Re: [Biofuel] Scientific method- Titration and another outraged reader.
Or, as someone who maintanes websites, my feeling is - " if you don't like it, feel free to write something better and I'll post it" Tom Scheel wrote: I love the JtF site. Its very existence (and this mailing list) gives me confidence to go forward with biodiesel. So I totally understand the pride of creation and that the site is excellent. As a teacher I am aware that there is only one moment when you don't "get it" and after you "get it" you can't go back and be in that place of not getting it. What is jargon? Its when "professionals" forget what words are special to their field and which are in the common lexicon. I think teaching is in essence smoothing the way to the "getting it" that moment for a motivated student. Anyways of all the items Brian brought up, the one that merited attention, in my opinion, was the "w/v". As a pre-newbie in creating biodiesel, I would not have known that term and honestly, would not have gotten it from context. Perhaps because I was taught pounds and gallons for weights and volumes, or perhaps I am not as smart as your average biodieseler (probably would have ignored it - not exactly careful process: ignore what doesn't make sense :->). Having supported that one admittedly small problem with the JtF site, I am not sure that we need to provide Brian with a new orifice for excrement removal, as he seems to be doing fine with the one he has. [Brian,hopefully you will get to "getting it" and get on with spreading the gospel of sustainable fuel]. If I may segue, folks on this site were recently talking about how to take sustainability to the next level, in terms of concrete actions. I think of the world in terms of tons of CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) not released into the atmosphere. I make my living designing and installing solar thermal installations to heat water for space heating and domestic use. Making biodiesel is an extension of that by producing less CO2 and (I think a lot of people miss the significance of this) using current CO2, rather than stored from previous eras. So my idea is to figure out what greenhouse gasses you are avoiding, what you are using from current accounts, and talk it up. Put it in your email signature, talk to friends and family. If you want to escalate, talk about it, in concrete terms (ie we could keep x tons of CO2 out of the atmosphere if we ran the trash hauling trucks on bio-diesel) with someone in your local government. If you are not already maxed out (no non-current greenhouse gases), make a concrete commitment to reduce your gas emissions over the next 12 months. Mine, BTW is to run my business trucks on B-something large (100 in the summers, enough petro-diesel to keep the lines unclogged in winter). I haven't yet figured out what that translates into in terms of CO2 avoided and CO2 from current accounts. Tom ___ Keith I am exhausted after reading all of this. I think it should be good enough to say go back and read it again. You have a ton more patience than I do. All the best : Derick From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mike Weaver Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2005 5:24 PM To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Scientific method- Titration and anorther outraged reader. I personally am outraged. I just spent all weekend printing out and completely reading the JTF website. Though it pains me greatly to say this: I did find a comma out of place. Keith, I've done the hard work identifying the problem, now I expect you to fix it, instead of lolly-gagging, or was it shilly shallying? No matter. Enough. To arms. NB. I am sending a spare comma for your use under separate cover. -Miss Grundy Keith Addison wrote: LOL Brian!!! SNIP "Dissolve 1 gram of lye in 1 liter of distilled or de-ionized water (0.1% w/v lye solution)." Here, according to JtF, we are in the absolute most important first step Titration, which a newbie is going to perform! Radiance Heating and Plumbing, Inc. (ROC 204149,204150) Tom Scheel 928-380-6294 ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Scientific method- Titration and another outraged reader.
