Re: [Biofuel] re: Bill Clark and Acusorb Beads

[Andrew Cunningham]

And I answered all of your questions and would like to know if you are
blowing smoke about the function of the beads or do you actually have
any information on them.

Andy


On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 05:55:18 +0900, Keith Addison
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I am still waiting for answers
> >
> >Andy
> 
> :-)
> 
> I hope you're not holding your breath...
> 
> From previous... I'll put it in quotes for you rather than the
> long-standing worldwide standard of >'s for previous messages, since
> you're still >-challenged:
> 
> "On the other hand, you didn't answer mine, why should I answer
> yours? Especially as I've already done so, though you can't see it. I
> told you to keep looking, but it's apparent you can't see for looking
> anyway... Go see for yourself. It's all right there, right in front
> of your eyes, but you see it as "useless". That's your problem. I'll
> leave you to play with your beads."
> 
> Also: "If you want to leap to the conclusion that all that means is
> that I can't answer, go right ahead."
> 
> Keith
> 
> 
> >
> >On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 02:15:21 +0900, Keith Addison
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >Martin,
> > > >
> > > >I am using gmail and still trying to figure it out.  When I get
> > > >messages quoted text is hidden so if someone else doesn't snip I can't
> > > >see that.
> > >
> > > So you DO only go one level deep.
> > >
> > > >It would appear that there must have been 12 other times
> > > >that the discussion was not snipped which lead up to this point.  I
> > > >would suggest that all individuals who were not snipping be more
> > > >careful.
> > >
> > > Eight of them were yours, including the previous two. Before that, I
> > > left them in for your benefit as you kept losing the context - your
> > > confusion over pronouns, for but one example.
> > >
> > > The first message I can find from you with your "new" gmail address
> > > was on 5 Sep 2004. More than five months now and you still haven't
> > > figured out how to see previous messages?
> > >
> > > Keith
> > >
> > >
> > > >Andy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 02:05:57 -0500, Martin Klingensmith
> > > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > Andrew,
> > > > > Your message consisted of a single '?' character, and the entire reply
> > > > > (up to 12 replies deep) is 23KB. This means your signal to noise ratio
> > > > > was 1/23000, or about  .004% useful information.
> > > > > --
> > > > > Martin K
> > > > >
> > > > > Andrew Cunningham wrote:
> 
> ___
> 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] IRS Extension

[Lyle Estill]

period for their interpretation of the impending biodiesel tax credits.

It strikes me that a whole bunch of folks have been working very hard 
at getting their comments in on time, and that no extension is 
necessary.


Here is the sixth version of what may hit the IRS on time:


CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-153838-04)
Room 5203
Internal Revenue Service
POB 7604
Ben Franklin Station
Washington, DC 20044

Re: Biodiesel Excise Tax Credit and Biodiesel Income Tax Credit

Dear Commissioner:

I am writing on behalf of a broad constituency of organizations, which 
are listed
below as signatories to this letter.  As you may know, the 
organizations listed below are
stakeholders in the biodiesel industry throughout the nation, many of 
whom have played a key role in advancing the use of neat biodiesel 
(100% biodiesel or B100) as a renewable

transportation fuel.

In response to Internal Revenue Bulletin 2005-2, dated January 10, 
2005, we would

like to raise the following concerns:

1. B100 should be eligible for the Excise Tax Credit under Section 6426
2. All biodiesel blends should be eligible for the Excise Tax Credit
3. The definition of a "retail sale" for tax and credit purposes 
should be consistent

4. The Biodiesel Income Tax Credit should be able to be carried forward
5. Calculation of the credit for Agri-biodiesel and all other 
biodiesel should be clarified

6. Section 4041(a)(1) tax should not be imposed on a biodiesel mixture

B100 should be eligible for the Excise Tax Credit under Section 6426

We understand that the Service has initially interpreted Section 6426 
in a manner that
would exclude B100 form the Excise Tax Credit.  We believe that 
interpretation is
unfortunate for several reasons and respectfully request that the 
Service take a more expansive interpretation of Section 6426.


We believe the spirit of the Biodiesel Excise Tax Credit created by 
the American Jobs
Creation Act of 2004 is to encourage growth of the biodiesel industry 
through financial
incentives which bring the cost of biodiesel down for the consumer.  
The most direct and effective way to reduce the cost of biodiesel to 
consumers and encourage growth of the biodiesel industry is for the 
Excise Tax Credit to apply to all blends of biodiesel up to and 
including B100.




We believe the Service should broadly interpret the reference to 
"Biodiesel Mixture
Credit" in Section 6426(c) to include all biodiesel blends from B1 to 
B100.  The common
terminology in the industry is to refer to blends of biodiesel – B20, 
B50, B100; similar to grades of gasoline – regular, unleaded, premium. 
 Since biodiesel is inherently a blended mixture, it seems appropriate 
that the Service broadly interpret "mixture" to include all biodiesel 
blends including B100.


We further believe the Service should take an expansive interpretation 
Section 6426(a)
so that it includes B100 as eligible for the Excise Tax Credit.  
Section 6426(a) that states
"There shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by Section 
4081 an amount equal to . . ."  As was outlined in Rev. Rul. 2002-76, 
biodiesel is taxed pursuant to Section 4041(a)(1).  Section 4041(a)(1) 
imposes tax on any liquid other than gasoline sold for use or used as 
a fuel in a diesel-powered highway vehicle, unless tax was imposed on 
the liquid by Section 4081 and not credited or refunded.  Section 
4041(a)(1)(C) provides that "the rate of the tax imposed by this 
paragraph (4041(a)(1)) shall be the rate of tax specified in section 
4081(a)(2)(A) on diesel fuel which is in effect at the time of such 
sale or use".  Thus, the biodiesel excise tax imposed by Section 
4041(a)(1) is identical to the excise tax imposed by 4081 and thus 
should qualify for the Excise Tax Credit.


The most unfortunate implication of the possibility of B100 not 
qualifying for the
Excise Tax Credit is the disincentive this would provide to non-income 
tax paying entities such as 501(c)(3)s, municipalities, and state 
government agencies.  After talking to Renee
Kramer at the Service, we understand that government agencies are 
subject to the diesel excise tax in some cases and not in others and 
that 501(c)(3)s are generally subject to the diesel excise tax, but 
not always.  If our understanding is correct, we are concerned that 
unless the Excise Tax Credit is available for B100 these non-income 
tax paying entities receive no tax benefit from using B100.  These 
non-income tax paying entities are key biodiesel consumers and, 
consistent with Congress' intent, the Service should be looking for 
ways to provide incentives to these key consumers to use biodiesel.  
If B100 is not eligible for the Excise Tax Credit, and these 
non-income tax paying entities cannot make use of  the Income Tax 
Credit by virtue of the fact that they do not pay income tax, the cost 
of B100 for such users will remain prohibitively high. Without the 
Excise Tax Credit for B100, it will place an undue financial burden on 
non-inc

Re: [Biofuel] IRS Extension

[Kenneth Kron]

What you probably don't know is that I corrected that letter on Friday 
(1/11) and I was not involved in writing it but simply on one of the 
mailing lists where they hurriedly tried to recruit people to sign it?  
I saw several other corrections posted to lists I was on also made at on 
Friday.  Believe it was a last minute rush job one worth doing but the 
only proper response in my opinion.


I commend this small group of poeple, probably less than 30, for getting 
something in there in time but they were in a massive rush to do so and 
only made the dealine because the found a volunteeer lawyer who wasn't 
busy on Friday.


As I said
"So I am suggesting that anyone who has only recently become aware that 
the bulletin was published in such a way as to apparently avoid scrutiny 
and comment by the public and feels that they would like more time and a 
more thorough public vetting of the bulletin before it advances.


Go to the IRS web site 
http://www.irs.gov/app/scripts/ct.jsp?regTitle=Fuel%20Tax%20Guidance

and let them know that you think the comment window should be extended.
"

You can also join the Government Biofuel Regulations Discussion List 
.  Which I'll note 
was recently joined by the author of the above mentioned letter.


Does this change your thoughts?

Lyle Estill wrote:

Earlier today Kenneth Kron called for an extension of the IRS comment 
period for their interpretation of the impending biodiesel tax credits.


It strikes me that a whole bunch of folks have been working very hard 
at getting their comments in on time, and that no extension is necessary.


Here is the sixth version of what may hit the IRS on time:


CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-153838-04)
Room 5203
Internal Revenue Service
POB 7604
Ben Franklin Station
Washington, DC 20044

Re: Biodiesel Excise Tax Credit and Biodiesel Income Tax Credit

Dear Commissioner:

I am writing on behalf of a broad constituency of organizations, 
which are listed
below as signatories to this letter.  As you may know, the 
organizations listed below are
stakeholders in the biodiesel industry throughout the nation, many of 
whom have played a key role in advancing the use of neat biodiesel 
(100% biodiesel or B100) as a renewable

transportation fuel.

