Re[2]: FW: [Biofuel] about God
Hallo Kirk, You perhaps misunderstand what the U-book claims to be, which is a divine revelation of the 20th century and the customs of the period have nothing whatsoever to do with that particular story as the count was not made by someone of that period but is claimed to have been made by some heavenly agent. The book is, in the fourth part, excellent and if read as gospel truth or historical fiction it makes no difference. Whatever its origins it is an excellent read. For my money it expands on what Friends have been believing for 400 years, and like Friends it does not espouse proselytization. There are a lot of excellent books out there, both religious and non-religious and they all have to be read the same. Keep the flowers you find but not the manure they are growing in. Happy Happy, Gustl Wednesday, 10 November, 2004, 20:08:53, you wrote: KM Mel, I have problems accepting Urantia as an accurate KM history. KM For example-- KM Page 1701 when recounting the feeding of the five KM thousand says: KM They who ate of this extraordinary feast numbered KM about five thousand men, women, and children. KM We know from that period that counts were of men only KM so saying men, women and children exposes the writer KM as unfamiliar with customs of 2000 years ago. KM As it is written, if you cannot trust a small thing KM then. . . KM All the best KM Kirk -- Je mehr wir haben, desto mehr fordert Gott von uns. Mitglied-Team AMIGA ICQ: 22211253-Gustli The safest road to Hell is the gradual one - the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts. C. S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters Es gibt Wahrheiten, die so sehr auf der Stra§e liegen, da§ sie gerade deshalb von der gewhnlichen Welt nicht gesehen oder wenigstens nicht erkannt werden. Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music. George Carlin The best portion of a good man's life - His little, nameless, unremembered acts of kindness and of love. William Wordsworth ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping, not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod
Well said Todd!! I'm not religious, have nothing against people that are. I just think god, Darwin and all such contentious issues that people have a tendency to form distinct opinions on should kept them just as that - opinions. Not some sort of power to coerce others with differing thoughts to fall into line with them. It's no wonder with this level of mentality going around that the world is looking increasingly scary to those with clearer vision .may the omnipotent being be merciful. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Appal Energy Sent: 10 November 2004 21:04 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod Amazingly blind and foolish, humans are. Cobb County Georgia School Board puts stickers on their biology books stating that evolution is only a theory, all at the behest of a few screaming meamies, and two thousand petition signers. They're rationale? God is real but evolution is unproven. Well now..., one must ask the question: If sufficient proof of evolution is requisite, shouldn't the existance of God, gods or goddesses be held to the same standard? Would someone please show me the irrefutable proof that God exists? Now, now. You can't rely upon semi-contemporary interpretations of written words from thousands of years ago. That's hearsay and second hand at best. That would be no different than anyone quoting from Darwin's Origin of the Species. Just because someone wrote it doesn't make it fact anymore than just declaring it. What is required is first hand knowledge that is repeatable and provable, given the correct set of circumstances of course. So given enough time (millenia or just a few biologic cycles), it's rather easy to prove the selectivity of nature for specific traits that are best suited to certain environmental characteristics. Rather kind of mindless work. Perfectly amazing, but none-the-less simple. But given the same amount of time, all that is evidenced relative to God's existance is more hearsay, first hand, second hand and off-hand tales of miracles and magnificent radiance, but nothing tangible, nothing repeatable, and in many respects nothing at all. It's really rather easy to feel some degree of sympathy for those who believe but can't prove the existance of what it is they believe in. Frustrating it must be for them. Of course, there is the age-old and failure-proof standby that If you don't believe me, you must be an agent from hell. That usually gets most people to leave them alone in their dither. Now please don't get me wrong. I'd bet good money that there's something out there that's bigger than me, and you as well. Just that virtually no-one has any proof as to exactly what that is. It's all theory. And while theory is all rather nice and no doubt necessary, especially when considering the needy, foolish and frail mental capacities of humanity in general (see the dismal, human propensity to punch time clocks and afford governments opportunity to cast bullets, muzzles and bombs and then put them in the hands of their children to unleash on whomever they wish), it remains nothing more than that. So, while the world waits for an irrefutable appearance of the cosmos' most premier water walker, perhaps we oughta' either take all the stickers off the books, or at minimum eliminate the double standard and put two stickers on everything, declaring that God and evolution are both theories, giving evidence to a little honesty in advertising for a change. I know. Jeers, virtual athiesm tomatos and fatwahs all around. Must often times be depressing, disconcerting and demoralizing for those who have a belief and no proof...other than the proof of their belief, of course. Circular logic, that. A record stuck playing in the same groove, never letting the listener/audience hear the rest of the song, much less experience it as fully as they could... Todd Swearingen ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping, not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod
the way, the truth and the lite (life or whatever)? So when did this 10th planet hop onto the scene? Is it before or after Pluto? Looking from the front or the back? And by the way, which way is upside down in the cosmos? Frankly, about the only sane religious revelation there could possibly be is to acknowledge that all the human generated aspects of them (which is right at 100.000%) are absolutely nuts and lend to the inevitable destruction that they all rail against. Phooey on them all. A person can pretty well sit on the back porch anytime of day or night with a cup of tea and a like minded mate and figure what reality is and how nonsense threatens to destroy it all. And certainly one doesn't need a new age standard to point the way anymore than the old standards. Todd Swearingen Religion is what keeps the poor from killing the rich. - Original Message - From: Mel Riser [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 4:13 PM Subject: RE: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod P.597 - ¤3 Even on normal evolutionary worlds the realization of the world-wide brotherhood of man is not an easy accomplishment. On a confused and disordered planet like Urantia such an achievement requires a much longer time and necessitates far greater effort. Unaided social evolution can hardly achieve such happy results on a spiritually isolated sphere. Religious revelation is essential to the realization of brotherhood on Urantia. While Jesus has shown the way to the immediate attainment of spiritual brotherhood, the realization of social brotherhood on your world depends much on the achievement of the following personal transformations and planetary adjustments: The Urantia book EXPLICITLY tells us we evolved, give us the timelines and debunks much of the ahem... Mythology of the Judeo-Christian dogma mel -Original Message- From: Appal Energy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 3:04 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod Amazingly blind and foolish, humans are. Cobb County Georgia School Board puts stickers on their biology books stating that evolution is only a theory, all at the behest of a few screaming meamies, and two thousand petition signers. They're rationale? God is real but evolution is unproven. Well now..., one must ask the question: If sufficient proof of evolution is requisite, shouldn't the existance of God, gods or goddesses be held to the same standard? Would someone please show me the irrefutable proof that God exists? Now, now. You can't rely upon semi-contemporary interpretations of written words from thousands of years ago. That's hearsay and second hand at best. That would be no different than anyone quoting from Darwin's Origin of the Species. Just because someone wrote it doesn't make it fact anymore than just declaring it. What is required is first hand knowledge that is repeatable and provable, given the correct set of circumstances of course. So given enough time (millenia or just a few biologic cycles), it's rather easy to prove the selectivity of nature for specific traits that are best suited to certain environmental characteristics. Rather kind of mindless work. Perfectly amazing, but none-the-less simple. But given the same amount of time, all that is evidenced relative to God's existance is more hearsay, first hand, second hand and off-hand tales of miracles and magnificent radiance, but nothing tangible, nothing repeatable, and in many respects nothing at all. It's really rather easy to feel some degree of sympathy for those who believe but can't prove the existance of what it is they believe in. Frustrating it must be for them. Of course, there is the age-old and failure-proof standby that If you don't believe me, you must be an agent from hell. That usually gets most people to leave them alone in their dither. Now please don't get me wrong. I'd bet good money that there's something out there that's bigger than me, and you as well. Just that virtually no-one has any proof as to exactly what that is. It's all theory. And while theory is all rather nice and no doubt necessary, especially when considering the needy, foolish and frail mental capacities of humanity in general (see the dismal, human propensity to punch time clocks and afford governments opportunity to cast bullets, muzzles and bombs and then put them in the hands of their children to unleash on whomever they wish), it remains nothing more than that. So, while the world waits for an irrefutable appearance of the cosmos' most premier water walker, perhaps we oughta' either take all the stickers off the books, or at minimum eliminate the double standard and put two stickers on everything, declaring that God and evolution are both theories, giving evidence
RE: FW: [Biofuel] about God
Mel, I have problems accepting Urantia as an accurate history. For example-- Page 1701 when recounting the feeding of the five thousand says: They who ate of this extraordinary feast numbered about five thousand men, women, and children. We know from that period that counts were of men only so saying men, women and children exposes the writer as unfamiliar with customs of 2000 years ago. As it is written, if you cannot trust a small thing then. . . All the best Kirk --- Mel Riser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of COURSE they are evolved just as we are... But there are SUDDEN changes in the DNA that bring about Spontaneous mutation. And behold a new creature comes forth that does NOT look the Parents. The Urantia book goes in to evolution in Detail. Read the chapter on Andon and Fonta, the first humans... No not Adam and Eve. They are material sons and daughters of PERFECT DNA designed to up step the evolution of the evolved humans. Interesting chapter. http://www.urantia.org/papers/paper63.html And here is a chapter on Adam and Eve http://www.urantia.org/papers/paper74.html And here is the Default of Adam and Eve. What they REALLY did. No apples here :) http://www.urantia.org/papers/paper75.html I am looking for the chapter that has the paragraphs on the best religion is one you make up for yourself. Mel Btw the mandate from the midwayers was this WAS NEVER to be an organized religion. That is what has gotten so MANY messages off track in the past. You will not find a church of urantia. Only study groups And there are no priests. Or imams Or holy mothers for that matter :) -Original Message- From: Keith Addison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 1:43 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: FW: [Biofuel] about God Wouldn't it be the creature the chicken evolved from? john But which evolved from it first, the chicken, the egg or the rooster? And why, John, are you complicating matters by bringing all this suspect evolutionary theory into a perfectly good religious discussion? LOL! Anyway, they're dinosaurs, aren't they? Sure look like dinosaurs to me. Clever trick, that, evolving into warm-blooded critters. Maybe they had to use a two-tank system with a pre-heater first before they got it right. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Ferguson Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 9:36 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Biofuel] about God Thanks Keith, :-) Sorry Tim, couldn't resist... I can now rest easy :) ! That's more than I can say right now - both roosters are crowing, what a row. It's that big one, I dont know how he does it - whatever the season, no matter what time dawn breaks, regardless of the weather, he starts crowing at 4am, very punctual. Maybe he gets a wake-up call on his cell-phone. Anyway, yes, it's 4am, again, and actually the roosters don't bother me at all, I'll rest easy too, soon as I've finished this. All best Keith Best wishes, Tim -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Keith Addison Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 10:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Biofuel] about God Um... the rooster? Keith Very well said... Jonathan Tim Ferguson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gabriel, You are obviously a profound thinker so I will pose a troubling question to you. Which cam first? The Chicken..or the Egg? Best wishes, Tim -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Gabriel Proulx Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 9:54 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Biofuel] about God I saw that some people are talking about God. I just want to express my point of view about God: it's total bullshit! It's told that God can create and do anything, as he wish. Following the logic of this statement, he could create a rock which is impossible to lift even for him because he can do anything he wants. But if he can't lift that rock, this mean he can't do anything he wants. Seems that we got a paradox here. Seems that the Bible is not telling the truth. Some peole will say: it's impossible to create a rock which is impossible to lift even God can't do that. That directly say that god can't do anything and that the Bible was not right. Don't it smell like bullshit? Think about that and tell me if paradox can be true. Stop wasting your life and energy in this ridiculous story. It's all about collecting beliver's money. Help the world evolve instead. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
RE: [Biofuel] Bush stands by rejection of limits on gasesblamedforglobal warming
When a German company bought out a Dallas high tech company, they fired 10% of the work force each successive quarter for four quarters (without notice or reason--simply follow the armed guard and leave, NOW). That's not American influence folks. And the idea that many of our water systems are being taken over by German companies (this same company) is also not good for local self-sufficiency and community stewardship. Also consider another trend--ownership for convenience stores and motels is now Middle Eastern related in the US. It appears to be a global revolution--one business at a time The lesson could be biological in nature. Adapt or become extinct. There is such a melting pot of conglomerate forces acting that pin-pointing the causes as political in nature give excuses and makes for press-releases without adaptation philosophies. If a person wants to point a finger, please use it to give direction. Let's move in the right direction regardless of whatever reasons caused the motivation. We are one world. P. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Harbican Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 12:44 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Bush stands by rejection of limits on gasesblamedforglobal warming I would say more than one case.Over 75% of the work force, of that company, ended up like me - out of work. I know that the company is now back up to about 40% of it's original size, and has been slowly growing for the last 2 years, but they have had to diversify in the process. Greg H. - Original Message - From: Michael Redler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 10:46 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Bush stands by rejection of limits on gases blamedforglobal warming Well, we now have one documented case of a job that was not lost because of GWB's poor judgment in foreign affairs (foreign trade), the environment, no CEO left behind or any other disaster of foreign and domestic policy. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Do-Nothing White House GHG Climate Change Policy
