[biofuels-biz] New Fuel-Efficiency Initiative Is More PR Than Progress

[Keith Addison]

Driving In Circles
New Fuel-Efficiency Initiative Is More PR Than Progress
by Steven Rosenfeld
The Bush administration is giving Detroit a subsidy to develop
hydrogen-fueled cars. But if history is a guide, automakers will use the
program to cover their lack of any real progress on fuel efficiency.


http://www.tompaine.com/feature.cfm?ID=4959
TOMPAINE.com -
Driving In Circles
New Fuel-Efficiency Initiative Is More PR Than Progress

Steven Rosenfeld is an audio producer and reporter for TomPaine.com.

The Bush administration has announced that an eight-year-old, $2 
billion federal program to create high-mileage gas vehicles was being 
scrapped and a new program -- focusing on hydrogen fuel-cells -- was 
being created. The administration's decision has major consequences 
for the U.S. economy, energy policy, national security and global 
warming.

TomPaine.com's Steven Rosenfeld asked Jack Doyle, author of Taken for 
A Ride: Detroit's Big Three and the Politics of Pollution, to discuss 
the importance of this decision, the history behind it, and its 
likely ramifications.

TomPaine.com: The Bush Administration is ending a federal program to 
increase gas mileage to create so-called 80 mile-per-gallon cars, and 
instead says it will focus on hydrogen fuel cell technology. How much 
progress was being made toward the goal of more fuel-efficient 
vehicles?

Jack Doyle: When the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles, 
which is called PNGV, when that was created in 1993, [then 
Vice-President] Al Gore was the chief architect. He looked at it as a 
solution to getting the United States to [achieve] its global warming 
obligations, to cut back on CO2, in particular.

The auto industry had come to Clinton and Gore just after the 
election and said, 'We understand that you need some help on health 
care and trade issues. We're willing to help you on those fronts if 
you will back off on fuel economy.' It was never put in quite those 
terms, but they had gone to Arkansas, during the transition, after 
Clinton and Gore were elected, and a quid pro quo -- a deal was cut, 
basically -- that said, 'Okay. We create this venture to get to an 80 
mile-per-gallon car, fuel efficiency -- and you assure us that you 
won't enact fuel-economy standards through Congress,' known as 
Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, the acronym. This was, as I 
think Clinton put it at the time, 'a moonshot for fuel economy.'

TP.c: So how much progress was actually made in the intervening years?

Doyle: Well, to make a long story short, what happened here is 
basically, this PNGN became a hiding place for the Big Three 
[automakers] on fuel economy. They got to look around the federal 
labs. There's been nearly $2 billion of taxpayer money shoveled into 
this venture and not much to show for it. In fact, it's really served 
the automobile industry quite well. It really has kept them out of 
the business of increasing fuel economy.

Our national fleet today, all the vehicles out there, average about 
20 miles per gallon. That's a technological embarrassment. That's 
just a real failure on the part of both the government and the auto 
industry, because, when you think about it, go back to the first 
energy crisis in the mid-1970s. Then vehicles were around 13 
miles-per-gallon average. Look at the top-10 selling SUVs and trucks 
today, they are getting about 16 miles-per-gallon.

TP.c: With the $2 billion that was spent on this program, were there 
any tangible results?

Doyle: There were some technologies developed in the federal labs. 
And there is probably some advance on batteries for electric 
vehicles. But those advances probably would have occurred in the 
federal laboratories, without the Big Three being involved.

This joint venture slowed things down, I think. It took away the 
competitive edge. The irony of this PNGV venture, when it was first 
established in 1993, the Japanese saw it. They became very concerned 
about this, because they said, 'Wow, this looks like a major 
initiative to get to electric or advanced vehicles, so we better step 
up our effort.' And that's exactly what they did. Some of the 
companies, namely Toyota and Honda, really redoubled their effort and 
came up in five years -- Toyota did in five years -- what PNGV has 
yet to do. The hybrid vehicle from Toyota, the Prius, gets nearly 
50-60 mpg, the equivalent of that, with a half-electric, half 
gasoline engine. And consequently today, General Motors, Ford and 
Chrysler are about five years behind the Japanese on hybrid vehicle 
development.

TP.c: In Taken for a Ride, you've written extensively about the 
automakers' repeated attempts, literally over the decades since World 
War II, to delay implementing new technologies, whether for cleaner 
exhaust or alternative fuels. So when the Administration today says 
that there is going to be a shift in focus to hydrogen fuel cells, 
how do you contextualize that announcement? Is it a lofty new goal, 

[biofuels-biz] U.S. science panel says Detroit can improve fuel use

[Keith Addison]

http://enn.com/news/wire-stories/2002/01/01172002/reu_46167.asp
- 1/17/2002 - ENN.com
U.S. science panel says Detroit can improve fuel use

Thursday, January 17, 2002

By Julie Vorman, Reuters

WASHINGTON - A National Academy of Sciences panel on Wednesday 
rebutted criticisms from automakers and reaffirmed a finding made in 
July that new technologies could be tapped to improve the fuel 
consumption of gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles and minivans over 
a 15-year period.

Stricter mileage standards have been endorsed by many Democrats and 
environmental groups as a key plank in a national energy policy that 
could save millions of barrels of petroleum.

Detroit automakers contend that improving the fuel consumption of 
sport utility vehicles means building lighter vehicles that are less 
safe for passengers. The Bush administration has had little to say 
about the government imposing stricter fuel standards but has 
endorsed an energy policy that promotes drilling for oil in places 
like the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

The independent science panel, which advises the U.S. government on 
complex issues, issued a new report Wednesday after automakers 
complained that its July report overestimated the industry's ability 
to improve fuel efficiency.

The July draft report concluded U.S. automakers could increase the 
fuel efficiency of sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks, minivans, 
and cars by 16 percent to 47 percent over the next 10 to 15 years. It 
stopped short of calling for specific government-mandated increases 
but said Detroit should use technology to raise fuel efficiency and 
cut emissions of greenhouse gases.

FINDINGS UNCHANGED

On Wednesday the National Academy of Sciences panel said its findings 
and recommendations presented in the July report were "essentially 
unchanged."

"The committee reaffirms its approach and general results: 
Significant gains in fuel economy are possible with the application 
of new technology at corresponding increases in vehicle price,'' it 
said.

However, the scientists said they did find some "minor computational 
or data entry errors" in the earlier report and that the data would 
be changed before a final report is published later this year.

The science panel's report examined a wide range of mechanical 
changes and new technology. For example, SUV fuel consumption could 
be improved by up to 4 percent if vehicle weight was cut 5 percent, a 
change that could add as much as $350 to the retail cost, the panel 
said.

An SUV could also cut fuel use by up to 7 percent with an integrated 
starter/generator costing about $350, and by up to 10 percent with an 
engine equipped with camless valve actuation that would boost the 
price by about $560, the report said.

AUTOMAKERS SAY TRADE-OFFS INVOLVED

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers said it was concerned that 
some of the estimated fuel gains do not reflect the uncertainty and 
complex business of making vehicles or the trade-offs involved in 
manufacturing. "What makes a sports car more efficient may not work 
on a minivan," said Gloria Berquist, spokeswoman for the group. 
''Even if the technology could have benefits, that doesn't mean a 
consumer will buy it and that it will get on the road.''

U.S. automakers say some 50 vehicles that get more than 35 miles per 
gallon are already on the market but they account for less than 1 
percent of all sales.

The science panel addressed the so-called Corporate Average Fuel 
Economy (CAFE) standards adopted by Congress in 1975 after the Arab 
oil embargo. They require passenger cars to get an average 27.5 miles 
per gallon and light trucks 20.7 mpg. When the CAFE standards were 
written, light trucks were allowed to get lower mileage because they 
were used mostly by farmers and small businesses. Today, sport 
utility vehicles and other light trucks account for half of U.S. 
vehicle sales.

Any government-mandated boost for sport utility vehicles and minivans 
won't occur before the 2005 model year. Last month, the head of the 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration told Congress that 
there was little time left for the government to order fuel changes 
to model year 2004 vehicles that are scheduled to become available in 
late 2003.

The 13-member National Academy of Sciences panel was led by Paul 
Portney of Resources for the Future. Other members included John 
Wise, a former Mobil Oil employee; Philip Sharp of Harvard 
University; David Green of Oak Ridge National Laboratory; and Adrian 
Lund of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

Copyright 2002, Reuters

 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Access Your PC from Anywhere
Check Email & Transfer files - Free Download
http://us.click.yahoo.com/_WCYWA/3XkDAA/ySSFAA/9bTolB/TM
-~->

Biofuels at Journey to Forever
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel at WebConX
http://www.web

[biofuels-biz] Who Owns The Sky?

[Keith Addison]

Who Owns The Sky?
We All Do -- And Polluters Should Pay Us For Dumping There
by Ann Hancock
The "Sky Trust" is a free-market approach to reducing air pollution
that has an interesting dividend: annual payments to all U.S. citizens.
Such 'sky rent' could put a $1,000 check in your pocket each year.


http://www.tompaine.com/feature.cfm?ID=4973
TOMPAINE.com -
Who Owns The Sky?
We All Do -- And Polluters Should Pay Us For Dumping There

Ann Hancock is a sustainability educator who lives in Sonoma County, 
north of San Francisco.

Steven Rosenfeld produced this piece.

The White House doesn't need Enron to show its true loyalties on 
energy. Whatever's best for energy companies' profits suits their 
definition of public policy. How else to explain the recent Bush 
proposal rolling back clean air standards by 30 years? Or its 
announcement that new or expanding power plants needn't install the 
latest anti-air pollution devices? It's payback time for Bush's 
energy friends and funders, plain and simple.

