[biofuels-biz] Sound familiar? - Global Smokescreen
Seems to have been rather effective. http://www.fair.org/extra/9808/global-smokescreen.html August 1998 Global Smokescreen As evidence continues to emerge that global warming is already occurring (Nature, 4/23/98), the oil industry is gearing up to try to convince the public that science is still uncertain. Representatives from the American Petroleum Institute, Exxon, Chevron and from corporate-backed think tanks got together to produce a Global Climate Science Communications Action Plan, a copy of which was obtained by the New York Times (4/28/98). Part of the plan includes the creation of a $5 million think tank set up specifically to spread the word that we just don't know whether global warming is happening or not, or what could possibly be done to stop it. Another aspect of the plan calls for spending $600,000 to try to sway the media to the industry point of view that scientific uncertainties about global warming make it reckless to try to curtail the burning of fossil fuels. Here's one point from the plan: Produce, distribute via syndicate and directly to newspapers nationwide a steady stream of op-ed columns and letters to the editor authored by scientists--scientists, that is, who take the industry line on global warming. Don't look for any of these op-eds or letters to the editor to mention that they were arranged by the oil industry. Likewise, when the plan manages to place the industry's hand-picked scientists on talk radio, or gets them quoted in newspapers, don't expect to see these sources identified as agents of big oil. The plan is carefully designed to hide the fact that the main motive is not the search for truth about climate changes, but protection of the oil business's profits. Regular readers of Extra! may be interested to note that only one journalist is mentioned by name as being particularly likely to do a story with the oil industry's point of view: That's ABC's John Stossel. Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuels-biz] The Railroading of Amtrak
http://fair.org/extra/0207/amtrak.html July/August 2002 The Railroading of Amtrak Trains, planes and automobiles held to different standards By Christopher Ott Coverage of Amtrak contains two surprises: the details reported about the 31-year-old railroad, and the details that aren't reported about its competition. Despite the introduction of successful high-speed trains in the Northeast, as well as increased ridership both before and after September 11's airborne attacks, coverage of Amtrak is surprisingly negative. You don't read much in the way of good news, says Ross Capon, executive director of the National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP). Instead, typical reporting singles out Amtrak for criticism and glosses over the advantages enjoyed by rail's competitors. Most coverage focuses on the rail network's financial situation. Amtrak is in disarray, reported USA Today (5/2/02). The nation's passenger railroad faces a projected $1.1 billion deficit this fiscal year--its biggest ever. The Associated Press (4/12/02) reported that Amtrak is a chronic money-loser for the government. The Arizona Daily Star (4/18/02) editorialized that Congress should relegate Amtrak to the dustbin of failed efforts to overturn the law of supply and demand. The implication that Amtrak is exceptional in the transportation industry in its reliance on government subsidies, however, is troublesome--and ironic, given the recent well-publicized bailout for U.S. airlines. On top of $13 billion in federal aviation spending for fiscal year 2002, Congress approved a $15 billion package of airline aid within two weeks of September 11. Intercity passenger rail, by comparison, received half a billion in federal funds for the current fiscal year, and Amtrak is asking for $1.2 billion in the next to avoid service cuts. Subsidies for automotive transport also dwarf support for federally subsidized Amtrak (Reuters, 4/10/02). The Worldwatch Institute, in a paper on The Global Rail Revival (4/94), pointed out: Although government support of rail is necessary--since passenger fares seldom cover the full cost of train service--this subsidy pales in comparison to the hidden costs of road travel. For example, in the United States, few people realize that direct taxes on automobiles and gasoline barely cover two thirds of the cost of road building, maintenance, administration and safety. Additional social costs of car and air travel--including accidents, lost time, and loss of quality of life--are obvious to planners and economists, and are increasingly counted as a real drag on the economy. The social costs of car travel in 11 countries studied is nearly twice that of air travel and seven times that of trains. Stephen Goddard, in his 1994 book Getting There: The Epic Struggle Between Road and Rail in the American Century, found that hidden subsidies for drivers amount to well over $2 for every gallon of gasoline sold. A double standard The NARP's Capon says a tremendous double standard is at work. Government support for Amtrak is deemed a subsidy, while spending on aviation and highways is thought of as investment and decoupled from a need to break even. They never talk about the money-losing highway system, says Capon. One reason is that it's easy to see the costs of rail on a single balance sheet, Capon says. Subsidies for highway travel in particular come from a wider array of local, state and government agencies. The aviation and highway industries are also powerful lobbies. As the New York Times reported (10/10/01), lobbyists for the airline industry were instrumental in winning quick passage of last year's airline aid package. Another missing element in Amtrak coverage is international context. Successful railroads in other countries get much greater levels of government support. Canada has passenger-rail service that is flush with a new infusion of federal government funding, new locomotives and rolling stock, improved railbed infrastructure and burgeoning ridership (Windsor Star, 4/15/02). According to figures from the European Conference of Ministers of Transport, Germany spends 22 percent of its total transportation capital spending on rail, while France spends 21 percent. The United States spends 0.4 percent. The real issue in most coverage of Amtrak is not whether the railroad pays its own way. Instead, it's whether rail receives a share of government support that is appropriate to its advantages over other forms of transportation and the options that rail provides. The most important things that journalists covering Amtrak can do, according to Capon, is not be seduced by talk about how we can have the trains without paying for them. Christopher Ott's work on rail issues has appeared in publications including Salon.com, E: The Environmental Magazine and the Baltimore Sun. Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
[biofuels-biz] U.S. Energy Policy 11 years ago
http://www.fair.org/extra/best-of-extra/press-energy.html May/June 1991 Press Ignores the Obvious in U.S. Energy Policy By Daniel Lazare Following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the Wall Street Journal (9/10/90) reported on why Japan has been so much more successful in conserving oil than the U.S. The report focused on the role of Japan's government in coordinating energy programs and compelling corporations to install energy-saving machinery. Yet it managed to overlook what Ronald Morse, an energy specialist quoted in the article, subsequently described to EXTRA! as the most important reason of all: a tax policy that keeps Japanese energy prices high and demand low. The omission was indicative of the daily press' persistent myopia concerning energy issues. While showing passing interest in auto fuel-efficiency standards, alternative fuels, and other oil conservation programs, the mainstream press has exhibited near-zero interest in what distinguishes U.S. energy consumption from that of virtually all other industrial economies: the comprehensive system of tax breaks and subsidies in the U.S. that supports domestic oil production and encourages energy consumption No nation provides motorists with a more elaborate highway system than the U.S., supplies more government-mandated low-cost parking, or is more tolerant of auto-related environmental damage. No country has committed itself to tens of billion of dollars in annual military expenditures to ensure an uninterrupted flow of oil from the Mideast. Yet no country demands so little from motorists by way of taxes. Average state and federal gas taxes in the U.S. stand at a little over 30 cents a gallon, with prices at the pump slightly more than a buck. In Japan, by contrast, gas taxes total $1.60 a gallon, boosting prices overall to about $3.40. In France motorists have paid upwards of $5 a gallon, while Helmut Kohl recently proposed boosting gas prices by 67 cents to more than $4 a gallon to help cover the growing cost of German unification. The debate over fuel efficiency regulations notwithstanding, the relatively free ride provided to U.S. motorists is the chief reason that Americans consume roughly three times as much gas per capita as (West) Germans, four times as much as the French, and five times as much as the Japanese. It's also why Americans have the least adequate mass transit. This is fairly obvious, yet it somehow manages to escape the mainstream press. In a page-one report on American energy consumption on Jan. 30, the Wall Street Journal zeroed in on big cars, high speeds, and other individualistic concerns, while side-stepping the politically charged issue of taxation. New York Times energy reporter Matthew L. Wald observed (2/9/91) that because the Bush administration's long-awaited National Energy Strategy short-changed conservation, it is aimed mainly at supplying the American appetite, rather than curbing it -- as if the nation's energy appetite has not been developed and nurtured over the years by a non-stop stream of federal investments. The difference is more than semantic; it obscures the fact that what America suffers from is not so much a lack of conservation as a broad array of government programs aimed at fostering hyper-consumption. The same day that Matthew Wald was holding forth on the national appetite, Washington Post energy reporter Thomas W. Lippman wrote that Bush administration officials had nixed various conservation measures because they deviate[d] from the administration's free-market, anti-tax philosophy--begging the question how a system dependent on vast, unreimbursed government outlays for highways and other services could possibly be described as free market. The Washington Post was guilty of a particularly telling juxtaposition on Feb. 21. On page A5, it ran an update on the Bush energy plan, followed by an article on page A6 about the administration's new $105.4-billion highway construction program--with no hint in either story that there might be a connection between the two. There are a number of reasons for such institutional short-sightedness. Given that taxes remain a dirty word inside Washington, reporters tend to view Japanese or West European-style gas taxes as simply beyond the pale and therefore not even worth considering. In addition, the reigning political conformism and cultural insularity in most newsrooms promotes the assumption that anything America does is natural, right, and proper, no matter how out of step with the rest of the world, and taht any problems that might arise are merely incidental. Cheap gas, cars, and highways are--unquestionably--the American way. Thus, a front-page Los Angeles Times (2/13/91) on chaotic suburban sprawl was fairly frank concerning such problems as traffic congestion, three-hour commutes, etc. Yet it was remarkably cursory as to the reasons why. The paper cited white flight, fear
[biofuels-biz] Re: Sound familiar? - Global Smokescreen
Hi, I hope as the economies of different countries become interdependent, people will start questioning where the products come from. Today people oppose any goods that abuse human rights, may be in future people will oppose economies that are causing global warming ? Sooner the better.. Best Regards, Suresh. --- In biofuels-biz@yahoogroups.com, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Seems to have been rather effective. http://www.fair.org/extra/9808/global-smokescreen.html August 1998 Global Smokescreen As evidence continues to emerge that global warming is already occurring (Nature, 4/23/98), the oil industry is gearing up to try to convince the public that science is still uncertain. Representatives from the American Petroleum Institute, Exxon, Chevron and from corporate-backed think tanks got together to produce a Global Climate Science Communications Action Plan, a copy of which was obtained by the New York Times (4/28/98). Part of the plan includes the creation of a $5 million think tank set up specifically to spread the word that we just don't know whether global warming is happening or not, or what could possibly be done to stop it. Another aspect of the plan calls for spending $600,000 to try to sway the media to the industry point of view that scientific uncertainties about global warming make it reckless to try to curtail the burning of fossil fuels. Here's one point from the plan: Produce, distribute via syndicate and directly to newspapers nationwide a steady stream of op-ed columns and letters to the editor authored by scientists--scientists, that is, who take the industry line on global warming. Don't look for any of these op-eds or letters to the editor to mention that they were arranged by the oil industry. Likewise, when the plan manages to place the industry's hand-picked scientists on talk radio, or gets them quoted in newspapers, don't expect to see these sources identified as agents of big oil. The plan is carefully designed to hide the fact that the main motive is not the search for truth about climate changes, but protection of the oil business's profits. Regular readers of Extra! may be interested to note that only one journalist is mentioned by name as being particularly likely to do a story with the oil industry's point of view: That's ABC's John Stossel. Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuels-biz] Re: [biofuel] Henry Ford, Charles Kettering and The Fuel of the Future
On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:10:53 -0800 (PST), you wrote: Backward compatability does not seem to be at issue. Yes and no. Once it is established that backward compatability is not at issue or is mostly not at issue, for dino-diesel engines, then this information needs to be disseminated or chewed over by people such as myself in our battles comparing biodiesel, as an alt-fuel, with the half-dozen or more other supposedly-superior-to-everything-under-the-sun alt-fuel proposals (such as for Propane, CNG, electricity, H2, Hythane, etc.) that we hear every week. Then there are nuances to the debate in other alt-fuels. With electricity, for example, we have all sorts of charger proposals with all levels of safety or claimed safety, convencience, time of recharge (very important with EV and grid-chargeable hybrid proposals, etc.) Electricity is more backwards-compatible with present infrastructure in one sense than other alt-fuels, because the means for distributing the fuel all well-estalished all over the place. Then if you have a standard plug on your EV it is very compatible (assuming you install proper charger and safety equipment in your garage). But those standard plugs may or may not be not tops in other areas such as safety or efficiency or time-to-recharge, so there are just lots of details as you can see. Not to say that this non-biofuel-stuff is what you took away from my mention of backwards compatability, but once I can hear clearly from folks such as yourself on the finer points (if any) of biodiesel in all areas, such as backwards compatability, then I can try, as I have been, to bring this to other folks who don't know as much about it, in the energy policy debates that are where I'm sort of coming from. So, I cannot as easily dismiss this debate, although I could see for someone like yourself that getting it momentarily out of the way would be critical to getting-your-tasks-done. MM Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuels-biz] (fwd) (fwd) news-release: School Bus Idling ATCM
Some in the biofuel groups and elsewhere may look askance at the CARB instituting such seeming common-sense measures for slightly decreasing emissions and improving air quality near school-children, but then seeming to fail to implement biofuel and other clean-air technologies. I'm not sure if CARB has made any headway in researching benefits of using biofuels as against dino fuels in school busses. Remember that not only is CARB limited to emissions debates (NOT mileage debates) but they weaken or even destroy their entire footing sometimes when they venture into mileage and other areas (I think there's recently been a lawsuit from the enviro-hostile Federal government against some of the CARB-related activities or rulings because of their alleged straying from clean-air-related concerns.) Anyway, I'd love to see CARB evaluate some pilot school-bus biofuel programs (such as I think SSPC was running?) for some very specific measureable changes in school bus emissions and perhaps for some changes in overall community emissions if they were able to attach numbers to the benefits (or damages or harms) of reprocessing waste grease rather than allowing it to be thrown away and emit-gosh-knows-what from its resting hole (if I understand correctly what happens to some of it?). Two more strategizing notes: Since so much of the school system is publicly owned, (governmentally-owned-and-run), this means IMO that an agency like CARB has a much more clear-cut legitimate ability to mandate, incontrovertibly, how the fleet of busses serving those public schools should be run. They are part of ownership, part of the management team. I am not a fan of government-involvement in the education business, but this is one instance where the issue plays in favor of some progress, IMO. Second, busses, in particular, seem to be focus points for some of the alternative fuel efforts at advanced research. You hear about this or that pilot program by this or that manufacture, major and minor, to research super-advanced batteries, fuel cells, hybrids including ultracaps, etc., in busses. EFCX, for example where their semi-battery-fuel-cell (whatever the hell it is) technology I think has done some bus work (with GE?) and Maxwell was going on about GM putting some ultracaps in busses or large trucks for a sort of initial effort. So, although I'm very much in favor of a simple straightforward gaining of knowledge and promulgation of a 100%-biodiesel-in-busses concept, biofuel advocates may wish to be aware of the compatibilities with other alt-fuel efforts. MM On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:09:11 -0800, Gennet Paauwe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please find the following California Air Resources Board news release on today's approval of an air toxic control measure for idling school buses. You may view it at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/nr121202.htm Thanks, Gennet Paauwe Office of Communications California Air Reosurces Board ++ California Environmental Protection Agency NEWS RELEASE Air Resources Board Release 02-46 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE December 12, 2002 CONTACT: Jerry Martin Gennet Paauwe (916) 322-2990 www.arb.ca.gov Air Board Adopts Measure to Reduce Pollution from School Bus Idling SACRAMENTO -- A measure adopted today by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) eliminates unnecessary idling for school buses and other heavy-duty vehicles, protecting children from unhealthful exhaust emissions. The main purpose of the measure is to reduce localized exposure to air toxics and other harmful air pollutants at and near schools. ãRestricted idling times at schools will not only protect our children from toxic air contaminants, but improve air quality in the surrounding area,ä said ARB Chairman Alan C. Lloyd. In addition to protecting childrensâ health, reducing motor vehicle emissions will benefit teachers, parents, bus maintenance workers and drivers, and people who live or work near schools. The measure is expected to save school districts and other operators up to $800,000 in fuel costs. More than 26,000 school buses operate in California. Emissions from individual school buses and heavy-duty vehicles vary, depending on vehicle type, age, maintenance and amount of time spent idling. Health impacts from exhaust exposure include: eye and respiratory irritation, enhanced respiratory allergic reactions, asthma exacerbation, increased cancer risk, and immune system degradation. The measure, part of Californiaâs Diesel Particulate Matter Risk Reduction Plan, but expanded to include other bus types, requires the driver of a school bus or other heavy-duty vehicle not to idle at schools. Additional unnecessary idling restrictions are imposed for such vehicles stopping within 100 feet of a school. Exemptions are provided for idling that is necessary for safety or operational purposes. The measure does not affect private passenger vehicles. The measure also requires the motor
Re: [biofuels-biz] (fwd) (fwd) news-release: School Bus Idling ATCM
Yeah, it's kinda interesting the article on SF busses being forced to go to CNG or some other alterna-petrol proposal, due to CARB emmision guidelines. Good that the Fleet manager was fighting back for Diesel, although absolutely NO mention was made of B100 or even B20 for that matter. It just shocks me how little the Muni planners (and fleet managers) know about such things. It would be a great opportunity for someone to do a Broker type of thing for them for B100, thus they wouldn't have to get rid of their capital cost that already has been realized on the present busses. If someone doesn't do it, I might just call up Graham N. and broker it myself ;-) Sheesh!!! James Slayden On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, murdoch wrote: Some in the biofuel groups and elsewhere may look askance at the CARB instituting such seeming common-sense measures for slightly decreasing emissions and improving air quality near school-children, but then seeming to fail to implement biofuel and other clean-air technologies. I'm not sure if CARB has made any headway in researching benefits of using biofuels as against dino fuels in school busses. Remember that not only is CARB limited to emissions debates (NOT mileage debates) but they weaken or even destroy their entire footing sometimes when they venture into mileage and other areas (I think there's recently been a lawsuit from the enviro-hostile Federal government against some of the CARB-related activities or rulings because of their alleged straying from clean-air-related concerns.) Anyway, I'd love to see CARB evaluate some pilot school-bus biofuel programs (such as I think SSPC was running?) for some very specific measureable changes in school bus emissions and perhaps for some changes in overall community emissions if they were able to attach numbers to the benefits (or damages or harms) of reprocessing waste grease rather than allowing it to be thrown away and emit-gosh-knows-what from its resting hole (if I understand correctly what happens to some of it?). Two more strategizing notes: Since so much of the school system is publicly owned, (governmentally-owned-and-run), this means IMO that an agency like CARB has a much more clear-cut legitimate ability to mandate, incontrovertibly, how the fleet of busses serving those public schools should be run. They are part of ownership, part of the management team. I am not a fan of government-involvement in the education business, but this is one instance where the issue plays in favor of some progress, IMO. Second, busses, in particular, seem to be focus points for some of the alternative fuel efforts at advanced research. You hear about this or that pilot program by this or that manufacture, major and minor, to research super-advanced batteries, fuel cells, hybrids including ultracaps, etc., in busses. EFCX, for example where their semi-battery-fuel-cell (whatever the hell it is) technology I think has done some bus work (with GE?) and Maxwell was going on about GM putting some ultracaps in busses or large trucks for a sort of initial effort. So, although I'm very much in favor of a simple straightforward gaining of knowledge and promulgation of a 100%-biodiesel-in-busses concept, biofuel advocates may wish to be aware of the compatibilities with other alt-fuel efforts. MM On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:09:11 -0800, Gennet Paauwe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please find the following California Air Resources Board news release on today's approval of an air toxic control measure for idling school buses. You may view it at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/nr121202.htm Thanks, Gennet Paauwe Office of Communications California Air Reosurces Board ++ California Environmental Protection Agency NEWS RELEASE Air Resources Board Release 02-46 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE December 12, 2002 CONTACT: Jerry Martin Gennet Paauwe (916) 322-2990 www.arb.ca.gov Air Board Adopts Measure to Reduce Pollution from School Bus Idling SACRAMENTO -- A measure adopted today by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) eliminates unnecessary idling for school buses and other heavy-duty vehicles, protecting children from unhealthful exhaust emissions. The main purpose of the measure is to reduce localized exposure to air toxics and other harmful air pollutants at and near schools. Restricted idling times at schools will not only protect our children from toxic air contaminants, but improve air quality in the surrounding area, said ARB Chairman Alan C. Lloyd. In addition to protecting childrens health, reducing motor vehicle emissions will benefit teachers, parents, bus maintenance workers and drivers, and people who live or work near schools. The measure is expected to save school districts and other operators up to $800,000 in fuel costs. More than 26,000 school buses operate in California.