In response to Internal Revenue Bulletin 2005-2, dated January 10, 
2005, we would

like to raise the following concerns:

1. B100 should be eligible for the Excise Tax Credit under Section 6426
2. All biodiesel blends should be eligible for the Excise Tax Credit
3. The definition of a "retail sale" for tax and credit purposes 
should be consistent

4. The Biodiesel Income Tax Credit should be able to be carried forward
5. Calculation of the credit for Agri-biodiesel and all other 
biodiesel should be clarified

6. Section 4041(a)(1) tax should not be imposed on a biodiesel mixture

B100 should be eligible for the Excise Tax Credit under Section 6426

We understand that the Service has initially interpreted Section 6426 
in a manner that
would exclude B100 form the Excise Tax Credit.  We believe that 
interpretation is
unfortunate for several reasons and respectfully request that the 
Service take a more expansive interpretation of Section 6426.


We believe the spirit of the Biodiesel Excise Tax Credit created by 
the American Jobs
Creation Act of 2004 is to encourage growth of the biodiesel industry 
through financial
incentives which bring the cost of biodiesel down for the consumer.  
The most direct and effective way to reduce the cost of biodiesel to 
consumers and encourage growth of the biodiesel industry is for the 
Excise Tax Credit to apply to all blends of biodiesel up to and 
including B100.




We believe the Service should broadly interpret the reference to 
"Biodiesel Mixture
Credit" in Section 6426(c) to include all biodiesel blends from B1 to 
B100.  The common
terminology in the industry is to refer to blends of biodiesel – B20, 
B50, B100; similar to grades of gasoline – regular, unleaded, 
premium.  Since biodiesel is inherently a blended mixture, it seems 
appropriate that the Service broadly interpret "mixture" to include 
all biodiesel blends including B100.


We further believe the Service should take an expansive 
interpretation Section 6426(a)
so that it includes B100 as eligible for the Excise Tax Credit.  
Section 6426(a) that states
"There shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by 
Section 4081 an amount equal to . . ."  As was outlined in Rev. Rul. 
2002-76, biodiesel is taxed pursuant to Section 4041(a)(1).  Section 
4041(a)(1) imposes tax on any liquid other than gasoline sold for use 
or used as a fuel in a diesel-powered highway vehicle, unless tax was 
imposed on the liquid by Section 4081 and not credited or refunded.  
Section 4041(a)(1)(C) provides that "the rate of the tax imposed by 
this paragraph (4041(a)(1)) shall be the rate of tax specified in 
section 4081(a)(2)(A) on diesel fuel which is in effect at the time 
of such

Re: [Biofuel] Glycerine soap making

[Andrew Cunningham]

Let me just make sure I had all the details first, since some things
were left unsaid and require assumptions.  If I read what you are
saying correctly, I agree with Keith on this one and it doesn't appear
viable.

1)You make BioD with the Lye/methanol method
2)Separate out the BioD from the glycerin/soap/lye/methanol by gravity.  
{Note: You do not acidify the layer and convert the Soap back to FFA.}
3)Boil off the methanol (possible recovery but inmaterial to
discussion) and leaves you with glycerin/soap/lye.
4)You add water and more lye and mix

IF the above is what you are doing, this will leave you with the same
amount of glycerin, the same amount of soap, more lye and water.

The only way you would get more soap would be if you had left over
BioD or unreacted oil in there that didn't separate out in step 2. 
Even then you would still end up with lye heavy soap and it would be
very harsh.

FFANa+   OH-   (aq) <->Soap   and   water 
BioD   Na+   OH-   (aq) <->Soap   and   methanol
Oil  Na+   OH-   (aq)   ->Soap   and   glycerin

One viable option would be to take some water and unreacted oil and
add the glycerin layer (without the methanol).  Do not add anymore
lye.  The extra oil can react with the lye left over in the glycerin
layer and make soap.  You know how much lye you added so you can
estimate the amount of oil to add to use up all the lye from the
reaction.  You do not want any lye unreacted in soap as it will make
it very harsh.

I hope this helps, but if anything in the 4 steps at the beginning is
off let me know and I can go through the reactions based on your
actual process.

Andy







On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 04:15:03 +0900, Keith Addison
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Luc
> 
> As you know I'm a bit sceptical but do not seek to discourage! I'm
> most interested to see what you achieve.
> 
> >What to do with the copious amounts of glycerine by product ? We can
> >follow through with the seperation of the components an get a close
> >to pure glycerine, providing we have a market for it, or we can use
> >it to make soap. JtF has a few good articles on that too.
> >http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_glycerin.html
> >I am in the process of experiementing with a couple recipes that, I
> >hope, will give a fairly decent usable product. I have used some as
> >a body soap and it works great, however very little foamong action
> >and that is a problem in most circles, so I am trying three
> >diffenrent approaches.
> >1) 100ml water with 10gr NaOH per liter of glycerine by product
> >2) 150ml water with 15gr NaOH per liter of glycerine by product
> >30 200ml water with 20gr NaOH per liter of glycerine by product
> 
> The amount of lye needed will depend on how much you used in the
> biodiesel process, ie on the titration result.
> 
> >Firstly the methanol must be removed/recovered by raising the temps
> >above 65C (148.5F)
> 
> Well above - probably until it stops bubbling. Not something to do in
> an enclosed space.
> 
> >and then the NaOH disolved into a little more than warm water. Once
> >the glycerine has cooled a bit, to about 43C (110F) then mix in the
> >water/NaOH while stirring for about a minute or two. Pour into a
> >mold and let settle. How long will be subject of another post when I
> >have it figured out :-)
> >The first one has had two weeks to settle out anything that was
> >going to do that and it did. Some gelatenous substance caked a
> >portion of the hardened glycerine and had to be scrapped off, but
> >the result was still solid bars.
> >The second and third recipes are yet to be finished however they
> >already show more potential, primarily the third which began
> >solidifying almost immediately and shows good promise.
> 
> The trouble is it's not just glycerine, and if it were you wouldn't
> be able to make soap out of it - glycerine is an ingredient of soap,
> a non-essential ingredient furthermore. Soap is made out of fats and
> oils, and the fats and oils you'll be making soap out of this way
> (soap with a VERY high glycerine content) (and a high content of
> impurities) will be the Free Fatty Acids displaced from the brew by
> the NaOH. Aka soapstock or foots. Not the ideal material for the
> making of quality soap. From about soapstock/foots here:
> 
> The Fats and Oils: a General View, by Carl L. Alsberg and Alonzo E.
> Taylor, 1928, Food
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library.html#fatsoils
> 
> Food Fats and Oils (1994) -- online book (Acrobat file, 1.3Mb):
> http://www.iseo.org/foodfatsoils.pdf
> 
> >I shall keep you posted as to the success/failure of this as we go along.
> 
> Please do, and good luck.
> 
> >No sense throwing away a perfectly good product if it can be used
> >eh? I am determined that it will.
> 
> There are other choices before you get to throwing it away. Before
> you get to composting it too.
> 
> Best wishes
> 
> Keith
> 
> 
> >Luc
> 
> ___
> Biofuel mailing list
> [EMAIL P

Re: [Biofuel] Glycerin soap making

[Andrew Cunningham]

Tracy,

I am currently taking classes towards a Masters in Health Product
Regulation.  I have spent a lot of time with various FDA regulations
and the way I would interpret "most" is that it has to  more than 50%
of the final product.  Therefore you could take pure soap and mix 49%
dirt into it and sell it as soap.  Not many people would buy 49% dirt
soap, but it would meet the FDA's description of "Soap".  I would have
to lookup the definition of cosmetics to be sure, but the main
differences between soaps, cosmetics and drugs are what you claim it
does.

You are correct about the soap reaction, by-product glycerin can be
added to soap but cannot be made into soap.

My only suggestion on how to determine the amount of lye to use would
be to do small trial batches or some form of titration.