I love the JtF site. Its very existence (and this mailing list) gives me confidence to go forward with biodiesel. So I totally understand the pride of creation and that the site is excellent. As a teacher I am aware that there is only one moment when you don't "get it" and after you "get it" you can't go back and be in that place of not getting it. What is jargon? Its when "professionals" forget what words are special to their field and which are in the common lexicon. I think teaching is in essence smoothing the way to the "getting it" that moment for a motivated student. Anyways of all the items Brian brought up, the one that merited attention, in my opinion, was the "w/v". As a pre-newbie in creating biodiesel, I would not have known that term and honestly, would not have gotten it from context. Perhaps because I was taught pounds and gallons for weights and volumes, or perhaps I am not as smart as your average biodieseler (probably would have ignored it - not exactly careful process: ignore what doesn't make sense :->). Having supported that one admittedly small problem with the JtF site, I am not sure that we need to provide Brian with a new orifice for excrement removal, as he seems to be doing fine with the one he has. [Brian,hopefully you will get to "getting it" and get on with spreading the gospel of sustainable fuel]. If I may segue, folks on this site were recently talking about how to take sustainability to the next level, in terms of concrete actions. I think of the world in terms of tons of CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) not released into the atmosphere. I make my living designing and installing solar thermal installations to heat water for space heating and domestic use. Making biodiesel is an extension of that by producing less CO2 and (I think a lot of people miss the significance of this) using current CO2, rather than stored from previous eras. So my idea is to figure out what greenhouse gasses you are avoiding, what you are using from current accounts, and talk it up. Put it in your email signature, talk to friends and family. If you want to escalate, talk about it, in concrete terms (ie we could keep x tons of CO2 out of the atmosphere if we ran the trash hauling trucks on bio-diesel) with someone in your local government. If you are not already maxed out (no non-current greenhouse gases), make a concrete commitment to reduce your gas emissions over the next 12 months. Mine, BTW is to run my business trucks on B-something large (100 in the summers, enough petro-diesel to keep the lines unclogged in winter). I haven't yet figured out what that translates into in terms of CO2 avoided and CO2 from current accounts. Tom ___ Keith I am exhausted after reading all of this. I think it should be good enough to say go back and read it again. You have a ton more patience than I do. All the best : Derick From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike WeaverSent: Sunday, October 23, 2005 5:24 PMTo: Biofuel@sustainablelists.orgSubject: Re: [Biofuel] Scientific method- Titration and anorther outraged reader. I personally am outraged. I just spent all weekend printing out and completely reading the JTF website.Though it pains me greatly to say this: I did find a comma out of place.Keith, I've done the hard work identifying the problem, now I expect you to fix it, instead of lolly-gagging, or was it shilly shallying?No matter. Enough. To arms.NB.I am sending a spare comma for your use under separate cover.-Miss GrundyKeith Addison wrote: LOL Brian!!!SNIP "Dissolve 1 gram of lye in 1 liter of distilled or de-ionized water(0.1% w/v lye solution)."Here, according to JtF, we are in the absolute most important firststep Titration, which a newbie is going to perform!Radiance Heating and Plumbing, Inc. (ROC 204149,204150)Tom Scheel928-380-6294___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Scientific method- Titration
Hi im Maty Goshorn i am also a nebwie ,also a pipe welder who new nothing about Cemisty i but in the last year i have learned alot about biofuels from this website and its set up for someone who has never had a cemisty class (me) I only came across this web site becuse i have worked in the industy 2 years ago i did even know what biodiesel was i ran pipe in a plant that made it . if my dumbass can understand this anyone can. thanks to all that has put this websight togther From: Brian Rodgers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: [Biofuel] Scientific method- Titration Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 11:15:36 -0600 Hi everyone My wife and I worked on titration until pretty late last night, at least late for me. I am a morning person and I pruned and thinned a massive area of Piñon & Cedar wood and then loaded it prior to beginning our first titration of WVO. I say this because I'd rather not have people telling me I am not tip-top with my labwork. Tired is all. Anyway, yesterday evening we finally had most of the equipment and chemicals in place. Saturday morning, I did some test runs using the TI-83 & Vernier LabPro Data logger. It is the Vernier Data Logger that is the most useful of the two for our needs. It has a USB interface and the data logger software was easy enough to figure out. I started out with the stainless-steel temperature sensor as we have a decent thermometer to check against. Very nice readout on the screen and easy to understand. I then removed the pH sensor from its soaking bath bottle. We set it in tap water first and got a pH reading of 7.5, rinsed it in distilled water and gently cleaned it with a paper towel, next dipping the sensor end in fresh distilled water, pH 7. With readings of that which we could expect, we then moved on to basic titration. If you all will bear with me a moment, I do have some questions. I will intertwine my questions right into the JtF web site directions