RE: [Biofuel] methanol and airmodel engine fuel
Sorry I was not explicit enough and did give the wrong impression. I do not create anything, rather I mix up my own model airplane engine fuel from the discussed components. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rafal Szczesniak Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 2:53 AM To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] methanol and airmodel engine fuel On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 05:23:11PM -0500, James G. Branaum wrote: I buy my methanol in bulk at the local representative of the refinery. I strongly suspect is probably not available in your area. I also don't think you want to use it unless you make it yourself. What do you mean by making it myself ? Making what ? Sorry, I'm not sure I understood clearly. -- cheers, Rafal Szczesniak **mir[at]diament.ists.pwr.wroc.pl Samba Team member mi***[at]samba.org +-+ *BSD, GNU/Linux and Samba http://www.samba.org +-+ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
RE: [Biofuel] methanol and airmodel engine fuel
I have been mixing my own model airplane engine fuel for the last 12 years or so. I normally use 70% methanol, 10% nitro methane (as an igniter) and 20% oil of various make ups. I eschew castor because it gums things up unless it is hot and can render an expensive 4-stroke engine useless due to sticky carbon build up. Typically the additions to the synthetic oils are things to retard corrosion and improve the burn of the oil itself during combustion as in model engines it is the source of lubrication and adds nothing to the energy developed. Most of the makers of that specific product protect their intellectual property rights viciously as there are different compounds that have different properties under different conditions. Jim Branaum -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rafal Szczesniak Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 5:34 AM To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: [Biofuel] methanol and airmodel engine fuel Hi, As I've found it nearly impossible buy small (1-2 litres) amounts of pure methanol here, in Poland, I've taken closer look at model fuels. They mostly contain methanol (40-85%), castor oil, EDL synthetic oil and additions. Now, castor oil might be even good. EDL definately not - luckily not all fuels do have it. Does anyone know what's in those additions ? I'm not talking about nitromethan here - that one I know about. This leads to a more specific question - how those fuels (after a bit of processing, naturally) can be useful as a source of methanol ? -- cheers, Rafal Szczesniak **mir[at]diament.ists.pwr.wroc.pl Samba Team member mi***[at]samba.org +-+ *BSD, GNU/Linux and Samba http://www.samba.org +-+ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
RE: [Biofuel] methanol and airmodel engine fuel
I buy my methanol in bulk at the local representative of the refinery. I strongly suspect is probably not available in your area. I also don't think you want to use it unless you make it yourself. That probably will take some special licensing as your product could be mistaken for a very highly taxable consumable. Cheers. Jim Branaum - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rafal Szczesniak Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 3:00 PM To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] methanol and airmodel engine fuel On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 11:39:30AM -0500, James G. Branaum wrote: I have been mixing my own model airplane engine fuel for the last 12 years or so. I normally use 70% methanol, 10% nitro methane (as an igniter) and 20% oil of various make ups. I eschew castor because it gums things up unless it is hot and can render an expensive 4-stroke engine useless due to sticky carbon build up. Where do you dig up your methanol from ? :) I don't have such an experience with model engines but I know that mixture of 80% methanol and 20% castor (no nitromethane) is still the official FAI fuel for contests. Typically the additions to the synthetic oils are things to retard corrosion and improve the burn of the oil itself during combustion as in model engines it is the source of lubrication and adds nothing to the energy developed. Most of the makers of that specific product protect their intellectual property rights viciously as there are different compounds that have different properties under different conditions. That's probably why you can't really find any information about kind of additions at least (not proportions which are significant). -- cheers, Rafal Szczesniak **mir[at]diament.ists.pwr.wroc.pl Samba Team member mi***[at]samba.org +-+ *BSD, GNU/Linux and Samba http://www.samba.org +-+ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
RE: [Biofuel] Re: CUMMINS B5.9TD
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Addison Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 3:02 AM To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Re: CUMMINS B5.9TD Hello James In one of my many conversations with a fuels specialist, he strongly suggested that BD has some thermal stability problems when used in over a 10% mix with Petro. He has the degree and over 20 years experience in the field since I first met him. What are thermal stability problems? Sorry, I did not follow up the remark with any questions. However in the past (10 years ago?) when he and I were discussing fuels the term meant the fuel was unable to release all of its chemical power when stored at various differing temperatures. Or so I understood when he explained. Don't forget biodiesel also has 20 years' experience, or more, and many millions of on-road miles behind it, along with tons of research, and not just B10. Best Keith -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 4:47 PM To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: CUMMINS B5.9TD - Original Message - From: Doug Memering [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, July 