Evironmental/Business Coalition Warns that White House is Out-of-Touch and Irresponsible for its Continued Do-Nothing Climate Change Policy and Rejection of Limits on Greenhouse Gas Emissions Sustainable Energy Coalition http://www.sustainableenergy.org NOVEMBER 10, 2004 http://www.commondreams.org/news2004/1110-15.htm WASHINGTON -- November 10 -- The Sustainable Energy Coalition today sharply criticized recent comments by senior White House officials rejecting any limits on greenhouse gas emissions. The criticism was in response to statements made following President Bush's re-election, by James Connaughton, chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, White House science adviser John Marburger, and Mike Leavitt, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. In light of the recent release of two major new studies* that conclude global warming is dramatically impacting the United States faster than many scientists had anticipated, the Administration's position is shortsighted and irresponsible. Moreover, given the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol by the Russian Federation and more than 120 other nations, the U.S. is now out of touch with virtually every other industrialized country on the planet other than Australia. The Administration continues to rely on questionable economic analyses as justification for its lack of effective policy and argues that the Kyoto Protocol would cost the U.S. economy nearly 5 million jobs. Accordingly, the Sustainable Energy Coalition calls upon the Administration to identify the analysis upon which this 5 million job loss figure is based, and to explain why the findings of multiple other analyses that smart strategies to reduce U.S. carbon emissions can produce a net increase in domestic employment were rejected. According to analyses by SEC member group, the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Administration's own computer model and assumptions show that increasing the use of renewable electricity sources to just 20 percent by 2020 would cut the growth of power plant carbon emissions by more than half, while saving consumers billions of dollars and creating hundreds of thousands of new jobs.** Adopting other renewable energy incentives such as a Renewable Fuels Standard and incorporating cost-effective energy efficiency savings could further reduce U.S. carbon emissions substantially compared to the Administration's business-as-usual projections. Ironically, while the White House has based its rejection of both the Kyoto Protocol and other form of mandatory limits on greenhouse gas emissions on economic grounds, its position actually threatens to undermine the nation's economic health -- as well as its environmental health. In a letter sent to President Bush on October 14, the Sustainable Energy Coalition warned that the U.S.'s continued rejection of meaningful international involvement in the effort to address climate change is not only undermining the global environment but also risks great damage to the American economy. By not being a signatory, the United States now faces the very real possibility of putting itself at a serious competitive disadvantage in the world marketplace. Russia's approval of the Kyoto Protocol means that U.S. business may be cut out of the new carbon trading markets which have already been set up in London. Furthermore, carbon trading and incentives to install renewables and other clean technologies in the treaty will give companies in Europe and elsewhere a financial advantage in joint trading agreements with former Eastern bloc and developing countries. In addition, by giving industry, local authorities and consumers incentives to take action on climate change, Russia, Japan, the European Union and the other industrialized countries that have joined the protocol will set themselves on a path to greater economic efficiency. This will ultimately translate into foreign enterprises being significantly more competitive in the global marketplace. Moreover, post-election analyses reveal that whatever policy support President Bush may have received from the voters did not include inaction on the issue of global warming. In fact, the Administration's climate change policies may be handicapping the economies of many of the very states that assured his election. For example, America's agricultural sector is already profitably reducing greenhouse gases by turning to no-till or minimum-till farming practices, producing ethanol, biodiesel, biogas (reducing methane emissions) and other biofuels, hosting a rapidly increasing number of wind farms and seeking efficiencies throughout their operations. The Sustainable Energy Coalition consequently reiterates its call to President Bush to commit the United States to binding goals for the reduction of greenhouse gases. Addressing climate change with policies and investments that
RE: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping, not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod
Like Gustl said... Whether you take it as literal truth, fiction or just a nice book, the truths contained are real in as much as they MOTIVATE you to bring will to power. It is not cult or ridden with church dogma... At least not yet. Yes there have been schisms and off shoots. The real appeal is does it work for YOU. If so then have some faith and enjoy the sublime relationship with the god that dwells within. If not reject and seek your own truth. However before you reject it from a few sentences, read some chapters and then if it still does not sit truthfully within you reject the message. I personally find it to be the most refreshing take on religion, man and our situation of anything I have read on this planet in 45 years of time. Just as I like the Bahaii faith and have been studying that, the UB has something for everyone. If you mind is big enough, tackle the first section and if YOU REALLY read and UNDERSTAND it you have a greater mind than I. As the first section is the deepest, most intense section on cosmic divinity and the nature of the universe. Is it true? I dunno, is ANYTHING you read true? Especially a religious document? What counts is does it give you will to power that leads to action. Of course a total rejection of all things religious based on proof can never be proved. What came first? Chicken, egg or rooster? Man, god or the mind of god? mel -Original Message- From: Appal Energy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 5:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod What? You offer up another textbook of human worksmanship as evidence of the way, the truth and the lite (life or whatever)? So when did this 10th planet hop onto the scene? Is it before or after Pluto? Looking from the front or the back? And by the way, which way is upside down in the cosmos? Frankly, about the only sane religious revelation there could possibly be is to acknowledge that all the human generated aspects of them (which is right at 100.000%) are absolutely nuts and lend to the inevitable destruction that they all rail against. Phooey on them all. A person can pretty well sit on the back porch anytime of day or night with a cup of tea and a like minded mate and figure what reality is and how nonsense threatens to destroy it all. And certainly one doesn't need a new age standard to point the way anymore than the old standards. Todd Swearingen Religion is what keeps the poor from killing the rich. - Original Message - From: Mel Riser [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 4:13 PM Subject: RE: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod P.597 - ¤3 Even on normal evolutionary worlds the realization of the world-wide brotherhood of man is not an easy accomplishment. On a confused and disordered planet like Urantia such an achievement requires a much longer time and necessitates far greater effort. Unaided social evolution can hardly achieve such happy results on a spiritually isolated sphere. Religious revelation is essential to the realization of brotherhood on Urantia. While Jesus has shown the way to the immediate attainment of spiritual brotherhood, the realization of social brotherhood on your world depends much on the achievement of the following personal transformations and planetary adjustments: The Urantia book EXPLICITLY tells us we evolved, give us the timelines and debunks much of the ahem... Mythology of the Judeo-Christian dogma mel -Original Message- From: Appal Energy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 3:04 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod Amazingly blind and foolish, humans are. Cobb County Georgia School Board puts stickers on their biology books stating that evolution is only a theory, all at the behest of a few screaming meamies, and two thousand petition signers. They're rationale? God is real but evolution is unproven. Well now..., one must ask the question: If sufficient proof of evolution is requisite, shouldn't the existance of God, gods or goddesses be held to the same standard? Would someone please show me the irrefutable proof that God exists? Now, now. You can't rely upon semi-contemporary interpretations of written words from thousands of years ago. That's hearsay and second hand at best. That would be no different than anyone quoting from Darwin's Origin of the Species. Just because someone wrote it doesn't make it fact anymore than just declaring it. What is required is first hand knowledge that is repeatable and provable, given the correct set of circumstances of course. So given enough time (millenia or just a few biologic cycles), it's rather
Re: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping, not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod
some chapters and then if it still does not sit truthfully within you reject the message Nah, nah, nah, nah Why in the world would I want to subject myself to yet another evening of doublespeak, long-winded sentences and enough switchbacks of convoluted thought in every paragraph to turn anyone into butter? Forget running around a mulberry bush. But if that's what keeps you from going postal, more power to you - higher, lower or indifferent. My truth is that the last thing I (and probably almost the entire rest of the world) need is another brain trust telling them what they need or should want to think. As for motivation? Bringing will to power? What are we talking here? Suzanne Summers, Thy Master and a metaphysical meditation between repetitions with the temptation of a double-fudge brownie within arm's reach? Schisms and off shoots... Yup. More stupid human tricks. Should have bet money on that one. The god that dwells within... You must mean that one that nobody seems to be able to offer any proof of other than goose pimples with the passing of an occasional thought. Seems to make a whole lot more sense to enjoy the experience for what it is rather than fouling it up and distorting it by attempting to ascribe it to something deified which none of us know for sure exists. On the other side of the coin is the foolishness of ascribing it to the wonderfulness of self. All a bit of puffery that. Frankly Mel? If it's communion with this theoretical Dog., I mean God that I want, I think I'll conduct it via a slice of hot apple pie and a pint of homemade ice cream, or whilst sticking my nose in a lilac bush and marveling (or cursing) when it gets bit by what buzzes, or when bundled up and watching Saturn rocket debris fall back to Earth on a moonless winter's night. certainly not crawling up with yet another human concocted script of what's supposed to be what and how it's all supposed to be interpreted and coped with. Bananas. Pure, unadulterated bananas. Todd Swearingen - Original Message - From: Mel Riser [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 11:08 PM Subject: RE: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod Like Gustl said... Whether you take it as literal truth, fiction or just a nice book, the truths contained are real in as much as they MOTIVATE you to bring will to power. It is not cult or ridden with church dogma... At least not yet. Yes there have been schisms and off shoots. The real appeal is does it work for YOU. If so then have some faith and enjoy the sublime relationship with the god that dwells within. If not reject and seek your own truth. However before you reject it from a few sentences, read some chapters and then if it still does not sit truthfully within you reject the message. I personally find it to be the most refreshing take on religion, man and our situation of anything I have read on this planet in 45 years of time. Just as I like the Bahaii faith and have been studying that, the UB has something for everyone. If you mind is big enough, tackle the first section and if YOU REALLY read and UNDERSTAND it you have a greater mind than I. As the first section is the deepest, most intense section on cosmic divinity and the nature of the universe. Is it true? I dunno, is ANYTHING you read true? Especially a religious document? What counts is does it give you will to power that leads to action. Of course a total rejection of all things religious based on proof can never be proved. What came first? Chicken, egg or rooster? Man, god or the mind of god? mel -Original Message- From: Appal Energy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 5:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod What? You offer up another textbook of human worksmanship as evidence of the way, the truth and the lite (life or whatever)? So when did this 10th planet hop onto the scene? Is it before or after Pluto? Looking from the front or the back? And by the way, which way is upside down in the cosmos? Frankly, about the only sane religious revelation there could possibly be is to acknowledge that all the human generated aspects of them (which is right at 100.000%) are absolutely nuts and lend to the inevitable destruction that they all rail against. Phooey on them all. A person can pretty well sit on the back porch anytime of day or night with a cup of tea and a like minded mate and figure what reality is and how nonsense threatens to destroy it all. And certainly one doesn't need a new age standard to point the way anymore than the old standards. Todd Swearingen Religion is what keeps the poor from killing the rich. - Original Message - From: Mel Riser [EMAIL PROTECTED] To:
Re: [Biofuel] Methanol Safety of Dispensing from 55 Gal. Drums tocarboy safely
methanol for $40. I buy my methanol in 55 gal steel drums and pump it with that very pump... Doon't forget the resperator...Punasurfer - Original Message - From: Kevin Shea [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 8:05 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Methanol Safety of Dispensing from 55 Gal. Drums tocarboy safely After 11 months of research of biodiesel and pondering methanol safety, I have not come across any recent scenarios of dispensing methanol from a 55 gal metal drum to a BD methoxide processor (carboy) with only one exception. (On Journey to Forever's site) One chap using a 55 gal poly drum of methanol with a special bung cap fitted with a tire valve plug /shaft. The listed method is from memory, but I believe it is ...Applying compressed air to the tire plug will create pressure within the drum to exhaust pressured output (methanol) or pump methanol to the methoxide container etc. To purchase a 55 gal. drum or drums of methanol is a vast saving compared to buying meth. in 5 gal pails here on the northeast coast of the US. Methanol is your most expensive raw material when it comes to biodiesel production. My first question is 1.) How to dispense the Methanol from a 55 gal drum to my carboy safely using approved drum equipment? Model number of hand pumps helps to include with reply!! etc.? How do you ground the drum? I can make a ground 55 gal drum clamp w/wire and ground it to the arth. -Solved Method of delivery? Not sure how the chap purchased the Methanol in a poly drum, or maybe he transferred it, since methanol should most likely be sold in a metal drums?. 2.)Question is: Can't find a rated 55 gal. drum pump (hand) to use for methanol that is explosive proof and is rated for methanol. Any help Thank you, Kevin Shea ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] washing water
heated up to remove some methanol. Then I delute it 1/4 glycerin to 3/4 water add 1/4 cup blood or feather meal 1 cup bone meal and water my fruit trees with it. I live in Hawaii and my banana trees are very happyPunasurfer - Original Message - From: tommy newman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 2:31 PM Subject: [Biofuel] washing water I am very much interested of the effects if any the water used for washing the biodiesl has on plants and if it is put into rivers the effects, or what it contains. I have been told it contains salts i.e. Calcium and sodium /potassium but that has not been confirmed. ___ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] titration
is it normal to have a precipitate at the bottom when approching 8.5ph? I use the better titration approach. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] The Other People
Kim, excellent morning reading :-)_ Cheers, Aleks Sorry, I forgot I can't send an attachment. Here is the article for those who wanted to read it. Bright Blessings, Kim We Are the Other People by Oberon Zell Ding-dong! goes the doorbell. Is it Avon calling? Or perhaps Ed McMahon with my three million dollars? No, it's Yahweh's Witlesses again, just wanting to have a nice little chat about the Bible...:: Boy, did they ever come to the wrong house! So we invite them in: Enter freely and of your own will... (Hey, it's Sunday morning, nothing much going on, why not have a little entertainment?) Diane and I amuse ourselves watching their expressions as they check out the living room: great horned owl on the back of my chair; ceremonial masks and medicine skulls of dragons and unicorns on the wall; crystals, wands, staffs, swords; lots of Goddess figures and several altars; boa constrictors draped in amorous embrace over the elk horn; white doves sitting in the hanging planters; cats and weasels underfoot; iron dragon snorting steam atop the wood stove; posters and paintings of wizards and dinosaurs and witchy women, some proudly naked; sculptures of mythological beasties and lots more dinosaurs; warp six on the star-filled viewscreen of my computer; a five-foot model of the USS Enterprise and the skeleton of a plesiosaur hanging from the ceiling; very, very many books, most of them dealing with obviously weird subjects... To say nothing of the great horned owl perched on the back of my chair and the Unicorn grazing in the front yard. You know; early Addams Family decor. : And then, of course, it being late in the morning, you can expect Morning Glory to come wandering out naked, looking for her wake-up cup of tea. Morning Glory naked is a truly impressive sight, and the Witlesses look as if she'd set titties on stun as they stand immobilized, hands clasped over their genitals. With the stage set and all the actors in place, the show is ready to begin. : : Their mission, of course, it to save our heathen souls by turning us on to The Word of the Lord - their Bible. I guess they figure some of us just haven't heard about it yet, and we're all eagerly awaiting their joyous tidings of personal salvation through giving our rational faculties to Jesus. Every time they come around, I look forward to trying out a new riposte. Sure, it may be cruel and sadistic of me, but hey, I didn't call them up and ask them to come over; they entered at their own risk! : : This time should be pretty good. After letting them run off their basic rap while lovely Morning Glory serves us all hot herb tea, I innocently remark: But none of that applies to us. We have no need for salvation because we don't have original sin. We are the Other People. : : Hunh? What? they reply eloquently. It's clear they've never heard this one before. : : Right, I say. It's all in your Bible. And I proceed to tell them the story, using their own book for reference: : : Genesis 1:26 - The [Elohim] said, Let us make humanity in our own image, in the likeness of ourselves, and let them be masters of the fish of the sea, the birds of heaven, the cattle, all the wild beasts and all the reptiles that crawl upon the earth. : : Elohim is a plural word, including male and female, and should properly be translated Gods or Pantheon. : : 27 The Gods created humanity in the image of themselves, In the image of the Gods they created them, Male and Female they created them. : 28 The Gods blessed them, saying to them, Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth and conquer it. Be masters of the fish of the sea, the birds of heaven and all living animals on the earth. : : Now clearly, here we are talking about the original creation of the human species: male and female. All the animals,plants, etc. have all been created in previous verses. This is before the Garden of Eden, and Yahweh is not mentioned as the creator of these people. The next chapter talks about how Yahweh, an individual member of the Pantheon, goes about assembling his own special little botanical and zoological Garden in Eden, and making his own little man to inhabit it: : : Gen 2:7 - Yahweh God fashioned a man of dust from the soil. Then he breathed into his nostrils a breath of life, and thus the man became a living being. : 8 Yahweh God planted a garden in Eden which is in the east, and there he put the man he had fashioned. : 9 Yahweh God caused to spring up from the soil every kind of tree, enticing to look at and good to eat, with the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the middle of the garden. : 15 Yahweh God took the man and settled him in the garden of Eden to cultivate and take care of it. : Now this next is crucial: note Yahweh's precise words: 16 Then Yahweh God gave the man this admonition, You may eat indeed of all the trees in the garden. 17
Re: [Biofuel] Questions with using biodiesel
no problems besides fuel filters clogging up. I did replace some rubber fuel line which was a five minute job. I put in an inline glass fuel filter with a replaceable filter and chanced that about every other week for quite a while then it finally cleared up. I had the car for a year then bought a 2002 golf one year ago. The people I sold the car too still come by for BD once in a while and their car still runs fine. Home made BD is fine as long as it's washed well. - Original Message - From: Theo Chadzichristos [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 11:58 AM Subject: [Biofuel] Questions with using biodiesel HI all, I've been looking for a post that people actually respond to, and it looks like I have finally found a good one. I have made blender sized batched of biodiesel successfully but I want to move to a larger scale. I have a 1976 Mercedes Benz 300d which I want to run on biodiesel. I know that higher concentrations of biodiesel will clean up all the junk from the dino diesel that's accumulated in the tank and probably clog up my filters. That's not a problem because I can easily replace those. My main concern is screwing up my injector pump, injectors and all my fuel lines by using biodiesel since those are expensive parts to replace. I have read of others with Mercedes Benz diesels that run successfully on biodiesel with no problem but the 1976 model year was the very first 5 cylinder diesel that came out. The basic engine design stayed the same as the years went by but there were a lot of minor changes made to the engine as time went on. I'm not sure if it is capable of using biodiesel without a lot of problems. If anyone has any personal experience or knows of anyone with a diesel this old I would greatly appreciate any feedback on whether or not they had any problems with any engine component because of biodiesel. Sorry about the length of the message and thanks for the time. Theo C ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Methanol Safety of Dispensing from 55 Gal. Drums tocarboy safely
We use this set up to empty 55 gal Drums... Most Drums have a large fill hole and a small vent hole. Most hardware stores carry brass (spark proof) fittings that will attach to these holes. I try to avoid the pvc fittings, they can snap off when tipping the drum over if they are bumped. The large one we use came with a valve already attached. The small fitting has a vacuum breaker inside. With the drum upright, install both fittings. Please, always use spark proof tools. A spark around methanol is verry dangerous. I once saw a fire started when a guy dropped his wrench to the floor into another pile of tools. All it took was one spark. Use a lot of teflon tape on the threads, the methanol is so thin that it will leak around the rough threads. Ensure the valve is closed as sometimes people will play with the valves in the store. Lay the drum on its side with the vent hole uppermost. When you open the valve on the large attachment, the vacuum breaker will open to allow flow. Grounding... I can't think of the manufacturer...someone else on the list may know. It looks like a very small c-clamp, with the exception that the threaded part has a jagged, sharp set of teeth to cut through paint, gunk, and dirt build up on the drum. It attaches to the bottom rim. The wire is welded to the clamp at one end and to the grounding rod on the other. They are very cheap (less than a dollar) and are guaranteed to work. As you know, a good ground is very important because of static build up when flowing a volatile fluid into or out of a vapor space like a drum. Sorry if this was too simplistic. I never know how much detail is too much detail... By the way, How much does a 55 gallon drum of pure methanol cost in your area? Also, what is your area? ps(to the list) What does everyone else pay for their chemicals? Please include size of product and area of country(us) . Jonathan From: Kevin Shea [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Biofuel] Methanol Safety of Dispensing from 55 Gal. Drums tocarboy safely Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 01:05:34 -0500 After 11 months of research of biodiesel and pondering methanol safety, I have not come across any recent scenarios of dispensing methanol from a 55 gal metal drum to a BD methoxide processor (carboy) with only one exception. (On Journey to Forever's site) One chap using a 55 gal poly drum of methanol with a special bung cap fitted with a tire valve plug /shaft. The listed method is from memory, but I believe it is ...Applying compressed air to the tire plug will create pressure within the drum to exhaust pressured output (methanol) or pump methanol to the methoxide container etc. To purchase a 55 gal. drum or drums of methanol is a vast saving compared to buying meth. in 5 gal pails here on the northeast coast of the US. Methanol is your most expensive raw material when it comes to biodiesel production. My first question is 1.) How to dispense the Methanol from a 55 gal drum to my carboy safely using approved drum equipment? Model number of hand pumps helps to include with reply!! etc.? How do you ground the drum? I can make a ground 55 gal drum clamp w/wire and ground it to the earth. -Solved Method of delivery? Not sure how the chap purchased the Methanol in a poly drum, or maybe he transferred it, since methanol should most likely be sold in a metal drums?. 2.)Question is: Can't find a rated 55 gal. drum pump (hand) to use for methanol that is explosive proof and is rated for methanol. Any help Thank you, Kevin Shea ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal
Hi folks, I've read one interesting factoid recently. It was stated, that the nuclear power plant produces less radioactive material (per kWh generated) than the coal power plant (which emits radioactive particles through the smokestack - mostly thorium IIRC) Maybe someone has more information/links about this? -- Tomas Juknevicius ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Fiat Palio?
Hi Raunak As far as I can gather, biodiesel works on most modern diesel motors. Where are you in RSA? P.E. man me. -Original Message- From: Raunak Singh Ahluwalia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 10:24 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Biofuel] Fiat Palio? Hi, Does neone here have any experience on using bio-diesel on a Fiat Palio? Cheers, RSA ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ http://152.107.42.100/RocketSeed/mail/433a313a323239393932343a323236313a2d323a3133 DISCLAIMER : Volkswagen of South Africa (Pty) Ltd Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. No liability shall attach whatsoever to VWSA from this communication except where the sender is acting on specific authority of VWSA, such authority being public record and acknowledged by VWSA by nature of the employee's functions. This document may in no way be photocopied, printed, scanned or electronically duplicated for any purposes other than that for which it was originally intended. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please discard this message and notify VWSA immediately at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping, not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod
I LOVE bananas... seriously though I used to think exectly the same way as you. and it's your freewill choice to do that. It's your choice to do and be ANYTHING you want to do. I'm just GLAD you are in the cult of Permaculture and Renewable energy. So with all that I am going to try and bring the focus back to BioDiesel. mel -Original Message- From: Appal Energy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 12:00 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod However before you reject it from a few sentences, read some chapters and then if it still does not sit truthfully within you reject the message Nah, nah, nah, nah Why in the world would I want to subject myself to yet another evening of doublespeak, long-winded sentences and enough switchbacks of convoluted thought in every paragraph to turn anyone into butter? Forget running around a mulberry bush. But if that's what keeps you from going postal, more power to you - higher, lower or indifferent. My truth is that the last thing I (and probably almost the entire rest of the world) need is another brain trust telling them what they need or should want to think. As for motivation? Bringing will to power? What are we talking here? Suzanne Summers, Thy Master and a metaphysical meditation between repetitions with the temptation of a double-fudge brownie within arm's reach? Schisms and off shoots... Yup. More stupid human tricks. Should have bet money on that one. The god that dwells within... You must mean that one that nobody seems to be able to offer any proof of other than goose pimples with the passing of an occasional thought. Seems to make a whole lot more sense to enjoy the experience for what it is rather than fouling it up and distorting it by attempting to ascribe it to something deified which none of us know for sure exists. On the other side of the coin is the foolishness of ascribing it to the wonderfulness of self. All a bit of puffery that. Frankly Mel? If it's communion with this theoretical Dog., I mean God that I want, I think I'll conduct it via a slice of hot apple pie and a pint of homemade ice cream, or whilst sticking my nose in a lilac bush and marveling (or cursing) when it gets bit by what buzzes, or when bundled up and watching Saturn rocket debris fall back to Earth on a moonless winter's night. certainly not crawling up with yet another human concocted script of what's supposed to be what and how it's all supposed to be interpreted and coped with. Bananas. Pure, unadulterated bananas. Todd Swearingen - Original Message - From: Mel Riser [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 11:08 PM Subject: RE: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod Like Gustl said... Whether you take it as literal truth, fiction or just a nice book, the truths contained are real in as much as they MOTIVATE you to bring will to power. It is not cult or ridden with church dogma... At least not yet. Yes there have been schisms and off shoots. The real appeal is does it work for YOU. If so then have some faith and enjoy the sublime relationship with the god that dwells within. If not reject and seek your own truth. However before you reject it from a few sentences, read some chapters and then if it still does not sit truthfully within you reject the message. I personally find it to be the most refreshing take on religion, man and our situation of anything I have read on this planet in 45 years of time. Just as I like the Bahaii faith and have been studying that, the UB has something for everyone. If you mind is big enough, tackle the first section and if YOU REALLY read and UNDERSTAND it you have a greater mind than I. As the first section is the deepest, most intense section on cosmic divinity and the nature of the universe. Is it true? I dunno, is ANYTHING you read true? Especially a religious document? What counts is does it give you will to power that leads to action. Of course a total rejection of all things religious based on proof can never be proved. What came first? Chicken, egg or rooster? Man, god or the mind of god? mel -Original Message- From: Appal Energy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 5:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod What? You offer up another textbook of human worksmanship as evidence of the way, the truth and the lite (life or whatever)? So when did this 10th planet hop onto the scene? Is it before or after Pluto? Looking from the front or the back? And by the way, which way is upside down in the cosmos? Frankly, about the only sane religious revelation there could possibly be is
Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal
Tomas, What kind of question is this? Produces, what do you mean? A nuclear power plant does not produce, it uses radioactive material, if I have not been misinformed. Both nuclear and coal are very dangerous fossil fuel applications and the fuel will be spent by both, neither are a renewable energy alternative. Both are going to be depleted and be used up and are a favorite energy sources by USA, who is using more than the rest of the world. Hakan At 11:11 AM 11/11/2004, you wrote: Hi folks, I've read one interesting factoid recently. It was stated, that the nuclear power plant produces less radioactive material (per kWh generated) than the coal power plant (which emits radioactive particles through the smokestack - mostly thorium IIRC) Maybe someone has more information/links about this? -- Tomas Juknevicius ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Methanol Safety of Dispensing from 55 Gal. Drums tocarboy safely
supply are very helpful. to ground things to code (US NEC 2002) you must use mechanical connections like screw terminals that are torqued to the proper torque spec per the manufacturer (which is ultimately per UL) I would highly recommend it. also if you are in the US and your house is grounded to code the electrician who did it was required to leave an outside accessible means for grounding other things to the system, you can usually find this as a piece of #6 copper wire (strip the paint off if you have painted the house since then) that runs from the meter into the ground (if you dig it up you will find an 8' ground rod) it is required to be bonded to your breaker panel with a piece of #6 so you can follow that out to find the ground rod for your house. you can attach to that using a split bolt which is just what it sounds like it is usually brass and it has a notch down the center so that when you take the nut off you can slip it around a wire that you do not have any free ends on and then slip in the wire that you are trying to ground. make sure that you are using hardware that is compatible with the metals that you are grounding to, improper compatibility can result in corrosion and will degrade your ground over time. you may find when it matters most that you aren't really grounded at all. always call your local version of dig safe (your utility company will know who that is) if you intend to drive a ground rod, wouldn't want to hit a gas line. here in Ithaca, NY one can obtain 55gal drums of 99% methanol for $2.22/gal +$20/run (up to 5 drums) to have it delivered, if you have a truck you can pick up up to two drums without the special hazmat placards and license. Jonathan Howell wrote: Kevin- We use this set up to empty 55 gal Drums... Most Drums have a large fill hole and a small vent hole. Most hardware stores carry brass (spark proof) fittings that will attach to these holes. I try to avoid the pvc fittings, they can snap off when tipping the drum over if they are bumped. The large one we use came with a valve already attached. The small fitting has a vacuum breaker inside. With the drum upright, install both fittings. Please, always use spark proof tools. A spark around methanol is verry dangerous. I once saw a fire started when a guy dropped his wrench to the floor into another pile of tools. All it took was one spark. Use a lot of teflon tape on the threads, the methanol is so thin that it will leak around the rough threads. Ensure the valve is closed as sometimes people will play with the valves in the store. Lay the drum on its side with the vent hole uppermost. When you open the valve on the large attachment, the vacuum breaker will open to allow flow. Grounding... I can't think of the manufacturer...someone else on the list may know. It looks like a very small c-clamp, with the exception that the threaded part has a jagged, sharp set of teeth to cut through paint, gunk, and dirt build up on the drum. It attaches to the bottom rim. The wire is welded to the clamp at one end and to the grounding rod on the other. They are very cheap (less than a dollar) and are guaranteed to work. As you know, a good ground is very important because of static build up when flowing a volatile fluid into or out of a vapor space like a drum. Sorry if this was too simplistic. I never know how much detail is too much detail... By the way, How much does a 55 gallon drum of pure methanol cost in your area? Also, what is your area? ps(to the list) What does everyone else pay for their chemicals? Please include size of product and area of country(us) . Jonathan From: Kevin Shea [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Biofuel] Methanol Safety of Dispensing from 55 Gal. Drums tocarboy safely Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 01:05:34 -0500 After 11 months of research of biodiesel and pondering methanol safety, I have not come across any recent scenarios of dispensing methanol from a 55 gal metal drum to a BD methoxide processor (carboy) with only one exception. (On Journey to Forever's site) One chap using a 55 gal poly drum of methanol with a special bung cap fitted with a tire valve plug /shaft. The listed method is from memory, but I believe it is ...Applying compressed air to the tire plug will create pressure within the drum to exhaust pressured output (methanol) or pump methanol to the methoxide container etc. To purchase a 55 gal. drum or drums of methanol is a vast saving compared to buying meth. in 5 gal pails here on the northeast coast of the US. Methanol is your most expensive raw material when it comes to biodiesel production. My first question is 1.) How to dispense the Methanol from a 55 gal drum to my carboy safely using approved drum equipment? Model number of hand pumps helps to include with reply!! etc.? How do you ground the drum? I can make a ground 55 gal drum clamp
Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/gen99/gen99402.HTM has a quick overview http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html is from Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Basically, coal can trap heavy elements when water laden with dissolved metals encounters a coal seam underground. Slightly acidic water flowing over rock, especially granite, will leach out some components of the rock. When the water encounters reducing organic material, such as coal, anything dissolved in it will be trapped. This isn't just a problem with thorium, uranium, etc. In many areas of the world, arsenic and mercury are found in coal as well. As hard coal stock are depleted, soft coals that contain more contaminants are being used. On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:11:13 +0200, Tomas Juknevicius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi folks, I've read one interesting factoid recently. It was stated, that the nuclear power plant produces less radioactive material (per kWh generated) than the coal power plant (which emits radioactive particles through the smokestack - mostly thorium IIRC) Maybe someone has more information/links about this? -- Tomas Juknevicius ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ -- Vpred na Mars! ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Fiat Palio?