Andy


On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 00:50:47 -0800 (PST), Jeremy & Tracy Longworth
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My name is Tracy, and I am Jeremy's wife.  I am also a soapmaker.  There are 
> a few things that concern me about making soap with the by-product of 
> biodiesel.
> 
> First, imho, the wvo is not exactly the cleanest stuff to begin with and I 
> think there might be problems with the government in producing soap with it.  
> The FDA defines soap as "a product in which most of the nonvolatile matter 
> consists of an alkali salt of fatty acids and whose detergent properties are 
> due to these alkali-fatty acid compounds".  If I read the regulations 
> correctly, if a "soap" is made mostly of anything else, it is then considered 
> a cosmetic and comes under certain regulations.  True soap is not regulated 
> by the FDA: cosmetics are.
> 
> Secondly, soap cannot be made from primarily glycerin.  Glycerin is a 
> by-product of soapmaking and is left in handmade soaps or extracted from 
> commercially made soaps.  The soap is formed from the reaction of a caustic 
> soda and fatty acids.  If anyone is truly making soap from the by-product of 
> making biodiesel, then it would stand to reason that there are left-over oils 
> in the glycerin.
> 
> Third, there is no way to know for certain what kinds of oils comprise WVO.  
> Many restaurants don't always use the same kind of oil.  That being the case, 
> I can't see how one could accurately figure the amount of lye needed in order 
> to achieve proper saponification.  Every oil requires a different amount of 
> lye in order for it to properly saponify.  If one were to use too much lye, 
> the resultant soap would be "lye heavy" and too harsh for anyone to use.
> 
> I did also see written that the lye was to be added to warm water, I believe. 
>  I, and the soapmakers I am in contact with, add their lye to cold water.  
> When the lye is added to water, the resulting solution can reach temperatures 
> near boiling at times.  If one was to start out with warm water, the solution 
> could volcano and create quite a mess, not to mention it could also cause 
> harm to anyone around at the time.
> 
> ___
> 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] IRS Extension

[Appal Energy]

"blend?"

B-1 through B-99.9 are blends, not B-100.

Whoever wrote that letter needs to redress that error if it's not already 
sent. If a credit is being

sought for biodiesel, great. If it's being sought for blends, great. But
they're two separate animals and should be treated as precisely that.

It's a bit like calling a blend of 30% fruit concentrate and 70% corn syrup
"juice."  It's not, nor will it ever be.

Todd Swearingen

- Original Message - 
From: "Lyle Estill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 7:07 PM
Subject: [Biofuel] IRS Extension


Earlier today Kenneth Kron called for an extension of the IRS comment
period for their interpretation of the impending biodiesel tax credits.

It strikes me that a whole bunch of folks have been working very hard
at getting their comments in on time, and that no extension is
necessary.

Here is the sixth version of what may hit the IRS on time:


CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-153838-04)
Room 5203
Internal Revenue Service
POB 7604
Ben Franklin Station
Washington, DC 20044

Re: Biodiesel Excise Tax Credit and Biodiesel Income Tax Credit

Dear Commissioner:

I am writing on behalf of a broad constituency of organizations, which are
listed
below as signatories to this letter.  As you may know, the organizations
listed below are
stakeholders in the biodiesel industry throughout the nation, many of whom
have played a key role in advancing the use of neat biodiesel (100%
biodiesel or B100) as a renewable
transportation fuel.

In response to Internal Revenue Bulletin 2005-2, dated January 10, 2005,
we would
like to raise the following concerns:

1. B100 should be eligible for the Excise Tax Credit under Section 6426
2. All biodiesel blends should be eligible for the Excise Tax Credit
3. The definition of a "retail sale" for tax and credit purposes should be
consistent
4. The Biodiesel Income Tax Credit should be able to be carried forward
5. Calculation of the credit for Agri-biodiesel and all other biodiesel
should be clarified
6. Section 4041(a)(1) tax should not be imposed on a biodiesel mixture

B100 should be eligible for the Excise Tax Credit under Section 6426

We understand that the Service has initially interpreted Section 6426 in a
manner that
would exclude B100 form the Excise Tax Credit.  We believe that
interpretation is
unfortunate for several reasons and respectfully request that the Service
take a more expansive interpretation of Section 6426.

We believe the spirit of the Biodiesel Excise Tax Credit created by the
American Jobs
Creation Act of 2004 is to encourage growth of the biodiesel industry
through financial
incentives which bring the cost of biodiesel down for the consumer.  The
most direct and effective way to reduce the cost of biodiesel to consumers
and encourage growth of the biodiesel industry is for the Excise Tax
Credit to apply to all blends of biodiesel up to and including B100.




We believe the Service should broadly interpret the reference to
"Biodiesel Mixture
Credit" in Section 6426(c) to include all biodiesel blends from B1 to
B100.  The common
terminology in the industry is to refer to blends of biodiesel – B20, B50,
B100; similar to grades of gasoline – regular, unleaded, premium. Since
biodiesel is inherently a blended mixture, it seems appropriate that the
Service broadly interpret "mixture" to include all biodiesel blends
including B100.

We further believe the Service should take an expansive interpretation
Section 6426(a)
so that it includes B100 as eligible for the Excise Tax Credit.  Section
6426(a) that states
"There shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by Section
4081 an amount equal to . . ."  As was outlined in Rev. Rul. 2002-76,
biodiesel is taxed pursuant to Section 4041(a)(1).  Section 4041(a)(1)
imposes tax on any liquid other than gasoline sold for use or used as a
fuel in a diesel-powered highway vehicle, unless tax was imposed on the
liquid by Section 4081 and not credited or refunded.  Section
4041(a)(1)(C) provides that "the rate of the tax imposed by this paragraph
(4041(a)(1)) shall be the rate of tax specified in section 4081(a)(2)(A)
on diesel fuel which is in effect at the time of such sale or use".  Thus,
the biodiesel excise tax imposed by Section 4041(a)(1) is identical to the
excise tax imposed by 4081 and thus should qualify for the Excise Tax
Credit.

The most unfortunate implication of the possibility of B100 not qualifying
for the
Excise Tax Credit is the disincentive this would provide to non-income tax
paying entities such as 501(c)(3)s, municipalities, and state government
agencies.  After talking to Renee
Kramer at the Service, we understand that government agencies are subject
to the diesel excise tax in some cases and not in others and that
501(c)(3)s are generally subject to the diesel excise tax, but not always.
If our understanding is correct, we are concerned that unless the Excise
Tax Credit is available for B100 these non-incom

Re: [Biofuel] IRS Extension

[Greg Harbican]

That may be, but, in many cases people are still finding about such an
important subject.

In many cases, there has been to many cases that are important, with some if
not many things left unsaid, because 'someone' decided that the subject
didn't need that much discussion.

>
> It's obvious from the review period and lack of extensive publication
> that they did not plan to hear from many of us,

What if it is true, they it was not as widely publicized as it could have
been, so that fewer people would be able to participate?It wouldn't be
the first time, and it will not be the last, that this tactic was used.

Greg H.


- Original Message - 
From: "Lyle Estill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 17:07
Subject: [Biofuel] IRS Extension



It strikes me that a whole bunch of folks have been working very hard
at getting their comments in on time, and that no extension is
necessary.



___
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] Status (biofuel@wwia.org)

[aleksander . kac]

Mail Delivery System - This mail contains binary characters

- failed message -
TAV)&acxJCä,en4fzMQver6ydaBß-rsR(%fü_F-öf+
Vlar!3N&?Cw:bPPFLytD.khISZ(gSU*Wj?x2cp5DEo~ü
3zrV~XKü'pT&XEH'g#QGö:?PGm.w0M'bD9OGD86K>ßW
wAEoNs>f!lzDZx2L9LBNh4)&xbyddfMXGQV&_ädrChPY4h
->?

The message has been sent as a binary attachment.


___
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] IRS Extension -- B100 as a blend

[Kenneth Kron]

Does anyone have an idea as to when 100% Biodiesel achieved notariety 
as a

"blend?"

B-1 through B-99.9 are blends, not B-100.

Whoever wrote that letter needs to redress that error if it's not 
already sent. If a credit is being

sought for biodiesel, great. If it's being sought for blends, great. But
they're two separate animals and should be treated as precisely that.

It's a bit like calling a blend of 30% fruit concentrate and 70% corn 
syrup

"juice."  It's not, nor will it ever be.

Todd Swearingen


Some of reasons it makes sense in this instance are as follows (some of 
these are my own interpretation some came from the draftees of the 
response).


1) The standard test for blending gives you a number with an error 
margin of 1% so B99 is between B98 & B100, B100 could be B99 or B101 :^).
2) ASTM-D675 is for biodiesel as a "blended stock", this could possibly 
have caused confusion in the creating of the legislation.
3) Enforcement is much more complicated if you have to make sure that 
petro was actually blended with bio and what if you're running B99 and 
the test says you're running B100 do they reject your application for 
the tax rebate?  So what this group is saying is that
4) Biodiesel should get a level playing field with petrodiesel no matter 
how it's used
5) The cost of verifying that someone is actually blending is worth the 
value as the vast majority of the BD sold is blended at or below B20 and 
the Jobs Creation act talks about blending.
6) We should not enact laws that will be invalidated by technology the 
specifics of biodiesel usage which are dependent on engine technology, 
which will change.