for basic titration. Our hope is to clarify these directions for ourselves and for other newbies as well. We believe that there are several statements found here and in the email list which are contradictory at best. "Basic titration An electronic pH meter is best, but you can also use pH test strips (or litmus paper), or phenolphthalein solution (from a chemicals supplier)." I suggest sorting the test equipment according to preference. We were ridiculed for using litmus paper. Why list it second if it is preferred as a third choice? Phenolphthalein sounds very interesting. Why not give more information on the setup and use of this test? Yes we followed the links. "Dissolve 1 gram of lye in 1 liter of distilled or de-ionized water (0.1% w/v lye solution)." Here, according to JtF, we are in the absolute most important first step Titration, which a newbie is going to perform! Standard procedure in all technical writing as far as I am aware it to define all abbreviations Why throw out a statement like: "(0.1% w/v lye solution)" and not simply define (w/v?) This is making an already completely new process unnecessarily cloudy in the mind of the newbies. Ok, this is the second sentence in a half page description of how to do the most important step in making biodiesel. "In a smaller beaker, dissolve 1 ml of dewatered WVO oil in 10 ml of pure isopropyl alcohol. Warm the beaker gently by standing it in some hot water, stir until all the oil dissolves in the alcohol and the mixture turns clear. Add 2 drops of phenolphthalein solution." Smaller beaker than what? WVO oil is redundant. Again, if the pH Meter is the "best" tool and listed first in the sentence above, why are we jumping back to phenolphthalein? If this is the preferred test, why not say so in the first sentence? "Using a graduated syringe, add the 0.1% lye solution drop by drop to the oil-alcohol-phenolphthalein solution, stirring all the time. It might turn a bit cloudy, keep stirring. Keep on carefully adding the lye solution until the solution stays pink (actually magenta) for 15 seconds." See above. We are using a continuous readout pH meter. What is the pH we are looking for here! Yes Keith, layered information is great, but why push it when it is unnecessary? We are jumping all over the place in order to do one simple step. Different methods are combined in the same paragraph. This could be the reason newbies are confused. "Take the number of milliliters of 0.1% lye solution you used and add 3.5 (the basic amount of lye needed for virgin oil). This is the number of grams of lye you'll need per liter of oil." Sheesh, I am sorry, but I have a question about every sentence in this basic titration. "Take the number of milliliters of 0.1% lye solution you used and add 3.5" ?? This is sloppy writing. Are you saying add a number of milliliters to 3.5 grams? If it took
Re: [Biofuel] Scientific method- Titration and anorther outraged reader.
I personally am outraged. I just spent all weekend printing out and completely reading the JTF website. Though it pains me greatly to say this: I did find a comma out of place. Keith, I've done the hard work identifying the problem, now I expect you to fix it, instead of lolly-gagging, or was it shilly shallying? No matter. Enough. To arms. NB. I am sending a spare comma for your use under separate cover. -Miss Grundy Keith Addison wrote: LOL Brian!!! Actually it's not funny. It's just inept, and it sows confusion - extracting such clouds of complexitites out of such simplicities is not exactly going to encourage newbies, though that's apparently what you're trying to do. Now it requires explanations of things which need no explanations, which always makes them appear more complex than they are, very encouraging for newbies, yes. Sigh... I say this because I'd rather not have people telling me I am not tip-top with my labwork. Tired is all. And I'm finally getting just a little tired of your saying our website doesn't work properly when it's quite obviously you who doesn't work properly. How come, for starters, you're starting with WVO and not virgin oil? How come lots of things. First of all, in order to re-establish the whereabouts of our feet somewhere near the surface of Planet Earth once again, see: Basic titration http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make2.html#titrate With readings of that which we could expect, we then moved on to basic titration. If you all will bear with me a moment, I do have some questions. I will intertwine my questions right into the JtF web site directions for basic titration. Our hope is to clarify these directions for ourselves and for other newbies as well. We believe that there are several statements found here and in the email list which are contradictory at best. Uh-huh. "Basic titration An electronic pH meter is best, but you can also use pH test strips (or litmus paper), or phenolphthalein solution (from a chemicals supplier)." I suggest sorting the test equipment according to preference. It's sorted according to cost and simplicity, cheapest and easiest to most expensive, and that's how most people see it, especially newbies. There's no confusion and no contradiction. We were ridiculed for using litmus paper. I don't think you were ridiculed, you were simply advised against it. Why do you need to say you were ridiculed? Why list it second if it is preferred as a third choice? Phenolphthalein sounds very interesting. Do you mean to tell me, after all this time you claim to have been studying this, months, that this is the first you hear of phenolphthalein? Why not give more information on the setup and use of this test? Yes we followed the links. Did you. Then what's the complaint? There's a whole section on "phenolphthalein", and more information on it too, if only you'd bothered to check the Table of Contents at the top of the pages where it says