16, 2005 9:40 pm Subject: [Biofuel] Re: CUMMINS B5.9TD Any of which can be replaced on an as needed basis. Terry's mechanic should be a little more specific with him, rather than issuing a sweeping and perhaps unsupported statement. Perhaps I can shed some light on this topic, as I am an engineer at Cummins Inc, and work in Fuel System Development. Officially, Cummins supports Biodiesel blends up to B5 or 5% Biodiesel.There are several concerns the company has with higher ratio blends. There are three major areas of concerns that the company has. These are mostlycommercial concerns which will be evident as I explain them any of which an individual could deal with by being aware and careful about what they put into their tank. First, while biodiesel is touted as being cleaner, there are some caveats.While the particulate emissions (the ones you can see) are considerablyimproved with biodiesel, the NOx emmission will increase and the higher the biodiesel ratio the higher the NOx increases. Up to B5 the increase will not likely move the engine's NOx emissions beyond the federal limit, but B20 and higher will likely move the NOx emissions outside of the box. Since the US tends to hold the manufacturers repsonsible for the emissions of the engines instead of the users the company must maintain a strict policy against recommending or accepting fuels that will violate the regulations. Second, biodiesel has a lower heating value than Petro diesel, therefore the higher the biodiesel blend the lower the available power from the engine.Most vehicles with B5.9 diesel are substantially overpowered so the driver may not notice the 2% loss of power with a B5 blend, but it will become more noticeable as the ratio is increased. As I said many of the vehicles, especially pickups are overpowered for the job they do, so you it wouldlikely not be bothered unless you are street racing or pulling a large (heavy) trailer through the mountains. But once again as a company Cummins is in the position that if the sell a 305 Hp engine and the customers tend to expect to get 305 Hp regardless of what fuel they chose to put in the tank. The third and more serious concern for us homegrown biodieselers, in my opinion, is water. Most tanks collect water, many vehicles are equippedwith water separation filters to protect the fuel system components. The problem is the biodiesel has a higher affinity for water than petrol diesel, so the biodiesel is going to carry the water out of the tank. Furthermore,the water separators that are normally used will NOT extract the water from biodiesel so the water gets carried into the fuel system. Most modern fuel systems are very sensitive to water. The engine will run initially but the internal fuel system components will quickly corrode which will lead to a fuel system failure, and usually an expensive one. The company is also concerned about the quality of the biodiesel coming on the market. They have a wide variety from some very high quality to some very poor quality and currently there are no recognized quality standardthat the commercial producers are going by. There are other concerns with blending biodiesel with the coming Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD). It has a few challenges to overcome but I will not go into the details here. With all that said, my personal observation (not the view of Cummins) is that if you pay attention to what you are putting in your tank qaulity wise. You make sure that it is dry. Then you should not have any
RE: [Biofuel] Abuse [was] It's imperialism, stupid
Gosh Mike, You seem to have made yet another weak assumption or intentionally taken the low road when the presented facts you swear by indicated other courses would have been more proper. The only misstatement in my comments was the convicted part which should have read morally convicted. My comments about idiots, fools, convicted, and crazies among us were all inclusive as written and intended. Had I said among you, your remarks might have been on target. I purposefully left any judgments to be made in the mind of the reader rather than directing or attempting to control thought. You are more than welcome to disagree all you wish -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Redler Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 6:08 PM To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Abuse [was] It's imperialism, stupid ...duly noted James. I'm just wondering... My mind is open to the idiots, fools, convicted, and crazies among us because even a blind pig finds an acorn once in a while. - If your predisposed to judging others (as idiots, etc.), how can you keep an open mind? I would (for example) consider the opinions of others, irrespective of their criminal record or mental health. It always is, has been, and will into the far distant future be a function of how things are said rather than what is said. - Without meaning to be sarcastic, I have no idea what It is and how It is a function of how things are said.I do know that I'm a big fan of facts. So, we can agree to disagree. I will endeavorto improve on my offensive style (or at least measure how much I dispose of it). Mike James G. Branaum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ROFLOL! Mike, It always is, has been, and will into the far distant future be a function of how things are said rather than what is said. However, do not take that to the extreme or you fall into the how rather than what trap again. Extremes, like generalities, can be proven to be false gods followed by many with unwavering false standards. Keep trying. Jim -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Redler Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 3:07 PM To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Abuse [was] It's imperialism, stupid That means even you who I more often than not disagree with on magnitude rather than complete substance. Does this mean that it's a matter of how I say it rather than what's being