Such favoritism is bad from an environmental perspective. It's also 
bad economics. But it is possible to reduce air pollution using the 
marketplace. It is possible for private companies to follow their 
profit-making instincts and still make money while reducing global 
warming emissions. How is that, you might ask? It's all laid out in a 
brilliant book by Peter Barnes titled Who Owns The Sky, describing an 
idea called the Sky Trust.

Who owns the sky? The answer is obvious. It's everybody. In public 
policy terms, it's called "public trust," based on a legal doctrine 
that declares that the state holds certain resources in trust for its 
citizens -- like national parks. With this as a starting point, 
Barnes, the founder of Working Assets, suggests that we consider 
carbon emissions just like any other commodity. Polluters such as 
power plants would pay to discharge into the sky, similar to the 
effective system now used to limit U.S. sulfur emissions. Polluters 
could use alternative technologies and pay less, or not at all. And 
where would the money go that's been collected? Into an account 
that's returned to citizens, the Sky Trust.

This notion is not far-fetched. In Alaska, where oil companies have 
been drilling on state and federal lands -- public lands -- a similar 
dividend accrues to residents. Last year the Alaska Permanent Fund 
paid citizens about $2,000 each. What Alaskans do with oil, Americans 
can do with sky. Annual sky rent could equal about $386 billion, 
according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, enough for 
each American to receive a $1,000 check every year.

Congressional analysts like the Sky Trust idea, too. The 
Congressional Budget Office studied various approaches for reducing 
greenhouse gases, and concluded that the Sky Trust's cap-and-trade 
approach is the best. Every year Congress would establish a limit on 
the amount of allowable greenhouse gas, and the Sky Trust would 
auction off the rights to pollute. As the allowable emissions were 
gradually reduced, the price would go up, and so would each 
American's annual dividend.

And just in case anyone needs reminding, news about climate change is 
very troubling. Last decade was the warmest on record. Sea levels 
rose about 8 to 12 inches during the last century, recently forcing 
thousands of residents of Tuvalu, a tiny spot in the Pacific Ocean, 
to leave their island home. To avert the worst of global warming, 
predominant scientific opinion says that we must reduce greenhouse 
gas emissions worldwide by at least 60 percent. Compare this figure 
with the 5.2 percent cut called for in the Kyoto Treaty signed two 
months ago by 180 nations, every major nation except the United 
States. Clearly, a new approach is badly needed.

Barnes is setting up a turnkey Sky Trust complete with board of 
directors, ready for the public, Congress, and the President to 
implement. All Congress must do is pass a law creating the Sky Trust.

America would curb its fossil fuel appetite. Those who use the most 
would pay, and those who use the least would be rewarded. Our 
children's children would inherit a habitable Earth. The Sky Trust 
reflects American capitalism at its finest.

To learn more, and to get a free, non-transferable Certificate of 
Ownership representing your share of sky, visit www.skyowners.org.

Published: Jan 14 2002

 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Tiny Wireless Camera under $80!
Order Now! FREE VCR Commander!
Click Here - Only 1 Day Left!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/9bTolB/TM
-~->

Biofuels at Journey to Forever
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel at WebConX
http://www.webconx.com/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

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

[biofuel] Scary but true, I know we all know what to do with this.

[k5farms]

This is never going to make headline news like the CJD prion but 
never the less people are going to lose out on this deal.

But I'm from the neck of the woods that sufferred through the PBB 
scare in late 1970's, devastated hundreds and few heard of it, 
though, I'd think some would learn a lesson.

Please turn this stuff into motor fuel, ASAP??
Thanx,

Pfizer Corp. (PFE) is making the announcement today that
Viagra will soon be available in liquid form, and will be
marketed by Pepsi Cola as a power beverage suitable
for use as-is or as a mixer, under the name "Mount and Do."
Pepsi's proposed ad campaign suggests: "It will now be
possible for a man to literally pour himself a stiff one."



 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Access Your PC from Anywhere
Full setup in 2 minutes! - Free Download
http://us.click.yahoo.com/.WCYWA/2XkDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

[biofuel] OH MY

[k5farms]

I'm sorry!! please add my comments to this article, had the wrong 
article in memomory and I have no idea how to rephrase an article, 
Please read the following:

Suspect Fish Meal Sparks European Food Alert
By Michael Hogan

HAMBURG (Reuters) - Four European countries scrambled on Wednesday to 
trace animal feed laced with a potent antibiotic that can halt 
production of human blood cells, fearing tons of the meal may have 
got into the food chain.

Germany impounded material at an animal feed plant on Wednesday, 
while authorities in Denmark, Poland and Romania were probing whether 
tainted fish meal had been fed to livestock.

``We now know which (German) producers of pig or poultry food 
received the ingredients and the material is being impounded, this 
has taken place at one factory today,'' a spokesman for the Lower 
Saxony regional government in Germany said.

German federal and state authorities said on Monday they were 
investigating the import late last year of feed ingredients from the 
Netherlands tainted with chloramphenicol, used to treat such life-
threatening diseases as anthrax and typhoid.

The antibiotic is restricted to such serious infections because of 
the risk of it causing a potentially lethal form of anemia.

Officials in Germany said contaminated shrimps imported into the 
Netherlands from the Far East had become part of a consignment of 188 
tons of fish scraps subsequently shipped to a feed plant in Lower 
Saxony.

``These ingredients (later) were sent to six animal feed producers in 
Germany and three other companies -- one each in Denmark, Poland, and 
Romania,'' a state agriculture official said.

Meanwhile, authorities in the north German state of Bremen 
investigating the affair said it could not be ruled out that larger 
numbers of companies could be involved. A Bremen-based trader sold 
some feed to two Austrian feed producers and one plant in Lower 
Saxony. Another Bremen trader sold some to seven other German traders.

Masterfoods GmbH, a German unit of U.S. group Mars Inc., said on 
Wednesday it has withdrawn some dry catfood from sale produced by its 
Verden factory in Lower Saxony while tests are underway. But 
spokeswoman Margrit Kolbe-Hopp said none of the firm's leading brands 
such as Whiskas contain fish meal and so sales continue.

GERMAN ALERTS

Denmark, Poland and Romania were just beginning investigations after 
alerts from Germany this week.

A leading Danish feed producer said it had sold on imported fish meal 
that it had since learned was possibly contaminated.

Four tons went to local farmers late last year and had probably been 
consumed. ``The four tons must be gone by now,'' said Hans Erik 
Bylling, a partner in feed producer Aller.

He added, ``At this stage there is no reason to panic. We'll get an 
answer late today or tomorrow whether something is wrong.''

A spokeswoman at Denmark's Department of Plant Production -- a unit 
in Denmark's Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries -- said: 
``We don't know whether the fish meal sent to Denmark was 
contaminated and the Germans don't know either.''

Poland launched a probe on Wednesday, and chief veterinarian Piotr 
Kolodziej said investigations could take several days.

Viorel Antonie, head of Romania's veterinary authority, said German 
officials had been in contact by telephone late on Tuesday and were 
promising details on the size of shipments and the identity of the 
Romanian importer on Wednesday.

(Additional reporting by Abigail Levene in Amsterdam, Birgitte 
Dyrekilde in Copenhagen, Ewa Krukowska in Warsaw



 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Access Your PC from Anywhere
It's Easy. It's Fast. - Free Download
http://us.click.yahoo.com/yWCYWA/6XkDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

RE: [biofuel] wvo burner v2.0

[M Rolan]

i made the traslation, you can find it here:
http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/wvoburner.doc

to see the biger photos you still need to go to the html spanish version:
http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.htm

with my english i don't know if you will understand better the spanish
version ;-)

cheers
Manolo Rol‡n
Valencia, Espa–a



-Mensaje original-
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Enviado el: miŽrcoles, 16 de enero de 2002 23:03
Para: biofuel@yahoogroups.com
Asunto: Re: [biofuel] wvo burner v2.0


i would much appreciate a english version of this.
i thank you in advance for taking the time to translate
this.
  best regards, roger kurz ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> here is my second try of wvo burner, i have to change some thinks 
> like the feed of wvo is a rubber pipe on a place where it gets too 
> hot so this rubber melts, better versions will came.
> 
> I intend to use this to dry wvo to make biodiesel
> 
> i've made a document with photos, schema and explanations, at the 
> moment only in spanish, if someone is interested i can traslate it.
> 
> large version, big photos (1Mb):
> http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.htm
> 
> short version, smaller photos (128k)
> http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.doc
> 
> please, comments are welcome, please please please.
> 
> cheers
> 
> Manolo Rol‡n
> Valencia, Spain
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 


Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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


Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

RE: [biofuel] wvo burner v2.0

[r . p . kurz]

could not find the translation when i clicked your site?
   regrds, roger
> i made the traslation, you can find it here:
> http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/wvoburner.doc
> 
> to see the biger photos you still need to go to the html spanish version:
> http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.htm
> 
> with my english i don't know if you will understand better the spanish
> version ;-)
> 
> cheers
> Manolo Rol‡n
> Valencia, Espa–a
> 
> 
> 
> -Mensaje original-
> De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Enviado el: miŽrcoles, 16 de enero de 2002 23:03
> Para: biofuel@yahoogroups.com
> Asunto: Re: [biofuel] wvo burner v2.0
> 
> 
> i would much appreciate a english version of this.
> i thank you in advance for taking the time to translate
> this.
>   best regards, roger kurz ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> > here is my second try of wvo burner, i have to change some thinks 
> > like the feed of wvo is a rubber pipe on a place where it gets too 
> > hot so this rubber melts, better versions will came.
> > 
> > I intend to use this to dry wvo to make biodiesel
> > 
> > i've made a document with photos, schema and explanations, at the 
> > moment only in spanish, if someone is interested i can traslate it.
> > 
> > large version, big photos (1Mb):
> > http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.htm
> > 
> > short version, smaller photos (128k)
> > http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.doc
> > 
> > please, comments are welcome, please please please.
> > 
> > cheers
> > 
> > Manolo Rol‡n
> > Valencia, Spain
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> > Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
> > To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > 
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

