnace which needed more attention than I was qualified to give it. I spoke to Erv, the repairman, about the problems with diesel Nr. 1 and Nr. 2 and then asked him about biofuel and the furnace. He told me there were no rubber parts at all that would touch the biofuel and that the only thing which would need to be changed for it to work would possibly be the nozzle. I have seen this topic several times on the list but don't remember the details of the discussion. Thought this might be of some use to someone. I know I will be heating with biofuel this winter. Happy Happy, Gustl -- Je mehr wir haben, desto mehr fordert Gott von uns. We can't change the winds but we can adjust our sails. The safest road to Hell is the gradual one - the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts. C. S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters Es gibt Wahrheiten, die so sehr auf der Stra§e liegen, da§ sie gerade deshalb von der gewhnlichen Welt nicht gesehen oder wenigstens nicht erkannt werden. Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music. George Carlin The best portion of a good man's life - His little, nameless, unremembered acts of kindness and of love. William Wordsworth ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
Hi All, Any information like this on oil from palm trees? I«m not a fan of soybean because of Monsanto. Thanks, Tom Irwin -Original Message- From: Jan Warnqvist To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 1/04/05 5:39 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Hello Keith and thank you for your input. I agree with you, blending an oil with a high IV with one with a lower, should produce an average IV. But in some course literature I read some time ago, it said that oil spill from rape seed oil will leave you two months to wipe it up before it polymerizes, soy bean oil will leave you two weeks, and linseed oil two days. From this way of reasoning one can conclude, when comparing the average IV values of each oil, that blending rape seed oil with llinseed oil to an average IV value of soybean oil, will produce an oil with similar polymerization properties as soybean oil. And further- if producing of biodiesel out of high IV oils, will lower the fatty acids« ability to polymerize one can conclude that the first step of polmerization takes place within the triglyceride molecule, possibly with bridges of oxygen between the double bonds of different fatty acids. In methyl ester the fatty acids with the right will to polymerize have some difficulties finding each other and build bridges. Give me some input on this way of explanation ,Keith ! Best regards Jan Jan Warnqvist AGERATEC AB [EMAIL PROTECTED] + 46 554 201 89 +46 70 499 38 45 - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 7:28 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Hello DB and all Anyone making bio-diesel should be concerned with the IV of the oil and the polymerzation of the engine. After a careful reading of the australian report WVO as a Diesel replacement fuel it is obvious that they are concerned with it's use as straight veggy oil and Not so much Bio-diesel.( I would be concerned too) Here is a direct quote from that report. Trans esterifying triglyceride oils and fats with monohydric alcohols to form biodiesel largly eliminates the tendency of the oils and fats to polymerization and auto-oxidation.. The base crop for european biodiesel being rapeseed with a IV of 98 is a reasonable goal to acheve. Most of my stock is soy oil and much of it is hydrogenated. I also get cottonseed and peanut oil along with canola (rapeseed) I no longer use straight soy oil and try to make a blend. In the past when I only had soy oil based biodiesel I would only run BD50. I an no longer worried about the IV of the oil and if you are then just run BD50.Drive down the road Happy...DB ..PS. I have been making biodiesel since '02 and have made 1000's of gallons with zero problems. I agree, and thankyou, but I'm not sure I follow the logic of your solution, attractive though it is. Does an IV value average out when you blend different oils? Other things will, of course, like say FFA levels, you'll end up with an average and that's that. But in a blend with biodiesel made from a high IV oil with biodiesel made from lower IV oils, while the proportion of high IV oil will be lower, what's to stop it oxidising and polymerising just the same? Blending it doesn't change its makeup. I'm not sure what effect blending it with petrodiesel would have, but that wouldn't change its makeup either, it still has its double bonds to be broken down and polymerise. All you'd get is proportionately less polymerisation, no? So it'll take longer to gunge up the engine. That doesn't solve the problem, just mitigates it. Sorry, I don't know if this is right or not, just trying to be logical - maybe it doesn't work like that, but I'd like to know. Regards Keith - Original Message - From: TLC Orchids and Such [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 4:37 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?] Where can we get the veg-based motor oil? Can better oil filtering help with this problem? Racor has a motor oil filter used in race cars. - Original Message - From: stephan torak [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; stephan torak [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 5:45 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?] Thanks for the follow up, Keith. I have since spent many hours researching the issue and have found some relevant facts here: www.blt.bmlf.gv.at/vero/veroeff/0100_Technical_performance_of_methyl_e sthe rs _e.pdf #www.blt.bmlf.gv.atveroveroeff0100_Tec Keith Addison wrote: Hello Stephan, Jan and all I asked Elsbett's Alexander Noack for some comment on what he was quoted as saying about soy oil, and got a very brief response from him: Hi Keith, this all is nearly correct, but only for direct injection
RE: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
Hi all, Wow! Carter gave the green light for that? Remove my humanitarian label immediately. Maybe it«s the guilt that«s driven him to build all those homes for humanity. Tom -Original Message- From: Keith Addison To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 1/04/05 11:54 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come Henri Naths wrote: Hakan, I would like to give a humble option here, ( Hakan wrote;...Criminal, established by the fact that we now know that Iraq were no WMD threat to US. ) We took out Hitler for the same reason, Him and Suddam Hussein were weapons of mass destruction. H. Judging from past posts, I think Hakan and many others here are a little sceptical about claims that the US took out Hitler. As for Saddam, as is very well known and widely established beyond any possibility of doubt or controversy... http://www.progressive.org/0901/anth0498.html The Progressive magazine April 1998 Issue Anthrax for Export U.S. companies sold Iraq the ingredients for a witch's brew by William Blum The United States almost went to war against Iraq in February because of Saddam Hussein's weapons program. In his State of the Union address, President Clinton castigated Hussein for developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. You cannot defy the will of the world, the President proclaimed. You have used weapons of mass destruction before. We are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again. Most Americans listening to the President did not know that the United States supplied Iraq with much of the raw material for creating a chemical and biological warfare program. Nor did the media report that U.S. companies sold Iraq more than $1 billion worth of the components needed to build nuclear weapons and diverse types of missiles, including the infamous Scud. When Iraq engaged in chemical and biological warfare in the 1980s, barely a peep of moral outrage could be heard from Washington, as it kept supplying Saddam with the materials he needed to build weapons. From 1980 to 1988, Iraq and Iran waged a terrible war against each other, a war that might not have begun if President Jimmy Carter had not given the Iraqis a green light to attack Iran, in response to repeated provocations. Throughout much of the war, the United States provided military aid and intelligence information to both sides, hoping that each would inflict severe damage on the other. Noam Chomsky suggests that this strategy is a way for America to keep control of its oil supply: It's been a leading, driving doctrine of U.S. foreign policy since the 1940s that the vast and unparalleled energy resources of the Gulf region will be effectively dominated by the United States and its clients, and, crucially, that no independent indigenous force will be permitted to have a substantial influence on the administration of oil production and price. During the Iran-Iraq war, Iraq received the lion's share of American support because at the time Iran was regarded as the greater threat to U.S. interests. According to a 1994 Senate report, private American suppliers, licensed by the U.S. Department of Commerce, exported a witch's brew of biological and chemical materials to Iraq from 1985 through 1989. Among the biological materials, which often produce slow, agonizing death, were: * Bacillus Anthracis, cause of anthrax. * Clostridium Botulinum, a source of botulinum toxin. * Histoplasma Capsulatam, cause of a disease attacking lungs, brain, spinal cord, and heart. * Brucella Melitensis, a bacteria that can damage major organs. * Clostridium Perfringens, a highly toxic bacteria causing systemic illness. * Clostridium tetani, a highly toxigenic substance. Also on the list: Escherichia coli (E. coli), genetic materials, human and bacterial DNA, and dozens of other pathogenic biological agents. These biological materials were not attenuated or weakened and were capable of reproduction, the Senate report stated. It was later learned that these microorganisms exported by the United States were identical to those the United Nations inspectors found and removed from the Iraqi biological warfare program. The report noted further that U.S. exports to Iraq included the precursors to chemical-warfare agents, plans for chemical and biological warfare production facilities, and chemical-warhead filling equipment. The exports continued to at least November 28, 1989, despite evidence that Iraq was engaging in chemical and biological warfare against Iranians and Kurds since as early as 1984. The American company that provided the most biological materials to Iraq in the 1980s was American Type Culture Collection of Maryland and Virginia, which made seventy shipments of the anthrax-causing germ and other pathogenic agents, according to a 1996 Newsday story. Other American companies also provided Iraq with the chemical or biological compounds, or the
Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device
entail huge men standing in the doorway to the guys home.threatening to make the guy disappear if he pursues this technology. surprisingly I have seen this device before a local guy around here was on the news saying the U.S. wont give him a patent on the devise. the basic argument people have with this device is that if you ground the machine it only produces less than 8 percent of the input, however ungrounded it produces like 1500 times the energy you put into it. even if the universe grants this machine special privileges to ignore the law of thermal dynamics the only way to get it to work is to leave the whole system ungrounded. - Original Message - From: D. Mindock [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Undisclosed-Recipient:; Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 12:45 AM Subject: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device This device (see attached pic) is due for release, starting in Australia where Lutec Pty Ltd is located, and then to all countries where licensing is completed. This device can furnish the all the electricity needed by the average home and runs on battery power. It produces 15 times more energy than it uses from the battery input. It's installed in the home where it's to be used. See their website at: www.lutec.com.au It appears to be the real deal. Let's hope it is. Peace and light, D. Mindock P.S. It is interesting that the Australian government would not provide any startup help whatsoever. Let's hope nothing stops the release of this new technology. It does seem that every time something like this comes along it is trashed by vested powers. It is not hard to imagine this technology powering cars and trucks, producing zero pollution and unlimited mileage. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device
- Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 11:42 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device Hi Craig Keith, I haven't laughed that hard in the past 74 3/8 hours! Oh well I put a stop payment on my $1,000 check just to get in line to order the 15:1 energy unit! Still looking for that cold fusion guy from RONCO! :-) Great, isn't it? Humans, you gotta love 'em! While you've got your checkbook handy... Never mind the guy from RONCO, I've developed this wonderful technique of producing cold fusion in a Dr Pepper bottle, just add the secret ingredients and shake it 3.5 times... Interested? Keith - Original Message - From: Keith Addisonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 8:11 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device I see why they call it down under now.Perpetural motion isn't possible on this planet. I think not in this universe.This guy has slid over into another dimension or what? JD2005 Eric Krieg lists 78 free energy scams here, doesn't seem to get into the zero-point stuff and instant cold fusion, so there's all that besides: http://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.htmlhttp://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.html Eric's history of Perpetual Motion and Free Energy Machines Plus: How to become a Free Energy con man http://www.phact.org/e/con_man.htmhttp://www.phact.org/e/con_man.htm And: The Museum of Unworkable Devices http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htmhttp://www.lhup.edu/~d simanek/museum/unwork.htm Enjoy! Keith - Original Message - From: D. Mindock To: Undisclosed-Recipient:; Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 12:45 AM Subject: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device This device (see attached pic) is due for release, starting in Australia where Lutec Pty Ltd is located... ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Eritrea leads the way in the environment. biodiesel/ ethanol next project
thanks for the info. I guess we wil have to buy methanol. We have a home in Eritrea, in the highlands, and working on a pilot project in the lowlands of the gash barka region to demonstrate a practical solution to the energy crisis. Eritrea has banned all personal gasoline and diesel purchases since last november and the biodiesel/ethanol project is timely, once the threat of another US backed Ethiopian invasion is dealt with. The government is extremely proactive environmentally with major water conservation projects focusing on building thousands of microdams, reforestation and the award winning Manazar mangrove project on the Red Sea in Massawa (with a time release fertilizer package buried at the base of the mangroves lasting 10 years) mangroves are the future of salt water farming, providing both seed and foliage in desert regions to support animal husbandry, as well as humidifying the desert and soaking up tons and tons of co2. To see the amazing soil conservation and reforestation efforts nationally in Eritrea is really an inspiration and example of what a real national service program for the youth can do. What is needed now is rain and peace and biodiesel/ethanol to free up hard foriegn exchange for water, electricity, health and education development. The good thing about Eritrea is the lack of corruption in the government, the close connection the leadership of the country has with the people and the high level of unity and consciousness of the people. The main problem facing Eritrea, as in much of the world, is the US...even the terrible drought is a much smaller problem with all the ground water the country has... selam and rain for the Horn of Africa, tom From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 03:46:01 +0900 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Methanol backyard manufacturing possible? Hello Tom As a newcomer to the biodiesel world I was wondering if it was possible to make methanol in your backyard so to speak? No. We've been discussing this since the list was founded five years ago, but nobody's found a solution yet. Dr Tom Reed, who probably knows more about methanol than most, told me we just aren't there yet. Walt Patrick of Windward posted some interesting information some time ago and said his organisation would be working on it, but we've heard nothing since. You can check it in the archives if you like. And the other question is it possible to make biodiesel with ethanol? Not for novices: Ethyl esters -- making ethanol biodiesel http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make2.html#ethylester I am putting together a proposal for an East African country to follow Brazils lead and have to do some homework first. There have been enquiries and initiatives from quite a few African countries concerning ethyl esters, but we've never heard anything further. I'd investigate it thoroughly first before recommending anything if I were you. Best wshes Keith selam, tom mountain ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
War has it's causalities. let us not be one of them. people make themselves victims of situations No need for more casualties. Sudam and his despots had a mural of 911painted on the side of a building.. people are responsible for there own actions not anybody else. Not you , me or the U.S. government.If someone is going to murder someone they are responsible for that action. Would you rather live in an undemocratic country? What exactly are your option.? My grand patents died in the ww2. Who took out Hitler? Ho-hum?? would you rather have some rogue government agent throw you in jail for being a security threat How about your whole family killed because you have the wrong religious belief (note quotations) There are places on this planet where people are murdered and raped en mass and there is never any media coverage because it is not politically correct. H. ps it's not perfect and it never will be... stop sniveling. - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 01 April, 2005 1:23 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come Keith, I think it is quite irrelevant who sold what to whom, Even if the very same people who sold them then accuse those same people who they sold them to of having them and use it as an excuse to illegally invade their countries, causing maybe 100,000 deaths in the doing? Even though it turns out they don't have them anymore. Saddam a mass murderer? Maybe, but up until very recently it was all okay because he was our mass-murderer - even as far as okaying his invasion of Kuwait. Yes, that's right, you didn't know? When the US invaded Iraq he was no threat to anyone, just another tin-pot dictator brought to ruin by the people who'd supported him, so what's new? And now? http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=342672005 Starving Iraqi children double after war THE number of children starving in Iraq has almost doubled since the war, a United Nations report has warned. Etc etc etc. Hypothetically,I have the all the means at my disposal to kill a very large amount of people, does it mean the people that educated me are responsible? how about my bank? The money will come from them.!? The supply source is irrelevant. I could use anything in my hypothetical backyard and I'm no genius.Anybody can. The word history is full of these people that murder millions. The right person will be in the right place at the right time to take them out. That's a given. Hopefully political b.s. that man orchestrates won't impede the job that has be done before these people go on their murderous rampage. War has it's casualties let's not be one of them. You're too late - the aggressors are as much casualties as the victims are. We live in free democratic countries There seems tobe some disagreement here about that, and it seems to be rather substantial. where we can make biodiesel. How cool is that... H. Ho-hum. I recommend a crash course of William Blum for a realignment of your views of just who it is that murders millions that is more in line with reality and history. The people you referred to as we (We took out Hitler...) are not quite as you see them. Try these: http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/41438/ An Interview with William Blum - The Granma Moses of Radical Writing http://members.aol.com/superogue/homepage.htm Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower, by William Blum http://members.aol.com/bblum6/American_holocaust.htm Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II, by William Blum http://members.aol.com/bblum6/American_holocaust.htm The American Holocaust Or try this for starters, since it seems you're at the beginner stage: Since World War II, the U.S. government has given more than $200 billion in military aid to train, equip, and subsidize more than 2.3 million troops and internal security forces in more than eighty countries, the purpose being not to defend them from outside invasions but to protect ruling oligarchs and multinational corporate investors from the dangers of domestic anti-capitalist insurgency. Among the recipients have been some of the most notorious military autocracies in history, countries that have tortured, killed or otherwise maltreated large numbers of their citizens because of their dissenting political views, as in Turkey, Zaire, Chad, Pakistan, Morocco, Indonesia, Honduras, Peru, Colombia, El Salvador, Haiti, Cuba (under Batista), Nicaragua (under Somoza), Iran (under the Shah), the Philippines (under Marcos), and Portugal (under Salazar). U.S. leaders profess a dedication to democracy. Yet over the past five decades, democratically elected reformist governments in Guatemala, Guyana, the Dominican Republic, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay, Syria, Indonesia (under Sukarno), Greece, Argentina, Bolivia, Haiti, and numerous other nations were overthrown by pro-capitalist militaries
RE: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device
Greetings all, If nothing else, well said! There is much we do not know about magnetism in general. I am facinated by the life of Nicola Tesla. He seems far ahead of his time. When something goes against what many of us have been taught and accept as truth we often react critically. As a scientist I accept this criticism even when harse as relatively benign. It«s part of the scientific process. We in science do not really prove anything. We rather good at disproving things. But no scientist worth his salt will give you anything more than a probability that something is the truth. I appreciate your input but with this, as the saying goes, I«m from Missouri I have to be shown. Thanks, Tom Irwin -Original Message- From: D. Mindock To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 1/04/05 5:10 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device To All, I must say first of all that I was only acting as the bearer of the information. I also did not say that I believed it was real, only that I hoped that it was. Anything wrong with that? If you read the Lutec website you will see that they do not want your money, even if you offered it to them. (My friend Renee has known co-inventor John since the early 80's when he was working on this device. She later lost contact with him when he moved to Santa Cruz. She was surprised, relieved, and very happy to see that John might have finally got the device to work.) Now for Michael's point that no energy is produced since force x distance = energy. I don't know, but if the magnet is counteracting the force of gravity, it seems that something energetic must be doing this. Let's do a mental experiment. Suppose that a steel bearing is precisely balancing the force of gravity so that the bearing is suspended in space. Now let's introduce a very small magnet next to the bigger one that holding the bearing suspended. What will happen? The bearing will rise against the force of gravity until it contacts the magnet. Work was done, obviously. But now the magnet is not doing classical work since the bearing is in contact with it. No movement implies no energy expenditure. Only potential energy remains. The inventors compare this situation to one using an electromagnet. If an electromagnet is used you must pump current through the coil winding to make the magnetic force arise. To hold the bearing in place against the force of gravity you must expend energy to hold the bearing. Energy is used up as the current goes through the windings. The magnet does this for free. That's their argument. Is it sound? Well, if the windings and source had zero resistance, the loss would be zero, and it too would be free. So it doesn't seem to be a valid argument. Maybe they were using baby talk to explain a complex idea? But by simplifying they missed the mark. It could be that this device is working in spite of an imperfect knowledge, by the inventors, of it. Inventors do a huge amount of trial and error steps as they try to perfect their concept. And most are not PhD's in quantum physics. WRT the patent, it is always safer to make the lesser claim. I think that's what they did. In a field as controversial as this, it is the pragmatic thing to do. It could be that the device is working but the reasons given are not the actual ones. It could be because of some unknown reaction. The bottom line to me is the measurements. If the energy output is greater than the energy input then it's working. It is very nice indeed though to know how/why the device is doing what it's doing. It might take a lot of lab analysis to get to that point. I would hope that some top flight lab is doing this kind of work on the Lutec device. (and others, but let's leave them aside). As I implied from my original message, I HOPE the Lutec device is real. I won't bet $1000 on it, for sure! Maybe $1. If it isn't the one we're all waiting for, from what I have read by some very smart people, it is only a matter of time before the Casimir Force and what it represents, really is harnessed, now that it's existence is proven. These physicists subject themselves to the disdain of their peers but nevertheless forge ahead. We should all be thankful that such people exist. In the past, all inventors/researchers of really new technology were ridiculed, some were even jailed or worse. (Big Oil must be very fearful that this technology gets out without their total control of it.) Peace and light, D. Mindock P.S. I don't consider this subject to be spam. It is about energy and that's what biofuel is. - Original Message - From: Michael Nehring [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 9:23 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device Hi, I've been on the list for a couple months now, reading happily, but have yet to post anything. So first, hi everyone:-). Internet scams or jokes are among my favorites, just because sometimes they're so funny and
RE: [Biofuel] Methanol backyard manufacturing possible?
