Re: [Biofuel] (no subject)
Hallo Michael, I am referring specifically to fundamentalist, dispensationalist, literalist, apocalyptic Christianity as it is applied by the neocons to the political situation in the world today. It is not so much that it is incomprehensible and unobtainable but more like the foundation on which the building is built. Unless you look at more than just the outside and inside of the building, unless you dig you never much think of the foundation. It is there but isn't given much consideration because folks are looking at the facade and trappings and how the building is used. Out of sight out of mind. This entire middle east situation is based on religious radicalism and fundamentalism of the worst sort and not just the radicalism and fundamentalism of the Muslim world, but that of the Israeli's and the U.S. The information is there for the finding but one has to get beyond the rhetoric and study the religious and political philosophies of the players in the U.S. and Israel to get to the roots of the matter. It is neither simple nor easy. Good luck if you are interested in pursuing this and get real familiar with your bible because it is all in there. Most Christians have no idea what these people uphold and what they are willing to do. They just see and identify with the "Christian" bit and think that they all have the same basic beliefs. They couldn't be more wrong. Hope this helps. Happy Happy, Gustl On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 13:48:34 -0500 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What do you mean specifically? Why only reference > Christianity? What is the secret that nobody seems to be > able to spell out? > > If the truth is so incomprehensible and unobtainable how > can anyone be expected to know it when they find it? > > > Michael M > > > > > Better start thinking neocons and giving biblical > prophecy > a helping hand. A lot more there than meets the eye. > Nasty business. Takes some digging and some > understanding > of fundamental Christianity. Rational to them but very, > very scary. > > Happy Happy, > > Gustl > > > On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 20:28:13 -0500 > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Darryl wrote: > > > > "Clearly, "taking out Saddam" had nothing to do with > > weapons of mass destruction > > (the U.N. inspectors had all but proven he had none > > before the U.S. found the > > courage to invade), or 9/11 (the plans were in play in > > the U.S. Administration > > *before* the planes hit the towers). It was not about > > getting the oil, as it > > was > > available for sale on the world market prior to the > > invasion. It wasn't about > > Iraq > > as a military threat in the region - the U.S. and U.K. > > were flying military and > > surveillance over the country *daily* prior to the > > invasion. It wasn't about > > Al- > > Qaeda - they despised Saddam. Hussein did not attack > or > > threaten the U.S. > > > > So, Henri, in your opinion, why had the Bush White > House > > really decided to > > invade > > Iraq - prior to 9/11?" > > > > > > Could it be because the UN sanctions were failing and > > about to be lifted? The US was not about to allow the > > Saddam administration to get $10+ Billion in oil > revenue > > each year knowing they would use it to resume their > > weapons programs. > > > > No, they did not have weapons of mass destruction yet, > > but they did have the know how and planned to build > them > > ASAP once the sanctions were lifted. > > > > Mike > > > > ___ > Biofuel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/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/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Titration question
Our Appleseed derived testbed reactor is now operational, and our longterm goal is to automate the heck out of the thing. Thus, I was pondering about how to automatically meter the correct amount of sodium methoxide into the reactor. My partner in crime is the electrical engineer in charge of that end of things, so I just need to figure out the chemistry bit. Anyway, if the pH of the diluted WVO is available, is titration still neccessary? That is, could one construct a simple conversion table wherein a sample pH of X requires Y grams of NaOH per liter? My gut tells me no, but I'm too many years removed from analytical chem to put my finger on why. I did find the following reference that suggests a titration free method is possible, albeit difficult: Kuselman et al. pH-metric determination of the acid value of vegetable oils without titration. J AOAC Int. 1998 Jul-Aug;81(4):873-9. Any thoughts? jh ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Re: taking out Saddam - was (no subject)
What do you mean specifically? Why only reference Christianity? What is the secret that nobody seems to be able to spell out? If the truth is so incomprehensible and unobtainable how can anyone be expected to know it when they find it? Michael M Check the archives Mike, lots about it there. This, for instance: Our foreign policy with respect to Israel and its neighbors, is informed by a convoluted, bizarre, dispensationalist eschatology that twists scripture and deceives people into believing we're doing God's will by spreading misery around the world. I can tell by the tenor of posts on this list alone that much of the world doesn't really understand this. Many of them do though. There's some good references in the archives: http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/35006/ >There are rules in Netiquette about criticising religions, especially on a multi-cultural list like this, and I hope you're aware of that, but I have no compunctions about it in this case because this is not a religion, it's an evil cult that's hell-bent on sowing war and destruction at any cost. I'm glad George Monbiot has penned this piece for the Guardian in the UK, because it's so bizarre that non-Americans have a really hard time believing it, and fail to realise its importance. http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1195568,00.html Comment US Christian fundamentalists are driving Bush's Middle East policy Their beliefs are bonkers, but they are at the heart of power George Monbiot Tuesday April 20, 2004 http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=13750 Fundamentally Unsound By Michelle Goldberg, Salon August 2, 2002 Quite a lot more like that. But it's not just the dispensationalist eschatology, it's their weird alliances with the neo-cons, recycled Reaganists and Straussians. It's remarkable that such mismatched alliances can hold together for so long (if they are). They don't despise us as human beings. They despise what we do. I think they despise what your government does in your name. Probably about as personal as it gets is to resent the jingoism and isolationism that can remain ignorant of it and doesn't care about the rest of the world. We saw something of that here before the last election or-whatever-you-want-to-call-it when several "foreigners" (!?) complained, sort of, about not having a vote in the world's greatest democratic election when the outcome would probably affect them as much as it would an American voter, or something like that (with some hilariously out of synch American responses). Best wishes Keith Better start thinking neocons and giving biblical prophecy a helping hand. A lot more there than meets the eye. Nasty business. Takes some digging and some understanding of fundamental Christianity. Rational to them but very, very scary. Happy Happy, Gustl On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 20:28:13 -0500 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Darryl wrote: > > "Clearly, "taking out Saddam" had nothing to do with > weapons of mass destruction > (the U.N. inspectors had all but proven he had none > before the U.S. found the > courage to invade), or 9/11 (the plans were in play in > the U.S. Administration > *before* the planes hit the towers). It was not about > getting the oil, as it > was > available for sale on the world market prior to the > invasion. It wasn't about > Iraq > as a military threat in the region - the U.S. and U.K. > were flying military and > surveillance over the country *daily* prior to the > invasion. It wasn't about > Al- > Qaeda - they despised Saddam. Hussein did not attack or > threaten the U.S. > > So, Henri, in your opinion, why had the Bush White House > really decided to > invade > Iraq - prior to 9/11?" > > > Could it be because the UN sanctions were failing and > about to be lifted? The US was not about to allow the > Saddam administration to get $10+ Billion in oil revenue > each year knowing they would use it to resume their > weapons programs. > > No, they did not have weapons of mass destruction yet, > but they did have the know how and planned to build them > ASAP once the sanctions were lifted. > > Mike ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] 271 Diesel Generators