--
Kenneth Kron
President Bay Area Biofuel
http://www.bayareabiofuel.com/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: 415-867-8067
What you can do, or dream you can do, begin it!
Boldness has genius, power and magic in it.
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe .


___
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] Creation Care - What Would Jesus Drive

[MH]

 Though I haven't noticed the topic about biofuels yet
 according to Creation Care the references from past
 articles on this list may spur a interest in
 http://whatwouldjesusdrive.org  

 What Jesus Would Drive 
   "Editor's note:
   The following is a series of articles by the
   Evangelical Environmental Network and Creation Care magazine,
   exploring decisions facing all who buy and drive automobiles.
   This first article explores the character of Jesus.
   Subsequent articles will consider
   health issues, peace and security issues, global warming and
   recommended actions for readers to consider."  

 Thinking About What Jesus Would Drive
 by Creation Care. 11-22-2002.
 http://www.thegoodsteward.com/article.php3?articleID=1342 
 Choosing your vehicle is a moral decision

 Thinking About What Jesus Would Drive, Part 2
 by Creation Care. 11-27-2002.
 http://www.thegoodsteward.com/article.php3?articleID=1354 
 There are health factors to consider

 What Would Jesus Drive - Part 3
 by Creation Care. 12-07-2002.
 http://www.thegoodsteward.com/article.php3?articleID=1366 
 National security among the considerations

 What Would Jesus Drive - Part 4
 by Creation Care. 12-16-2002.
 http://www.thegoodsteward.com/article.php3?articleID=1378 
 Global warming a critical question to consider
 Today we in the U.S. are driving much more than
 we were in years past, and our driving is having
 harmful consequences. Consider these facts. 

 What Would Jesus Drive - Conclusion
 by Creation Care. 12-23-2002.
 http://www.thegoodsteward.com/article.php3?articleID=1390 
 Actions suggested 
 What transportation choices would Jesus choose?
 The following action suggestions are based upon
 Jesus' teaching of the Great Commandments and the
 Golden Rule in light of current transportation impacts.
___
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] Creation Care - What Would Jesus Drive

[Keith Addison]

Isn't it a bit like asking which TV program Jesus would watch? Or 
Mohammed or Gautama.


But I guess it gets the point across.

Best wishes

Keith




Though I haven't noticed the topic about biofuels yet
according to Creation Care the references from past
articles on this list may spur a interest in
http://whatwouldjesusdrive.org

What Jesus Would Drive
  "Editor's note:
  The following is a series of articles by the
  Evangelical Environmental Network and Creation Care magazine,
  exploring decisions facing all who buy and drive automobiles.
  This first article explores the character of Jesus.
  Subsequent articles will consider
  health issues, peace and security issues, global warming and
  recommended actions for readers to consider."

Thinking About What Jesus Would Drive
by Creation Care. 11-22-2002.
http://www.thegoodsteward.com/article.php3?articleID=1342
Choosing your vehicle is a moral decision

Thinking About What Jesus Would Drive, Part 2
by Creation Care. 11-27-2002.
http://www.thegoodsteward.com/article.php3?articleID=1354
There are health factors to consider

What Would Jesus Drive - Part 3
by Creation Care. 12-07-2002.
http://www.thegoodsteward.com/article.php3?articleID=1366
National security among the considerations

What Would Jesus Drive - Part 4
by Creation Care. 12-16-2002.
http://www.thegoodsteward.com/article.php3?articleID=1378
Global warming a critical question to consider
Today we in the U.S. are driving much more than
we were in years past, and our driving is having
harmful consequences. Consider these facts.

What Would Jesus Drive - Conclusion
by Creation Care. 12-23-2002.
http://www.thegoodsteward.com/article.php3?articleID=1390
Actions suggested
What transportation choices would Jesus choose?
The following action suggestions are based upon
Jesus' teaching of the Great Commandments and the
Golden Rule in light of current transportation impacts.


___
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] Fw: reply to original post...

[Keith Addison]

> Anibal, please tell us just what you did.
>
> Did you check the oil for water content?
yes  i checked the wvo for water content.. it had a lot of water.. so i
boiled it off...
took a long time though...  and a lot of smoke/steam... coming from the
wvo..
the oil crackles as sson as you turn on the heat..


Best not to boil it - take Todd's good advice:
http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20050207/005731.html
[Biofuel] Fw: reply to original post...

More advice on dewatering here:
http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make.html#biodwvo


> Why do you suspect it might have been too much catalyst?
>
 i suspected it was to much catalist because of the soap formation.. isnt
soap. the result of  fatty acid + water + lye?
>
> Did you titrate the oil? What was the result? Did you double-check it?
>
 i titrated the oil 4 times... with ethanol, methanol... the only factor
that could be interfering with my titration is that the oil gels when
dropped
into the alcohol... and is very hard to mix with the alcochol..
i titrated to 5 ml...6ml... until reaching ph 9? 5 ml will leave the ph at
7-8 and with 6 ml.. 9


I think you need to pay a lot of attention to this, or you'll be 
working in the dark.


First, use 99+% isopropanol for titration, not ethanol or methanol. Re this:


that could be interfering with my titration is that the oil gels when
dropped
into the alcohol... and is very hard to mix with the alcochol..


"Warm the beaker gently by standing it in some hot water, stir until 
all the oil dissolves in the alcohol and the mixture turns clear."

-- From "Basic titration:
http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make2.html#titrate


> It really pays off being extra-careful with titration, as well as
> spending a bit of money of need be on accurate measuring equipment:
> flasks, syringes, pipettes, accurate scales, and a good pH meter if
> you can afford it (better than phenolphthalein - and DON'T use phenol
> red!).

i am using ph hydrion solution.. a ph indicator sokution. i have a hanah
electronic ph.. but i need to calibrate it first,,
here in mexico it is very hard to find  many things.,,like buffer solution
to calibrate,,,


It must be available from laboratory supply companies. Measuring pH 
is such a common requirement in so many different fields.



my scale  is not very accurate...it is a kitchen scale sensitive to  1
gram,,


You can't do this with inaccurate scales. You can check the accuracy 
(or lack of accuracy) of your scales with new (mint) coins, usually 
they have exact weights. I think you should check the accuracy of all 
your equipment.


Why didn't you start with virgin oil (new, unused)? Just buy a litre 
of cooking oil/salad oil and do this:

"Where do I start?"
http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make.html#start

Then, once you've got that right and you can wash it without 
difficulty etc, you'll have a much better idea what to expect when 
you move on to WVO.


For instance, I doubt the stuff you put in your generator was 
biodiesel. Maybe it was, maybe not.



> How much lye did you use? Was it pure and fresh?
>
i used as pure as i can manage lye.. i got a big bag of PELS caustic soda
pellets from a chemical distributor..i have stored it in a hdpe2 bucket with
a airtight seal..
> as for how much lye i used...there wer 2 batches the first one the one
i posted about..
i was making a BIG mistake.. with my
measurments.. and for the batch this original post was about,,, i can't
remember very well.. but it was about 20 g ..per liter!!! it was that thick
paste from  carl's jr...
it gave me about 50% biodiesel and 50% solid  graese soap disgusting stuff
on the bottom... the biodiesel was much clearer thant the second batch
now that i corrected my measurments,i noticed an interestin phenomenon...
the first batch i washed.. the one where i used alot of lye..  and used it
in my generator with no problems.. with a little bit of dino..
that reaction... gave some pretty clear biodiesel...


Clarity isn't important until you've washed it and settled it. It's 
not a good indicator that the process went well and the results are 
good.



about 50 % solids on
the bottom,and a  gell soap on top..
yesterday i made a batch using proper titration results...


Well, maybe.


i got about 20% glycerin on the bottom, a little
soapy layer with water in the middle and abour 80% biodiesel but very
very dark
> How much methanol did you use?
i kept methanol at 20%
>
> How did you mix the methanol and the lye?
yes sodium methoxide were completely dissolved before mixing.. in a open
hdpe bucket...with a metal paint mixer attached to a drill.. not
in a closed container .


You may have lost quite a lot of methanol through evaporation as the 
lye heated it up.


Do it this way:
"Methoxide the easy way" (also the safe way)
http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_aleksnew.html#easymeth


> Did you heat the oil? To what temperature?
the oil was heated to 130 f
>
> How did you agitate it? For 

[Biofuel] (no subject)

[ccm]

Dear Sir/Madam,

How can I get out of left glycerin left in biodiesel.

Regards,

cuneyt

___
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] Glycerin soap making

[Legal Eagle]

- Original Message - 
From: "JD2005" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 5:20 PM
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Glycerin soap making



Thank you for this thread.   It is one of the best threads at the moment
because it is constructive.