Hi All, Just a quick word of caution about backyard methanol. It definitely is not ethanol. The direct meaning is it is a deadly toxin than can be readily absorbed through the skin and inhaled into the lungs. I«m certain a very small percentage of the population has a very small capacity to detoxify this in their liver. The vast majority can«t tolerate it at all. In direct laymans terms, first you go blind then you die usually of acidosis. Sounds scary and painful to me. I«m trying desperately to use ethanol when I make Bio D. I«ve had some success. But quite frankly I have never had a bad batch when I used methanol. I«m fairly certain I know why but won«t mention it here cause it«s probably in the archieves that Keith keeps pounding on me to read. :- Sorry but the letters are just too darn interesting for the moment. Tom Irwin -Original Message- From: Henri Naths To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 1/04/05 15:08 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Methanol backyard manufacturing possible? short answer yes. (methanol.. backyard) if money is no object.H. - Original Message - From: Thomas Mountain [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 31 March, 2005 6:20 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Methanol backyard manufacturing possible? As a newcomer to the biodiesel world I was wondering if it was possible to make methanol in your backyard so to speak? And the other question is it possible to make biodiesel with ethanol? I am putting together a proposal for an East African country to follow Brazils lead and have to do some homework first. selam, tom mountain ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
I'm not American but I'm awful proud of what the American soldiers did.You talk to the average American solider and he knows what he is doing . He's no dummy. As any solider in any war that puts his life on the line for his/her country to fight for life and justice and knows that his /her ultimate sacrifice will be for the better of future generation, my grandfather/mother fought against the oppressing Nazi regime and gave the ultimate sacrifice... that is to be honored.This is not a Michael Moore twisted fantasy/ disneyland film.This is reality. I think anybody that enjoys peace, life and a democratic/freedom of speech society and can sit around bad mouthing everything because someone ,somewhere said this or that is a hypocrite. I wouldn't want George Bush's job, would you? One slip up and someone is launching a nuclear attack on your country because the majority of American are of a certain religious background and infidels. Anybody think they can do better? I didn't think so. H. ps I've read the Koran. - Original Message - From: Michael Redler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 01 April, 2005 12:17 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come Hi Henry, Hitler and Suddam Hussein were weapons of mass destruction? I agree and sympathies with your statement. But; Boy, does that open Pandora's box. This causes one to ask all kinds of questions about sovereignty, hypocrisy and whether or not to act on what we think a dictator might do (the Bush administration's current policy) in the future. Mike R Henri Naths [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hakan, I would like to give a humble option here, ( Hakan wrote;...Criminal, established by the fact that we now know that Iraq were no WMD threat to US. ) We took out Hitler for the same reason, Him and Suddam Hussein were weapons of mass destruction. H. - Original Message - From: Hakan Falk To: Sent: 31 March, 2005 7:29 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come Bob, You were right and I am wrong and I am glad that I did get a very good explanation on how Hubbert could be so right. It also explains why president Carter was so genuinely worried, when he developed his energy plan. He had the foresight to realize that Hubbert was right. It also explains why we see the surge in the genuine hate of Americans. It is the cost of aggressive and egoistic foreign policies, that resulted in about 10 more years of artificially low oil prices. All of this, ending up in an almost criminal behavior by the Bush administration. I say almost, because I do not want to be too crude. The legal aspect of being criminal, is very clearly established, Criminal, established by the fact that we now know that Iraq were no WMD threat to US. By laying the responsibility at the feet of faulty US intelligence community, the Bush administration is trying deliberately to avoid their legal responsibility. A kind of reversed side of the well known argument it was not my fault, I was ordered to do it. LOL All of this supported by the America people, in a reelection of president Bush. I hear the false argument that only 48% voted him in office. This argument is poor mathematics, I cannot get to this result, when Bush won with a more than 3 million of the populous American vote. It was the first election of Bush, that he did not have a populous majority and he was put in office by the Courts. Hakan At 11:16 PM 3/31/2005, you wrote: All I know is what I read in the brief biography. (and what I recall from hearing about his work many years ago) Hakan Falk wrote: Bob, I stand corrected and the only excuse I have, is that I only brought forward a mistake that I read earlier. I remember that it was an article about the hearings in US congress in mid 70'. Will however not do this mistake again, but do not despair, there are many others I will do and surely in my far from perfect English. -:) What was his field at Berkeley? Hakan At 05:35 PM 3/31/2005, you wrote: Howdy Hakan, calling him a mathematician is a bit short-sighted. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marion_King_Hubbert Hubbert was born in San Saba, Texas in 1903. He attended the University of Chicago, where he received his B.S. in 1926, his M.S. in 1928, and his Ph.D in 1937, studying geology, mathematics, and physics. He worked as an assistant geologist for the Amerada Petroleum Company for two years while pursuing his Ph.D. He joined the Shell Oil Company in 1943, retiring in 1964. After he retired from Shell, he became a senior research geophysicist for the United States Geological Survey until his retirement in 1976. He also held positions as a professor of geology and geophysics at Stanford University from 1963 to 1968, and as a professor at Berkeley from 1973 to 1976. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
Hakan Of course I read your posts. The misunderstanding is all yours this time my friend, I assure you. However, the one whose English (at least as far as writing skills go) is so bad, is clearly me. The first paragraph of that last post was directed to you Hakan. The rest of that post was not intended for you at all. Again, the way that post reads, the surprise isn't that you misunderstood. The real surprise would be had you understood what I meant from the start. Antifossil. On Apr 1, 2005 6:34 PM, Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Antifossil, Of course you cannot agree with my earlier postings. You have not even read them, because if you had done that? THEN YOU WOULD KNOW THAT I AM SWEDISH AND LIVE IN SPAIN: LOL Thanks anyway, because I thought that my English is so bad, that it exclude the possibility that I was American. Hakan At 10:11 PM 4/1/2005, you wrote: Hakan, I am stunned almost beyond the point of being able to write this response. I say stunned because I think that for the first time, I actually agree with you. I doubt it will happen too often, if ever again, but as for this post, I can find no reason to disagree. Here is where I should have added a space and let the members of the list who are also Americans know that from this point on, I was addressing them. Like it or not, the Canadians, did not vote gwb (lower case used to display my absolute disdain) back into office, nor did the Norwegians, nor the Japanese, nor the Egyptians. You and I did the voting. You and I know who we voted for. If our actual stance, as American citizens of the 21st century is going to be that well we tried, but mean ole George didn't play fair, and now we don't know what to do but wait... then why in the hell should the rest of the world look up to us anymore! And what right do we have to complain we they make truthful, but difficult to hear (for Americans), statements. I would like to know what it is that we, as Americans, collectively, want? Status quo? I dont think that a collective voice, or direction, is even possible for America anymore. That may not be such a bad thing, but who knows. I do know this, I'm an American, and I will always be an American. I will work within whatever framework we have to make this country as strong as she can be. But I want to do it looking truth right square in the face. No more lies Bush. No more deceipt Bush. No more greed before all else corp. America. No more raping the globe corp. America. If I had my way there would simply be no more corporations. Sorry for the ranting, Antifossil. snip ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
Hi All, Correct me if I am wrong but I believe President Carter was the only President to be an engineer. I recall him as having a degree in nuclear engineering? True? He is also a great humanitarian. Here's a quote from the World's Finest Navy site: When Admiral Hyman G. Rickover (then captain) started his program to create nuclear powered submarines, Carter wanted to join the program and was interviewed by Rickover. On 1 June 1952, Carter was promoted to Lieutenant. Selected by Rickover, Carter was detached on 16 October 1952 from K-1 for duty with the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Division of Reactor Development in Schenectady, New York. From 3 November 1952 to 1 March 1953, he served on temporary duty with the Naval Rersearch Branch, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Washington D.C. to assist in the design and development of nuclear propulsion plants for naval vessels. From 1 March to 8 October, Carter was preparing to become the engineering officer for the nuclear power plant to be placed in USS Seawolf (SSN 575), one of the first submarines to operate on atomic power. He assisted in setting up and training for the enlisted men who would serve on Seawolf. During this time his father became very sick and died in July 1953. After his father's death, Carter resigned from the Navy to return to Georgia to manage the family interests. On 7 December 1961, he transferred to the retired reserve with the rank of Lieutenant at his own request. As for being a humanitarian, I agree with you. He personifies his Christianity in a manner that many who claim to be followers of Christ would do well to emulate. However, he was not an effective leader as president, had a LOT of trouble and little success getting his policies through the Congress. The Carter Doctrine, which essentially defines the Middle East as an area of strategic importance to the United States, has been subsequently used to justify various military actions in the region. Interestingly, I remember the wide perception of Mr. Carter as weak while he was president because he seemed reluctant to utilize the demoralized U.S. military (which was still reeling from Vietnam) as an instrument of policy. The failed hostage rescue in Iran underscored the perception of military impotence that led one of Iran's diplomats to characterize America as a paper tiger. (I wonder if the Iranian leadership would say that now.) When Mr. Reagan came to office, the HUGE increase in defense spending squandered the opportunity to make good on progress Mr. Carter began in directing the nation away from its addiction to foreign energy supplies. We would be in much better shape now if Mr. Carter's energy policies had not been discarded by a president whose idea of conservation was shivering in the dark. robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.authorhouse.com/BookStore/ItemDetail.aspx?bookid=9782 Ranger Supercharger Project Page http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Living on Earth -was: US Emergency
Living on Earth April 1, 2005 Tough on Mercury (Dan Gorenstein) / Alien Planets / Oil National Security (Jeff Young) / Oil National Security Roundtable / Emerging Science Note/Parroting Elephants / Simple Living / Ask Umbra http://www.loe.org/archives/archives.htm Oil National Security / Jeff Young The White House recently received a letter asking for increased spending on alternative fuels in order to cut down on foreign oil dependence. The letter wasn't from environmentalists, but from former national security officials who see energy policy as a security issue. Living on Earth's Jeff Young reports. (4:15) Oil National Security Roundtable Two signatories of the letter to President Bush talk about the Middle East threat to U.S. energy, and about the here and now of alternative energy like plug-in hybrids and bio-diesel. Host Steve Curwood speaks with former CIA director James Woolsey and former national security advisor Robert McFarlane. (13:30) Simple Living Eric Brende was midway through his PhD at MIT when he decided to live on an Amish farm. Host Steve Curwood talks with Brende about the challenges of going off the grid and living off the land, and about his new book, Better Off: Flipping the Switch on Technology. (9:00) --- Oil National Security CURWOOD: It's Living on Earth. I'm Steve Curwood. A letter recently arrived at the White House urging President Bush to cut the country's consumption of oil. The writers say the U.S. must increase its investments in conservation, alternative fuels and fuel-efficient cars. Sounds like another plea from an environmental group -- until you get to the list of signatories. They are some three dozen leaders in the field of national security, including a former director of the CIA, a former national security advisor and top brass from the defense departments of previous Republican and Democratic administrations. Living on Earth's Jeff Young explains why heavy hitters in the defense world are joining the green chorus for conservation. YOUNG: Ronald Reagan's face beams down from a large poster at the entrance to Frank Gaffney's Washington office. Back when Gaffney was an undersecretary of defense, Reagan was his boss and he still champions the late president's ideals at the conservative think tank, Center for Security Policy. Now, Gaffney finds himself in agreement with people Reagan had little use for: environmentalists. GAFFNEY: Well, I've had my disagreements with people in the environmental movement for a long time. I think, like many, I had not fully appreciated how urgent was the need to adopt these sorts of existing technologies in light of national security realities of the day. YOUNG: The existing technologies Gaffney mentions are alternative fuels and more fuel-efficient cars. He and 30 others in the national security field asked President Bush to invest a billion dollars in those efforts to wean the country from imported oil. They see a very real chance of a terror attack disrupting oil supplies, perhaps by as much as a third of U.S. daily use. GAFFNEY: If we were to take six million barrels off of the oil market at one fell swoop, you would have very serious economic repercussions. And the nature of our economy, as well as our ability to use oil to project power around the world - which we have to do - would be impaired. I think there's no getting around it. YOUNG: Foreign oil has been a concern for defense hawks at least since the OPEC embargo and gas lines of the 70s. President Bush made the connection at an event on the White House lawn three years ago. BUSH: And, this dependence on foreign oil is a matter of national security. To put it bluntly, sometimes we rely upon energy sources from countries that don't particularly like us. YOUNG: What's new, Gaffney says, is the sense of urgency. GAFFNEY: I believe there is a national security emergency, certainly in prospect if not already here. It's now something we have to do something about right away in order to translate that rhetoric into reality. YOUNG: Environmental groups say it's about time. David Hamilton directs the Sierra Club's energy program. He says he's happy to have national security types make the same argument he's made for years. HAMILTON: I think that a lot of people were hesitant to criticize administration policy before the election, you know, especially Republicans who did not want to appear disloyal or trying to undermine the president. I think you have more of a willingness and a comfort with calling the administration's policies on energy into question. YOUNG: The national security experts do not explicitly criticize the president. Their letter says supply alone cannot eliminate the need for imports and that equal attention must be paid to reducing oil demand. That would seem at odds with the administration's focus on increasing domestic supply.
Re: [Biofuel] bush and money.
tunnel and it is a train Andrew Tracey wrote: I might be mistaken and probably are but it appears to me that now mr wolfowitz has his hands on a bottomless pit of money that he is going to give his buddy ALL THAT IT TAKES to get rid of the baddies. When is the next election in the U.S.? It seems that there will be just enough time to duplicate the Iraq effort in Iran and N. Korea. Does anybody else think this is a possibility? or am i just paranoid. One way to achieve it would be to drive oil prices sky high so as to fill the coffers of your mates oil company's,then they in turn could produce more fuel reserves for just an action. But that couldn't be because that would mean the bosses have an alternative agenda to what they are telling all the gullible little people. The little back slapping bum licking bloke from Aust might just wake up to how he has been used. Well anyway i just thought i would air my paranoia. Keep your bomb shelters in order guys, cheers. Andrew. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Methanol backyard manufacturing possible?
No. We've been discussing this since the list was founded five years ago, but nobody's found a solution yet. Dr Tom Reed, who probably knows more about methanol than most, told me we just aren't there yet. Tom's knowledge of the field is such that when one finds themselves in disagreement with him, they need to go back and check their records to figure out where they went wrong. Walt Patrick of Windward posted some interesting information some time ago and said his organisation would be working on it, but we've heard nothing since. You can check it in the archives if you like. The efficient conversion of biomass to methanol is a complex process. It's long been feasible to do at the industrial level; what we're working on is getting it viable at the community/neighborhood level. Windward is an intentional community dedicated to modeling self-reliant systems, and that's the scale that we're focused on. Maybe it can be simplified further down to the backyard level, but that's hard to see happening. Then again, who would have thought that they come up with bread machines that can mix and bake a loaf of pretty decent bread right there on your kitchen counter? We've been working on the ancillary processes involved such as pressure swing adsorption to provide an on-site oxygen supply for the auto-thermal steam reactor needed to convert char into syngas, the instrumentation network so that we can follow what's going on at the various stages, hydraulic compression, syngas storage, co-generation of steam to feed our 1HP steam engine to drive the generator to power the controls, pumps and so on. The actual condensation of syngas into methanol isn't the demanding part; it's all the other stuff that has to happen first - and happen safely - that is the challenge. Walt http://www.windward.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
Robert, I did not misunderstood, I earlier said that after this election the argument of that he was not representative for US is not valid. This is what democracy is all about. He is elected now and he represent USA. Sigh. . . On this we agree. The ones who do not agree should accept and support US, at least in theory. Ah, but that, honored sir, is not an American attitude. As an American, I not only have the right to disagree with my government, to petition it for redress, but also, according to Abraham Lincoln, the right to overthrow it: Our safety, our liberty, depends upon preserving the Constitution of the United States as our fathers made it inviolate. The people of the United States are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution. also: This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it. Thomas Jefferson wrote: Resistence to tyrants is obedience to God and: We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our selection between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debts as that we must be taxed in our meat in our drink, in our necessities and comforts, in our labors and in our amusements, for our callings and our creeds...our people.. must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four, give earnings of fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses; and the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live.. We have not time to think, no means of calling the mismanagers to account, but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow suffers. Our landholders, too...retaining indeed the title and stewardship of estates called theirs, but held really in trust for the treasury, must...be contented with penury, obscurity and exile..private fortunes are destroyed by public as well as by private extravagance. This is the tendancy of all human governments. A departure from principle becomes a precedent for a second; that second for a third; and so on, till the bulk of society is reduced to mere automatons of misery, to have no sensibilities left but for sinning and suffering... And the fore horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in it's train wretchedness and oppression. also this dreadful statement: And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure. So I will oppose what is going on here with every breath of my conservative soul! Now I do not condone violence, nor would I take up arms, nor advocate others to do so, but the principle of standing up to oppression remains alive in the blood of every patriotic American; especially if the oppression originates in the government that is supposed to represent us. Personally I respect the opposition and the difficult position they are in. However, I talked about the general hate of USA that I see in development. I do not hate Americans, I am only the messenger. I live as a guest in someone else's country, and I've seen the development of hatred to which you refer for quite some time. Singer Pat Benatar once wrote in a song about the Vietnam war: As nations we're divided, but as people we are one. robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.authorhouse.com/BookStore/ItemDetail.aspx?bookid=9782 Ranger Supercharger Project Page http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
Thankyou! This was the point I was trying to make: ... you will reduce polymerization. But not eliminate it. ... the time to reach a specified degree of polymerization will be extended by dilution. But it still won't be eliminated. Thanks again. Best wishes Keith Howdy Kieth and Jan At the risk of looking foolish as I am an organic chemist, but don't have much experience with polymer chemistry- here goes Polymerization is a molecule molecule reaction. A compound with double carbon carbon bond is particularly susceptible free radical oxidation. Let's call them U. Compounds without carbon carbon double bounds are relatively unreactive. We will call these S. Oxygen will activate one molecule, U, but for polymerization to occur, the activated molecule must encounter another U, then the now covalently bonded pair, must encounter another U, and so on. Collisions of activated U with S don't result in a reaction. It seems to me that if you dilute U with S, that you will reduce polymerization. Or how about this. An activated molecule has only a finite amount of time to react. If an activated molecule U bumps into another U then chain growth continues. But if activated U bumps into S, no reaction occurs, other than U reacting internally, which also stops chain growth. Polymer chemists can modulate the number of molecules in a chain (chain length) by addition of non polymerizing stuff. Being a right brain guy, this discussion is made more difficult, as I can't draw all the pictures which exemplify the points I am trying to make. :( The long and short of it (no pun intended) chain length of polymers will be reduced by dilution of biodiesel blended from high IV oils with low IV oils. Put another way, the time to reach a specified degree of polymerization will be extended by dilution. Keith Addison wrote: Hello Keith and thank you for your input. I agree with you, blending an oil with a high IV with one with a lower, should produce an average IV. -- Bob Allen http://ozarker.org/bob Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves Richard Feynman ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: re erucic acid in rapeseed oil, also re snake oil, WAS Re:[Biofuel] Re:FOOD vS FUEL
Hello Keith, Thank you for your interest in my post. I like to find the stories behind societal beliefs like this that have so often been accepted without question. It's MOST important to do that, IMO. We rely on the 4th Estate (of which I'm a lifelong member) to do that for us, that's their role and essential function, but (though the exceptions are many and honorable) there's no need for me to say how derelict they've become in this duty, especially over the last few decades. It's always been a kept press, of course, owned by the very interests it's supposed to protect society against. So we have to find out for ourselves, or be at the mercy of inimical forces that are too often little short of sociopathic. Fortunately it's almost always possible to do that, with a bit of tenacity and scepticism, especially with the Internet - the Internet will save us all, the first true leveller. Truly something new under the sun. I find it annoying when I find yet another example of my having been manipulated to suit someone else's agenda. Oh yes! Very annoying! On the other hand, I'm glad that I found it so that I can update my thinking. And I thank you and everyone else on this list in helping to stretch and broaden my mind with your postings! Thankyou Joanne. I was pleased to see this because quite a few thing about it have puzzled me, and of course the difference between rapeseed and canola have often been discussed, with much confusion, and not much clarity on the erucic acid issue itself. Best regards Keith Thank you, Joanne Re-examine all you have been told. Dismiss that which insults your soul. - Walt Whitman - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 11:32 AM Subject: Re: re erucic acid in rapeseed oil, also re snake oil, WAS Re:[Biofuel] Re:FOOD vS FUEL Hello Joanne Very interesting, thanks very much for taking the trouble. Hello to Kirk and List, The following is some further information that I think is worth considering. I have not heard of any contradictory information to this since the book was first published. It took awhile to get written permission from the publisher to extract two entire chapters from the book, then it took me another while to get them typed Typed?! Yikes - you need a scanner! and cobbled together to send to the list. My apologies for not getting this done in a more timely manner. Never mind, we're all still here. :-) Except Kirk, actually, who's away right now, but I'll send it to him to make sure he sees it. Thanks again. Keith Thank you, Joanne - Original Message - From: Kirk McLoren [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 2:48 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re:FOOD vS FUEL snip Chickens fed rapeseed and calves given rapeseed oil do not prosper. Rapeseed oil naturally contains a high percentage (30-60%) of erucic acid, a substance associated with heart lesions in laboratory animals. For this reason rapeseed oil was not used for consumption in the United States prior to 1974, although it was used in other countries. (Americans chose to use it as a lubricant to maintain Allied naval and merchant ships during World War II.) In 1974, rapeseed varieties with a low erucic content were introduced. Scientists had found a way to replace almost all of rapeseed's erucic acid with oleic acid, a type of monounsaturated fatty acid. (This change was accomplished through the cross-breeding of plants, not by the techniques commonly referred to as genetic engineering.) By 1978, all Canadian rapeseed produced for food use contained less than 2% erucic acid. The Canadian seed oil industry rechristened the product canola oil (Canadian oil) in 1978 in an attempt to distance the product from negative associations with the word rape. Why ingest any erucic acid? Economics as usual. As for me and my family we minimize the use of Canada Oil except as motor fuel. end snip [From the book Fats that Heal Fats that Kill by Udo Erasmus, with permission from Alive Publishing Group Inc., Canada. www.alive.com] Fats that Heal, Fats that Kill by Udo Erasmus Copyright 1986, 1993 Second Edition, Fifteenth Printing - May 2004 Chapter 20 Erucic Acid: Toxic or Beneficial? Chapter 56 Snake Oil (EPA) and Patent Medicines snip ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device
do I sign..:-) :-) Sign on the cheque Malcolm, in the usual way, don't forget to add the right number of noughts. Best Keith -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Addison Sent: 01 April 2005 20:43 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device Hi Craig Keith, I haven't laughed that hard in the past 74 3/8 hours! Oh well I put a stop payment on my $1,000 check just to get in line to order the 15:1 energy unit! Still looking for that cold fusion guy from RONCO! :-) Great, isn't it? Humans, you gotta love 'em! While you've got your checkbook handy... Never mind the guy from RONCO, I've developed this wonderful technique of producing cold fusion in a Dr Pepper bottle, just add the secret ingredients and shake it 3.5 times... Interested? Keith - Original Message - From: Keith Addisonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 8:11 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device I see why they call it down under now.Perpetural motion isn't possible on this planet. I think not in this universe.This guy has slid over into another dimension or what? JD2005 Eric Krieg lists 78 free energy scams here, doesn't seem to get into the zero-point stuff and instant cold fusion, so there's all that besides: http://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.htmlhttp://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.html Eric's history of Perpetual Motion and Free Energy Machines Plus: How to become a Free Energy con man http://www.phact.org/e/con_man.htmhttp://www.phact.org/e/con_man.htm And: The Museum of Unworkable Devices http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htmhttp://www.lhup.edu/~d simanek/museum/unwork.htm Enjoy! Keith - Original Message - From: D. Mindock To: Undisclosed-Recipient:; Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 12:45 AM Subject: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device This device (see attached pic) is due for release, starting in Australia where Lutec Pty Ltd is located... ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Optimism