[biofuels-biz] Re: [biofuel] U.S. Energy Policy 11 years ago
The difference is more than semantic; it obscures the fact that what America suffers from is not so much a lack of conservation as a broad array of government programs aimed at fostering hyper-consumption. The same day that Matthew Wald was holding forth on the national appetite, Washington Post energy reporter Thomas W. Lippman wrote that Bush administration officials had nixed various conservation measures because they deviate[d] from the administration's free-market, anti-tax philosophy--begging the question how a system dependent on vast, unreimbursed government outlays for highways and other services could possibly be described as free market. Thanks, both this and the Amtrak article were particularly welcome, as they focus in part on what I have come to believe is an important (if not the important) Achiles Heel Hypocrisy of those who equate their supposed free market advocacy with their anti-progressive vehicles stances. It is to get down and dirty and analyze, and really understand and disect, where there are hidden subsidies (i.e. NON-free-market mechanisms) to favored transportation or energy solutions over others). We are so often faced with free market advocates who claim to be interested in a level playing field and in ending subsidies to alternative energy proposals and alternative fuel proposals. Yet, are they *really* interested in advocating a level playing field. I suggest that, even if some of them are, they are unwittingly (or irresponsibly and not wisely) allowing others to hide in their skirts whose interest is not free market advocacy but advocacy of their pet industry or company while taking the cause celebre of free market advocacy as being enormously sociologically expedient by which to smuggle in what is really, for them, an agenda of favoritism toward their company or industry. Anyway, both articles taken a somewhat uncompromising stance, with which I am not in agreement, that is roughly increased taxation and subsidization is absolutely critical, given the unfair advantages quietly accorded to competing technologies, though this may be a somewhat unfair brief summary. I think at least I could concede their point that when journalists cover these issues they have failed to allow for increased taxes and subsidies and the public policy points those mechanisms *seem* to make in some economies. In the meantime what I think is over-ridingly important, as well, is the continued analysis and discussion of secret, hidden messy hard-to-define subsidization of some of our markets and industries and companies, and the need to debate and discuss those subsidies. I.e., there are two ways to level the playing field, one by raising everyone's advantages (fair or unfair, as the reader may be judge) or two, by eliminating everyone's advantages (fair or unfair, as the reader may judge). Also, this may be simplistic. Perhaps there are other ways to look at it, such as whether in some cases the playing field should not be level but whether there are cases calling for societal intervention (such as a wartime need to manipulate fuel technologies so as to win the war rather than continuing to enrich one's enemies or claimed-enemies by buying fuel from them). I wonder if the U.S. continued to buy fuel from any Axis powers after Pearl Harbor in WW II? If so, how much? As to the Amtrak article, likewise, I thought it was terrific. MM The Washington Post was guilty of a particularly telling juxtaposition on Feb. 21. On page A5, it ran an update on the Bush energy plan, followed by an article on page A6 about the administration's new $105.4-billion highway construction program--with no hint in either story that there might be a connection between the two. There are a number of reasons for such institutional short-sightedness. Given that taxes remain a dirty word inside Washington, reporters tend to view Japanese or West European-style gas taxes as simply beyond the pale and therefore not even worth considering. In addition, the reigning political conformism and cultural insularity in most newsrooms promotes the assumption that anything America does is natural, right, and proper, no matter how out of step with the rest of the world, and taht any problems that might arise are merely incidental. Cheap gas, cars, and highways are--unquestionably--the American way. Thus, a front-page Los Angeles Times (2/13/91) on chaotic suburban sprawl was fairly frank concerning such problems as traffic congestion, three-hour commutes, etc. Yet it was remarkably cursory as to the reasons why. The paper cited white flight, fear of crime, desire to own one's own home, and so on as reasons that middle-class Southern Californians are settling in ever more far-flung subdivisions. Yet it made no mention of the seamless web of public subsidies that make rampant suburbanization all but inevitable--everything from free highways and parking to suburban infrastructure grants and
[biofuels-biz] Re: The Railroading of Amtrak (and the destruction of Light Rail by GM and others, earlier in the 20th century)
Light rail, modern high speed inter-urban rail, hybrid buses, etc. need support because their competition has lured away all their customers over the years through glamorous salesmanship and appeals to the freedoms of air travel or solo driving. Not only have these factors contributed to the decline of importance of light rail, but, also, there was a much more direct form of competition which, early on in the 20th century, contribued to the overall trend toward individual vehicular travel for day-to-day needs as opposed to within-city rail travel: the deliberate destruction of some rail lines and buyout of their owners by the auto and related companies. This description of GM's deliberate destruction of light rail lines (not only alleged but they appear to have gotten a legal conviction for it) (starting about 5 paragraphs below) was posted a few months ago in one of the EV discussion areas by one of the prominent editors. I have been meaning to bring it to the attention of other alt-fuel people so as to make sure it did not pass by un-noticed, as I think it was a good start to researching the history of these matters. I get frustrated locally, in Portland Oregon, with demands for the bus system to be self-sufficient. Of course we all want that, but people still love their cars, and their is a level of investment required in making bus transit appeal to more riders---a level of investment which won't be recouped immediately if at all. Still, the reduction in traffic congestion, accidents, pollution, latent road warrior hostility, etc. are rarely considered in these arguments regarding funding transit modes. The car and the airplane are 20th century freedom machines and viewed as essential to being 'merican. Yes, although there is some propaganda machine behind those concepts. Not everyone dislikes the idea of getting on a machine and having someone else do the driving (and insurance-paying and maintenance and headache and fuel-paying) to get to work. I personally have felt *far* more free, at times, when going this route then at other times, stuck in cities without any such realitic option, I have been stuck in traffic. The post that was made by Bruce, the editor of www.electrifyingtimes.com and moderator of about 30 groups (I think). Notice the awesome brief transcript excerpt from a Senate hearing, at the end, between a Senator who has pre-decided that supply and demand had worked the way they're sometimes thought to, and a person who attempts to bring to the Senator's attention that in this instance the markets were manipulated in an unusual and surprising way. To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu Subject: GM convicted for destroying Electric transportation -long From: Bruce EVangel Parmenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 13:57:43 -0700 (PDT) GM convicted for destroying Electric transportation -long [POSTed to the EV List as an interesting fyi] -[Edited] Date:Sun, 20 Oct 2002 10:41:55 -0700 Subject: Need info on GM destroying US electric trollys I've been searching and can't find GM being covicted a very small fine for destroying US electric buses in order to sell their diesel buses. Any info would be greatly appreciated. - EV List members with more on this, please POST. My web searching ... links found on: http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=electric+trolley+gm http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=electric+trolley+general+motors http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=electric+buses+general+motors Here are two pieces found from the above searches: - http://rapidtransit.com/net/thirdrail/9905/agt4.htm American Ground Transport* Page 4 By 1949, General Motors had been involved in the replacement of more than 100 electric transit systems with GM buses in 45 cities including New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, St. Louis, Oakland, Salt Lake City, and Los Angeles. In April of that year, a Chicago Federal jury convicted GM of having criminally conspired with Standard Oil of California, Firestone Tire and others to replace electric transportation with gas- or diesel-powered buses and to monopolize the sale of buses and related products to local transportation companies throughout the country. The court imposed a sanction of $5,000 on GM. In addition, the jury convicted H.C. Grossman, who was then treasurer of General Motors. Grossman had played a key role in the motorization campaigns and had served as a director of Pacific City Lines when that company undertook the dismantlement of the $100 million Pacific Electric system. The court fined Grossman the magnanimous sum of $1. Despite its criminal conviction, General Motors continued to acquire and dieselize electric transit properties through September of 1955. By then, approximately 88 percent of the nationâs electric streetcar network had been eliminated. In 1936, when GM organized National City Lines, 40,000 streetcars were operating in the United States; at the end of 1965, only 5,000 remained. In December of that year,
[biofuel] Hemp and history
This thread just keeps getting funnier...unless of course these pronouncements are meant to be taken seriously. Marc Also... Napoleon's invasion of Russa was an attempt to cut off America's hemp supply, thus crippling its' navy. Napoleon at war with America? New one on me. At 11:20 AM 12/11/02 -0800, you wrote: Did you know that hemp was directly responsible for the Roman Empire's success in conquering the world. Armor, clothing, shoes, tack for horses, cooking oil, etc. were all made from hemp. Guffaw Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Veg. Oil and or soaps from BioD production
Veg oils should work. I wouldnt expect any critters to be attracted to this. The gycerin left probably wouldnt work as it seems to be somewhat water soluble. I remember the Alfa Romeo owner club used to recommend making a tar from used motor oil and lint from vacuum cleaner bags and dryer vents.(No point in me bring that up except to reminisce about the old days ;) __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] [m]ethyl esters to methane
Glenn wrote: In theory it is possible to break methyl esters or any other hydrocarbon chain into smaller CH4 molecules. Design a device that's borrowed from a Babington Burner, limit the air intake and install a heavy duty spark plug with the grounding flange removed. Use another modified spark plug as the ground and install it across from the first one. Apply direct current voltage to this when the air compressor and oil pump are working. If you really want to get fancy, run the resulting plasma gas through a catalyst and inject a bit of steam. You should end up with hydrogen and carbon monoxide gas. It may not be methane, but it will burn cleanly. robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.1stbooks.com/bookview/9782 Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Article about biofuel business
Dear Hakan, some comments: I think I was talking about biofuels. FT-fuels made of biomass is a synthetic fuel made of biomass via gasification and the Fischer-Tropsch-synthesis. But it is not ready for use. Biogas upgraded to Natural Gas is Natural Gas from Biogas and it is 100% renewable (biodiesel mostly is not 100% renewable!!!). Upgrading Biogas to Natural Gas is ready to use and it is done and uesd in Sweden and Switzerland. Biogas can use existing consumer equipment and fit into existing distribution systems. This could also be a business. You talk about time spans of 20-40 years. That is a long time, many things could be developed and put into use in this time. I hope I could clear my points. Also I know that this forum is very Biodiesel/SVO-sided ;-) Daniel Hakan Falk schrieb: Dear Daniel, The subject was biofuel and I see them as renewable biological sources. I was driving Taxis on NG, 40 years ago in Sweden, but it is not a biofuel. The country that adopted NG the most is probably The Netherlands and I have often driven NG fueled cars there. They also have resources of natural gas. Keith initiated a very interesting discussion about synthetic fuels and the production of oil from coal. All of this are especially interesting for the coal rich Germany. It is however not biofuel. I do not think that Germany lacks agricultural area, it is a pseudo argument. You do not hear this in The Netherlands who have most people per square kilometer of the countries in the world. I also had an other restriction that excludes many alternative that are possible to develop. That is the ready for use condition. This means that it could be generally implemented in a time span of 20 to 40 years. Ethanol and Biodiesel/SVO can use existing consumer equipment and fit into existing distribution systems. If you start a business based on biofuel it must be possible to sell and use it now. If not, it is not a business. In fact, it was a very interesting exercise to take that perspective, because it becomes an acid test for the ready for use perspective. I have so much that I want to learn and so much that I want to communicate. I will continue and you will probably find the tings you missed in an other piece for our web site. Hakan At 04:22 PM 12/12/2002 +0100, you wrote: Thanks Hakan for this very interesting view on biofuels! But may I give you some impression fo the german point of view? First of all you did not mention Methanol, Fischer-Tropsch-Fuels (FT-fuels) and Biogas. Ethanol is not discussed in Germany probably of the lack of agricultural aera. I will not talk about Methanol because I think it will not have any chance. So what about FT-fuels? This fuel is promoted in Germany by federal institutions and by the automobil industry - namely DC and VW. This medium-term opportunity needs no chances in the motors, it can be made from every organic material but it needs bigger productions sites. On the other hand it is very energy intensive in production and the technology is still in development. Here a big discussion is going on. Biogas also now is in the discussion: cleaned and enriched up to Natural Gas and bringing it to a filling station or feeding it into a gas pipeline may be an interesting thing. This is already done in Sweden and Switzerland. There are cars driving with NG, many new NG filling stations will be built in nearest future, the liberalisation of the EU Gas market is in progress and the technology is available. The fraction of NG cars will increase. Producing electricity from biogas in Germany is economically very interesting because of a refund assured by law. And biogas can be produced in very small units. Biodiesel does not have the best reputation cause of the problems of monocultures. But it takes 0,55 % of the fuel market in Germany. So these are some points what is in the discussion in Germany. But Germany is not the biggest country although it has the most people in the Europe. A unique solution can only be found within Europe, here Ethanol might be leading. Another thing is the opening of the EU towards the east, with it big aeras of land and cheap labor. So, this is a little input - hastily written. Greetings Daniel Hakan Falk schrieb: Hi Keith and others, I am now close to publish, http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml I am still insecure about Ethanol, big or small? and will probably take this as a separate issue all together. Politics and perceptions are very important for a business, so I am not sure yet. Please look at it and give me your comments, both good and bad. Hakan ** If you want to take a look on a project that is very close to my heart, go to: http://energysavingnow.com/ http://hakan.vitools.net/ My .Net Card http://hakan.vitools.org/ About me http://vitools.com/ My webmaster site ** A truth's
Re: [biofuel] Article about biofuel business
Daniel, Yes you are right and I misunderstood you when you talked about NG. The use in percent of fleet is largest in The Netherlands, it is very small in Sweden and I believe also in Switzerland. If I am not wrong, it is some use in Germany and it is comparable with Sweden and Switzerland. The NG fleets in those countries, if something great did not happened the last 5 years are mostly using fossil NG. Sweden had about the same usage the last 35 years. But it is an advantage in that it is some kind of existing distribution system in place, that easily could be upgraded in those countries. Maybe I am somewhat pessimistic about a rapid development first on fossil NG and then on the bio NG substitute. I saw that many started to realize that fossil NG maybe not was such a good idea and that it is depleting much faster than first thought. this mainly because of large buildup of equipment for heating and domestic use in many countries. The investments in this sector, might force the Big oil/gas to move to bio NG much faster. It could also be that this is a good fall back strategy for them in several of the largest developed countries. In the heating and electricity sector, it could very well be the case. I have had this thoughts for quite a while, but I do not really knew how to evaluate it. You might be right and if it is successful, they really pulled a good one. By the over investment in equipment, network of pipes in streets and deposits, they would control it as good as Big Electricity and Big Telco. I discarded this thoughts mainly because I could not see how we could get a diversified business environment. Maybe I am wrong, but if I am right, it would not be a window of opportunity in this sector. Hakan At 08:53 AM 12/13/2002 +0100, you wrote: Dear Hakan, some comments: I think I was talking about biofuels. FT-fuels made of biomass is a synthetic fuel made of biomass via gasification and the Fischer-Tropsch-synthesis. But it is not ready for use. Biogas upgraded to Natural Gas is Natural Gas from Biogas and it is 100% renewable (biodiesel mostly is not 100% renewable!!!). Upgrading Biogas to Natural Gas is ready to use and it is done and uesd in Sweden and Switzerland. Biogas can use existing consumer equipment and fit into existing distribution systems. This could also be a business. You talk about time spans of 20-40 years. That is a long time, many things could be developed and put into use in this time. I hope I could clear my points. Also I know that this forum is very Biodiesel/SVO-sided ;-) Daniel Hakan Falk schrieb: Dear Daniel, The subject was biofuel and I see them as renewable biological sources. I was driving Taxis on NG, 40 years ago in Sweden, but it is not a biofuel. The country that adopted NG the most is probably The Netherlands and I have often driven NG fueled cars there. They also have resources of natural gas. Keith initiated a very interesting discussion about synthetic fuels and the production of oil from coal. All of this are especially interesting for the coal rich Germany. It is however not biofuel. I do not think that Germany lacks agricultural area, it is a pseudo argument. You do not hear this in The Netherlands who have most people per square kilometer of the countries in the world. I also had an other restriction that excludes many alternative that are possible to develop. That is the ready for use condition. This means that it could be generally implemented in a time span of 20 to 40 years. Ethanol and Biodiesel/SVO can use existing consumer equipment and fit into existing distribution systems. If you start a business based on biofuel it must be possible to sell and use it now. If not, it is not a business. In fact, it was a very interesting exercise to take that perspective, because it becomes an acid test for the ready for use perspective. I have so much that I want to learn and so much that I want to communicate. I will continue and you will probably find the tings you missed in an other piece for our web site. Hakan At 04:22 PM 12/12/2002 +0100, you wrote: Thanks Hakan for this very interesting view on biofuels! But may I give you some impression fo the german point of view? First of all you did not mention Methanol, Fischer-Tropsch-Fuels (FT-fuels) and Biogas. Ethanol is not discussed in Germany probably of the lack of agricultural aera. I will not talk about Methanol because I think it will not have any chance. So what about FT-fuels? This fuel is promoted in Germany by federal institutions and by the automobil industry - namely DC and VW. This medium-term opportunity needs no chances in the motors, it can be made from every organic material but it needs bigger productions sites. On the other hand it is very energy intensive in production and the technology is still in development. Here a big discussion is going on. Biogas also now is in the
[biofuel] Engine conversion
Hello, I produce biodiesel and plan to convert a car engine that works with gas to diesel. I plan to use diesel injectors, instead of spark plugs. I know the compression ratio is different, but I wonder if it works or not. Any idea about it..? also mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Engine conversion
HELLOW MR FRIEND, YES U CAN CONVERT YOUR PETROL ENGINES TO DIESEL INJECTION MODE, BUT LIFE OF PISTON ,RINGS, SLEEVES WILL BE LESS, DONT WOREY ABOUT COMPRESION RATIOS AS WOOD GAS WORKES ON LOWCOMPRESION RATIOS. U CAN DO IT YOURSELF, REGARDS, V.GANESAN INDIA. OF Ozan Tezer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hello, I produce biodiesel and plan to convert a car engine that works with gas to diesel. I plan to use diesel injectors, instead of spark plugs. I know the compression ratio is different, but I wonder if it works or not. Any idea about it..? also mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Catch all the cricket action. Download Yahoo! Score tracker [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Engine conversion
The ratio is REALLY different, and thus a diesel head and block are built much heavier. The early (oil crisis response) atrocious GM diesel failures (which are probably responsible for why AMericans don't drive diesel cars) were essentially a gasoline 350 with a diesel head. They aren't around anymore... for a good reason. the block, crankshaft, etc, just couldn';t take the extreme conditions that a diesel block is built heavy for... Besides this issue, you'd really need a whole new head with a proper prechamber, etc, and a diesel head and cylinder faces is machined just to achieve the proper fuel injection spray pattern and the proper behavior of the gases once they start to ignite. It's not at all the same as a gasoline head and pistons. Mark At 11:57 AM 12/13/2002 +0200, you wrote: Hello, I produce biodiesel and plan to convert a car engine that works with gas to diesel. I plan to use diesel injectors, instead of spark plugs. I know that compression ratio is different, but I wonder if it works or not. Any idea about it..? also mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuel] UK WVO quantities
Hello, I am trying to find a rough estimate of the quantity of WVO being produced in the UK as part of a undergraduate project that I am involved in. Does anyone have this information or know where I can get it? Thanks, James Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [biofuel] Engine conversion
Dear Ozan: As you mentioned, the engine compression ratios is going to be a problem. The compression of gasoline engine is around 9 to 1, and the diesel engine is around 20 to1. The modifications to change would be extensive, and expensive. I am not even mentioning the rest the changes of injector pumps, and timing. You would be father ahead to find a diesel engine. Harley -Original Message- From: Ozan Tezer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 3:58 AM To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com Subject: [biofuel] Engine conversion Hello, I produce biodiesel and plan to convert a car engine that works with gas to diesel. I plan to use diesel injectors, instead of spark plugs. I know the compression ratio is different, but I wonder if it works or not. Any idea about it..? also mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Embodied energy