Re: [biofuel] BD slightly murky at low temps (35 F)

[r . p . kurz]

excuse my ignorance but what is Dipetane and whrer can 
one get it?
   regards,roger
> You can add Dipetane at a ratio of 1:200 and it should help most biofuels.
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 

 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Tiny Wireless Camera under $80!
Order Now! FREE VCR Commander!
Click Here - Only 1 Day Left!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

RE: [biofuel] wvo burner v2.0

[Keith Addison]

>i made the traslation, you can find it here:
>http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/wvoburner.doc
>
>to see the biger photos you still need to go to the html spanish version:
>http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.htm
>
>with my english i don't know if you will understand better the spanish
>version ;-)
>
>cheers
>Manolo Rol‡n
>Valencia, Espa–a

Very nice Manolo. Nice and simple. Thanks for translating it. Would 
you be able to regulate the flame, and thus the temperature of the 
WVO being dried, by putting a rheostat on the blower? Or maybe just 
by putting a simple valve on the air-inlet pipe somewhere to reduce 
the air pressure?

Best

Keith Addison
Journey to Forever
Handmade Projects
Tokyo
http://journeytoforever.org/



>-Mensaje original-
>De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Enviado el: miŽrcoles, 16 de enero de 2002 23:03
>Para: biofuel@yahoogroups.com
>Asunto: Re: [biofuel] wvo burner v2.0
>
>
>i would much appreciate a english version of this.
>i thank you in advance for taking the time to translate
>this.
>  best regards, roger kurz ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> > here is my second try of wvo burner, i have to change some thinks
> > like the feed of wvo is a rubber pipe on a place where it gets too
> > hot so this rubber melts, better versions will came.
> >
> > I intend to use this to dry wvo to make biodiesel
> >
> > i've made a document with photos, schema and explanations, at the
> > moment only in spanish, if someone is interested i can traslate it.
> >
> > large version, big photos (1Mb):
> > http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.htm
> >
> > short version, smaller photos (128k)
> > http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.doc
> >
> > please, comments are welcome, please please please.
> >
> > cheers
> >
> > Manolo Rol‡n
> > Valencia, Spain
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>


Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

[biofuel] New Fuel-Efficiency Initiative Is More PR Than Progress

[Keith Addison]

Driving In Circles
New Fuel-Efficiency Initiative Is More PR Than Progress
by Steven Rosenfeld
The Bush administration is giving Detroit a subsidy to develop
hydrogen-fueled cars. But if history is a guide, automakers will use the
program to cover their lack of any real progress on fuel efficiency.


http://www.tompaine.com/feature.cfm?ID=4959
TOMPAINE.com -
Driving In Circles
New Fuel-Efficiency Initiative Is More PR Than Progress

Steven Rosenfeld is an audio producer and reporter for TomPaine.com.

The Bush administration has announced that an eight-year-old, $2 
billion federal program to create high-mileage gas vehicles was being 
scrapped and a new program -- focusing on hydrogen fuel-cells -- was 
being created. The administration's decision has major consequences 
for the U.S. economy, energy policy, national security and global 
warming.

TomPaine.com's Steven Rosenfeld asked Jack Doyle, author of Taken for 
A Ride: Detroit's Big Three and the Politics of Pollution, to discuss 
the importance of this decision, the history behind it, and its 
likely ramifications.

TomPaine.com: The Bush Administration is ending a federal program to 
increase gas mileage to create so-called 80 mile-per-gallon cars, and 
instead says it will focus on hydrogen fuel cell technology. How much 
progress was being made toward the goal of more fuel-efficient 
vehicles?

Jack Doyle: When the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles, 
which is called PNGV, when that was created in 1993, [then 
Vice-President] Al Gore was the chief architect. He looked at it as a 
solution to getting the United States to [achieve] its global warming 
obligations, to cut back on CO2, in particular.

The auto industry had come to Clinton and Gore just after the 
election and said, 'We understand that you need some help on health 
care and trade issues. We're willing to help you on those fronts if 
you will back off on fuel economy.' It was never put in quite those 
terms, but they had gone to Arkansas, during the transition, after 
Clinton and Gore were elected, and a quid pro quo -- a deal was cut, 
basically -- that said, 'Okay. We create this venture to get to an 80 
mile-per-gallon car, fuel efficiency -- and you assure us that you 
won't enact fuel-economy standards through Congress,' known as 
Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, the acronym. This was, as I 
think Clinton put it at the time, 'a moonshot for fuel economy.'

TP.c: So how much progress was actually made in the intervening years?

Doyle: Well, to make a long story short, what happened here is 
basically, this PNGN became a hiding place for the Big Three 
[automakers] on fuel economy. They got to look around the federal 
labs. There's been nearly $2 billion of taxpayer money shoveled into 
this venture and not much to show for it. In fact, it's really served 
the automobile industry quite well. It really has kept them out of 
the business of increasing fuel economy.

Our national fleet today, all the vehicles out there, average about 
20 miles per gallon. That's a technological embarrassment. That's 
just a real failure on the part of both the government and the auto 
industry, because, when you think about it, go back to the first 
energy crisis in the mid-1970s. Then vehicles were around 13 
miles-per-gallon average. Look at the top-10 selling SUVs and trucks 
today, they are getting about 16 miles-per-gallon.

TP.c: With the $2 billion that was spent on this program, were there 
any tangible results?

Doyle: There were some technologies developed in the federal labs. 
And there is probably some advance on batteries for electric 
vehicles. But those advances probably would have occurred in the 
federal laboratories, without the Big Three being involved.

This joint venture slowed things down, I think. It took away the 
competitive edge. The irony of this PNGV venture, when it was first 
established in 1993, the Japanese saw it. They became very concerned 
about this, because they said, 'Wow, this looks like a major 
initiative to get to electric or advanced vehicles, so we better step 
up our effort.' And that's exactly what they did. Some of the 
companies, namely Toyota and Honda, really redoubled their effort and 
came up in five years -- Toyota did in five years -- what PNGV has 
yet to do. The hybrid vehicle from Toyota, the Prius, gets nearly 
50-60 mpg, the equivalent of that, with a half-electric, half 
gasoline engine. And consequently today, General Motors, Ford and 
Chrysler are about five years behind the Japanese on hybrid vehicle 
development.

TP.c: In Taken for a Ride, you've written extensively about the 
automakers' repeated attempts, literally over the decades since World 
War II, to delay implementing new technologies, whether for cleaner 
exhaust or alternative fuels. So when the Administration today says 
that there is going to be a shift in focus to hydrogen fuel cells, 
how do you contextualize that announcement? Is it a lofty new goal, 

[biofuel] U.S. science panel says Detroit can improve fuel use

[Keith Addison]

http://enn.com/news/wire-stories/2002/01/01172002/reu_46167.asp
- 1/17/2002 - ENN.com
U.S. science panel says Detroit can improve fuel use

Thursday, January 17, 2002

By Julie Vorman, Reuters

WASHINGTON - A National Academy of Sciences panel on Wednesday 
rebutted criticisms from automakers and reaffirmed a finding made in 
July that new technologies could be tapped to improve the fuel 
consumption of gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles and minivans over 
a 15-year period.

Stricter mileage standards have been endorsed by many Democrats and 
environmental groups as a key plank in a national energy policy that 
could save millions of barrels of petroleum.

Detroit automakers contend that improving the fuel consumption of 
sport utility vehicles means building lighter vehicles that are less 
safe for passengers. The Bush administration has had little to say 
about the government imposing stricter fuel standards but has 
endorsed an energy policy that promotes drilling for oil in places 
like the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

The independent science panel, which advises the U.S. government on 
complex issues, issued a new report Wednesday after automakers 
complained that its July report overestimated the industry's ability 
to improve fuel efficiency.

The July draft report concluded U.S. automakers could increase the 
fuel efficiency of sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks, minivans, 
and cars by 16 percent to 47 percent over the next 10 to 15 years. It 
stopped short of calling for specific government-mandated increases 
but said Detroit should use technology to raise fuel efficiency and 
cut emissions of greenhouse gases.

FINDINGS UNCHANGED

On Wednesday the National Academy of Sciences panel said its findings 
and recommendations presented in the July report were "essentially 
unchanged."

"The committee reaffirms its approach and general results: 
Significant gains in fuel economy are possible with the application 
of new technology at corresponding increases in vehicle price,'' it 
said.

However, the scientists said they did find some "minor computational 
or data entry errors" in the earlier report and that the data would 
be changed before a final report is published later this year.

The science panel's report examined a wide range of mechanical 
changes and new technology. For example, SUV fuel consumption could 
be improved by up to 4 percent if vehicle weight was cut 5 percent, a 
change that could add as much as $350 to the retail cost, the panel 
said.

An SUV could also cut fuel use by up to 7 percent with an integrated 
starter/generator costing about $350, and by up to 10 percent with an 
engine equipped with camless valve actuation that would boost the 
price by about $560, the report said.