Count me in too! Do you have a link or contact info? ROY Washbish wrote: Jeremy If this turns out to be good I sure am interested in buying one. 23 KW DIESEL is just what I'm looking for. Thanks Roy Jeremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have found a source for 20Kw General Motors 271 that have come off of Union Pacific Railroad cars. The hours are unkown, but is assumed that they were well taken care of as they refrigerated railroad cars. They are all tested and painted. Apperently someone bought 2300 of them, and is selling them for a few grand. Is this a desirable motor for biofuel or in general, can someone who is running them testify to their value- even if you don't know the hours. Rebuild is reported to be very easy, full rebuild kits with pistons cost 400. Thanks for any respones. Jeremy ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Roy Washbish Certified Health Coach A HOME BUSINESS & PRODUCTS THAT WORK PRODUCTS & BUSINESS HTTP://WWW.TRIVITA.COM/11393920 - Do you Yahoo!? Better first dates. More second dates. Yahoo! Personals ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/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/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] (no subject)
What do you mean specifically? Why only reference Christianity? What is the secret that nobody seems to be able to spell out? If the truth is so incomprehensible and unobtainable how can anyone be expected to know it when they find it? Michael M Better start thinking neocons and giving biblical prophecy a helping hand. A lot more there than meets the eye. Nasty business. Takes some digging and some understanding of fundamental Christianity. Rational to them but very, very scary. Happy Happy, Gustl On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 20:28:13 -0500 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Darryl wrote: > > "Clearly, "taking out Saddam" had nothing to do with > weapons of mass destruction > (the U.N. inspectors had all but proven he had none > before the U.S. found the > courage to invade), or 9/11 (the plans were in play in > the U.S. Administration > *before* the planes hit the towers). It was not about > getting the oil, as it > was > available for sale on the world market prior to the > invasion. It wasn't about > Iraq > as a military threat in the region - the U.S. and U.K. > were flying military and > surveillance over the country *daily* prior to the > invasion. It wasn't about > Al- > Qaeda - they despised Saddam. Hussein did not attack or > threaten the U.S. > > So, Henri, in your opinion, why had the Bush White House > really decided to > invade > Iraq - prior to 9/11?" > > > Could it be because the UN sanctions were failing and > about to be lifted? The US was not about to allow the > Saddam administration to get $10+ Billion in oil revenue > each year knowing they would use it to resume their > weapons programs. > > No, they did not have weapons of mass destruction yet, > but they did have the know how and planned to build them > ASAP once the sanctions were lifted. > > Mike ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] U.S. Obstructs Global Justice
Hi All, I understand the U.S. point of view very clearly. It has to protect people like Henry Kissinger. He and tricky Dick extended the Vietnam War by 4 years and that was only one of his warcrimes. Tom -Original Message- From: Keith Addison To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 4/2/05 2:58 PM Subject: [Biofuel] U.S. Obstructs Global Justice http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8417.htm U.S. Obstructs Global Justice By Jonathan F. Fanton http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-fanton29mar29,0,4 400554,print.story 03/29/05 "Los Angeles Times" - - When a United Nations commission of inquiry recommended this year that gross human rights abuses in Darfur be referred to the new International Criminal Court, Pierre-Richard Prosper, the U.S. ambassador at large for war crimes issues, made headlines by rejecting the idea. "We don't want to be party to legitimizing the ICC," he said. But why not? Ninety-eight nations have signed the Rome Treaty, which created the court that the United States now opposes. President Clinton signed the treaty too, in the final days of his term, but the Bush administration quickly said it had no intention of seeking ratification. The ICC, which is already up and running in The Hague, has jurisdiction over crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed after July 1, 2002, if and when the justice system of a signatory country is unwilling or unable to act. What's going on in Darfur seems exactly suited for the court, but the U.S. has said it would rather pursue those who have committed atrocities in Darfur by creating a separate court in Arusha, Tanzania - even though such ad hoc tribunals are slow to organize and costly to run. "We don't want to be in a situation where we see the question of African justice being exported, or outsourced, to The Hague," Prosper said, in an obvious attempt to play the Southern Hemisphere against the northern. But African opinion is more complex than that. The reality is that the ICC has already won wide support among Africans and that people there are looking to it for help and hope. Today, 27 of the 98 countries that have signed the Treaty of Rome are from Africa. Four African countries have invited the court to investigate atrocities committed within their borders: Uganda, the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Central African Republic and Ivory Coast. Each is looking to the court for assistance where its own legal system has failed or fallen short. As the first permanent criminal court with potentially worldwide jurisdiction, the ICC is designed to deter future Pol Pots and Pinochets. The year 2005 will be crucial in the ICC's early history. Its first two investigations, one in Uganda and one in Congo, are moving forward. Despite U.S. opposition, there is strong support in the U.N. Security Council for referring the Darfur situation to the court as well. A vigorous discussion underway this week will determine that outcome. The court's first-ever round of indictments may soon be made in Uganda against key leaders of the Lord's Resistance Army, which has waged a war against the government by targeting civilians in the north. More than 20,000 children have been abducted and about 1.6 million people have been displaced. Tens of thousands more have been killed or wounded. Already, the ICC's investigation has brought greater pressure on both sides to end the conflict there and has concentrated international attention on the abuses. If indictments do come and senior leaders of the Lord's Resistance Army are prosecuted at the ICC, that will not keep other perpetrators from being tried in traditional courts, nor will it impede the work of reconciliation mechanisms like truth commissions. The Bush administration strongly opposes the ICC apparently because of concerns that the court might engage in political show trials against American soldiers and citizens. These fears are misplaced: Only countries whose legal systems cannot or will not adjudicate cases involving genocide, war crimes or crimes against humanity are within the reach of the court. Manipulation of the kind feared by some U.S. officials is virtually impossible. A sound system of checks and balances keeps the ICC's procedures from being abused. The prosecutor, for instance, must obtain permission from a pretrial chamber of judges before he can initiate investigations or serve indictments. States can appeal these decisions if they believe their own courts have adjudicated matters properly. Because the United States has a functioning criminal justice system capable of addressing allegations of gross abuse, U.S. citizens have nothing to fear from the International Criminal Court. Dictators, corrupt armies and armed groups in failing states do. The ICC and a robust system of international criminal justice will disrupt the culture of impunity that often protects architect
Re: [Biofuel] Optimism