At 08:40 PM 12/12/2002, you wrote: This is a bit OT, but I don't know where else to address an audience with the potential interest level. I'm planning to build a new house in a rural area, and I'd like to do it in an ecologically sound way. The plan at present is 1700 sq.ft., straw bale walls, minimal usage of wood and concrete, Research , research, research... did I get my point across? Building a house is a BIG financial and lifestyle investment. Before you choose or discard any options try to find someone who has a working model of that component. Some research of straw bale that I ran across showed that within a year there was significant mold growth. I am sure this is climate related, yet certainly worth considering.I chose cellulose insulation, due to it's cost and the fact that it is recycled newspaper. I don't know whether this is why or not- but this winter (2nd in this house) we are overrun with mice living in it. Not that big a deal, (till you find the dead ones trapped in the file cabinet smelling up that whole room) but I never considered that. Also, wood is certainly a renewable resource- your common 2x4 can be harvested every 8-10 years on our woods. We are considering cob for our next building project. If you are building in a place with dirt-(not just sand). This may meet many of your goals. ( tip- I would purchase a tractor with a loader.) etc etc. I've run across a measure of environmental impact called embodied energy, which tries to include not only the energy required to manufacture the basic material, but also such factors as the energy needed to transport the raw and finished materials, the amount of labor needed to install (ie, transporting n workers to a site), This could also be interpreted as just plain expense, which comes up for everyone as they try to make a sustainable housing project a reality. The more unusual or out of the ordinary, unless very simple, will be more expensive in labor. This is a big deal IMO, construction workers are seldom known for their intellectual abilities. I chose a manufactured straight truss- only so their would be no on site labor cost and associated possible problems. I found a wonderfully easy to install reflective metal roof which my workers could install rather than getting a roofer. On the other hand, the insulation factory is 15 miles away, yet I had to purchase it from a retailer 30 miles away, in order to get use of the blower- wasteful, yet simpler and less expensive. as well as the lifetime of the end result. Once again this is an expense issue. I chose concrete blocks, stone or brick, because of so many old building I saw, still useable or reclaimable when clad in this material. As my aunt used to say- You can't build a 1990's house at 1960's labor prices. the labor that went into the brick on a colonial house has paid for itself, many times over. The clapboard has only been preserved with many coats of paint over the years. For this however, I think you must use your own common sense and think it out. What can you see currently that has lasted . This does give new stuff a serious disadvantage, but that is just the way it is. We chose an in floor radiant heat system. I have had lots of problems with the pump needing to be replaced EVERY year after being dormant for the summer. Perhaps it is a bad pump, yet this could become way more expensive and bothersome than a traditional tried and true heating system would have been. Unfortunately, this index (imprecise at best) DOESN'T typically seem to address two issues of particular concern to me -- carbon burden (atmospheric), and sustainability (how long will supplies of the material last at current consumption rates). Maybe that's because the bulk of the work was done in the 70's, when such info was less significant or not yet emphasized. Anyway, does anyone know of RECENT research addressing these issues as they pertain to home construction methods? Steel roofs vs comp shingle Don't know the embodied energy rating, but a reflective roof will significantly reduce cooling needs. One fellow at the DOE said that if CA had all white or reflective roofs they would have 100 less smog days per year. (This was heard during a conference I don't have a written reference, wish I did.) He said most folks don't like the look- thus we all pay a higher cost. :( -- concrete slab floor vs wooden joists -- solid timber beams vs engineered wood products, etc. ? What there is I could find, though I don't have it handy on this computer. If no one else answers on that, email me again after Christmas. I would be glad to share what I have. I took a year or two to study all these things before building this house. I can offer you my opinion and some experts to contact. The best thing is to find an example and go feel it. Ask about any unexpected bugs. (Our concrete floor was poured a bit too late in the fall- full of
[biofuel] Sound familiar? - Global Smokescreen
Seems to have been rather effective. http://www.fair.org/extra/9808/global-smokescreen.html August 1998 Global Smokescreen As evidence continues to emerge that global warming is already occurring (Nature, 4/23/98), the oil industry is gearing up to try to convince the public that science is still uncertain. Representatives from the American Petroleum Institute, Exxon, Chevron and from corporate-backed think tanks got together to produce a Global Climate Science Communications Action Plan, a copy of which was obtained by the New York Times (4/28/98). Part of the plan includes the creation of a $5 million think tank set up specifically to spread the word that we just don't know whether global warming is happening or not, or what could possibly be done to stop it. Another aspect of the plan calls for spending $600,000 to try to sway the media to the industry point of view that scientific uncertainties about global warming make it reckless to try to curtail the burning of fossil fuels. Here's one point from the plan: Produce, distribute via syndicate and directly to newspapers nationwide a steady stream of op-ed columns and letters to the editor authored by scientists--scientists, that is, who take the industry line on global warming. Don't look for any of these op-eds or letters to the editor to mention that they were arranged by the oil industry. Likewise, when the plan manages to place the industry's hand-picked scientists on talk radio, or gets them quoted in newspapers, don't expect to see these sources identified as agents of big oil. The plan is carefully designed to hide the fact that the main motive is not the search for truth about climate changes, but protection of the oil business's profits. Regular readers of Extra! may be interested to note that only one journalist is mentioned by name as being particularly likely to do a story with the oil industry's point of view: That's ABC's John Stossel. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuel] The Railroading of Amtrak
http://fair.org/extra/0207/amtrak.html July/August 2002 The Railroading of Amtrak Trains, planes and automobiles held to different standards By Christopher Ott Coverage of Amtrak contains two surprises: the details reported about the 31-year-old railroad, and the details that aren't reported about its competition. Despite the introduction of successful high-speed trains in the Northeast, as well as increased ridership both before and after September 11's airborne attacks, coverage of Amtrak is surprisingly negative. You don't read much in the way of good news, says Ross Capon, executive director of the National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP). Instead, typical reporting singles out Amtrak for criticism and glosses over the advantages enjoyed by rail's competitors. Most coverage focuses on the rail network's financial situation. Amtrak is in disarray, reported USA Today (5/2/02). The nation's passenger railroad faces a projected $1.1 billion deficit this fiscal year--its biggest ever. The Associated Press (4/12/02) reported that Amtrak is a chronic money-loser for the government. The Arizona Daily Star (4/18/02) editorialized that Congress should relegate Amtrak to the dustbin of failed efforts to overturn the law of supply and demand. The implication that Amtrak is exceptional in the transportation industry in its reliance on government subsidies, however, is troublesome--and ironic, given the recent well-publicized bailout for U.S. airlines. On top of $13 billion in federal aviation spending for fiscal year 2002, Congress approved a $15 billion package of airline aid within two weeks of September 11. Intercity passenger rail, by comparison, received half a billion in federal funds for the current fiscal year, and Amtrak is asking for $1.2 billion in the next to avoid service cuts. Subsidies for automotive transport also dwarf support for federally subsidized Amtrak (Reuters, 4/10/02). The Worldwatch Institute, in a paper on The Global Rail Revival (4/94), pointed out: Although government support of rail is necessary--since passenger fares seldom cover the full cost of train service--this subsidy pales in comparison to the hidden costs of road travel. For example, in the United States, few people realize that direct taxes on automobiles and gasoline barely cover two thirds of the cost of road building, maintenance, administration and safety. Additional social costs of car and air travel--including accidents, lost time, and loss of quality of life--are obvious to planners and economists, and are increasingly counted as a real drag on the economy. The social costs of car travel in 11 countries studied is nearly twice that of air travel and seven times that of trains. Stephen Goddard, in his 1994 book Getting There: The Epic Struggle Between Road and Rail in the American Century, found that hidden subsidies for drivers amount to well over $2 for every gallon of gasoline sold. A double standard The NARP's Capon says a tremendous double standard is at work. Government support for Amtrak is deemed a subsidy, while spending on aviation and highways is thought of as investment and decoupled from a need to break even. They never talk about the money-losing highway system, says Capon. One reason is that it's easy to see the costs of rail on a single balance sheet, Capon says. Subsidies for highway travel in particular come from a wider array of local, state and government agencies. The aviation and highway industries are also powerful lobbies. As the New York Times reported (10/10/01), lobbyists for the airline industry were instrumental in winning quick passage of last year's airline aid package. Another missing element in Amtrak coverage is international context. Successful railroads in other countries get much greater levels of government support. Canada has passenger-rail service that is flush with a new infusion of federal government funding, new locomotives and rolling stock, improved railbed infrastructure and burgeoning ridership (Windsor Star, 4/15/02). According to figures from the European Conference of Ministers of Transport, Germany spends 22 percent of its total transportation capital spending on rail, while France spends 21 percent. The United States spends 0.4 percent. The real issue in most coverage of Amtrak is not whether the railroad pays its own way. Instead, it's whether rail receives a share of government support that is appropriate to its advantages over other forms of transportation and the options that rail provides. The most important things that journalists covering Amtrak can do, according to Capon, is not be seduced by talk about how we can have the trains without paying for them. Christopher Ott's work on rail issues has appeared in publications including Salon.com, E: The Environmental Magazine and the Baltimore Sun. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
[biofuel] U.S. Energy Policy 11 years ago
http://www.fair.org/extra/best-of-extra/press-energy.html May/June 1991 Press Ignores the Obvious in U.S. Energy Policy By Daniel Lazare Following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the Wall Street Journal (9/10/90) reported on why Japan has been so much more successful in conserving oil than the U.S. The report focused on the role of Japan's government in coordinating energy programs and compelling corporations to install energy-saving machinery. Yet it managed to overlook what Ronald Morse, an energy specialist quoted in the article, subsequently described to EXTRA! as the most important reason of all: a tax policy that keeps Japanese energy prices high and demand low. The omission was indicative of the daily press' persistent myopia concerning energy issues. While showing passing interest in auto fuel-efficiency standards, alternative fuels, and other oil conservation programs, the mainstream press has exhibited near-zero interest in what distinguishes U.S. energy consumption from that of virtually all other industrial economies: the comprehensive system of tax breaks and subsidies in the U.S. that supports domestic oil production and encourages energy consumption No nation provides motorists with a more elaborate highway system than the U.S., supplies more government-mandated low-cost parking, or is more tolerant of auto-related environmental damage. No country has committed itself to tens of billion of dollars in annual military expenditures to ensure an uninterrupted flow of oil from the Mideast. Yet no country demands so little from motorists by way of taxes. Average state and federal gas taxes in the U.S. stand at a little over 30 cents a gallon, with prices at the pump slightly more than a buck. In Japan, by contrast, gas taxes total $1.60 a gallon, boosting prices overall to about $3.40. In France motorists have paid upwards of $5 a gallon, while Helmut Kohl recently proposed boosting gas prices by 67 cents to more than $4 a gallon to help cover the growing cost of German unification. The debate over fuel efficiency regulations notwithstanding, the relatively free ride provided to U.S. motorists is the chief reason that Americans consume roughly three times as much gas per capita as (West) Germans, four times as much as the French, and five times as much as the Japanese. It's also why Americans have the least adequate mass transit. This is fairly obvious, yet it somehow manages to escape the mainstream press. In a page-one report on American energy consumption on Jan. 30, the Wall Street Journal zeroed in on big cars, high speeds, and other individualistic concerns, while side-stepping the politically charged issue of taxation. New York Times energy reporter Matthew L. Wald observed (2/9/91) that because the Bush administration's long-awaited National Energy Strategy short-changed conservation, it is aimed mainly at supplying the American appetite, rather than curbing it -- as if the nation's energy appetite has not been developed and nurtured over the years by a non-stop stream of federal investments. The difference is more than semantic; it obscures the fact that what America suffers from is not so much a lack of conservation as a broad array of government programs aimed at fostering hyper-consumption. The same day that Matthew Wald was holding forth on the national appetite, Washington Post energy reporter Thomas W. Lippman wrote that Bush administration officials had nixed various conservation measures because they deviate[d] from the administration's free-market, anti-tax philosophy--begging the question how a system dependent on vast, unreimbursed government outlays for highways and other services could possibly be described as free market. The Washington Post was guilty of a particularly telling juxtaposition on Feb. 21. On page A5, it ran an update on the Bush energy plan, followed by an article on page A6 about the administration's new $105.4-billion highway construction program--with no hint in either story that there might be a connection between the two. There are a number of reasons for such institutional short-sightedness. Given that taxes remain a dirty word inside Washington, reporters tend to view Japanese or West European-style gas taxes as simply beyond the pale and therefore not even worth considering. In addition, the reigning political conformism and cultural insularity in most newsrooms promotes the assumption that anything America does is natural, right, and proper, no matter how out of step with the rest of the world, and taht any problems that might arise are merely incidental. Cheap gas, cars, and highways are--unquestionably--the American way. Thus, a front-page Los Angeles Times (2/13/91) on chaotic suburban sprawl was fairly frank concerning such problems as traffic congestion, three-hour commutes, etc. Yet it was remarkably cursory as to the reasons why. The paper cited white flight, fear
[biofuel] Engine conversion
girl mark, I have been doing my own research into why the GM diesel failure happened and the only information I have found was that the head bolts stretched and that this was the primary failure for the GM line because the bolts were not torqued at correct intervals and/or the head bolts stretched and were usually not replaced on a rebuilt. Do you have a source on the info about problems with the block crankshaft,etc. ? I'd like to find out more about it. Thanks, Jess --- Jesse Parris | studio53 | 53 maitland rd | stamford, ct 06906 203.324.4371www.jesseparris.com/ Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Henry Ford, Charles Kettering and The Fuel of the Future
Backward compatability does not seem to be at issue. Japenese manufacturers diesel models do not seem to have the endurance to go as long as European autos Not true. The Japanese have built some amazingly tough and long-lasting diesels, and they still do. The Japanese companies are right up there with the latest diesel technology. After all, Europe is a major market for them, they're not missing out on the growth in diesel sales there. All you tend to hear about in the US is the hybrids. There's much more to it than that. and Europeans have been building with biodiesel in mind since 1996. After x amount of years, it wont be a problem. As far as the legally protected monopolies...I see a bigger problem with the oil companies and the government needed to implement change. Change that starts from the bottom up can go right ahead without waiting for governments and oil companies. That already started some time ago, and has been growing and spreading very fast indeed. Waste (such as grease from homes and restauraunts) is currently thrown out as hazardous materials here in New York! Yes, all over the US, billions of gallons of it. I have been crunching some numbers to see if it is feasible to take advantage of this. Of course it is. You sure won't be the first. There's loads of stuff in the archives about this. Keith G Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Article about biofuel business
Dear Hakan, some comments: I think I was talking about biofuels. FT-fuels made of biomass is a synthetic fuel made of biomass via gasification and the Fischer-Tropsch-synthesis. But it is not ready for use. Biogas upgraded to Natural Gas is Natural Gas from Biogas and it is 100% renewable (biodiesel mostly is not 100% renewable!!!). Upgrading Biogas to Natural Gas is ready to use and it is done and uesd in Sweden and Switzerland. Biogas can use existing consumer equipment and fit into existing distribution systems. This could also be a business. You talk about time spans of 20-40 years. That is a long time, many things could be developed and put into use in this time. I hope I could clear my points. Also I know that this forum is very Biodiesel/SVO-sided ;-) Not so, Daniel, it's very open-ended. All biofuels subjects are discussed here, and many related issues. Keith Daniel Hakan Falk schrieb: Dear Daniel, The subject was biofuel and I see them as renewable biological sources. I was driving Taxis on NG, 40 years ago in Sweden, but it is not a biofuel. The country that adopted NG the most is probably The Netherlands and I have often driven NG fueled cars there. They also have resources of natural gas. Keith initiated a very interesting discussion about synthetic fuels and the production of oil from coal. All of this are especially interesting for the coal rich Germany. It is however not biofuel. I do not think that Germany lacks agricultural area, it is a pseudo argument. You do not hear this in The Netherlands who have most people per square kilometer of the countries in the world. I also had an other restriction that excludes many alternative that are possible to develop. That is the ready for use condition. This means that it could be generally implemented in a time span of 20 to 40 years. Ethanol and Biodiesel/SVO can use existing consumer equipment and fit into existing distribution systems. If you start a business based on biofuel it must be possible to sell and use it now. If not, it is not a business. In fact, it was a very interesting exercise to take that perspective, because it becomes an acid test for the ready for use perspective. I have so much that I want to learn and so much that I want to communicate. I will continue and you will probably find the tings you missed in an other piece for our web site. Hakan At 04:22 PM 12/12/2002 +0100, you wrote: Thanks Hakan for this very interesting view on biofuels! But may I give you some impression fo the german point of view? First of all you did not mention Methanol, Fischer-Tropsch-Fuels (FT-fuels) and Biogas. Ethanol is not discussed in Germany probably of the lack of agricultural aera. I will not talk about Methanol because I think it will not have any chance. So what about FT-fuels? This fuel is promoted in Germany by federal institutions and by the automobil industry - namely DC and VW. This medium-term opportunity needs no chances in the motors, it can be made from every organic material but it needs bigger productions sites. On the other hand it is very energy intensive in production and the technology is still in development. Here a big discussion is going on. Biogas also now is in the discussion: cleaned and enriched up to Natural Gas and bringing it to a filling station or feeding it into a gas pipeline may be an interesting thing. This is already done in Sweden and Switzerland. There are cars driving with NG, many new NG filling stations will be built in nearest future, the liberalisation of the EU Gas market is in progress and the technology is available. The fraction of NG cars will increase. Producing electricity from biogas in Germany is economically very interesting because of a refund assured by law. And biogas can be produced in very small units. Biodiesel does not have the best reputation cause of the problems of monocultures. But it takes 0,55 % of the fuel market in Germany. So these are some points what is in the discussion in Germany. But Germany is not the biggest country although it has the most people in the Europe. A unique solution can only be found within Europe, here Ethanol might be leading. Another thing is the opening of the EU towards the east, with it big aeras of land and cheap labor. So, this is a little input - hastily written. Greetings Daniel Hakan Falk schrieb: Hi Keith and others, I am now close to publish, http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml I am still insecure about Ethanol, big or small? and will probably take this as a separate issue all together. Politics and perceptions are very important for a business, so I am not sure yet. Please look at it and give me your comments, both good and bad. Hakan ** If you want to take a look on a project that is very close to my heart, go
Re: [biofuel] Engine conversion
This is not so. The 5.7 liter Olds diesel was a new engine from the ground up. It shared external dimensions with other V-8 GM engines, but NONE of the internal parts are interchangeable. Where did you get this information? Not doubting what you are saying, however I have been repeatedly told by good sources thta this was a converted gasoline engine. I believed the block was in fact the same as an olds V8... J-L Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [biofuel] Engine conversion
Hello This is the FAQ about gas engine convertion in my country specially with those WW II old military Jeeps or old trucks and the way people has deal with it is the following: They sell the gasoline engine with the gearbox or get rid of them, then they buy an used japanese diesel engine with the gearbox and put them in. There are many importers of used japanese engines here. Regards Juan Paraguay - South America - The ratio is REALLY different, and thus a diesel head and block are built much heavier. The early (oil crisis response) atrocious GM diesel failures (which are probably responsible for why AMericans don't drive diesel cars) were essentially a gasoline 350 with a diesel head. They aren't around anymore... for a good reason. the block, crankshaft, etc, just couldn';t take the extreme conditions that a diesel block is built heavy for... Besides this issue, you'd really need a whole new head with a proper prechamber, etc, and a diesel head and cylinder faces is machined just to achieve the proper fuel injection spray pattern and the proper behavior of the gases once they start to ignite. It's not at all the same as a gasoline head and pistons. Mark At 11:57 AM 12/13/2002 +0200, you wrote: Hello, I produce biodiesel and plan to convert a car engine that works with gas to diesel. I plan to use diesel injectors, instead of spark plugs. I know that compression ratio is different, but I wonder if it works or not. Any idea about it..? also mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Article about biofuel business