AUTOMAKERS SAY TRADE-OFFS INVOLVED

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers said it was concerned that 
some of the estimated fuel gains do not reflect the uncertainty and 
complex business of making vehicles or the trade-offs involved in 
manufacturing. "What makes a sports car more efficient may not work 
on a minivan," said Gloria Berquist, spokeswoman for the group. 
''Even if the technology could have benefits, that doesn't mean a 
consumer will buy it and that it will get on the road.''

U.S. automakers say some 50 vehicles that get more than 35 miles per 
gallon are already on the market but they account for less than 1 
percent of all sales.

The science panel addressed the so-called Corporate Average Fuel 
Economy (CAFE) standards adopted by Congress in 1975 after the Arab 
oil embargo. They require passenger cars to get an average 27.5 miles 
per gallon and light trucks 20.7 mpg. When the CAFE standards were 
written, light trucks were allowed to get lower mileage because they 
were used mostly by farmers and small businesses. Today, sport 
utility vehicles and other light trucks account for half of U.S. 
vehicle sales.

Any government-mandated boost for sport utility vehicles and minivans 
won't occur before the 2005 model year. Last month, the head of the 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration told Congress that 
there was little time left for the government to order fuel changes 
to model year 2004 vehicles that are scheduled to become available in 
late 2003.

The 13-member National Academy of Sciences panel was led by Paul 
Portney of Resources for the Future. Other members included John 
Wise, a former Mobil Oil employee; Philip Sharp of Harvard 
University; David Green of Oak Ridge National Laboratory; and Adrian 
Lund of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

Copyright 2002, Reuters

 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Tiny Wireless Camera under $80!
Order Now! FREE VCR Commander!
Click Here - Only 1 Day Left!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT 

[biofuel] Who Owns The Sky?

[Keith Addison]

Who Owns The Sky?
We All Do -- And Polluters Should Pay Us For Dumping There
by Ann Hancock
The "Sky Trust" is a free-market approach to reducing air pollution
that has an interesting dividend: annual payments to all U.S. citizens.
Such 'sky rent' could put a $1,000 check in your pocket each year.


http://www.tompaine.com/feature.cfm?ID=4973
TOMPAINE.com -
Who Owns The Sky?
We All Do -- And Polluters Should Pay Us For Dumping There

Ann Hancock is a sustainability educator who lives in Sonoma County, 
north of San Francisco.

Steven Rosenfeld produced this piece.

The White House doesn't need Enron to show its true loyalties on 
energy. Whatever's best for energy companies' profits suits their 
definition of public policy. How else to explain the recent Bush 
proposal rolling back clean air standards by 30 years? Or its 
announcement that new or expanding power plants needn't install the 
latest anti-air pollution devices? It's payback time for Bush's 
energy friends and funders, plain and simple.

Such favoritism is bad from an environmental perspective. It's also 
bad economics. But it is possible to reduce air pollution using the 
marketplace. It is possible for private companies to follow their 
profit-making instincts and still make money while reducing global 
warming emissions. How is that, you might ask? It's all laid out in a 
brilliant book by Peter Barnes titled Who Owns The Sky, describing an 
idea called the Sky Trust.

Who owns the sky? The answer is obvious. It's everybody. In public 
policy terms, it's called "public trust," based on a legal doctrine 
that declares that the state holds certain resources in trust for its 
citizens -- like national parks. With this as a starting point, 
Barnes, the founder of Working Assets, suggests that we consider 
carbon emissions just like any other commodity. Polluters such as 
power plants would pay to discharge into the sky, similar to the 
effective system now used to limit U.S. sulfur emissions. Polluters 
could use alternative technologies and pay less, or not at all. And 
where would the money go that's been collected? Into an account 
that's returned to citizens, the Sky Trust.

This notion is not far-fetched. In Alaska, where oil companies have 
been drilling on state and federal lands -- public lands -- a similar 
dividend accrues to residents. Last year the Alaska Permanent Fund 
paid citizens about $2,000 each. What Alaskans do with oil, Americans 
can do with sky. Annual sky rent could equal about $386 billion, 
according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, enough for 
each American to receive a $1,000 check every year.

Congressional analysts like the Sky Trust idea, too. The 
Congressional Budget Office studied various approaches for reducing 
greenhouse gases, and concluded that the Sky Trust's cap-and-trade 
approach is the best. Every year Congress would establish a limit on 
the amount of allowable greenhouse gas, and the Sky Trust would 
auction off the rights to pollute. As the allowable emissions were 
gradually reduced, the price would go up, and so would each 
American's annual dividend.

And just in case anyone needs reminding, news about climate change is 
very troubling. Last decade was the warmest on record. Sea levels 
rose about 8 to 12 inches during the last century, recently forcing 
thousands of residents of Tuvalu, a tiny spot in the Pacific Ocean, 
to leave their island home. To avert the worst of global warming, 
predominant scientific opinion says that we must reduce greenhouse 
gas emissions worldwide by at least 60 percent. Compare this figure 
with the 5.2 percent cut called for in the Kyoto Treaty signed two 
months ago by 180 nations, every major nation except the United 
States. Clearly, a new approach is badly needed.

Barnes is setting up a turnkey Sky Trust complete with board of 
directors, ready for the public, Congress, and the President to 
implement. All Congress must do is pass a law creating the Sky Trust.

America would curb its fossil fuel appetite. Those who use the most 
would pay, and those who use the least would be rewarded. Our 
children's children would inherit a habitable Earth. The Sky Trust 
reflects American capitalism at its finest.

To learn more, and to get a free, non-transferable Certificate of 
Ownership representing your share of sky, visit www.skyowners.org.

Published: Jan 14 2002

 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Tiny Wireless Camera under $80!
Order Now! FREE VCR Commander!
Click Here - Only 1 Day Left!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

RE: [biofuel] wvo burner v2.0

[M Rolan]

try again, is a word file on english, sometimes geocities said that there
was a lot of trafic and disabbles the acces for a while, try again an tell
me, Àyou get any error?
http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/wvoburner.doc

-Mensaje original-
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Enviado el: jueves, 17 de enero de 2002 10:57
Para: biofuel@yahoogroups.com
Asunto: RE: [biofuel] wvo burner v2.0


could not find the translation when i clicked your site?
   regrds, roger
> i made the traslation, you can find it here:
> http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/wvoburner.doc
> 
> to see the biger photos you still need to go to the html spanish version:
> http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.htm
> 
> with my english i don't know if you will understand better the spanish
> version ;-)
> 
> cheers
> Manolo Rol‡n
> Valencia, Espa–a
> 
> 
> 
> -Mensaje original-
> De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Enviado el: miŽrcoles, 16 de enero de 2002 23:03
> Para: biofuel@yahoogroups.com
> Asunto: Re: [biofuel] wvo burner v2.0
> 
> 
> i would much appreciate a english version of this.
> i thank you in advance for taking the time to translate
> this.
>   best regards, roger kurz ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> > here is my second try of wvo burner, i have to change some thinks 
> > like the feed of wvo is a rubber pipe on a place where it gets too 
> > hot so this rubber melts, better versions will came.
> > 
> > I intend to use this to dry wvo to make biodiesel
> > 
> > i've made a document with photos, schema and explanations, at the 
> > moment only in spanish, if someone is interested i can traslate it.
> > 
> > large version, big photos (1Mb):
> > http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.htm
> > 
> > short version, smaller photos (128k)
> > http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.doc
> > 
> > please, comments are welcome, please please please.
> > 
> > cheers
> > 
> > Manolo Rol‡n
> > Valencia, Spain
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> > Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
> > To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > 
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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


Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

RE: [biofuel] copper vessels

[janandjoe]

Excellent! -thank you very much Adrian

Any further info would be much appreciated - I was beginning to doubt my
sanity (again). A Masters research project rests on this idea and the
company I work for would love to be able to give "added value" to the copper
cylinders we replace when installing solar hot water systems - how do you
heat yours (could do you a good deal on a solar thermal panel!!)

I realised it would be an ideal vessel physically - it was the chemical
reactivity of copper that seemed problematic

Where are you based?

Thanks again for the reassurance - much appreciated

Jan

-Original Message-
From: Adrian Walsh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 15 January 2002 22:05
To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [biofuel] copper vessels


I have been using a copper hot water cylinder to make
Bio. It stays very clean and there is no sign of
corrosion. It is held in a frame upside down with the
bottom (now the top) cut off. This works great as it
gives a conical bottom and fittings for valves and the
heater element are already there.