1951. Excerpt from Chapter 6: Making Use of Weeds and Other 'Pests' "I used to be one of those farmers who are unable to walk through a field without stooping to pull a weed every few yards. My father always carried a walking stick with a 'spud' on the end, with which he would dig out the deep-rooting weed, or at least cut it off below the crown. I proudly imitated this habit, feeling the walking-stick spud was the mark of an efficient farmer. I have since come to realize that it is rather the mark of a thoughtless and unobservant farmer. For when I stopped, before cutting out a dock from my field of wheat, and said to myself, maybe this plant has a purpose, I soon found the answer and withheld the hand of destruction. "This little action illustrated to me the extremely unintelligent way in which most of us approach nature -- indeed the whole of the universe. If it is not blatantly obvious that a plant or an animal or any other phenomenon of nature has a value to our commercial activities, then we attempt its destruction without further thought. If anything appears in the least way to obstruct, or indeed fail to serve, our artificial activities, our main desire is to be rid of it -- to remove it from the face of the earth. It is this flaw in human intelligence which has allowed us to destroy vast areas of fertile land and, in a smaller way on our own British farms, to bring upon ourselves untold pests and diseases which would have remained under the control of nature had we not thoughtlessly destroyed that part of nature whose purpose it was to control the pest or disease. Not only weeds which help to maintain the fertility of our top soil, but all kinds of birds and animals are relentlessly destroyed, because we, in our lack of wisdom, consider that they bear no obvious human benefit. "Mine is the only farm for miles around which harbours a rookery. Mine is the only farm I know where the hare and partridge live in peace, and are not made the objects of mine or anyone else's lust to kill something. "Rabbits are generally considered to be utter and complete vermin, but on British farms at least they have a place in small numbers, and may be taken as an indication that there is waste land on the farm that could be used to some better purpose, or that there are hedges and banks that need to be cleared of undergrowth and ditches that need to be cut back and cleaned. When I first came to Goosegreen the farm was infested with rabbits; but so were the hedges and ditches overgrown and infested with brambles and briars, and Ball Hill was covered with gorse and brambles, providing a perfect cover for the free multiplication of the rabbit colonies. When Ball Hill was cleared and reseeded, and all hedges cut back and ditches cleaned, the rabbits quickly disappeared. For years they were almost non-existent, but gradually returned with the new growth of rubbish along the bank below Ball Hill. As soon as they became brave enough to venture out into my wheat and oat crops for food, I knew it was time I got to work on the hill and hedges and banks again, to remove the excessive cover in which they were once more freely breeding. "It is interesting to note that the preservation of the hare seems to discourage the rabbit. The two species don't seem to hit it off together. And as the rabbits increase the hares become less evident. I do not know the explanation of this, for there does not appear to be any active warfare between them. It is merely that on my farm, at any rate, they do not live happily together. "Foxes which were once troublesome on my farm have completely disappeared since, at the beginning of the war, the hunt ceased in the district. "Let no one think that I am advocating indiscriminate freedom for all wild life, though I am sure this would be the ideal to which to cultivate one's moral courage. I have yet to find a use for the rat, and I must say that I am not hopeful of finding one. I do find it necessary to take measures to keep down the rat population. But here again the simple method of reduction is to take advantage of natural controls. I have found no better means of keeping down rats than keeping up dogs and cats, and above all, allowing no accumulations of rubbish and scrap of the kind in which rats delight to gather. "But what I do advocate is a more thoughtful approach to all natural manifestations. It is wrong to conclude that because there is no clearly apparent human use for a natural phenomenon, it is therefore our duty to destroy it. Destruction is a deadly boomerang. Nowhere is this more apparent than on the farm, in my experience. And of course in this plea for the protection of nature I include bacteria of all kinds. I often think it is man's desire to destroy that creates within him the fear which gives rise to the belief that nature has destructive intentions against man. It is just not true. Nature destroy
Re: [Biofuel] Co-ops and EPA
In the US, does a co-op structure for a bioD producer exempt it from regstering with the EPA as a fuel manufacturer? Corrolary: Can a fleet operator be a co-op member, and not be subject toPA scrutiny about Tier 1 Health Study certification? thanks! There are several quite detailed posts on coops in the US in the archives, if you do a search you should be able to find them. Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Best wishes Keith ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] NBB '05 conference slides and info
February?? I am a student and I have the slides from last year, but I REALLY need the slides from this year for my business plan research!!! If anybody has access to them or knows someone who does, please let me know because I could really use some current info and statistics. They said it would cost me $250 just to gain access to the slides. Thanks, Evan Gady ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] SAFETY REQUEST
Hey All, As Im sure most biodiesel makers know and are interested in... I want to do this SAFE!!! Methanol and Lye are Nasty, what can I do to be safe with them, do I need an LEL meter or a mask? Electrical/Fire safety is always big too. Does anyone have any suggestions or stories on how they make there biodiesel safetly. much thanks Evan J. Franklin Deputy Chief, Unity Search & Rescue, The Franklin Biodiesel Project, Dispatcher, Operation Game Thief, Unity College, Unity Maine 42 Murdoc Drive U.C. Box 650 Unity, ME 04988 1-207-948-3215 x552 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Original Message -- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 09:49:54 -0700 > > > In search of answers to the following: > > > In the US, does a co-op structure for a bioD producer exempt it from > reg= istering with the EPA as a fuel manufacturer? > > > Corrolary: Can a fleet operator be a co-op member, and not be subject > to= EPA scrutiny about Tier 1 Health Study certification? > > > thanks! > > _ > > Msg sent via @bmi.net Mail v4 - http://www.bmi.net >___ >Biofuel mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel > >Biofuel at Journey to Forever: >http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > >Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): >http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ > Sent via the WebMail system at unity.unity.edu ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/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 Storeage and Safety
Mike, Keith, thanks for your comments, they put a restless mind to rest. On Apr 4, 2005 8:31 AM, Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello Mike, Thomas > > >My biggest concern about mixing flammable materials in a blender is > >that in industry, you would normally see explosion proof motors used > >in such an application. If your container seal leaks and a flammable > >mixture gets inside the motor enclosure, you might get a small > >explosion. > > In fact there have been cases of blender seals leaking, but not of > explosions as a result, or not that I've heard (I probably would have > heard). But blenders aren't the best way - mix it first (see below), > then add it to the oil in the blender. > > >My risk assessments are not always on the "safety at whatever cost" > >side of the spectrum. So, if I have a concern, I won't mention it > >unless I think it poses a relatively high probability of going > >"poof!". > > > > > >Mike > > > >Thomas Giguiere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Hello Biodeisel mavens! I have started my preliminary experimentation > >with the biodeisel manufacturing process. Everything is going alright, > >but I have concerns about the safety of methanol. > > Please see this previous message (and quite a few others): > http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/45586/ > > >I bought a 5 gallon drum of methanol for use in my experiments. > >Finding that it was difficult to transfer it from the drum to my > >measuring cup, > > Use an aquarium air-pump to pump it out. Just adapt the lid - two > holes, the air goes in one, a ppe fits in the other, going down to > the bottom of the drum and leading to your jug or mixing container > (graduated mixing containers are better than measuring cups for this). > > >I have transfered it to a white, 5-gallon "fuel > >transporter" that a lot of dirt biking enthusiasts use to pour fuel > >into their bikes. It is easier to pour from this container, but is it > >safe to store it in it? Is methanol going to eat through or otherwise > >interact with the plastic? > > It might depend what kind of plastic it is, if it's HDPE there won't > be any problem. But I've never known methanol eat any kind of > plastic. It seems to harden some types, but hasn't made them brittle, > or not so you'd notice, and hasn't eaten through anything. > > >Also, I am mixing up the lye and methanol in a blender. Does this pose > >serious saftey hazards. > > Not if you're careful, but this is the easiest, safest and best way: > Methoxide the easy way > http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_aleksnew.html#easymeth > > >I do all this at my fathers house (he has more backyard space than > >me). I just don't want to blow his propety up. > > Not much danger of that, it's not a very hazardous process, there > have been very few accidents, none of them serious, and I think all > due to carelessness. > > Best wishes > > Keith > > > >Any info is appreciated > > > >Best Regards, > > > >Thomas > > ___ > Biofuel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/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/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 Storeage and Safety