Craig, I'm in India. Was actually wondering about 100% BD usage. Have been dredging the net for info, and quite a few sites indicate that all BD used commercially is actually a 25/75 Blend, the larger fraction being petroleum dieselso, its got me a bit confused. Cheers, Rsa -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Emmerick, Craig Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 4:38 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Fiat Palio? Hi Raunak As far as I can gather, biodiesel works on most modern diesel motors. Where are you in RSA? P.E. man me. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Methanol Safety of Dispensing from 55 Gal. Drumstocarboy safely
Thanks Jonathan, Not sure the route I'm going to take on the dispensing from a 55 gal drum. I have got many replies and this is the most dangerous part. Like you said, It only takes a spark! I've been paying $29.00 in Connecticut for a 5 gal pail of Power-Mist Methanol in order to get of the ground with short BD production. After about 90 gal of BD production, I decided to hold-off on production to build a larger processor with Methanol recovery and design an efficient process (The other processor made just 30 liters without methanol recovery) . I believe I was quoted $179.00 back in May for a 55 gal drum of methanol -Kevin - Original Message - From: Jonathan Howell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 1:43 AM Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Methanol Safety of Dispensing from 55 Gal. Drumstocarboy safely Kevin- We use this set up to empty 55 gal Drums... Most Drums have a large fill hole and a small vent hole. Most hardware stores carry brass (spark proof) fittings that will attach to these holes. I try to avoid the pvc fittings, they can snap off when tipping the drum over if they are bumped. The large one we use came with a valve already attached. The small fitting has a vacuum breaker inside. With the drum upright, install both fittings. Please, always use spark proof tools. A spark around methanol is verry dangerous. I once saw a fire started when a guy dropped his wrench to the floor into another pile of tools. All it took was one spark. Use a lot of teflon tape on the threads, the methanol is so thin that it will leak around the rough threads. Ensure the valve is closed as sometimes people will play with the valves in the store. Lay the drum on its side with the vent hole uppermost. When you open the valve on the large attachment, the vacuum breaker will open to allow flow. Grounding... I can't think of the manufacturer...someone else on the list may know. It looks like a very small c-clamp, with the exception that the threaded part has a jagged, sharp set of teeth to cut through paint, gunk, and dirt build up on the drum. It attaches to the bottom rim. The wire is welded to the clamp at one end and to the grounding rod on the other. They are very cheap (less than a dollar) and are guaranteed to work. As you know, a good ground is very important because of static build up when flowing a volatile fluid into or out of a vapor space like a drum. Sorry if this was too simplistic. I never know how much detail is too much detail... By the way, How much does a 55 gallon drum of pure methanol cost in your area? Also, what is your area? ps(to the list) What does everyone else pay for their chemicals? Please include size of product and area of country(us) . Jonathan From: Kevin Shea [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Biofuel] Methanol Safety of Dispensing from 55 Gal. Drums tocarboy safely Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 01:05:34 -0500 After 11 months of research of biodiesel and pondering methanol safety, I have not come across any recent scenarios of dispensing methanol from a 55 gal metal drum to a BD methoxide processor (carboy) with only one exception. (On Journey to Forever's site) One chap using a 55 gal poly drum of methanol with a special bung cap fitted with a tire valve plug /shaft. The listed method is from memory, but I believe it is ...Applying compressed air to the tire plug will create pressure within the drum to exhaust pressured output (methanol) or pump methanol to the methoxide container etc. To purchase a 55 gal. drum or drums of methanol is a vast saving compared to buying meth. in 5 gal pails here on the northeast coast of the US. Methanol is your most expensive raw material when it comes to biodiesel production. My first question is 1.) How to dispense the Methanol from a 55 gal drum to my carboy safely using approved drum equipment? Model number of hand pumps helps to include with reply!! etc.? How do you ground the drum? I can make a ground 55 gal drum clamp w/wire and ground it to the earth. -Solved Method of delivery? Not sure how the chap purchased the Methanol in a poly drum, or maybe he transferred it, since methanol should most likely be sold in a metal drums?. 2.)Question is: Can't find a rated 55 gal. drum pump (hand) to use for methanol that is explosive proof and is rated for methanol. Any help Thank you, Kevin Shea ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
[Biofuel] U.S. Genetically Modified Corn Is Assailed
NAFTA Report Calls Grain a Threat to Mexico; Administration Disputes Study By Marc Kaufman Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, November 10, 2004; Page A02 A scientific panel of international experts has concluded that the unintended spread of U.S. genetically modified corn in Mexico -- where the species originated and modified plants are not allowed -- poses a potential threat that should be limited or stopped. But the United States yesterday attacked the report and its conclusions as unscientific, and made clear it did not intend to accept the recommendations. The report, written by a group convened under the North American Free Trade Agreement, rejected the U.S. position that the modified corn is, in effect, no different than conventionally bred corn hybrids. It said that because the Mexican government has never examined or approved the use of transgenic crops, their presence in the country is an inherent problem. How would Americans feel if we started getting living transgenic seeds that had been judged to be safe by the Cuban government but not the American government? asked Norman C. Ellstrand, a University of California at Riverside geneticist and member of the NAFTA-appointed panel. We would be outraged, and so are many Mexicans. Like us, they have the right to make up their own minds about genetically modified crops. The Mexican government embraced the NAFTA report and said it expected to implement many of its recommendations. The report, only the fifth in the treaty organization's history, was requested by Mexican farmers and officials in 2002 after researchers found that some forms of genetically modified corn were present in Mexico and were being naturally spread by cross-pollination. One variety contained genetically modified bacteria that protect the plant from certain insects, and another protects the plant if a particular kind of otherwise deadly weed killer is used on the fields. Although it remains uncertain how the modified corn got into Mexican fields, the report concluded that the large-scale importation of U.S. corn was the likely cause. The Mexican government distributes massive amounts of U.S. corn for grinding into cornmeal and flour, but some farmers are believed to have planted the corn instead. Once planted, the genetically modified corn spread naturally in fields over the seasons. Genetically modified corn can be legally used as food in Mexico but cannot be planted and grown, except in small test plots recently approved by the government. The NAFTA report concluded that the modified corn does not pose a health risk, but it did say that the environmental consequences are less well understood. It also raised the possibility of the spread of potentially more hazardous types of modified corn -- such as varieties grown in the United States to produce pharmaceuticals and industrial products. If those types of corn ever made it to Mexico and got planted, then yes, there would be a health and safety problem that would be very hard to solve, Ellstrand said. The U.S. rejection of the NAFTA report was broad and pointed. This report is fundamentally flawed and unscientific; key recommendations are not based on sound science and are contradicted by the report's own scientific findings, the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Trade Representative said in a joint statement. Implementing many of the report's recommendations would cause economic harm to farmers and consumers of all NAFTA countries and restrict international trade. The U.S. statement specifically criticized one recommendation -- that all U.S. corn coming into Mexico be milled at or near the border so it cannot be planted. That practice, it says, would increase the cost of U.S. corn significantly, negatively affecting Mexico's livestock producers and consumers. The NAFTA report and the U.S. response are also far apart on what constitutes a scientific assessment of the issue. The report included information about the attitudes of Mexican farmers to the genetically modified corn, saying many find it frightening and a threat to their staple food, while American officials said those views have no place in a scientific study. In support of their formal critique, the U.S. agencies cited the report's conclusion that scientific investigations and analyses over the past 25 years have shown that the process of transferring a gene from one organism to another does not pose any intrinsic threat over the short or long term, either to health, biodiversity or the environment. The NAFTA report went on, however, to conclude that the specific characteristics of any newly created organism need to be examined -- making the case that the benefits and dangers of any genetically modified plant can be determined only by testing in the locales where it will be used. In the United States, the EPA, the Agriculture Department and sometimes the Food and
[Biofuel] Squeezing Jello in Iraq
Published on Wednesday, November 10, 2004 by Aljazeera.net Squeezing Jello in Iraq by Scott Ritter The much-anticipated US-led offensive to seize the Iraqi city of Falluja from anti-American Iraqi fighters has begun. Meeting resistance that, while stiff at times, was much less than had been anticipated, US Marines and soldiers, accompanied by Iraqi forces loyal to the interim government of Iyad Allawi, have moved into the heart of Falluja. Fighting is expected to continue for a few more days, but US commanders are confident that Falluja will soon be under US control, paving the way for the establishment of order necessary for nation-wide elections currently scheduled for January 2005. But will it? American military planners expected to face thousands of Iraqi resistance fighters in the streets of Falluja, not the hundreds they are currently fighting. They expected to roll up the network of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his foreign Islamic militants, and yet to date have found no top-tier leaders from that organization. As American forces surge into Falluja, Iraqi fighters are mounting extensive attacks throughout the rest of Iraq. Far from facing off in a decisive battle against the resistance fighters, it seems the more Americans squeeze Falluja, the more the violence explodes elsewhere. It is exercises in futility, akin to squeezing jello. The more you try to get a grasp on the problem, the more it slips through your fingers. This kind of war, while frustrating for the American soldiers and marines who wage it, is exactly the struggle envisioned by the Iraqi resistance. They know they cannot stand toe-to-toe with the world's most powerful military and expect to win. While the US military leadership struggles to get a grip on a situation in Iraq that deteriorates each and every day, the anti-US occupation fighters continue to execute a game plan that has been in position since day one. President Bush prematurely declared mission accomplished back in May 2003. For Americans, this meant that major combat operations in Iraq had come to an end, that we had won the war. But for the Iraqis, it meant something else. In Iraq, there never was a 'Missouri moment', where the government formally surrendered. The fact is, Saddam Hussein's government never surrendered, and still is very much in evidence in Iraq today in the form of the anti-US resistance. It is a war the United States cannot win, and which the interim government of Iyad Allawi cannot survive While we in America were declaring victory, the government of Saddam was planning its war. The first battles were fought in March and April 2003. Token resistance, no decisive engagement. The Iraqis fought just enough to establish the principle of resistance, but not enough to squander their resources. Since May 2003, the resistance has grown in size and sophistication. Some attribute this to the incompetence of the post-war occupation policies of the United States. While this certainly was a factor in facilitating the resistance, the fact remains that what is occurring today in Iraq is part of a well-conceived plan the goal of which is to restore the Baath Party back to power. And the policies of the Bush administration are playing right into their hands. The terror attacks carried out against the United Nations and other international aid organizations succeeded in driving out of Iraq the vestiges of foreign involvement the Bush administration relied upon to present an international face to the US-led occupation. In the chaos and anarchy that followed, the United States was compelled to use more and more force in an attempt to restore order, creating a Catch-22 situation where the more force we used, the more resistance we generated, requiring more force in response. The cycle of violence fed the resistance, destabilizing huge areas of Iraq that are still outside the control of the Iraqi government and US military. High profile operations in Najaf, Sadr City and Sammara did little to bring these cities to bear. While we in America were declaring victory, the government of Saddam was planning its war Today, fighters in Iraq operate freely, continuing their orgy of death and destruction in order to attract the inevitable heavy-handed US response. Falluja is a prime case in point. While the US is unlikely to deliver a fatal blow to the Iraqi resistance, it is succeeding in levelling huge areas of Falluja, recalling the Vietnam-era lament that we had to destroy the village in order to save it. The images from Falluja will only fuel the anti-American sentiment in Iraq, enabling the anti-US fighters to recruit ten new fighters for every newly-minted 'martyr' it loses in the current battle against the Americans. The battle for Falluja is supposed to be the proving ground of the new Iraq Army. Instead, it may well prove to be a fatal pill. The reality is there is no Iraqi Army. Of
[Biofuel] Just What America Needs - A Car Even Bigger Than the Hummer
Published on Wednesday, November 10, 2004 by the Independent / UK Just What America Needs - A Car Even Bigger Than the Hummer by David Usborne NEW YORK - It may not be long before drivers of the Hummer - the steroid-laden sports utility vehicle favoured by the likes of Arnold Schwarzenegger - get a fright when they look in their rear-view mirrors. Trailing them will be a set of wheels even bigger, greedier and more eye-catching than their own. The US Army and the Chicago manufacturer International Truck and Engine Corporation are jointly developing a replacement for the venerable Humvee troop transporter, from which the Hummer was derived. Last week, prototypes of the so-called Smart Truck 3 were displayed at a trade show in Las Vegas. The army also wants the vehicles to be marketed to other customers such as government agencies or regular Joes who only feel right using a stepladder to get behind thewheel. The commercial version would not have the electronics designed to detect anthrax, the Kevlar armouring on the underside, the night-vision cameras and the 25-inch LCD touch-screen computer monitors. But it would be just as big. The Smart Truck would weigh in at no less than 8,000lb, compared to nearly 5,000lb for the second generation Hummer, the H2. It would be about 3in higher than the Hummer and 4ft longer, but its fuel consumption would be lower. However, the era of bigger-is-always-better may have passed, even in size-obsessed America. Sales of the Hummer in the first 10 months of this year were down by a fifth compared to 2003. © 2004 Independent Newspapers, Ltd. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal
They use ( or used to ) Thorium nitrate as the main source of the bright white glow, emitted by lantern mantels, for Coleman type gas lanterns. It might be interesting if the thorium could be filtered / collected and recycled for this purpose, and made for bio-gas illumination. Greg H. - Original Message - From: Tomas Juknevicius [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 03:11 Subject: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal Hi folks, I've read one interesting factoid recently. It was stated, that the nuclear power plant produces less radioactive material (per kWh generated) than the coal power plant (which emits radioactive particles through the smokestack - mostly thorium IIRC) Maybe someone has more information/links about this? -- Tomas Juknevicius ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal
Hi, Hakan Falk wrote: Tomas, What kind of question is this? this was not supposed to be a trol question; sorry, if it sounded like so. What I wanted to find out, is this a hoax or not? Maybe someone has some real numbers to put out or a link to a research or article of some kind.. Produces, what do you mean? A nuclear power plant does not produce, it uses radioactive material, if I have not been misinformed. Okay, by saying produces I did mean that the plant produces the waste. So, the statement was that after producing the X kWh of electricity with the nuclear powerplant we are left with the Y1 kg amount of radioactive waste material (mostly concentrated in one place); On the other hand, if we produce the same X kWh of electricity with the coal-fired power plant we are left with the Y2 kg amount of radioactive waste material (dispersed through the smoke stack on a large area) And the guy on the other forum was stating, that the Y2 Y1 (nulcear power plant produces less radioactive waste than coal fired plant). This did surprise me, hence this question. Both nuclear and coal are very dangerous fossil fuel applications and the fuel will be spent by both, neither are a renewable energy alternative. Both are going to be depleted and be used up and are a favorite energy sources by USA, who is using more than the rest of the world. Hakan Yes, yes, I know that they are both dirty and dangerous. But never the less I am interested which one of these is less evil ;-) -- Tomas Juknevicius ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping, not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod
I'm not well versed on the text of various religions or faiths because I am committed to my faith and its practices. Just because I believe in God doesn't mean that there is a God; it means that I believe that there is a God. A God in whom I believe created man in is own image and who God also gave a free will to either believe in him or to not believe in him. I think most people would agree that mankind possesses a free will regardless of how they exercise it. And from the text which guides my faith God is Love. Or for those who think primarily with the other side of the brain, God=Love. Love is to dwell in mankind and be shown one towards another. So with that said I can see why so many today are finding it hard to believe that God exist. So much focus is on the negatives and little is said of the positives. Religious beliefs are being forced onto society and that's not Love. It's goes against free will. Its not of God. Individuals must come to their own realization and experience with Love; of their own will. I can't force anyone to Love or accept my Love; that's against free will, and its not God. I can show Love towards all mankind and they can choose to accept it or not; that's free will, and its of God. Sharing the abundance of what I am blessed with, with my neighbors (of varying faiths) is showing Love, and proving that God does exist. And what if I'm wrong about God? What if all my beliefs that he exist are wrong? At the end of my life I would not have done any more than share Love and the Fruits of my labors with my neighbors. So I'm curious, is there any Love in your neighborhood? Best wishes, Tim -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of malcolm maclure Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 2:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod Well said Todd!! I'm not religious, have nothing against people that are. I just think god, Darwin and all such contentious issues that people have a tendency to form distinct opinions on should kept them just as that - opinions. Not some sort of power to coerce others with differing thoughts to fall into line with them. It's no wonder with this level of mentality going around that the world is looking increasingly scary to those with clearer vision .may the omnipotent being be merciful. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Bush stands by rejection of limits ongasesblamedforglobal warming
In the case of the company I used to work for, the biggest contract that they had was bought out, buy another company. The new company then spent 8 months looking at were they could cut corners, then with 3 days notice, told my company that they were going to do the work in house, and so we lost our biggest contract, almost over night.This contract was responsible for just under 75% of the revenue that my company took in.Up until a week before they killed the contract, we were doing 5 hrs mandatory overtime a week and 1 - 2 times a month we worked a mandatory extra shift, to keep up with their orders. Greg H. - Original Message - From: Peggy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 19:44 Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Bush stands by rejection of limits ongasesblamedforglobal warming When a German company bought out a Dallas high tech company, they fired 10% of the work force each successive quarter for four quarters (without notice or reason--simply follow the armed guard and leave, NOW). That's not American influence folks. And the idea that many of our water systems are being taken over by German companies (this same company) is also not good for local self-sufficiency and community stewardship. Also consider another trend--ownership for convenience stores and motels is now Middle Eastern related in the US. It appears to be a global revolution--one business at a time The lesson could be biological in nature. Adapt or become extinct. There is such a melting pot of conglomerate forces acting that pin-pointing the causes as political in nature give excuses and makes for press-releases without adaptation philosophies. If a person wants to point a finger, please use it to give direction. Let's move in the right direction regardless of whatever reasons caused the motivation. We are one world. P. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal
Tomas, I do not think that it was total waste they meant, I do think that they meant released pollution. Otherwise it is no reason to mention the smoke stacks in the comparison. This is a typical trick question used by nuclear promoters and does not amount to much. Nuclear power plants does have a minimal radioactive pollution, except in incidents were radioactive steam is released. Coal have very inadequate pollution control, but it is no real surprise in this and it is probably true for any pollution. You are chasing a non issue, if it was the comparison, but if you want cleaner burning of coal I am with you. It does not help a lot, that Bush weakened the demands on less pollution from coal fired power plants and the particle pollution kills a massive amount of people every year, Bush is an evil man, he gases his own people. Hakan At 03:28 PM 11/11/2004, you wrote: Hi, Hakan Falk wrote: Tomas, What kind of question is this? this was not supposed to be a trol question; sorry, if it sounded like so. What I wanted to find out, is this a hoax or not? Maybe someone has some real numbers to put out or a link to a research or article of some kind.. Produces, what do you mean? A nuclear power plant does not produce, it uses radioactive material, if I have not been misinformed. Okay, by saying produces I did mean that the plant produces the waste. So, the statement was that after producing the X kWh of electricity with the nuclear powerplant we are left with the Y1 kg amount of radioactive waste material (mostly concentrated in one place); On the other hand, if we produce the same X kWh of electricity with the coal-fired power plant we are left with the Y2 kg amount of radioactive waste material (dispersed through the smoke stack on a large area) And the guy on the other forum was stating, that the Y2 Y1 (nulcear power plant produces less radioactive waste than coal fired plant). This did surprise me, hence this question. Both nuclear and coal are very dangerous fossil fuel applications and the fuel will be spent by both, neither are a renewable energy alternative. Both are going to be depleted and be used up and are a favorite energy sources by USA, who is using more than the rest of the world. Hakan Yes, yes, I know that they are both dirty and dangerous. But never the less I am interested which one of these is less evil ;-) -- Tomas Juknevicius ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping, not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod
--- Mel Riser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I LOVE bananas... Most of us do. That's the problem. I find I have more faith in my intellectual decisions if I examine my feelings and I am certain I am free of wanting to believe. Very important knowing your heart. There is a party game called Balderdash of which I am undisputed champion in my circles. It was a sad discovery when I found my ability to sound convincing most definitely extends to myself. No one can BS me like myself. :( All the best Kirk seriously though I used to think exectly the same way as you. and it's your freewill choice to do that. It's your choice to do and be ANYTHING you want to do. I'm just GLAD you are in the cult of Permaculture and Renewable energy. So with all that I am going to try and bring the focus back to BioDiesel. mel -Original Message- From: Appal Energy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 12:00 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod However before you reject it from a few sentences, read some chapters and then if it still does not sit truthfully within you reject the message Nah, nah, nah, nah Why in the world would I want to subject myself to yet another evening of doublespeak, long-winded sentences and enough switchbacks of convoluted thought in every paragraph to turn anyone into butter? Forget running around a mulberry bush. But if that's what keeps you from going postal, more power to you - higher, lower or indifferent. My truth is that the last thing I (and probably almost the entire rest of the world) need is another brain trust telling them what they need or should want to think. As for motivation? Bringing will to power? What are we talking here? Suzanne Summers, Thy Master and a metaphysical meditation between repetitions with the temptation of a double-fudge brownie within arm's reach? Schisms and off shoots... Yup. More stupid human tricks. Should have bet money on that one. The god that dwells within... You must mean that one that nobody seems to be able to offer any proof of other than goose pimples with the passing of an occasional thought. Seems to make a whole lot more sense to enjoy the experience for what it is rather than fouling it up and distorting it by attempting to ascribe it to something deified which none of us know for sure exists. On the other side of the coin is the foolishness of ascribing it to the wonderfulness of self. All a bit of puffery that. Frankly Mel? If it's communion with this theoretical Dog., I mean God that I want, I think I'll conduct it via a slice of hot apple pie and a pint of homemade ice cream, or whilst sticking my nose in a lilac bush and marveling (or cursing) when it gets bit by what buzzes, or when bundled up and watching Saturn rocket debris fall back to Earth on a moonless winter's night. certainly not crawling up with yet another human concocted script of what's supposed to be what and how it's all supposed to be interpreted and coped with. Bananas. Pure, unadulterated bananas. Todd Swearingen - Original Message - From: Mel Riser [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 11:08 PM Subject: RE: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod Like Gustl said... Whether you take it as literal truth, fiction or just a nice book, the truths contained are real in as much as they MOTIVATE you to bring will to power. It is not cult or ridden with church dogma... At least not yet. Yes there have been schisms and off shoots. The real appeal is does it work for YOU. If so then have some faith and enjoy the sublime relationship with the god that dwells within. If not reject and seek your own truth. However before you reject it from a few sentences, read some chapters and then if it still does not sit truthfully within you reject the message. I personally find it to be the most refreshing take on religion, man and our situation of anything I have read on this planet in 45 years of time. Just as I like the Bahaii faith and have been studying that, the UB has something for everyone. If you mind is big enough, tackle the first section and if YOU REALLY read and UNDERSTAND it you have a greater mind than I. As the first section is the deepest, most intense section on cosmic divinity and the nature of the universe. Is it true? I dunno, is ANYTHING you read true? Especially a religious document? What counts is does it give you will to power that leads to action. Of course a total rejection of all things religious based on proof can never be proved. What came first? Chicken,
Re: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping, not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] about God
Cobb County Georgia School Board puts stickers on their biology books stating that evolution is only a theory, all at the behest of a few screaming meamies, and two thousand petition signers. They're rationale? God is real but evolution is unproven. Well now..., one must ask the question: If sufficient proof of evolution is requisite, shouldn't the existance of God, gods or goddesses be held to the same standard? Would someone please show me the irrefutable proof that God exists? This is an excellent question that nicely illustrates the conflict between the scientific method and religion. If I depend on the scientific method, I must be able to quantify my deductions by virtue of experimentation that can be reproduced by my peers with the same results. This is an unsatisfactory way to contemplate the question of origins, as no one really knows with certainty what conditions existed on earth at the time life began. Further, no experimentation has ever demonstrated that non living matter can be transformed into living things; nor has any verifiable, reproducible experiment ever shown the transformation of one kind of living thing into another. Our understanding of genetics harmonizes with the principle that variations in phenotype must exist in the genotype of a living thing before micro variations can be expressed. So if science can, at best, offer conjecture about origins, it's unreasonable to demand proof of God or gods in a purely scientific sense. Once we begin speaking and writing of God and origins, we have moved into the realm of philosophy and religion. The diversity of views already expressed in this forum illustrate the lack of consensus among intelligent humans in this area. snip So given enough time (millenia or just a few biologic cycles), it's rather easy to prove the selectivity of nature for specific traits that are best suited to certain environmental characteristics. Rather kind of mindless work. Perfectly amazing, but none-the-less simple. But these traits exist in the genotype before they're expressed in the environment. The mechanism for the existence of latency in the genotype is not well understood. Many people conclude that the process of mutation explains variance in the genotype, but this explanation does not fit the observations biologists have made in repeated studies of the matter. It is, at best, a mystery at this time. It's really rather easy to feel some degree of sympathy for those who believe but can't prove the existance of what it is they believe in. Frustrating it must be for them. Of course, there is the age-old and failure-proof standby that If you don't believe me, you must be an agent from hell. That usually gets most people to leave them alone in their dither. I am a deeply devoted Christian who also happens to be educated in evolutionary theory, as my undergraduate degree is in biology. I find no dichotomy in my faith concerning the issue of origins. The tension you are describing does not exist for me. Further, I'm perfectly happy to allow room for you to disagree because we can BOTH agree that the idea of God, creation and salvation cannot be quantified in the same sense that science can describe the composition of biodiesel. (I HAD to throw that in somehow. . .) My experience, however, moves me and motivates me (and other people of faith) on a level that simply can't be explained in terms of what is rational. For this reason, philosophy and religion continue to provide a vehicle for the human experience. So, while the world waits for an irrefutable appearance of the cosmos' most premier water walker, perhaps we oughta' either take all the stickers off the books, or at minimum eliminate the double standard and put two stickers on everything, declaring that God and evolution are both theories, giving evidence to a little honesty in advertising for a change. As science is not an appropriate tool for understanding the question of origins, the scriptures were not intended to be a science primer, and I strongly disagree with those who would like to make it so. While much harmony has appeared in the two realms within the last hundred years (as, thanks to Einstein, science generally accepts a beginning to all things), the scriptures cannot be used to substantiate science, nor can science be used to substantiate the existence of God. Our conclusions absolutely depend on the a priori assumptions we bring into our examination of the evidence. You are right in underscoring this. I know. Jeers, virtual athiesm tomatos and fatwahs all around. I think I understand your perspective on this issue more than you realize, as I once believed in a similar fashion. If there is grace for me, then there is certainly grace available to you! The essence of my faith in Jesus Christ gives me hope, no matter how dark the world becomes; and we are certainly on the path
which diesel WAS [Biofuel] Fiat Palio?