Adrian

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/


Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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



Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

RE: [biofuel] wvo burner v2.0

[M Rolan]

now is in other server, i hope now it works better.

english version:
http://www27.brinkster.com/manolorolan/wvoburner.doc
spanish version with big photos:
http://www27.brinkster.com/manolorolan/quemadorwvo.htm

tell me if you are having any problems

Manolo rolan
Valencia, Spain

-Mensaje original-
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Enviado el: jueves, 17 de enero de 2002 10:57
Para: biofuel@yahoogroups.com
Asunto: RE: [biofuel] wvo burner v2.0


could not find the translation when i clicked your site?
   regrds, roger
> i made the traslation, you can find it here:
> http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/wvoburner.doc
> 
> to see the biger photos you still need to go to the html spanish version:
> http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.htm
> 
> with my english i don't know if you will understand better the spanish
> version ;-)
> 
> cheers
> Manolo Rol‡n
> Valencia, Espa–a
> 
> 
> 
> -Mensaje original-
> De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Enviado el: miŽrcoles, 16 de enero de 2002 23:03
> Para: biofuel@yahoogroups.com
> Asunto: Re: [biofuel] wvo burner v2.0
> 
> 
> i would much appreciate a english version of this.
> i thank you in advance for taking the time to translate
> this.
>   best regards, roger kurz ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> > here is my second try of wvo burner, i have to change some thinks 
> > like the feed of wvo is a rubber pipe on a place where it gets too 
> > hot so this rubber melts, better versions will came.
> > 
> > I intend to use this to dry wvo to make biodiesel
> > 
> > i've made a document with photos, schema and explanations, at the 
> > moment only in spanish, if someone is interested i can traslate it.
> > 
> > large version, big photos (1Mb):
> > http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.htm
> > 
> > short version, smaller photos (128k)
> > http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.doc
> > 
> > please, comments are welcome, please please please.
> > 
> > cheers
> > 
> > Manolo Rol‡n
> > Valencia, Spain
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> > Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
> > To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > 
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Access Your PC from Anywhere
It's Easy. It's Fast. - Free Download
http://us.click.yahoo.com/yWCYWA/6XkDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

Re: [biofuel] Re: Cummins Diesel Engines

[JOSEPH . MARTELLE]

Please respond to biofuel@yahoogroups.com

To:   biofuel@yahoogroups.com
cc:(bcc: Joseph Martelle/US/GM/GMC)
Subject:  Re: [biofuel] Re: Cummins Diesel Engines




>I have 50 cummins engines for sale ,  low hours , 400 hp vt400 turbo  V8
>engines

Triple Nickles? How much?

Joe.









 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Tiny Wireless Camera under $80!
Order Now! FREE VCR Commander!
Click Here - Only 1 Day Left!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

RE: [biofuel] wvo burner v2.0

[M Rolan]

opening a valve on the air circuit that lets the air came out the circuit,
it reduces the air presure on the burner and reduce the flame, i want to try
too with a valve on the oil feed.
 
as soon i have any new result i will post it here
 
Manolo Rolan
Valencia, Spain

 -Mensaje original-
De: Keith Addison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Enviado el: jueves, 17 de enero de 2002 11:04
Para: biofuel@yahoogroups.com
Asunto: RE: [biofuel] wvo burner v2.0



>i made the traslation, you can find it here:
> http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/wvoburner.doc
 
>
>to see the biger photos you still need to go to the html spanish version:
> http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.htm
 
>
>with my english i don't know if you will understand better the spanish
>version ;-)
>
>cheers
>Manolo Rol‡n
>Valencia, Espa–a

Very nice Manolo. Nice and simple. Thanks for translating it. Would 
you be able to regulate the flame, and thus the temperature of the 
WVO being dried, by putting a rheostat on the blower? Or maybe just 
by putting a simple valve on the air-inlet pipe somewhere to reduce 
the air pressure?

Best

Keith Addison
Journey to Forever
Handmade Projects
Tokyo
http://journeytoforever.org/  



>-Mensaje original-
>De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Enviado el: miŽrcoles, 16 de enero de 2002 23:03
>Para: biofuel@yahoogroups.com
>Asunto: Re: [biofuel] wvo burner v2.0
>
>
>i would much appreciate a english version of this.
>i thank you in advance for taking the time to translate
>this.
>  best regards, roger kurz ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> > here is my second try of wvo burner, i have to change some thinks
> > like the feed of wvo is a rubber pipe on a place where it gets too
> > hot so this rubber melts, better versions will came.
> >
> > I intend to use this to dry wvo to make biodiesel
> >
> > i've made a document with photos, schema and explanations, at the
> > moment only in spanish, if someone is interested i can traslate it.
> >
> > large version, big photos (1Mb):
> > http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.htm
 
> >
> > short version, smaller photos (128k)
> > http://www.geocities.com/manolorolan/Quemadorwvo.doc
 
> >
> > please, comments are welcome, please please please.
> >
> > cheers
> >
> > Manolo Rol‡n
> > Valencia, Spain
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor   

ADVERTISEMENT
 
  
 
  

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
 
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
 . 




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


Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

RE: [biofuel] Who Owns The Sky?

[M Rolan]

the problem here that the sky puluted is not only owned by us citizens, and
the more afected by climate change are the citizens far awey the us, like
the ones afected by the mitch, or the starvation, on central america.
 
and still other problem, big american enterprises goes to contaminate
outside their bounderies where the polution and security laws are weak
 
Manolo Rolan
Valencia, Spain

 -Mensaje original-
De: Keith Addison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Enviado el: jueves, 17 de enero de 2002 11:23
Para: biofuel@yahoogroups.com
CC: biofuels-biz@yahoogroups.com
Asunto: [biofuel] Who Owns The Sky?



Who Owns The Sky?
We All Do -- And Polluters Should Pay Us For Dumping There
by Ann Hancock
The "Sky Trust" is a free-market approach to reducing air pollution
that has an interesting dividend: annual payments to all U.S. citizens.
Such 'sky rent' could put a $1,000 check in your pocket each year.


http://www.tompaine.com/feature.cfm?ID=4973
 
TOMPAINE.com -
Who Owns The Sky?
We All Do -- And Polluters Should Pay Us For Dumping There

Ann Hancock is a sustainability educator who lives in Sonoma County, 
north of San Francisco.

Steven Rosenfeld produced this piece.

The White House doesn't need Enron to show its true loyalties on 
energy. Whatever's best for energy companies' profits suits their 
definition of public policy. How else to explain the recent Bush 
proposal rolling back clean air standards by 30 years? Or its 
announcement that new or expanding power plants needn't install the 
latest anti-air pollution devices? It's payback time for Bush's 
energy friends and funders, plain and simple.

Such favoritism is bad from an environmental perspective. It's also 
bad economics. But it is possible to reduce air pollution using the 
marketplace. It is possible for private companies to follow their 
profit-making instincts and still make money while reducing global 
warming emissions. How is that, you might ask? It's all laid out in a 
brilliant book by Peter Barnes titled Who Owns The Sky, describing an 
idea called the Sky Trust.

Who owns the sky? The answer is obvious. It's everybody. In public 
policy terms, it's called "public trust," based on a legal doctrine 
that declares that the state holds certain resources in trust for its 
citizens -- like national parks. With this as a starting point, 
Barnes, the founder of Working Assets, suggests that we consider 
carbon emissions just like any other commodity. Polluters such as 
power plants would pay to discharge into the sky, similar to the 
effective system now used to limit U.S. sulfur emissions. Polluters 
could use alternative technologies and pay less, or not at all. And 
where would the money go that's been collected? Into an account 
that's returned to citizens, the Sky Trust.

This notion is not far-fetched. In Alaska, where oil companies have 
been drilling on state and federal lands -- public lands -- a similar 
dividend accrues to residents. Last year the Alaska Permanent Fund 
paid citizens about $2,000 each. What Alaskans do with oil, Americans 
can do with sky. Annual sky rent could equal about $386 billion, 
according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, enough for 
each American to receive a $1,000 check every year.

Congressional analysts like the Sky Trust idea, too. The 
Congressional Budget Office studied various approaches for reducing 
greenhouse gases, and concluded that the Sky Trust's cap-and-trade 
approach is the best. Every year Congress would establish a limit on 
the amount of allowable greenhouse gas, and the Sky Trust would 
auction off the rights to pollute. As the allowable emissions were 
gradually reduced, the price would go up, and so would each 
American's annual dividend.

And just in case anyone needs reminding, news about climate change is 
very troubling. Last decade was the warmest on record. Sea levels 
rose about 8 to 12 inches during the last century, recently forcing 
thousands of residents of Tuvalu, a tiny spot in the Pacific Ocean, 
to leave their island home. To avert the worst of global warming, 
predominant scientific opinion says that we must reduce greenhouse 
gas emissions worldwide by at least 60 percent. Compare this figure 
with the 5.2 percent cut called for in the Kyoto Treaty signed two 
months ago by 180 nations, every major nation except the United 
States. Clearly, a new approach is badly needed.

Barnes is setting up a turnkey Sky Trust complete with board of 
directors, ready for the public, Congress, and the President to 
implement. All Congress must do is pass a law creating the Sky Trust.

America would curb its fossil fuel appetite. Those who use the most 
would pay, and those who use the least would be rewarded. Our 
children's children would inherit a habitable Earth. The Sky Trust 
reflects American capitalism at its finest.

To learn more, and to get a free, non-transferable Certificate of 
Ownership representing 

Re: [biofuel] Re: Cummins Diesel Engines

[HDirkx]

$3000 for 903 v8  vt400 cummins

 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Tiny Wireless Camera under $80!
Order Now! FREE VCR Commander!
Click Here - Only 1 Day Left!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

Re: [biofuel] Scary but true, I know we all know what to do with this.

[HDirkx]

LOL  LOL pepsi

 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Tiny Wireless Camera under $80!
Order Now! FREE VCR Commander!
Click Here - Only 1 Day Left!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

Re: [biofuel] OH MY

[HDirkx]

Befor we start a panic , why dont we ck dose  that might be dlivered to 
comsumer , and amount needed for blood discrasia.

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

Re: [biofuel] Who Owns The Sky?

[Olga Lange]

I think there's an inherent problem with the whole idea of pollution
credits and the commodifcation of our entire environment. How have we
gotten  to the point where we don't think it's absurd to charge rent for
the sky? Also, as to who owns the sky, "we all do"--that all is not just
homo sapiens. $1,000 checks for clams and koalas too?

But if we're going to start charging rent, I've long felt that we should be
charging storage fees for the toxic wastes in our lungs.



Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

RE: [biofuel] Who Owns The Sky?