Blenders exploding? Not so that pieces of blender are embedded in your head. But, nevertheless a rapid expansion of gasses from the ignition of a stoichiometric mixture in the motor enclosure (OK, that hurt, my brain is tired). The ignited gasses from the motor enclosure could vent outside the blender and ignite other materials on your blender or bench top. Mike Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello Mike, Thomas >My biggest concern about mixing flammable materials in a blender is >that in industry, you would normally see explosion proof motors used >in such an application. If your container seal leaks and a flammable >mixture gets inside the motor enclosure, you might get a small >explosion. In fact there have been cases of blender seals leaking, but not of explosions as a result, or not that I've heard (I probably would have heard). But blenders aren't the best way - mix it first (see below), then add it to the oil in the blender. >My risk assessments are not always on the "safety at whatever cost" >side of the spectrum. So, if I have a concern, I won't mention it >unless I think it poses a relatively high probability of going >"poof!". > > >Mike > >Thomas Giguiere wrote: >Hello Biodeisel mavens! I have started my preliminary experimentation >with the biodeisel manufacturing process. Everything is going alright, >but I have concerns about the safety of methanol. Please see this previous message (and quite a few others): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/45586/ >I bought a 5 gallon drum of methanol for use in my experiments. >Finding that it was difficult to transfer it from the drum to my >measuring cup, Use an aquarium air-pump to pump it out. Just adapt the lid - two holes, the air goes in one, a ppe fits in the other, going down to the bottom of the drum and leading to your jug or mixing container (graduated mixing containers are better than measuring cups for this). >I have transfered it to a white, 5-gallon "fuel >transporter" that a lot of dirt biking enthusiasts use to pour fuel >into their bikes. It is easier to pour from this container, but is it >safe to store it in it? Is methanol going to eat through or otherwise >interact with the plastic? It might depend what kind of plastic it is, if it's HDPE there won't be any problem. But I've never known methanol eat any kind of plastic. It seems to harden some types, but hasn't made them brittle, or not so you'd notice, and hasn't eaten through anything. >Also, I am mixing up the lye and methanol in a blender. Does this pose >serious saftey hazards. Not if you're careful, but this is the easiest, safest and best way: Methoxide the easy way http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_aleksnew.html#easymeth >I do all this at my fathers house (he has more backyard space than >me). I just don't want to blow his propety up. Not much danger of that, it's not a very hazardous process, there have been very few accidents, none of them serious, and I think all due to carelessness. Best wishes Keith >Any info is appreciated > >Best Regards, > >Thomas ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/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/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Co-ops and EPA
In search of answers to the following: In the US, does a co-op structure for a bioD producer exempt it from regstering with the EPA as a fuel manufacturer? Corrolary: Can a fleet operator be a co-op member, and not be subject toPA scrutiny about Tier 1 Health Study certification? thanks! _ Msg sent via @bmi.net Mail v4 - http://www.bmi.net ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] 271 Diesel Generators
Jeremy If this turns out to be good I sure am interested in buying one. 23 KW DIESEL is just what I'm looking for. Thanks Roy Jeremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have found a source for 20Kw General Motors 271 that have come off of Union Pacific Railroad cars. The hours are unkown, but is assumed that they were well taken care of as they refrigerated railroad cars. They are all tested and painted. Apperently someone bought 2300 of them, and is selling them for a few grand. Is this a desirable motor for biofuel or in general, can someone who is running them testify to their value- even if you don't know the hours. Rebuild is reported to be very easy, full rebuild kits with pistons cost 400. Thanks for any respones. Jeremy ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Roy Washbish Certified Health Coach A HOME BUSINESS & PRODUCTS THAT WORK PRODUCTS & BUSINESS HTTP://WWW.TRIVITA.COM/11393920 - Do you Yahoo!? Better first dates. More second dates. Yahoo! Personals ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] taking out Saddam
Hallo Kids, Better start thinking neocons and giving biblical prophecy a helping hand. A lot more there than meets the eye. Nasty business. Takes some digging and some understanding of fundamental Christianity. Rational to them but very, very scary. Happy Happy, Gustl On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 20:28:13 -0500 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Darryl wrote: > > "Clearly, "taking out Saddam" had nothing to do with > weapons of mass destruction > (the U.N. inspectors had all but proven he had none > before the U.S. found the > courage to invade), or 9/11 (the plans were in play in > the U.S. Administration > *before* the planes hit the towers). It was not about > getting the oil, as it > was > available for sale on the world market prior to the > invasion. It wasn't about > Iraq > as a military threat in the region - the U.S. and U.K. > were flying military and > surveillance over the country *daily* prior to the > invasion. It wasn't about > Al- > Qaeda - they despised Saddam. Hussein did not attack or > threaten the U.S. > > So, Henri, in your opinion, why had the Bush White House > really decided to > invade > Iraq - prior to 9/11?" > > > Could it be because the UN sanctions were failing and > about to be lifted? The US was not about to allow the > Saddam administration to get $10+ Billion in oil revenue > each year knowing they would use it to resume their > weapons programs. > > No, they did not have weapons of mass destruction yet, > but they did have the know how and planned to build them > ASAP once the sanctions were lifted. > > Mike > > > ___ > Biofuel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/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/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] hazy biodiesel
on 4/4/05 8:07 AM, Todd Hershberger at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I had a liter of finished biodiesel that I let settle for 24 hours, but > it was still hazy. Then I gently heated it to 90 degrees F and it > become crystal clear with some droplets of water at the bottom of the > vessel. Then I removed it and let it cool at room temperature. 12 > hours later it was hazy again, but with some droplets of water still on > the bottom. There are two things that will make biodiesel hazy -- water droplets that are so small (colloidal) that they won't settle out over weeks or months, and various esters (stearate, palmitate, et.al.) that are waxy solids at normal temperatures. Either of these will go into solution in the main body of the biodiesel at elevated temperatures, and then separate out again upon cooling. The best way to get rid of both is filtration through a water-loving medium (cotton, paper, etc.) at low temperature. The waxy esters are filtered out mechanically, and the water (if there isn't too much) is soaked up by the cellulose. I let my cloudy biodiesel sit through a couple of nights, then filter through cotton first thing in the morning while still cold. Comes out crystal clear. -K ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Lutec- right to defense responded
