What is the point of being wealthy if you can't choose the music? The energy tycoons have stated the future is fuel cells. Any competing technology will be outlawed if it can't be done another way. