None of the current refrigerants are flamable except for R406 which is only slightly so under extreme conditions.
Gasoline is not explosive unless the vapors are contained at a certian mixture with air.
Propane, being much more volitile, will make that mixture more readily than gasoline...like nearly instantly...and there's no missing the presence of gasoline fumes in the air.
[Propane has 'stinky' added to it so it 'can' be detected...otherwise, it's odorless]
It is quite illegal to carry or store a propane cylinder in an enclosed space or even take one through a long tunnel for that reason. [A 12 car pileup in a tunnel could be a problem if they all used propane for the AC?]
The greater danger would be from a blowtorch effect in most collisions as the AC condenser is in a very vulnerable spot. An engine fire that includes burning off the fuel line while the electric fuel pump is still running would become a probability rather than a possibility. [Mine won't run for more than 5 seconds without some back pressure. An inertial safety switch wouldn't be hard to do either...but that's still a whopper of a highly likely blowtorch]
I was not aware that propane was such a good refrigerant.
I found out that it can be directly substituted and/or mixed with R12 in most cases...but if you happen to have a leak in the freezer coils, the fridge fills up with propane and that little light goes on...or it leaks off into todays tightly sealed house and someone throws a light switch.... BOOM!!! [Not that leaks happen all that much]
I wouldn't hesitate to use it under the right conditions [An outdoor deep freezer?], but automotive AC ain't that.
I did notice that the Gov't changed the safety standards for propane cylinder valves and effectively STOLE all my old ones from me in the process. "I" had no problems with them. Apparently, all it takes is one idiot to inconvenience the entire country. That's what the "supplement" issue is all about. That's why we have the FDA storm troopers. [Just gotta help idiots stay alive]
NO arguement here about Duponts propensity to manipulate congress..it wouldn't be the first time they had a hand in squelching an entire competing, more environmentally friendly industry. [See Dupont bleaching process for paper and the hemp story]
But then, we can also thank Ralph Nader for safety paranoia syndrome.
That alone would prevent the use of propane in automotive AC units much faster and more effectively than any Dupont lobbiest.
Our own fear of possibly being stupid now and then prevents us from learning from small errors till they get big enough to make for a good settlement.
People are no longer required to learn about the safety parameters of what they are doing and can sue somebody else for their ignorance and neglect instead.
Now we pay insurance companies to think for us...and whine when they do.
Now we have mandatory safety interlocks that make things inoperable...warning stickers instead of paint.
Children can no longer discover what can choke or burn them until they are old enough to sue a restaurant.
...yes, fish have bones and coffee is hot... DUH!
Had Nader been around in 1910, Henry Ford would be a famous plumber...and Nader, a methane safety proponant outlawing gas lights in bathrooms. [The bean gas sniffer industry would boom..er, I mean, grow ..till after Edison made 9,999 thousand light bulbs that didn't work.]
PS, Don't try lighting your farts with a hole in your jeans. [Just one of those small educational errors that tell everything about the dangers of a propane blow torch and the properties of flame baffles at the marginal cost of quick em-bare.ass-ment...and instant removal of any "wild hairs" that were going up somewhere]
Future rebottomed mine safety expert invents spark arrestors for ATVs. ;-)
Ode [A kid with scissors and an outlet, that lived to be smarter than that. BTW, don't plug the Erector Set motor into the wall..it spins REAL fast, till it catches fire.]... what's that ball of warning labels with two wires sticking out of it for? [More fuel for the small educational fire?]
I got my first pocket knife at the age of 5....and only 'deeply' cut myself twice.
First hatchet at age 8...and never cut myself with one to this day.
A few nicks with a bow saw..no problems with chain saws. [And I take that stupid tip thing off right away so I can freeking cut wood with it. Australian blades work 10x better than American 'safety raker/anti kickkback' blades too.]
Trim, chop and table saw parts usually get dumpstered before ever seeing saw dust.
Don't cut ANYTHING with body parts in line with the blade, stupid! [DUH!]
Use fogged up safety glasses so you can't read labels that say "Use safety glasses", then bash your thumb with that label encrusted hammer because you can't freeking see.
Never mind.
Airhead Chokeproof Barbie is gesturing me over with her inarticulated elbows sayin' "Oh, He's a 'pretty' fart smeller!" Pull my string, Barbie!
###############################################################################################
Sorry Mike..I guess we all have our rubber axes to grind on our styrofoam grinders.
Where's my rubber nails?
end of thread?
Ode
At 10:47 AM 7/25/2005 -0400, you wrote:
>>>>
Yeh, the HFC-134a is a good example of industry controlling what can can sold to maximize their profits. When freon 12 was banned, and freon 22 was restricted, they started looking for a good replacement. One was quickly found, a combination of butane and propane. In fact it worked as well as or better than the original freons, was compatible with them and the lubrication oil they used, so it could be used directly to replace them. But oh no, those chemicals are dirt cheap, and Dupont did not want to lose this nice cash cow, so they convinced congress that use of these should be outlawed because they are flammable. They ignored that fact that there is only a few pounds of them in a car air conditioner, and if they leaked they would immediately dissipate, and there is about 100 times more highly explosive gasoline in a car, plus the fact that freon was also flammable. They outlawed the environment finely butane an propane, and instead pushed the less friendly 134a because they could patent it and make more money on it. It required completely redoing the systems, uses an incompatible oil, and is, as far as I know, flammable as well.<<<<
Marshall
Ode Coyote wrote:
Fluorochlorocarbons are pretty much inert but contain both deadly Chlorine
and Flourine...and carbon.
[Sure, that stuff will 'break down' into toxic componants with high energy
UV..but you don't have that sort of radiation source inside and if you did,
that would kill you a lot faster]
You can't make broad assumptions about chemical compounds.
Each one has to be examined under "real" conditions in proper contexts.
In summary, HFC-134a has been rigorously tested for toxicity more than is
usual for other industrial chemicals, and all the testing has shown it to
have extremely low toxicity. HFC-134a is expected to be at least as safe as
CFC-12 which has an outstanding record of safety.
CFCs are members of the halocarbon family; which consist of a chemical
compound of the element carbon, and one or more of the halogens bromine,
iodine, chlorine, or fluorine (Encyclopedia Brittannica, 1982). CFCs were
first produced in 1928 by Thomas Midgley of the Frigirdaire Division of
General Motors, to obtain a safer substitute to the previous toxic coolants
such as ammonia and sulfur dioxide used in refrigeration and cooling systems.
..on the other hand...
Water can be quite toxic.
Ode
At 01:50 PM 7/24/2005 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
>Hi Duncan,
>
>I have to differ with you on your point of view on splenda.
>
>I'm not a chemist, but I did read Betty Martini's article. She did not say
>that no chlorine is good. Rather she said "chlorocarbons" are bad, and that
>chlorine in other forms, such as salt, are safe.
>
>Quote:
>"It is logical to ask why table salt, which also contains chlorine, is safe
>while Splenda/sucralose is toxic? Because salt isn't a chlorocarbon. When
>molecular chemistry binds sodium to chlorine to make salt carbon isn't
>included. Sucralose and salt are as different as oil and water."
>
>"Unlike sodium chloride, chlorocarbons are never nutritionally compatible
>with our metabolic processes and are wholly incompatible with normal human
>metabolic functioning.".....
>
>..."Splenda/sucralose is simply chlorinated sugar; a chlorocarbon. Common
>chlorocarbons include carbon tetrachloride, trichlorethelene and methylene
>chloride, all deadly. Chlorine is nature's Doberman attack dog, a highly
>excitable, ferocious atomic element employed as a biocide in bleach,
>disinfectants, insecticide, WWI poison gas and hydrochloric acid."
>End quote.
>
>You also mention that the body has only to deal with the .45 mg of a 15mg
>dose of suralose, and that "your body has built in mechanisms to deal with
>it". While this is probably true, it is also true that our body has the
>ability to deal with many poisons/toxins such as lead, fluoride, cadmium,
>mercury, DDT and chloridane, PFOA (from Teflon) and dozens of other
>poisons... but WHY ADD TO THE BURDEN? With cancer, heart disease,
>Alzheimer's, and so many other diseases on the rise, it just doesn't make
>sense to me. Doctors routinely see diseases today that were rare 30 and 40
>years ago - Alzheimer's, childhood cancer and macular degeneration for
>example. There is so much toxic load in today's world that babies are now
>born polluted.
>See:
><http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=healthNews&storyid=2005>http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=healthNews&storyid=2005-
>07-14T152835Z_01_N14715900_RTRIDST_0_HEALTH-CHEMICALS-DC.XML
>
>Also note that according to:
><http://www.splendaexposed.com/>http://www.splendaexposed.com/
>the percent of splenda that your body absorbs is around 15% (2.25 mg) not
>0.45 mg that you mention. I don't know who if either is correct.
>
>
>There are plenty of documented cases of people who didn't have the ability
>to detox splenda:
><http://www.mercola.com/2000/dec/3/sucralose_testimonials.htm>http://www.mercola.com/2000/dec/3/sucralose_testimonials.htm
>
>
>
>Who knows what the long term side effects of Splenda are? - There have never
>been any long term studies to determine what they are, so those who take it
>are gambling. In my view, the prudent action is to use those sweeteners made
>by nature, they have a know track record of many generations. I don't
>understand why someone as yourself, who is a proponent of natural medicine,
>would promote something unnatural as splenda.
>
>John
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Duncan Crow [<mailto:[email protected]>mailto:[email protected]]
>Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 11:28 AM
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: CS>The Lethal Science Of Splenda - A Poisonous Chlorocarbon at
>News Breaking Healt
>
>Betty Martini's sucralose scare that is propagating on the Internet
>seems to be overstated. It does not mention that about 97% of each
>dose of about 15 mg of sucralose taken as a sweetener is excreted.
>This leaves .45 mg to be dealt with.
>........................................
>
>
>
>--
>The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver.
>
>Instructions for unsubscribing are posted at: <http://silverlist.org>http://silverlist.org
>
>To post, address your message to: [email protected]
>Silver List archive: <http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html>http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html
>
>Address Off-Topic messages to: [email protected]
>OT Archive: <http://escribe.com/health/silverofftopiclist/index.html>http://escribe.com/health/silverofftopiclist/index.html
>
>List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
>
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.4/57 - Release Date: 7/22/2005
>
>
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.4 - Release Date: 7/22/2005
>
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.4 - Release Date: 7/22/2005
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.5 - Release Date: 7/25/2005
No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.5 - Release Date: 7/25/2005