Donkeys. Right. LOL! Thanks for asking him. His response: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: john christie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 5:20 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Lutec- right to defense >> >> Dear Sir, > > The know it all persons you refer to are simply donkeys, > perhapse they do know were the energy comes from. > 1.) 1 + 1 = 2, meaning that when we have for instance a repulsive > magnetic force of lets say 10 watts from the permanent magnets of the > rotor and a 10 watt repulsive force create in the stator core by the > electrical input, less its loses, its sum is always and will be always > more then 1 or 10 watts. > > As for the weight hanging from a beam, use a electromagnet instead . > There is also no movement, but what happens when you switch off the > power, watch out, don't stand under it. > > As for stored energy in a magnet. Why is it that, when for instance a > windmill drives a permanent magnet generator. Electricity is produced > for decades by the permanent nagnets, don't tell me that the energy is > so dense that it takes years to get it all out , when it needs only a > brief moment to create them. > > There will be always kings fools. That there will, and there'll always be those who prey on them too. And, after hundreds of year of it, we can probably say there will always be free energy scams too. By the way, I'm in record in the archives several times as saying that scepticism is healthy, and surely called for with free-energy claims, but I wouldn't write it off as impossible. We're surrounded by realities that were yesteryear's impossibilities. But, meanwhile - hold onto your wallet. Best wishes Keith > Best Regards > > Lu Brits ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
Some past gleanings from the Bioenergy List Bioenergy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/ "Oil Production -- According to the oil map on page 56, May 2000 Popular Science, world oil production will be down to half of what it is now by 2015. From there it just keeps going down until by 2050 production is down to 15% of present levels. More optimistic forecasts merely shift the time scale by a few years. Our own oil is nearly gone." -- Kermit Schlansker "How many billions of barrels could be brought to the surface in the US if oil prices were at $75 per bbl?" -- Kevin Chisholm "... excellent point. We tried to stabilize the price of Gold for years. Now its >200$ and mines are viable that weren't at $35/oz. Plus, many commercial processes that used Gold have found substitutes or ways to use less Gold. Gold-plated contacts are alloyed with Nickel to extend and strengthen the microlayer of Gold. Companies have arisen to reclaim Gold off e-scrap. Now, the analogy is obvious. If Gold were held at $35, then none of these measures would be existent. In the same way, tech-progress in energy has been halted due to cheap oil. I have no doubt whatsoever that inventors can come up with a way to make oil at $20-50 per barrel. So let the price rise. I hope oil goes to $200 per barrel." -- JB "US Department of State, "Energy Resources of the World", p. 71 - all known petroleum reserves would be exhausted in 25 years. Date of publication? 1949." -- N Yes, quite. Funny, that. An article I wrote in 1980 counted I think six previous such revisions following an oil "crisis". Doesn't include coal - there's still LOTS of coal. Good oil is easily produced from poor-quality coal (SASOL, eg). Then there's this: Earth Has More Oil Than Previously Estimated RESTON, Virginia, March 24, 2000 (ENS) - The latest U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) assessment of the world's oil and gas reserves estimates there is about 20 percent more undiscovered oil than previously believed. The agency also reports a slight decrease in estimates of undiscovered natural gas. The USGS World Petroleum Assessment 2000 estimates the volume of oil and gas, outside the U.S., that may be added to the world's reserves in the next 30 years. "There is still an abundance of oil and gas in the world," said Thomas Ahlbrandt, USGS World Petroleum Assessment project chief. "Since oil became a major energy source about 100 years ago, about 539 billion barrels of oil have been produced outside of the U.S. We now estimate the total amount of future technically recoverable oil, outside the U.S., to be about 2120 billion barrels." The assessment indicates that there is more oil and gas in the Middle East and in the offshore areas of western Africa and eastern South America than previously reported. There is less oil and gas in Canada and Mexico, and lower volumes of natural gas in the Former Soviet Union. The USGS World Petroleum Assessment 2000 is the first report to provide a rigorous geologic foundation for estimating undiscovered energy resources. The results have implications for energy prices, policy, security and the global resource balance. "These assessments provide a snapshot of current information about the location and abundance of undiscovered oil and gas resources at a point in history," said Gene Whitney, USGS Energy Team chief scientist. http://ens.lycos.com/ens/mar2000/2000L-03-24-09.html Which also keeps happening, somehow. Regarding this USGS study, Joshua Tickell said: "As of '97, we had extracted 807 billion barrels of oil and 995 billion barrels of extractable oil remained in the earth's crust. We're consuming 24 billion barrels a year with an annual consumption increase of 2%. Here's the key: there is another trillion barrels of oil buried under rock sediment and in other virtually inaccessible areas. The cost to extract it will equate in 2000 dollars to over $5 a gallon for gasoline at US pumps. The marginal utility of gasoline (the point at which the demand for gasoline begins to decline) is $3 a gallon. Who's going to extract oil they can't sell? The end of oil is not about geology, it's about profit margins." So, cut-off at $3. But Europeans pay about $4 or more, others pay a lot more. So that's a relative figure, not an absolute one. Anyway it's utility that matters, not price. Some cars now get 80 mpg, some more than that - that $5 a gallon at the pump might take you further than your $1.70 or whatever does now, maybe twice as far. If the gas costs twice as much but it takes you twice as far, who'll even notice? So no cut-off at $3. As for the vast amounts of oil under the rocks and the shale and so on, shortly after Joshua wrote that some scientists announced promising new techniques for getting the oil out of the shale at economic prices. "Virtually inaccessible" is another movable feast, as is "extractable". Then there are the revelations,
[Biofuel] 271 Diesel Generators
I have found a source for 20Kw General Motors 271 that have come off of Union Pacific Railroad cars. The hours are unkown, but is assumed that they were well taken care of as they refrigerated railroad cars. They are all tested and painted. Apperently someone bought 2300 of them, and is selling them for a few grand. Is this a desirable motor for biofuel or in general, can someone who is running them testify to their value- even if you don't know the hours. Rebuild is reported to be very easy, full rebuild kits with pistons cost 400. Thanks for any respones. Jeremy ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] hazy biodiesel
it was still hazy. Then I gently heated it to 90 degrees F and it become crystal clear with some droplets of water at the bottom of the vessel. Then I removed it and let it cool at room temperature. 12 hours later it was hazy again, but with some droplets of water still on the bottom. Why did the water become suspended in the biodiesel again? I'm not certain what kind of vegetable oil feedstock it is made from. The wash water was clear and the pH tested neutral. Thanks for your help. Todd Todd G. Hershberger, CTS ITSMedia - Goshen College 574.674.2149 - Pager 574.535.7735 - Work ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/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 Storeage and Safety