Keith Addison wrote: Hello Robert Thanks for this, nice read! You're welcome. I thought things were sounding a bit grim on this forum lately! Too much reality? It does tend to be a bit grim at times. Equisetum arvense? Yes, that's the one. It's toxic to colts and lambs when it's dry. I've read that its tubers store food reserves, which, coupled with an extensive creeping rhizome system, makes the plant very persistent. I've dug up rhizome leads better than a meter in length, but the plant will regenerate from even a tiny bit of root left in the ground. Thank God the fertile stems don't remain active for very long! Interestingly, equisetum arvense has medicinal uses. It's widely used in traditional medicine. Also, it says here, Romans always used horsetail to clean their pots and pans, not just to make them clean but also, thanks to the silica, to make them nonstick. In the Middle Ages it was used as an abrasive by cabinetmakers, to clean pewter, brass, and copper, and for scouring wood containers and milk pans... This herb has been associated with various goblins, toads and snakes, and the devil. I guess you'll agree with the devil bit. :-) Actually it said in the Meddle Ages, LOL! But that'd be now, not then. The dried herb aids in the treatment of urinary and prostatic disease, repair of lung and pulmonary tissue, among others, but its high inorganic silica content makes ingestion dangerous for children. Ancient plant. Midori picked a whole bunch of them two days ago and stir-fried the tops according to Japanese traditional practice. Not bad! My loving wife, who is a very good cook, wrinkled her nose when I told her you'd written this. Give it a try, the shoots are tender, good! Makes a good medicinal tea too. Horsetails indicate acid soil and drainage problems. This is certainly our situation. It rains a lot in this climate, and acidic soil loving blueberries grow well here. Probably it's acid because of the poor drainage. When we built our house, the excavator removed 17 loads of soil from our property, leaving us in a sea of grey colored muck; a perennially wet clay in which very little that's useful to us will grow. We stopped several trucks that were removing dirt from the properties around us and asked them to dump their loads back on our lot, simply so we could get proper landscaping done. (And worse, we got a bill from the excavators for taking our dirt away!) Now, as the area around us develops, the same thing is happening on other properties. The trouble is they so often mix up topsoil with subsoil. Of course they shouldn't remove it at all. Wantonly destroying topsoil has to be a mortal sin, IMO. Right now, we have a very lumpy front yard, mostly in grass, that is doing marginally well. Our front flower beds are flourishing, but we've conditioned the soil extensively with barn litter and compost, so we have very little trouble with horsetail at the front of the house. I had a vision for the western slope of our property that involved a combination of fruit trees, shrubs, evergreens and aspens that was supposed to provide shade as well as food. (Our house gets very hot during the summer because we're a corner lot and there is NO shade around us during the long daylight period. R 50 ceilings trap heat very nicely!) After grading by hand (agonizingly) to minimize run off (which had been a REAL problem when we first moved in), we planted the trees, shrubs and covered the ground with cedar bark mulch in the hope that creeping ground cover would eventually occupy the slope. So far, the creepers we've planted have hardly taken a foothold. This is where our horsetail problem is dominant. The north end of our property is the sunniest place during the growing season. This is where we've built four raised beds and where our crops of lettuce, cabbage, beets, purple beans, broccoli and carrots thrived last summer. On the eastern side of our driveway, a long, narrow strip of land serves as our area for corn, squash, potatoes, eggplant and other large plants. It's been extensively worked, the topsoil there is about half a meter deep, and it's literally crawling with living things! Horsetail doesn't grow there. We subsoiled one of our fields today, thin layer of topsoil over really sticky clay, with, indeed, severe drainage problems. Tomorrow we'll compost it and rotavate it lightly, since we can't lay our hands on a disk harrow. Then what would be ideal would be a deep-rooting grass mixture and a two-year ley, heavily grazed by livestock, along with several hay cuts. But we don't have the grass mixture either, nor can we get anything suitable here, but we'll do what we can. Getting a thick layer of well drained topsoil seems key to controlling the horsetail. Key to just about everything. You can build it from nothing - what you start with is just the
Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
War has it's causalities. let us not be one of them. You are already, as I said. people make themselves victims of situations No need for more casualties. Sudam and his despots had a mural of 911painted on the side of a building.. So? You're saying he did it? Are you insisting against all evidence that he had anything to do with 9/11? Of course it's plainly obvious by now that you're going to think whatever makes you comfortable, facts and evidence regardless. You're not alone in that but I wouldn't any you're in good company. Pitiable. people are responsible for there own actions not anybody else. And for the consequences of them, which is the issue that you're squirming so hard to avoid confronting. Not you , me or the U.S. government.If someone is going to murder someone they are responsible for that action. Would you rather live in an undemocratic country? What exactly are your option.? My grand patents died in the ww2. Who took out Hitler? Ho-hum?? Yes, ho-hum. Very much so. would you rather have some rogue government agent throw you in jail for being a security threat Have I been arrested by some rogue government agent for being a security threat? Yes. Have you? No. How do I know? Because anyone who has really lived with such a situation would never assume that another person hasn't, without checking first. And in my case it's easily checked. You live a nice, safe, comfortable life where you can ignore whatever it makes you more comfortable to ignore, deny whatever you think might challenge your cherished notions, and think that you don't have to face the consequences of what you support, even if by default and in ignorance, and of what you fail to oppose. You are morally supine sir, and foolish with it. How about your whole family killed because you have the wrong religious belief (note quotations) Has that happened to you? I was alone among my family, but for many years I very actively opposed one of the most oppressive and hated regimes in the world. I broke hundreds of oppressive laws every day, as did my friends and colleagues. Many of my friends were killed: shot, tortured to death, beaten to death, thrown out of high windows, or they just vanished, never to be seen again. I had to flee several times, but I survived. And you? Well? Armchair theorist. Huh! There are places on this planet where people are murdered and raped en mass and there is never any media coverage because it is not politically correct. H. ps it's not perfect and it never will be... stop sniveling. Snivelling, eh? Did you read the references I gave you? Of course not. You know damn' well you wouldn't have any response other than capitulation. You can't even be honest. Fool. Keith Addison Journey to Forever KYOTO Pref., Japan http://journeytoforever.org/ - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 01 April, 2005 1:23 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come Keith, I think it is quite irrelevant who sold what to whom, Even if the very same people who sold them then accuse those same people who they sold them to of having them and use it as an excuse to illegally invade their countries, causing maybe 100,000 deaths in the doing? Even though it turns out they don't have them anymore. Saddam a mass murderer? Maybe, but up until very recently it was all okay because he was our mass-murderer - even as far as okaying his invasion of Kuwait. Yes, that's right, you didn't know? When the US invaded Iraq he was no threat to anyone, just another tin-pot dictator brought to ruin by the people who'd supported him, so what's new? And now? http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=342672005 Starving Iraqi children double after war THE number of children starving in Iraq has almost doubled since the war, a United Nations report has warned. Etc etc etc. Hypothetically,I have the all the means at my disposal to kill a very large amount of people, does it mean the people that educated me are responsible? how about my bank? The money will come from them.!? The supply source is irrelevant. I could use anything in my hypothetical backyard and I'm no genius.Anybody can. The word history is full of these people that murder millions. The right person will be in the right place at the right time to take them out. That's a given. Hopefully political b.s. that man orchestrates won't impede the job that has be done before these people go on their murderous rampage. War has it's casualties let's not be one of them. You're too late - the aggressors are as much casualties as the victims are. We live in free democratic countries There seems tobe some disagreement here about that, and it seems to be rather substantial. where we can make biodiesel. How cool is that... H. Ho-hum. I recommend a crash course of William Blum for a realignment of your views of just who it is
RE: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
Any information like this on oil from palm trees? I can see it's useless telling you this, but the archives is full of it. Keith I«m not a fan of soybean because of Monsanto. Thanks, Tom Irwin -Original Message- From: Jan Warnqvist To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 1/04/05 5:39 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Hello Keith and thank you for your input. I agree with you, blending an oil snip ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device
I'll take two! Ah heck, make it a six pack. Okay, Craig, 20% discount on sixpacks, that's $5,000, cheap at half the price. Keith - Original Message - From: Keith Addisonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 12:42 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device Hi Craig Keith, I haven't laughed that hard in the past 74 3/8 hours! Oh well I put a stop payment on my $1,000 check just to get in line to order the 15:1 energy unit! Still looking for that cold fusion guy from RONCO! :-) Great, isn't it? Humans, you gotta love 'em! While you've got your checkbook handy... Never mind the guy from RONCO, I've developed this wonderful technique of producing cold fusion in a Dr Pepper bottle, just add the secret ingredients and shake it 3.5 times... Interested? Keith - Original Message - From: Keith Addisonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] r.org To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]mailt o:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 8:11 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device I see why they call it down under now.Perpetural motion isn't possible on this planet. I think not in this universe.This guy has slid over into another dimension or what? JD2005 Eric Krieg lists 78 free energy scams here, doesn't seem to get into the zero-point stuff and instant cold fusion, so there's all that besides: http://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.htmlhttp://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.htm lhttp://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.htmlhttp://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.h tml Eric's history of Perpetual Motion and Free Energy Machines Plus: How to become a Free Energy con man http://www.phact.org/e/con_man.htmhttp://www.phact.org/e/con_man.htm http://www.phact.org/e/con_man.htmhttp://www.phact.org/e/con_man.htm And: The Museum of Unworkable Devices http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htmhttp://www.lhup.edu/~ dhttp://www.lhup.edu/~d simanek/museum/unwork.htm Enjoy! Keith - Original Message - From: D. Mindock To: Undisclosed-Recipient:; Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 12:45 AM Subject: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device This device (see attached pic) is due for release, starting in Australia where Lutec Pty Ltd is located... ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: Fw: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
I wonder what he's talking about... Keith I wrote; - Original Message - From: Henri Naths [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 01 April, 2005 12:37 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come Keith, I think it is quite irrelevant who sold what to whom, Hypothetically,I have the all the means at my disposal to kill a very large amount of people, does it mean the people that educated me are responsible? how about my bank? The money will come from them.!? The supply source is irrelevant. I could use anything in my hypothetical backyard and I'm no genius.Anybody can. The world history is full of these people that murder millions. The right person will be in the right place at the right time to take them out. That's a given. Hopefully political b.s. that man orchestrates won't impede the job that has be done before these people go on their murderous rampage. War has it's casualties let's not be one of them. We live in free democratic countries where we can make biodiesel. How cool is that... H. - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 01 April, 2005 7:54 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come Henri Naths wrote: Hakan, I would like to give a humble option here, ( Hakan wrote;...Criminal, established by the fact that we now know that Iraq were no WMD threat to US. ) We took out Hitler for the same reason, Him and Suddam Hussein were weapons of mass destruction. H. Judging from past posts, I think Hakan and many others here are a little sceptical about claims that the US took out Hitler. As for Saddam, as is very well known and widely established beyond any possibility of doubt or controversy... http://www.progressive.org/0901/anth0498.html The Progressive magazine April 1998 Issue Anthrax for Export U.S. companies sold Iraq the ingredients for a witch's brew by William Blum The United States almost went to war against Iraq in February because of Saddam Hussein's weapons program. In his State of the Union address, President Clinton castigated Hussein for developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. You cannot defy the will of the world, the President proclaimed. You have used weapons of mass destruction before. We are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again. Most Americans listening to the President did not know that the United States supplied Iraq with much of the raw material for creating a chemical and biological warfare program. Nor did the media report that U.S. companies sold Iraq more than $1 billion worth of the components needed to build nuclear weapons and diverse types of missiles, including the infamous Scud. When Iraq engaged in chemical and biological warfare in the 1980s, barely a peep of moral outrage could be heard from Washington, as it kept supplying Saddam with the materials he needed to build weapons. From 1980 to 1988, Iraq and Iran waged a terrible war against each other, a war that might not have begun if President Jimmy Carter had not given the Iraqis a green light to attack Iran, in response to repeated provocations. Throughout much of the war, the United States provided military aid and intelligence information to both sides, hoping that each would inflict severe damage on the other. Noam Chomsky suggests that this strategy is a way for America to keep control of its oil supply: It's been a leading, driving doctrine of U.S. foreign policy since the 1940s that the vast and unparalleled energy resources of the Gulf region will be effectively dominated by the United States and its clients, and, crucially, that no independent indigenous force will be permitted to have a substantial influence on the administration of oil production and price. During the Iran-Iraq war, Iraq received the lion's share of American support because at the time Iran was regarded as the greater threat to U.S. interests. According to a 1994 Senate report, private American suppliers, licensed by the U.S. Department of Commerce, exported a witch's brew of biological and chemical materials to Iraq from 1985 through 1989. Among the biological materials, which often produce slow, agonizing death, were: * Bacillus Anthracis, cause of anthrax. * Clostridium Botulinum, a source of botulinum toxin. * Histoplasma Capsulatam, cause of a disease attacking lungs, brain, spinal cord, and heart. * Brucella Melitensis, a bacteria that can damage major organs. * Clostridium Perfringens, a highly toxic bacteria causing systemic illness. * Clostridium tetani, a highly toxigenic substance. Also on the list: Escherichia coli (E. coli), genetic materials, human and bacterial DNA, and dozens of other pathogenic biological agents. These biological materials were not attenuated or weakened and were capable of reproduction, the Senate report stated. It was later learned that
Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device
Convenience plus, no more black outs, brown outs, interruptions because of line maintenance, lightning strike, heavy rain, strong wind, fire, cyclone, flood, poor maintenance at power stations. Even if it doesnt provide free energy, this suggests that the magnetic fields inside the device somehow shield your property from rain, cyclones, wind and floods, maybe this would be a better marketing angle? Chris.. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
Hello Tom. Are you referring to palm oil ? This is a highly saturated oil common in Europe as frying oil. The oil is imported from Malaysia. Is it this one ? Bst rgrds Jan Warnqvist AGERATEC AB [EMAIL PROTECTED] + 46 554 201 89 +46 70 499 38 45 - Original Message - From: Tom Irwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 11:57 PM Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Hi All, Any information like this on oil from palm trees? I«m not a fan of soybean because of Monsanto. Thanks, Tom Irwin -Original Message- From: Jan Warnqvist To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 1/04/05 5:39 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Hello Keith and thank you for your input. I agree with you, blending an oil with a high IV with one with a lower, should produce an average IV. But in some course literature I read some time ago, it said that oil spill from rape seed oil will leave you two months to wipe it up before it polymerizes, soy bean oil will leave you two weeks, and linseed oil two days. From this way of reasoning one can conclude, when comparing the average IV values of each oil, that blending rape seed oil with llinseed oil to an average IV value of soybean oil, will produce an oil with similar polymerization properties as soybean oil. And further- if producing of biodiesel out of high IV oils, will lower the fatty acids« ability to polymerize one can conclude that the first step of polmerization takes place within the triglyceride molecule, possibly with bridges of oxygen between the double bonds of different fatty acids. In methyl ester the fatty acids with the right will to polymerize have some difficulties finding each other and build bridges. Give me some input on this way of explanation ,Keith ! Best regards Jan Jan Warnqvist AGERATEC AB [EMAIL PROTECTED] + 46 554 201 89 +46 70 499 38 45 - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 7:28 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Hello DB and all Anyone making bio-diesel should be concerned with the IV of the oil and the polymerzation of the engine. After a careful reading of the australian report WVO as a Diesel replacement fuel it is obvious that they are concerned with it's use as straight veggy oil and Not so much Bio-diesel.( I would be concerned too) Here is a direct quote from that report. Trans esterifying triglyceride oils and fats with monohydric alcohols to form biodiesel largly eliminates the tendency of the oils and fats to polymerization and auto-oxidation.. The base crop for european biodiesel being rapeseed with a IV of 98 is a reasonable goal to acheve. Most of my stock is soy oil and much of it is hydrogenated. I also get cottonseed and peanut oil along with canola (rapeseed) I no longer use straight soy oil and try to make a blend. In the past when I only had soy oil based biodiesel I would only run BD50. I an no longer worried about the IV of the oil and if you are then just run BD50.Drive down the road Happy...DB ..PS. I have been making biodiesel since '02 and have made 1000's of gallons with zero problems. I agree, and thankyou, but I'm not sure I follow the logic of your solution, attractive though it is. Does an IV value average out when you blend different oils? Other things will, of course, like say FFA levels, you'll end up with an average and that's that. But in a blend with biodiesel made from a high IV oil with biodiesel made from lower IV oils, while the proportion of high IV oil will be lower, what's to stop it oxidising and polymerising just the same? Blending it doesn't change its makeup. I'm not sure what effect blending it with petrodiesel would have, but that wouldn't change its makeup either, it still has its double bonds to be broken down and polymerise. All you'd get is proportionately less polymerisation, no? So it'll take longer to gunge up the engine. That doesn't solve the problem, just mitigates it. Sorry, I don't know if this is right or not, just trying to be logical - maybe it doesn't work like that, but I'd like to know. Regards Keith - Original Message - From: TLC Orchids and Such [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 4:37 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?] Where can we get the veg-based motor oil? Can better oil filtering help with this problem? Racor has a motor oil filter used in race cars. - Original Message - From: stephan torak [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; stephan torak [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 5:45 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?] Thanks for the follow up, Keith. I have since spent many hours researching the issue and have found some
Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
Hello TLC. The main idea with hydrogenation is to alter the IV value of an oil. The answer is yes. Jan Warnqvist AGERATEC AB [EMAIL PROTECTED] + 46 554 201 89 +46 70 499 38 45 - Original Message - From: TLC Orchids and Such [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005 5:13 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Hydrogenated canola has an IV of around 65 while non hydrogenated has an IV of around 112. Does anyone know if the IV in soybean (131) safflower (145) hemp (165) or sunflower (133) are altered in any way by the hydrogenation process? - Original Message - From: bob allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Howdy Kieth and Jan At the risk of looking foolish as I am an organic chemist, but don't have much experience with polymer chemistry- here goes Polymerization is a molecule molecule reaction. A compound with double carbon carbon bond is particularly susceptible free radical oxidation. Let's call them U. Compounds without carbon carbon double bounds are relatively unreactive. We will call these S. Oxygen will activate one molecule, U, but for polymerization to occur, the activated molecule must encounter another U, then the now covalently bonded pair, must encounter another U, and so on. Collisions of activated U with S don't result in a reaction. It seems to me that if you dilute U with S, that you will reduce polymerization. Or how about this. An activated molecule has only a finite amount of time to react. If an activated molecule U bumps into another U then chain growth continues. But if activated U bumps into S, no reaction occurs, other than U reacting internally, which also stops chain growth. Polymer chemists can modulate the number of molecules in a chain (chain length) by addition of non polymerizing stuff. Being a right brain guy, this discussion is made more difficult, as I can't draw all the pictures which exemplify the points I am trying to make. :( The long and short of it (no pun intended) chain length of polymers will be reduced by dilution of biodiesel blended from high IV oils with low IV oils. Put another way, the time to reach a specified degree of polymerization will be extended by dilution. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
Henri, Do not be so certain you that you will be free to make Bio D forever as a private citizen. You can«t make your own opium to treat your pain. You can«t buy large amounts of ammonium nitrate fertilizer (which is maybe a good thing) without filing extensive paperwork. I am quite serious when I mention to folks to go back and read Huxley and Orwell. We«re living in their world. They just didn«t get the date right. Tom -Original Message- From: Henri Naths To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 1/04/05 16:37 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come Keith, I think it is quite irrelevant who sold what to whom, Hypothetically,I have the all the means at my disposal to kill a very large amount of people, does it mean the people that educated me are responsible? how about my bank? The money will come from them.!? The supply source is irrelevant. I could use anything in my hypothetical backyard and I'm no genius.Anybody can. The word history is full of these people that murder millions. The right person will be in the right place at the right time to take them out. That's a given. Hopefully political b.s. that man orchestrates won't impede the job that has be done before these people go on their murderous rampage. War has it's casualties let's not be one of them. We live in free democratic countries where we can make biodiesel. How cool is that... H. - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 01 April, 2005 7:54 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come Henri Naths wrote: Hakan, I would like to give a humble option here, ( Hakan wrote;...Criminal, established by the fact that we now know that Iraq were no WMD threat to US. ) We took out Hitler for the same reason, Him and Suddam Hussein were weapons of mass destruction. H. Judging from past posts, I think Hakan and many others here are a little sceptical about claims that the US took out Hitler. As for Saddam, as is very well known and widely established beyond any possibility of doubt or controversy... http://www.progressive.org/0901/anth0498.html The Progressive magazine April 1998 Issue Anthrax for Export U.S. companies sold Iraq the ingredients for a witch's brew by William Blum The United States almost went to war against Iraq in February because of Saddam Hussein's weapons program. In his State of the Union address, President Clinton castigated Hussein for developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. You cannot defy the will of the world, the President proclaimed. You have used weapons of mass destruction before. We are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again. Most Americans listening to the President did not know that the United States supplied Iraq with much of the raw material for creating a chemical and biological warfare program. Nor did the media report that U.S. companies sold Iraq more than $1 billion worth of the components needed to build nuclear weapons and diverse types of missiles, including the infamous Scud. When Iraq engaged in chemical and biological warfare in the 1980s, barely a peep of moral outrage could be heard from Washington, as it kept supplying Saddam with the materials he needed to build weapons. From 1980 to 1988, Iraq and Iran waged a terrible war against each other, a war that might not have begun if President Jimmy Carter had not given the Iraqis a green light to attack Iran, in response to repeated provocations. Throughout much of the war, the United States provided military aid and intelligence information to both sides, hoping that each would inflict severe damage on the other. Noam Chomsky suggests that this strategy is a way for America to keep control of its oil supply: It's been a leading, driving doctrine of U.S. foreign policy since the 1940s that the vast and unparalleled energy resources of the Gulf region will be effectively dominated by the United States and its clients, and, crucially, that no independent indigenous force will be permitted to have a substantial influence on the administration of oil production and price. During the Iran-Iraq war, Iraq received the lion's share of American support because at the time Iran was regarded as the greater threat to U.S. interests. According to a 1994 Senate report, private American suppliers, licensed by the U.S. Department of Commerce, exported a witch's brew of biological and chemical materials to Iraq from 1985 through 1989. Among the biological materials, which often produce slow, agonizing death, were: * Bacillus Anthracis, cause of anthrax. * Clostridium Botulinum, a source of botulinum toxin. * Histoplasma Capsulatam, cause of a disease attacking lungs, brain, spinal cord, and heart. * Brucella Melitensis, a bacteria that can damage major organs. * Clostridium Perfringens, a highly toxic bacteria
RE: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
Hi Bob, I like the us and ss for those uninitiated. But my question is at high temperature, like that found near or in a diesel engine, will the us be able to find those other us more easily and thus have a polymerization reaction anyway? Tom -Original Message- From: bob allen To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 1/04/05 17:24 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Howdy Kieth and Jan At the risk of looking foolish as I am an organic chemist, but don't have much experience with polymer chemistry- here goes Polymerization is a molecule molecule reaction. A compound with double carbon carbon bond is particularly susceptible free radical oxidation. Let's call them U. Compounds without carbon carbon double bounds are relatively unreactive. We will call these S. Oxygen will activate one molecule, U, but for polymerization to occur, the activated molecule must encounter another U, then the now covalently bonded pair, must encounter another U, and so on. Collisions of activated U with S don't result in a reaction. It seems to me that if you dilute U with S, that you will reduce polymerization. Or how about this. An activated molecule has only a finite amount of time to react. If an activated molecule U bumps into another U then chain growth continues. But if activated U bumps into S, no reaction occurs, other than U reacting internally, which also stops chain growth. Polymer chemists can modulate the number of molecules in a chain (chain length) by addition of non polymerizing stuff. Being a right brain guy, this discussion is made more difficult, as I can't draw all the pictures which exemplify the points I am trying to make. :( The long and short of it (no pun intended) chain length of polymers will be reduced by dilution of biodiesel blended from high IV oils with low IV oils. Put another way, the time to reach a specified degree of polymerization will be extended by dilution. Keith Addison wrote: Hello Keith and thank you for your input. I agree with you, blending an oil with a high IV with one with a lower, should produce an average IV. -- Bob Allen http://ozarker.org/bob Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves Richard Feynman --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Living on Earth -was: US Emergency