so, and in a logical sequence furthermore. Did you notice the Table of Contents at the top yet? You're looking at "Basic titration" right? And only that it seems. Immediately below that: Basic titration Better titration Accurate measurements pH meters Phenolphthalein pH meters vs phenolphthalein All duly listed and linked, couldn't be clearer. "Dissolve 1 gram of lye in 1 liter of distilled or de-ionized water (0.1% w/v lye solution)." Here, according to JtF, we are in the absolute most important first step Titration, which a newbie is going to perform! That's not the absolute most important first step according to JtF. The absolute most important first step according to JtF is to make a test-batch with virgin oil, where no titration is required, moving on to WVO and titration later, when you have a few skills and know what to expect. Not you though of course, you know better. Standard procedure in all technical writing as far as I am aware it to define all abbreviations Why throw out a statement like: "(0.1% w/v lye solution)" and not simply define (w/v?) Good grief, it says GRAM, that's a WEIGHT, which starts with a "W", it says LITER, that's a VOLUME, it starts with a "V", it's obvious! Especially as it tells you exactly what to do first. It's a universal convention and standard procedure in all technical writing and other writing that if you use an abbreviation you put it in brackets after the initial explanation. Did you say your wife's a science teacher?? This is making an already completely new process unnecessarily cloudy in the mind of the newbies. Ok, this is the second sentence in a half page description Half page. So you're using a print-out. What I suggested, I thought it might help, since you can't use a website with more than one page and one level. Se
Re: [Biofuel] Scientific method- Titration
LOL Brian!!! Actually it's not funny. It's just inept, and it sows confusion - extracting such clouds of complexitites out of such simplicities is not exactly going to encourage newbies, though that's apparently what you're trying to do. Now it requires explanations of things which need no explanations, which always makes them appear more complex than they are, very encouraging for newbies, yes. Sigh... >I say this because I'd rather >not have people telling me I am not tip-top with my labwork. Tired is >all. And I'm finally getting just a little tired of your saying our website doesn't work properly when it's quite obviously you who doesn't work properly. How come, for starters, you're starting with WVO and not virgin oil? How come lots of things. First of all, in order to re-establish the whereabouts of our feet somewhere near the surface of Planet Earth once again, see: Basic titration http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make2.html#titrate >With readings of that which we could expect, we then moved on to basic >titration. If you all will bear with me a moment, I do have some >questions. I will intertwine my questions right into the JtF web site >directions for basic titration. Our hope is to clarify these >directions for ourselves and for other newbies as well. We believe >that there are several statements found here and in the email list >which are contradictory at best. Uh-huh. >"Basic titration >An electronic pH meter is best, but you can also use pH test strips >(or litmus paper), or phenolphthalein solution (from a chemicals >supplier)." >I suggest sorting the test equipment according to preference. It's sorted according to cost and simplicity, cheapest and easiest to most expensive, and that's how most people see it, especially newbies. There's no confusion and no contradiction. >We were >ridiculed for using litmus paper. I don't think you were ridiculed, you were simply advised against it. Why do you need to say you were ridiculed? >Why list it second if it is >preferred as a third choice? Phenolphthalein sounds very interesting. Do you mean to tell me, after all this time you claim to have been studying this, months, that this is the first you hear of phenolphthalein? >Why not give more information on the setup and use of this test? Yes >we followed the links. Did you. Then what's the complaint? There's a whole section on "phenolphthalein", and more information on it too, if only you'd bothered to check the Table of Contents at the top of the pages where it says so, and in a logical sequence furthermore. Did you notice the Table of Contents at the top yet? You're looking at "Basic titration" right? And only that it seems. Immediately below that: Basic titration Better titration Accurate measurements pH meters Phenolphthalein pH meters vs phenolphthalein All duly listed and linked, couldn't be clearer. >"Dissolve 1 gram of lye in 1 liter of distilled or de-ionized water >(0.1% w/v lye solution)." >Here, according to JtF, we are in the absolute most important first >step Titration, which a newbie is going to perform! That's not the absolute most important first step according to JtF. The absolute most important first step according to JtF is to make a test-batch with virgin oil, where no titration is required, moving on to WVO and titration later, when you have a few skills and know what to expect. Not you though of course, you know better. >Standard procedure >in all technical writing as far as I am aware it to define all >abbreviations Why throw out a statement like: "(0.1% w/v lye >solution)" and not simply define (w/v?) Good grief, it says GRAM, that's a WEIGHT, which starts with a "W", it says LITER, that's a VOLUME, it starts with a "V", it's obvious! Especially as it tells you exactly what to do first. It's a universal convention and standard procedure in all technical writing and other writing that if you use an abbreviation you put it in brackets after the initial explanation. Did you say your wife's a science teacher?? >This is making an already >completely new process unnecessarily cloudy in the mind of the >newbies. Ok, this is the second sentence in a half page description Half page. So you're using a print-out. What I suggested, I thought it might help, since you can't use a website with more than one page and one level. Seems not. >of how to do the most important step in making biodiesel. > >"In a smaller beaker, dissolve 1 ml of dewatered WVO oil in 10 ml of >pure isopropyl alcohol. Warm the beaker gently by standing it in some >hot water, stir until all the oil dissolves in the alcohol and the >mixture turns clear. Add 2 drops of phenolphthalein solution." >Smaller beaker than what? Maybe - hey, let's take a chance here and really stick our necks out - just maybe it MIGHT mean smaller than the one you just used two words previously to make one litre of 0.1% w/v lye solution? >WVO oil is redundant. I think in your