My biggest concern about mixing flammable materials in a blender is that in industry, you would normally see explosion proof motors used in such an application. If your container seal leaks and a flammable mixture gets inside the motor enclosure, you might get a small explosion. In fact there have been cases of blender seals leaking, but not of explosions as a result, or not that I've heard (I probably would have heard). But blenders aren't the best way - mix it first (see below), then add it to the oil in the blender. My risk assessments are not always on the "safety at whatever cost" side of the spectrum. So, if I have a concern, I won't mention it unless I think it poses a relatively high probability of going "poof!". Mike Thomas Giguiere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello Biodeisel mavens! I have started my preliminary experimentation with the biodeisel manufacturing process. Everything is going alright, but I have concerns about the safety of methanol. Please see this previous message (and quite a few others): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/45586/ I bought a 5 gallon drum of methanol for use in my experiments. Finding that it was difficult to transfer it from the drum to my measuring cup, Use an aquarium air-pump to pump it out. Just adapt the lid - two holes, the air goes in one, a ppe fits in the other, going down to the bottom of the drum and leading to your jug or mixing container (graduated mixing containers are better than measuring cups for this). I have transfered it to a white, 5-gallon "fuel transporter" that a lot of dirt biking enthusiasts use to pour fuel into their bikes. It is easier to pour from this container, but is it safe to store it in it? Is methanol going to eat through or otherwise interact with the plastic? It might depend what kind of plastic it is, if it's HDPE there won't be any problem. But I've never known methanol eat any kind of plastic. It seems to harden some types, but hasn't made them brittle, or not so you'd notice, and hasn't eaten through anything. Also, I am mixing up the lye and methanol in a blender. Does this pose serious saftey hazards. Not if you're careful, but this is the easiest, safest and best way: Methoxide the easy way http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_aleksnew.html#easymeth I do all this at my fathers house (he has more backyard space than me). I just don't want to blow his propety up. Not much danger of that, it's not a very hazardous process, there have been very few accidents, none of them serious, and I think all due to carelessness. Best wishes Keith Any info is appreciated Best Regards, Thomas ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] ...in a debate/need some help
Hi everyone, I'm in a debate with my Uncle about gasoline vs. ethanol (good exercise for the mind). You might think that this is a waste of time since sustainable vs. unsustainable fuel is hardly debatable. But, it has me asking some questions and I'd like to have the answers. When comparing gasoline to ethanol: 1.) How much better are the emissions of ethanol over gasoline and what are the quantities of each of the products of combustion? 2.) What pollutants/greenhouse gasses are produced (or absorbed) during the production of each? 3.) What are the environmental impacts of each during handling and storage? Thanks in advance for your help. Mike ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] FW: Lutec- right to defense responded
His response: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: john christie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 5:20 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Lutec- right to defense >> >> Dear Sir, > > The know it all persons you refer to are simply donkeys, > perhapse they do know were the energy comes from. > 1.) 1 + 1 = 2, meaning that when we have for instance a repulsive > magnetic force of lets say 10 watts from the permanent magnets of the > rotor and a 10 watt repulsive force create in the stator core by the > electrical input, less its loses, its sum is always and will be always > more then 1 or 10 watts. > > As for the weight hanging from a beam, use a electromagnet instead . > There is also no movement, but what happens when you switch off the > power, watch out, don't stand under it. > > As for stored energy in a magnet. Why is it that, when for instance a > windmill drives a permanent magnet generator. Electricity is produced > for decades by the permanent nagnets, don't tell me that the energy is > so dense that it takes years to get it all out , when it needs only a > brief moment to create them. > > There will be always kings fools. > > Best Regards > > Lu Brits -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.1 - Release Date: 4/1/2005 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/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 Storeage and Safety
My biggest concern about mixing flammable materials in a blender is that in industry, you would normally see explosion proof motors used in such an application. If your container seal leaks and a flammable mixture gets inside the motor enclosure, you might get a small explosion. My risk assessments are not always on the "safety at whatever cost" side of the spectrum. So, if I have a concern, I won't mention it unless I think it poses a relatively high probability of going "poof!". Mike Thomas Giguiere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello Biodeisel mavens! I have started my preliminary experimentation with the biodeisel manufacturing process. Everything is going alright, but I have concerns about the safety of methanol. I bought a 5 gallon drum of methanol for use in my experiments. Finding that it was difficult to transfer it from the drum to my measuring cup, I have transfered it to a white, 5-gallon "fuel transporter" that a lot of dirt biking enthusiasts use to pour fuel into their bikes. It is easier to pour from this container, but is it safe to store it in it? Is methanol going to eat through or otherwise interact with the plastic? Also, I am mixing up the lye and methanol in a blender. Does this pose serious saftey hazards. I do all this at my fathers house (he has more backyard space than me). I just don't want to blow his propety up. Any info is appreciated Best Regards, Thomas ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/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/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] taking out Saddam
I wanted to share some information I came across a couple of weeks ago because I think it contributes to at least one statement in this thread. "Clearly, 'taking out Saddam' had nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction..." FYI: My partner is a chemist and interviewed a candidate for her employer who worked in a lab for the UN in Iraq. He said the disclosures that were made before the war were not only extensive, but they were accurate. I doubt that anyone is really surprised by this. But, I thought it's worth mentioning as is comes from "the horses mouth" as it were. Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Darryl wrote: "Clearly, "taking out Saddam" had nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction (the U.N. inspectors had all but proven he had none before the U.S. found the courage to invade), or 9/11 (the plans were in play in the U.S. Administration *before* the planes hit the towers). It was not about getting the oil, as it was available for sale on the world market prior to the invasion. It wasn't about Iraq as a military threat in the region - the U.S. and U.K. were flying military and surveillance over the country *daily* prior to the invasion. It wasn't about Al- Qaeda - they despised Saddam. Hussein did not attack or threaten the U.S. So, Henri, in your opinion, why had the Bush White House really decided to invade Iraq - prior to 9/11?" Could it be because the UN sanctions were failing and about to be lifted? The US was not about to allow the Saddam administration to get $10+ Billion in oil revenue each year knowing they would use it to resume their weapons programs. No, they did not have weapons of mass destruction yet, but they did have the know how and planned to build them ASAP once the sanctions were lifted. Mike ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/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/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Re: the 4th Estate
Corporate Influence in the Media by Anup Shah Advertising is the art of arresting the human intelligence just long enough to get money from it. - Chuck Blore, a partner in the advertising firm Chuck Blore & Don Ruchman, Inc., quoted by Ben H. Bagdikian, The Media Monopoly, Sixth Edition, (Beacon Press, 2000), p.185. Ever since mass media became mass media, companies have naturally used this means of communications to let a large number of people know about their products. There is nothing wrong with that, as it allows innovative ideas and concepts to be shared with others. However, as the years have progressed, the sophistication of advertising methods and techniques has advanced, enticing and shaping and even creating consumerism and needs where there has been none before, or turning luxuries into necessities. This section introduces some of the issues and concerns this raises. Tableofcontentsforthispage This web page has the following sub-sections: * Free media channels have a cost * The Audience as the Product * The Audience also as the Consumer * Advertorials - Advertisements disguised as News! * Advertainment - Advertisements disguised as Entertainment! * Product Placement * Political influence * Globalization of consumers Free media channels have a cost Various public and free media such as the numerous channels available in America and other nations are naturally subsidized with advertising to help pay the costs. However, as corporate competition has increased, so too has the need for returns on massive expenditures on advertising. Industries spending from millions to billions to win our hearts and influence our choices towards their products and ideas. The sheer amounts of money this brings to media companies is significant and for many cases forms then main form of support for the