Hi All, I would love to believe but truth be told I no longer have faith and trust in my own government. I have been lied to too often. Should these folks continue to push for implimentation of sound programs then and only then will they receive my full support. Tom -Original Message- From: MH To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 2/04/05 2:20 Subject: [Biofuel] Living on Earth -was: US Emergency Living on Earth April 1, 2005 Tough on Mercury (Dan Gorenstein) / Alien Planets / Oil National Security (Jeff Young) / Oil National Security Roundtable / Emerging Science Note/Parroting Elephants / Simple Living / Ask Umbra http://www.loe.org/archives/archives.htm Oil National Security / Jeff Young The White House recently received a letter asking for increased spending on alternative fuels in order to cut down on foreign oil dependence. The letter wasn't from environmentalists, but from former national security officials who see energy policy as a security issue. Living on Earth's Jeff Young reports. (4:15) Oil National Security Roundtable Two signatories of the letter to President Bush talk about the Middle East threat to U.S. energy, and about the here and now of alternative energy like plug-in hybrids and bio-diesel. Host Steve Curwood speaks with former CIA director James Woolsey and former national security advisor Robert McFarlane. (13:30) Simple Living Eric Brende was midway through his PhD at MIT when he decided to live on an Amish farm. Host Steve Curwood talks with Brende about the challenges of going off the grid and living off the land, and about his new book, Better Off: Flipping the Switch on Technology. (9:00) --- Oil National Security CURWOOD: It's Living on Earth. I'm Steve Curwood. A letter recently arrived at the White House urging President Bush to cut the country's consumption of oil. The writers say the U.S. must increase its investments in conservation, alternative fuels and fuel-efficient cars. Sounds like another plea from an environmental group -- until you get to the list of signatories. They are some three dozen leaders in the field of national security, including a former director of the CIA, a former national security advisor and top brass from the defense departments of previous Republican and Democratic administrations. Living on Earth's Jeff Young explains why heavy hitters in the defense world are joining the green chorus for conservation. YOUNG: Ronald Reagan's face beams down from a large poster at the entrance to Frank Gaffney's Washington office. Back when Gaffney was an undersecretary of defense, Reagan was his boss and he still champions the late president's ideals at the conservative think tank, Center for Security Policy. Now, Gaffney finds himself in agreement with people Reagan had little use for: environmentalists. GAFFNEY: Well, I've had my disagreements with people in the environmental movement for a long time. I think, like many, I had not fully appreciated how urgent was the need to adopt these sorts of existing technologies in light of national security realities of the day. YOUNG: The existing technologies Gaffney mentions are alternative fuels and more fuel-efficient cars. He and 30 others in the national security field asked President Bush to invest a billion dollars in those efforts to wean the country from imported oil. They see a very real chance of a terror attack disrupting oil supplies, perhaps by as much as a third of U.S. daily use. GAFFNEY: If we were to take six million barrels off of the oil market at one fell swoop, you would have very serious economic repercussions. And the nature of our economy, as well as our ability to use oil to project power around the world - which we have to do - would be impaired. I think there's no getting around it. YOUNG: Foreign oil has been a concern for defense hawks at least since the OPEC embargo and gas lines of the 70s. President Bush made the connection at an event on the White House lawn three years ago. BUSH: And, this dependence on foreign oil is a matter of national security. To put it bluntly, sometimes we rely upon energy sources from countries that don't particularly like us. YOUNG: What's new, Gaffney says, is the sense of urgency. GAFFNEY: I believe there is a national security emergency, certainly in prospect if not already here. It's now something we have to do something about right away in order to translate that rhetoric into reality. YOUNG: Environmental groups say it's about time. David Hamilton directs the Sierra Club's energy program. He says he's happy to have national security types make the same argument he's made for years. HAMILTON: I think that a lot of people were hesitant to criticize administration policy before the election, you know, especially Republicans who did not want to appear disloyal or trying to undermine the president. I think you have more of
Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
Hi you fine people I read a lot about IV and have not been able to figure out what it is. I'm new to all this. Would someone PLEASE help me out here? Thanks Roy TLC Orchids and Such [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hydrogenated canola has an IV of around 65 while non hydrogenated has an IV of around 112. Does anyone know if the IV in soybean (131) safflower (145) hemp (165) or sunflower (133) are altered in any way by the hydrogenation process? - Original Message - From: bob allen To: Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Howdy Kieth and Jan At the risk of looking foolish as I am an organic chemist, but don't have much experience with polymer chemistry- here goes Polymerization is a molecule molecule reaction. A compound with double carbon carbon bond is particularly susceptible free radical oxidation. Let's call them U. Compounds without carbon carbon double bounds are relatively unreactive. We will call these S. Oxygen will activate one molecule, U, but for polymerization to occur, the activated molecule must encounter another U, then the now covalently bonded pair, must encounter another U, and so on. Collisions of activated U with S don't result in a reaction. It seems to me that if you dilute U with S, that you will reduce polymerization. Or how about this. An activated molecule has only a finite amount of time to react. If an activated molecule U bumps into another U then chain growth continues. But if activated U bumps into S, no reaction occurs, other than U reacting internally, which also stops chain growth. Polymer chemists can modulate the number of molecules in a chain (chain length) by addition of non polymerizing stuff. Being a right brain guy, this discussion is made more difficult, as I can't draw all the pictures which exemplify the points I am trying to make. :( The long and short of it (no pun intended) chain length of polymers will be reduced by dilution of biodiesel blended from high IV oils with low IV oils. Put another way, the time to reach a specified degree of polymerization will be extended by dilution. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Roy Washbish Certified Health Coach A HOME BUSINESS PRODUCTS THAT WORK PRODUCTS BUSINESS HTTP://WWW.TRIVITA.COM/11393920 - Do you Yahoo!? Better first dates. More second dates. Yahoo! Personals ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re[2]: [Biofuel] Biofuel and Oil Burning Furnaces
Hallo Tom, I am not the one to ask about rubber and biodiesel. It is my impression that the two get along fine although they have a bad reputation to the contrary but I don't know that as fact. I just put the rubber bit in there in case someone had concerns about biodiesel and rubber coming into contact because in my fuel oil burner they don't and I don't believe they do in any others. Todd or some of the others can tell you definitively. Just consider me a half blind old fart hobbling around muttering to himself trying to make sense of things. ;o) Happy Happy, Gustl Friday, 01 April, 2005, 16:53:08, you wrote: TI Greetings Gustl, TI I was under the impression from my reading that viton rubber would be ok in TI contact with biodiesel. If I«m wrong about this someone please say so. All TI metal is definitely better as I imagine even viton will degrade in a 5 or 10 TI year time span just due to the heat. As far as the burner is concerned I TI think if it can run diesel heating oil it should be fine with Bio D. Unless TI it«s really cold the Bio D should flow even better. Anyone else have TI comments? TI Tom Irwin TI -Original Message- TI From: Gustl Steiner-Zehender TI To: Biofuel TI Sent: 1/04/05 9:00 TI Subject: [Biofuel] Biofuel and Oil Burning Furnaces TI Hallo Folks, TI We have run out of wood and I am not fit to cut and split it at this TI time so we had to use our fuel oil furnace which needed more attention TI than I was qualified to give it. TI I spoke to Erv, the repairman, about the problems with diesel Nr. 1 TI and Nr. 2 and then asked him about biofuel and the furnace. He told TI me there were no rubber parts at all that would touch the biofuel and TI that the only thing which would need to be changed for it to work TI would possibly be the nozzle. TI I have seen this topic several times on the list but don't remember TI the details of the discussion. Thought this might be of some use to TI someone. I know I will be heating with biofuel this winter. TI Happy Happy, TI Gustl -- Je mehr wir haben, desto mehr fordert Gott von uns. We can't change the winds but we can adjust our sails. The safest road to Hell is the gradual one - the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts. C. S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters Es gibt Wahrheiten, die so sehr auf der Stra§e liegen, da§ sie gerade deshalb von der gewhnlichen Welt nicht gesehen oder wenigstens nicht erkannt werden. Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music. George Carlin The best portion of a good man's life - His little, nameless, unremembered acts of kindness and of love. William Wordsworth ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Optimism
Yeah, that's right, she does all the work, or most of it - she's the one who's learning, it's the only way. I should say Midori does most of the gardening and farm work, but that's by no means all the work there is around here - there's also all the biofuel work (and not just making the stuff), lots of Appropriate Technology projects, seminars, lectures, plus website maintenance and development, mailing lists, a constant flood of feedback and correspondence. We both work really hard all the time. Lots of variety and lots of fun, but it can get kind of gruelling just the same. No complaints. Plenty of optimism! Regards Keith ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
I read a lot about IV and have not been able to figure out what it is. I'm new to all this. Would someone PLEASE help me out here? Thanks Roy Hello Roy I gave you this before: Start here: Where do I start? http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make.html#start That's on this page: http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make.html Make your own biodiesel: Journey to Forever Read the whole thing, and then keep going. You'll find this on that page: Iodine Values -- High Iodine Values -- Talking about the weather All you need to know about IV. Best wshes Keith TLC Orchids and Such [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hydrogenated canola has an IV of around 65 while non hydrogenated has an IV of around 112. Does anyone know if the IV in soybean (131) safflower (145) hemp (165) or sunflower (133) are altered in any way by the hydrogenation process? - Original Message - From: bob allen To: Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Howdy Kieth and Jan At the risk of looking foolish as I am an organic chemist, but don't have much experience with polymer chemistry- here goes Polymerization is a molecule molecule reaction. A compound with double carbon carbon bond is particularly susceptible free radical oxidation. Let's call them U. Compounds without carbon carbon double bounds are relatively unreactive. We will call these S. Oxygen will activate one molecule, U, but for polymerization to occur, the activated molecule must encounter another U, then the now covalently bonded pair, must encounter another U, and so on. Collisions of activated U with S don't result in a reaction. It seems to me that if you dilute U with S, that you will reduce polymerization. Or how about this. An activated molecule has only a finite amount of time to react. If an activated molecule U bumps into another U then chain growth continues. But if activated U bumps into S, no reaction occurs, other than U reacting internally, which also stops chain growth. Polymer chemists can modulate the number of molecules in a chain (chain length) by addition of non polymerizing stuff. Being a right brain guy, this discussion is made more difficult, as I can't draw all the pictures which exemplify the points I am trying to make. :( The long and short of it (no pun intended) chain length of polymers will be reduced by dilution of biodiesel blended from high IV oils with low IV oils. Put another way, the time to reach a specified degree of polymerization will be extended by dilution. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] New Crop of batteries
Tomas, here's what I found about them: http://www.betterhumans.com/News/news.aspx?articleID=2005-04-01-3 - Original Message - From: Tom Irwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 1:44 PM Subject: RE: [Biofuel] New Crop of batteries Tomas, I am not as up to date on battery technology as I would like to be. Could you or anyone else update me on these new type batteries and battery technology in general? Keith if this is in the achives, sorry I still haven«t been to them yet. Maybe this weekend or next I will get some free time. Tom Irwin -Original Message- From: Tomas Juknevicius To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 1/04/05 6:17 Subject: [Biofuel] New Crop of batteries Hello folks, I've just read an exciting piece of news. The new crop of electric batetries is upon us. These are the usual Li-Ion batteries, but with a twist - ability to charge to 80% capacity in 1minute. Also these have excelent lifecycle - only loose 1% of capacity after 1000 cycles The energy density is the same as usual Li-Ions (not very much, when compared to gasoline energy density, but sifficient). Article also says that these will debut in 2006, probably in hybrid cars first. Also has the potential to revive the electric cars This is the kind of breakthrough I've dreamed for a long time. Generaly speaking, such breakthroughs can change the entire landscape of electricity usage. http://www.toshiba.co.jp/about/press/2005_03/pr2901.htm http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7081 Also a long'ish discussion on slashdot: http://hardware.slashdot.org/hardware/05/03/30/0050228.shtml?tid=126tid =137 -- Tomas Juknevicius ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
Thanks Keith I remember you giving me all this BUT I never made the connection betweem IV and IODINE VALUE. I GOT IT NOW Slow but Sure me. Thanks again ~BEST~ Roy Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi you fine people I read a lot about IV and have not been able to figure out what it is. I'm new to all this. Would someone PLEASE help me out here? Thanks Roy Hello Roy I gave you this before: Start here: Where do I start? http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make.html#start That's on this page: http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make.html Make your own biodiesel: Journey to Forever Read the whole thing, and then keep going. You'll find this on that page: Iodine Values -- High Iodine Values -- Talking about the weather All you need to know about IV. Best wshes Keith TLC Orchids and Such wrote: Hydrogenated canola has an IV of around 65 while non hydrogenated has an IV of around 112. Does anyone know if the IV in soybean (131) safflower (145) hemp (165) or sunflower (133) are altered in any way by the hydrogenation process? - Original Message - From: bob allen To: Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Howdy Kieth and Jan At the risk of looking foolish as I am an organic chemist, but don't have much experience with polymer chemistry- here goes Polymerization is a molecule molecule reaction. A compound with double carbon carbon bond is particularly susceptible free radical oxidation. Let's call them U. Compounds without carbon carbon double bounds are relatively unreactive. We will call these S. Oxygen will activate one molecule, U, but for polymerization to occur, the activated molecule must encounter another U, then the now covalently bonded pair, must encounter another U, and so on. Collisions of activated U with S don't result in a reaction. It seems to me that if you dilute U with S, that you will reduce polymerization. Or how about this. An activated molecule has only a finite amount of time to react. If an activated molecule U bumps into another U then chain growth continues. But if activated U bumps into S, no reaction occurs, other than U reacting internally, which also stops chain growth. Polymer chemists can modulate the number of molecules in a chain (chain length) by addition of non polymerizing stuff. Being a right brain guy, this discussion is made more difficult, as I can't draw all the pictures which exemplify the points I am trying to make. :( The long and short of it (no pun intended) chain length of polymers will be reduced by dilution of biodiesel blended from high IV oils with low IV oils. Put another way, the time to reach a specified degree of polymerization will be extended by dilution. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Roy Washbish Certified Health Coach A HOME BUSINESS PRODUCTS THAT WORK PRODUCTS BUSINESS HTTP://WWW.TRIVITA.COM/11393920 - Yahoo! Messenger Show us what our next emoticon should look like. Join the fun. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Castor beens and oil
Helow All Fransico Well we in north east of Brasil. A lot of castor oil is produces here and other place , but the e first time we hear the odour problems which can be esily solved You can solve the problem using different hot and cold extraction process which are under development very seriously in Brasil As we are in Brasil we can surley join with Irwin in the biofilter design as we do have posgraduate programme In Chemical engineering dept UFRN, Natal to do the same. The price of the castor oil sold for the petro chemical companies are very high compared to heating. It is better you find a alternate energy such as used vegetabale oil and make Biofuel for Motor . As we are in Brazil we can jointly work to solve our problem . sd Pannirselvam P.V On Apr 1, 2005 5:04 PM, Tom Irwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi All, I'm an American living in Uruguay and I may have a potential solution for your odor problem. It's called a compost biofilter. In essence you pull the air from your castor bean pressing facility and pass it through a large enough pile of compost. The compost scrubs the organics (the odors) from the air stream and eats them for dinner. You have to keep the compost optimally moist with water and it is sized by the number of cubic meter of air you pull from your pressing operation. I'm certain there are engineers in Brazil who can size this for you properly if not write back with the number of cubic meters you need scrubbed and I'll do a rough pass design for you. By rough pass, I mean I will oversize it to more than adequately scrub what you need. It will cost you slightly more in terms of land, compost and water. But heck, you live in Brazil, have lots of land, and if you can convince some folks there to just slow down on the cutting of the rainforest, plenty of water. Tom Irwin -Original Message- From: FRANCISCO To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 3/31/05 9:36 AM Subject: [Biofuel] Castor beens and oil Hy!!! need help form the group We are developping a project to replace fossil fuel ( about 12 million gallons per year ) by vegetable oil at 1 to1 ratio . The customer is a paper industry. We will have small farmers planting castor to begin with and later we will move to jatropha when we domesticate it. We will press and extract the oil then burn it in the furnace. The problem we will face in the field is odor as when we press castor beens a _*very bad smell*_ just come out( we found that on our lab/bench test). As of know we do not want a individual solution ( masks with activated carbon ) but an industrial operational solution. Does any one had experienced same thing with castor??? If so is there any solution and if so what is it and how do we implement it I thank you in advance for your cooperation. Very best for us Chico ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ -- Pagandai V Pannirselvam Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte - UFRN Departamento de Engenharia Qumica - DEQ Centro de Tecnologia - CT Programa de Ps Graduao em Engenharia Qumica - PPGEQ Grupo de Pesquisa em Engenharia de Custos - GPEC Av. Senador Salgado Filho, Campus Universitrio CEP 59.072-970 , Natal/RN - Brasil Residence : Av Odilon gome de lima, 2951, Q6/Bl.G/Apt 102 Capim Macio EP 59.078-400 , Natal/RN - Brasil Telefone(fax) ( 84 ) 215-3770 Ramal20 2171557 Telefone(fax) ( 84 ) 215-3770 Ramal20 2171557 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
IVIodine Value - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005 7:50 AM Subject: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Hi you fine people I read a lot about IV and have not been able to figure out what it is. I'm new to all this. Would someone PLEASE help me out here? Thanks Roy Hello Roy I gave you this before: Start here: Where do I start? http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make.html#start That's on this page: http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make.html Make your own biodiesel: Journey to Forever Read the whole thing, and then keep going. You'll find this on that page: Iodine Values -- High Iodine Values -- Talking about the weather All you need to know about IV. Best wshes Keith TLC Orchids and Such [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hydrogenated canola has an IV of around 65 while non hydrogenated has an IV of around 112. Does anyone know if the IV in soybean (131) safflower (145) hemp (165) or sunflower (133) are altered in any way by the hydrogenation process? - Original Message - From: bob allen To: Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Howdy Kieth and Jan At the risk of looking foolish as I am an organic chemist, but don't have much experience with polymer chemistry- here goes Polymerization is a molecule molecule reaction. A compound with double carbon carbon bond is particularly susceptible free radical oxidation. Let's call them U. Compounds without carbon carbon double bounds are relatively unreactive. We will call these S. Oxygen will activate one molecule, U, but for polymerization to occur, the activated molecule must encounter another U, then the now covalently bonded pair, must encounter another U, and so on. Collisions of activated U with S don't result in a reaction. It seems to me that if you dilute U with S, that you will reduce polymerization. Or how about this. An activated molecule has only a finite amount of time to react. If an activated molecule U bumps into another U then chain growth continues. But if activated U bumps into S, no reaction occurs, other than U reacting internally, which also stops chain growth. Polymer chemists can modulate the number of molecules in a chain (chain length) by addition of non polymerizing stuff. Being a right brain guy, this discussion is made more difficult, as I can't draw all the pictures which exemplify the points I am trying to make. :( The long and short of it (no pun intended) chain length of polymers will be reduced by dilution of biodiesel blended from high IV oils with low IV oils. Put another way, the time to reach a specified degree of polymerization will be extended by dilution. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
Sorry, but I live in Texas and your English is so much better than the average of what I hear, that you must be a foreigner grin Bright Blessings, Kim At 06:34 PM 4/1/2005, you wrote: Thanks anyway, because I thought that my English is so bad, that it exclude the possibility that I was American. Hakan ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
Thank you Jan for your reply. Does anyone know the IV of Hydrogenated soybean oil? and does this affect whether or not it polymerizes? - Original Message - From: Jan Warnqvist [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005 4:50 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Hello TLC. The main idea with hydrogenation is to alter the IV value of an oil. The answer is yes. Jan Warnqvist AGERATEC AB [EMAIL PROTECTED] + 46 554 201 89 +46 70 499 38 45 - Original Message - From: TLC Orchids and Such [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005 5:13 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Hydrogenated canola has an IV of around 65 while non hydrogenated has an IV of around 112. Does anyone know if the IV in soybean (131) safflower (145) hemp (165) or sunflower (133) are altered in any way by the hydrogenation process? - Original Message - From: bob allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Howdy Kieth and Jan At the risk of looking foolish as I am an organic chemist, but don't have much experience with polymer chemistry- here goes Polymerization is a molecule molecule reaction. A compound with double carbon carbon bond is particularly susceptible free radical oxidation. Let's call them U. Compounds without carbon carbon double bounds are relatively unreactive. We will call these S. Oxygen will activate one molecule, U, but for polymerization to occur, the activated molecule must encounter another U, then the now covalently bonded pair, must encounter another U, and so on. Collisions of activated U with S don't result in a reaction. It seems to me that if you dilute U with S, that you will reduce polymerization. Or how about this. An activated molecule has only a finite amount of time to react. If an activated molecule U bumps into another U then chain growth continues. But if activated U bumps into S, no reaction occurs, other than U reacting internally, which also stops chain growth. Polymer chemists can modulate the number of molecules in a chain (chain length) by addition of non polymerizing stuff. Being a right brain guy, this discussion is made more difficult, as I can't draw all the pictures which exemplify the points I am trying to make. :( The long and short of it (no pun intended) chain length of polymers will be reduced by dilution of biodiesel blended from high IV oils with low IV oils. Put another way, the time to reach a specified degree of polymerization will be extended by dilution. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device
over unity is certainly a name that will give Lutec a lot of grief. It's a little like saying the Lutec magic device. Claims about using the Earths EM field for power generation has been around for a while. They are often called Methernitha generators, named after the Swiss society who were one of the first to make the claim. Although I don't understand the principles of the device in question and I find it very difficult to believe, I wonder if there was a similar response to ideas like wireless communications. I understand the laws of thermodynamics and would agree that you can't get something for nothing. But, I just wonder if there is an explaination as to where/what the energy is converted from/to and we haven't heard it yet. Mike --- Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Keith, I'll take two! Ah heck, make it a six pack. Okay, Craig, 20% discount on sixpacks, that's $5,000, cheap at half the price. Keith - Original Message - From: Keith Addisonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 12:42 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device Hi Craig Keith, I haven't laughed that hard in the past 74 3/8 hours! Oh well I put a stop payment on my $1,000 check just to get in line to order the 15:1 energy unit! Still looking for that cold fusion guy from RONCO! :-) Great, isn't it? Humans, you gotta love 'em! While you've got your checkbook handy... Never mind the guy from RONCO, I've developed this wonderful technique of producing cold fusion in a Dr Pepper bottle, just add the secret ingredients and shake it 3.5 times... Interested? Keith - Original Message - From: Keith Addisonmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] r.org To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]mailt o:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 8:11 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device I see why they call it down under now. Perpetural motion isn't possible on this planet. I think not in this universe.This guy has slid over into another dimension or what? JD2005 Eric Krieg lists 78 free energy scams here, doesn't seem to get into the zero-point stuff and instant cold fusion, so there's all that besides: http://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.htmlhttp://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.htm lhttp://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.htmlhttp://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.h tml Eric's history of Perpetual Motion and Free Energy Machines Plus: How to become a Free Energy con man http://www.phact.org/e/con_man.htmhttp://www.phact.org/e/con_man.htm http://www.phact.org/e/con_man.htmhttp://www.phact.org/e/con_man.htm And: The Museum of Unworkable Devices http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htmhttp://www.lhup.edu/~ dhttp://www.lhup.edu/~d simanek/museum/unwork.htm Enjoy! Keith - Original Message - From: D. Mindock To: Undisclosed-Recipient:; Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 12:45 AM Subject: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device This device (see attached pic) is due for release, starting in Australia where Lutec Pty Ltd is located... ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Re: Security Threats and Religious belief
- Original Message - From: Henri Naths [EMAIL PROTECTED] would you rather have some rogue government agent throw you in jail for being a security threat You mean like Jan Lentz, Suni Haught, and Mauricio Rosas? Three senior citizens arrested at a Bush rally in Tampa on July 4, 2001? Their transgression? Holding an 8x10 cardboard sign saying BOO http://search.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artikkel?SearchID=73116629072027Avis=SHDato=20021102Kategori=NEWSLopenr=211020364Ref=AR How about your whole family killed because you have the wrong religious belief You mean like the Schiavo family who are under protective armed guard because of the death threats by the Christians? Same for Judge Greer's family. And 9 Republican lawmakers? Like them? http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/story/293376p-251139c.html ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Re: the 4th Estate
- Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] We rely on the 4th Estate (of which I'm a lifelong member) to do that for us, that's their role and essential function, but (though the exceptions are many and honorable) there's no need for me to say how derelict they've become in this duty, especially over the last few decades. It's always been a kept press, of course, owned by the very interests it's supposed to protect society against. ---end--- The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes. - John Swinton, the Chief of Staff for the New York Times, 1953 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
Thank You TLC Orchids and Such [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:IV Iodine Value - Original Message - From: Keith Addison To: Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005 7:50 AM Subject: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Hi you fine people I read a lot about IV and have not been able to figure out what it is. I'm new to all this. Would someone PLEASE help me out here? Thanks Roy Hello Roy I gave you this before: Start here: Where do I start? http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make.html#start That's on this page: http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make.html Make your own biodiesel: Journey to Forever Read the whole thing, and then keep going. You'll find this on that page: Iodine Values -- High Iodine Values -- Talking about the weather All you need to know about IV. Best wshes Keith TLC Orchids and Such wrote: Hydrogenated canola has an IV of around 65 while non hydrogenated has an IV of around 112. Does anyone know if the IV in soybean (131) safflower (145) hemp (165) or sunflower (133) are altered in any way by the hydrogenation process? - Original Message - From: bob allen To: Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Howdy Kieth and Jan At the risk of looking foolish as I am an organic chemist, but don't have much experience with polymer chemistry- here goes Polymerization is a molecule molecule reaction. A compound with double carbon carbon bond is particularly susceptible free radical oxidation. Let's call them U. Compounds without carbon carbon double bounds are relatively unreactive. We will call these S. Oxygen will activate one molecule, U, but for polymerization to occur, the activated molecule must encounter another U, then the now covalently bonded pair, must encounter another U, and so on. Collisions of activated U with S don't result in a reaction. It seems to me that if you dilute U with S, that you will reduce polymerization. Or how about this. An activated molecule has only a finite amount of time to react. If an activated molecule U bumps into another U then chain growth continues. But if activated U bumps into S, no reaction occurs, other than U reacting internally, which also stops chain growth. Polymer chemists can modulate the number of molecules in a chain (chain length) by addition of non polymerizing stuff. Being a right brain guy, this discussion is made more difficult, as I can't draw all the pictures which exemplify the points I am trying to make. :( The long and short of it (no pun intended) chain length of polymers will be reduced by dilution of biodiesel blended from high IV oils with low IV oils. Put another way, the time to reach a specified degree of polymerization will be extended by dilution. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Roy Washbish Certified Health Coach A HOME BUSINESS PRODUCTS THAT WORK PRODUCTS BUSINESS HTTP://WWW.TRIVITA.COM/11393920 - Do you Yahoo!? Make Yahoo! your home page ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Methanol backyard manufacturing possible?