said? If I'm not getting it, can you elaborate? Mike James G. Branaum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mike, Your style can be offensive, but so what? I also have been kicked off a list because the moderator and I crossed swords. It took 8 years, but he has since recanted his position and admitted I was right. Before you get the idea I have a swelled head remember that being right does no good if one is dead right. My mind is open to the idiots, fools, convicted, and crazies among us because even a blind pig finds an acorn once in a while. That means even you who I more often than not disagree with on magnitude rather than complete substance. Jim Branaum -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Redler Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2005 2:45 PM To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: [Biofuel] Abuse [was] It's imperialism, stupid Kieth wrote ...too much abuse, and not only of the list. I was kicked off a Yahoo! Group today: RefrigeratorAlternatives Maybe it was me. However,some shared my opinionthat there were too muchhostilities toward fellow members. Unlike this group, I found that going a little off topic earnedyou a nasty-gramfrom the moderator (who referred to it as my group). Since your getting the story from only one side, I'll stop there. I've been a part of thislist for a while so you have some experience about my opinions, my attitude and my writing style. Of course I've made mistakes, used strong language and debated aggressively. However, I don't thinkthe moderator of RefrigeratorAlternatives truly has the interest of the group in mind. I'm very disappointed. It looked like a great topic for an on-line discussion. Is there anyone else who had a similar experience? Mike Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for the encouragement, Mike. Kieth, Earlier, you mentioned how companies like Monsanto try to infiltrate groups like ours. In addition I'm sure that there are many emotionally driven and misguided individuals like Tim who are acting on their own. Yes, an endless trickle, Chinese water torture, LOL! Sorry, I know it's not funny, I am sympathetic. Everybody, soon or late, sits down to a banquet of consequences, said Robert Louis Stevenson, and I don't envy some of these people
RE: [Biofuel] Abuse [was] It's imperialism, stupid
ROFLOL! Mike, It always is, has been, and will into the far distant future be a function of how things are said rather than what is said. However, do not take that to the extreme or you fall into the how rather than what trap again. Extremes, like generalities, can be proven to be false gods followed by many with unwavering false standards. Keep trying. Jim -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Redler Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 3:07 PM To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Abuse [was] It's imperialism, stupid That means even you who I more often than not disagree with on magnitude rather than complete substance. Does this mean that it's a matter of how I say it rather than what's being said? If I'm not getting it, can you elaborate? Mike James G. Branaum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mike, Your style can be offensive, but so what? I also have been kicked off a list because the moderator and I crossed swords. It took 8 years, but he has since recanted his position and admitted I was right. Before you get the idea I have a swelled head remember that being right does no good if one is dead right. My mind is open to the idiots, fools, convicted, and crazies among us because even a blind pig finds an acorn once in a while. That means even you who I more often than not disagree with on magnitude rather than complete substance. Jim Branaum -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Redler Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2005 2:45 PM To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: [Biofuel] Abuse [was] It's imperialism, stupid Kieth wrote ...too much abuse, and not only of the list. I was kicked off a Yahoo! Group today: RefrigeratorAlternatives Maybe it was me. However,some shared my opinionthat there were too muchhostilities toward fellow members. Unlike this group, I found that going a little off topic earnedyou a nasty-gramfrom the moderator (who referred to it as my group). Since your getting the story from only one side, I'll stop there. I've been a part of thislist for a while so you have some experience about my opinions, my attitude and my writing style. Of course I've made mistakes, used strong language and debated aggressively. However, I don't thinkthe moderator of RefrigeratorAlternatives truly has the interest of the group in mind. I'm very disappointed. It looked like a great topic for an on-line discussion. Is there anyone else who had a similar experience? Mike Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for the encouragement, Mike. Kieth, Earlier, you mentioned how companies like Monsanto try to infiltrate groups like ours. In addition I'm sure that there are many emotionally driven and misguided individuals like Tim who are acting on their own. Yes, an endless trickle, Chinese water torture, LOL! Sorry, I know it's not funny, I am sympathetic. Everybody, soon or late, sits down to a banquet of consequences, said Robert Louis Stevenson, and I don't envy some of these people the feast that awaits them. But it's not a workable sympathy, too much abuse, and not only of the list. It's the garbageman people take to abusing when the garbage happens to be them, and that's me, LOL! But if you don't like bouncers then shape up and learn how to behave. Quite often it works out that way too, I'm happy to say. Otherwise it's just a job, it's not a matter of personalities, which I've said before, and it's true, but these people will never believe that. What they want to believe is their problem. When I told Tim I wouldn't let him lead the list in another crazed circular argument like he'd