When you make boifuel you are left with alot of glycerin we all know that.
What we don't know is what this glycerin can be utilised for.

Also if the glycerin is from a wvo reaction to make rem or ree whether it 
is

suitable for making soap or not.


Yes, maybe, and that is the experimenting part :-)
There is a lot of info at JtF about soap making too, have you snooped it ?
Also about seperating the FFA's from the glycerine.
http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_glycsep.html
http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_glycerin.html



JD2005


Presumeably lye water would be realy an ideal method of making soap from
glycerin.


___
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] Creation Care - What Would Jesus Drive

[Legal Eagle]

Actually the question is moot and quite academic. One merely has to apply 
the lessons that Jesus taught to come to within a reasonable and 
sufficiently precise answer, but what is the point ?
If we follow what it is He taught then the answer is : exactly what we are 
doing.Not only is it in keeping with the protectorate of the planet but also 
in keeping with "love thy neighbour" in that if you love him (her) you will 
not want to do anything that will harm him (her) and that includes mucking 
up the environment that we all must share.
It all come around to the same circle of consideration for others that 
fosters the same response (or should) and the circle self propagates. A 
whole lot like "you reap what you sow" and the Eastern equivalent of "good 
or bad Karma", "what goes around comes around" ect. all based in the same 
truth.
Sustainability in all things was the original plan for Creation, as clearly 
seen in the self rejuvenative properties of all life forms. It wasn't until 
greed and the other lovely (not) attributes of those not so inclined to 
share anything with anyone that it started going south, and so it continues.
So, what *would* Jesus drive, if anything ? What is most in keeping with the 
basic foundation of all of what He taught is essentially the same question? 
Now apply it to everything else as well. It really is quite a dumb question 
once you think about it.

Luc




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] IRS Extension -- B100 as a blend

[Appal Energy]

1) The standard test for blending gives you a number with an error margin 
of 1% so B99 is between B98 & B100, B100 could be B99 or B101 :^).


So B-100 could actually be B-101 when tested?  :-)

And it would be perfectly acceptable to sell B-1 and it actually not have 
any biodiesel in it at all?


You're pulling everyone's leg, right?

2) ASTM-D675 is for biodiesel as a "blended stock", this could possibly 
have caused confusion in the creating of the legislation.


I bellieve the matter at hand is whether or not there is any confusion on 
the part of those who drafted either D-6751 or the proposed rule. See 
paragraph 6 beneath your line item #5 below.


3) Enforcement is much more complicated if you have to make sure that 
petro was actually blended with bio and what if you're running B99 and the 
test says you're running B100 do they reject your application for the tax 
rebate?


Again, this is a rather specious arguement. You state that in the standard 
blending test there is a permitted margin of error of + or - 1%. Since when 
have enforcement agencies penalized distributors for giving consumers more 
of what they paid for? The credit is for what's stipulated on paper. The 
test simply reflects that the paperwork is correct, or "correct" within the 
margin of permitted error.


The founding problem is what needs to be corrected, not the ensuing 
consequences. The margin of error should have no minus factor. Next thing 
someone's going to say  is that "B-Zero" or "B-Negative Something" are 
blends because they fall within a minus 1% margin of error.


5) The cost of verifying that someone is actually blending is worth the 
value as the vast majority of the BD sold is blended at or below B20 and 
the Jobs Creation act talks about blending.


I wasn't aware that anyone was saying otherwise. Without 
oversight/enforcement there will be entire herds of blenders that will 
shortchange consumers - no different than with any other liquid fuel.


The simple solution? Regulate federally at the source, not mid-stream. Give 
the credit to those who actually produce B-100 and let the cost reductions 
work their way through the distribution system to the end user. No 
enforcement issues, or at least not many, with "blending violations" at the 
point of B-100 purchase. Certainly distributors aren't going to sit on B-100 
inventories after they purchase them.


Enacting the credit at the manufacturing source also reduces the overall 
bureaucratic nightmare and cost of implementing the rule as it's proposed. 
Better to file the paperwork for one manufacturer than maintain 1,000 files 
for a gaggle of distributors, at least at the federal level. State oversite 
and enforcement agencies already address the sprawling tiers of distributors 
and the quality of their fuels.


On the other hand, increased investment of resources to manage this 
nightmare may be exactly what is desired by some interests in the government 
sector. Implementing more human and material resources to effect the rule 
inherantly dictates increased tax revenues.


What was it that Edward Abbey said? "Growth for growth's sake is the 
ideology of the cancer cell."


Then there's that tiny little matter of how D-6751 came about to designate 
B-100 as a "blend stock." All rather convenient how the petroleum industry 
suddenly became inextricable from the distribution, if not viable market 
existance, of biodiesel. And this new rule only re-enforces that construct. 
You don't get your credit if you don't blend with petroleum. You don't blend 
with petroleum unless you get into the petroleum business, or peculiarly 
enough are already in the petroleum business.


Even more peculiar is exactly who benefits from the tax credit.

B-100 manufacturers? Only as the last recipient in the chain of "trickle 
down economics," most peculiarly well after the end-user as product demand 
may or may not increase.


Petroleum distributors? As fast as their little butts can fill out the 
forms, lick the stamp and rush to the mailbox every filing period (or send 
the electronic mail).


The end-user/consumer? Not necessarily. There is no reason to believe that 
any large percentage of the tax credit will be conveyed by the distributors 
and be reflected by the pump price.


What will all too frequently occur in the latter instance is precisely what 
occurs daily in the sale of non-taxable, off-road, distillate fuel oils. 
Distributors claim a disproportionally high cost of making dyed, off-road 
fuel available (to be read "increased manufacturing and infrastructure 
costs"), and then pass only a fraction of the zero tax level on to the 
consumer.


This is all very tidy and people should not only see it for what it is but 
express it so.


6) We should not enact laws that will be invalidated by technology the 
specifics of biodiesel usage which are dependent on engine technology, 
which will change.


???
You lost me on this one.
How will the tax credit rule be i

Re: [Biofuel] Creation Care - What Would Jesus Drive

[mark manchester]

Luc, MH, Keith, 
Guys, this is exciting!  (Scary too.)

>The New Testament clearly proclaims that as the Second Person of the Trinity,
Christ created the universe and continues to sustain it. As such, all of
creation belongs to Him. He is Creator, Sustainer, and Owner. (Heb. 1:2-3;
Col. 1:16-17, 19; Jn. 1:1-4.)

>Therefore, pollution harms His creation

If we have moved on from the old ball and chain, that US politics is married
to entertainment...   to US politics is now pontificating religion (!) well
then!  Yay!  

While normally I would run terrified from the room at the onset of this
thinking, can it not be useful?  Make ecological stewardship part of strong,
evangelical, mid-American fist-pounding?  Oh, I'm going all Margaret Atwood,
"Handmaid's Tale", doesn't it just make you shiver.

Don't shoot me, I have 4 children.

Okay, sorry, MH, I'll read your many links properly.  Forgive my Sunday
afternoon silliness.
Jesse



> From: "Legal Eagle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 11:54:13 -0500
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Creation Care - What Would Jesus Drive
> 
> G'day all;
> Actually the question is moot and quite academic. One merely has to apply
> the lessons that Jesus taught to come to within a reasonable and
> sufficiently precise answer, but what is the point ?
> If we follow what it is He taught then the answer is : exactly what we are
> doing.Not only is it in keeping with the protectorate of the planet but also
> in keeping with "love thy neighbour" in that if you love him (her) you will
> not want to do anything that will harm him (her) and that includes mucking
> up the environment that we all must share.
> It all come around to the same circle of consideration for others that
> fosters the same response (or should) and the circle self propagates. A
> whole lot like "you reap what you sow" and the Eastern equivalent of "good
> or bad Karma", "what goes around comes around" ect. all based in the same
> truth.
> Sustainability in all things was the original plan for Creation, as clearly
> seen in the self rejuvenative properties of all life forms. It wasn't until
> greed and the other lovely (not) attributes of those not so inclined to
> share anything with anyone that it started going south, and so it continues.
> So, what *would* Jesus drive, if anything ? What is most in keeping with the
> basic foundation of all of what He taught is essentially the same question?
> Now apply it to everything else as well. It really is quite a dumb question
> once you think about it.
> Luc
> 
> 
> 
>> 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/

[Biofuel] dragster facts-this is fun!