Hi All, Just a quick word of caution about backyard methanol. There's no such thing, as yet. You can't make methanol in your backyard, as both Walt and I have just explained. You can distill ethanol, and it will have minute amounts of methanol in the first bit which you discard. But you can't make methanol in any usable amounts. It definitely is not ethanol. The direct meaning is it is a deadly toxin than can be readily absorbed through the skin and inhaled into the lungs. I«m certain a very small percentage of the population has a very small capacity to detoxify this in their liver. Everybody can, and it's not as deadly as you make out. In fact it's a common household item, sold in supermarkets and hardware stores, and other common household items are more dangerous than methanol. It's used as a dinner-table barbecue and fondue fuel, kids use it in their model aeroplane motors. Yes, it's dangerous, but we deal with dangerous things all the time in our daily lives. I don't think methanol has held any perils for biodiesel makers since we left the dark old days of From the Fryer to the Fuel Tank behind, years ago. Use closed containers and closed processors as Journey to Forever and all other responsible websites advise, don't be sloppy or careless, follow the safety instructions, and it's an easily managed hazard. I'm not downplaying it, our website constantly emphasises safety, but a lot of people overplay the methanol hazard, as you're doing. The vast majority can«t tolerate it at all. In direct laymans terms, first you go blind then you die usually of acidosis. You have to drink at least a couple of tablespoonsful for that to happen. So what? Are you going to try that with paint remover, or drain cleaner, or cellulose thinners? Or gasoline? The fumes are dangerous, but it only fumes when it's hot, and that hazard is completely removed with closed containers and closed processors. Sounds scary and painful to me. I«m trying desperately to use ethanol when I make Bio D. I«ve had some success. But quite frankly I have never had a bad batch when I used methanol. I«m fairly certain I know why but won«t mention it here cause it«s probably in the archieves that Keith keeps pounding on me to read. :- Sorry but the letters are just too darn interesting for the moment. You're supposed to consult the archives BEFORE you post and ask questions, not as an ever-postponed afterthought. It's one of the List rules, which you were referred to when you joined the list, and which you're obliged to read, and to follow: If you don't see what you're interested in, just ask. Or check the archives first to see if it has been dealt with previously, and then ask. Please make use of the resources listed at the Biofuel list home page: http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Especially the searchable list archives: http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ The archives contains more than 38,000 messages over nearly five years. The question you want to ask or the topic you're interested in has probably already been covered. That's no reason not to ask it again, but if you know what's gone before you'll ask a better question and get better answers. Otherwise we just keep on rehashing the same old stuff again and again and again, and the sheer tedium of it drives people away after awhile - and these are the ones with the experience, so the whole community suffers. I hope you've got that straight now. Keith Addison Journey to Forever KYOTO Pref., Japan http://journeytoforever.org/ Biofuel list owner Tom Irwin -Original Message- From: Henri Naths To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 1/04/05 15:08 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Methanol backyard manufacturing possible? short answer yes. (methanol.. backyard) if money is no object.H. - Original Message - From: Thomas Mountain [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 31 March, 2005 6:20 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Methanol backyard manufacturing possible? As a newcomer to the biodiesel world I was wondering if it was possible to make methanol in your backyard so to speak? And the other question is it possible to make biodiesel with ethanol? I am putting together a proposal for an East African country to follow Brazils lead and have to do some homework first. selam, tom mountain ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
carbon double bonds, so the amount of Iodine absorbed is a direct measure of the number of double bonds. Hydrogenation removes the double bonds. Complete hydrogenation will remove all double bonds hence the Iodine value should be essentially zero. TLC Orchids and Such wrote: Hydrogenated canola has an IV of around 65 while non hydrogenated has an IV of around 112. this must be partially hydrogenated Does anyone know if the IV in soybean (131) safflower (145) hemp (165) or sunflower (133) are altered in any way by the hydrogenation process? sure, the IV of these compounds will be zero also if completely hydrogenated. The product will me a solid at room temperature, and the derived biodiesel will have a higher gel point. -- Bob Allen http://ozarker.org/bob Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves - Richard Feynman ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] bush and money.
The presidential election is in four years but the off election for congress is in two years and there will be a chance to weaken the Republican power in the congress at that time. It gives us something to work for anyway. I suspect the role of Wolfowitz will be to assist international corporations in securing favorable (to them) deals in developing nations that will be to the detriment of the citizens of those nations and to use the power of the bank to pressure countries the administration doesn't like such as Venezuela to cooperate or change their government. I don't think the administration is going to go to war again for a long time. Iran is not Iraq. The government has much more popular support and a much stronger army than Iraq. North Korea has nuclear weapons and if it looked like they were losing they might just use them out of desperation though I doubt they would start a war with them. Unless the administration is willing to impose a draft, we are in no position to invade another country at this point and a draft would virtually eliminate the Republican party's chances in any future election. There are serious manpower shortages in all of the services. This is a government with little understanding or interest in the outside world beyond what they can exploit and a naive belief that everyone wants to be just like us if only their leaders would let them. Remember Wolfowitz actually believed that the Iraqis would not openly welcome us for liberating them but would love to pay us out of their oil revenue for doing so. Bush's approval rating continues to decline and he is having more and more difficulty domestically with his base. His initiatives have not been received well and his alleged mandate is fading fast. Rick Andrew Tracey wrote: I might be mistaken and probably are but it appears to me that now mr wolfowitz has his hands on a bottomless pit of money that he is going to give his buddy ALL THAT IT TAKES to get rid of the baddies. When is the next election in the U.S.? It seems that there will be just enough time to duplicate the Iraq effort in Iran and N. Korea. Does anybody else think this is a possibility? or am i just paranoid. One way to achieve it would be to drive oil prices sky high so as to fill the coffers of your mates oil company's,then they in turn could produce more fuel reserves for just an action. But that couldn't be because that would mean the bosses have an alternative agenda to what they are telling all the gullible little people. The little back slapping bum licking bloke from Aust might just wake up to how he has been used. Well anyway i just thought i would air my paranoia. Keep your bomb shelters in order guys, cheers. Andrew. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
in temperature results in a doubling of a reaction rate. So the short answer is yes, but with the caveat: You really don't need to worry about a polymerization reaction occurring in an injector or hot engine part that it would interfere with the operation of the engine. Tom Irwin wrote: Hi Bob, I like the us and ss for those uninitiated. But my question is at high temperature, like that found near or in a diesel engine, will the us be able to find those other us more easily and thus have a polymerization reaction anyway? Tom -Original Message- -- Bob Allen http://ozarker.org/bob Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves - Richard Feynman ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
We took out Hitler because Germany declared war on us after Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor. Sadam did not declare war on us and presented no immediate threat. In the long run he was a danger to US and European oil interests in that he was determined to get control of the Arabian peninsula and Iran thus controlling the majority of the oil on the planet as far as has been proven. From such a position he could have bled us white. Beyond unlimited avarice he appears to have had no ideology. In this respect he resembled some of the current administrations most influential backers. That he was a real threat was demonstrated by his invasions of Kuwait and Iran though he was sufficiently contained by international pressure that any risk was potential rather than actual and manageable without going to war. There is no question that he was a dirt ball but there are much worse that we do nothing about and some of them are our allies. What we lost attacking Iraq so far exceeds what we have gained and if the Shiite party that won the election establishes a radical theocracy like Iran we will find ourselves in a far worse position than we were with Sadam. Rick Henri Naths wrote: Hakan, I would like to give a humble option here, ( Hakan wrote;...Criminal, established by the fact that we now know that Iraq were no WMD threat to US. ) We took out Hitler for the same reason, Him and Suddam Hussein were weapons of mass destruction. H. - Original Message - From: Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 31 March, 2005 7:29 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come Bob, You were right and I am wrong and I am glad that I did get a very good explanation on how Hubbert could be so right. It also explains why president Carter was so genuinely worried, when he developed his energy plan. He had the foresight to realize that Hubbert was right. It also explains why we see the surge in the genuine hate of Americans. It is the cost of aggressive and egoistic foreign policies, that resulted in about 10 more years of artificially low oil prices. All of this, ending up in an almost criminal behavior by the Bush administration. I say almost, because I do not want to be too crude. The legal aspect of being criminal, is very clearly established, Criminal, established by the fact that we now know that Iraq were no WMD threat to US. By laying the responsibility at the feet of faulty US intelligence community, the Bush administration is trying deliberately to avoid their legal responsibility. A kind of reversed side of the well known argument it was not my fault, I was ordered to do it. LOL All of this supported by the America people, in a reelection of president Bush. I hear the false argument that only 48% voted him in office. This argument is poor mathematics, I cannot get to this result, when Bush won with a more than 3 million of the populous American vote. It was the first election of Bush, that he did not have a populous majority and he was put in office by the Courts. Hakan At 11:16 PM 3/31/2005, you wrote: All I know is what I read in the brief biography. (and what I recall from hearing about his work many years ago) Hakan Falk wrote: Bob, I stand corrected and the only excuse I have, is that I only brought forward a mistake that I read earlier. I remember that it was an article about the hearings in US congress in mid 70'. Will however not do this mistake again, but do not despair, there are many others I will do and surely in my far from perfect English. -:) What was his field at Berkeley? Hakan At 05:35 PM 3/31/2005, you wrote: Howdy Hakan, calling him a mathematician is a bit short-sighted. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marion_King_Hubbert Hubbert was born in San Saba, Texas in 1903. He attended the University of Chicago, where he received his B.S. in 1926, his M.S. in 1928, and his Ph.D in 1937, studying geology, mathematics, and physics. He worked as an assistant geologist for the Amerada Petroleum Company for two years while pursuing his Ph.D. He joined the Shell Oil Company in 1943, retiring in 1964. After he retired from Shell, he became a senior research geophysicist for the United States Geological Survey until his retirement in 1976. He also held positions as a professor of geology and geophysics at Stanford University from 1963 to 1968, and as a professor at Berkeley from 1973 to 1976. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at
[Biofuel] Re: the 4th Estate
Let's put in some of the rest of it, because you've provided a good example of it. Joanne said: Thank you for your interest in my post. I like to find the stories behind societal beliefs like this that have so often been accepted without question. And I replied: It's MOST important to do that, IMO. We rely on the 4th Estate (of which I'm a lifelong member) to do that for us ... Okay? - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] We rely on the 4th Estate (of which I'm a lifelong member) to do that for us, that's their role and essential function, but (though the exceptions are many and honorable) there's no need for me to say how derelict they've become in this duty, especially over the last few decades. It's always been a kept press, of course, owned by the very interests it's supposed to protect society against. Though the exceptions are many and honorable, and indeed they are. It continued: So we have to find out for ourselves, or be at the mercy of inimical forces that are too often little short of sociopathic. Fortunately it's almost always possible to do that, with a bit of tenacity and scepticism, especially with the Internet - the Internet will save us all, the first true leveller. Truly something new under the sun. So, to your legendary and largely FICTITIOUS quote from John Swinton. Sorry Scott, it's an urban legend, one of these: ... societal beliefs like this that have so often been accepted without question. ---end--- The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes. - John Swinton, the Chief of Staff for the New York Times, 1953 There are many debunkings of this myth. Here's one: ... One journalist there, Jeff McMahon, made this in response: Yeah, I'll take that bait. The last time I saw that phony quote Swinton was identified as the chief of staff of the New York SUN, the date was 1853, and where it now says I am paid weekly, it then said I am paid $150 a week. Which is, actually, about how much I made in journalism. Then some liar realized that newspapers don't have chiefs of staff, at least the editorial departments don't, and if you're going to lie you might as well do it big, so they made him the EDITOR IN CHIEF of the New York TIMES in NINETEEN53. Unfortunately, the editor of the New York Times in 1953 was Turner Catledge. So the quote itself betrays a need for journalists because otherwise people who spread such propaganda might go unchecked. That having been said, I will acknowledge that this cheap lie, like most cheap lies, has some truth to it. I think it is expressed rather bitterly, personally, but I'm sure every journalist with any history in the biz has had at least one day when they felt that way. It's the very reason that I gladly applied the word former to the word journalist when it is attached to my name. Indeed, New York Times executive editor Max Frankel said something very similar about the impact of profiteering on journalism after he retired in 1994. Frankel probably isn't quoted quite so widely because he doesn't use 21st century Neo_Old_Testament Naderite phrasiology like fawn at the feet of mammon. What Swinton describes is not so easily described or it would have been dealt with. It is more like a constant, subtle pressure to bend to power. A pressure that can be defied and maybe even often, but that does not seem to ever go away. The strong spend a career tilting against it; the weak let it direct them, as you can see every day in this country's media. It certainly isn't true that you can never write your true opinion in the American press. I wrote my true opinion plenty of times, most recently when I wrote that commentary about Hearst Ranch. It managed to pass through two editors and a publisher without one word changed. However, no anti_Hearst commentary can run in this county without a Steve Hearst commentary on the very same page. And who is responsible for that? Is it the fault of the journalists? No, for that subversion of truth and integrity we can thank our county's professional greenwashers. Anyway, before posting such, we should consider how our brothers and sisters in the Newspaper Guild might feel about such a broadbrush defilement of a very diverse group of largely hard working and underpaid men and women. I propose the following bumper sticker: SUPPORT YOUR LOCAL FACT CHECKER In cheerful solidarity, Jeff McMahon That's here: http://www.zeppscommentaries.com/History/swinton.htm John Swinton:
[Biofuel] End of Suburbia
I had the opportunity to see this video on Thursday evening. (Part of the program for how Ottawa should deal with the consequences of Peak Oil. Clearly a low-budget production, but it covered the topic well. Few surprises for those on this list, I expect. Set the context of the different types of suburbs (first Victorian suburbs, radial rail suburbs, early automotive suburbs, post- WWII suburbs). Covers sprawl and related issues. Food miles. Much more on social aspects. Then evidence of peak oil. Interviews with Matthew Simmons, Richard Heinberg (Powerdown), Michael C. Ruppert (Crossing the Rubicon), Dr. Colin Campbell, Dr. Kenneth Deffeyes, etc. Unfortunately, Ruppert was pretty negative on biofuels, focusing on one-to-one substitution for todays fossil fuel use, and repeating the mantra that it takes more oil to make ethanol than is imbedded in the ethanol produced. Still, on the whole, it strikes as a reasonably honest appraisal. Recommended. Commerical screenings are rare, but if you can find an opportunity to see it, try to do so. I learned at the presentation that the DVD and VHS is now available via the web if anyone else is interested (US$28.50 or Cdn$36.00). I expect I will be buying a copy to show to friends and for future reference. Also at the presentation were a video of Thomas Homer-Dixon on the August 2003 blackout, climate change and nuclear energy/enriched uranium issues. Highlight of the evening was a live presentation by Paul Sears (one of the local environmental usual suspects) on some facts and figures on oil and natural gas reserves. Put ANWR in context very nicely I thought (essentially irrelevant in terms of oil production on the world scale). Largely preaching to the converted, but I expect there will be subsequent sessions to cover some positive measures for the future. -- Darryl McMahon http://www.econogics.com/ It's your planet. If you won't look after it, who will? ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] The Corporation
My last post got me thinking that The Corporation video is also available on the Internet now, if anyone is interested. Superb complement to the book, for those that have read it. Clearly Bakan and company knew what would work in print, and what would work in video, and used both to advantage. Directions to acquire the book (Cdn$14.99), DVD (Cdn$29.71) or VHS (Cdn$26.96) at: http://www.thecorporation.com/index.php?page_id=10 Also provides links to where the movie is playing around the world. I already bought a copy of the VHS, and have read the book. Both recommended. Synopsis of the book at: http://www.thecorporation.com/index.php?page_id=47 -- Darryl McMahon http://www.econogics.com/ It's your planet. If you won't look after it, who will? ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
SVO, not biodiesel: The use of drying oils or sem-drying - with linseed and tung being the most drying (although few would use them in a diesel engine, given how much more expensive they are that WVO frying oils) and walnut and soy being less so - is reported to cause polymerization of lube oils if they migrate into the crankcase. And, as you point out, any straight vegetable oil can do this if unheated. Poor atomization of WVO or SVO is the main mechanism that leads to dilution/contamination of the lube oil - if the fuel-air charge isn't atomized well enough, the resulting larger droplets don't combust, and can run down the cylinder walls and into the crankcase - and if the WVO or SVO is a drying or semi-drying oil, polymerization will occur. Also, the uncombusted fuel can, reportedly, cause deposits in the ring lands - the piston ring grooves - preventing the rings from expanding and contracting as designed, resulting in an even greater tendency of any uncombusted fuel to get into the crankcase, and, if the compression rings are also effected, poor compression results, with even worse combustion. The vicious circle phenomenon. And, direct-injection engines are more subject to all of this, since the pre-chamber in an indirect injection engine helps with combustion with less-than-perfect fuels. So, the best way(s) to prevent polymerization of lube oils, are, in rough order of priority (and in my opinion:) 1. Heat the WVO/SVO. The hotter the better - which is why we use both coolant and 12V electric. This is even more critical in direct-injection (DI) engines. 2. Use a synthetic motor oil - they are less prone to polymerization. 3. Especially with a genset, and even more especially with a DI genset, don't use drying or semi-drying oils. 4. As Anton pointed out, run the genset at full load. Add load if necessary. 5. Use a two-tank system, and purge well. Bioidiesel is better for purging/cleaning than diesel, so use that. 6. Pay for periodic lube oil analysis to check for uncombusted veggie oil. 7. Change the lube oil more frequently with the $ you've saved by running the thing on free fuel. Or, in the case of a genset, just run it on good biodiesel. Craig Reece Neoteric Biofuels http://www.biofuels.ca ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re[2]: [Biofuel] Biofuel and Oil Burning Furnaces
I am not the one to ask about rubber and biodiesel. It is my impression that the two get along fine although they have a bad reputation to the contrary but I don't know that as fact. I just put the rubber bit in there in case someone had concerns about biodiesel and rubber coming into contact because in my fuel oil burner they don't and I don't believe they do in any others. Todd or some of the others can tell you definitively. Just consider me a half blind old fart hobbling around muttering to himself trying to make sense of things. ;o) :-) Right, Gustl, sure you are! LOL! Have a look at this: Biodiesel Blends in Space Heating Equipment C.R. Krishna DECEMBER 2001 Prepared for: National Renewable Energy Laboratory http://www.homepower.com/files/Biodiesel_Space_Heating.pdf I think there's another one somewhere, or maybe two, I'll have a look. Regards Keith Happy Happy, Gustl Friday, 01 April, 2005, 16:53:08, you wrote: TI Greetings Gustl, TI I was under the impression from my reading that viton rubber would be ok in TI contact with biodiesel. If I«m wrong about this someone please say so. All TI metal is definitely better as I imagine even viton will degrade in a 5 or 10 TI year time span just due to the heat. As far as the burner is concerned I TI think if it can run diesel heating oil it should be fine with Bio D. Unless TI it«s really cold the Bio D should flow even better. Anyone else have TI comments? TI Tom Irwin TI -Original Message- TI From: Gustl Steiner-Zehender TI To: Biofuel TI Sent: 1/04/05 9:00 TI Subject: [Biofuel] Biofuel and Oil Burning Furnaces TI Hallo Folks, TI We have run out of wood and I am not fit to cut and split it at this TI time so we had to use our fuel oil furnace which needed more attention TI than I was qualified to give it. TI I spoke to Erv, the repairman, about the problems with diesel Nr. 1 TI and Nr. 2 and then asked him about biofuel and the furnace. He told TI me there were no rubber parts at all that would touch the biofuel and TI that the only thing which would need to be changed for it to work TI would possibly be the nozzle. TI I have seen this topic several times on the list but don't remember TI the details of the discussion. Thought this might be of some use to TI someone. I know I will be heating with biofuel this winter. TI Happy Happy, TI Gustl ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
Hello Bob and thank you for your input. There should also be pointed out that polymerization may take place in the fuel tank of the vehicle, at least to some extent, since many diesels have leak fuel lines transporting hot fuel to the tank, so the temperature in the tank will rise in proportion to the amount of hot fuel coming in. This may lead to fuel filter clogging. Not instantly, of course, but after a number of hours. Jan Warnqvist AGERATEC AB [EMAIL PROTECTED] + 46 554 201 89 +46 70 499 38 45 - Original Message - From: bob allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005 5:00 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? The general rule of thumb is that a 10 degree Celsius rise in temperature results in a doubling of a reaction rate. So the short answer is yes, but with the caveat: You really don't need to worry about a polymerization reaction occurring in an injector or hot engine part that it would interfere with the operation of the engine. Tom Irwin wrote: Hi Bob, I like the us and ss for those uninitiated. But my question is at high temperature, like that found near or in a diesel engine, will the us be able to find those other us more easily and thus have a polymerization reaction anyway? Tom -Original Message- -- Bob Allen http://ozarker.org/bob Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves - Richard Feynman ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
What sealed Saddam's fate was him converting to the Euro as Iraq's Oil Reserve Currency in November 2000. UN weapons inspectors were inside Iraq and about to certify Iraq as WMD-Free. Since 97% of all his WMD's were destroyed in the first weapons inspections before the inspectors were ordered out of Iraq by the Clinton Administration the day before the US and Britain started bombing, those inspectors would have had to give Saddam a clean bill of health as far as WMD's were concerned and he would have been able to open the oil spigots and sell his oil for Euro's. Iran had indicated a willingness to also convert to Euro's as well as North Korea. The axis of evil or in other words, the axis of petro-dollar elimination. If and when the time comes that China and Japan do not need a large reserve of dollars with which to buy oil, the US Dollar will be essentially what it costs to produce. i.e.nearly worthless, $.003 for any denomination... that's what it costs to print, and eventually that's what it will be worth. The illegal Iraq war is only a stop-gap to the inevitable crash of the global petro-dollar economy. It's not just about the oil, it's about propping up the fraudulent dollar. PEACE Scott - Original Message - From: Rick Littrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sadam did not declare war on us and presented no immediate threat. In the long run he was a danger to US and European oil interests ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: the 4th Estate
Dan Rather certainly made the same point on British TV when he talked about being necklaced if he reported the truth about the bogus rush to war in Iraq. It was a confession that Americans did not see on the corporate controlled TV stations here in the States. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/archive/2029634.stm PEACE Scott - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debunking the Swinton quote. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Oil prices surge to new records
BBC NEWS | Business | 1 April, 2005, 21:50 GMT 22:50 UK Oil prices surge to new records Oil traders say the ratio of global supply to demand is tight Crude oil prices hit record levels on Friday, with leading investment bank Goldman Sachs warning the cost of a barrel could eventually top $100. Goldman Sachs said that the oil market may be in the early stages of a super spike, which could push prices as high as $105 a barrel. It said strong global demand, allied to potential instability in oil producing countries, could inflate prices. US light crude rose as much as $2.40 to $57.70 a barrel in New York. By the close, the price had slipped back to $57.27 a barrel. The previous high was $57.60, set on 17 March. In London, the benchmark contract of Brent crude climbed $2.22, or 4.1%, to $56.51 a barrel. There are real concerns about product availability, that's what is underpinning the strength of the market at the moment, said Kevin Norrish, an analyst at Barclays Capital. Consumption effect The last time prices were at these levels, economists highlighted the potential dangers to global economic growth and inflation. Oil production cartel Opec was prompted to lift production quotas by 500,000 barrels a day. In its report, Goldman Sachs said the possibility of political turmoil in major oil producers such as Saudi Arabia could lead to a significant rise in prices over the long-term. The fundamental situation is not nearly as bad as what current oil prices would suggest David de Garis, ANZ Investment Bank US light, crude oil price Brent crude oil price The firm has raised its average US price forecasts for 2005 and 2006 to $50 and $55 a barrel from $41 and $40 respectively. Oil markets may have entered the early stages of what we have referred to as a 'super spike' period, said Goldman Sachs analyst Arjun Murti. This would result in a multi-year trading band of oil prices high enough to meaningfully reduce energy consumption and recreate a spare capacity cushion only after which will lower prices return. Tight supply Prices have remained above $55 a barrel in recent days after data showed that US gasoline stocks fell last week while demand was 2% higher than this time last year. Markets are also nervous about disruptions to supply after the recent fatal explosion at BP's largest refinery in the United States and a power failure which caused the closure of a Venezuelan refinery on Thursday. However, other analysts said it would require a major disruption in supply to cause a spike in prices of such magnitude. The market is still of the mind that supply/demand is still very tight but the fundamental situation is not nearly as bad as what current oil prices would suggest, said David de Garis, an economist at ANZ Investment Bank. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] World Bank Board Approves Wolfowitz