Daniel wrote: snip Biodiesel does not have the best reputation cause of the problems of monocultures. You might as well say that most food doesn't have the best reputation, for the same reason. That's not the only way to grow food, not even the best way, in fact it's the worst way. - As Europe (and elsewhere) is now discovering, with its policy to adopt more sustainable agricultural methods. The same goes for biodiesel. No need for monocropping or industrialized production systems with high fossil-fuel inputs and high levels of externalizations. In fact it makes better sense on an integrated, mixed sustainable farm, which can produce a lot of biofuel from waste products without any dedicated land use. But it takes 0,55 % of the fuel market in Germany. So these are some points what is in the discussion in Germany. But Germany is not the biggest country although it has the most people in the Europe. A unique solution can only be found within Europe, here Ethanol might be leading. A start for that might be found in the current over-production of sugar beet, rather than using inequitable trading arrangements to dump it on 3rd World countries, distorting their markets and rural sectors. And (unlike the US) maybe it will occur to someone to marry the two and replace the methanol in biodiesel with ethanol. Keith Another thing is the opening of the EU towards the east, with it big aeras of land and cheap labor. So, this is a little input - hastily written. Greetings Daniel Hakan Falk schrieb: Hi Keith and others, I am now close to publish, http://energy.saving.nu/biofuels/biofuelorg.shtml I am still insecure about Ethanol, big or small? and will probably take this as a separate issue all together. Politics and perceptions are very important for a business, so I am not sure yet. Please look at it and give me your comments, both good and bad. Hakan Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuel] Re: Petroleum's Role in Hemp Prohibition
Kris said: Ater doing a little reading, I must adjust my statement slightly but, Harmon you are way off base here. Hardly. It's pretty clear you have no personal knowledge of this stuff and have been reading the wrong stuff. In this country both hemp and marijuana come from the cannabis sativa plant. Nope, wrong again -- well, partially right, but most of the marijuana grown in north america these days is a hybred of cannabis sativa and cannabis indica. And a lot of it is pure indica. Forty years ago it was all sativa, and that is the species native to this hemisphere, but the problem was that the marijuana seeds (sativa) were all from Mexico and further south, and wouldn't mature here, would not flower. The hemp plant, OTOH, does mature, flower and go to seed, in the northern US and even Canada and Alaska. And while hemp is taken from the female stem as well as the male, the male's fibers are much stronger, so are more highly valued. I can't find the link but, I read that high quality Manila rope comes exclusively from male plants. You may be right, but that's irrelevant. Like Keith said, there is 0.3% THC in hemp fiber and the drug czar claimed on TV the other day that today's marijuana has up to 30%. Well, I think he's full of BS, as usual, more like a max of 13% with most being around 5-6%. How high do you think you'll get on something that is 90 times weaker that what people are smoking. You can't sell male plant for any price, only an idiot would smoke something that will only give you a headache instead of a high. Now here's where you are getting seriously silly, and I'm having a seriously hard time even following your logic. Where do you get the idea you can't sell male plant for any price? Back in the '60's when everybody was planting the seeds they got from the Mexican pot, the Panama Red, the Columbian Gold, etc. that they bought, nobody had ever heard of sinsemilla, and, more importantly, since in the northern US those plants never flowered anyway, so almost all the homegrown anybody ever had was just leaf, not bud -- and nobody whatsoever ever discriminated between male and female plants. People smoked and sold male plants the same as the female. Kris, I've smoked a whole lot of male plants -- there is no significant difference, there is probably more difference between top leaves and bottom leaves than between male and female. Furthermore, at one point we were living on a farm in WI, and back at the edge of a neighbor's pig pasture we discovered this absolutely huge patch of 12-15 foot tall *female* cannabis plants -- and, they were even in flower and had the huge buds like you see in the pictures now in High Times. So, of course, thinking we were in hippy heaven, we dried some of the bud and smoked it -- and smoked it, and smoked it. Nada, zilch. You'd have died from carbon monoxide before you got a buzz off that stuff. That's hemp. It used to grow wild all over WI and most other states before these morons in gov't and their scumbag pig goons got going and their sicko War on Some Drugs revved up. Hey, don't just take my word for it, check out http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/cannabis_info16.shtml Or, as I suggested before, crank up your usenet newsreader and post your theory to alt.drugs.pot.cultivation and see what kind of response you'll get. Although, as I said previously too, most of those sinsemilla growers claim they throw *all* the leaves away and only smoke the bud, but the truthful ones will tell you they all smoke the male plants they weed out and there ain't nothin a bit wrong with it. Hemp is hemp and pot is pot and male/female has absolutely nothing to do with it. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Embodied energy
- Original Message - From: Grahams Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 07:00 Subject: Re: [biofuel] Embodied energy Research , research, research... did I get my point across? Building a house is a BIG financial and lifestyle investment. Before you choose or discard any options try to find someone who has a working model of that component. Some research of straw bale that I ran across showed that within a year there was significant mold growth. I am sure this is climate related, yet certainly worth considering. I to have researched straw bale construction, and the mold problem sounds like 2 things. The first is climate like you mentioned and the second is the construction of the outre layer of the wall. In a damp climate or one that can get cold if the outer layer of the wall can't breath, the water vapor just condences on the outer layer and causes the mold. In straw bale contruction it is important to have the outer layer be able to breath so you don't have the build up of water vapor and the condensation that follows. Don't know the embodied energy rating, but a reflective roof will significantly reduce cooling needs. One fellow at the DOE said that if CA had all white or reflective roofs they would have 100 less smog days per year. (This was heard during a conference I don't have a written reference, wish I did.) He said most folks don't like the look- thus we all pay a higher cost. :( I have heard somthing simular for Greenroofs ( roofs covered with plants ). This is one thing that I am wanting to do when we ( the wife and I ) build. Greg H. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Engine conversion
HELLOW MR FRIEND, YES U CAN CONVERT YOUR PETROL ENGINES TO DIESEL INJECTION MODE, BUT LIFE OF PISTON ,RINGS, SLEEVES WILL BE LESS, DONT WOREY ABOUT COMPRESION RATIOS AS WOOD GAS WORKES ON LOWCOMPRESION RATIOS. U CAN DO IT YOURSELF, REGARDS, V.GANESAN INDIA. I think Ozan means gasoline, not woodgas. Keith OF Ozan Tezer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hello, I produce biodiesel and plan to convert a car engine that works with gas to diesel. I plan to use diesel injectors, instead of spark plugs. I know the compression ratio is different, but I wonder if it works or not. Any idea about it..? also mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuel] Re: Engine conversion
--- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, venkat gasn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: HELLOW MR FRIEND, YES U CAN CONVERT YOUR PETROL ENGINES TO DIESEL INJECTION MODE, BUT LIFE OF PISTON ,RINGS, SLEEVES WILL BE LESS, DONT WOREY ABOUT COMPRESION RATIOS AS WOOD GAS WORKES ON LOWCOMPRESION RATIOS. Woodgas does not work well in low-compression engines. Yes, you can get them to run, but woodgas works best in diesel engines, the higher compression the better. Even in a spark ignition engine, you really need to raise the compression to at least 13:1 if you want any sort of decent power off the woodgas. And he's talking about diesel fuel, not woodgas. U CAN DO IT YOURSELF, REGARDS, V.GANESAN INDIA. OF Ozan Tezer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hello, I produce biodiesel and plan to convert a car engine that works with gas to diesel. I plan to use diesel injectors, instead of spark plugs. I know the compression ratio is different, but I wonder if it works or not. Any idea about it..? also mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Catch all the cricket action. Download Yahoo! Score tracker [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuel] Re: Engine conversion
--- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, Ozan Tezer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I produce biodiesel and plan to convert a car engine that works with gas to diesel. I plan to use diesel injectors, instead of spark plugs. I know the compression ratio is different, but I wonder if it works or not. Any idea about it..? That won't work, but you can try running one as a dual fuel engine, where you start the engine on gasoline, get it warmed up well, then switch to biodiesel. Many older tractors had this ability, although they ran only used kerosene, not diesel. I have a garden tractor which I could have ordered, when I bought it new, this feature, with a dual tank and the other mods, which include a hotter sparkplug (necessay to reduce plug fouling) and a bigger mainjet in the carb. Also the ignition was advanced. If you try this, you would also want to heat the fuel line for the biodiesel so as to thin the viscosity a lot, and it might work with biodiesel as well as kerosene because of the higher cetane rating of the biodiesel. But it also might pollute more. All in all, you'd probably be alot better off to pull the gasoline engine and replace it with a diesel. I was actually going to try running my Toyota pickup on biodiesel, even bought the dual fuel switch and fuel line heater (like people use for running SVO in a diesel) to do it with, then suddenly found myself with two good running diesel vehicles and a Kubota diesel for a stationary genset so gave up on the idea. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] UK WVO quantities
Hello, I am trying to find a rough estimate of the quantity of WVO being produced in the UK as part of a undergraduate project that I am involved in. Does anyone have this information or know where I can get it? Thanks, James You asked before, and you got some responses. Don't you read the list? Here's one: http://archive.nnytech.net/index.php?view=18807list=BIOFUEL http://archive.nnytech.net/index.php?view=18861list=BIOFUEL Also you were asked for some feedback: Last time you were asking for help with data on moisture content of wvo for the design of a veg oil fired dehydrator to dry wvo. We'd appreciate a progress report, or some sort of feedback. Thankyou. Keith Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] [m]ethyl esters to methane
Why not use veggie oil rather than biodiesel Martin? Keith Well I have been reading about hydrocarbon cracking on the hobbicast list and trying to stir up some information. So I was thinking about biodiesel and wondering if you could do the same with it. Perhaps I can burn biodiesel in my melting furnace! :) Or perhaps biodiesel could be broken into thinner chains to make it's gel point lower. My sister is a chemistry major I'll have to ask her. Shameless endorsement: hobbicast http://infoarchive.net/index.php?list=hobbicast is archived at the infoarchive http://infoarchive.net/, as well as 12 other groups. Glenn wrote: Martin, Time to dig out the organic chemistry books again :) In theory it is possible to break methyl esters or any other hydrocarbon chain into smaller CH4 molecules. -- --- Martin Klingensmith http://nnytech.net/ http://infoarchive.net/ Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Gasoline and Petrol (was Re: [biofuel] Engine conversion
Hakan, What we Americans call gas, or gasoline, the British (and perhaps others) call petrol. Craig Hakan Falk wrote: No, he means gas, since Juan was writing about gas engine. Yes, if you want to run a gasoline engine in injection mode for gas, it will work fine. Only a slight language problem and I am happy that I am not the only foreigner with this. It is some differences between English and Americans on petrol, gas etc.. What is what? Hakan Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Engine conversion
girl mark, I have been doing my own research into why the GM diesel failure happened and the only information I have found was that the head bolts stretched and that this was the primary failure for the GM line because the bolts were not torqued at correct intervals and/or the head bolts stretched and were usually not replaced on a rebuilt. Do you have a source on the info about problems with the block crankshaft,etc. ? I'd like to find out more about it. Thanks, Jess I found the same site Robert did when I researched this. Lots of Injector Pump problems, blowing head gaskets, and poor maintenence due to lack of knowledge basically killed them. Many engines were perfesionally changed out by GM mechanics, but still with many top end problems and poor maintenence, and also due to water in the fuel. Also breaking crankshaft and other bottom end problems... http://members.tripod.com/~A350Diesel/disaster.html This is the main site: http://members.tripod.com/~A350Diesel/index-17.html The 350 Diesel Page Best Keith --- Jesse Parris | studio53 | 53 maitland rd | stamford, ct 06906 203.324.4371www.jesseparris.com/ Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Corrugated steel roofing (was Re: [biofuel] Embodied energy
Ken, I've built a couple of outbuildings on my lot in Berkeley using corrugated steel roofing, and I just used conventional rafters with purlins - 2x4's in one case, 3x6's in the other - running at right angles to, and on top of, the rafters to support the corrugated. Very easy to do, and the corrugated goes up way quicker than any other kind of roofing. Where in Tuolumne County are you? - I have an engineer friend who's building a rammed earth house in Strawberry. He found the building inspection department very easy to deal with, and he might be able to help you with getting strawbale to fly. You wrote: snip I'm also planning on a steel roof, but I'm not sure what sort of support system to use (e.g., wood truss, steel truss, traditional rafters, etc). snip Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Engine conversion
No, he means gas, since Juan was writing about gas engine. Yes, if you want to run a gasoline engine in injection mode for gas, it will work fine. Only a slight language problem and I am happy that I am not the only foreigner with this. It is some differences between English and Americans on petrol, gas etc.. What is what? Hakan At 01:36 AM 12/14/2002 +0900, you wrote: HELLOW MR FRIEND, YES U CAN CONVERT YOUR PETROL ENGINES TO DIESEL INJECTION MODE, BUT LIFE OF PISTON ,RINGS, SLEEVES WILL BE LESS, DONT WOREY ABOUT COMPRESION RATIOS AS WOOD GAS WORKES ON LOWCOMPRESION RATIOS. U CAN DO IT YOURSELF, REGARDS, V.GANESAN INDIA. I think Ozan means gasoline, not woodgas. Keith OF Ozan Tezer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hello, I produce biodiesel and plan to convert a car engine that works with gas to diesel. I plan to use diesel injectors, instead of spark plugs. I know the compression ratio is different, but I wonder if it works or not. Any idea about it..? also mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Veg. Oil and or soaps from BioD production
coachgeo3 wrote: Ive read some post in other places where folk have used diesel fuel, and waste motor oils to make a paste or inside body part rust prevention sprays(like in doors). Military has run test on diff. oils for this purpose, but not veg oils. I live in the rust belt so I like the idea. Anyone done this with veg oils. Would it invite mice and bugs and other creatures to invade? I haven't really noticed. I could see swabbing it on under your car in the winter with a big wall paper brush. or just rubber gloves and coat her all up. Each spring and fall for the past several years I used a tin can paint brush with drained petroleum oil, gear lubricants and grease on rusted areas. Draw back is the flash point temp. Now I use canola oil to slow down rust especially the rocker panels. Not sure what the flash point is but I have trouble keeping it lit so I assume its less of a danger then petroleum lubricants. Draw back is washing the vehicle but at least its biodegradable rate is faster (I think). One thing I like about these oily liquids is it appears to penetrate wick somewhat. They also cake up with sand dirt. It still amazes me out at the junk yards these parts coated with this gunk are relatively well preserved. One of the reasons I started using canola oil was because of something someone mentioned about coating steel to minimize oxidation and its adhesiveness. I apologize to whomever brought this to our attention for not crediting you directly. I also hope I understood it correctly. So far I'm happy with the results or else cut out the heavily rusty metal, weld, paint. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] [m]ethyl esters to methane
Would be interesting to to have that methane cleaned up and processed into methanol. :) A small bio-source of methanol . mm Anyone know of a small methanol processing unit? James Slayden On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, girl mark wrote: It seems a little backwards to do this- after all the methanol is reformulated from methane, no? I'm reading a great book called 'a chinese biogas manual' about methane digesters. they're mostly talking about large-scale (large family or work group within a large rural commune). My friend the UC Davis grad student studying digesters (and building them, and teaching about them, and probably thinking about little but anaerobic bacteria and how to make them comfortable!) uses a small-scale design that's based on an old water heater as a demo digester. DOn't know how much comes out of one of those but I think it's signficant. So there's fairly easy ways of making methane without resorting to chemical cracking of hydrocarbons when the bacteria can do it for you. One of my buddies wants to build one to digest excess glycerine from biodiesel. Mark At 12:44 AM 12/13/2002 -0500, you wrote: Well I have been reading about hydrocarbon cracking on the hobbicast list and trying to stir up some information. So I was thinking about biodiesel and wondering if you could do the same with it. Perhaps I can burn biodiesel in my melting furnace! :) Or perhaps biodiesel could be broken into thinner chains to make it's gel point lower. My sister is a chemistry major I'll have to ask her. Shameless endorsement: hobbicast http://infoarchive.net/index.php?list=hobbicasthttp://infoarchive.net/index php?list=hobbicast is archived at the infoarchive http://infoarchive.net/http://infoarchive.net/, as well as 12 other groups. Glenn wrote: Martin, Time to dig out the organic chemistry books again :) In theory it is possible to break methyl esters or any other hydrocarbon chain into smaller CH4 molecules. -- --- Martin Klingensmith http://nnytech.net/http://nnytech.net/ http://infoarchive.net/ Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.htmlhttp://journeytoforever.org/biofuel. tml Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] [m]ethyl esters to methane
hrmm, wonder if that would work for glyc . (my brain starts turning). On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, robert luis rabello wrote: Glenn wrote: In theory it is possible to break methyl esters or any other hydrocarbon chain into smaller CH4 molecules. Design a device that's borrowed from a Babington Burner, limit the air intake and install a heavy duty spark plug with the grounding flange removed. Use another modified spark plug as the ground and install it across from the first one. Apply direct current voltage to this when the air compressor and oil pump are working. If you really want to get fancy, run the resulting plasma gas through a catalyst and inject a bit of steam. You should end up with hydrogen and carbon monoxide gas. It may not be methane, but it will burn cleanly. robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.1stbooks.com/bookview/9782 Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Engine conversion
stick with converting it to E85 or NG. On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Ozan Tezer wrote: Hello, I produce biodiesel and plan to convert a car engine that works with gas to diesel. I plan to use diesel injectors, instead of spark plugs. I know the compression ratio is different, but I wonder if it works or not. Any idea about it..? also mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Embodied energy
Hakan, Greg April, Caroline, et. al. -- Thanks for your detailed responses -- I'll check out all those ideas and more. I agree that the mold problem with straw bales could have been mitigated with proper permeability, and also it's import- ant EXACTLY how you support the first course of bales -- they have to be well-raised above the slab. I'm very interested in radiant heat, so I'll check on pump lifetimes as a possible problem. I'm also planning on a steel roof, but I'm not sure what sort of support system to use (e.g., wood truss, steel truss, traditional rafters, etc). I'm not even sure if I'll be able to get load-bearing strawbale past the building dept., but many in the area (Tuolumne County, CA) have paved the way, so the answers should be forthcoming. Another interesting subject is the whole passive solar thing -- I'd love to use clerestory windows, light tunnels, etc. The house will be at 3000 ft. elevation (914 m), light snow in the winter, often 105 F (40 C) in the summer. -K Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Embodied energy
I know of someone who has a two story HUGE strawbale house in the Santa Cruz mountains, 12K of solar completely off the grid, solar water heating for both home, spa, and subfloor heading. They provided for awesome passive heating on the south window structure. Let me know if you want to visit and I will call them for a walk through. BTW, also have a Yoga studio attached to the house that one of the owners teachs in. Nice people with some great applications of doing things right. Just the idea that your going to use alternative building technology puts you ahead of 99.99% of standard building. James Slayden On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Grahams wrote: At 08:40 PM 12/12/2002, you wrote: This is a bit OT, but I don't know where else to address an audience with the potential interest level. I'm planning to build a new house in a rural area, and I'd like to do it in an ecologically sound way. The plan at present is 1700 sq.ft., straw bale walls, minimal usage of wood and concrete, Research , research, research... did I get my point across? Building a house is a BIG financial and lifestyle investment. Before you choose or discard any options try to find someone who has a working model of that component. Some research of straw bale that I ran across showed that within a year there was significant mold growth. I am sure this is climate related, yet certainly worth considering.I chose cellulose insulation, due to it's cost and the fact that it is recycled newspaper. I don't know whether this is why or not- but this winter (2nd in this house) we are overrun with mice living in it. Not that big a deal, (till you find the dead ones trapped in the file cabinet smelling up that whole room) but I never considered that. Also, wood is certainly a renewable resource- your common 2x4 can be harvested every 8-10 years on our woods. We are considering cob for our next building project. If you are building in a place with dirt-(not just sand). This may meet many of your goals. ( tip- I would purchase a tractor with a loader.) etc etc. I've run across a measure of environmental impact called embodied energy, which tries to include not only the energy required to manufacture the basic material, but also such factors as the energy needed to transport the raw and finished materials, the amount of labor needed to install (ie, transporting n workers to a site), This could also be interpreted as just plain expense, which comes up for everyone as they try to make a sustainable housing project a reality. The more unusual or out of the ordinary, unless very simple, will be more expensive in labor. This is a big deal IMO, construction workers are seldom known for their intellectual abilities. I chose a manufactured straight truss- only so their would be no on site labor cost and associated possible problems. I found a wonderfully easy to install reflective metal roof which my workers could install rather than getting a roofer. On the other hand, the insulation factory is 15 miles away, yet I had to purchase it from a retailer 30 miles away, in order to get use of the blower- wasteful, yet simpler and less expensive. as well as the lifetime of the end result. Once again this is an expense issue. I chose concrete blocks, stone or brick, because of so many old building I saw, still useable or reclaimable when clad in this material. As my aunt used to say- You can't build a 1990's house at 1960's labor prices. the labor that went into the brick on a colonial house has paid for itself, many times over. The clapboard has only been preserved with many coats of paint over the years. For this however, I think you must use your own common sense and think it out. What can you see currently that has lasted . This does give new stuff a serious disadvantage, but that is just the way it is. We chose an in floor radiant heat system. I have had lots of problems with the pump needing to be replaced EVERY year after being dormant for the summer. Perhaps it is a bad pump, yet this could become way more expensive and bothersome than a traditional tried and true heating system would have been. Unfortunately, this index (imprecise at best) DOESN'T typically seem to address two issues of particular concern to me -- carbon burden (atmospheric), and sustainability (how long will supplies of the material last at current consumption rates). Maybe that's because the bulk of the work was done in the 70's, when such info was less significant or not yet emphasized. Anyway, does anyone know of RECENT research addressing these issues as they pertain to home construction methods? Steel roofs vs comp shingle Don't know the embodied energy rating, but a reflective roof will significantly reduce cooling needs. One fellow at the DOE said that if CA had all white or reflective roofs they would have 100 less smog days per year. (This was