[Busyditch]

Clear Day


NHRA Fun Facts 



1. Under full throttle, a dragster engine consumes 1-1/2 gallons of nitro fuel 
per
   second. To put that into perspective that is the same rate of fuel 
consumption as a
   fully loaded 747 in flight, but with 4 times the energy release per volume.
2. The supercharger takes more power to drive it than a stock Hemi makes.
3. With nearly 3000 cubic feet of air being rammed in by the supercharger on
   overdrive, the fuel mixture is compressed into nearly-solid form before 
ignition.
   Cylinders run on the verge of hydraulic lock!
4. Dual magnetos apply 44 amps to each spark plug. This is equivalent to the 
output
   of an arc welder inside each cylinder.
5. At stoichiometric (exact) 1.7|1 air/fuel mixture (for nitro) the flame front 
of nitro
   methane measures 7050 degrees F.
6. Nitro methane burns yellow. The spectacular white flame seen above the 
stacks of a
   dragster during a night race is actually burning hydrogen, as it is being 
dissociated
   from atmospheric water vapor by the searing hot exhaust gases.
7. Spark plug electrodes are totally consumed during one pass down the track. 
In the
   3 or 4 seconds it takes to get halfway through the quarter! the engine is 
tinseling
   from compression and the glow of the exhaust valves at 1400 degrees F. The
   engine can now only be killed by shutting off the fuel flow.
8. If spark momentarily fails early in the run, unburned nitro builds up so 
fast in the
   cylinders that once spark is restored the explosion is so violent that the 
cylinder
   heads can be blown off the block in pieces and the block can blow in half.
9. Dragsters twist the crank (torsionally) so far (20 degrees in the big end of 
the track)
   that sometimes cam lobes are ground offset on purpose from front to rear to 
rephase
   the valve timing somewhere closer to synchronization with the pistons.
10. To exceed 3000 mph in 4.5 seconds, dragsters must accelerate at an average 
of 4
   G's. But if they reach 200 MPH well before 1/2 track the pressure on the 
driver is
   closer to 8G's.
11.  Drivers shut off the fuel before the finish line or even double-chutes 
will not stop
the car.
12. If all the racing teams' equipment is paid off, the crew works for free and 
for once
NOTHING blows up, then each run only costs $1000,00 per second.
13. Dragsters reach over 300 mph before you have read this sentence.

___
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] Soap

[Pieter Koole]

Hi all,
The more I read the messages about soap making, the more I realize that I
don't understand the principle of soap making.
Can anybody tell me (or give a link) what exactly is saponification ? Do
only the FFA's saponify, or the total oil ?
If this saponification is well known, why isn't it possible to find out how
much lye is needed in an unknown oil (mixture) like WVO ? If somebody ever
found out
how much lye one needs to saponify (is that the right word ?) for example
olive oil, how did he or she do that ? Can't we replicate that method with a
mixture of used oils ?
Mike wrote that coconut oil could dry out the skin if used to much. Why does
it do that ? What happens ? Why doesn't olive oil do that ? Somewhere I also
read, that glycerin moisturizes the skin, but if one would use to much in
soap, it would work the other way round and dry out the skin. Why is that ?

Met  dank en vriendelijke groet,
Pieter Koole
Netherlands

- Original Message -
From: "Anti-Fossil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 3:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Glycerine soap making


> I have been making my own soap for about 14 years now.  The only real
> "secret" that I have found in regards to fantastic foaming action of your
> soaps is the inclusion of coconut oil (c.o.) in your recipe.  I am aware
> that a few of the more popular websites, and even books written on the
> subject, warn against using too high a percentage of c.o. because of its
> drying effects on the skin.  However, I keep the percentage of c.o. in my
> soap between 20% and 40%, and haven't had any problems with excessively
dry
> skin.  Common sense must also come in to play of course.  If you start
with
> dry skin, you would definitely want to stay on lower end of those
> percentages with c.o., and increase the hydrating oils like olive, and
> settle for less foaming soap.
>
> AntiFossil
> Mike Krafka USA
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Phillip Wolfe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 12:21 PM
> Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Glycerine soap making
>
>
> > Dear Legal Eagle,
> >
> > There is an industrial and commercial method of using
> > refined glycerin for the manufacturing of natural
> > soaps and detergents (and the harsher soaps too).
> >
> > As JFT advocates, there is a personal quest too -
> > making your own stuff.
> >
> > In the industrial and commercial world there is a
> > worldwide "glut" of glcyerin! compared to a couple
> > years ago. I've been following this recently.
> >
> > But on the personal level, me thinks the idea of
> > making homegrown soaps is pretty neat.
> >
> > It can be Family get together like making ice cream!
> >
> > Take care and good luck!
> >
> > --- Legal Eagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > What to do with the copious amounts of glycerine by
> > > product ? We can follow
> > > through with the seperation of the components an get
> > > a close to pure
> > > glycerine, providing we have a market for it, or we
> > > can use it to make soap.
> > > JtF has a few good articles on that too.
> > > http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_glycerin.html
> > > I am in the process of experiementing with a couple
> > > recipes that, I hope,
> > > will give a fairly decent usable product. I have
> > > used some as a body soap
> > > and it works great, however very little foamong
> > > action and that is a problem
> > > in most circles, so I am trying three diffenrent
> > > approaches.
> > > 1) 100ml water with 10gr NaOH per liter of glycerine
> > > by product
> > > 2) 150ml water with 15gr NaOH per liter of glycerine
> > > by product
> > > 30 200ml water with 20gr NaOH per liter of glycerine
> > > by product
> > >
> > > Firstly the methanol must be removed/recovered by
> > > raising the temps above
> > > 65C (148.5F) and then the NaOH disolved into a
> > > little more than warm water.
> > > Once the glycerine has cooled a bit, to about 43C
> > > (110F) then mix in the
> > > water/NaOH while stirring for about a minute or two.
> > > Pour into a mold and
> > > let settle. How long will be subject of another post
> > > when I have it figured
> > > out :-)
> > > The first one has had two weeks to settle out
> > > anything that was going to do
> > > that and it did. Some gelatenous substance caked a
> > > portion of the hardened
> > > glycerine and had to be scrapped off, but the result
> > > was still solid bars.
> > > The second and third recipes are yet to be finished
> > > however they already
> > > show more potential, primarily the third which began
> > > solidifying almost
> > > immediately and shows good promise.
> > > I shall keep you posted as to the success/failure of
> > > this as we go along. No
> > > sense throwing away a perfectly good product if it
> > > can be used eh? I am
> > > determined that it will.
> > > Luc
> > >
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Biofuel mailing list
> > > [EMAIL PRO

Re: [Biofuel] For cuneyt (no subject)

[Keith Addison]

Dear Sir/Madam,

How can I get out of left glycerin left in biodiesel.


Can you explain a bit more? Do you mean there's still glycerin in 
your biodiesel? There will always be some, but the various national 
standards set an upper limit of 0.25% by mass of total glycerol, 
including triglycerides, diglycerides, monoglycerides and free 
glycerol. Not very much! See:


National standards for biodiesel
http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_yield2.html#biodstds

Washing will remove the free glycerin, but not the others. After the 
process, the glycerin sinks to the bottom. After minimum 12 hours 
settling time, you can drain it off from the bottom of the reactor, 
or syphon the biodiesel off from the top. If you're getting some of 
the settled glycerin with the separated biodiesel you'll have trouble 
washing the biodiesel, so separate it carefully. If you've done all 
that and there's still glycerin or glycerides in the biodiesel then 
the processing needs attention. Titration, the amount of methanol 
used, agitation and processing time, and temperature control are all 
possible problem areas.


If this is the problem, please tell us which method you used, what 
equipment, what quantities of materials, what kind of oil, and 
exactly how you did it.


Hope this helps.

Best wishes

Keith



Regards,

cuneyt


___
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] Soap

[Appal Energy]

Some definitions:
http://www.lipid.co.uk/maintest.html
http://www.snowdriftfarm.com/fatproperties2.html

A cursory explanation of saponification:
http://chemistry.about.com/library/glossary/bldef825.htm


Do
only the FFA's saponify, or the total oil ?


Presuming the amount of caustic in the reaction is sufficient to match the 
number of fatty acid carbo chains in the oil mixture, all the carbon chains 
of the tri-, di- and mono-glycerides snap off and bond with the caustic to 
make soap. If FFAs are present  in the mix (FFAs are carbon chains that have 
already been snapped off a mono-, di- or triglyceride) they immediately 
attach to the metal ion (potassium, sodium, etc.) to form soap as well.


Each carbon chain from a fat or oil molecule is a fatty acid. It's called a 
FFA when it's roaming around unattached to anything else. It's a soap when 
attached to a metal ion (potassium, sodium, calcium, magnesium, aluminum, 
etc.). It's a glyceride when a glycerol molecule is still attached to it. 
Mono-glycerides are one fatty-acid (one carbon chain) attached to a glycerol 
molecule. Di-glycerides are two fatty-acids (two carbon chains) attached to 
one glycerol molecule. Tri-glycerides are three fatty-acids (three carbon 
chains) attached to one glycerol molecule.