Hello all, Maybe this was discussed before, but would it be possible for the list members to share information about which diesel cars they have used with bio-diesel? This may be helpfull for the ones who are trying locate a diesel vehicle locally. Regards Burak Cedetas -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Raunak Singh Ahluwalia Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 4:11 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Fiat Palio? Craig, I'm in India. Was actually wondering about 100% BD usage. Have been dredging the net for info, and quite a few sites indicate that all BD used commercially is actually a 25/75 Blend, the larger fraction being petroleum dieselso, its got me a bit confused. Cheers, Rsa -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Emmerick, Craig Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 4:38 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Fiat Palio? Hi Raunak As far as I can gather, biodiesel works on most modern diesel motors. Where are you in RSA? P.E. man me. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Alternative Jet Fuel
_ Donât just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal
Nuclear power stations do not release many pollutants but reprocessing plants dump vast amounts of nuclear waste into the environment. Sellafield in the UK has contaminated all of the north part of the Irish Sea. They claim pollution emissions are now 1000 time less than they were 20 years, scares the sh$t out of me. Chris. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.789 / Virus Database: 534 - Release Date: 07/11/2004 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal
The nukesters routinely indulge in deception to promote their industry. The pollution associated with the nuclear fuel cycle is spun like stories regarding a president who didn't think a blowjob was sex. I don't think any reasonable person would believe it just like the nuclear industry rubbish. Thomas, the real reason for the promotion of nuclear power is so you can clad a light water reactor with U238 and form U239 which is easily separated by chemical action and has very modest shielding requirements making it quite useful as a military explosive. The amount of coal burned and hydro power displaced to obtain the original fuel is oft overlooked, just as the expense to taxpayers is. Utility companies get their fuel from the gvt for pennies on the dollar. Remember there are liars, there are damn liars and there are nuclear industry information people. There are lots of resources on the web to determine the real state of affairs. Get busy with your search engine. Kirk --- Tomas Juknevicius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Hakan Falk wrote: Tomas, What kind of question is this? this was not supposed to be a trol question; sorry, if it sounded like so. What I wanted to find out, is this a hoax or not? Maybe someone has some real numbers to put out or a link to a research or article of some kind.. Produces, what do you mean? A nuclear power plant does not produce, it uses radioactive material, if I have not been misinformed. Okay, by saying produces I did mean that the plant produces the waste. So, the statement was that after producing the X kWh of electricity with the nuclear powerplant we are left with the Y1 kg amount of radioactive waste material (mostly concentrated in one place); On the other hand, if we produce the same X kWh of electricity with the coal-fired power plant we are left with the Y2 kg amount of radioactive waste material (dispersed through the smoke stack on a large area) And the guy on the other forum was stating, that the Y2 Y1 (nulcear power plant produces less radioactive waste than coal fired plant). This did surprise me, hence this question. Both nuclear and coal are very dangerous fossil fuel applications and the fuel will be spent by both, neither are a renewable energy alternative. Both are going to be depleted and be used up and are a favorite energy sources by USA, who is using more than the rest of the world. Hakan Yes, yes, I know that they are both dirty and dangerous. But never the less I am interested which one of these is less evil ;-) -- Tomas Juknevicius ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ __ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal correction
ufda Had a stupid attack it is plutonium (Pu) 239 that is formed. Hard to imagine how I could make a mistake like that considering I used to do radiation hardness and susceptibility for a living. Must be oldtimers. Kirk --- Kirk McLoren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The nukesters routinely indulge in deception to promote their industry. The pollution associated with the nuclear fuel cycle is spun like stories regarding a president who didn't think a blowjob was sex. I don't think any reasonable person would believe it just like the nuclear industry rubbish. Thomas, the real reason for the promotion of nuclear power is so you can clad a light water reactor with U238 and form U239 which is easily separated by chemical action and has very modest shielding requirements making it quite useful as a military explosive. The amount of coal burned and hydro power displaced to obtain the original fuel is oft overlooked, just as the expense to taxpayers is. Utility companies get their fuel from the gvt for pennies on the dollar. Remember there are liars, there are damn liars and there are nuclear industry information people. There are lots of resources on the web to determine the real state of affairs. Get busy with your search engine. Kirk --- Tomas Juknevicius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Hakan Falk wrote: Tomas, What kind of question is this? this was not supposed to be a trol question; sorry, if it sounded like so. What I wanted to find out, is this a hoax or not? Maybe someone has some real numbers to put out or a link to a research or article of some kind.. Produces, what do you mean? A nuclear power plant does not produce, it uses radioactive material, if I have not been misinformed. Okay, by saying produces I did mean that the plant produces the waste. So, the statement was that after producing the X kWh of electricity with the nuclear powerplant we are left with the Y1 kg amount of radioactive waste material (mostly concentrated in one place); On the other hand, if we produce the same X kWh of electricity with the coal-fired power plant we are left with the Y2 kg amount of radioactive waste material (dispersed through the smoke stack on a large area) And the guy on the other forum was stating, that the Y2 Y1 (nulcear power plant produces less radioactive waste than coal fired plant). This did surprise me, hence this question. Both nuclear and coal are very dangerous fossil fuel applications and the fuel will be spent by both, neither are a renewable energy alternative. Both are going to be depleted and be used up and are a favorite energy sources by USA, who is using more than the rest of the world. Hakan Yes, yes, I know that they are both dirty and dangerous. But never the less I am interested which one of these is less evil ;-) -- Tomas Juknevicius ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ __ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ __ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal
...so many misconceptions, so little time. Nuclear plants DO produce radioactive material...internally some of the metals, exposed to high alpha, gamma and neutron radiation become radioactive themselves. Yet those materials are sequestered within the plant in very large very deep pools of water.(spent fuel pool) They are so radioactive that they can never be released.(some have halflives of thousands of years) Also Hakan, although they both start with the letter f, fission fuel and fossil fuel are not the same. I can see where you might have been confused. Hope this helps clear up any misconceptions and may help slow down that knee-jerk reaction.(nuclear-bad...coal-bad...usa-bad) Thomas- I think the term most associated with what you are talking about is BRC materials. Small amounts of only slightly radioactive materials can be classified by industry as Below Radiological Concern.(BRC) These small amounts are processed as normal waste. They are produced in almost all mining operations, almost all paint manufacturing facilities(Left overs from the titanium oxide purification) etc. The problem with the classification is this...small amounts in small concentrations over a large number of plants for a long period of time results in a lot of radioactive material. Luckily, the producers are not all in one place sending their waste to the same landfill. --There is no concentration or buildup from numerous facilities in one place. Think of it this way... There is a small fraction of iodine found in nature that is radioactive.(very small fraction) When processing table salt into iodized salt, some of that radioactive iodine is used. This is so small an amount that it is considered BRC. Now I'm not trying to start a salt scare, but if you were to check your table salt with a geiger counter set at it's most sensitive setting...you would ger a reading showing radioactivity. The amount is so small that eating the salt in quantity does more damage than the radiation. Jonathan From: Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:45:57 +0100 Tomas, What kind of question is this? Produces, what do you mean? A nuclear power plant does not produce, it uses radioactive material, if I have not been misinformed. Both nuclear and coal are very dangerous fossil fuel applications and the fuel will be spent by both, neither are a renewable energy alternative. Both are going to be depleted and be used up and are a favorite energy sources by USA, who is using more than the rest of the world. Hakan At 11:11 AM 11/11/2004, you wrote: Hi folks, I've read one interesting factoid recently. It was stated, that the nuclear power plant produces less radioactive material (per kWh generated) than the coal power plant (which emits radioactive particles through the smokestack - mostly thorium IIRC) Maybe someone has more information/links about this? -- Tomas Juknevicius ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal
Don't you mean heavy water reactor? Light water does nothing to promote fusion, because it does not slow down neutrons so that they will combine with other atoms. Greg H. - Original Message - From: Kirk McLoren [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 10:02 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal Thomas, the real reason for the promotion of nuclear power is so you can clad a light water reactor with U238 and form U239 which is easily separated by chemical action and has very modest shielding requirements making it quite useful as a military explosive. The amount of coal burned and hydro power displaced to obtain the original fuel is oft overlooked, just as the expense to taxpayers is. Utility companies get their fuel from the gvt for pennies on the dollar. Remember there are liars, there are damn liars and there are nuclear industry information people. There are lots of resources on the web to determine the real state of affairs. Get busy with your search engine. Kirk --- Tomas Juknevicius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Hakan Falk wrote: Tomas, What kind of question is this? this was not supposed to be a trol question; sorry, if it sounded like so. What I wanted to find out, is this a hoax or not? Maybe someone has some real numbers to put out or a link to a research or article of some kind.. Produces, what do you mean? A nuclear power plant does not produce, it uses radioactive material, if I have not been misinformed. Okay, by saying produces I did mean that the plant produces the waste. So, the statement was that after producing the X kWh of electricity with the nuclear powerplant we are left with the Y1 kg amount of radioactive waste material (mostly concentrated in one place); On the other hand, if we produce the same X kWh of electricity with the coal-fired power plant we are left with the Y2 kg amount of radioactive waste material (dispersed through the smoke stack on a large area) And the guy on the other forum was stating, that the Y2 Y1 (nulcear power plant produces less radioactive waste than coal fired plant). This did surprise me, hence this question. Both nuclear and coal are very dangerous fossil fuel applications and the fuel will be spent by both, neither are a renewable energy alternative. Both are going to be depleted and be used up and are a favorite energy sources by USA, who is using more than the rest of the world. Hakan Yes, yes, I know that they are both dirty and dangerous. But never the less I am interested which one of these is less evil ;-) -- Tomas Juknevicius ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ __ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal
i never heard of a nuclear fossil, last i heard uranum was formed in supermasive super novas or posibly blackholes. nuclear powerplants only use radiactive material becaue the uranum isotope is so massive that its relitivly easy to nock off some chunks of the nucleus to start a fission reaction. and yes both aren't renewable in the sence that both crude oil and uranum don't have enless supplies. the fact is that nuclear power will be our salvation, botom line. the problem is that now we do it halfassed and our end result is an extreamly harmful substance. more reaserch needs to be put into the advances of nuclear power. the day we achive a sustained fusion reaction will be a landmark in world history. - Original Message - From: Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 5:45 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal Tomas, What kind of question is this? Produces, what do you mean? A nuclear power plant does not produce, it uses radioactive material, if I have not been misinformed. Both nuclear and coal are very dangerous fossil fuel applications and the fuel will be spent by both, neither are a renewable energy alternative. Both are going to be depleted and be used up and are a favorite energy sources by USA, who is using more than the rest of the world. Hakan At 11:11 AM 11/11/2004, you wrote: Hi folks, I've read one interesting factoid recently. It was stated, that the nuclear power plant produces less radioactive material (per kWh generated) than the coal power plant (which emits radioactive particles through the smokestack - mostly thorium IIRC) Maybe someone has more information/links about this? -- Tomas Juknevicius ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Fwd: FROM HYDROCARBONS TO CARBOHYDRATES
Subject: FROM HYDROCARBONS TO CARBOHYDRATES Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 09:00:17 -0800 A FOOD CHAIN RELEASE FROM METROFARM.COM With ever more people drawing from an ever-diminishing supply, it is becoming obvious that the end of oil is not going to be a pleasant experience· unless, we learn how to replace hydrocarbons with carbohydrates! This Saturday at 9AM Pacific, the Food Chain with Michael Olson hosts Dartmouth Professors Lee Lynd and Charles Wyman for a conversation about cellulosic ethanol. (Listen on your computer at www.metrofarm.com) Topics include the difference between hydrocarbon and carbohydrate fuels; the hurdles that must be overcome to make ethanol competitive with gasoline; and whether it will be possible, in the near future, to rely on farmers for a fuel that is cheap, clean and renewable. Listeners are invited to call the program on KFRM, KGET, KGOE, KMPH, KNTK, KOMY, KSCO,KSIR, KTIP, KVON, TRUTH RADIO and the HEALTH RADIO NETWORK with questions and comments, or log them to the Forum page at www.metrofarm.com. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re[2]: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping, not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] about God
Hallo Robert, The scientific method requires, if memory serves: 1. Define operational terms 2. Allow for experimental duplication, repeatability 3. Emperical observation and induction 4. Analytic-synthetic thinking 5. Prediction and falsification 6. Scientific public consensus of truth The piece below was written to Friends (Quakers) by a minister from New Jersey named Elias Hicks in 1826. The operational terms, although not enumerated and defined in the letter were and are already defined and accepted by Friends so you will not find that in his letter. He advises Friends to duplicate and repeat his experiment, calls for emperical observation and induction, requires analytic-synthetic thinking for the experiment to be successful, gives his prediction of the outcome and calls not once but twice for either falsification of his premise or a public consensus of truth. The problem is that ones knowledge of and relationship with that which is pure and is called many different things by many different people is that it is, like the headache, entirely subjective and beyond objective proofs. But, like the headache, if one has had the experience then one knows and relates to others who have had the same experience and this does not require a lot of words because the experience is nigh onto impossible to accurately describe. To these folks proofs are moot. The experience stands on its own. But again, like the headache, if one has not had the experience one may believe that since there is no measurable proof (or at least there was not the last time I looked-this may have changed) the headache does not exist because they have not experienced one and it cannot be measured. And again, religion and science are both used and abused each and every minute of each and every day. Both are criminal in my book. But as Hicks says, investigate them for yourselves and if you find nothing worthy in them then turn and walk away. Just remember though, that just as in science the experiment has to be repeated exactly or the results will be skewed. We cannot expect less from science than we demand from religion. Happy Happy, Gustl From a sermon by Elias Hicks in 1826: Now I want these things to sink deep into the heart of every age, sex and condition. Be willing to investigate for yourselves; don't mind what I say, or what any one else may say, but bring things home to the truth in your own bosoms; turn them over and over, and see if there is not something in them worthy of preservation--and if there is not, leave them. I say, I want you to investigate for yourselves; for we have that liberty, in this land of liberty. We have a right to think for ourselves, about what we know to be the truth in ourselves, and nothing but the truth...Oh! then, that we may become willing to turn inward to what the light makes manifest...Whatsoever is wrong is reproved by this light, and all things that are reproveable we know, for they are made manifest by the light; clearly so. And it is reasonable to conclude that without light, nothing can be made manifest. But when we come into the light of the Lord, all things will be made manifest, when the mind is willing, and the heart is disposed to receive God in the way of his coming. I feel earnest in my desires for us, that we may this evening lay these things properly to heart. I hope you will take these things home, my friends, and not be hasty in deciding, but turn them over in your minds, and if you can find any thing in them, well, and if not leave them. (Gould 1830) Thursday, 11 November, 2004, 11:36:15, you wrote: rlr Appal Energy wrote: Cobb County Georgia School Board puts stickers on their biology books stating that evolution is only a theory, all at the behest of a few screaming meamies, and two thousand petition signers. They're rationale? God is real but evolution is unproven. Well now..., one must ask the question: If sufficient proof of evolution is requisite, shouldn't the existance of God, gods or goddesses be held to the same standard? Would someone please show me the irrefutable proof that God exists? rlr This is an excellent question that nicely illustrates the conflict rlr between the scientific method and religion. If I depend on the rlr scientific method, I must be able to quantify my deductions by virtue rlr of experimentation that can be reproduced by my peers with the same rlr results. This is an unsatisfactory way to contemplate the question of rlr origins, as no one really knows with certainty what conditions existed rlr on earth at the time life began. Further, no experimentation has ever rlr demonstrated that non living matter can be transformed into living rlr things; nor has any verifiable, reproducible experiment ever shown the rlr transformation of one kind of living thing into another. Our
Re: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping, not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] about God
snip Further, no experimentation has ever demonstrated that non living matter can be transformed into living things; nor has any verifiable, reproducible experiment ever shown the transformation of one kind of living thing into another. Our understanding of genetics harmonizes with the principle that variations in phenotype must exist in the genotype of a living thing before micro variations can be expressed. What? I have personally conducted experiments, verifiably and reproducibly (as have countless others) that transform one kind of living thing into another. The Ames assay depends on the conversion of a histidine dependent strain of Salmonella to non-dependence via mutagenesis. Undergraduates in genetics courses routinely manipulate the genome of fruit flies. No end of new kinds of critters, up to and including mammals, are available on a daily basis via directed mutagenesis. Even without human intervention, viruses are constantly dragging bits of DNA from one organism to another. New flu vaccines are needed on an annual basis because the viruses have mutated. As to origins, I prefer Occam's razor. It is a lot easier for me to imagine thermodynamics for origins than belief in supernatural voodoo. -- -- Bob Allen,http://ozarker.org/bob -- - The modern conservative is engaged in one of Man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness JKG --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Fiat Palio?