media company. Hence if something is reported that the advertiser doesn't like, the media company risks losing much needed revenue to stay alive. As a result, the mainstream media is largely driven by the forces of the market. The Audience as the Product Additionally, as Noam Chomsky points out in his article, What Makes Mainstream Media Mainstream, for a company such as the New York Times, it too has to sell products to its customers. For the New York Times and other such companies, Chomsky points out that the product is the audience, and the customers are the corporate advertisers. This at first thought doesn't seem to make sense. It is not, as we would normally think, and it should be that the product is the newspaper, and the customers are the audience/readers. Sure, readers buy the paper, but as he further points out, readers fit a demography and it is this that is valuable information that can be used by advertisers. Hence, to the advertisers, the product that the New York Times and such companies bring to them, is the audience itself and it is the advertisers that bring the money to the media companies, not the audience. [T]he New York Times [is] a corporation and sells a product. The product is audiences. They don't make money when you buy the newspaper. They are happy to put it on the worldwide web for free. They actually lose money when you buy the newspaper. But the audience is the product. ... You have to sell a product to a market, and the market is, of course, advertisers (that is, other businesses). Whether it is television or newspapers, or whatever, they are selling audiences. Corporations sell audiences to other corporations. - Noam Chomsky, What Makes Mainstream Media Mainstream, Z Magazine, June 1997. The Audience also as the Consumer Ben Bagdikian, a prominent media critic, and author of the well-acclaimed book The Media Monopoly, provides more detail and examples. In Chapter 6 of his book, for example, Bagdikian describes in detail the pressure on media companies to change content (to "dumb down") and to shape content based on the demographics of the audiences. Slowly then, the content of media isn't as important as the type of person being targeted by the ads. He also shows that the notion of "giving the audience what they want" is also a bit misleading because, if anything, it is more about targeting those readers that can afford the products that are advertised and so it is almost like giving the advertisers what they want! The "dumbing down" of the content also acts to promote a "buying mood." Hence, as Bagdikian summarizes, "programming is carefully noncontroversial, light, and nonpolitical" (see p. 133). As he traces briefly the history of advertising in magazines he also hints that this has happened for a long time: The influence of advertising on magazines reached a point where editors began selecting articles not only on the basis of their expected interest for readers but for their influence on advertisements. Serious articles were not always the best support for ads. An article that put the reader
[Biofuel] Re: the 4th Estate
Media Manipulation by Anup Shah The media is manipulated in all manners, for example through professional public relations (PR), and covert and overt government propaganda which disseminates propaganda as news. What are often deemed as credible news sources can often knowingly or unknowingly be pushing political agendas and propaganda. Table of contents for this page This web page has the following sub-sections: * Media management and public relations is very professional * Smear tactics are increasing in sophistication * Fake News * Fake News in the United States * Government Propaganda through Prepackaged News? * Illegal US Domestic Propaganda but Legal International Propaganda? * Benefits for Broadcaster * Fake news in the United Kingdom * These issues are not new * More Information Media management and public relations is very professional The impacts of public relations cannot be underestimated. In the commercial world, marketing and advertising are typically needed to make people aware of products. There are many issues in that area alone (which is looked at in this site's section on corporate media.) When it comes to propaganda for purposes of war, for example, professional public relations firms can often be involved to help sell a war. In cases where a war is questionable, the PR firms are indirectly contributing to the eventual and therefore unavoidable casualties. Media management may also be used to promote certain political policies and ideologies. Where this is problematic for the citizenry is when media reports on various issues do not attribute their sources properly. Some techniques used by governments and parties/people with hidden agendas include: * Paying journalists to promote certain issues without the journalist acknowledging this, or without the media mentioning the sources; * Governments and individuals contracting PR firms to sell a war, or other important issues * Disinformation or partial information reported as news or fact without attributing sources that might be questionable * PR firms feeding stories to the press without revealing the nature of the information with the intention of creating a public opinion (for example, to support a war, as the previous link highlights where even human rights groups fell for some of the disinformation, thus creating an even more effective propaganda campaign) The Gulf War in Iraq, 1991, highlighted a lot of PR work in action. Founder of the Washington PR firm, The Rendon Group, John Rendon told cadets at the U.S. Air Force Academy in 1996: "I am not a national security strategist or a military tactician," Rendon said. "I am a politician, and a person who uses communication to meet public policy or corporate policy objectives. In fact, I am an information warrior and a perception manager." He reminded the Air Force cadets that when victorious troops rolled into Kuwait City at the end of the first war in the Persian Gulf, they were greeted by hundreds of Kuwaitis waving small American flags. The scene, flashed around the world on television screens, sent the message that U.S. Marines were being welcomed in Kuwait as liberating heroes. "Did you ever stop to wonder," Rendon asked, "how the people of Kuwait City, after being held hostage for seven long and painful months, were able to get hand-held American, and for that matter, the flags of other coalition countries?" He paused for effect. "Well, you now know the answer. That was one of my jobs then." ... Public relations firms often do their work behind the scenesBut his description of himself as a "perception manager" echoes the language of Pentagon planners, who define "perception management" as "actions to convey and (or) deny selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning. ... In various ways, perception management combines truth projection, operations security, cover, and deception, and psyops [psychological operations]." - Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber, How To Sell a War, In These Times, 4 August, 2003 Such technical phrases like "truth projection" hide their true meanings and intent: propaganda. One can understand how these have been tactics of war. Churchill used such a technique to fool the Nazis regarding the Normandy landings, for example. Yet, in the Iraq example, PR is turned onto one's own citizens to convince them to support a war or make it look more glorious and right, than could otherwise have been. The 2003 war on Iraq saw similar amounts of public relations and media manipulation at work. A detailed account was given by Ahmed Chalabi who seemed to boast how he helped influence major politicians and countries into drumming the beats of war against Iraq. This is discussed in further detail on this site's Iraq section. Smear tactics are increasing in sophistication Smear tactics are often used to discredit, sta
Re: [Biofuel] The need for Gmail invitation
Hello Keith and all our list members Gmail is going to increase from 1 Mega To 2 Mega , as I have alot of invitation to be sent , Most of our list members are welcome as our e mail list is very big one . Please kindly inform if any one really need as gmail help us too There are some concerns about gmail. I think it's as well to be aware of them. See: http://www.google-watch.org/ Google Watch http://www.google-watch.org/gmail.html Gmail is too creepy http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3602745.stm BBC NEWS | Business | Google's Gmail sparks privacy row 5 April, 2004 http://www.privacyrights.org/ar/GmailLetter.htm Thirty-One Privacy and Civil Liberties Organizations Urge Google to Suspent Gmail http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,62917,00.html Wired News: Free E-Mail With a Steep Price? Regards Keith Thanking all sd Pannirselvam P.V Brasil -- Pagandai V Pannirselvam Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte - UFRN Departamento de Engenharia Qumica - DEQ Centro de Tecnologia - CT Programa de Ps Graduao em Engenharia Qumica - PPGEQ Grupo de Pesquisa em Engenharia de Custos - GPEC Av. Senador Salgado Filho, Campus Universitrio CEP 59.072-970 , Natal/RN - Brasil Residence : Av Odilon gome de lima, 2951, Q6/Bl.G/Apt 102 Capim Macio EP 59.078-400 , Natal/RN - Brasil Telefone(fax) ( 84 ) 215-3770 Ramal20 2171557 Telefone(fax) ( 84 ) 215-3770 Ramal20 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Lutec- right to defense