[AndrŽs Stepkowski]

Manolo is right in that the sky does not end at the Big River boundary. The
laws of nature (thermodynamics) tell us that mass flows always go in the
direction of the more to the less. Heat moves from the hotter to the colder,
water flows from the higher to the lower, and unfortunately, pollution also
follows the law, but never stops at that imaginary border, and rather
continues on to ravage my water, my beaches and my trees down here, or
anywhere else.
It is anybody«s wild guess when dollars will begin to obey the laws of
nature.
Andydownsouth

- Original Message -
From: M Rolan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 9:25 AM
Subject: RE: [biofuel] Who Owns The Sky?


> the problem here that the sky puluted is not only owned by us citizens,
and
> the more afected by climate change are the citizens far awey the us, like
> the ones afected by the mitch, or the starvation, on central america.
>
> and still other problem, big american enterprises goes to contaminate
> outside their bounderies where the polution and security laws are weak
>
> Manolo Rolan
> Valencia, Spain
>
>  -Mensaje original-
> De: Keith Addison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Enviado el: jueves, 17 de enero de 2002 11:23
> Para: biofuel@yahoogroups.com
> CC: biofuels-biz@yahoogroups.com
> Asunto: [biofuel] Who Owns The Sky?
>
>
>
> Who Owns The Sky?
> We All Do -- And Polluters Should Pay Us For Dumping There
> by Ann Hancock
> The "Sky Trust" is a free-market approach to reducing air pollution
> that has an interesting dividend: annual payments to all U.S. citizens.
> Such 'sky rent' could put a $1,000 check in your pocket each year.
>
>
> http://www.tompaine.com/feature.cfm?ID=4973
> 
> TOMPAINE.com -
> Who Owns The Sky?
> We All Do -- And Polluters Should Pay Us For Dumping There
>
> Ann Hancock is a sustainability educator who lives in Sonoma County,
> north of San Francisco.
>
> Steven Rosenfeld produced this piece.
>
> The White House doesn't need Enron to show its true loyalties on
> energy. Whatever's best for energy companies' profits suits their
> definition of public policy. How else to explain the recent Bush
> proposal rolling back clean air standards by 30 years? Or its
> announcement that new or expanding power plants needn't install the
> latest anti-air pollution devices? It's payback time for Bush's
> energy friends and funders, plain and simple.
>
> Such favoritism is bad from an environmental perspective. It's also
> bad economics. But it is possible to reduce air pollution using the
> marketplace. It is possible for private companies to follow their
> profit-making instincts and still make money while reducing global
> warming emissions. How is that, you might ask? It's all laid out in a
> brilliant book by Peter Barnes titled Who Owns The Sky, describing an
> idea called the Sky Trust.
>
> Who owns the sky? The answer is obvious. It's everybody. In public
> policy terms, it's called "public trust," based on a legal doctrine
> that declares that the state holds certain resources in trust for its
> citizens -- like national parks. With this as a starting point,
> Barnes, the founder of Working Assets, suggests that we consider
> carbon emissions just like any other commodity. Polluters such as
> power plants would pay to discharge into the sky, similar to the
> effective system now used to limit U.S. sulfur emissions. Polluters
> could use alternative technologies and pay less, or not at all. And
> where would the money go that's been collected? Into an account
> that's returned to citizens, the Sky Trust.
>
> This notion is not far-fetched. In Alaska, where oil companies have
> been drilling on state and federal lands -- public lands -- a similar
> dividend accrues to residents. Last year the Alaska Permanent Fund
> paid citizens about $2,000 each. What Alaskans do with oil, Americans
> can do with sky. Annual sky rent could equal about $386 billion,
> according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, enough for
> each American to receive a $1,000 check every year.
>
> Congressional analysts like the Sky Trust idea, too. The
> Congressional Budget Office studied various approaches for reducing
> greenhouse gases, and concluded that the Sky Trust's cap-and-trade
> approach is the best. Every year Congress would establish a limit on
> the amount of allowable greenhouse gas, and the Sky Trust would
> auction off the rights to pollute. As the allowable emissions were
> gradually reduced, the price would go up, and so would each
> American's annual dividend.
>
> And just in case anyone needs reminding, news about climate change is
> very troubling. Last decade was the warmest on record. Sea levels
> rose about 8 to 12 inches during the last century, recently forcing
> thousands of residents of Tuvalu, a tiny spot in the Pacific Ocean,
> to leave their island home. To avert the worst of global warming,
> predominant scientific opinion say

Re: [biofuel] BD slightly murky at low temps (35 F)

[rmcphe8888]

In a message dated 01/17/2002 2:04:27 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


> excuse my ignorance but what is Dipetane and where can 
> one get it?
>regards, roger
> 
Roger: It is available from Bob Pond at Combustion Technologies 
1-800-993-6370.  You add it at the ratio of 1:200 or 1/2 percent by volume. I 
have attached a couple of pages in a Rich Text Format (RTF) file that you 
might find interesting.  Very truly yours, Richard McPherson  


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


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Access Your PC from Anywhere
Check Email & Transfer files - Free Download
http://us.click.yahoo.com/_WCYWA/3XkDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

Re Dipetane - was Re: [biofuel] BD slightly murky at low temps (35 F)

[Keith Addison]

>In a message dated 01/17/2002 2:04:27 AM Pacific Standard Time,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>
> > excuse my ignorance but what is Dipetane and where can
> > one get it?
> >regards, roger
> >
>Roger: It is available from Bob Pond at Combustion Technologies
>1-800-993-6370.  You add it at the ratio of 1:200 or 1/2 percent by volume. I
>have attached a couple of pages in a Rich Text Format (RTF) file that you
>might find interesting.  Very truly yours, Richard McPherson

Sorry Richard, no attachments allowed on this list. Suggest send the 
info by email, if it can do without graphics (no html either).

Keith Addison
Journey to Forever
Handmade Projects
Tokyo
http://journeytoforever.org/


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Tiny Wireless Camera under $80!
Order Now! FREE VCR Commander!
Click Here - Only 1 Day Left!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

RE: [biofuel] Who Owns The Sky?/off topic but worth it?

[Dana Linscott]

Andres,
>It is anybody´s wild guess when dollars will begin
> to obey the laws of
> nature.
> Andydownsouth

Sadly the very concept of currency allows the
accumulation of "unatural" amounts of wealth. Without
"chits" one would be unable to squirrel away more
wealth than one had a "natural" ability to spend 
relativly soon after it was created/gathered. It is
also the concept of currency that allow some of the
most "physically" unproductive human beings to
accummulate wealth most easily. I speak from
experience as I have been both.

I have also seen that we all have power that CAN be
used to facilitate incredable changes...but most
prefer to believe thay do not and so by proxy hand
that power over to those that most often, at least in
my opinion, deserve it the least. 

Dana

--- Andrés_Stepkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Manolo is right in that the sky does not end at the
> Big River boundary. The
> laws of nature (thermodynamics) tell us that mass
> flows always go in the
> direction of the more to the less. Heat moves from
> the hotter to the colder,
> water flows from the higher to the lower, and
> unfortunately, pollution also
> follows the law, but never stops at that imaginary
> border, and rather
> continues on to ravage my water, my beaches and my
> trees down here, or
> anywhere else.
> It is anybody´s wild guess when dollars will begin
> to obey the laws of
> nature.
> Andydownsouth


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/

 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Access Your PC from Anywhere
It's Easy. It's Fun. - Free Download.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/zWCYWA/7XkDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

[biofuel] Fuel Cell Efficiency

[MH]

After doing the math I see a conflict addressed below \/

(was)   Subject: Re: [biofuel] Steam powered bike

The web page, 
entitled:"Efficiency of Fuel Cells" 
  subtitle: "Fuel-Cell-Powered Electric Car" 

when doing the calculations; 
   80 percent - efficiency of the electric motor/inverter 
x 30 to 40 percent - efficiency converting methanol to electricity 
x 80 percent - efficiency converting electricity to mechanical power

about 19-26% overall efficiency for Fuel-Cell-Powered Electric Car.  

> How stuff works explains efficiency; 
> 24-32% Fuel-Cell-Powered Electric Car 
>   20% Gasoline-Powered Car 
>   26% Battery-Powered Electric Car (combustion process - power plant) 
>   65% Battery-Powered Electric Car (HydroElectric plant) 
> "Efficiency of Fuel Cells" 
> http://www.howstuffworks.com/fuel-cell4.htm
> or page thru from the beginning http://www.howstuffworks.com/fuel-cell.htm 


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Tiny Wireless Camera under $80!
Order Now! FREE VCR Commander!
Click Here - Only 1 Day Left!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

[biofuel] Re: Cummins Diesel Engines

[motie_d]

--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Martin Klingensmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I too spent at least an hour reading that.
> Very interesting, also interesting that they can engineer a 290 HP 
engine to
> put out 700 HP max, without losing any mileage, though when you're 
pulling 40
> tons I guess more HP could help you out a lot.

When I was still actively driving, I went from a 400 to 600 HP, and 
gained fuel economy. With 400, I could get 5 MPG if I really tried to 
economize. With 600, I could drive like an idiot, and never get less 
than 6 MPG. Normal driving was about 6.5 MPG.
At 800 miles/day, the fuel savings add up quickly, but more important 
to me, was the extra 2 hours of sleep I could get. No more stuck in 
traffic at 40 MPH, because I didn't have enough power to pass a 
slower vehicle.

Motie



 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Access Your PC from Anywhere
Check Email & Transfer files - Free Download
http://us.click.yahoo.com/_WCYWA/3XkDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

RE: [biofuel] Who Owns The Sky?/off topic but worth it?