done before, he answered: Oh, so is this about list leadership? Huh? Another guy who got abusive in this thread told me I'm a control freak. On the contrary, when we moved the list from Yahoo last year it was less control I was after. Much of our thinking was in helping the list to be a self-moderating community, which it kept trying to be but it kept getting shot down because one or two simply had the wrong attitude - regardless of their views, they didn't think of communities, they thought of themselves. I posted a few messages about this at the time. The second Welcome message sent onlist is from the administrators - rules, of a sort. The gist of it is that the list is an online community, for sharing and mutual benefit, not a shop where you can be demanding and the customer's always right. Once you realize that it's all fairly obvious. If you come to a mailing list via Yahoo though you might be more inclined to see it as a shop - the wrong expectations, and another reason for leaving there. It worked well, it's much more a self-moderating community now. In the past, I've mentioned (rhetorically) that we have strength in solidarity
RE: [Biofuel] Abuse [was] It's imperialism, stupid
Mike, Your style can be offensive, but so what? I also have been kicked off a list because the moderator and I crossed swords. It took 8 years, but he has since recanted his position and admitted I was right. Before you get the idea I have a swelled head remember that being right does no good if one is dead right. My mind is open to the idiots, fools, convicted, and crazies among us because even a blind pig finds an acorn once in a while. That means even you who I more often than not disagree with on magnitude rather than complete substance. Jim Branaum -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Redler Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2005 2:45 PM To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: [Biofuel] Abuse [was] It's imperialism, stupid Kieth wrote ...too much abuse, and not only of the list. I was kicked off a Yahoo! Group today: RefrigeratorAlternatives Maybe it was me. However,some shared my opinionthat there were too muchhostilities toward fellow members. Unlike this group, I found that going a little off topic earnedyou a nasty-gramfrom the moderator (who referred to it as my group). Since your getting the story from only one side, I'll stop there. I've been a part of thislist for a while so you have some experience about my opinions, my attitude and my writing style. Of course I've made mistakes, used strong language and debated aggressively. However, I don't thinkthe moderator of RefrigeratorAlternatives truly has the interest of the group in mind. I'm very disappointed. It looked like a great topic for an on-line discussion. Is there anyone else who had a similar experience? Mike Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for the encouragement, Mike. Kieth, Earlier, you mentioned how companies like Monsanto try to infiltrate groups like ours. In addition I'm sure that there are many emotionally driven and misguided individuals like Tim who are acting on their own. Yes, an endless trickle, Chinese water torture, LOL! Sorry, I know it's not funny, I am sympathetic. Everybody, soon or late, sits down to a banquet of consequences, said Robert Louis Stevenson, and I don't envy some of these people the feast that awaits them. But it's not a workable sympathy, too much abuse, and not only of the list. It's the garbageman people take to abusing when the garbage happens to be them, and that's me, LOL! But if you don't like bouncers then shape up and learn how to behave. Quite often it works out that way too, I'm happy to say. Otherwise it's just a job, it's not a matter of personalities, which I've said before, and it's true, but these people will never believe that. What they want to believe is their problem. When I told Tim I wouldn't let him lead the list in another crazed circular argument like he'd done before, he answered: Oh, so is this about list leadership? Huh? Another guy who got abusive in this thread told me I'm a control freak. On the contrary, when we moved the list from Yahoo last year it was less control I was after. Much of our thinking was in helping the list to be a self-moderating community, which it kept trying to be but it kept getting shot down because one or two simply had the wrong attitude - regardless of their views, they didn't think of communities, they thought of themselves. I posted a few messages about this at the time. The second Welcome message sent onlist is from the administrators - rules, of a sort. The gist of it is that the list is an online community, for sharing and mutual benefit, not a shop where you can be demanding and the customer's always right. Once you realize that it's all fairly obvious. If you come to a mailing list via Yahoo though you might be more inclined to see it as a shop - the wrong expectations, and another reason for leaving there. It worked well, it's much more a self-moderating community now. In the past, I've mentioned (rhetorically) that we have strength in solidarity. The fact that we can debate about the details but stay unanimous about almost everything else There are so many different kinds of people here, from different backgrounds, different places, different cultures. It's great! Solidarity in diversity. shows extraordinary strength and fidelity for this type of forum and I think we stand a better chance than most in defending ourselves and this group from such kinds of sabotage. I'm glad other list members think that too, so do I, but on the other hand I don't want to be overconfident. The fakes at Bivings did a lot of harm, they're not dumb. The Margolis article below is a great example of how this list is an extremely important conduit for getting the truth out to potentially millions of people. Many in this group have contributed in big ways and others are inspired to do the same. You have earned many titles Kieth. Yes!