(washingtonpost.com) World Bank Board Approves Wolfowitz By Paul Blustein Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, March 31, 2005; 3:00 PM The board of the World Bank unanimously approved Paul D. Wolfowitz today as the bank's next president, heralding a new era of conservative influence over the giant antipoverty institution. The approval came two weeks after President Bush nominated Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary who played a central role in advocating and designing the invasion of Iraq. The move initially aroused shock abroad, especially in European countries opposed to the Iraq war, and speculation arose that some member nations of the bank would try to block the nomination on the grounds that Wolfowitz would make the institution an instrument of U.S. foreign policy. But talk of opposition subsided as foreign officials grudgingly accepted Wolfowitz's assurances that he would respect the bank's multilateral nature and was not coming armed with a preset agenda for turning the organization upside down. In a statement issued after the board's action, Wolfowitz continued to stress his willingness to listen to a wide range of views. Fortunately, I already know I will have a great deal of help from the many people who are deeply committed to the mission of the World Bank, he said, noting that he had met with all 24 board members, flown to Europe to meet with top economic policymakers and spoken with dozens of other officials. He also extended an olive branch to people who have been among the most uneasy about his appointment, including activist organizations that often tangle with the bank over its policies in the developing world. I look forward now to deepening my understanding of the challenges facing the bank through exchange [of] views with two key groups: the civil society organizations whose advice and views have become increasingly important in bank deliberations; and the extraordinarily professional staff of the bank, who constitute the richest body of expertise in the world on the problems of economic development and poverty reduction, he said. The installation of Wolfowitz as president, scheduled to take place June 1, will put the Bush administration's stamp on the World Bank's management much more firmly than before. The bank lends about $20 billion a year to developing countries, for projects ranging from roads and ports to education and health systems, and in the process it exercises great influence over those countries' policies because of the conditions it sets for providing aid. The United States traditionally gets to choose the bank's president, but the current holder of the job, James D. Wolfensohn, was named by President Clinton, first in 1995 and again in 2000. Wolfensohn, a charismatic crusader against global poverty, has clashed often with the Bush team, which has tended to view his style of management as erratic and often wasteful of bank resources. Wolfowitz has offered only broad suggestions about how he would run the bank differently; in interviews and statements, he has emphasized his admiration for much of what Wolfensohn accomplished, particularly the bank's focus on reducing corruption. In his statement today Wolfowitz said that Wolfensohn's commitment to the bank's mission will be a hard act to follow and I will be counting on his continued advice and support. Still, many bank insiders and observers expect him to shift the bank's direction in important ways, reflecting the complaints that administration officials have expressed about its shortcomings. The administration has been eager to see the bank improve the way it monitors and holds countries accountable for their use of its funds. It also wants more bank aid for very poor countries to be provided in the form of grants rather than loans, on the theory that all too often the bank ends up lending to impoverished nations just so they can pay back previous loans. Because of the administration's recent emphasis on spreading democracy, especially in the Middle East, much speculation has arisen that Wolfowitz will use the bank's clout to prod governments to implement democratic reforms. He has sought to quash talk of a dramatic change in policy by stressing that he believes the bank should focus on economic development and alleviating poverty. But development experts who know him well expect him to place particular importance on encouraging the development of solid political institutions and the rule of law. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Wolfowitz - Most of the EU cast miss Wolfowitz 'audition'
FT.com / International Economy / Most of the EU cast miss Wolfowitz 'audition' By Raphael Minder in Brussels Published: March 30 2005 19:18 | Last updated: March 30 2005 19:18 Paul Wolfowitz, the US nominee to head the World Bank, on Wednesday gave what one minister described as a positive signal by making a flying visit to Brussels to help alleviate European concerns about his appointment. However, as he boarded his United Airlines flight back to Washington just five hours after landing, Mr Wolfowitz might not have felt so positive about the European turnout. Only seven out of the 25 European Union member states were represented by a minister or secretary of state at Wednesday's meeting. This was in spite of the fact that EU finance ministers had insisted on holding such an audition before Mr Wolfowitz's expected election as World Bank president in Washington on Thursday. In the end, several countries sent their Brussels-based ambassadors to what was billed as an informal meeting of EU governors of the World Bank. France, which is trying to create a new number-two post at the World Bank, sent its treasury director. Only two of the big EU countries, Germany and Britain, managed a minister, along with the smaller nations Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, Luxembourg and Belgium. There were some absentees but I don't think that lowered the quality of the debate with Mr Wolfowitz, said Armand De Decker, the Belgian development minister. Having said that, it is true that people could probably have found a way to be there. EU officials blamed the fact that the meeting had to be scheduled at short notice, on the heels of the Easter weekend, while many ministers were still on holiday or otherwise engaged. Nonetheless, one official described the poor turnout as a fiasco and truly humiliating considering that we [the EU] supposely had serious concerns that we really needed to discuss with him and that, perhaps against expectations, he did bother to show up. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] The neocon revolution
Martin Jacques Thursday 9:28 AM By placing John Bolton at the United Nations and Paul Wolfowitz at the World Bank, the neocons are extending their influence into the architecture of the international order. Martin Jacques challenges Europeans on their reluctance to stand up for an international order based on the rule of law and collective security and to so readily accept the strategic moves of the neoconservatives in Washington. http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1448651,00.html Guardian Unlimited | Guardian daily comment | Comment The neocon revolution US unilateralism was a means of breaking the old order. Now it is building new alliances Martin Jacques Thursday March 31, 2005 The Guardian With any new political phenomenon, there is always a tendency to underestimate its novelty and treat it as some kind of short-term aberration. I vividly recall how long it took commentators and analysts, on the right and left, to recognise that Thatcherism was something quite new and here to stay. Similar doubts greeted the Bush administration and the neocon revolution: its novelty would be short-lived, it would not last and it was just not viable. It is always hard to imagine a new kind of world, easier to think of the future as an extension of the past, and difficult to comprehend a paradigm shift and grasp a new kind of logic. There was speculation last autumn that the second Bush term would be different, that the breach with Europe would be healed as a matter of necessity, that the US could not afford another Iraq, that somehow the new position was unsustainable. Already, however, from last November's presidential election it was clear that the neocon revolution had wide popular support and serious electoral roots, that it was establishing a new kind of domestic political hegemony. In fact, the right has been setting the political agenda in the US for at least 30 years and that is now true with a vengeance. All the indications suggest that the revolution is continuing apace. The appointment of John Bolton as the US ambassador to the United Nations and the nomination of Paul Wolfowitz as president of the World Bank reveal a determination to place the cadres of the neocon revolution in key positions of power and influence and thereby create the conditions for its continuation and expansion. This was heralded almost immediately after the presidential election with the decision to replace Colin Powell, a man of very different political hue, with Condoleezza Rice as secretary of state. During the first Bush administration, and especially in its conduct of the Iraq war, the neocon revolution was often characterised as unilateralist, but this was always somewhat simplistic. No nation can simply go it alone, certainly not one that seeks to dominate the world. However strong it may be, it is still required to pursue its power and ambitions through a system of alliances. The end of the cold war led to the realisation that the US was now the world's sole superpower. The period following 9/11 persuaded the Americans that they now had an opportunity to remake the world in their own image, that the alliances that had been necessary in pursuit of the cold war, notably that with Europe, were no longer appropriate, certainly not on the old terms. The US has similarly renounced, or chosen to ignore, many of the international treaties that it had previously been party to - Kyoto, the international criminal court, even the Geneva conventions - either because it no longer believed in them or because it regarded them as a threat to the exercise of a new kind of American power. But it would be more accurate to see this unilateralism as a phase rather than a permanent new condition, as a means of breaking the old order rather than a long-term strategy for the new. The Bush administration has displayed a differential calculus. The heart of its strategy has been concerned with the Middle East where it has deployed a unilateralist policy of pre-emptive strikes and regime change as part of a wider attempt to remake the region. The Europeans were disregarded and relegated to the role of bystanders. In East Asia, the Americans have behaved quite differently. North Korea, like Iraq and Iran, was part of the axis of evil, but there has been no attempt at regime change. North Korea's nuclear weapons, the geographical proximity of Seoul, the opposition of South Korea towards precipitous action, and the role and interest of China, have obliged the Americans to move with caution. Far from unilateralism, they have vested their efforts in the six-party talks, and the hope that China might act as a restraining force on Pyongyang. In the longer run, China remains the greatest global challenge to the US. But here again the Americans have moved with care and restraint. They sought to enlist China in the war against terror following 9/11, and since then
[Biofuel] U.S. Obstructs Global Justice
U.S. Obstructs Global Justice By Jonathan F. Fanton http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-fanton29mar29,0,4 400554,print.story 03/29/05 Los Angeles Times - - When a United Nations commission of inquiry recommended this year that gross human rights abuses in Darfur be referred to the new International Criminal Court, Pierre-Richard Prosper, the U.S. ambassador at large for war crimes issues, made headlines by rejecting the idea. We don't want to be party to legitimizing the ICC, he said. But why not? Ninety-eight nations have signed the Rome Treaty, which created the court that the United States now opposes. President Clinton signed the treaty too, in the final days of his term, but the Bush administration quickly said it had no intention of seeking ratification. The ICC, which is already up and running in The Hague, has jurisdiction over crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed after July 1, 2002, if and when the justice system of a signatory country is unwilling or unable to act. What's going on in Darfur seems exactly suited for the court, but the U.S. has said it would rather pursue those who have committed atrocities in Darfur by creating a separate court in Arusha, Tanzania - even though such ad hoc tribunals are slow to organize and costly to run. We don't want to be in a situation where we see the question of African justice being exported, or outsourced, to The Hague, Prosper said, in an obvious attempt to play the Southern Hemisphere against the northern. But African opinion is more complex than that. The reality is that the ICC has already won wide support among Africans and that people there are looking to it for help and hope. Today, 27 of the 98 countries that have signed the Treaty of Rome are from Africa. Four African countries have invited the court to investigate atrocities committed within their borders: Uganda, the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Central African Republic and Ivory Coast. Each is looking to the court for assistance where its own legal system has failed or fallen short. As the first permanent criminal court with potentially worldwide jurisdiction, the ICC is designed to deter future Pol Pots and Pinochets. The year 2005 will be crucial in the ICC's early history. Its first two investigations, one in Uganda and one in Congo, are moving forward. Despite U.S. opposition, there is strong support in the U.N. Security Council for referring the Darfur situation to the court as well. A vigorous discussion underway this week will determine that outcome. The court's first-ever round of indictments may soon be made in Uganda against key leaders of the Lord's Resistance Army, which has waged a war against the government by targeting civilians in the north. More than 20,000 children have been abducted and about 1.6 million people have been displaced. Tens of thousands more have been killed or wounded. Already, the ICC's investigation has brought greater pressure on both sides to end the conflict there and has concentrated international attention on the abuses. If indictments do come and senior leaders of the Lord's Resistance Army are prosecuted at the ICC, that will not keep other perpetrators from being tried in traditional courts, nor will it impede the work of reconciliation mechanisms like truth commissions. The Bush administration strongly opposes the ICC apparently because of concerns that the court might engage in political show trials against American soldiers and citizens. These fears are misplaced: Only countries whose legal systems cannot or will not adjudicate cases involving genocide, war crimes or crimes against humanity are within the reach of the court. Manipulation of the kind feared by some U.S. officials is virtually impossible. A sound system of checks and balances keeps the ICC's procedures from being abused. The prosecutor, for instance, must obtain permission from a pretrial chamber of judges before he can initiate investigations or serve indictments. States can appeal these decisions if they believe their own courts have adjudicated matters properly. Because the United States has a functioning criminal justice system capable of addressing allegations of gross abuse, U.S. citizens have nothing to fear from the International Criminal Court. Dictators, corrupt armies and armed groups in failing states do. The ICC and a robust system of international criminal justice will disrupt the culture of impunity that often protects architects of massive human rights violations and will deter others from committing these crimes. For most of its history, the United States was in the vanguard of setting democratic and humanitarian norms. People I spoke with during a recent trip to Nigeria took heart when I cited a national poll conducted by the Chicago Council on Foreign Affairs: 69% of Americans support the ICC. The Bush administration
[Biofuel] Wake Up! Washington's alarming foreign policy
In These Times Wake Up! Washington's alarming foreign policy By Chalmers Johnson The Sorrows of Empire : Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic [The American Empire Project] By Chalmers Johnson Metropolitan Books á $25.00 The Rubicon is a small stream in northern Italy just south of the city of Ravenna. During the prime of the Roman Republic, roughly the last two centuries B.C., it served as a northern boundary protecting the heartland of Italy and the city of Rome from its own imperial armies. An ancient Roman law made it treason for any general to cross the Rubicon and enter Italy proper with a standing army. In 49 B.C., Julius Caesar, Rome's most brilliant and successful general, stopped with his army at the Rubicon, contemplated what he was about to do, and then plunged south. The Republic exploded in civil war, Caesar became dictator and then in 44 B.C. was assassinated in the Roman Senate by politicians who saw themselves as ridding the Republic of a tyrant. However, Caesar's death generated even more civil war, which ended only in 27 B.C. when his grand nephew, Octavian, took the title Augustus Caesar, abolished the Republic and established a military dictatorship with himself as emperor for life. Thus ended the great Roman experiment with democracy. Ever since, the phrase to cross the Rubicon has been a metaphor for starting on a course of action from which there is no turning back. It refers to the taking of an irrevocable step. I believe that on November 2, 2004, the United States crossed its own Rubicon. Until last year's presidential election, ordinary citizens could claim that our foreign policy, including the invasion of Iraq, was George Bush's doing and that we had not voted for him. In 2000, Bush lost the popular vote and was appointed president by the Supreme Court. In 2004, he garnered 3.5 million more votes than John Kerry. The result is that Bush's war changed into America's war and his conduct of international relations became our own. This is important because it raises the question of whether restoring sanity and prudence to American foreign policy is still possible. During the Watergate scandal of the early '70s, the president's chief of staff, H. R. Haldeman, once reproved White House counsel John Dean for speaking too frankly to Congress about the felonies President Nixon had ordered. John, he said, once the toothpaste is out of the tube, it's very hard to get it back in. This homely warning by a former advertising executive who was to spend 18 months in prison for his own role in Watergate fairly accurately describes the situation of the United States after the reelection of George W. Bush. James Weinstein, the founding editor of In These Times, recently posed for me the question How should U.S. foreign policy be changed so that the United States can play a more positive role on the world stage? For me, this raises at least three different problems that are interrelated. The first must be solved before we can address the second, and the second has to be corrected before it even makes sense to take up the third. Sinking the ship of state First, the United States faces the imminent danger of bankruptcy, which, if it occurs, will render all further discussion of foreign policy moot. Within the next few months, the mother of all financial crises could ruin us and turn us into a North American version of Argentina, once the richest country in South America. To avoid this we must bring our massive trade and fiscal deficits under control and signal to the rest of the world that we understand elementary public finance and are not suicidally indifferent to our mounting debts. Second, our appalling international citizenship must be addressed. We routinely flout well-established norms upon which the reciprocity of other nations in their relations with us depends. This is a matter not so much of reforming our policies as of reforming attitudes. If we ignore this, changes in our actual foreign policies will not even be noticed by other nations of the world. I have in mind things like the Army's and the CIA's secret abduction and torture of people; the trigger-happy conduct of our poorly trained and poorly led troops in places like Iraq and Afghanistan; and our ideological bullying of other cultures because of our obsession with abortion and our contempt for international law (particularly the International Criminal Court) as illustrated by Bush's nomination of John R. Bonkers Bolton to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. Third, if we can overcome our imminent financial crisis and our penchant for boorish behavior abroad, we might then be able to reform our foreign policies. Among the issues here are the slow-moving evolutionary changes in the global balance of power that demand new approaches. The most important evidence that our life as the sole superpower is going to be exceedingly short
[Biofuel] Analysis Points to Election 'Corruption'
Published on Friday, April 1, 2005 by the Akron Beacon Journal / Ohio Analysis Points to Election 'Corruption' Group Says Chance of Exit Polls Being So Wrong in '04 Vote is One-in-959,000 by Stephen Dyer There's a one-in-959,000 chance that exit polls could have been so wrong in predicting the outcome of the 2004 presidential election, according to a statistical analysis released Thursday. Exit polls in the November election showed Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., winning by 3 percent, but President George W. Bush won the vote count by 2.5 percent. The explanation for the discrepancy that was offered by the exit polling firm -- that Kerry voters were more likely to participate in the exit polling -- is an ``implausible theory,'' according to the report issued Thursday by US Count Votes, a group that claims it's made up of about two dozen statisticians. http://www.electionarchive.org Twelve -- including a Case Western Reserve University mathematics instructor -- signed the report. Instead, the data support the idea that ``corruption of the vote count occurred more freely in districts that were overwhelmingly Bush strongholds.'' The report dismisses chance and inaccurate exit polling as the reasons for their discrepancy with the results. They found that the one hypothesis that can't be ruled out is inaccurate election results. ``The hypothesis that the voters' intent was not accurately recorded or counted... needs further investigation,'' it said. The conclusion drew a yawn from Ohio election officials, who repeated that the discrepancy issue was settled when the polling firms Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International disavowed its polls because Kerry voters were more likely to answer exit polls -- the theory Thursday's report deemed ``implausible.'' Ohio has been at the center of a voter disenfranchisement debate since the election. ``What are you going to do except laugh at it?'' said Carlo LoParo, spokesman for Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell, who's responsible for administering Ohio's elections and is a Republican candidate for governor. ``We're not particularly interested in (the report's findings). We wish them luck, but hope they find something more interesting to do.'' The statistical analysis, though, shows that the discrepancy between polls and results was especially high in precincts that voted for Bush -- as high as a 10 percent difference. The report says if the official explanation -- that Bush voters were more shy about filling out exit polls in precincts with more Kerry voters -- is true, then the precincts with large Bush votes should be more accurate, not less accurate as the data indicate. The report also called into question new voting machine technologies. ``All voting equipment technologies except paper ballots were associated with large unexplained exit poll discrepancies all favoring the same party, (which) certainly warrants further inquiry,'' the report concludes. However, LoParo remained unimpressed. ``These (Bush) voters have been much maligned by outside political forces who didn't like the way they voted,'' he said. ``The weather's turning nice. There are more interesting things to do than beat a dead horse.'' © 2005 Beacon Journal and wire service sources ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] The good news about terrorism
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8421.htm The good news about terrorism Paul Robinson 04/02/05 The Spectator - - 'We are facing the gravest threat that this nation has ever faced.' Elizabeth I, speaking of the Spanish Armada? Winston Churchill, in the aftermath of Dunkirk? No. Home Office minister Baroness Scotland on Newsnight, justifying the new Prevention of Terrorism Act by reference to the threat from al-Qa'eda. 'Hang on,' I said to myself on hearing the Baroness, 'that can't be right.' My mum can remember lying in bed hearing bombs drop, and she once saw a V1 go over and heard the engine cut out as she watched. As an army officer a decade ago I used to have to check under my car for IRA bombs every time I went out. Army officers don't have to do that any more. The gravest threat ever? Surely not. But as an academic, I am loath to scoff without investigating the facts. Since my speciality is international security, I attend many conferences with and about the military-industrial establishment. With a few exceptions, I hear the same view with monotonous regularity - the world is more dangerous than ever before, the threat from Islamist terrorism is unlike anything we have ever known, our way of life and our very existence are menaced. Challenge this accepted wisdom and everybody looks at you as if you are an idiot. What is it they know that I don't? Not a lot, as it turns out. Vested interests are involved. Ever since the collapse of the Warsaw Pact eliminated the need for 90 per cent of our armed forces, the defence establishment has been working overtime to justify its continued existence. Similarly, ever since the disintegration of the USSR ended the threats from Soviet subversion and KGB espionage and put most of MI5 out of a job, the security service has brilliantly re-invented itself as an anti-terrorist agency. Over the past 15 years military planners, the intelligence and security services and security experts in academia have pulled off a brilliant confidence trick, convincing the public that, despite the visible signs of peace breaking out, the world is actually growing ever more dangerous. Their basic thesis is that during the Cold War there was a degree of stability which kept a lid on conflicts, and provided some certainty in the sphere of international relations. After 1991 these Good Old Days came to an end. Now we face not one stolid and predictable enemy, but numerous insane and suicidal ones. We can only wish to be as safe as my mother wondering where that V1 was going to land. If we haven't evacuated our children, it is because there is no safe place on the planet to send them. Alas for the experts, but luckily for us, the facts do not back this up. Far from being more dangerous, the world is safer now than ever before; and far from being an ever-growing problem, terrorism has been in sharp decline for over a decade. This is not a matter of opinion. It is provable. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sipri) and Canada's Project Ploughshares both annually track the number of armed conflicts taking place worldwide. Sipri counts only those which result in 1,000 deaths or more in a given year, so its figures are slightly lower. Even so, it agrees with Project Ploughshares that the amount of fighting on the planet is declining. According to Sipri, there were only 19 conflicts in 2003, down from 33 in 1991. With its broader definition, Project Ploughshares reports a decline to 36 in 2003 from a peak of 44 in 1995. More good news follows, I'm afraid. Battle-related deaths rose slightly from 15,000 in 2002 to 20,000 in 2003 because of the Iraq war, but even these figures are substantially down from the annual tolls of 40,000 to 100,000 during the Cold War. Global military expenditure also fell by 11 per cent in real terms between 1992 and 2000, and the Congressional Research Service in Washington notes that international arms sales fell from £22.8 billion in 2000 to £14.3 billion in 2003. In short, there are fewer wars, fewer arms sales and fewer people dying, each year, than at any time since the second world war. So much for the idea that the world is becoming more unstable. What of the second thesis - that global terrorism poses a new and unprecedented threat to our security? Again, the concept turns out to be unsound. I recommend that the fearful visit the excellent website of the Rand Corporation's MIPT (Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism) database and try out its 'Incident Analysis Wizard' (www.tkb.org/ChartModule.jsp). However you fiddle MIPT's figures, the chart always ends up looking roughly the same - a big peak in terrorism in the late 1970s and early '80s, followed by a steady reduction ever since. During the 1980s, the number of international terrorist incidents worldwide averaged about 360 a year. By the year 2000, it was down to just 100.