[biofuel] Re: Engine conversion
Harmon Seaver wrote: --- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, venkat gasn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: HELLOW MR FRIEND, YES U CAN CONVERT YOUR PETROL ENGINES TO DIESEL INJECTION MODE, BUT LIFE OF PISTON ,RINGS, SLEEVES WILL BE LESS, DONT WOREY ABOUT COMPRESION RATIOS AS WOOD GAS WORKES ON LOWCOMPRESION RATIOS. Woodgas does not work well in low-compression engines. Yes, you can get them to run, but woodgas works best in diesel engines, the higher compression the better. Even in a spark ignition engine, you really need to raise the compression to at least 13:1 if you want any sort of decent power off the woodgas. Other way round actually. 2.1.1 Possibilities of using producer gas with different types of engines Spark ignition engines, normally used with petrol-or kerosene, can be run on producer gas alone. Diesel engines can be converted to full producer gas operation by lowering the compression ratio and the installation of a spark ignition system. Another possibility is to run a normal unconverted diesel engine in a dual fuel mode, whereby the engine draws anything between 0 and 90 per cent of its power output from producer gas (17), the remaining diesel oil being necessary for ignition of the combustible gas/air mixture. The advantage of the latter system lies in its flexibility: in case of malfunctioning of the gasifier or lack of biomass fuel, an immediate change to full diesel operation is generally possible. However, not all types of diesel engines can be converted to the above mode of operation. Compression ratios of ante-chamber and turbulence chamber diesel engines are too high for satisfactory dual fuel operation and use of producer gas in those engines leads to knocking caused by too high pressures combined with delayed ignition (20). Direct injection diesel engines have lower compression ratios and can generally be successfully converted. http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/T0512E/T0512e00.htm Wood gas as engine fuel, Mechanical Wood Products Branch, Forest Industries Division, FAO Forestry Department, 1986, ISBN 92-5-102436-7 See also: The Gengas Page: http://www.gengas.nu/byggbes/index.shtml The making of the Klle-gasifier by Torsten Klle, Royal Swedish Academy of Engineering, 1942 (Translation to English 2000, Joacim Persson: http://www.hotel.ymex.net/~s-20222/gengas/kg_eng.html And he's talking about diesel fuel, not woodgas. Um, gasoline, not diesel fuel. Keith U CAN DO IT YOURSELF, REGARDS, V.GANESAN INDIA. OF Ozan Tezer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hello, I produce biodiesel and plan to convert a car engine that works with gas to diesel. I plan to use diesel injectors, instead of spark plugs. I know the compression ratio is different, but I wonder if it works or not. Any idea about it..? also mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] [m]ethyl esters to methane
The person who devolopes a small methanol processing unit, stands to make a lot of money if big bussiness doesn't drive him under. Greg H. - Original Message - From: James Slayden Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 11:00 Subject: Re: [biofuel] [m]ethyl esters to methane Would be interesting to to have that methane cleaned up and processed into methanol. :) A small bio-source of methanol . mm Anyone know of a small methanol processing unit? James Slayden Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Embodied energy
- Original Message - From: Ken Provost [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 11:12 Subject: Re: [biofuel] Embodied energy I'm not even sure if I'll be able to get load-bearing strawbale past the building dept., but many in the area (Tuolumne County, CA) have paved the way, so the answers should be forthcoming. Call it a building of post and beam construction with compressed cellouse insulation, and you will have described a straw bale house in terms that are meaningful and likely to get approved. Greg H. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Embodied energy
Yes, it puts your head on European medieval buildings and if you study works from restoration experts on this type of buildings, you can avoid a lot of problems. The key is to keep the construction open, so it can dry up any humidity sufficiently fast. The moment you apply any plastic paints or similar actions, it will start to rotten fast. This is the most common way of destroying a medieval building with straw in the wall construction. Will work very good with heated floors, because of its large heat or cold storage capacity and (high in winter, low in summer) inside surface temperatures. Straw bales do have quite good load bearing capacity, because they are pre-pressurized and a very large thickness. In the medieval construction they had a wooden frame, often oak, and applied the straw in the frame. The straw was glued together with clay or cement. Wall surfaces of unpainted stuck, with chicken net reinforcement is also one adapted traditional method. Your project will be very interesting and a rewarding one. It is fun to study and really understand the sustainable traditions of this kind of buildings. Have fun, Hakan At 10:15 AM 12/13/2002 -0800, you wrote: I know of someone who has a two story HUGE strawbale house in the Santa Cruz mountains, 12K of solar completely off the grid, solar water heating for both home, spa, and subfloor heading. They provided for awesome passive heating on the south window structure. Let me know if you want to visit and I will call them for a walk through. BTW, also have a Yoga studio attached to the house that one of the owners teachs in. Nice people with some great applications of doing things right. Just the idea that your going to use alternative building technology puts you ahead of 99.99% of standard building. James Slayden On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Grahams wrote: At 08:40 PM 12/12/2002, you wrote: This is a bit OT, but I don't know where else to address an audience with the potential interest level. I'm planning to build a new house in a rural area, and I'd like to do it in an ecologically sound way. The plan at present is 1700 sq.ft., straw bale walls, minimal usage of wood and concrete, Research , research, research... did I get my point across? Building a house is a BIG financial and lifestyle investment. Before you choose or discard any options try to find someone who has a working model of that component. Some research of straw bale that I ran across showed that within a year there was significant mold growth. I am sure this is climate related, yet certainly worth considering.I chose cellulose insulation, due to it's cost and the fact that it is recycled newspaper. I don't know whether this is why or not- but this winter (2nd in this house) we are overrun with mice living in it. Not that big a deal, (till you find the dead ones trapped in the file cabinet smelling up that whole room) but I never considered that. Also, wood is certainly a renewable resource- your common 2x4 can be harvested every 8-10 years on our woods. We are considering cob for our next building project. If you are building in a place with dirt-(not just sand). This may meet many of your goals. ( tip- I would purchase a tractor with a loader.) etc etc. I've run across a measure of environmental impact called embodied energy, which tries to include not only the energy required to manufacture the basic material, but also such factors as the energy needed to transport the raw and finished materials, the amount of labor needed to install (ie, transporting n workers to a site), This could also be interpreted as just plain expense, which comes up for everyone as they try to make a sustainable housing project a reality. The more unusual or out of the ordinary, unless very simple, will be more expensive in labor. This is a big deal IMO, construction workers are seldom known for their intellectual abilities. I chose a manufactured straight truss- only so their would be no on site labor cost and associated possible problems. I found a wonderfully easy to install reflective metal roof which my workers could install rather than getting a roofer. On the other hand, the insulation factory is 15 miles away, yet I had to purchase it from a retailer 30 miles away, in order to get use of the blower- wasteful, yet simpler and less expensive. as well as the lifetime of the end result. Once again this is an expense issue. I chose concrete blocks, stone or brick, because of so many old building I saw, still useable or reclaimable when clad in this material. As my aunt used to say- You can't build a 1990's house at 1960's labor prices. the labor that went into the brick on a colonial house has paid for itself, many times over. The clapboard has only been preserved with many coats of paint over the years. For this however, I think you must use
[biofuel] Re: Engine conversion
--- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Harmon Seaver wrote: --- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, venkat gasn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: HELLOW MR FRIEND, YES U CAN CONVERT YOUR PETROL ENGINES TO DIESEL INJECTION MODE, BUT LIFE OF PISTON ,RINGS, SLEEVES WILL BE LESS, DONT WOREY ABOUT COMPRESION RATIOS AS WOOD GAS WORKES ON LOWCOMPRESION RATIOS. Woodgas does not work well in low-compression engines. Yes, you can get them to run, but woodgas works best in diesel engines, the higher compression the better. Even in a spark ignition engine, you really need to raise the compression to at least 13:1 if you want any sort of decent power off the woodgas. Other way round actually. I think if you check the archives of the gasification list, you'll find that this has been discussed fairly thoroughly, and so far no one has had a problem with knocking when using woodgas in a high compression diesel engine. The consensus seems to be that there is no problem. Indeed, it would be hard to see why there would be since woodgas has so much less inherent engergy than diesel fuel, and burns relatively slowly. In a gasoline engine you need to both raise the compression *and* greatly advance the spark to burn woodgas effectively. Even so you'll be lucky to get 50% of the rated power of the engine on gasoline. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuel] Re: Petroleum's Role in Hemp Prohibition
Harmon Seaver wrote: Kris said: Ater doing a little reading, I must adjust my statement slightly but, Harmon you are way off base here. Hardly. It's pretty clear you have no personal knowledge of this stuff and have been reading the wrong stuff. In this country both hemp and marijuana come from the cannabis sativa plant. Nope, wrong again -- well, partially right, but most of the marijuana grown in north america these days is a hybred of cannabis sativa and cannabis indica. Not a hybrid, just a cross. Cannabis indica and cannabis sativa are synonyms, the same plant according to different classification systems. And a lot of it is pure indica. Forty years ago it was all sativa, and that is the species native to this hemisphere, but the problem was that the marijuana seeds (sativa) Marijuana is just the Mexican name for it, you can't differentiate between marijuana and hemp, it's all cannabis. were all from Mexico and further south, and wouldn't mature here, would not flower. The hemp plant, OTOH, does mature, flower and go to seed, in the northern US and even Canada and Alaska. The hemp plant in question, industrial hemp (there are others), is a variety of cannabis, or many varieties, bred for local adaptation in various regions, bred initially for yield and for fibre qualities, and later for low THC content as well. Both low- and high-THC hemp (cannabis) covers a wide range: Native to Central Asia, and long cultivated in Asia, Europe, and China. Now a widespread tropical, temperate and subarctic cultivar and waif. (James Duke) And while hemp is taken from the female stem as well as the male, the male's fibers are much stronger, so are more highly valued. Hemp varieties tested in Ontario to date have all been of European origin. They come in two types: Dioecious, which have male and female flower parts on separate plants, and Monoecious, which have male and female flower parts on the same plant. A third type of cultivar, known as Female Predominant, has 85 to 90 percent female plants. It is believed that this type can produce a higher yield of bast fibres. http://www.gov.on.ca/OMAFRA/english/crops/facts/hempprod.htm Hemp Production I can't find the link but, I read that high quality Manila rope comes exclusively from male plants. Manila hemp is a different species, not cannabis, it's Musa textilis (abaca). You may be right, but that's irrelevant. :-) Like Keith said, there is 0.3% THC in hemp fiber and the drug czar claimed on TV the other day that today's marijuana has up to 30%. That's right, industrial varieties have virtually zilch THC, and the latest psychoactive strains do get that high (sorry!). I think breeders in the US have achieved similar results to those in Holland and Europe, but I know less about the US. All the same species though, just different varieties, purpose-bred. Well, I think he's full of BS, as usual, Oh really. That's a bit rich. My BS is here: http://eesc.orst.edu/agcomwebfile/EdMat/SB681/whole2.html more like a max of 13% with most being around 5-6%. I gave references and I've also researched this subject, as I've said in other posts, to discover how 3rd World crop development and production fares without any help from development agencies, mainstream research programs or extension services, as opposed to official (and disastrous) efforts like the so-called Green Revolution. (The answer was very well indeed.) Where are your references? You want to argue with the OECD? (Probably you do.) Only pedigreed seed varieties will be approved for planting in Canada. These varieties are set out in the List of Cultivars Eligible for Certification, published by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and/or in the List of Varieties Eligible for Certification in Canada, published by the Canadian Seed Growers' Association (CSGA). Approved varieties tried in Ontario so far have been: Uniko-B, Kompolti, Lavron 110, Irene, Secuieni1, Felina 34, Fedora 19, Fedrina 74 and Futura 77. These varieties are known to produce plants containing less than 0.3% THC under normal conditions. This level may vary with stage of growth and increase under environmental stress conditions. They mature to fibre in 60 to 90 days, and to seed in 110 to 150 days. http://www.gov.on.ca/OMAFRA/english/crops/facts/hempprod.htm#vari How high do you think you'll get on something that is 90 times weaker that what people are smoking. You can't sell male plant for any price, only an idiot would smoke something that will only give you a headache instead of a high. It's not the difference between male and female plants, it's the difference between varieties. Now here's where you are getting seriously silly, and I'm having a seriously hard time even following your logic. Where do you get the idea you can't sell male plant for any price? Back in the '60's when everybody was planting the
Re: [biofuel] [m]ethyl esters to methane
Would be interesting to to have that methane cleaned up and processed into methanol. :) A small bio-source of methanol . mm Anyone know of a small methanol processing unit? No, despite much searching. Ken said he did though - any news, Ken? I put this question to the GAS list at Crest recently (gasification), where Dr Tom Reed responded, as hoped. He's a methanol fan, did a lot of work with methanol in the 70s. His response was, sadly, nothing for backyarders. Processing methane into methanol takes steam reforming, I think for starters. Best Keith James Slayden On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, girl mark wrote: It seems a little backwards to do this- after all the methanol is reformulated from methane, no? I'm reading a great book called 'a chinese biogas manual' about methane digesters. they're mostly talking about large-scale (large family or work group within a large rural commune). My friend the UC Davis grad student studying digesters (and building them, and teaching about them, and probably thinking about little but anaerobic bacteria and how to make them comfortable!) uses a small-scale design that's based on an old water heater as a demo digester. DOn't know how much comes out of one of those but I think it's signficant. So there's fairly easy ways of making methane without resorting to chemical cracking of hydrocarbons when the bacteria can do it for you. One of my buddies wants to build one to digest excess glycerine from biodiesel. Mark At 12:44 AM 12/13/2002 -0500, you wrote: Well I have been reading about hydrocarbon cracking on the hobbicast list and trying to stir up some information. So I was thinking about biodiesel and wondering if you could do the same with it. Perhaps I can burn biodiesel in my melting furnace! :) Or perhaps biodiesel could be broken into thinner chains to make it's gel point lower. My sister is a chemistry major I'll have to ask her. Shameless endorsement: hobbicast http://infoarchive.net/index.php?list=hobbicasthttp://infoarch ive.net/index php?list=hobbicast is archived at the infoarchive http://infoarchive.net/http://infoarchive.net/, as well as 12 other groups. Glenn wrote: Martin, Time to dig out the organic chemistry books again :) In theory it is possible to break methyl esters or any other hydrocarbon chain into smaller CH4 molecules. -- --- Martin Klingensmith http://nnytech.net/http://nnytech.net/ http://infoarchive.net/ Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuel] RE: The Railroading of Amtrak
Keith- We need to support rail transport (not to mention bus transport) not based on a government fiscal cost argument. We need to do it because it's right for the environment. If you argue that Amtrak should get proportionate funding inline with air, the statistics you pointed out fail to support the conclusion that 1.2Billion funding for rail makes sense, if the proportionality is based on miles traveled per capita. Based on 1998 US travel statistics, Annual average ridership for rail is less than 1/85th that of air travel @ 200miles vs 1700-plus miles for air travel---see http://www.publicpurpose.com/ic-airrailcontext.htm . Looking at it that way, given the government is funding and bailing out the airlines to the tune of 28-billion, the subsidy request by Amtrak of 1.2-billion ( a ratio of 1/23) is proportionately out of whack---if we expect the feds to spend our money to get the biggest bang for the buck, the airline subisdies are 3.5-times more value than the rail funding request. Still, as with most NEW things, and with struggling old ones, it takes front loading to get people to herd their way toward the bus door, the railway car stairs or the new renovated downtown. That's the issue. Rail and Bus transit need the bucks BECAUSE they have been so relegated as non-20th century and expected to make it on their own since they are OLD TECHNOLOGIES. We need to turn that around. Light rail, modern high speed inter-urban rail, hybrid buses, etc. need support because their competition has lured away all their customers over the years through glamorous salesmanship and appeals to the freedoms of air travel or solo driving. I get frustrated locally, in Portland Oregon, with demands for the bus system to be self-sufficient. Of course we all want that, but people still love their cars, and their is a level of investment required in making bus transit appeal to more riders---a level of investment which won't be recouped immediately if at all. Still, the reduction in traffic congestion, accidents, pollution, latent road warrior hostility, etc. are rarely considered in these arguments regarding funding transit modes. The car and the airplane are 20th century freedom machines and viewed as essential to being 'merican. That is the undercurrent we run against. Still, overpopulation, congestion, resource depletion and pollution will result in mass transit solutions regardlessif not too late. -Myles Twete, Portland, Or. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] UK WVO quantities
Hi James, You could try EPA in UK as they carry lot this type info. Regards, Damian biofuel@yahoogroups.com wrote: Hello, I am trying to find a rough estimate of the quantity of WVO being produced in the UK as part of a undergraduate project that I am involved in. Does anyone have this information or know where I can get it? Thanks, James Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuel] Re: Engine conversion
Harmon Seaver wrote: --- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Harmon Seaver wrote: --- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, venkat gasn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: HELLOW MR FRIEND, YES U CAN CONVERT YOUR PETROL ENGINES TO DIESEL INJECTION MODE, BUT LIFE OF PISTON ,RINGS, SLEEVES WILL BE LESS, DONT WOREY ABOUT COMPRESION RATIOS AS WOOD GAS WORKES ON LOWCOMPRESION RATIOS. Woodgas does not work well in low-compression engines. Yes, you can get them to run, but woodgas works best in diesel engines, the higher compression the better. Even in a spark ignition engine, you really need to raise the compression to at least 13:1 if you want any sort of decent power off the woodgas. Other way round actually. I think if you check the archives of the gasification list, you'll find that this has been discussed fairly thoroughly, and so far no one has had a problem with knocking when using woodgas in a high compression diesel engine. The consensus seems to be that there is no problem. Indeed, it would be hard to see why there would be since woodgas has so much less inherent engergy than diesel fuel, and burns relatively slowly. In a gasoline engine you need to both raise the compression *and* greatly advance the spark to burn woodgas effectively. Even so you'll be lucky to get 50% of the rated power of the engine on gasoline. Check the refs I gave you Harmon. I'm also a member of the GAS list at Crest, in fact I think you asked me for the address when you wanted to join, didn't you? Keith Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuel] RE: The Railroading of Amtrak
Sorryrail miles traveled per capita has been at less than 20miles/yr, not 200miles/yr. The ratio of 1/85th that of US air travel/capita is about right. rail is less than 1/85th that of air travel @ 200miles vs 1700-plus miles for air travel---see http://www.publicpurpose.com/ic-airrailcontext.htm . -Myles Twete, Portland, Or. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [biofuel] [m]ethyl esters to methane
I figured it was easier to vaporize biodiesel than veggie oil. This summer I want to experiment with a pre-burning chamber and see if I can do without any special nozzles or a pump. --- Martin Klingensmith infoarchive.net [archive.nnytech.net] nnytech.net -Original Message- From: Keith Addison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 11:53 AM To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [biofuel] [m]ethyl esters to methane Why not use veggie oil rather than biodiesel Martin? Keith Well I have been reading about hydrocarbon cracking on the hobbicast list and trying to stir up some information. So I was thinking about biodiesel and wondering if you could do the same with it. Perhaps I can burn biodiesel in my melting furnace! :) Or perhaps biodiesel could be broken into thinner chains to make it's gel point lower. My sister is a chemistry major I'll have to ask her. Shameless endorsement: hobbicast http://infoarchive.net/index.php?list=hobbicast is archived at the infoarchive http://infoarchive.net/, as well as 12 other groups. Glenn wrote: Martin, Time to dig out the organic chemistry books again :) In theory it is possible to break methyl esters or any other hydrocarbon chain into smaller CH4 molecules. -- --- Martin Klingensmith http://nnytech.net/ http://infoarchive.net/ Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuel] RE: The Railroading of Amtrak