RE: [Biofuel] Re: CUMMINS B5.9TD
In one of my many conversations with a fuels specialist, he strongly suggested that BD has some thermal stability problems when used in over a 10% mix with Petro. He has the degree and over 20 years experience in the field since I first met him. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 4:47 PM To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Re: CUMMINS B5.9TD - Original Message - From: Doug Memering [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, July 16, 2005 9:40 pm Subject: [Biofuel] Re: CUMMINS B5.9TD Any of which can be replaced on an as needed basis. Terry's mechanic should be a little more specific with him, rather than issuing a sweeping and perhaps unsupported statement. Perhaps I can shed some light on this topic, as I am an engineer at Cummins Inc, and work in Fuel System Development. Officially, Cummins supports Biodiesel blends up to B5 or 5% Biodiesel.There are several concerns the company has with higher ratio blends. There are three major areas of concerns that the company has. These are mostlycommercial concerns which will be evident as I explain them any of which an individual could deal with by being aware and careful about what they put into their tank. First, while biodiesel is touted as being cleaner, there are some caveats.While the particulate emissions (the ones you can see) are considerablyimproved with biodiesel, the NOx emmission will increase and the higher the biodiesel ratio the higher the NOx increases. Up to B5 the increase will not likely move the engine's NOx emissions beyond the federal limit, but B20 and higher will likely move the NOx emissions outside of the box. Since the US tends to hold the manufacturers repsonsible for the emissions of the engines instead of the users the company must maintain a strict policy against recommending or accepting fuels that will violate the regulations. Second, biodiesel has a lower heating value than Petro diesel, therefore the higher the biodiesel blend the lower the available power from the engine.Most vehicles with B5.9 diesel are substantially overpowered so the driver may not notice the 2% loss of power with a B5 blend, but it will become more noticeable as the ratio is increased. As I said many of the vehicles, especially pickups are overpowered for the job they do, so you it wouldlikely not be bothered unless you are street racing or pulling a large (heavy) trailer through the mountains. But once again as a company Cummins is in the position that if the sell a 305 Hp engine and the customers tend to expect to get 305 Hp regardless of what fuel they chose to put in the tank. The third and more serious concern for us homegrown biodieselers, in my opinion, is water. Most tanks collect water, many vehicles are equippedwith water separation filters to protect the fuel system components. The problem is the biodiesel has a higher affinity for water than petrol diesel, so the biodiesel is going to carry the water out of the tank. Furthermore,the water separators that are normally used will NOT extract the water from biodiesel so the water gets carried into the fuel system. Most modern fuel systems are very sensitive to water. The engine will run initially but the internal fuel system components will quickly corrode which will lead to a fuel system failure, and usually an expensive one. The company is also concerned about the quality of the biodiesel coming on the market. They have a wide variety from some very high quality to some very poor quality and currently there are no recognized quality standardthat the commercial producers are going by. There are other concerns with blending biodiesel with the coming Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD). It has a few challenges to overcome but I will not go into the details here. With all that said, my personal observation (not the view of Cummins) is that if you pay attention to what you are putting in your tank qaulity wise. You make sure that it is dry. Then you should not have any problems with the fuel system of the age mentioned. The timing does not need to be changed in order for the engine run, however you will be producing more NOx than you were with petrodiesel. You will likely see degradation of non metal lines in the fuel system and you have to replace all of them at some point. Return lines are probably the first ones you will notice. I believe most vehicles run steel lines for the supply lines from the tank to the engine. I am brewing my own biodiesel and running it in my 94 Cummins 5.9L dieseland I intend to eventually run on straight biodiesel. I know the risks and will watch things carefully. I hope this helps Doug ___ Biofuel mailing
RE: [Biofuel] Taking to the Wind