Re: [Biofuel] End of Suburbia
Thanks for this, it helps put the previous discussion in perspective. About Ruppert, see below for Sheldon Rampton's view, with which I agree (the guy's nuts): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/35514/ The unfortunate thing is that there are people out there who take Ruppert seriously, including progressive activists. It's a pity they included him. Best wishes Keith I had the opportunity to see this video on Thursday evening. (Part of the program for how Ottawa should deal with the consequences of Peak Oil. Clearly a low-budget production, but it covered the topic well. Few surprises for those on this list, I expect. Set the context of the different types of suburbs (first Victorian suburbs, radial rail suburbs, early automotive suburbs, post- WWII suburbs). Covers sprawl and related issues. Food miles. Much more on social aspects. Then evidence of peak oil. Interviews with Matthew Simmons, Richard Heinberg (Powerdown), Michael C. Ruppert (Crossing the Rubicon), Dr. Colin Campbell, Dr. Kenneth Deffeyes, etc. Unfortunately, Ruppert was pretty negative on biofuels, focusing on one-to-one substitution for todays fossil fuel use, and repeating the mantra that it takes more oil to make ethanol than is imbedded in the ethanol produced. Still, on the whole, it strikes as a reasonably honest appraisal. Recommended. Commerical screenings are rare, but if you can find an opportunity to see it, try to do so. I learned at the presentation that the DVD and VHS is now available via the web if anyone else is interested (US$28.50 or Cdn$36.00). I expect I will be buying a copy to show to friends and for future reference. Also at the presentation were a video of Thomas Homer-Dixon on the August 2003 blackout, climate change and nuclear energy/enriched uranium issues. Highlight of the evening was a live presentation by Paul Sears (one of the local environmental usual suspects) on some facts and figures on oil and natural gas reserves. Put ANWR in context very nicely I thought (essentially irrelevant in terms of oil production on the world scale). Largely preaching to the converted, but I expect there will be subsequent sessions to cover some positive measures for the future. -- Darryl McMahon http://www.econogics.com/ It's your planet. If you won't look after it, who will? ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: the 4th Estate
Dan Rather certainly made the same point on British TV when he talked about being necklaced if he reported the truth about the bogus rush to war in Iraq. It was a confession that Americans did not see on the corporate controlled TV stations here in the States. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/archive/2029634.stm PEACE Scott - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debunking the Swinton quote. Most journalists have made that point, though perhaps not quite so shrilly. I perhaps made it by spending most of my professional life as a freelancer, though I've also worked for a lot of newspapers, including quite a few of the grand ones. But it's simply no use (literally - it's not useful) to try to paint it with such a broad brush. It's simplistic, and perilous. For instance, you compare the BBC favourably with the corporate controlled TV stations in the US, but the BBC is far from perfect and has been heavily criticised for its coverage of the Iraq war. From a previous message: While I heartily agree the mainstream media give us a sugar-coated view and won't touch controversial stuff Well, they do, eventually, maybe, some of them, some of it, and journalists do - the media may be morally bankrupt, more or less, but journalism isn't, with many exceptions, but not as whole. That message also says this: What is in the archives is quite a few spin exposes, along with all the resources you need to do that. While the Internet has greatly added to the confusion, IMO that's more than outweighed by its providing a real alternative and antidote to the strictures of the kept press, and sufficient good resources to help you sort one from the other, with a bit of effort. Since you've just shown that you're yourself susceptible to unquestioned societal beliefs (John Swinton), and perhaps worse (Joseph Newman), perhaps you should take note. By the way, Joanne asked you this: Hello Scott, Can you provide a link or links for details on: snip while babies in Texas have their breathing tubes ripped from their bodies against their mother's wishes because the hospital can't extract enough money from them. Thank you, Joanne Please don't ignore people when they question you. Best wishes Keith Addison Journey to Forever KYOTO Pref., Japan http://journeytoforever.org/ Biofuel list owner Hello Scott Let's put in some of the rest of it, because you've provided a good example of it. Joanne said: Thank you for your interest in my post. I like to find the stories behind societal beliefs like this that have so often been accepted without question. And I replied: It's MOST important to do that, IMO. We rely on the 4th Estate (of which I'm a lifelong member) to do that for us ... Okay? - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] We rely on the 4th Estate (of which I'm a lifelong member) to do that for us, that's their role and essential function, but (though the exceptions are many and honorable) there's no need for me to say how derelict they've become in this duty, especially over the last few decades. It's always been a kept press, of course, owned by the very interests it's supposed to protect society against. Though the exceptions are many and honorable, and indeed they are. It continued: So we have to find out for ourselves, or be at the mercy of inimical forces that are too often little short of sociopathic. Fortunately it's almost always possible to do that, with a bit of tenacity and scepticism, especially with the Internet - the Internet will save us all, the first true leveller. Truly something new under the sun. So, to your legendary and largely FICTITIOUS quote from John Swinton. Sorry Scott, it's an urban legend, one of these: ... societal beliefs like this that have so often been accepted without question. ---end--- The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes. - John Swinton, the Chief of Staff for the New York Times, 1953 There are many debunkings of this myth. Here's one: ... One journalist there, Jeff McMahon, made this in response: Yeah, I'll take that bait. The last time I saw that phony quote Swinton was identified as the chief of staff of the New York SUN, the date was 1853, and where it now says I am paid weekly, it then said I am paid $150 a week. Which is, actually, about how much I made in journalism. Then some liar realized that newspapers don't have chiefs of staff, at least the editorial departments don't, and if
[Biofuel] USA regulations
Looking for reliable answers to: In the USA, does a co-op making bioD have to register with the EPA as a uel producer? Can a fleet managing company (like a transit company) be a co-op member nd not incur the EPA Tier 1 Health Certification requirements? Thank You! _ Msg sent via @bmi.net Mail v4 - http://www.bmi.net ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
Jan, That is exactly the oil I have in mind. From what I have read it produces the greatest amount of oil per hectare. Highly saturated is good news. Must be lots of folks making Bio D from this material, once used. in Europe, yes? Thanks, Tom -Original Message- From: Jan Warnqvist To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 2/04/05 6:41 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Hello Tom. Are you referring to palm oil ? This is a highly saturated oil common in Europe as frying oil. The oil is imported from Malaysia. Is it this one ? Bst rgrds Jan Warnqvist AGERATEC AB [EMAIL PROTECTED] + 46 554 201 89 +46 70 499 38 45 - Original Message - From: Tom Irwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 11:57 PM Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Hi All, Any information like this on oil from palm trees? I«m not a fan of soybean because of Monsanto. Thanks, Tom Irwin -Original Message- From: Jan Warnqvist To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 1/04/05 5:39 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Hello Keith and thank you for your input. I agree with you, blending an oil with a high IV with one with a lower, should produce an average IV. But in some course literature I read some time ago, it said that oil spill from rape seed oil will leave you two months to wipe it up before it polymerizes, soy bean oil will leave you two weeks, and linseed oil two days. From this way of reasoning one can conclude, when comparing the average IV values of each oil, that blending rape seed oil with llinseed oil to an average IV value of soybean oil, will produce an oil with similar polymerization properties as soybean oil. And further- if producing of biodiesel out of high IV oils, will lower the fatty acids« ability to polymerize one can conclude that the first step of polmerization takes place within the triglyceride molecule, possibly with bridges of oxygen between the double bonds of different fatty acids. In methyl ester the fatty acids with the right will to polymerize have some difficulties finding each other and build bridges. Give me some input on this way of explanation ,Keith ! Best regards Jan Jan Warnqvist AGERATEC AB [EMAIL PROTECTED] + 46 554 201 89 +46 70 499 38 45 - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 7:28 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Hello DB and all Anyone making bio-diesel should be concerned with the IV of the oil and the polymerzation of the engine. After a careful reading of the australian report WVO as a Diesel replacement fuel it is obvious that they are concerned with it's use as straight veggy oil and Not so much Bio-diesel.( I would be concerned too) Here is a direct quote from that report. Trans esterifying triglyceride oils and fats with monohydric alcohols to form biodiesel largly eliminates the tendency of the oils and fats to polymerization and auto-oxidation.. The base crop for european biodiesel being rapeseed with a IV of 98 is a reasonable goal to acheve. Most of my stock is soy oil and much of it is hydrogenated. I also get cottonseed and peanut oil along with canola (rapeseed) I no longer use straight soy oil and try to make a blend. In the past when I only had soy oil based biodiesel I would only run BD50. I an no longer worried about the IV of the oil and if you are then just run BD50.Drive down the road Happy...DB ..PS. I have been making biodiesel since '02 and have made 1000's of gallons with zero problems. I agree, and thankyou, but I'm not sure I follow the logic of your solution, attractive though it is. Does an IV value average out when you blend different oils? Other things will, of course, like say FFA levels, you'll end up with an average and that's that. But in a blend with biodiesel made from a high IV oil with biodiesel made from lower IV oils, while the proportion of high IV oil will be lower, what's to stop it oxidising and polymerising just the same? Blending it doesn't change its makeup. I'm not sure what effect blending it with petrodiesel would have, but that wouldn't change its makeup either, it still has its double bonds to be broken down and polymerise. All you'd get is proportionately less polymerisation, no? So it'll take longer to gunge up the engine. That doesn't solve the problem, just mitigates it. Sorry, I don't know if this is right or not, just trying to be logical - maybe it doesn't work like that, but I'd like to know. Regards Keith - Original Message - From: TLC Orchids and Such [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 4:37 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?] Where can we get the veg-based motor oil? Can better oil filtering help with this
Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
Dear Henri and Rick, I only like to put this we took out Hitler to rest. That the Americans single handed took out Hitler, is a myth that only exists in Hollywood movies. The crucial material support from US in WWII was the deliveries of war material. The US infantry troop participation in Europe was on a low level and not crucial. By only look at the loss of soldiers, you understand clearly who was doing the major fighting. Russia 6,000,000 troop causalities Europe Alliance600,000 USA 60,000 Germany was very advanced and introduced for the first time the modern warfare and materials, with a massive air support. They tested much of it in the Spanish civil war. US took out Japan, not on the ground, but with Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This at a time when the European part of WWII was at its end. I do agree that the US propaganda methods was/is superior. Something that Hitler and his administration several times acknowledged and copied. This superiority is maintained even today. Hakan At 05:13 PM 4/2/2005, you wrote: Dear Henri, We took out Hitler because Germany declared war on us after Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor. Sadam did not declare war on us and presented no immediate threat. In the long run he was a danger to US and European oil interests in that he was determined to get control of the Arabian peninsula and Iran thus controlling the majority of the oil on the planet as far as has been proven. From such a position he could have bled us white. Beyond unlimited avarice he appears to have had no ideology. In this respect he resembled some of the current administrations most influential backers. That he was a real threat was demonstrated by his invasions of Kuwait and Iran though he was sufficiently contained by international pressure that any risk was potential rather than actual and manageable without going to war. There is no question that he was a dirt ball but there are much worse that we do nothing about and some of them are our allies. What we lost attacking Iraq so far exceeds what we have gained and if the Shiite party that won the election establishes a radical theocracy like Iran we will find ourselves in a far worse position than we were with Sadam. Rick Henri Naths wrote: Hakan, I would like to give a humble option here, ( Hakan wrote;...Criminal, established by the fact that we now know that Iraq were no WMD threat to US. ) We took out Hitler for the same reason, Him and Suddam Hussein were weapons of mass destruction. H. - Original Message - From: Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 31 March, 2005 7:29 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come Bob, You were right and I am wrong and I am glad that I did get a very good explanation on how Hubbert could be so right. It also explains why president Carter was so genuinely worried, when he developed his energy plan. He had the foresight to realize that Hubbert was right. It also explains why we see the surge in the genuine hate of Americans. It is the cost of aggressive and egoistic foreign policies, that resulted in about 10 more years of artificially low oil prices. All of this, ending up in an almost criminal behavior by the Bush administration. I say almost, because I do not want to be too crude. The legal aspect of being criminal, is very clearly established, Criminal, established by the fact that we now know that Iraq were no WMD threat to US. By laying the responsibility at the feet of faulty US intelligence community, the Bush administration is trying deliberately to avoid their legal responsibility. A kind of reversed side of the well known argument it was not my fault, I was ordered to do it. LOL All of this supported by the America people, in a reelection of president Bush. I hear the false argument that only 48% voted him in office. This argument is poor mathematics, I cannot get to this result, when Bush won with a more than 3 million of the populous American vote. It was the first election of Bush, that he did not have a populous majority and he was put in office by the Courts. Hakan At 11:16 PM 3/31/2005, you wrote: All I know is what I read in the brief biography. (and what I recall from hearing about his work many years ago) Hakan Falk wrote: Bob, I stand corrected and the only excuse I have, is that I only brought forward a mistake that I read earlier. I remember that it was an article about the hearings in US congress in mid 70'. Will however not do this mistake again, but do not despair, there are many others I will do and surely in my far from perfect English. -:) What was his field at Berkeley? Hakan At 05:35 PM 3/31/2005, you wrote: Howdy Hakan, calling him a mathematician is a bit short-sighted. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marion_King_Hubbert Hubbert was born in San Saba, Texas in 1903. He attended the University of Chicago, where he received
Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
Hello Bob and thank you for your input. There should also be pointed out that polymerization may take place in the fuel tank of the vehicle, at least to some extent, since many diesels have leak fuel lines transporting hot fuel to the tank, so the temperature in the tank will rise in proportion to the amount of hot fuel coming in. This may lead to fuel filter clogging. Not instantly, of course, but after a number of hours. Jan Warnqvist AGERATEC AB [EMAIL PROTECTED] + 46 554 201 89 +46 70 499 38 45 - Original Message - From: bob allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005 5:00 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Just a little suggestion on this, I have re-plumbed the return feed from the pump back to the inlet of the filter so the return fuel is circulated straight back into the pump. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Castor beens and oil
Hi All, They have been using these compost biofilters for quite some time in the U.S. They tend to have big footprints but really low operating expenses. They«re used at wastewater treatment plants, MSW compost facilities, and fish processing plants to name a few. I«m happy to be of whatever help I can to my large northern neighbor. Tom Irwin -Original Message- From: Pannir P.V To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 2/04/05 10:21 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Castor beens and oil Helow All Fransico Well we in north east of Brasil. A lot of castor oil is produces here and other place , but the e first time we hear the odour problems which can be esily solved You can solve the problem using different hot and cold extraction process which are under development very seriously in Brasil As we are in Brasil we can surley join with Irwin in the biofilter design as we do have posgraduate programme In Chemical engineering dept UFRN, Natal to do the same. The price of the castor oil sold for the petro chemical companies are very high compared to heating. It is better you find a alternate energy such as used vegetabale oil and make Biofuel for Motor . As we are in Brazil we can jointly work to solve our problem . sd Pannirselvam P.V On Apr 1, 2005 5:04 PM, Tom Irwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi All, I'm an American living in Uruguay and I may have a potential solution for your odor problem. It's called a compost biofilter. In essence you pull the air from your castor bean pressing facility and pass it through a large enough pile of compost. The compost scrubs the organics (the odors) from the air stream and eats them for dinner. You have to keep the compost optimally moist with water and it is sized by the number of cubic meter of air you pull from your pressing operation. I'm certain there are engineers in Brazil who can size this for you properly if not write back with the number of cubic meters you need scrubbed and I'll do a rough pass design for you. By rough pass, I mean I will oversize it to more than adequately scrub what you need. It will cost you slightly more in terms of land, compost and water. But heck, you live in Brazil, have lots of land, and if you can convince some folks there to just slow down on the cutting of the rainforest, plenty of water. Tom Irwin -Original Message- From: FRANCISCO To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 3/31/05 9:36 AM Subject: [Biofuel] Castor beens and oil Hy!!! need help form the group We are developping a project to replace fossil fuel ( about 12 million gallons per year ) by vegetable oil at 1 to1 ratio . The customer is a paper industry. We will have small farmers planting castor to begin with and later we will move to jatropha when we domesticate it. We will press and extract the oil then burn it in the furnace. The problem we will face in the field is odor as when we press castor beens a _*very bad smell*_ just come out( we found that on our lab/bench test). As of know we do not want a individual solution ( masks with activated carbon ) but an industrial operational solution. Does any one had experienced same thing with castor??? If so is there any solution and if so what is it and how do we implement it I thank you in advance for your cooperation. Very best for us Chico ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ -- Pagandai V Pannirselvam Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte - UFRN Departamento de Engenharia Qumica - DEQ Centro de Tecnologia - CT Programa de Ps Graduao em Engenharia Qumica - PPGEQ Grupo de Pesquisa em Engenharia de Custos - GPEC Av. Senador Salgado Filho, Campus Universitrio CEP 59.072-970 , Natal/RN - Brasil Residence : Av Odilon gome de lima, 2951, Q6/Bl.G/Apt 102 Capim Macio EP 59.078-400 , Natal/RN - Brasil Telefone(fax) ( 84 ) 215-3770 Ramal20 2171557 Telefone(fax) ( 84 ) 215-3770 Ramal20 2171557 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
That is exactly the oil I have in mind. From what I have read it produces the greatest amount of oil per hectare. Highly saturated is good news. Must be lots of folks making Bio D from this material, once used. in Europe, yes? No - highly saturated might be good news as far as drying is concerned, but it also means a high cloud point. CHECK THE ARCHIVES! There's TONS of stuff about palm oil in the archives! And/or Journey to Forever: Iodine Values -- High Iodine Values -- Talking about the weather http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_yield.html#iodine Keith Thanks, Tom -Original Message- From: Jan Warnqvist To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 2/04/05 6:41 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Hello Tom. Are you referring to palm oil ? This is a highly saturated oil common in Europe as frying oil. The oil is imported from Malaysia. Is it this one ? Bst rgrds Jan Warnqvist AGERATEC AB [EMAIL PROTECTED] + 46 554 201 89 +46 70 499 38 45 - Original Message - From: Tom Irwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 11:57 PM Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making? Hi All, Any information like this on oil from palm trees? I«m not a fan of soybean because of Monsanto. Thanks, Tom Irwin ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Re: USA regulations
That was supposed to say: ...register with the EPA as a fuel producer...bsp; sorry. * _ Msg sent via @bmi.net Mail v4 - http://www.bmi.net ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Oil prices surge to new records
Energy efficiency proponents and conservationists have been pointing to these occurences for three decades now. They even wrote the book(s) as to what would happen and how to address/prevent it. And what was the snotty remark Dick Cheney said after thirty years, back in May of 2001? Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy. And now it's coming into vogue for arch-conservatives to start preaching efficiency and alternative fuels as if it was their invent? Let's see.. May of 2001 conservation is a personal virtue. September, 2001, everything's changed. But it takes three and one-half years for the first squeaks to start coming out of Washington about what needs to be done to address that change relative to obese consumption of liquid fossil fuels? If America were run like a corporation, these guys would be up on charges from the SEC for malfeasance and dereliction of duty. Meanwhile the rest of the world toils to compensate for their mistakes while they prepare to cash their lifetime pension checks. Lovely. Just lovely. Todd Swearingen - Original Message - From: Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005 12:58 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Oil prices surge to new records http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4399537.stm BBC NEWS | Business | 1 April, 2005, 21:50 GMT 22:50 UK Oil prices surge to new records Oil traders say the ratio of global supply to demand is tight Crude oil prices hit record levels on Friday, with leading investment bank Goldman Sachs warning the cost of a barrel could eventually top $100. Goldman Sachs said that the oil market may be in the early stages of a super spike, which could push prices as high as $105 a barrel. It said strong global demand, allied to potential instability in oil producing countries, could inflate prices. US light crude rose as much as $2.40 to $57.70 a barrel in New York. By the close, the price had slipped back to $57.27 a barrel. The previous high was $57.60, set on 17 March. In London, the benchmark contract of Brent crude climbed $2.22, or 4.1%, to $56.51 a barrel. There are real concerns about product availability, that's what is underpinning the strength of the market at the moment, said Kevin Norrish, an analyst at Barclays Capital. Consumption effect The last time prices were at these levels, economists highlighted the potential dangers to global economic growth and inflation. Oil production cartel Opec was prompted to lift production quotas by 500,000 barrels a day. In its report, Goldman Sachs said the possibility of political turmoil in major oil producers such as Saudi Arabia could lead to a significant rise in prices over the long-term. The fundamental situation is not nearly as bad as what current oil prices would suggest David de Garis, ANZ Investment Bank US light, crude oil price Brent crude oil price The firm has raised its average US price forecasts for 2005 and 2006 to $50 and $55 a barrel from $41 and $40 respectively. Oil markets may have entered the early stages of what we have referred to as a 'super spike' period, said Goldman Sachs analyst Arjun Murti. This would result in a multi-year trading band of oil prices high enough to meaningfully reduce energy consumption and recreate a spare capacity cushion only after which will lower prices return. Tight supply Prices have remained above $55 a barrel in recent days after data showed that US gasoline stocks fell last week while demand was 2% higher than this time last year. Markets are also nervous about disruptions to supply after the recent fatal explosion at BP's largest refinery in the United States and a power failure which caused the closure of a Venezuelan refinery on Thursday. However, other analysts said it would require a major disruption in supply to cause a spike in prices of such magnitude. The market is still of the mind that supply/demand is still very tight but the fundamental situation is not nearly as bad as what current oil prices would suggest, said David de Garis, an economist at ANZ Investment Bank. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.8.4 - Release Date: 3/27/2005 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Methanol backyard manufacturing possible?