One thing you  need to be aware of is that all oils and fats possess 
different types of fatty acid chains in varying combinations and ratios.


An oil or fat is defined by what ratios of particular fatty acids exist 
within its entire makeup. For instance, palm oil is comprized of 
approximately 42.7% oleic fatty acids, 40.1% linoleic fatty acids, 10.3 
stearic fatty acids and 1.4 myristic fatty acids. Within that ratio, a 
single tri-glyceride of palm oil might have one myristic fatty acid (one 
"myristic" carbon chain), one stearic fatty acid (one "stearic" carbon 
chain) and one oleic fatty acid (one "oleic" carbon chain). The 
tri-glyceride next to it might have a completely different set of fatty 
acids or a different ratio of some of the same.


A completely different oil will have a completely different ratio of fatty 
acids. Some of those acids are largely universal in all fats and oils 
Others are found only in a specific few or perhaps single oil.


A short list of fatty acids include arachidic, behenic, capric, caproic, 
caprylic, lauric, lignoceric, linoleic, linolenic, monoethenoic, myristic, 
myristoleic, oleic, palmitic, palmitioleic, ricinoleic, stearic.


Here is a chart that gives sap values and an idea of what the saponified 
characteristics of some oils are.

http://www.tlcsoaps.com/oilsapval.htm

There are other charts out there. Just Google "sap value" or "saponification 
chart."


If you can locate a copy of "The Soapmaker's Companion," by Susan Miller 
Cavitch, published by Storey Books, you'll find most of your answers to 
soapmaking, a vast percentage of which are equally applicable to making 
biodiesel.


It's well worth the coin.

Todd Swearingen

- Original Message - 
From: "Pieter Koole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 1:48 PM
Subject: [Biofuel] Soap



Hi all,
The more I read the messages about soap making, the more I realize that I
don't understand the principle of soap making.
Can anybody tell me (or give a link) what exactly is saponification ? Do
only the FFA's saponify, or the total oil ?
If this saponification is well known, why isn't it possible to find out 
how

much lye is needed in an unknown oil (mixture) like WVO ? If somebody ever
found out
how much lye one needs to saponify (is that the right word ?) for example
olive oil, how did he or she do that ? Can't we replicate that method with 
a

mixture of used oils ?
Mike wrote that coconut oil could dry out the skin if used to much. Why 
does
it do that ? What happens ? Why doesn't olive oil do that ? Somewhere I 
also

read, that glycerin moisturizes the skin, but if one would use to much in
soap, it would work the other way round and dry out the skin. Why is that 
?


Met  dank en vriendelijke groet,
Pieter Koole
Netherlands

- Original Message -
From: "Anti-Fossil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 3:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Glycerine soap making



I have been making my own soap for about 14 years now.  The only real
"secret" that I have found in regards to fantastic foaming action of your
soaps is the inclusion of coconut oil (c.o.) in your recipe.  I am aware
that a few of the more popular websites, and even books written on the
subject, warn against using too high a percentage of c.o. because of its
drying effects on the skin.  However, I keep the percentage of c.o. in my
soap between 20% and 40%, and haven't had any problems with excessively

dry

skin.  Common sense must also come in to play of course.  If you start

with

dry skin, you would definitely want to stay on lower end of those
percentages with c.o., and increase the hydratin

Re: [Biofuel] Glycerin soap making

[Legal Eagle]

- Original Message - 
From: "JD2005" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 11:15 PM
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Glycerin soap making



Ok Thanks,

The burning idea with the milk cartons looks really good to us here. 
We're
burning wood and stuff on an old oxfordshire range here at the moment. 
I
wouldn't put one on untill we'd got a really hot fire though because of 
the

poison fumes it can cause.Also you stand stand to lose methanol or
ethanol that way unless you separate that out.


You don't lose anything as you leave it in there on purpose, it adds to the 
combustability of the glycerine "log".

Luc


The FFA separation with
some kind of expensive acid I reject on the grounds of expense.   Unless, 
I

could (I havn't got any methanol or a license for ethenol yet.) find a
market for the pure glycerin.

JD2005
- Original Message -
From:Legal Eagle

G'day JD;

Yes, maybe, and that is the experimenting part :-)
There is a lot of info at JtF about soap making too, have you snooped it 
?

Also about seperating the FFA's from the glycerine.
http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_glycsep.html
http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_glycerin.html

>
> JD2005
>
>
> Presumeably lye water would be realy an ideal method of making soap 
> from

> glycerin.
>
>




___
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] Creation Care - What Would Jesus Drive

[citizens]

> A donkey?
>
> Isn't it a bit like asking which TV program Jesus would watch? Or
> Mohammed or Gautama.

Sure. So why not spell it out for WUFV in 2006 and let us make a choice?

Jesus/Mohammed/Guatama would build _ features into their model
city because __

Z


> But I guess it gets the point across.
>
> Best wishes
>
> Keith
>
>
>
>> Though I haven't noticed the topic about biofuels yet
>> according to Creation Care the references from past
>> articles on this list may spur a interest in
>> http://whatwouldjesusdrive.org
>>
>> What Jesus Would Drive
>>   "Editor's note:
>>   The following is a series of articles by the
>>   Evangelical Environmental Network and Creation Care magazine,
>>   exploring decisions facing all who buy and drive automobiles.
>>   This first article explores the character of Jesus.
>>   Subsequent articles will consider
>>   health issues, peace and security issues, global warming and
>>   recommended actions for readers to consider."
>>
>> Thinking About What Jesus Would Drive
>> by Creation Care. 11-22-2002.
>> http://www.thegoodsteward.com/article.php3?articleID=1342
>> Choosing your vehicle is a moral decision
>>
>> Thinking About What Jesus Would Drive, Part 2
>> by Creation Care. 11-27-2002.
>> http://www.thegoodsteward.com/article.php3?articleID=1354
>> There are health factors to consider
>>
>> What Would Jesus Drive - Part 3
>> by Creation Care. 12-07-2002.
>> http://www.thegoodsteward.com/article.php3?articleID=1366
>> National security among the considerations
>>
>> What Would Jesus Drive - Part 4
>> by Creation Care. 12-16-2002.
>> http://www.thegoodsteward.com/article.php3?articleID=1378
>> Global warming a critical question to consider
>> Today we in the U.S. are driving much more than
>> we were in years past, and our driving is having
>> harmful consequences. Consider these facts.
>>
>> What Would Jesus Drive - Conclusion
>> by Creation Care. 12-23-2002.
>> http://www.thegoodsteward.com/article.php3?articleID=1390
>> Actions suggested
>> What transportation choices would Jesus choose?
>> The following action suggestions are based upon
>> Jesus' teaching of the Great Commandments and the
>> Golden Rule in light of current transportation impacts.
>
> ___
> 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] dragster facts-this is fun!

[Kirk McLoren]

 To exceed 3000 mph in 4.5 seconds, dragsters
> must accelerate at an average of 4
>G's. But if they reach 200 MPH well before 1/2
> track the pressure on the driver is
>closer to 8G's.

3000 mph x 5280 ft/mile = 15,840,000 feet per hour or
264,000 feet per minute or 4,400 feet per second.
If the acceleration is 4.5 seconds the acceleration
per second is 4,400/4.5 or 977.8 feet per second.
Since 1 g=32.2fps we see that 977.8/32.2 =30.37g's of
acceleration.

I think your velocity is way too high.

Kirk




--- Busyditch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Clear Day
> 
> 
> NHRA Fun Facts 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Under full throttle, a dragster engine consumes
> 1-1/2 gallons of nitro fuel per
>second. To put that into perspective that is the
> same rate of fuel consumption as a
>fully loaded 747 in flight, but with 4 times the
> energy release per volume.
> 2. The supercharger takes more power to drive it
> than a stock Hemi makes.
> 3. With nearly 3000 cubic feet of air being rammed
> in by the supercharger on
>overdrive, the fuel mixture is compressed into
> nearly-solid form before ignition.
>Cylinders run on the verge of hydraulic lock!
> 4. Dual magnetos apply 44 amps to each spark plug.
> This is equivalent to the output
>of an arc welder inside each cylinder.
> 5. At stoichiometric (exact) 1.7|1 air/fuel mixture
> (for nitro) the flame front of nitro
>methane measures 7050 degrees F.
> 6. Nitro methane burns yellow. The spectacular white
> flame seen above the stacks of a
>dragster during a night race is actually burning
> hydrogen, as it is being dissociated
>from atmospheric water vapor by the searing hot
> exhaust gases.
> 7. Spark plug electrodes are totally consumed during
> one pass down the track. In the
>3 or 4 seconds it takes to get halfway through
> the quarter! the engine is tinseling
>from compression and the glow of the exhaust
> valves at 1400 degrees F. The
>engine can now only be killed by shutting off the
> fuel flow.
> 8. If spark momentarily fails early in the run,
> unburned nitro builds up so fast in the
>cylinders that once spark is restored the
> explosion is so violent that the cylinder
>heads can be blown off the block in pieces and
> the block can blow in half.
> 9. Dragsters twist the crank (torsionally) so far
> (20 degrees in the big end of the track)
>that sometimes cam lobes are ground offset on
> purpose from front to rear to rephase
>the valve timing somewhere closer to
> synchronization with the pistons.
> 10. To exceed 3000 mph in 4.5 seconds, dragsters
> must accelerate at an average of 4
>G's. But if they reach 200 MPH well before 1/2
> track the pressure on the driver is
>closer to 8G's.
> 11.  Drivers shut off the fuel before the finish
> line or even double-chutes will not stop
> the car.
> 12. If all the racing teams' equipment is paid off,
> the crew works for free and for once
> NOTHING blows up, then each run only costs
> $1000,00 per second.
> 13. Dragsters reach over 300 mph before you have
> read this sentence.
> 
> ___
> 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!? 
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
___
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] dragster facts-this is fun!