[Keith Addison]

> >It is anybody´s wild guess when dollars will begin
> > to obey the laws of
> > nature.
> > Andydownsouth

They do, once you ignore the spin that says otherwise. The winds of 
"free trade" quite naturally favour the ships with the biggest sails. 
"Free" market forces naturally drive goods towards those with excess 
liquidity away from those without. It's just that we're supposed to 
believe the opposite is true. Adam Smith said two merchants cannot 
sit down for a cup of coffee together without plotting against the 
public good, and I guess that's natural too. Which doesn't make it 
right.

But of course you're right - so is Manolo. Chinese atmospheric 
N-tests in the late 70s were said to have killed babies in New York.

http://www.nandotimes.com/healthscience/story/195828p-1880494c.html
Nevada air pollution found to originate in Mongolian desert  -- 
Christian Science Monitor Service , December 16, 2001

http://ens.lycos.com/ens/may2001/2001L-05-31-07.html
Ill Winds Carry Toxic Dust -- May 31, 2001 - Storms in places as 
distant as China and Africa have generated public attention with dust 
clouds that travel across oceans to North America, bringing with them 
living bacteria, fungi, heavy metals and other pollutants.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com:80/html/nationworld/134286076_haze18.html
Parts of U.S. seeing Asian dust storm; unusual haze expected to 
dissipate soon  -- The Associated Press, April 18, 2001, DENVER - A 
dust storm that started in Mongolia and picked up industrial 
pollution from China has spread a haze across a quarter of the 
mainland United States, experts said yesterday.

Etc etc.

Manolo wrote:

>the problem here that the sky puluted is not only owned by us citizens, and
>the more afected by climate change are the citizens far awey the us, like
>the ones afected by the mitch, or the starvation, on central america.

Sadly, it's often the most vulnerable and innocent who seem to bear 
the brunt of it.

>and still other problem, big american enterprises goes to contaminate
>outside their bounderies where the polution and security laws are weak

Yes, and big European and Japanese and Southeast Asian and other 
corporations also do that. Japanese companies deforest Southeast 
Asia, Southeast Asian companies deforest Africa and Latin America.

>Sadly the very concept of currency allows the
>accumulation of "unatural" amounts of wealth. Without
>"chits" one would be unable to squirrel away more
>wealth than one had a "natural" ability to spend
>relativly soon after it was created/gathered. It is
>also the concept of currency that allow some of the
>most "physically" unproductive human beings to
>accummulate wealth most easily. I speak from
>experience as I have been both.
>
>I have also seen that we all have power that CAN be
>used to facilitate incredable changes...but most
>prefer to believe thay do not and so by proxy hand
>that power over to those that most often, at least in
>my opinion, deserve it the least.
>
>Dana

Quite right - but "deserve" power, as if it's a reward, or a valuable 
commodity? Well yes, sure it is, but isn't that what's wrong? David 
Brin fantasized Ben Franklin saying this (in 'The Postman'): "It's 
said that 'power corrupts', but actually it's more true that power 
attracts the corruptible. The sane are usually attracted by other 
things than power. When they do act, they think of it as service, 
which has limits. The tyrant, though, seeks mastery, for which he is 
insatiable, implacable." Huxley said only angels could cope with 
power responsibly, but they invariably refused to accept it. Or 
something like that.

Which partly explains why people cede power to others, competent or 
not - it's because they're sane. Also because that's the purpose of 
the spin industry ("manufacturing consent" etc), and partly because 
they're reluctant to accept the extra responsibility.

It's not just political power, it holds true much closer to home. A 
very common reaction to biodiesel is sheer disbelief that any 
ordinary Joe can make his own fuel without being a Seven Sister - can 
generate his own power without being a massive utility or a coal 
mine, and so on and on.

But wouldn't you agree that there's always a significant minority 
that doesn't think nor act that way, which is capable of effecting 
the groundswell of change and (real) progress that's always required 
in a society?

Olga Lange wrote:

>I think there's an inherent problem with the whole idea of pollution
>credits and the commodifcation of our entire environment. How have we
>gotten  to the point where we don't think it's absurd to charge rent for
>the sky? Also, as to who owns the sky, "we all do"--that all is not just
>homo sapiens. $1,000 checks for clams and koalas too?
>
>But if we're going to start charging rent, I've long felt that we should be
>charging storage fees for the toxic wastes in our lungs.

Hear hear! (Not just in our lungs.) Frankly I think the whole idea of 
the "Sky Trust" is

[biofuel] hydrogen powered cars - am I missing something?

[jmwelter]

I always like to post those tough chemistry questions since I am a 
chemistry major in college right now, and the current one is one I 
believe I asked a while back, but got no response.

In a car powered by a fuel cell where hydrogen is essentially the 
main fuel source, or solely the fuel source, what is used to burn 
it?  It may sound like a dumb question, but the atmosphere is 80% 
nitrogen.  If air was used to burn hydrogen, then some of that 
hydrogen would result in ammonia being produced.  Along with the 
desirable water.  Of course, if the oxygen used to burn were 
generated through hydrolysis there wouldn't be a problem there, or if 
the hydrogen was used in such a way that it never really escaped the 
engine and went back into storage as fuel (hydrolyze in some way to 
return it to free hydrogen gas).

It seems to me that you would have to haul oxygen tanks with you, and 
the emissions from such a vehicle, if not burning hydrogen with pure 
oxygen, would have to be treated with a catalytic converter, so in 
the end, you've come full circle.  I am not sure if ammonia and 
oxygen would revert to water and nitrogen gas if sent through a 
catalytic converter.

Any ideas?  Or am I totally off on my reasoning here?

JEFF


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Access Your PC from Anywhere
Full setup in 2 minutes! - Free Download
http://us.click.yahoo.com/.WCYWA/2XkDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

RE: [biofuel] Who Owns The Sky?/off topic but worth it?

[r . p . kurz]

GOD owns the sky and i'm afraid that he's not too happy
with our stewardship of it.
 kind regards roger kurz
> Andres,
> >It is anybody«s wild guess when dollars will begin
> > to obey the laws of
> > nature.
> > Andydownsouth
> 
> Sadly the very concept of currency allows the
> accumulation of "unatural" amounts of wealth. Without
> "chits" one would be unable to squirrel away more
> wealth than one had a "natural" ability to spend 
> relativly soon after it was created/gathered. It is
> also the concept of currency that allow some of the
> most "physically" unproductive human beings to
> accummulate wealth most easily. I speak from
> experience as I have been both.
> 
> I have also seen that we all have power that CAN be
> used to facilitate incredable changes...but most
> prefer to believe thay do not and so by proxy hand
> that power over to those that most often, at least in
> my opinion, deserve it the least. 
> 
> Dana
> 
> --- AndrŽs_Stepkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Manolo is right in that the sky does not end at the
> > Big River boundary. The
> > laws of nature (thermodynamics) tell us that mass
> > flows always go in the
> > direction of the more to the less. Heat moves from
> > the hotter to the colder,
> > water flows from the higher to the lower, and
> > unfortunately, pollution also
> > follows the law, but never stops at that imaginary
> > border, and rather
> > continues on to ravage my water, my beaches and my
> > trees down here, or
> > anywhere else.
> > It is anybody«s wild guess when dollars will begin
> > to obey the laws of
> > nature.
> > Andydownsouth
> 
> 
> __
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
> http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
> 
> 
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
> Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 

 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Access Your PC from Anywhere
Check Email & Transfer files - Free Download
http://us.click.yahoo.com/_WCYWA/3XkDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

Re: [biofuel] hydrogen powered cars - am I missing something?

[Brian Dickinson]

You might get some answers here. Found it a while ago while looking for other 
ways to power engines. First topic is the previously mentioned skateboard car 
with pictures. 


-Original Message-
From: "jmwelter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 21:57:43 -
To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [biofuel] hydrogen powered cars - am I missing something?


> I always like to post those tough chemistry questions since I am a 
> chemistry major in college right now, and the current one is one I 
> believe I asked a while back, but got no response.
> 
> In a car powered by a fuel cell where hydrogen is essentially the 
> main fuel source, or solely the fuel source, what is used to burn 
> it?  It may sound like a dumb question, but the atmosphere is 80% 
> nitrogen.  If air was used to burn hydrogen, then some of that 
> hydrogen would result in ammonia being produced.  Along with the 
> desirable water.  Of course, if the oxygen used to burn were 
> generated through hydrolysis there wouldn't be a problem there, or if 
> the hydrogen was used in such a way that it never really escaped the 
> engine and went back into storage as fuel (hydrolyze in some way to 
> return it to free hydrogen gas).
> 
> It seems to me that you would have to haul oxygen tanks with you, and 
> the emissions from such a vehicle, if not burning hydrogen with pure 
> oxygen, would have to be treated with a catalytic converter, so in 
> the end, you've come full circle.  I am not sure if ammonia and 
> oxygen would revert to water and nitrogen gas if sent through a 
> catalytic converter.
> 
> Any ideas?  Or am I totally off on my reasoning here?
> 
> JEFF
> 
> 

-- 

___
Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup


1 cent a minute calls anywhere in the U.S.!

http://www.getpennytalk.com/cgi-bin/adforward.cgi?p_key=RG9853KJ&url=http://www.getpennytalk.com



 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Access Your PC from Anywhere
Check Email & Transfer files - Free Download
http://us.click.yahoo.com/_WCYWA/3XkDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

Re: [biofuel] hydrogen powered cars - am I missing something?

[jetoth123]

You ask the question of a fuel cell "burning" hydrogen. Your error is in the 
question. A fuel cell combines hydrogen and oxygen in a chemical reaction not 
in combustion to produce electricity, heat, and water.