Hi Tom and Kieth, I have a copy of Brown's Second Alcohol Fuel Cookbook by Michael H. Brown. In it, there is a section on methanol production (pg 125). It lists the ingredients and equipment and continues with a section called Step-by-Step Procedures. The procedure goes into a lot of detail and describes what your reaction will look like, how much heat to expect from the exothermic reaction and how it should behave -- beginning with the introduction of sulfuric acid, to pH balancing and finally to fermentation. It even suggests how to collect and make use of the lignin, a byproduct of the acid/sawdust reaction. Apparently it burns and can be used as a fuel for your still. I can't remember where I bought the book. But, if it's out of print or otherwise unavailable, I can transcribe the section if anyone is interested. Mike --- Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Tom As a newcomer to the biodiesel world I was wondering if it was possible to make methanol in your backyard so to speak? No. We've been discussing this since the list was founded five years ago, but nobody's found a solution yet. Dr Tom Reed, who probably knows more about methanol than most, told me we just aren't there yet. Walt Patrick of Windward posted some interesting information some time ago and said his organisation would be working on it, but we've heard nothing since. You can check it in the archives if you like. And the other question is it possible to make biodiesel with ethanol? Not for novices: Ethyl esters -- making ethanol biodiesel http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make2.html#ethylester I am putting together a proposal for an East African country to follow Brazils lead and have to do some homework first. There have been enquiries and initiatives from quite a few African countries concerning ethyl esters, but we've never heard anything further. I'd investigate it thoroughly first before recommending anything if I were you. Best wshes Keith selam, tom mountain ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: Re[2]: [Biofuel] Biofuel and Oil Burning Furnaces
.said the spider to the fly. : ) AntiFossil On Apr 2, 2005 6:32 AM, Gustl Steiner-Zehender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hallo Tom, I am not the one to ask about rubber and biodiesel. It is my impression that the two get along fine although they have a bad reputation to the contrary but I don't know that as fact. I just put the rubber bit in there in case someone had concerns about biodiesel and rubber coming into contact because in my fuel oil burner they don't and I don't believe they do in any others. Todd or some of the others can tell you definitively. Just consider me a half blind old fart hobbling around muttering to himself trying to make sense of things. ;o) Happy Happy, Gustl Friday, 01 April, 2005, 16:53:08, you wrote: TI Greetings Gustl, TI I was under the impression from my reading that viton rubber would be ok in TI contact with biodiesel. If I«m wrong about this someone please say so. All TI metal is definitely better as I imagine even viton will degrade in a 5 or 10 TI year time span just due to the heat. As far as the burner is concerned I TI think if it can run diesel heating oil it should be fine with Bio D. Unless TI it«s really cold the Bio D should flow even better. Anyone else have TI comments? TI Tom Irwin TI -Original Message- TI From: Gustl Steiner-Zehender TI To: Biofuel TI Sent: 1/04/05 9:00 TI Subject: [Biofuel] Biofuel and Oil Burning Furnaces TI Hallo Folks, TI We have run out of wood and I am not fit to cut and split it at this TI time so we had to use our fuel oil furnace which needed more attention TI than I was qualified to give it. TI I spoke to Erv, the repairman, about the problems with diesel Nr. 1 TI and Nr. 2 and then asked him about biofuel and the furnace. He told TI me there were no rubber parts at all that would touch the biofuel and TI that the only thing which would need to be changed for it to work TI would possibly be the nozzle. TI I have seen this topic several times on the list but don't remember TI the details of the discussion. Thought this might be of some use to TI someone. I know I will be heating with biofuel this winter. TI Happy Happy, TI Gustl -- Je mehr wir haben, desto mehr fordert Gott von uns. We can't change the winds but we can adjust our sails. The safest road to Hell is the gradual one - the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts. C. S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters Es gibt Wahrheiten, die so sehr auf der Stra§e liegen, da§ sie gerade deshalb von der gewhnlichen Welt nicht gesehen oder wenigstens nicht erkannt werden. Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music. George Carlin The best portion of a good man's life - His little, nameless, unremembered acts of kindness and of love. William Wordsworth ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net http://Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] and others wrote: Dear Henri and Rick, I only like to put this we took out Hitler to rest. That the Americans single handed took out Hitler, is a myth that only exists in Hollywood movies. Actually, my understanding of the history is that Hitler committed suicide. So he took himself out, nobody else. The Nazi military was forced into surrender by the Allies of WWII, of which the Americans made up a relatively small faction, essentially missing the first the first 4-5 years of the war. Admittedly, they had their hands full in the Pacific theatre come 1942, years after the Japanese had captured Hong Kong and invaded China. The crucial material support from US in WWII was the deliveries of war material. The US infantry troop participation in Europe was on a low level and not crucial. By only look at the loss of soldiers, you understand clearly who was doing the major fighting. The U.S. was playing both sides on the materials front. The Roosevelt government was definitely supporting Britain (and her colonies), but U.S. companies were happily trading with the Nazis. IBM provided logistical support for the labour and death camps (the tattoos on the inmates were essentially inventory control numbers used in the IBM machines at the camps). GM and Ford provided the bulk of the trucks used by the mechanized German infantry. The list goes on (e.g Standard Oil, Dupont, Chrysler, Kodak ...) Russia 6,000,000 troop causalities Europe Alliance600,000 USA 60,000 Germany was very advanced and introduced for the first time the modern warfare and materials, with a massive air support. They tested much of it in the Spanish civil war. There was a lot of support for Fascism in the U.S. during WWII, though it became less strident and publicly visible after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Standard U.S. revisionist history glosses over that now. Leading up to WWII, the U.S. government typically treated the Russian Bosheviks as the bad guys. US took out Japan, not on the ground, but with Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This at a time when the European part of WWII was at its end. I do agree that the US propaganda methods was/is superior. Something that Hitler and his administration several times acknowledged and copied. This superiority is maintained even today. Hakan At 05:13 PM 4/2/2005, you wrote: Dear Henri, We took out Hitler because Germany declared war on us after Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor. Sadam did not declare war on us and presented no immediate threat. In the long run he was a danger to US and European oil interests in that he was determined to get control of the Arabian peninsula and Iran thus controlling the majority of the oil on the planet as far as has been proven. From such a position he could have bled us white. Beyond unlimited avarice he appears to have had no ideology. In this respect he resembled some of the current administrations most influential backers. That he was a real threat was demonstrated by his invasions of Kuwait and Iran though he was sufficiently contained by international pressure that any risk was potential rather than actual and manageable without going to war. There is no question that he was a dirt ball but there are much worse that we do nothing about and some of them are our allies. What we lost attacking Iraq so far exceeds what we have gained and if the Shiite party that won the election establishes a radical theocracy like Iran we will find ourselves in a far worse position than we were with Sadam. Rick Henri Naths wrote: Hakan, I would like to give a humble option here, ( Hakan wrote;...Criminal, established by the fact that we now know that Iraq were no WMD threat to US. ) We took out Hitler for the same reason, Him and Suddam Hussein were weapons of mass destruction. H. So the real similarity between Hussein and Hitler in the U.S. was that they were good clients for U.S. industry. The U.S. didn't take out either Hitler (see above) or Hussein (he's still alive, and something of a political problem for the U.S. now - can't try him, can't kill him). The U.S. military actions were effectively an afterthought in both cases. Hussein was a useful U.S. ally when Iran was considered a bigger problem. Hitler was an OK guy when the Bolshies were the bigger problem. Clearly, taking out Saddam had nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction (the U.N. inspectors had all but proven he had none before the U.S. found the courage to invade), or 9/11 (the plans were in play in the U.S. Administration *before* the planes hit the towers). It was not about getting the oil, as it was available for sale on the world market prior to the invasion. It wasn't about Iraq as a military threat in the region - the U.S. and U.K. were flying military and surveillance over
Re: [Biofuel] Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD making?
Thank you for your reply IV is the iodine value. Iodine reacts with the carbon carbon double bonds, so the amount of Iodine absorbed is a direct measure of the number of double bonds. Hydrogenation removes the double bonds. Complete hydrogenation will remove all double bonds hence the Iodine value should be essentially zero. TLC Orchids and Such wrote: Hydrogenated canola has an IV of around 65 while non hydrogenated has an IV of around 112. this must be partially hydrogenated Does anyone know if the IV in soybean (131) safflower (145) hemp (165) or sunflower (133) are altered in any way by the hydrogenation process? sure, the IV of these compounds will be zero also if completely hydrogenated. The product will me a solid at room temperature, and the derived biodiesel will have a higher gel point. -- Bob Allen http://ozarker.org/bob Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves - Richard Feynman ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[OFF TOPIC] Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
Hakan, you are not well informed. World War II killed and missing ...armed forces KM... total population of country Australia26,976.6 million New Zealand..11,625.2 million Canada...42,04211 million Britain.357,11645 million France..210,00045 million USA.405,399...125 million USSR..low est.6,115,000...170 million? Germany...3,500,00065 million Japan.1,270,00080 million Finland..80,000.3 million The initial landings of the Normandy invasion comprised Infantry divisions 2 USA, 2 British, 1 Canadian Airborne divisions 2 USA, 1 British By the end of the war in Europe the Americans had about 2.5 million men on the continent, the British about 850,000. In the Pacific, the way from Pearl Harbor to Okinawa was a hard bloody slog. The U.S. Navy and Marines alone had about 60,000 killed and missing, almost all in the Pacific. The U.S. navy had 5 fleet carriers sunk, at least one other was never returned to service after being damaged, and lost many other lesser warships. In August 1945 Japan was incapable of doing anything except resisting am invasion with existing stockpiles; it could acquire or make no fuel and little in the way of weapons or ammunition. It could not threaten its enemies seriously. The atomic bombs were a political weapon useful in persuading the insane Japanese army-controlled government to surrender, as well as in intimidating the USSR. The Allies could have blockaded the Japanese home islands until the Japanese surrendered, but the American people and politicians weren't willing to wait. The USA, once the Japanese and Germans insisted that it join the war, made a tremendous military and naval effort. In addition the Soviet war effort was heavily dependent on American supplies for everything from food to aluminum. The mobility of the Red Army depended largely on tens of thousands of American trucks. The British war effort also depended heavily on supplies and equipment provided free by the U.S. - after the British had bankrupted themselves carrying on the war almost single-handed. Doug Woodard St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada On Sat, 2 Apr 2005, Hakan Falk wrote: Dear Henri and Rick, I only like to put this we took out Hitler to rest. That the Americans single handed took out Hitler, is a myth that only exists in Hollywood movies. The crucial material support from US in WWII was the deliveries of war material. The US infantry troop participation in Europe was on a low level and not crucial. By only look at the loss of soldiers, you understand clearly who was doing the major fighting. Russia 6,000,000 troop causalities Europe Alliance600,000 USA 60,000 Germany was very advanced and introduced for the first time the modern warfare and materials, with a massive air support. They tested much of it in the Spanish civil war. US took out Japan, not on the ground, but with Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This at a time when the European part of WWII was at its end. I do agree that the US propaganda methods was/is superior. Something that Hitler and his administration several times acknowledged and copied. This superiority is maintained even today. Hakan At 05:13 PM 4/2/2005, you wrote: Dear Henri, We took out Hitler because Germany declared war on us after Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor. Sadam did not declare war on us and presented no immediate threat. [snip] ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] The Lutec over unity device
I've developed this wonderful technique of producing cold fusion in a Dr Pepper bottle, just add the secret ingredients and shake it 3.5 times... Interested? Keith Chris Kueny ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 78 Chevy Custom DeLuxe '85 300TD '02 Subaru Outback ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [OFF TOPIC] Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
Won't argue with your figures, I ain't a historian so please if anyone knows different please say so, but to my knowledge the assistance provided by the US to Britain during WWII was not free. It had to be paid back, at least in part, which is why rationing continued in Britain for so long, well after the end of the war. Regards Malcolm -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 03 April 2005 01:31 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [OFF TOPIC] Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come Hakan, you are not well informed. World War II killed and missing ...armed forces KM... total population of country Australia26,976.6 million New Zealand..11,625.2 million Canada...42,04211 million Britain.357,11645 million France..210,00045 million USA.405,399...125 million USSR..low est.6,115,000...170 million? Germany...3,500,00065 million Japan.1,270,00080 million Finland..80,000.3 million The initial landings of the Normandy invasion comprised Infantry divisions 2 USA, 2 British, 1 Canadian Airborne divisions 2 USA, 1 British By the end of the war in Europe the Americans had about 2.5 million men on the continent, the British about 850,000. In the Pacific, the way from Pearl Harbor to Okinawa was a hard bloody slog. The U.S. Navy and Marines alone had about 60,000 killed and missing, almost all in the Pacific. The U.S. navy had 5 fleet carriers sunk, at least one other was never returned to service after being damaged, and lost many other lesser warships. In August 1945 Japan was incapable of doing anything except resisting am invasion with existing stockpiles; it could acquire or make no fuel and little in the way of weapons or ammunition. It could not threaten its enemies seriously. The atomic bombs were a political weapon useful in persuading the insane Japanese army-controlled government to surrender, as well as in intimidating the USSR. The Allies could have blockaded the Japanese home islands until the Japanese surrendered, but the American people and politicians weren't willing to wait. The USA, once the Japanese and Germans insisted that it join the war, made a tremendous military and naval effort. In addition the Soviet war effort was heavily dependent on American supplies for everything from food to aluminum. The mobility of the Red Army depended largely on tens of thousands of American trucks. The British war effort also depended heavily on supplies and equipment provided free by the U.S. - after the British had bankrupted themselves carrying on the war almost single-handed. Doug Woodard St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [OFF TOPIC] Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
I'm not too up on the history either. I do know that militqry equipment was provided on lend-lease, which meant that if it was still around after the war, the Brits had to give it back. So a month or so after V-J day, the U.S. under the influence of Congress said OK, time's up, give it back. So they did. The Americans then proceeded to dump a lot of the returned equipment (aircraft for example) into the sea. A lot of naval aircraft then had to be replaced by the impoverished Brits from new production in Britain. A lot of consumables had been paid for by loans if I recall correctly. The Americans refused to make much in the way of new loans for this purpose, although the British had committed their economy to the war effort to an extent far beyond the U.S. and needed a long time to re-adjust. They also wanted repayment to start forthwith. Part of the nasty U.S. attitude was due to the fact that Roosevelt was dead, and the people in the Administration and Congress didn't realize that Britain had made an enormous effort not only to maintain her independence from Hitler but to save the civilized world, and had provided the U.S, with much priceless technology (the jet engine, the cavity magnetron (radar), nuclear science and technology) on her own initiative without asking for payment. For example, Congress ignored commitments the U.S. had made on nuclear information. Part of it was due to traditional American attitudes (Brits were colonialist exploiters), part of ot due to the fact that the British were spending money on introducing a mild form of socialism, and partly due to a wish that the U.K. should be finished as a world power, to be replaced by the U.S. Lend-lease and the loans didn't start until the UK had spent all its foreign assets, was flat broke, and would otherwise have had to wind down its war effort, and probably make a deal with Hitler since she wouldn't have been able to defend herself. Of course the Labour government in Britain didn't exactly cover itself in glory in managing the economy after the war, for example it dealt with the coal crisis quite incompetently. Doug Woodard St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, malcolm maclure wrote: Won't argue with your figures, I ain't a historian so please if anyone knows different please say so, but to my knowledge the assistance provided by the US to Britain during WWII was not free. It had to be paid back, at least in part, which is why rationing continued in Britain for so long, well after the end of the war. Regards Malcolm [snip] ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [OFF TOPIC] Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
Doug, The number you give is WWII losses, I was talking about the European part of WWII. This because we talked about taking out Hitler. US lost several times more in the Pacific, than they did in Europe. Otherwise I find your number interesting and I have seen them before. As Darryl pointed out Hitler took out himself, with the Russian forces narrowing in, fighting in the streets around him. Many of his staff had left Berlin, to be able to give themselves up to the western part of the alliance. I am also confused by the numbers for Finland, that your source give. They must include the 1939 war and this can hardly be included in WWII. The 1941 war was less bloody. The Finns did throu out the Germans, who had helped them, as a part of the peace treaty with the Russians. This part was very short and it was the Germans who got killed, since they were moving on the roads and were not keen on fighting in the forests, it was like target shooting for the Finns. It is said that Hitler were not keen on taking on the Finns and the Swedes, after seen them fighting in Finland. His estimate was that it would take too much resources and got a lower priority Hakan At 02:31 AM 4/3/2005, you wrote: Hakan, you are not well informed. World War II killed and missing ...armed forces KM... total population of country Australia26,976.6 million New Zealand..11,625.2 million Canada...42,04211 million Britain.357,11645 million France..210,00045 million USA.405,399...125 million USSR..low est.6,115,000...170 million? Germany...3,500,00065 million Japan.1,270,00080 million Finland..80,000.3 million The initial landings of the Normandy invasion comprised Infantry divisions 2 USA, 2 British, 1 Canadian Airborne divisions 2 USA, 1 British By the end of the war in Europe the Americans had about 2.5 million men on the continent, the British about 850,000. In the Pacific, the way from Pearl Harbor to Okinawa was a hard bloody slog. The U.S. Navy and Marines alone had about 60,000 killed and missing, almost all in the Pacific. The U.S. navy had 5 fleet carriers sunk, at least one other was never returned to service after being damaged, and lost many other lesser warships. In August 1945 Japan was incapable of doing anything except resisting am invasion with existing stockpiles; it could acquire or make no fuel and little in the way of weapons or ammunition. It could not threaten its enemies seriously. The atomic bombs were a political weapon useful in persuading the insane Japanese army-controlled government to surrender, as well as in intimidating the USSR. The Allies could have blockaded the Japanese home islands until the Japanese surrendered, but the American people and politicians weren't willing to wait. The USA, once the Japanese and Germans insisted that it join the war, made a tremendous military and naval effort. In addition the Soviet war effort was heavily dependent on American supplies for everything from food to aluminum. The mobility of the Red Army depended largely on tens of thousands of American trucks. The British war effort also depended heavily on supplies and equipment provided free by the U.S. - after the British had bankrupted themselves carrying on the war almost single-handed. Doug Woodard St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada On Sat, 2 Apr 2005, Hakan Falk wrote: Dear Henri and Rick, I only like to put this we took out Hitler to rest. That the Americans single handed took out Hitler, is a myth that only exists in Hollywood movies. The crucial material support from US in WWII was the deliveries of war material. The US infantry troop participation in Europe was on a low level and not crucial. By only look at the loss of soldiers, you understand clearly who was doing the major fighting. Russia 6,000,000 troop causalities Europe Alliance600,000 USA 60,000 Germany was very advanced and introduced for the first time the modern warfare and materials, with a massive air support. They tested much of it in the Spanish civil war. US took out Japan, not on the ground, but with Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This at a time when the European part of WWII was at its end. I do agree that the US propaganda methods was/is superior. Something that Hitler and his administration several times acknowledged and copied. This superiority is maintained even today. Hakan At 05:13 PM 4/2/2005, you wrote: Dear Henri, We took out Hitler because Germany declared war on us after Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor. Sadam did not declare war on us and presented no immediate threat. [snip] ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