Hi Myles It's not what I'm saying, it's what the news article said. We have had quite a lot of discussion on rail, and comparisons between different modes of transport. Try a search for Amtrak or rail or trains in the archives. Mere miles travelled is not a very good comparison. We had this, for one: Average BTU consumed Per Passenger mile by mode of travel: SUV: 4,591 Air: 4,123 Bus: 3,729 Car: 3,672 Train: 2,138 Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics http://199.79.179.77/btsprod/nts/Ch4_web/4-20.htm There was quite a lot of argument about it. I think there should also be in the archive a story about how the automakers railroaded trams off the roads in the 30s or so, usual lobbying and spin. Also some horrendous stuff in the archives about airports, and their proliferation. It all needs to be considered in a *real* (?) light, shorn of hidden subsidies and silly economic theories. Practice shows that viable transport systems probably need subsidizing, and that what's important about them isn't whether or not they conform to the latest religion in Wall Street or the White House but whether or not they provide a viable and effective service. The real costs of an unviable rail system (Britain) are much higher than the costs of necessary subsidies for an effective one (Japan). Looking forwards, required energy economies and efficiencies, lower emissions, fewer externalizations - sustainable transport, in other words - simply rule out such preferences as the appeal of solo driving and what's essential to being 'merican. :-) Some painful lessons to be learnt, I fear. Keith- We need to support rail transport (not to mention bus transport) not based on a government fiscal cost argument. We need to do it because it's right for the environment. If you argue that Amtrak should get proportionate funding inline with air, the statistics you pointed out fail to support the conclusion that 1.2Billion funding for rail makes sense, if the proportionality is based on miles traveled per capita. Based on 1998 US travel statistics, Annual average ridership for rail is less than 1/85th that of air travel @ 200miles vs 1700-plus miles for air travel---see http://www.publicpurpose.com/ic-airrailcontext.htm . Looking at it that way, given the government is funding and bailing out the airlines to the tune of 28-billion, the subsidy request by Amtrak of 1.2-billion ( a ratio of 1/23) is proportionately out of whack---if we expect the feds to spend our money to get the biggest bang for the buck, the airline subisdies are 3.5-times more value than the rail funding request. Still, as with most NEW things, and with struggling old ones, it takes front loading to get people to herd their way toward the bus door, the railway car stairs or the new renovated downtown. That's the issue. Rail and Bus transit need the bucks BECAUSE they have been so relegated as non-20th century and expected to make it on their own since they are OLD TECHNOLOGIES. We need to turn that around. Light rail, modern high speed inter-urban rail, hybrid buses, etc. need support because their competition has lured away all their customers over the years through glamorous salesmanship and appeals to the freedoms of air travel or solo driving. I get frustrated locally, in Portland Oregon, with demands for the bus system to be self-sufficient. Of course we all want that, but people still love their cars, and their is a level of investment required in making bus transit appeal to more riders---a level of investment which won't be recouped immediately if at all. Still, the reduction in traffic congestion, accidents, pollution, latent road warrior hostility, etc. are rarely considered in these arguments regarding funding transit modes. The car and the airplane are 20th century freedom machines and viewed as essential to being 'merican. That is the undercurrent we run against. Still, overpopulation, congestion, resource depletion and pollution will result in mass transit solutions regardlessif not too late. Inevitable, I agree - the longer it's put off, the more painful the lesson will be. Americans have been living in a dream world for a long time as far as energy is concerned (let alone confining themselves to a fair proportion of it at least). As with all the industrialized countries, but particularly Americans in this case, about twice as bad as the rest (especially about trains and diesels!). regards Keith -Myles Twete, Portland, Or. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Embodied energy
The mold issue with strawbale or ANY otherr building material all has to do with weather detailing, and with the type of plaster used (ie, I hate cement stucco) and if it's applied correctly. This covers a huge array of possible mistakes, and these mistakes also occur with stickframe houses (some of the 'toxic mold' issue with building is (oops I can't remember the species name) stuff that loves drywall! that is, if water leaks onto it with any regularity that is). Ideally, with strawbale, people should be paying more attention to weatherproofing and waterproofing detailing because it's fairly obvious that you need to, but like with any form of construction you have plenty of builders who don't have all the skills they should. And there are some issues with building codes not saying nearly enough about weather detailing- my friend whose been a contractor (conventional buildings, that is) for 30 years in hurricane country said that they pretty much had to invent their own techniques for that harsh (ie horizontal rain) climate, because there was little conventional thinking about waterproofing that covered the extreme conditions they worked with, and because the codes said zero about it there. Cob is great but there's climate issues with it too, and pros and cons to it and all other natural and synthetic building materials and techniques. I might be wrong but we stayed away from cob on a building project in Montana because of some kind of frost heave possibilities. I however am not a cob builder so I could be totally wrong about the factors that influenced that decision. Mark At 09:00 AM 12/13/2002 -0500, you wrote: At 08:40 PM 12/12/2002, you wrote: This is a bit OT, but I don't know where else to address an audience with the potential interest level. I'm planning to build a new house in a rural area, and I'd like to do it in an ecologically sound way. The plan at present is 1700 sq.ft., straw bale walls, minimal usage of wood and concrete, Research , research, research... did I get my point across? Building a house is a BIG financial and lifestyle investment. Before you choose or discard any options try to find someone who has a working model of that component. Some research of straw bale that I ran across showed that within a year there was significant mold growth. I am sure this is climate related, yet certainly worth considering.I chose cellulose insulation, due to it's cost and the fact that it is recycled newspaper. I don't know whether this is why or not- but this winter (2nd in this house) we are overrun with mice living in it. Not that big a deal, (till you find the dead ones trapped in the file cabinet smelling up that whole room) but I never considered that. Also, wood is certainly a renewable resource- your common 2x4 can be harvested every 8-10 years on our woods. We are considering cob for our next building project. If you are building in a place with dirt-(not just sand). This may meet many of your goals. ( tip- I would purchase a tractor with a loader.) etc etc. I've run across a measure of environmental impact called embodied energy, which tries to include not only the energy required to manufacture the basic material, but also such factors as the energy needed to transport the raw and finished materials, the amount of labor needed to install (ie, transporting n workers to a site), This could also be interpreted as just plain expense, which comes up for everyone as they try to make a sustainable housing project a reality. The more unusual or out of the ordinary, unless very simple, will be more expensive in labor. This is a big deal IMO, construction workers are seldom known for their intellectual abilities. I chose a manufactured straight truss- only so their would be no on site labor cost and associated possible problems. I found a wonderfully easy to install reflective metal roof which my workers could install rather than getting a roofer. On the other hand, the insulation factory is 15 miles away, yet I had to purchase it from a retailer 30 miles away, in order to get use of the blower- wasteful, yet simpler and less expensive. as well as the lifetime of the end result. Once again this is an expense issue. I chose concrete blocks, stone or brick, because of so many old building I saw, still useable or reclaimable when clad in this material. As my aunt used to say- You can't build a 1990's house at 1960's labor prices. the labor that went into the brick on a colonial house has paid for itself, many times over. The clapboard has only been preserved with many coats of paint over the years. For this however, I think you must use your own common sense and think it out. What can you see currently that has lasted . This does give new stuff a serious disadvantage, but that is just the way it is. We chose an in floor radiant heat system. I have had lots of problems with the pump needing to be replaced EVERY year after being
Re: Corrugated steel roofing (was Re: [biofuel] Embodied energy
On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 04:35, you wrote: Ken, I've built a couple of outbuildings on my lot in Berkeley using corrugated steel roofing, and I just used conventional rafters with purlins - 2x4's in one case, 3x6's in the other - running at right angles to, and on top of, the rafters to support the corrugated. Very easy to do, and the corrugated goes up way quicker than any other kind of roofing. Where in Tuolumne County are you? - I have an engineer friend who's building a rammed earth house in Strawberry. He found the building inspection department very easy to deal with, and he might be able to help you with getting strawbale to fly. Corrugated iron roofing is very common in Australa. The best seems to be the 'Colourbond' made by BHP. We have seen some cheap imports on corugated iron some of these have suffered paint failure, that dosen't happen to colourbond. There is a technique of using long sheets, on a curved roof. (Not sure how it would go with a snow load.) that is economical as there is no ridge cap etc. Email me if you want more info, plus I can give you some ideas on support systems. Doug Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuel] Interesting way to get the water out of BD
Hehehehehe, check this out http://www.mitm.com/wt_drum_evaporator.html James Slayden Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Henry Ford, Charles Kettering and The Fuel of the Future
On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:10:53 -0800 (PST), you wrote: Backward compatability does not seem to be at issue. Yes and no. Once it is established that backward compatability is not at issue or is mostly not at issue, for dino-diesel engines, then this information needs to be disseminated or chewed over by people such as myself in our battles comparing biodiesel, as an alt-fuel, with the half-dozen or more other supposedly-superior-to-everything-under-the-sun alt-fuel proposals (such as for Propane, CNG, electricity, H2, Hythane, etc.) that we hear every week. Then there are nuances to the debate in other alt-fuels. With electricity, for example, we have all sorts of charger proposals with all levels of safety or claimed safety, convencience, time of recharge (very important with EV and grid-chargeable hybrid proposals, etc.) Electricity is more backwards-compatible with present infrastructure in one sense than other alt-fuels, because the means for distributing the fuel all well-estalished all over the place. Then if you have a standard plug on your EV it is very compatible (assuming you install proper charger and safety equipment in your garage). But those standard plugs may or may not be not tops in other areas such as safety or efficiency or time-to-recharge, so there are just lots of details as you can see. Not to say that this non-biofuel-stuff is what you took away from my mention of backwards compatability, but once I can hear clearly from folks such as yourself on the finer points (if any) of biodiesel in all areas, such as backwards compatability, then I can try, as I have been, to bring this to other folks who don't know as much about it, in the energy policy debates that are where I'm sort of coming from. So, I cannot as easily dismiss this debate, although I could see for someone like yourself that getting it momentarily out of the way would be critical to getting-your-tasks-done. MM Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
annoying way to get water out of BD was Re: [biofuel] Interesting way to get the water out of BD
It just started raining cats and dogs up here, and my biodiesel setup is outdoors (only slightly covered by blue tarps). We don't get winter here, we get 'the rains'. I'm standing in the kitchen watching the lake that's forming out there (and a lake full of cats and dogs is LOUD). The lake is creeping across the parking lot and getting closer and closer to our house, and I think the pallets (ok, so I'm on some kind of biofuel topic here) that I put down next to the biodiesel tanks as a walkway are about to go a-floating. The Lake is deep enough that there's almost no pallet showing. In the midst of this I have a tank of biodiesel that just finished washing. Arggh. It' ain't gonna dry anytime soon, not in 200% humidity. I'm not about to try and bubbledry it with humid air. I guess I'll be heating this batch to dry it. Results later. Mark At 03:14 PM 12/13/2002 -0800, you wrote: Hehehehehe, check this out http://www.mitm.com/wt_drum_evaporator.htmlhttp://www.mitm.com/wt_drum_evaporator.html James Slayden Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.htmlhttp://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuel] (fwd) (fwd) news-release: School Bus Idling ATCM
Some in the biofuel groups and elsewhere may look askance at the CARB instituting such seeming common-sense measures for slightly decreasing emissions and improving air quality near school-children, but then seeming to fail to implement biofuel and other clean-air technologies. I'm not sure if CARB has made any headway in researching benefits of using biofuels as against dino fuels in school busses. Remember that not only is CARB limited to emissions debates (NOT mileage debates) but they weaken or even destroy their entire footing sometimes when they venture into mileage and other areas (I think there's recently been a lawsuit from the enviro-hostile Federal government against some of the CARB-related activities or rulings because of their alleged straying from clean-air-related concerns.) Anyway, I'd love to see CARB evaluate some pilot school-bus biofuel programs (such as I think SSPC was running?) for some very specific measureable changes in school bus emissions and perhaps for some changes in overall community emissions if they were able to attach numbers to the benefits (or damages or harms) of reprocessing waste grease rather than allowing it to be thrown away and emit-gosh-knows-what from its resting hole (if I understand correctly what happens to some of it?). Two more strategizing notes: Since so much of the school system is publicly owned, (governmentally-owned-and-run), this means IMO that an agency like CARB has a much more clear-cut legitimate ability to mandate, incontrovertibly, how the fleet of busses serving those public schools should be run. They are part of ownership, part of the management team. I am not a fan of government-involvement in the education business, but this is one instance where the issue plays in favor of some progress, IMO. Second, busses, in particular, seem to be focus points for some of the alternative fuel efforts at advanced research. You hear about this or that pilot program by this or that manufacture, major and minor, to research super-advanced batteries, fuel cells, hybrids including ultracaps, etc., in busses. EFCX, for example where their semi-battery-fuel-cell (whatever the hell it is) technology I think has done some bus work (with GE?) and Maxwell was going on about GM putting some ultracaps in busses or large trucks for a sort of initial effort. So, although I'm very much in favor of a simple straightforward gaining of knowledge and promulgation of a 100%-biodiesel-in-busses concept, biofuel advocates may wish to be aware of the compatibilities with other alt-fuel efforts. MM On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:09:11 -0800, Gennet Paauwe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please find the following California Air Resources Board news release on today's approval of an air toxic control measure for idling school buses. You may view it at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/nr121202.htm Thanks, Gennet Paauwe Office of Communications California Air Reosurces Board ++ California Environmental Protection Agency NEWS RELEASE Air Resources Board Release 02-46 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE December 12, 2002 CONTACT: Jerry Martin Gennet Paauwe (916) 322-2990 www.arb.ca.gov Air Board Adopts Measure to Reduce Pollution from School Bus Idling SACRAMENTO -- A measure adopted today by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) eliminates unnecessary idling for school buses and other heavy-duty vehicles, protecting children from unhealthful exhaust emissions. The main purpose of the measure is to reduce localized exposure to air toxics and other harmful air pollutants at and near schools. ãRestricted idling times at schools will not only protect our children from toxic air contaminants, but improve air quality in the surrounding area,ä said ARB Chairman Alan C. Lloyd. In addition to protecting childrensâ health, reducing motor vehicle emissions will benefit teachers, parents, bus maintenance workers and drivers, and people who live or work near schools. The measure is expected to save school districts and other operators up to $800,000 in fuel costs. More than 26,000 school buses operate in California. Emissions from individual school buses and heavy-duty vehicles vary, depending on vehicle type, age, maintenance and amount of time spent idling. Health impacts from exhaust exposure include: eye and respiratory irritation, enhanced respiratory allergic reactions, asthma exacerbation, increased cancer risk, and immune system degradation. The measure, part of Californiaâs Diesel Particulate Matter Risk Reduction Plan, but expanded to include other bus types, requires the driver of a school bus or other heavy-duty vehicle not to idle at schools. Additional unnecessary idling restrictions are imposed for such vehicles stopping within 100 feet of a school. Exemptions are provided for idling that is necessary for safety or operational purposes. The measure does not affect private passenger vehicles. The measure also requires the motor
Re: annoying way to get water out of BD was Re: [biofuel] Interesting way to get the water out of BD
Hehehehe. Sorry but this is too funny. Gotta get pics of that!! BTW, don't get washed away. Hey, an idea!! put the stuff out that needs to be washed and just let it rain on it . ;-) Now on topic, have you tried to boubble dry before and what were the results? James Slayden (still giggling due to the picture in my head of the Lake) On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, girl mark wrote: It just started raining cats and dogs up here, and my biodiesel setup is outdoors (only slightly covered by blue tarps). We don't get winter here, we get 'the rains'. I'm standing in the kitchen watching the lake that's forming out there (and a lake full of cats and dogs is LOUD). The lake is creeping across the parking lot and getting closer and closer to our house, and I think the pallets (ok, so I'm on some kind of biofuel topic here) that I put down next to the biodiesel tanks as a walkway are about to go a-floating. The Lake is deep enough that there's almost no pallet showing. In the midst of this I have a tank of biodiesel that just finished washing. Arggh. It' ain't gonna dry anytime soon, not in 200% humidity. I'm not about to try and bubbledry it with humid air. I guess I'll be heating this batch to dry it. Results later. Mark At 03:14 PM 12/13/2002 -0800, you wrote: Hehehehehe, check this out http://www.mitm.com/wt_drum_evaporator.htmlhttp://www.mitm.com/wt_drum_evapo ator.html James Slayden Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.htmlhttp://journeytoforever.org/biofuel. tml Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuel] Re: [biofuels-biz] (fwd) (fwd) news-release: School Bus Idling ATCM
Yeah, it's kinda interesting the article on SF busses being forced to go to CNG or some other alterna-petrol proposal, due to CARB emmision guidelines. Good that the Fleet manager was fighting back for Diesel, although absolutely NO mention was made of B100 or even B20 for that matter. It just shocks me how little the Muni planners (and fleet managers) know about such things. It would be a great opportunity for someone to do a Broker type of thing for them for B100, thus they wouldn't have to get rid of their capital cost that already has been realized on the present busses. If someone doesn't do it, I might just call up Graham N. and broker it myself ;-) Sheesh!!! James Slayden On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, murdoch wrote: Some in the biofuel groups and elsewhere may look askance at the CARB instituting such seeming common-sense measures for slightly decreasing emissions and improving air quality near school-children, but then seeming to fail to implement biofuel and other clean-air technologies. I'm not sure if CARB has made any headway in researching benefits of using biofuels as against dino fuels in school busses. Remember that not only is CARB limited to emissions debates (NOT mileage debates) but they weaken or even destroy their entire footing sometimes when they venture into mileage and other areas (I think there's recently been a lawsuit from the enviro-hostile Federal government against some of the CARB-related activities or rulings because of their alleged straying from clean-air-related concerns.) Anyway, I'd love to see CARB evaluate some pilot school-bus biofuel programs (such as I think SSPC was running?) for some very specific measureable changes in school bus emissions and perhaps for some changes in overall community emissions if they were able to attach numbers to the benefits (or damages or harms) of reprocessing waste grease rather than allowing it to be thrown away and emit-gosh-knows-what from its resting hole (if I understand correctly what happens to some of it?). Two more strategizing notes: Since so much of the school system is publicly owned, (governmentally-owned-and-run), this means IMO that an agency like CARB has a much more clear-cut legitimate ability to mandate, incontrovertibly, how the fleet of busses serving those public schools should be run. They are part of ownership, part of the management team. I am not a fan of government-involvement in the education business, but this is one instance where the issue plays in favor of some progress, IMO. Second, busses, in particular, seem to be focus points for some of the alternative fuel efforts at advanced research. You hear about this or that pilot program by this or that manufacture, major and minor, to research super-advanced batteries, fuel cells, hybrids including ultracaps, etc., in busses. EFCX, for example where their semi-battery-fuel-cell (whatever the hell it is) technology I think has done some bus work (with GE?) and Maxwell was going on about GM putting some ultracaps in busses or large trucks for a sort of initial effort. So, although I'm very much in favor of a simple straightforward gaining of knowledge and promulgation of a 100%-biodiesel-in-busses concept, biofuel advocates may wish to be aware of the compatibilities with other alt-fuel efforts. MM On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:09:11 -0800, Gennet Paauwe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please find the following California Air Resources Board news release on today's approval of an air toxic control measure for idling school buses. You may view it at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/nr121202.htm Thanks, Gennet Paauwe Office of Communications California Air Reosurces Board ++ California Environmental Protection Agency NEWS RELEASE Air Resources Board Release 02-46 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE December 12, 2002 CONTACT: Jerry Martin Gennet Paauwe (916) 322-2990 www.arb.ca.gov Air Board Adopts Measure to Reduce Pollution from School Bus Idling SACRAMENTO -- A measure adopted today by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) eliminates unnecessary idling for school buses and other heavy-duty vehicles, protecting children from unhealthful exhaust emissions. The main purpose of the measure is to reduce localized exposure to air toxics and other harmful air pollutants at and near schools. Restricted idling times at schools will not only protect our children from toxic air contaminants, but improve air quality in the surrounding area, said ARB Chairman Alan C. Lloyd. In addition to protecting childrens health, reducing motor vehicle emissions will benefit teachers, parents, bus maintenance workers and drivers, and people who live or work near schools. The measure is expected to save school districts and other operators up to $800,000 in fuel costs. More than 26,000 school buses operate in California.