Dear Sirs, I participate in a discussion list about renewable energy sources, and your invention was brought to the forum. It was immediately "debunked" by many members. The most efficient example, I've included below. Before passing my own judgement (personal and not relative to other's opinions- just the to the facts presented), I am offering your scientific team an opportunity to respond to the facts listed below. Please, if you will, explain your device and how it can perform what has been considered impossible by physics for ...ever. Respectfully, Adrian Machado- Van Deusen The debunking: Internet scams or jokes are among my favorites, just because sometimes they're so funny and sometimes they're just so clever. I have to admit that this is pretty clever. First, there is reference to a US Patent application on their website. After do a little searching, I found a patent (granted) as described by them. US Patent number 6,630,806 viewable at: HYPERLINK "http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PAL L&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,630,806.WKU.&OS=PN/6,630 ,806&RS=PN/6,630,806"http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO 1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,630, 806.WKU.&OS=PN/6,630,806&RS=PN/6,630,806 (Here one can note the inefficiency of the US patent office, since the website address includes the patent number 3 times, where one time would have sufficed). However, the patent is not for an unlimited energy machine, but rather "[t]he present invention is aimed at providing an improved rotary device which operates with improved efficiency compared to conventional rotary devices." So it seems they just invented a smoother motor, perhaps. Basically their claim says that they will extract the stored energy from perminant magnets. I invite those who believe that claim to read: HYPERLINK "http://phact.org/e/z/freewire.htm"http://phact.org/e/z/freewire.htm The most important point is: Point 1. Under ideal conditions the electrical power output generated when you move a conductor through a magnetic field is exactly equal to the mechanical power input needed to move the conductor. A more complete debunking can be found here: HYPERLINK "http://www.phact.org/e/z/lutec.pdf"http://www.phact.org/e/z/lutec.pdf So if you happen to be someone who's looking to invest in green projects, don't give these people a cent (or whatever the lowest value of your own currency may be). Just one quote from the second debunking article which I find really good: "Where do the inventors think the energy is coming from? Their response to this article claims that a permanent magnet holding up a heavy iron object for a long time is doing work, ie supplying energy. We point out that the formula for work is the force acting multiplied by the distance moved, thus zero movement gives zero energy." Ok, I hope that wasn't all too long. Have a nice day everyone, -Michael -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.0 - Release Date: 3/31/2005 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Using E85 in a standard 1996 E150
I was in Duluth, MN this weekend and decided to experiment. I have been using E10 for years in all of my gasoline engines, large and small, without any problems, so Saturday when I saw E85 offered at one location at $0.55 per gallon less than gasoline I put in 10 gallons on top of the 10 gallons of E10 that I had in the tank. I drove all around town, on the highway, and up and down the steep hills of Duluth. No problems. So today when it was time to head home, I filled up with E85 (22 more gallons). I drove 105 miles, all at highway speed, without any performance problems. The "Check Engine" light came on at around 70 miles, but no drivability problems were detected. I suspect the "Check Engine" light is indicating a lean mixture due to the oxygen rich nature of ethanol, and therefore is simply out the calibration range the computer expects. I am confident the fuel system is ethanol compatible because Ford has been authorizing E10 for years. Can anyone suggest a reason not to continue using E85 in this vehicle? Thank you. Michael ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] methanol fromnatural gas
Hi group: If somebody has information how to make methanol from natural gas, references and or links are very welcome. Jose ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] taking out Saddam
Darryl wrote: "Clearly, "taking out Saddam" had nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction (the U.N. inspectors had all but proven he had none before the U.S. found the courage to invade), or 9/11 (the plans were in play in the U.S. Administration *before* the planes hit the towers). It was not about getting the oil, as it was available for sale on the world market prior to the invasion. It wasn't about Iraq as a military threat in the region - the U.S. and U.K. were flying military and surveillance over the country *daily* prior to the invasion. It wasn't about Al- Qaeda - they despised Saddam. Hussein did not attack or threaten the U.S. So, Henri, in your opinion, why had the Bush White House really decided to invade Iraq - prior to 9/11?" Could it be because the UN sanctions were failing and about to be lifted? The US was not about to allow the Saddam administration to get $10+ Billion in oil revenue each year knowing they would use it to resume their weapons programs. No, they did not have weapons of mass destruction yet, but they did have the know how and planned to build them ASAP once the sanctions were lifted. Mike ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
[Biofuel] Methanol Storeage and Safety
Hello Biodeisel mavens! I have started my preliminary experimentation with the biodeisel manufacturing process. Everything is going alright, but I have concerns about the safety of methanol. I bought a 5 gallon drum of methanol for use in my experiments. Finding that it was difficult to transfer it from the drum to my measuring cup, I have transfered it to a white, 5-gallon "fuel transporter" that a lot of dirt biking enthusiasts use to pour fuel into their bikes. It is easier to pour from this container, but is it safe to store it in it? Is methanol going to eat through or otherwise interact with the plastic? Also, I am mixing up the lye and methanol in a blender. Does this pose serious saftey hazards. I do all this at my fathers house (he has more backyard space than me). I just don't want to blow his propety up. Any info is appreciated Best Regards, Thomas ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Re: The Energy Crunch To Come
Dear Hakan, You are, of course, correct as far as the fighting in Europe. The Soviet Union fielded some 540 divisions to the German 250+ and the US 87. By the time of the Normandy invasion Germany had lost. The critical battles of the war were arguably Stalingrad, Kursk, Karkov, and perhaps Voronezh. However, the US participation did likely prevent the Red Army from over running the the entire continent. And then there is the matter of the atom bomb. While its development involved mostly Europeans who fled to the US it was in the US that is was developed and for a time made Western Europe and the US the preeminent world power. Also it would be a mistake to down play the logistical support of the US to Europe which included the reduction of the U boat threat in 1943 and the support of the North African invasion. Rick Dear Henri and Rick, I only like to put this "we took out Hitler" to rest. That the Americans single handed took out Hitler, is a myth that only exists in Hollywood movies. The crucial material support from US in WWII was the deliveries of war material. The US infantry troop participation in Europe was on a low level and not crucial. By only look at the loss of soldiers, you understand clearly who was doing the major fighting. Russia 6,000,000 troop causalities Europe Alliance600,000 USA 60,000 Germany was very advanced and introduced for the first time the modern warfare and materials, with a massive air support. They tested much of it in the Spanish civil war. US took out Japan, not on the ground, but with Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This at a time when the European part of WWII was at its end. I do agree that the US propaganda methods was/is superior. Something that Hitler and his administration several times acknowledged and copied. This superiority is maintained even today. Hakan ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