dear RSA My names Atul and i am based in chandigarh i have done abt 100 kms on my Indica DLE on pure BD and have encountred absolutely no trouble at all In fact i surprised my people with the nearly zero levels of obnoxious fumes my prob though is abit diff...till date i have been tapping some forest produce to get Biodiesel but obviously its in miniscule quantity...where can i get sufficient supplies as i am looking at captive power generation for my industrial unit as well. u can call me if u wish at 0 94 174 54735 Atul. --- Raunak Singh Ahluwalia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Craig, I'm in India. Was actually wondering about 100% BD usage. Have been dredging the net for info, and quite a few sites indicate that all BD used commercially is actually a 25/75 Blend, the larger fraction being petroleum dieselso, its got me a bit confused. Cheers, Rsa -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Emmerick, Craig Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 4:38 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Fiat Palio? Hi Raunak As far as I can gather, biodiesel works on most modern diesel motors. Where are you in RSA? P.E. man me. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ __ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping, not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod
seriously though I used to think exectly the same way as you. and it's your freewill choice to do that. It's your choice to do and be ANYTHING you want to do. I'm just GLAD you are in the cult of Permaculture and Renewable energy. So with all that I am going to try and bring the focus back to BioDiesel. Biofuels, if you please, Mel, it's not just a biodiesel list. By the way, you're far from the only one but your post had seven sets of footers at the end, lots of wasted bandwidth when sent to the entire membership. And was it really necessary to include all previous messages in the thread? Most of it could and should have been snipped. Just a reminder. Keith Addison List owner mel -Original Message- From: Appal Energy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 12:00 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod However before you reject it from a few sentences, read some chapters and then if it still does not sit truthfully within you reject the message snip ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Methanol Safety of Dispensing from 55 Gal. Drums tocarboy safely
By the way, How much does a 55 gallon drum of pure methanol cost in your area? Also, what is your area? ps(to the list) What does everyone else pay for their chemicals? Please include size of product and area of country(us) . Everyone else is not in the US, in fact most of them aren't. What's the point of asking this question anyway? Are you going to make a list and maintain it somewhere on the web, keeping it comprehensive and up to date? Keith Jonathan From: Kevin Shea [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Biofuel] Methanol Safety of Dispensing from 55 Gal. Drums tocarboy safely Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 01:05:34 -0500 After 11 months of research of biodiesel and pondering methanol safety, I have not come across any recent scenarios of dispensing methanol from a 55 gal metal drum to a BD methoxide processor (carboy) with only one exception. (On Journey to Forever's site) One chap using a 55 gal poly drum of methanol with a special bung cap fitted with a tire valve plug /shaft. snip ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] titration
is it normal to have a precipitate at the bottom when approching 8.5ph? I use the better titration approach. What sort of precipitate? And how many ml of 0.1% NaOH solution had you added by then? How are you measuring the pH? Best Keith ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: which diesel WAS [Biofuel] Fiat Palio?
Maybe this was discussed before, but would it be possible for the list members to share information about which diesel cars they have used with bio-diesel? This may be helpfull for the ones who are trying locate a diesel vehicle locally. Regards Burak Cedetas It would probably be easier and quicker to compile a list of which diesel cars haven't been used with biodiesel. If there's one that isn't suitable for biodiesel I'm sure we'd all like to know about it. If it has a diesel motor it'll be just fine. Best wishes Keith ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] New list member question
Any chances of people posting their experiences/suggestions to new list members that have bought specific diesels? This is not the first diesel that I have owned, but it is the first that I will have run non-dino. :-) I just bought a 1982 Mercedes 240D automatic--slow yes, but should be simple (I hope!). This is not going to be a daily driver--more of a test platform. Any tuning suggestions? Seals that need attention? Filter suggestions? Does anyone know if this model will do ok if I try SVO? Performance modifications? (snicker) Is there anyone on the list that lives in the Charlotte, NC area that can suggest good places for methanol and lye? Thanks in advance!! --Randall Van Engen ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Curious
Came to me... Got a chuckle and passed along Only in America... Only in America...do drugstores make the sick walk all the way to the back of the store to get their prescriptions while healthy people can buy cigarettes at the front. Only in America...do people order double cheeseburgers, large fries, and a diet Coke. Only in America...do banks leave both doors open and then chain the pens to the counters. Only in America...do we leave cars worth thousands of dollars in the driveway and put our useless junk in the garage. Only in America...do we buy hot dogs in packages of ten and buns in packages of eight. Only in America...do we use the word 'politics' to describe the process so well: 'Poli' in Latin meaning 'many' and 'tics' meaning 'bloodsucking creatures'. Only in America...do they have drive-up ATM machines with Braille lettering. EVER WONDER Why the sun lightens our hair, but darkens our skin? Why women can't put on mascara with their mouth closed? Why is abbreviated such a long word? Why is it that doctors call what they do practice? Why is lemon juice made with artificial flavor, and dishwashing liquid made with real lemons? Why is the man who invests all your money called a broker? Why is the time of day with the slowest traffic called rush hour? Why didn't Noah swat those two mosquitoes? Why do they sterilize the needle for lethal injections? You know that indestructible black box that is used on airplanes? Why don't they make the whole plane out of that stuff?! Why don't sheep shrink when it rains? Why are they called apartments when they are all stuck together? If con is the opposite of pro, is Congress the opposite of progress? If flying is so safe, why do they call the airport the terminal? --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 11/1/2004 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Alternative Jet Fuel
Needs to have 2 critical things addressed to be viable: 1)Flows well at sub-zero temps. 2)A BTU value as high or higher than the fossil fuel, that is currently used. I don't know of any BioFuel with those qualities. Greg H. - Original Message - From: Jeremy Farmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 09:50 Subject: [Biofuel] Alternative Jet Fuel Does anyone know of any alternative or bio jet or plane fuel? _ Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] about God
Very interesting reading Martin. I did not realize there was so much involved with discussion groups. Personally, I see no need for messages such as the one originally listed here that you responded to. I don't think it benefited anyone. Other than that, this list has a lot of interesting reading. Jonathan Schearer. Martin Klingensmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Whether you intended it or not it seems you are trolling See this: Note, I am not moderating any as that is up to Keith. -- Martin Klingensmith site admin Gabriel Proulx wrote: I saw that some people are talking about God. I just want to express my point of view about God: it's total bullshit! It's told that God can create and do anything, as he wish. Following the logic of this statement, he could create a rock which is impossible to lift even for him because he can do anything he wants. But if he can't lift that rock, this mean he can't do anything he wants. Seems that we got a paradox here. Seems that the Bible is not telling the truth. Some peole will say: it's impossible to create a rock which is impossible to lift even God can't do that. That directly say that god can't do anything and that the Bible was not right. Don't it smell like bullshit? Think about that and tell me if paradox can be true. Stop wasting your life and energy in this ridiculous story. It's all about collecting beliver's money. Help the world evolve instead. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ - Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal
Me too, and i'm living on the other side, go n'eiri an bothar leat... dD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nuclear power stations do not release many pollutants but reprocessing plants dump vast amounts of nuclear waste into the environment. Sellafield in the UK has contaminated all of the north part of the Irish Sea. They claim pollution emissions are now 1000 time less than they were 20 years, scares the sh$t out of me. Chris. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.789 / Virus Database: 534 - Release Date: 07/11/2004 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ _ Sign up for eircom broadband now and get a free two month trial.* Phone 1850 73 00 73 or visit http://home.eircom.net/broadbandoffer ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal
Me too, and i'm living on the other side, go n'eiri an bothar leat... dD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nuclear power stations do not release many pollutants but reprocessing plants dump vast amounts of nuclear waste into the environment. Sellafield in the UK has contaminated all of the north part of the Irish Sea. They claim pollution emissions are now 1000 time less than they were 20 years, scares the sh$t out of me. Chris. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.789 / Virus Database: 534 - Release Date: 07/11/2004 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ _ Sign up for eircom broadband now and get a free two month trial.* Phone 1850 73 00 73 or visit http://home.eircom.net/broadbandoffer ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Curious
Good one, although I know the answer to a few of those. The one that has me scratching my head is: Why is it, that we are no longer with Yahoo, but, for the last day or so, I have been getting double and triple of everything? Greg H. - Original Message - From: Mel Riser [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 13:01 Subject: [Biofuel] Curious Came to me... Got a chuckle and passed along Only in America... Only in America...do drugstores make the sick walk all the way to the back of the store to get their prescriptions while healthy people can buy cigarettes at the front. Only in America...do people order double cheeseburgers, large fries, and a diet Coke. Only in America...do banks leave both doors open and then chain the pens to the counters. Only in America...do we leave cars worth thousands of dollars in the driveway and put our useless junk in the garage. Only in America...do we buy hot dogs in packages of ten and buns in packages of eight. Only in America...do we use the word 'politics' to describe the process so well: 'Poli' in Latin meaning 'many' and 'tics' meaning 'bloodsucking creatures'. Only in America...do they have drive-up ATM machines with Braille lettering. EVER WONDER Why the sun lightens our hair, but darkens our skin? Why women can't put on mascara with their mouth closed? Why is abbreviated such a long word? Why is it that doctors call what they do practice? Why is lemon juice made with artificial flavor, and dishwashing liquid made with real lemons? Why is the man who invests all your money called a broker? Why is the time of day with the slowest traffic called rush hour? Why didn't Noah swat those two mosquitoes? Why do they sterilize the needle for lethal injections? You know that indestructible black box that is used on airplanes? Why don't they make the whole plane out of that stuff?! Why don't sheep shrink when it rains? Why are they called apartments when they are all stuck together? If con is the opposite of pro, is Congress the opposite of progress? If flying is so safe, why do they call the airport the terminal? --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 11/1/2004 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal
Hi Thomas, Sorry to give you the bad news. Your factoid talks like a duck but doesn't walk like a duck. The claim that nuclear energy is somehow less polluting than coal or other fossil fuel sources is a simple contradiction of reality. The exact opposite is true. As James Bellini said (in his excellent book High Tech Holocaust, published '86) the nuclear process creates an open-ended problem that has no parallel in the history of technology. A single 1,000 megawatt nuclear plant, typical of most in the US, will within a single year generate the following: 179,000 tonnes of uranium ore as tailings at the mine 242 tonnes of refinery waste 29 tonnes of high-level waste in the form of spent fuel rods. One tonne of mixed isotopes, producing one-fifth of a tonne of plutonium waste. ALL OF THIS IS RADIOACTIVE. Some of it for a matter of days, some for years, some for millenia. There are three phases of production of nuclear energy i.e. fissioning, activation and ionisation. The fissioning process alone creates more than 300 different radioactive chemicals some of which remain unstable for hundreds of thousands of years. One, Iodine 129, has a half life of 17 million years. Much of this is contained in the spent fuel rods. The activation process on the other hand contaminates the surrounding areas of the plant - air, water, pipes and even the structure of the building itself, which has a safe operating span of around 25 years. After that the installation becomes unstable and must be dismantled. All of this, ore tailings, refinery waste, fuel rods and eventually the plant itself must be disposed of. CURRENTLY THERE IS NO SAFE MEANS OF DISPOSAL. So we mothball the plants and store the waste in nuclear depositories around the US (about 20 of them so far). The mine tailings are left to erode to air and waterways, the rest of the residue is encased in concrete, steel or glass and dumped in the sea, left down old mine shafts or stored in purpose-built shelters. No container yet designed is fool-proof. All show signs of deterioration. What will they be like in ten years, fifty years, a century? Don't ask, we know the answer and it isn't reassuring. The cost alone is horrendous. Assuming only a nominal 100 dollars a day for simply guarding each site, the cost for a century or so will bankrupt our offspring let alone the idea of safely isolating the area for the 17 million years it takes for the Iodine isotope to decay. Add to that the opportunity cost of losing the site development value (you can NEVER EVER AGAIN build on or in any way use a nuclear site without totally prohibitive shielding costs). Multiply all that by 95, the number of nuclear plants in the US. Add in another three hundred or so worldwide and you can see we have an ongoing and steadily accreting annual problem that makes an ordinary coal mine and the burning of coal seem almost benign. Enjoy your day, Bob. Original Message - From: Tomas Juknevicius [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 11:11 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal Hi folks, I've read one interesting factoid recently. It was stated, that the nuclear power plant produces less radioactive material (per kWh generated) than the coal power plant (which emits radioactive particles through the smokestack - mostly thorium IIRC) Maybe someone has more information/links about this? -- Tomas Juknevicius ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Curious
Only in America... Only in America...do banks leave both doors open and then chain the pens to the counters. In my old home town, if you rent the shelter house at the park, they gave you the key to the bank next door to get in to use the restrooms! ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping, not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] about God