Re: annoying way to get water out of BD was Re: [biofuel] Interesting way to get the water out of BD
U serious about Biosmell's 55 Gal catchment filling up that fast?!! Holly Schyte!! Time for the Cistern Thanks for the info on bubble-drying. Nice bit of info to know. I was gunna do it anyway cause you noted it in class ;-) James Slayden On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, girl mark wrote: I am going to get a photo of this. It sucks. We actually just started talking last night (I've got biodiesel-making roommates as well) about doing rainwater catchment for the next wash water. And Biosmell just set up a (55-gallon I presume) rain barrel at his house and filled it in 15 minutes. We tried bubbledrying and it took 24 hours to dry some freshly washed fuel. Mark At 04:45 PM 12/13/2002 -0800, you wrote: Hehehehe. Sorry but this is too funny. Gotta get pics of that!! BTW, don't get washed away. Hey, an idea!! put the stuff out that needs to be washed and just let it rain on it . ;-) Now on topic, have you tried to boubble dry before and what were the results? James Slayden (still giggling due to the picture in my head of the Lake) On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, girl mark wrote: It just started raining cats and dogs up here, and my biodiesel setup is outdoors (only slightly covered by blue tarps). We don't get winter here, we get 'the rains'. I'm standing in the kitchen watching the lake that's forming out there (and a lake full of cats and dogs is LOUD). The lake is creeping across the parking lot and getting closer and closer to our house, and I think the pallets (ok, so I'm on some kind of biofuel topic here) that I put down next to the biodiesel tanks as a walkway are about to go a-floating. The Lake is deep enough that there's almost no pallet showing. In the midst of this I have a tank of biodiesel that just finished washing. Arggh. It' ain't gonna dry anytime soon, not in 200% humidity. I'm not about to try and bubbledry it with humid air. I guess I'll be heating this batch to dry it. Results later. Mark At 03:14 PM 12/13/2002 -0800, you wrote: Hehehehehe, check this out http://www.mitm.com/wt_drum_evaporator.htmlhttp://www.mitm.com/wt_dr um_evaporator.htmlhttp://www.mitm.com/wt_drum_evapo ator.html James Slayden Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.htmlhttp://journeytoforever.org/ biofuel.htmlhttp://journeytoforever.org/biofuel. tml Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/http://archive.nnytech.net/http://archiv e.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/Y ahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.htmlhttp://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.h ml Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.htmlhttp://journeytoforever.org/biofuel. tml Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: annoying way to get water out of BD was Re: [biofuel] Interesting way to get the water out of BD
I am going to get a photo of this. It sucks. We actually just started talking last night (I've got biodiesel-making roommates as well) about doing rainwater catchment for the next wash water. And Biosmell just set up a (55-gallon I presume) rain barrel at his house and filled it in 15 minutes. We tried bubbledrying and it took 24 hours to dry some freshly washed fuel. Mark At 04:45 PM 12/13/2002 -0800, you wrote: Hehehehe. Sorry but this is too funny. Gotta get pics of that!! BTW, don't get washed away. Hey, an idea!! put the stuff out that needs to be washed and just let it rain on it . ;-) Now on topic, have you tried to boubble dry before and what were the results? James Slayden (still giggling due to the picture in my head of the Lake) On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, girl mark wrote: It just started raining cats and dogs up here, and my biodiesel setup is outdoors (only slightly covered by blue tarps). We don't get winter here, we get 'the rains'. I'm standing in the kitchen watching the lake that's forming out there (and a lake full of cats and dogs is LOUD). The lake is creeping across the parking lot and getting closer and closer to our house, and I think the pallets (ok, so I'm on some kind of biofuel topic here) that I put down next to the biodiesel tanks as a walkway are about to go a-floating. The Lake is deep enough that there's almost no pallet showing. In the midst of this I have a tank of biodiesel that just finished washing. Arggh. It' ain't gonna dry anytime soon, not in 200% humidity. I'm not about to try and bubbledry it with humid air. I guess I'll be heating this batch to dry it. Results later. Mark At 03:14 PM 12/13/2002 -0800, you wrote: Hehehehehe, check this out http://www.mitm.com/wt_drum_evaporator.htmlhttp://www.mitm.com/wt_dr um_evaporator.htmlhttp://www.mitm.com/wt_drum_evapo ator.html James Slayden Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.htmlhttp://journeytoforever.org/ biofuel.htmlhttp://journeytoforever.org/biofuel. tml Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/http://archive.nnytech.net/http://archiv e.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/Y ahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.htmlhttp://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.htmlhttp://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Re: [biofuels-biz] (fwd) (fwd) news-release: School Bus Idling ATCM
Please do it If someone doesn't do it, I might just call up Graham N. and broker it myself ;-) Sheesh!!! James Slayden On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, murdoch wrote: Some in the biofuel groups and elsewhere may look askance at the CARB instituting such seeming common-sense measures for slightly decreasing emissions and improving air quality near school-children, but then seeming to fail to implement biofuel and other clean-air technologies. I'm not sure if CARB has made any headway in researching benefits of using biofuels as against dino fuels in school busses. Remember that not only is CARB limited to emissions debates (NOT mileage debates) but they weaken or even destroy their entire footing sometimes when they venture into mileage and other areas (I think there's recently been a lawsuit from the enviro-hostile Federal government against some of the CARB-related activities or rulings because of their alleged straying from clean-air-related concerns.) Anyway, I'd love to see CARB evaluate some pilot school-bus biofuel programs (such as I think SSPC was running?) for some very specific measureable changes in school bus emissions and perhaps for some changes in overall community emissions if they were able to attach numbers to the benefits (or damages or harms) of reprocessing waste grease rather than allowing it to be thrown away and emit-gosh-knows-what from its resting hole (if I understand correctly what happens to some of it?). Two more strategizing notes: Since so much of the school system is publicly owned, (governmentally-owned-and-run), this means IMO that an agency like CARB has a much more clear-cut legitimate ability to mandate, incontrovertibly, how the fleet of busses serving those public schools should be run. They are part of ownership, part of the management team. I am not a fan of government-involvement in the education business, but this is one instance where the issue plays in favor of some progress, IMO. Second, busses, in particular, seem to be focus points for some of the alternative fuel efforts at advanced research. You hear about this or that pilot program by this or that manufacture, major and minor, to research super-advanced batteries, fuel cells, hybrids including ultracaps, etc., in busses. EFCX, for example where their semi-battery-fuel-cell (whatever the hell it is) technology I think has done some bus work (with GE?) and Maxwell was going on about GM putting some ultracaps in busses or large trucks for a sort of initial effort. So, although I'm very much in favor of a simple straightforward gaining of knowledge and promulgation of a 100%-biodiesel-in-busses concept, biofuel advocates may wish to be aware of the compatibilities with other alt-fuel efforts. MM On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:09:11 -0800, Gennet Paauwe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please find the following California Air Resources Board news release on today's approval of an air toxic control measure for idling school buses. You may view it at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/nr121202.htm Thanks, Gennet Paauwe Office of Communications California Air Reosurces Board ++ California Environmental Protection Agency NEWS RELEASE Air Resources Board Release 02-46 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE December 12, 2002 CONTACT: Jerry Martin Gennet Paauwe (916) 322-2990 www.arb.ca.gov Air Board Adopts Measure to Reduce Pollution from School Bus Idling SACRAMENTO -- A measure adopted today by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) eliminates unnecessary idling for school buses and other heavy-duty vehicles, protecting children from unhealthful exhaust emissions. The main purpose of the measure is to reduce localized exposure to air toxics and other harmful air pollutants at and near schools. Restricted idling times at schools will not only protect our children from toxic air contaminants, but improve air quality in the surrounding area, said ARB Chairman Alan C. Lloyd. In addition to protecting childrens' health, reducing motor vehicle emissions will benefit teachers, parents, bus maintenance workers and drivers, and people who live or work near schools. The measure is expected to save school districts and other operators up to $800,000 in fuel costs. More than 26,000 school buses operate in California. Emissions from individual school buses and heavy-duty vehicles vary, depending on vehicle type, age, maintenance and amount of time spent idling. Health impacts from exhaust exposure include: eye and respiratory irritation, enhanced respiratory allergic reactions, asthma exacerbation, increased cancer risk, and immune system degradation. The measure, part of California's Diesel Particulate Matter Risk Reduction Plan, but expanded to include
Re: [biofuel] Engine conversion
Jean-Leon Morin wrote: Where did you get this information? Not doubting what you are saying, however I have been repeatedly told by good sources thta this was a converted gasoline engine. I believed the block was in fact the same as an olds V8... J-L That's a common belief, and I shared it at one time. However, it's erroneous. The best site on the web I've found for Olds diesel info can be found at the following link: http://members.tripod.com/~A350Diesel/newmain.html You can spend at least an hour reading through everything on that site, and it just might change your mind about this much maligned engine. Personally, I'd like to build one just for the fun of it! robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.1stbooks.com/bookview/9782 Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: annoying way to get water out of BD was Re: [biofuel] Interesting way to get the water out of BD
I'm still confused- can you clear this up just one more time, please- I promise I'll write it down- is girl mark a guy or girl? --- Jesse Parris | studio53 | 53 maitland rd | stamford, ct 06906 203.324.4371www.jesseparris.com/ - Original Message - From: girl mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 7:32 PM Subject: annoying way to get water out of BD was Re: [biofuel] Interesting way to get the water out of BD It just started raining cats and dogs up here, and my biodiesel setup is outdoors (only slightly covered by blue tarps). We don't get winter here, we get 'the rains'. I'm standing in the kitchen watching the lake that's forming out there (and a lake full of cats and dogs is LOUD). The lake is creeping across the parking lot and getting closer and closer to our house, and I think the pallets (ok, so I'm on some kind of biofuel topic here) that I put down next to the biodiesel tanks as a walkway are about to go a-floating. The Lake is deep enough that there's almost no pallet showing. In the midst of this I have a tank of biodiesel that just finished washing. Arggh. It' ain't gonna dry anytime soon, not in 200% humidity. I'm not about to try and bubbledry it with humid air. I guess I'll be heating this batch to dry it. Results later. Mark Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] U.S. Energy Policy 11 years ago
The difference is more than semantic; it obscures the fact that what America suffers from is not so much a lack of conservation as a broad array of government programs aimed at fostering hyper-consumption. The same day that Matthew Wald was holding forth on the national appetite, Washington Post energy reporter Thomas W. Lippman wrote that Bush administration officials had nixed various conservation measures because they deviate[d] from the administration's free-market, anti-tax philosophy--begging the question how a system dependent on vast, unreimbursed government outlays for highways and other services could possibly be described as free market. Thanks, both this and the Amtrak article were particularly welcome, as they focus in part on what I have come to believe is an important (if not the important) Achiles Heel Hypocrisy of those who equate their supposed free market advocacy with their anti-progressive vehicles stances. It is to get down and dirty and analyze, and really understand and disect, where there are hidden subsidies (i.e. NON-free-market mechanisms) to favored transportation or energy solutions over others). We are so often faced with free market advocates who claim to be interested in a level playing field and in ending subsidies to alternative energy proposals and alternative fuel proposals. Yet, are they *really* interested in advocating a level playing field. I suggest that, even if some of them are, they are unwittingly (or irresponsibly and not wisely) allowing others to hide in their skirts whose interest is not free market advocacy but advocacy of their pet industry or company while taking the cause celebre of free market advocacy as being enormously sociologically expedient by which to smuggle in what is really, for them, an agenda of favoritism toward their company or industry. Anyway, both articles taken a somewhat uncompromising stance, with which I am not in agreement, that is roughly increased taxation and subsidization is absolutely critical, given the unfair advantages quietly accorded to competing technologies, though this may be a somewhat unfair brief summary. I think at least I could concede their point that when journalists cover these issues they have failed to allow for increased taxes and subsidies and the public policy points those mechanisms *seem* to make in some economies. In the meantime what I think is over-ridingly important, as well, is the continued analysis and discussion of secret, hidden messy hard-to-define subsidization of some of our markets and industries and companies, and the need to debate and discuss those subsidies. I.e., there are two ways to level the playing field, one by raising everyone's advantages (fair or unfair, as the reader may be judge) or two, by eliminating everyone's advantages (fair or unfair, as the reader may judge). Also, this may be simplistic. Perhaps there are other ways to look at it, such as whether in some cases the playing field should not be level but whether there are cases calling for societal intervention (such as a wartime need to manipulate fuel technologies so as to win the war rather than continuing to enrich one's enemies or claimed-enemies by buying fuel from them). I wonder if the U.S. continued to buy fuel from any Axis powers after Pearl Harbor in WW II? If so, how much? As to the Amtrak article, likewise, I thought it was terrific. MM The Washington Post was guilty of a particularly telling juxtaposition on Feb. 21. On page A5, it ran an update on the Bush energy plan, followed by an article on page A6 about the administration's new $105.4-billion highway construction program--with no hint in either story that there might be a connection between the two. There are a number of reasons for such institutional short-sightedness. Given that taxes remain a dirty word inside Washington, reporters tend to view Japanese or West European-style gas taxes as simply beyond the pale and therefore not even worth considering. In addition, the reigning political conformism and cultural insularity in most newsrooms promotes the assumption that anything America does is natural, right, and proper, no matter how out of step with the rest of the world, and taht any problems that might arise are merely incidental. Cheap gas, cars, and highways are--unquestionably--the American way. Thus, a front-page Los Angeles Times (2/13/91) on chaotic suburban sprawl was fairly frank concerning such problems as traffic congestion, three-hour commutes, etc. Yet it was remarkably cursory as to the reasons why. The paper cited white flight, fear of crime, desire to own one's own home, and so on as reasons that middle-class Southern Californians are settling in ever more far-flung subdivisions. Yet it made no mention of the seamless web of public subsidies that make rampant suburbanization all but inevitable--everything from free highways and parking to suburban infrastructure grants and
Re: [biofuel] Embodied energy
Ken Provost wrote: Hakan, Greg April, Caroline, et. al. -- I'm very interested in radiant heat, so I'll check on pump lifetimes as a possible problem. We put radiant heat in our floors, and we love it! The lower floor of our house has plastic hose buried in concrete. The upper floor has plastic pipe attached directly to the bottom of the floor. Of the two techniques, the concrete, due to its thermal mass, seems to perform more satisfactorily. Another advantage of radiant heating is that it can be supplied by solar. If your boiler fires a holding tank, supplemental solar thermal is an easy addition. We couldn't afford it, but that's something I really wanted to do. If you have the dollars, I'm sure it will be well worth the price of the installation. I'm also planning on a steel roof, but I'm not sure what sort of support system to use (e.g., wood truss, steel truss, traditional rafters, etc). Steel is heavy and expensive. We looked into that option too, and ended up with a wooden roof covered by conventional fiberglass shingles. The environmental compromises seem endless, unless you have a LOT of money, or are living in an area without building restrictions. I haven't been in Tuolumne County for at least twenty years, but it was pretty rural when I was there last. Perhaps the construction and lending people are more progressive down in California than they are up here. We faced a lot of opposition whenever we wanted to do something unconventional. (R-50 in the ceiling? Are you CRAZY?) Another interesting subject is the whole passive solar thing -- I'd love to use clerestory windows, light tunnels, etc. The house will be at 3000 ft. elevation (914 m), light snow in the winter, often 105 F (40 C) in the summer. -K Do the passive solar, superinsulate and conserve! The bank and your construction jockeys will not love you, but your family will appreciate the energy security. We just received our first heating bill. In the month that we've been in our house, we've used 8.3 gigajoules in natural gas for heat and domestic hot water. (For the metrically challenged among you, that's 78 672 Btu, or 23 kilowatt hours.) That's an astonishing amount of energy, but we understand that it's about 1 / 5 of what our neighbors are paying. . . Using the sun will cost you nothing but the initial investment, and if you're going to build, you're going to spend money anyway! robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.1stbooks.com/bookview/9782 Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Embodied energy Correction!
robert luis rabello wrote: In the month that we've been in our house, we've used 8.3 gigajoules in natural gas for heat and domestic hot water. (For the metrically challenged among you, that's 78 672 Btu, or 23 kilowatt hours.) That's an astonishing amount of energy, but we understand that it's about 1 / 5 of what our neighbors are paying. . . Sorry, but maths were never my strong point! 8.3 gigajoules is 230 kw hours! robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.1stbooks.com/bookview/9782 Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -- robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.1stbooks.com/bookview/9782 Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [biofuel] Veg. Oil and or soaps from BioD production
If you want rust prevention use fish oil. I think Rustoleum is fish oil based. Kirk -Original Message- From: MH [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 10:42 AM To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [biofuel] Veg. Oil and or soaps from BioD production coachgeo3 wrote: Ive read some post in other places where folk have used diesel fuel, and waste motor oils to make a paste or inside body part rust prevention sprays(like in doors). Military has run test on diff. oils for this purpose, but not veg oils. I live in the rust belt so I like the idea. Anyone done this with veg oils. Would it invite mice and bugs and other creatures to invade? I haven't really noticed. I could see swabbing it on under your car in the winter with a big wall paper brush. or just rubber gloves and coat her all up. Each spring and fall for the past several years I used a tin can paint brush with drained petroleum oil, gear lubricants and grease on rusted areas. Draw back is the flash point temp. Now I use canola oil to slow down rust especially the rocker panels. Not sure what the flash point is but I have trouble keeping it lit so I assume its less of a danger then petroleum lubricants. Draw back is washing the vehicle but at least its biodegradable rate is faster (I think). One thing I like about these oily liquids is it appears to penetrate wick somewhat. They also cake up with sand dirt. It still amazes me out at the junk yards these parts coated with this gunk are relatively well preserved. One of the reasons I started using canola oil was because of something someone mentioned about coating steel to minimize oxidation and its adhesiveness. I apologize to whomever brought this to our attention for not crediting you directly. I also hope I understood it correctly. So far I'm happy with the results or else cut out the heavily rusty metal, weld, paint. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 12/6/2002 Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Embodied energy Correction!