Mike, I have yet to see the group that does not thrive on misinformation used to support their agenda, so there is no reason to limit the charge to government or conservatives. Besides, most birds are smart enough to fly around objects and stay out of the way of other flying objects. Proof of that can be seen on a daily basis when great flocks of birds move around looking for an evening roosting place. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Redler Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 9:05 AM To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Taking to the Wind Todd is absolutely right. The really frustrating part is that the same argument is being made byopponents of wind power,to shoot down the Nantucket sound project -- a totally useless argument because as Todd mentioned, the lesson of lattice type towers has long since been learned. So, theyare no longer incorporated innew installations. Side note: There is another baseless argument that wind turbines ruin marine habitats when used off-shore.Under-sea power lines themselves, are usually not challenged with the same fervor and the net effect of this, compared to the damagecaused byfossil fuelcollection, transportand use is negligible (IMHO). In past threads, we've discussed the problem of misinformation by our government and others to support their own agenda. I see wind power as an alternativewhich has been especially effected by this. Mike Appal Energy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Altamont Pass towers are of the lattice type, providing endless attraction to birds for resting and nesting. Power companies are hoping to not have to replace the towers with monocoques until the turbines reach the end of their life cycle. Essentially what is being found is that wind power is so maintenance efficient that the lattice towers are remaining in place far longer than anyone wants or expected. Todd Swearingen Thompson, Mark L. (PNB RD) wrote: What about the birds. Here in California we the enviro-groups suing the wind power generators for killing Ten's of thousands birds in the Altamont Pass area. Kinda hard to have it both ways. M -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Addison Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 3:15 PM To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: [Biofuel] Taking to the Wind The Institute of Science in Society Science Society Sustainability http://www.i-sis.org.uk ISIS Press Release 12/07/05 Taking to the Wind Peter Bunyard looks at the realities of wind power and answers its detractors Peter Bunyard will be speaking at Sustainable World Conference, 14-15 July 2005. References for this article are posted on ISIS members' website. Details here Wind power working Ian Fells, professor of Energy Conversion at Newcastle University, told BBC's Radio 4 Today programme back in December 2002 that if we wanted electricity on tap, while simultaneously meeting our Kyoto Protocol commitments to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, we would fail abysmally unless we replaced and even added to our nuclear power capacity (25 per cent of UK electricity generation in 2005). Renewable energy sources, such as wind-power, he insisted, would be marginal to needs and barely worth the cost of developing [1]. Ian Fells' remarks contrasted with the experience of one of Denmark's energy experts who, during the same December 2002 Radio 4 programme, pointed out how successful his country's strategy had been in developing an electricity supply industry (in which wind-power provides nearly 20 per cent of the total in 2005). It had been good for jobs, good for exports and good for Denmark's energy needs, with the industry employing 16 000 and annual sales of wind turbines reaching more than 2 GW, equal to two large nuclear power plants. Peter Edwards, ex-chairman of the British Wind Energy Society developed the first British wind-farm at Delabole in Cornwall 14 years ago in response to the threat of a nuclear power station being built nearby. Initially the economics did not look good, at least in the context of the UK, and Edwards all but abandoned the idea. But then, in 1991, the government simultaneously introduced the fossil fuel levy on fossil fuel generating plants and the non-fossil fuel obligation (NFFO) to support at least 20 per cent electricity production from non-fossil fuel sources. At the time, nuclear power was generating 20 per cent of the Central Electricity Generating Board's production, and with privatisation in the offing, the NFFO was little more than a straight subsidy to sweeten up the City in time for a sale. Nonetheless, the subsidy did open up the possibility of investing in the alternatives, such as wind. In 1990, the fossil fuel levy amounted to £900 million, much of which went into the pockets of the nuclear
RE: [Biofuel] Hybrid Diesel
Federal law DOES provide for job security in very specific circumstances. However, they are not general or all inclusive. I think Germany went down that path with disastrous results. Jobs seem to be for life, regardless of skill or effort not spent in employers behalf. I am pretty sure Japan was on that path and realized it had bad end results in their last economic downturn. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Hayes Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 10:19 AM To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Hybrid Diesel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: earl, i'm not familiar with any federal laws protecting workers, except for anti-discrimination laws. if you're referring to more than that, please enlighten me. Chris are you serious? I can think of plenty of federal protection for workers off the top of my head. a) minimum wage b) overtime rules (40 hr work week for hourly employees) c) OSHA d) EPA e) NLRB f) maternity/paternity leave g) child labor laws You may think worker protection doesn't go far enough but we're certainly not talking about the grossly unregulated laissez faire capitalism that made unions so necessary at the turn of the *least* century. Children don't work in textile mills. Miners don't work 