[Biofuel] Scientific method- Titration
Hi everyone My wife and I worked on titration until pretty late last night, at least late for me. I am a morning person and I pruned and thinned a massive area of Piñon & Cedar wood and then loaded it prior to beginning our first titration of WVO. I say this because I'd rather not have people telling me I am not tip-top with my labwork. Tired is all. Anyway, yesterday evening we finally had most of the equipment and chemicals in place. Saturday morning, I did some test runs using the TI-83 & Vernier LabPro Data logger. It is the Vernier Data Logger that is the most useful of the two for our needs. It has a USB interface and the data logger software was easy enough to figure out. I started out with the stainless-steel temperature sensor as we have a decent thermometer to check against. Very nice readout on the screen and easy to understand. I then removed the pH sensor from its soaking bath bottle. We set it in tap water first and got a pH reading of 7.5, rinsed it in distilled water and gently cleaned it with a paper towel, next dipping the sensor end in fresh distilled water, pH 7. With readings of that which we could expect, we then moved on to basic titration. If you all will bear with me a moment, I do have some questions. I will intertwine my questions right into the JtF web site directions for basic titration. Our hope is to clarify these directions for ourselves and for other newbies as well. We believe that there are several statements found here and in the email list which are contradictory at best. "Basic titration An electronic pH meter is best, but you can also use pH test strips (or litmus paper), or phenolphthalein solution (from a chemicals supplier)." I suggest sorting the test equipment according to preference. We were ridiculed for using litmus paper. Why list it second if it is preferred as a third choice? Phenolphthalein sounds very interesting. Why not give more information on the setup and use of this test? Yes we followed the links. "Dissolve 1 gram of lye in 1 liter of distilled or de-ionized water (0.1% w/v lye solution)." Here, according to JtF, we are in the absolute most important first step Titration, which a newbie is going to perform! Standard procedure in all technical writing as far as I am aware it to define all abbreviations Why throw out a statement like: "(0.1% w/v lye solution)" and not simply define (w/v?) This is making an already completely new process unnecessarily cloudy in the mind of the newbies. Ok, this is the second sentence in a half page description of how to do the most important step in making biodiesel. "In a smaller beaker, dissolve 1 ml of dewatered WVO oil in 10 ml of pure isopropyl alcohol. Warm the beaker gently by standing it in some hot water, stir until all the oil dissolves in the alcohol and the mixture turns clear. Add 2 drops of phenolphthalein solution." Smaller beaker than what? WVO oil is redundant. Again, if the pH Meter is the "best" tool and listed first in the sentence above, why are we jumping back to phenolphthalein? If this is the preferred test, why not say so in the first sentence? "Using a graduated syringe, add the 0.1% lye solution drop by drop to the oil-alcohol-phenolphthalein solution, stirring all the time. It might turn a bit cloudy, keep stirring. Keep on carefully adding the lye solution until the solution stays pink (actually magenta) for 15 seconds." See above. We are using a continuous readout pH meter. What is the pH we are looking for here! Yes Keith, layered information is great, but why push it when it is unnecessary? We are jumping all over the place in order to do one simple step. Different methods are combined in the same paragraph. This could be the reason newbies are confused. "Take the number of milliliters of 0.1% lye solution you used and add 3.5 (the basic amount of lye needed for virgin oil). This is the number of grams of lye you'll need per liter of oil." Sheesh, I am sorry, but I have a question about every sentence in this basic titration. "Take the number of milliliters of 0.1% lye solution you used and add 3.5" ?? This is sloppy writing. Are you saying add a number of milliliters to 3.5 grams? If it took 1.6 mL of lye solution then are we supposed to add 1.6 g to 3.5 g? I don't think so. How about a formula here? It would be clearer if you stated all of the proper terms, weight, volume, etc. No wonder so many questions appear on the email list about titration. "With a pH meter or test strips, use the same procedure without adding the phenolphthalein. Add the 0.1% lye solution drop by drop as before until the pH reaches 8.5." Duh! Why not just add this value to the sentence above to aid the newbies who are learning the procedure and keep them from jumping around. Also, please be consistent with the numbers throughout the directions. A pH of 8.5 is mentioned and then a pH of 8-9 is mentioned. This leads one to believe it does not really need to be exact. I know it is difficult for many f