[robert luis rabello]

3000 mph x 5280 ft/mile = 15,840,000 feet per hour or
264,000 feet per minute or 4,400 feet per second.
If the acceleration is 4.5 seconds the acceleration
per second is 4,400/4.5 or 977.8 feet per second.
Since 1 g=32.2fps we see that 977.8/32.2 =30.37g's of
acceleration.

I think your velocity is way too high.


	I agree.  Shouldn't it be 300 miles per hour?  Very few machines 
exceed the sound barrier, and far fewer 3 000 mph!



robert luis rabello
"The Edge of Justice"
Adventure for Your Mind
http://www.authorhouse.com/BookStore/ItemDetail.aspx?bookid=9782>

Ranger Supercharger Project Page
http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/


___
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] Glycerin soap making

[JD2005]

Thank you for this thread.   It is one of the best threads at the moment
because it is constructive.

When you make boifuel you are left with alot of glycerin we all know that.
What we don't know is what this glycerin can be utilised for.

Also if the glycerin is from a wvo reaction to make rem or ree whether it is
suitable for making soap or not.


JD2005


Presumeably lye water would be realy an ideal method of making soap from
glycerin.


___
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] dragster facts-this is fun!

[Busyditch]

You are both right, this is a typo. It should be 300 MPH
- Original Message - 
From: "robert luis rabello" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 5:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] dragster facts-this is fun!


> Kirk McLoren wrote:
> 
> 
> > 3000 mph x 5280 ft/mile = 15,840,000 feet per hour or
> > 264,000 feet per minute or 4,400 feet per second.
> > If the acceleration is 4.5 seconds the acceleration
> > per second is 4,400/4.5 or 977.8 feet per second.
> > Since 1 g=32.2fps we see that 977.8/32.2 =30.37g's of
> > acceleration.
> > 
> > I think your velocity is way too high.
> 
> I agree.  Shouldn't it be 300 miles per hour?  Very few machines 
> exceed the sound barrier, and far fewer 3 000 mph!
> 
> 
> robert luis rabello
> "The Edge of Justice"
> Adventure for Your Mind
> http://www.authorhouse.com/BookStore/ItemDetail.aspx?bookid=9782>
> 
> Ranger Supercharger Project Page
> http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Biorefinary ,Big blues and Globalization

[Pannir P.V]

Biorefinaries   is surly  less complex , small, tiny  than petroleum
oil very big refinaries, let  our young the chemical  and  other
engineers be prepare for this green  great  future of  biomass for
food, feed fuel, fertilizer  and  fine chemicals(natural product
medicine)
  Our biofuel  list is the major forum to promote this green
tecnology  and   is  not the place  where here  we promote  the
political views only as some one  may think
 Biofuel list is  nowadays  as someone misunderstood  that 
becoming  against  some political system  or  religious system  and  
Big Corporative marketing system
   I am   bring this  news here  because  this is not true as we all
know this   , but  I am sure that  what we all   want surely  and
agree  collectively here  is an  globalized  one world   where the 
globalized Village will be supported by our network  lending helping
hand  for  bio and people power , true democracy  for environmental 
protection where  including the Big Blues nations  small village  will
 have  it place too. Ruralization  with biorefinaries  is not means 
the technology of  the poor , but different  to the  Big  petro
refinery global  models
  Here in this new world  nothing is isolated  as we all are  in one
world moving to toward seein the  one TV news  only all the same  ,
but different language .What no one want here is no  the  war , but 
wish to promote integration  as I understand  with my  long time
participation here

  Here  surely  we the  list members  do  integrate political,
cultural , ecological  and of curse technological issues too.

  In this context , I express  my sincere  thanks  to our list  group
leader  Keith  courage  and determination  not to eliminate  freedom
of expression   even though it  is related with Powerful Big  Blues 
and Big Corporations leading to several legal  issues   , after all 
he  is not the one promoting this , but the responsibility is of the
one who  write ,send it and surely is not the Biofuel list that can be
blamed for the same.

 Some outsider  may  feel and be  unhappy informing that  our list
move nowadys  from technological  to political only. Here we do have
lot of  biodiversity  and some of our member
can freely express their  views .We do have several members from 
different countries wit  lot of biodiversity  and I am sure  that they
 can surely defend  any unfair attack if it is true.

Our list is not  made  to make  an war against  any nation  and not t
surely against  Big petro refineries , but  surely   focus  thoughts
to the   new biorefinarinary  inovative  model of decentralised ,
democratically  based  systems  globalized  village with small
Biorefinaries  to give people  biopower.If we cant defend this power
of the biofuel ,then who will do it as this is clearly against the 
interest of the  very  very Big Blues  Multinational  Corporation and 
they do  not belong to any nation but are there every where.
  As  native Indian  and  bees  collectively builds , each Village
Biorefinaries  are  differently  and collectivelly  build by the
people and for the people without the help of  BigBlues .Our network
need to be  the catalyst   to accelerate the process and not to allow 
the Big Blues mecanical and chemical  sytemswallowing all the 
small ecologically natural agricultural system But the the small
biorefinary  is surely  need tyo compete  with  Big blues. This is
reality  fight between  Big and small  not  betwen one nation against 
but  promoted with few people..Let us have courage  to stop this
unfare war  to make the ecolocal  equilibrium  and peace, biofuel ,
biorefinaries  for all


 All written here  is  surly my personel view, need  not be
confused with  any national or anti national  or Biofuel list  views
or the Keith  views .

  I thank again here that we   all can  not only express  freely . Let
us  we also  prepare well  to  recieve and  reply the  attack  if the
views expressed are unfair , and thus I find this as  the more
democratic and dynamic list  among 6  technical list I participate .
 Our debate on Sacred  Cow  and biofuel   is well known here , as 
Keith  never took  side   on the  particular group or nation  and thus
never  divided removed any one with out motive   but  he also  see 
the  point on the other side so that we have our objetive here  very
clear and us move colectively  together with renewation of the new
informations
 Birefinaries are  this new  biofuel hot topic where we all need to 
integrate bioethanol , biogas, Biooil, wood gas   and  also  bioD too
.Let us have  the ball rolling  on this hot topoic in our list.

sd
Pannir Selvam
Brazil.
-- 
 Pagandai V Pannirselvam
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte - UFRN
Departamento de Engenharia Qu’mica - DEQ
Centro de Tecnologia - CT
Programa de P—s Gradua‹o em Engenharia Qu’mica - PPGEQ
Grupo de Pesquisa em Engenharia de Custos - GPEC

Av. Senador Salgado Filho, Campus Universit‡ri

Re: [Biofuel] Glycerin soap making

[JD2005]

Ok Thanks,

The burning idea with the milk cartons looks really good to us here.   We're
burning wood and stuff on an old oxfordshire range here at the moment.I
wouldn't put one on untill we'd got a really hot fire though because of the
poison fumes it can cause.Also you stand stand to lose methanol or
ethanol that way unless you separate that out.   The FFA separation with
some kind of expensive acid I reject on the grounds of expense.   Unless, I
could (I havn't got any methanol or a license for ethenol yet.) find a
market for the pure glycerin.

JD2005
- Original Message -
From:Legal Eagle
> G'day JD;
>
> Yes, maybe, and that is the experimenting part :-)
> There is a lot of info at JtF about soap making too, have you snooped it ?
> Also about seperating the FFA's from the glycerine.
> http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_glycsep.html
> http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_glycerin.html
>
> >
> > JD2005
> >
> >
> > Presumeably lye water would be realy an ideal method of making soap from
> > glycerin.
> >
> >



___
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/