That strawbale house I was referring to has 12K PV solar installed, and they pull in on a sunny day ~25Kwh a day, so that's around 750Kwh's a month on a good month. James Slayden On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, robert luis rabello wrote: robert luis rabello wrote: In the month that we've been in our house, we've used 8.3 gigajoules in natural gas for heat and domestic hot water. (For the metrically challenged among you, that's 78 672 Btu, or 23 kilowatt hours.) That's an astonishing amount of energy, but we understand that it's about 1 / 5 of what our neighbors are paying. . . Sorry, but maths were never my strong point! 8.3 gigajoules is 230 kw hours! robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.1stbooks.com/bookview/9782 Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -- robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.1stbooks.com/bookview/9782 Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: annoying way to get water out of BD was Re: [biofuel] Interesting way to get the water out of BD
james continues to giggle at Mark's floating BioDiesel situation . Kinda like sushi boat, biodiesel boat!! I am truely sorry, just that picture keeps coming up. BTW, Got the first series of Pics back from the class and they look good. Now to figure out what the h*ll the picture was about. I might need to get with you and go over the whole set to add commentary before they go up on the web. James Slayden On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, girl mark wrote: I am a woman. Unfortunately for a lot of years in my 20's no one seemed to believe that (I now have long hair and it's a little more obvious). And since I do gender-nontraditional work (carpentry and mechanic work) and have spent way too much time at hardware and auto parts stores in the Southeast where everyone called me 'sir', the Mark nickname came about thanks to my sarcastic friends. It stuck. Mark (just got in from checking on the fuel and wading out in the Lake, which was above my ankles, and I was wearing sandals at the time. good thing it's California and it's not cold) At 08:36 PM 12/13/2002 -0500, you wrote: I'm still confused- can you clear this up just one more time, please- I promise I'll write it down- is girl mark a guy or girl? --- Jesse Parris | studio53 | 53 maitland rd | stamford, ct 06906 203.324.4371www.jesseparris.com/ - Original Message - From: girl mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 7:32 PM Subject: annoying way to get water out of BD was Re: [biofuel] Interesting way to get the water out of BD It just started raining cats and dogs up here, and my biodiesel setup is outdoors (only slightly covered by blue tarps). We don't get winter here, we get 'the rains'. I'm standing in the kitchen watching the lake that's forming out there (and a lake full of cats and dogs is LOUD). The lake is creeping across the parking lot and getting closer and closer to our house, and I think the pallets (ok, so I'm on some kind of biofuel topic here) that I put down next to the biodiesel tanks as a walkway are about to go a-floating. The Lake is deep enough that there's almost no pallet showing. In the midst of this I have a tank of biodiesel that just finished washing. Arggh. It' ain't gonna dry anytime soon, not in 200% humidity. I'm not about to try and bubbledry it with humid air. I guess I'll be heating this batch to dry it. Results later. Mark Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.htmlhttp://journeytoforever.org/biofuel. tml Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: annoying way to get water out of BD was Re: [biofuel] Interesting way to get the water out of BD
I am a woman. Unfortunately for a lot of years in my 20's no one seemed to believe that (I now have long hair and it's a little more obvious). And since I do gender-nontraditional work (carpentry and mechanic work) and have spent way too much time at hardware and auto parts stores in the Southeast where everyone called me 'sir', the Mark nickname came about thanks to my sarcastic friends. It stuck. Mark (just got in from checking on the fuel and wading out in the Lake, which was above my ankles, and I was wearing sandals at the time. good thing it's California and it's not cold) At 08:36 PM 12/13/2002 -0500, you wrote: I'm still confused- can you clear this up just one more time, please- I promise I'll write it down- is girl mark a guy or girl? --- Jesse Parris | studio53 | 53 maitland rd | stamford, ct 06906 203.324.4371www.jesseparris.com/ - Original Message - From: girl mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 7:32 PM Subject: annoying way to get water out of BD was Re: [biofuel] Interesting way to get the water out of BD It just started raining cats and dogs up here, and my biodiesel setup is outdoors (only slightly covered by blue tarps). We don't get winter here, we get 'the rains'. I'm standing in the kitchen watching the lake that's forming out there (and a lake full of cats and dogs is LOUD). The lake is creeping across the parking lot and getting closer and closer to our house, and I think the pallets (ok, so I'm on some kind of biofuel topic here) that I put down next to the biodiesel tanks as a walkway are about to go a-floating. The Lake is deep enough that there's almost no pallet showing. In the midst of this I have a tank of biodiesel that just finished washing. Arggh. It' ain't gonna dry anytime soon, not in 200% humidity. I'm not about to try and bubbledry it with humid air. I guess I'll be heating this batch to dry it. Results later. Mark Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.htmlhttp://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Embodied energy
Steel is heavy and expensive. We looked into that option too, and ended up with a wooden roof covered by conventional fiberglass shingles. The environmental compromises seem endless, unless you have a LOT of money, or are living in an area without building restrictions. I haven't been in Tuolumne County for at least twenty years, but it was pretty rural when I was there last. Perhaps the construction and lending people are more progressive down in California than they are up here. We faced a lot of opposition whenever we wanted to do something unconventional. (R-50 in the ceiling? Are you CRAZY?) robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.1stbooks.com/bookview/9782 Steel roofing is a lightweight roofing system. Usually in Australia, we just use sheetrock ceilings, some form of truss to support the roof, sarking/fibreglass blanket under the steel roof, which is usually screwed to 2x2 battens, supported on the trusses at 36 centres. (Snow loads would need more strength) It is possible to make multi-cord crved roof trusses if you wish to go curved roof. (ie gang-nail truss, with top cord segmented to follow curve approximately) regards Doug Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuel] Re: The Railroading of Amtrak (and the destruction of Light Rail by GM and others, earlier in the 20th century)
Light rail, modern high speed inter-urban rail, hybrid buses, etc. need support because their competition has lured away all their customers over the years through glamorous salesmanship and appeals to the freedoms of air travel or solo driving. Not only have these factors contributed to the decline of importance of light rail, but, also, there was a much more direct form of competition which, early on in the 20th century, contribued to the overall trend toward individual vehicular travel for day-to-day needs as opposed to within-city rail travel: the deliberate destruction of some rail lines and buyout of their owners by the auto and related companies. This description of GM's deliberate destruction of light rail lines (not only alleged but they appear to have gotten a legal conviction for it) (starting about 5 paragraphs below) was posted a few months ago in one of the EV discussion areas by one of the prominent editors. I have been meaning to bring it to the attention of other alt-fuel people so as to make sure it did not pass by un-noticed, as I think it was a good start to researching the history of these matters. I get frustrated locally, in Portland Oregon, with demands for the bus system to be self-sufficient. Of course we all want that, but people still love their cars, and their is a level of investment required in making bus transit appeal to more riders---a level of investment which won't be recouped immediately if at all. Still, the reduction in traffic congestion, accidents, pollution, latent road warrior hostility, etc. are rarely considered in these arguments regarding funding transit modes. The car and the airplane are 20th century freedom machines and viewed as essential to being 'merican. Yes, although there is some propaganda machine behind those concepts. Not everyone dislikes the idea of getting on a machine and having someone else do the driving (and insurance-paying and maintenance and headache and fuel-paying) to get to work. I personally have felt *far* more free, at times, when going this route then at other times, stuck in cities without any such realitic option, I have been stuck in traffic. The post that was made by Bruce, the editor of www.electrifyingtimes.com and moderator of about 30 groups (I think). Notice the awesome brief transcript excerpt from a Senate hearing, at the end, between a Senator who has pre-decided that supply and demand had worked the way they're sometimes thought to, and a person who attempts to bring to the Senator's attention that in this instance the markets were manipulated in an unusual and surprising way. To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu Subject: GM convicted for destroying Electric transportation -long From: Bruce EVangel Parmenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 13:57:43 -0700 (PDT) GM convicted for destroying Electric transportation -long [POSTed to the EV List as an interesting fyi] -[Edited] Date:Sun, 20 Oct 2002 10:41:55 -0700 Subject: Need info on GM destroying US electric trollys I've been searching and can't find GM being covicted a very small fine for destroying US electric buses in order to sell their diesel buses. Any info would be greatly appreciated. - EV List members with more on this, please POST. My web searching ... links found on: http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=electric+trolley+gm http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=electric+trolley+general+motors http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=electric+buses+general+motors Here are two pieces found from the above searches: - http://rapidtransit.com/net/thirdrail/9905/agt4.htm American Ground Transport* Page 4 By 1949, General Motors had been involved in the replacement of more than 100 electric transit systems with GM buses in 45 cities including New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, St. Louis, Oakland, Salt Lake City, and Los Angeles. In April of that year, a Chicago Federal jury convicted GM of having criminally conspired with Standard Oil of California, Firestone Tire and others to replace electric transportation with gas- or diesel-powered buses and to monopolize the sale of buses and related products to local transportation companies throughout the country. The court imposed a sanction of $5,000 on GM. In addition, the jury convicted H.C. Grossman, who was then treasurer of General Motors. Grossman had played a key role in the motorization campaigns and had served as a director of Pacific City Lines when that company undertook the dismantlement of the $100 million Pacific Electric system. The court fined Grossman the magnanimous sum of $1. Despite its criminal conviction, General Motors continued to acquire and dieselize electric transit properties through September of 1955. By then, approximately 88 percent of the nationâs electric streetcar network had been eliminated. In 1936, when GM organized National City Lines, 40,000 streetcars were operating in the United States; at the end of 1965, only 5,000 remained. In December of that year,
[biofuel] Re: Petroleum's Role in Hemp Prohibition
--- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Harmon Seaver wrote: Kris said: Ater doing a little reading, I must adjust my statement slightly but, Harmon you are way off base here. Hardly. It's pretty clear you have no personal knowledge of this stuff and have been reading the wrong stuff. In this country both hemp and marijuana come from the cannabis sativa plant. Nope, wrong again -- well, partially right, but most of the marijuana grown in north america these days is a hybred of cannabis sativa and cannabis indica. Not a hybrid, just a cross. Cannabis indica and cannabis sativa are synonyms, the same plant according to different classification systems. I think there are plenty of botanists who would disagree with that. And a lot of it is pure indica. Forty years ago it was all sativa, and that is the species native to this hemisphere, but the problem was that the marijuana seeds (sativa) Marijuana is just the Mexican name for it, you can't differentiate between marijuana and hemp, it's all cannabis. Sorry, I'm just using the term hemp as a shorthand for industrial hemp, and pot or marijuana to signify the stuff you smoke. I'm well aware that marijuana is the Spanish term for it. were all from Mexico and further south, and wouldn't mature here, would not flower. The hemp plant, OTOH, does mature, flower and go to seed, in the northern US and even Canada and Alaska. The hemp plant in question, industrial hemp (there are others), is a variety of cannabis, or many varieties, bred for local adaptation in various regions, bred initially for yield and for fibre qualities, and later for low THC content as well. Both low- and high-THC hemp (cannabis) covers a wide range: Native to Central Asia, and long cultivated in Asia, Europe, and China. Now a widespread tropical, temperate and subarctic cultivar and waif. (James Duke) And while hemp is taken from the female stem as well as the male, the male's fibers are much stronger, so are more highly valued. Hemp varieties tested in Ontario to date have all been of European origin. They come in two types: Dioecious, which have male and female flower parts on separate plants, and Monoecious, which have male and female flower parts on the same plant. A third type of cultivar, known as Female Predominant, has 85 to 90 percent female plants. It is believed that this type can produce a higher yield of bast fibres. http://www.gov.on.ca/OMAFRA/english/crops/facts/hempprod.htm Hemp Production I can't find the link but, I read that high quality Manila rope comes exclusively from male plants. Manila hemp is a different species, not cannabis, it's Musa textilis (abaca). You may be right, but that's irrelevant. :-) Like Keith said, there is 0.3% THC in hemp fiber and the drug czar claimed on TV the other day that today's marijuana has up to 30%. That's right, industrial varieties have virtually zilch THC, and the latest psychoactive strains do get that high (sorry!). I think breeders in the US have achieved similar results to those in Holland and Europe, but I know less about the US. All the same species though, just different varieties, purpose-bred. Well, I think he's full of BS, as usual, Oh really. That's a bit rich. My BS is here: http://eesc.orst.edu/agcomwebfile/EdMat/SB681/whole2.html Hold on there Keith, I was talking about the drug czar, not you, and, in fact, I'm saying exactly the same thing, there is no THC to speak of in hemp. (snip) There is no market for broadleaf, male or female. Maybe not where you live, but I'll guarantee you that there's plenty of people in the northern midwest who smoke mostly leaf. They grow their own, outdoors, and it the season isn't long enough for it to flower. Mostly what's sold does contain some leaf, but it's mostly buds, with or without seeds. Sensimilla (no seeds) consists of the unfertilized flowers of female plants. Males are identified and removed before the females flower. This forces the females to produce more resin instead of seeds - the flowers contain MUCH more THC than male leaves, or any leaves. Males also flower, but earlier, and the flowers are different (in the panicles). There's little or no difference in THC content between male and female leaves of the same crop. Furthermore, at one point we were living on a farm in WI, and back at the edge of a neighbor's pig pasture we discovered this absolutely huge patch of 12-15 foot tall *female* cannabis plants -- and, they were even in flower and had the huge buds like you see in the pictures now in High Times. So, of course, thinking we were in hippy heaven, we dried some of the bud and smoked it -- and smoked it, and smoked it. Nada, zilch. You'd have died from carbon monoxide before you got a buzz off that stuff. That's hemp.
Re: annoying way to get water out of BD was Re: [biofuel] Interesting way to get the water out of BD
girl mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I am a woman. Unfortunately for a lot of years in my 20's no one seemed to believe that (I now have long hair and it's a little more obvious). And since I do gender-nontraditional work (carpentry and mechanic work) and have spent way too much time at hardware and auto parts stores in the Southeast where everyone called me 'sir', the Mark nickname came about thanks to my sarcastic friends. It stuck. Mark (just got in from checking on the fuel and wading out in the Lake, which was above my ankles, and I was wearing sandals at the time. good thing it's California and it's not cold) At 08:36 PM 12/13/2002 -0500, you wrote: I'm still confused- can you clear this up just one more time, please- I promise I'll write it down- is girl mark a guy or girl? --- Jesse Parris | studio53 | 53 maitland rd | stamford, ct 06906 203.324.4371www.jesseparris.com/ - Original Message - From: girl mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 7:32 PM Subject: annoying way to get water out of BD was Re: [biofuel] Interesting way to get the water out of BD It just started raining cats and dogs up here, and my biodiesel setup is outdoors (only slightly covered by blue tarps). We don't get winter here, we get 'the rains'. I'm standing in the kitchen watching the lake that's forming out there (and a lake full of cats and dogs is LOUD). The lake is creeping across the parking lot and getting closer and closer to our house, and I think the pallets (ok, so I'm on some kind of biofuel topic here) that I put down next to the biodiesel tanks as a walkway are about to go a-floating. The Lake is deep enough that there's almost no pallet showing. In the midst of this I have a tank of biodiesel that just finished washing. Arggh. It' ain't gonna dry anytime soon, not in 200% humidity. I'm not about to try and bubbledry it with humid air. I guess I'll be heating this batch to dry it. Results later. Mark Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.htmlhttp://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Girl Mark IF you ever come to Cleveland Ohio ,e me and I will take you around town! We can talk about BIODIESEL!! your pal Ed Morze - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[biofuel] Re: Engine conversion
--- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Harmon Seaver wrote: --- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Harmon Seaver wrote: --- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, venkat gasn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: HELLOW MR FRIEND, YES U CAN CONVERT YOUR PETROL ENGINES TO DIESEL INJECTION MODE, BUT LIFE OF PISTON ,RINGS, SLEEVES WILL BE LESS, DONT WOREY ABOUT COMPRESION RATIOS AS WOOD GAS WORKES ON LOWCOMPRESION RATIOS. Woodgas does not work well in low-compression engines. Yes, you can get them to run, but woodgas works best in diesel engines, the higher compression the better. Even in a spark ignition engine, you really need to raise the compression to at least 13:1 if you want any sort of decent power off the woodgas. Other way round actually. I think if you check the archives of the gasification list, you'll find that this has been discussed fairly thoroughly, and so far no one has had a problem with knocking when using woodgas in a high compression diesel engine. The consensus seems to be that there is no problem. Indeed, it would be hard to see why there would be since woodgas has so much less inherent engergy than diesel fuel, and burns relatively slowly. In a gasoline engine you need to both raise the compression *and* greatly advance the spark to burn woodgas effectively. Even so you'll be lucky to get 50% of the rated power of the engine on gasoline. Check the refs I gave you Harmon. I'm also a member of the GAS list at Crest, in fact I think you asked me for the address when you wanted to join, didn't you? I read the FAO ref you gave, but I think you need to reread it yourself. They clearly state that a gasoline engine needs to have the compression increased and the spark advanced if you want to efficiently run it on woodgas. And while the intro to that section talks about lowering a diesel engines compression, it also seems pretty clear that the person writing that intro didn't really understand the issues. But as I said, go look thru the gasification list archives, you'll find pretty much a consensus that diesels are the preferred engine for woodgas, and people aren't lowering the CR. You also have to understand that anytime someone starts experimenting with engines/alternative fuels, and the like, the tuning the engine for that fuel is a first step, which usually involves advancing the ignition until it starts to knock (or has trouble starting), then backing off a bit. I'm sure any decent mechanic won't have any trouble getting a diesel to run well on woodgas, but when some group like FAO puts out a blanket statement that you have to lower the compression on a diesel, or it will knock, that's a bit silly. Which diesel? Turboed or non? What was the CR? Did they try adjusting the timing? How about the wastegate on the turbo? Did they have an exhaust gas temp gauge on it? How sure were they that it was actually detonating -- after all, most diesels sound like they knock. There are many other factors -- like how did they feed the woodgas into the engine? Just doing that the wrong way can cause considerable knocking and actual damage to the engine. Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Engine conversion
Nor did you mention the beefier running train(rods, pistons, crank etc.) I believe crank angle may be pretty important here too.. Personally i would never consider converting a gas engine to diesel esp if I was going to increase the compression ratio. Increasing the compression ration adds alot more stress to internal components and they just wont last. Sometimes they wont last 15 minutes. LOL Anyway it is just easier to find a Diesel Longblock and rebuild it. - Original Message - From: harley3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 5:45 AM Subject: RE: [biofuel] Engine conversion Dear Ozan: As you mentioned, the engine compression ratios is going to be a problem. The compression of gasoline engine is around 9 to 1, and the diesel engine is around 20 to1. The modifications to change would be extensive, and expensive. I am not even mentioning the rest the changes of injector pumps, and timing. You would be father ahead to find a diesel engine. Harley -Original Message- From: Ozan Tezer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 3:58 AM To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com Subject: [biofuel] Engine conversion Hello, I produce biodiesel and plan to convert a car engine that works with gas to diesel. I plan to use diesel injectors, instead of spark plugs. I know the compression ratio is different, but I wonder if it works or not. Any idea about it..? also mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Engine conversion
I have worked on these engines too. One of their main problems was their siiliarities to gas engines. Their pistons were kind of lightweight compared to most diesels youwill find today and their crank angle was very steep for such a high compression engine. Some people that like to work on engines have been able to baby them for many miles. I suspect many use synthetic oils and such to give them an edge but for most regular folks they were nothing but trouble. To find any differences between them and a standard olds V8 you would have to get down with a micrometer and search for them. For all practical purposes they just modified a gas engine to be a diesel. - Original Message - From: Jean-Leon Morin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 8:13 AM Subject: Re: [biofuel] Engine conversion This is not so. The 5.7 liter Olds diesel was a new engine from the ground up. It shared external dimensions with other V-8 GM engines, but NONE of the internal parts are interchangeable. Where did you get this information? Not doubting what you are saying, however I have been repeatedly told by good sources thta this was a converted gasoline engine. I believed the block was in fact the same as an olds V8... J-L Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] Engine conversion
Thanks alot for your info about converting gasoline engine to diesel engine. As a review; finding a diesel engine instead of converting is better... __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