I didn't say that any supposed diety should be subjected to any chemical tests or an MRI to substantiate existance. All I said was that proof of existance should be offered. And after several hundred million years, one would think that proof would be abundant. By proof I mean something more than simply declaring that a book says so, or sweeping one's hand to the horizon and declaring all of creation sufficient evidence. I think George Burns walking through Times Square tomorrow at noon would be sufficient proof. Turning lead into gold might take a close second. Walking on water a reasonable third, levitating and tight aerial acrobatics on the head of a pin a close runner-up. You can't offer any proof of substance other than what you hope and what you believe. Nobody can. That's not to say that God, gods or Goddess(s) don't exist. Lovely thing if they do. Just don't take me on a whirlwind tour of the toolies and your beliefs/indoctrinations/hopes and expect me to lose sight of the original premise. I'm happy for you. But none of that is sufficient evidence, much less evidence at all. The point is that if honesty and equity are supposed to be god-like attributes, then there should be either two stickers on each biology book stating that they're both theories or no stickers at all. One would hope that those professing to follow in the mold of their creator would understand such a principle long before the unindoctrinated pagan. Unfortunaely, reality and what one would think all too frequently are at odds with each other. Todd Swearingen - Original Message - From: robert luis rabello [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 11:36 AM Subject: Re: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] about God Appal Energy wrote: Cobb County Georgia School Board puts stickers on their biology books stating that evolution is only a theory, all at the behest of a few screaming meamies, and two thousand petition signers. They're rationale? God is real but evolution is unproven. Well now..., one must ask the question: If sufficient proof of evolution is requisite, shouldn't the existance of God, gods or goddesses be held to the same standard? Would someone please show me the irrefutable proof that God exists? This is an excellent question that nicely illustrates the conflict between the scientific method and religion. If I depend on the scientific method, I must be able to quantify my deductions by virtue of experimentation that can be reproduced by my peers with the same results. This is an unsatisfactory way to contemplate the question of origins, as no one really knows with certainty what conditions existed on earth at the time life began. Further, no experimentation has ever demonstrated that non living matter can be transformed into living things; nor has any verifiable, reproducible experiment ever shown the transformation of one kind of living thing into another. Our understanding of genetics harmonizes with the principle that variations in phenotype must exist in the genotype of a living thing before micro variations can be expressed. So if science can, at best, offer conjecture about origins, it's unreasonable to demand proof of God or gods in a purely scientific sense. Once we begin speaking and writing of God and origins, we have moved into the realm of philosophy and religion. The diversity of views already expressed in this forum illustrate the lack of consensus among intelligent humans in this area. snip So given enough time (millenia or just a few biologic cycles), it's rather easy to prove the selectivity of nature for specific traits that are best suited to certain environmental characteristics. Rather kind of mindless work. Perfectly amazing, but none-the-less simple. But these traits exist in the genotype before they're expressed in the environment. The mechanism for the existence of latency in the genotype is not well understood. Many people conclude that the process of mutation explains variance in the genotype, but this explanation does not fit the observations biologists have made in repeated studies of the matter. It is, at best, a mystery at this time. It's really rather easy to feel some degree of sympathy for those who believe but can't prove the existance of what it is they believe in. Frustrating it must be for them. Of course, there is the age-old and failure-proof standby that If you don't believe me, you must be an agent from hell. That usually gets most people to leave them alone in their dither. I am a deeply devoted Christian who also happens to be educated in evolutionary theory, as my undergraduate degree is in biology. I find no dichotomy in my faith concerning the issue of origins. The tension you are describing does not exist for me. Further, I'm perfectly happy to allow room for you to disagree because we can BOTH agree that the idea
Re: [Biofuel] Curious
Maybe I should say most everything, although now for some things it is quadruple post's. Greg H. - Original Message - From: Greg Harbican [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 14:09 Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Curious Good one, although I know the answer to a few of those. The one that has me scratching my head is: Why is it, that we are no longer with Yahoo, but, for the last day or so, I have been getting double and triple of everything? Greg H. ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping, not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod
So what happened to skitz you out? and it's your freewill choice to do that. Thanks. Glad you confirmed that. I was worried. It's your choice to do and be ANYTHING you want to do. So it's not those voices inside my head urging me on that I should blame? I'm just GLAD you are in the cult of Permaculture and Renewable energy. It's not a cult. It's called life. Todd Swearingen - Original Message - From: Mel Riser [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 8:39 AM Subject: RE: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod I LOVE bananas... seriously though I used to think exectly the same way as you. and it's your freewill choice to do that. It's your choice to do and be ANYTHING you want to do. I'm just GLAD you are in the cult of Permaculture and Renewable energy. So with all that I am going to try and bring the focus back to BioDiesel. mel -Original Message- From: Appal Energy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 12:00 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bible, Koran Torah Thumping,not to mention other general sheeple tricks was Re: [Biofuel] aboutGod However before you reject it from a few sentences, read some chapters and then if it still does not sit truthfully within you reject the message Nah, nah, nah, nah Why in the world would I want to subject myself to yet another evening of doublespeak, long-winded sentences and enough switchbacks of convoluted thought in every paragraph to turn anyone into butter? Forget running around a mulberry bush. But if that's what keeps you from going postal, more power to you - higher, lower or indifferent. My truth is that the last thing I (and probably almost the entire rest of the world) need is another brain trust telling them what they need or should want to think. As for motivation? Bringing will to power? What are we talking here? Suzanne Summers, Thy Master and a metaphysical meditation between repetitions with the temptation of a double-fudge brownie within arm's reach? Schisms and off shoots... Yup. More stupid human tricks. Should have bet money on that one. The god that dwells within... You must mean that one that nobody seems to be able to offer any proof of other than goose pimples with the passing of an occasional thought. Seems to make a whole lot more sense to enjoy the experience for what it is rather than fouling it up and distorting it by attempting to ascribe it to something deified which none of us know for sure exists. On the other side of the coin is the foolishness of ascribing it to the wonderfulness of self. All a bit of puffery that. Frankly Mel? If it's communion with this theoretical Dog., I mean God that I want, I think I'll conduct it via a slice of hot apple pie and a pint of homemade ice cream, or whilst sticking my nose in a lilac bush and marveling (or cursing) when it gets bit by what buzzes, or when bundled up and watching Saturn rocket debris fall back to Earth on a moonless winter's night. certainly not crawling up with yet another human concocted script of what's supposed to be what and how it's all supposed to be interpreted and coped with. Bananas. Pure, unadulterated bananas. Todd Swearingen ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal
Zach, You are right, I should have used the expression finite fuel instead making the fossil coal rub of on nuclear. I often do this mistake, when talking about finite fuel reserves in general. It has nothing to do with the substance of what I said or the principle, but technically it is not fossils and the formation and from what, is pretty much unknown, but with some plausible theories of origin. If I do the same mistake again in the future, which is quite possible, you can correct me again. I guess that my posting was not understood or was unclear for you and hope that you now know what I wanted to say. The fact is that nuclear power is not going to be a salvation for the world, if you talk about fission. The odds for fusion are quite grim at the moment and nobody knows if it is going to be possible with positive energy production. Considering the time line between finished research and general application, fusion will not have much to save, if we ever can do it. So I like to ask you who we are, that knows and experimented so much that they can guarantee any results with sustainable fusion i.e. positive reaction without bigger energy input than output? I cannot understand those who wants to make all bets on the possibility and maybe sustainable use of fusion and hydrogen. Instead of starting to shift to many ready for use technologies that are available, which together have proven sustainability with substantial growth margins. Since we know that we can do the same thing we do today, but only with something between a third and a quarter of the energy we use today, it is enough renewable energy to bring the whole world to a higher standard or at least to the same as the developed countries have today. The only real abnormality is US and their almost criminal waste of energy. As it looks now, Bush kick started a spiraling rise of debt and trade deficit and a US bankruptcy might be the best chance for the rest of the world. US is at the moment in a self destruct mode and within four more years it might be irreversible. The pure existence of EU together with a democratic Russia, might also make the consequences of an US bankruptcy survivable, which was not a case only a few years ago. Hakan At 07:12 PM 11/11/2004, you wrote: Hakan, i never heard of a nuclear fossil, last i heard uranum was formed in supermasive super novas or posibly blackholes. nuclear powerplants only use radiactive material becaue the uranum isotope is so massive that its relitivly easy to nock off some chunks of the nucleus to start a fission reaction. and yes both aren't renewable in the sence that both crude oil and uranum don't have enless supplies. the fact is that nuclear power will be our salvation, botom line. the problem is that now we do it halfassed and our end result is an extreamly harmful substance. more reaserch needs to be put into the advances of nuclear power. the day we achive a sustained fusion reaction will be a landmark in world history. - Original Message - From: Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 5:45 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal Tomas, What kind of question is this? Produces, what do you mean? A nuclear power plant does not produce, it uses radioactive material, if I have not been misinformed. Both nuclear and coal are very dangerous fossil fuel applications and the fuel will be spent by both, neither are a renewable energy alternative. Both are going to be depleted and be used up and are a favorite energy sources by USA, who is using more than the rest of the world. Hakan At 11:11 AM 11/11/2004, you wrote: Hi folks, I've read one interesting factoid recently. It was stated, that the nuclear power plant produces less radioactive material (per kWh generated) than the coal power plant (which emits radioactive particles through the smokestack - mostly thorium IIRC) Maybe someone has more information/links about this? -- Tomas Juknevicius ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Curious
No. Not just America, Canada too. But then the 49th parallel is just a State Line anyway isn't it? ;-) John Proud to be Canuck -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Mel Riser Sent: November 11, 2004 3:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Biofuel] Curious Only in America...do we buy hot dogs in packages of ten and buns in packages of eight. --- ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Questions with using biodiesel
Congrats on the Benz. The MB's diesel engines in those years (I have a 1983 240D) were built somewhat like a big truck using sleeves instead of having the pistons run up and down the cylendar walls, a much much better design as an overhaul consists of replacing the sleeves and any injectors that may be worn and then you are good to go for another mil on the odometer. The W123 Benz deisekls with handle B100 without a hitch and without you having to touch the engine, HOWEVER I have recently had to have the screen filter inside the tank and the fuel lines replaced at what amounts to no little cost as I do not have the withall or space to do it mysefl so it goes to the big silver star people (Kaching !). If your car's fuel tank is the original and it has never been thoroughly flushed before then there is a better than not chance that that interior screen sediment filter is goin to gum up big time within a few tank fills with B100. Do yourself a favour, drain the tank now if you can, remove the sediment filter and take the screen part off so that there is unhindered flow. The gradual cleansing will send all that gunk down the lines and to the other fuel filters. It would be a good idea to install another primary filter along the line to catch this stuff. It will be alot simpler and less agravating than having to deal with a choking a dying Benz on the road somewhere. It doesn't give much warning, and once it does you don't ge the luxury of choosing when it will die so preventative surgery will save the day. Once this is done however you will no longer have to touch it, other than do filter changes. The injectors will be just fine and you may even remark a noticeable smoothness to the engine as soon as you put the B100 in it. Be sure you make good fuel using the necessary quality tests: http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_vehicle.html#quality and keep the cold weather in mind: http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_winter.html And should you want your 300D to have a little more umpf try adjusting the ALDA a bit: http://users.vnet.net/w123d/w123d/adla.htm Once you have made good fuel, toss it in with confidence. You and your Benz will be happy you did. Luc - Original Message - From: Theo Chadzichristos [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 4:58 PM Subject: [Biofuel] Questions with using biodiesel HI all, I've been looking for a post that people actually respond to, and it looks like I have finally found a good one. I have made blender sized batched of biodiesel successfully but I want to move to a larger scale. I have a 1976 Mercedes Benz 300d which I want to run on biodiesel. I know that higher concentrations of biodiesel will clean up all the junk from the dino diesel that's accumulated in the tank and probably clog up my filters. That's not a problem because I can easily replace those. My main concern is screwing up my injector pump, injectors and all my fuel lines by using biodiesel since those are expensive parts to replace. I have read of others with Mercedes Benz diesels that run successfully on biodiesel with no problem but the 1976 model year was the very first 5 cylinder diesel that came out. The basic engine design stayed the same as the years went by but there were a lot of minor changes made to the engine as time went on. I'm not sure if it is capable of using biodiesel without a lot of problems. If anyone has any personal experience or knows of anyone with a diesel this old I would greatly appreciate any feedback on whether or not they had any problems with any engine component because of biodiesel. Sorry about the length of the message and thanks for the time. Theo C ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] washing water
wash waters on it :) The methanol and lye gie it a rude surprise that it doesn't recover from :) Luc - Original Message - From: tommy newman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 7:31 PM Subject: [Biofuel] washing water I am very much interested of the effects if any the water used for washing the biodiesl has on plants and if it is put into rivers the effects, or what it contains. I have been told it contains salts i.e. Calcium and sodium /potassium but that has not been confirmed. ___ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal
Jonathan, Look at an other posting were I explained that real term is finite fuel resources. Regarding production of nuclear energy in nuclear resp. coal plants, I still say that what I said and what you are saying is pollution, not production. That was about so many misconceptions. Regarding wasteful use of finite fuels, it has to stop in the whole world. US is very bad on this. US.bad implies on that I said more than I did. Your reaction here is a little childish and BS, because you say I am doing a bad thing, you say that I am bad. I am very sorry that you did not understand what I said, I try to be clearer i the future. Until now and with you, 0.5 promille of the list have proved and complained, about that they did not understand what I said. I am very sorry. Hakan At 06:16 PM 11/11/2004, you wrote: Hakan- ...so many misconceptions, so little time. Nuclear plants DO produce radioactive material...internally some of the metals, exposed to high alpha, gamma and neutron radiation become radioactive themselves. Yet those materials are sequestered within the plant in very large very deep pools of water.(spent fuel pool) They are so radioactive that they can never be released.(some have halflives of thousands of years) Also Hakan, although they both start with the letter f, fission fuel and fossil fuel are not the same. I can see where you might have been confused. Hope this helps clear up any misconceptions and may help slow down that knee-jerk reaction.(nuclear-bad...coal-bad...usa-bad) Thomas- I think the term most associated with what you are talking about is BRC materials. Small amounts of only slightly radioactive materials can be classified by industry as Below Radiological Concern.(BRC) These small amounts are processed as normal waste. They are produced in almost all mining operations, almost all paint manufacturing facilities(Left overs from the titanium oxide purification) etc. The problem with the classification is this...small amounts in small concentrations over a large number of plants for a long period of time results in a lot of radioactive material. Luckily, the producers are not all in one place sending their waste to the same landfill. --There is no concentration or buildup from numerous facilities in one place. Think of it this way... There is a small fraction of iodine found in nature that is radioactive.(very small fraction) When processing table salt into iodized salt, some of that radioactive iodine is used. This is so small an amount that it is considered BRC. Now I'm not trying to start a salt scare, but if you were to check your table salt with a geiger counter set at it's most sensitive setting...you would ger a reading showing radioactivity. The amount is so small that eating the salt in quantity does more damage than the radiation. Jonathan From: Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Nuclear vs coal Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:45:57 +0100 Tomas, What kind of question is this? Produces, what do you mean? A nuclear power plant does not produce, it uses radioactive material, if I have not been misinformed. Both nuclear and coal are very dangerous fossil fuel applications and the fuel will be spent by both, neither are a renewable energy alternative. Both are going to be depleted and be used up and are a favorite energy sources by USA, who is using more than the rest of the world. Hakan At 11:11 AM 11/11/2004, you wrote: Hi folks, I've read one interesting factoid recently. It was stated, that the nuclear power plant produces less radioactive material (per kWh generated) than the coal power plant (which emits radioactive particles through the smokestack - mostly thorium IIRC) Maybe someone has more information/links about this? -- Tomas Juknevicius ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