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


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Tiny Wireless Camera under $80!
Order Now! FREE VCR Commander!
Click Here - Only 1 Day Left!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

Re: [biofuel] hydrogen powered cars - link to url

[Brian Dickinson]

Sorry missed the link

http://www.hfcletter.com/

-Original Message-
From: "Brian Dickinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 08:18:46 +0800
To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [biofuel] hydrogen powered cars - am I missing something?


> You might get some answers here. Found it a while ago while looking for other 
> ways to power engines. First topic is the previously mentioned skateboard car 
> with pictures. 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: "jmwelter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 21:57:43 -
> To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [biofuel] hydrogen powered cars - am I missing something?
> 
> 
> > I always like to post those tough chemistry questions since I am a 
> > chemistry major in college right now, and the current one is one I 
> > believe I asked a while back, but got no response.
> > 
> > In a car powered by a fuel cell where hydrogen is essentially the 
> > main fuel source, or solely the fuel source, what is used to burn 
> > it?  It may sound like a dumb question, but the atmosphere is 80% 
> > nitrogen.  If air was used to burn hydrogen, then some of that 
> > hydrogen would result in ammonia being produced.  Along with the 
> > desirable water.  Of course, if the oxygen used to burn were 
> > generated through hydrolysis there wouldn't be a problem there, or if 
> > the hydrogen was used in such a way that it never really escaped the 
> > engine and went back into storage as fuel (hydrolyze in some way to 
> > return it to free hydrogen gas).
> > 
> > It seems to me that you would have to haul oxygen tanks with you, and 
> > the emissions from such a vehicle, if not burning hydrogen with pure 
> > oxygen, would have to be treated with a catalytic converter, so in 
> > the end, you've come full circle.  I am not sure if ammonia and 
> > oxygen would revert to water and nitrogen gas if sent through a 
> > catalytic converter.
> > 
> > Any ideas?  Or am I totally off on my reasoning here?
> > 
> > JEFF
> > 
> > 
> 
> -- 
> 
> ___
> Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
> http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
> 
> 
> 1 cent a minute calls anywhere in the U.S.!
> 
> http://www.getpennytalk.com/cgi-bin/adforward.cgi?p_key=RG9853KJ&url=http://www.getpennytalk.com
> 
> 
> 

-- 

___
Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup


1 cent a minute calls anywhere in the U.S.!

http://www.getpennytalk.com/cgi-bin/adforward.cgi?p_key=RG9853KJ&url=http://www.getpennytalk.com



 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Access Your PC from Anywhere
Check Email & Transfer files - Free Download
http://us.click.yahoo.com/_WCYWA/3XkDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

Re: Re Dipetane - was Re: [biofuel] BD slightly murky at low temps (35 F)

[rmcphe8888]

In a message dated 01/17/2002 10:44:40 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


> Sorry Richard, no attachments allowed on this list. Suggest send the 
> info by email, if it can do without graphics (no html either).
>   Keith just trying to be helpful. I have been in the energy conversions 
> business since 1962.  Are you in Tokyo?  I have spent a significant amount 
> of time in Tokyo.  Richard 

Keith Addison
> Journey to Forever
> Handmade Projects
> Tokyo
> http://journeytoforever.org/
> 
> 
> 




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


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Tiny Wireless Camera under $80!
Order Now! FREE VCR Commander!
Click Here - Only 1 Day Left!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

[biofuel] Mercedes/overnight/SVO/VEG-Therm

[Neoteric Biofuels Inc.]

Hello All:

Tested my Mercedes 300TDT left on SVO overnight (on purpose...really!).

The VEG-Therm starts  amperage draw starts off slowly and takes about the
same time to come up to full power heating as it takes for the glow plugs to
shut off.

So, they were both on at the same time...no problem, that works fine, since
as I say the amperage draw increases slowly at start, and then dcreases
again once full temp. of 70¼C is reached - so if there is no fuel flow, the
amperage will drop off again quite quickly...until the glowplugs are off,
the car is started, and the alternator is spinning. Nice.

The car started instantly on one glow, and ran smoother than previous days'
cold starts on diesel!

I really was surprised by this. I expected more misfiring and smoke than on
diesel. Nope, I got the opposite. Quieter running, very little smoke.
Excellent result, better than expected.


The ambient temp. at time of start was -3¼C (a little colder overnight). The
oil was new Canola oil. The temp of oil in the tank after driving less than
25 minutes was 25¼C (from -3¼C to + 25¼C)
Not sure how fast that temp. came up to that level, the temp. was taken at
end of the drive.

This heating was accomplished into about 15 litres of SVO using only return
fuel - no loop in the tank. No hose in hose. No coolant operated heater. No
block heater. Just return to the SVO tank, and use of the VEG-Therm.

Regards,

Edward Beggs
www.biofuels.ca


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Access Your PC from Anywhere
Flexibility and Freedom - Free Download
http://us.click.yahoo.com/9WCYWA/5XkDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

Re: Re Dipetane - was Re: [biofuel] BD slightly murky at low temps (35 F)

[Keith Addison]

Hello Richard

>In a message dated 01/17/2002 10:44:40 AM Pacific Standard Time,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>
> > Sorry Richard, no attachments allowed on this list. Suggest send the
> > info by email, if it can do without graphics (no html either).
> >   Keith just trying to be helpful.

It's appreciated - the restrictions are to stop viruses. Any way you 
can get the info into an email? If not, please send me the attachment 
direct and I'll see what's to be done.

>I have been in the energy conversions
> > business since 1962.  Are you in Tokyo?  I have spent a significant amount
> > of time in Tokyo.

Yes, we're Tokyoites for the time being - not for much longer though, 
we're about to move to Osaka. Tokyo's great, eh? Do you still come to 
Japan?

Best

Keith

>Richard


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Access Your PC from Anywhere
It's Easy. It's Fast. - Free Download
http://us.click.yahoo.com/yWCYWA/6XkDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

Re: [biofuel] hydrogen powered cars - am I missing something?

[Patrick McBrady]

JM,

I believe that when hydrogen is used in a fuel cell it is not burned but 
recombined with oxygen and the recombining of the two produces electricity that 
will run the electric motor like in the fuel cells used in space.

Patrick M
  - Original Message - 
  From: jmwelter 
  To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 1:57 PM
  Subject: [biofuel] hydrogen powered cars - am I missing something?


  I always like to post those tough chemistry questions since I am a 
  chemistry major in college right now, and the current one is one I 
  believe I asked a while back, but got no response.

  In a car powered by a fuel cell where hydrogen is essentially the 
  main fuel source, or solely the fuel source, what is used to burn 
  it?  It may sound like a dumb question, but the atmosphere is 80% 
  nitrogen.  If air was used to burn hydrogen, then some of that 
  hydrogen would result in ammonia being produced.  Along with the 
  desirable water.  Of course, if the oxygen used to burn were 
  generated through hydrolysis there wouldn't be a problem there, or if 
  the hydrogen was used in such a way that it never really escaped the 
  engine and went back into storage as fuel (hydrolyze in some way to 
  return it to free hydrogen gas).

  It seems to me that you would have to haul oxygen tanks with you, and 
  the emissions from such a vehicle, if not burning hydrogen with pure 
  oxygen, would have to be treated with a catalytic converter, so in 
  the end, you've come full circle.  I am not sure if ammonia and 
  oxygen would revert to water and nitrogen gas if sent through a 
  catalytic converter.

  Any ideas?  Or am I totally off on my reasoning here?

  JEFF


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
  ADVERTISEMENT
 
   
   

  Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
  http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
  Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
  To unsubscribe, send an email to:
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



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


Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

Re: [biofuel] Mercedes/overnight/SVO/VEG-Therm

[HDirkx]

where does one buy a vegtherm ?

 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Tiny Wireless Camera under $80!
Order Now! FREE VCR Commander!
Click Here - Only 1 Day Left!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

Re: [biofuel] hydrogen powered cars - am I missing something?

[robert luis rabello]

jmwelter wrote:

> In a car powered by a fuel cell where hydrogen is essentially the
> main fuel source, or solely the fuel source, what is used to burn
> it?

Oxygen in the air.

>  It may sound like a dumb question, but the atmosphere is 80%
> nitrogen.  If air was used to burn hydrogen, then some of that
> hydrogen would result in ammonia being produced.

No.  Nitrogen is inert, except at very high temperatures, or in the
presence of a catalyst.  The reaction will go the easier way, and there's
sufficient oxygen in air to burn all the available H2 in a combustion engine,
plus produce NOx long before any ammonia is formed.

> It seems to me that you would have to haul oxygen tanks with you, and
> the emissions from such a vehicle, if not burning hydrogen with pure
> oxygen, would have to be treated with a catalytic converter, so in
> the end, you've come full circle.  I am not sure if ammonia and
> oxygen would revert to water and nitrogen gas if sent through a
> catalytic converter.

Internal combustion engines can be modified to burn hydrogen at lower
pollution levels (measured at the tailpipe) than hydrocarbon fueled engines.
The better questions are : "Where do I get the requisite hydrogen?", and "How
can I store it in a safe manner that is dense enough for transportation
requirements."

Certain bacteria produce H2 from sugar in an anaerobic environment.  This
can address the production issue if done on a sufficiently large scale, but
the vexing storage issues remain.  It's better to produce ethanol from the
sugar because it's dense, easily stored and burns nicely in a suitably
modified engine.

> Any ideas?  Or am I totally off on my reasoning here?
>
> JEFF
>

I've been waiting for a "hydrogen economy" for nearly forty years now.
The fact that it hasn't happened yet should tell us all that this is an
unreasonable idea.

robert luis rabello


Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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