12 hr shifts 6 days a week. Given these protections, the benefits of unionization are far less compelling than in the past. Given the drawbacks: dues, seniority over merit, inability to cut deadwood, inability to negotiate an individual contract, it isn't suprising that union membership has steadily declined over the past several decades. as fro state laws, don't be fooled by what you found in PA. many states have very poor worker protections. for example, employers in many states can fire an employee for virtually any reason, because they are not required to have one. so although it might be illegal for a company to fire someone for, say, refusing to commit a crime, they can still fire you without justification. Tthis is called At-will employment and is the norm under US law unless your contract explicitly stipulates otherwise. However, all states also have common law exception to the at-will rule for retaliatory discharge; if an employer fires you for refusing to commit a criminal act, they are legally accountable. But yes, barring whistle-blower retaliation, a US employer can typically fire an employee without cause as is required in some other countries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At_will_employment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment (wikipedia has two different pages on this topic) I assume from your comments that you think federal labor laws should provide some job security provisions? ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
RE: [Biofuel] New biodiesel plants
That is a great idea. Just think, now we have a way to get double use out of land already owned by the public! Not sure of the oil content of those plants, or the viability of planting or harvesting them, but we have to start somewhere. Jim Branaum -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken Provost Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 7:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] New biodiesel plants on 5/3/05 11:54 AM, georgebostic at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If we have crunched these numbers correctly the land won't produce enough oil. How many liters or gallons is 100,000 tons of Bio? George I think it's about right -- 80 gallons of biodiesel per acre of canola. I agree -- it's a waste of land. That's why I'd rather use crops that grow wild on the roadside, like Brassica nigra, or meadowfoam. -K ___ 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] Bush on matter - a thousand points of light
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Redler Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2005 11:05 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Bush on matter - a thousand points of light SNIP For example, spending $0.50 for every $1.00 of my taxes on building the military does not represent balance when our (K-12) schools don't come close in comparison to most of those in the industrialized world. SNIP You hit one of my really hot buttons. One of the most expensive schools in the nation, when breaking out the cost per pupil, has the lowest scores on any standardized test given. That should clarify that fact that money is not the problem, but it gets ignored as most would prefer to simply accept the easy way out. I have several relatives who teach at college level and they espouse the same unwashed garbage without using their fine minds to analyze what the problem really is. What most folks ignore is the simple fact that throwing more money at the school system is NOT going to begin to address the problem as long as PARENTS use the schools as parking places with baby sitters for their offspring. That is one of the reasons that most schools are unwilling or not permitted to provide any punishment to miscreants. Hence we see pre-teens in handcuffs for temper tantrums or worse. The teachers unions are not going to say money is not the answer because it removes the reason for their fight to get more pay and reduces their political leverage. The taxing folks are not going to say that because then the people will want to lower taxes and politicians are against you having your own money and choices because then government won't be providing everything. Clearly the students are not going to say that because they don't know. Unfortunately for many, the intelligentsia has sold the idea of more money to the schools rather than parental involvement and interest. When was the last time YOU went to your kid's school to visit with a teacher? Even a bad teacher can be lead to the path of educating kids rather than babysitting, but someone who cares has to do the work. When was the last time you reviewed your kid's test results good AND bad with an eye to teaching the corrective information? When did you look at your kids homework to make sure they are getting the message? A little outside help goes a very long way towards making an education effective, and that is the parents JOB. In addition that is the sort of thing it will take to change the paradigm in our education system rather than more money. Let's put it on a more direct basis. How many of you discuss biofuels with your kids? That is educational, if someone explains some of the technical and financial issues that are hidden from view. I do. We cannot move towards biofuel usage without educating people with more than the intelligentsia allows in schools. Jim ___ 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/
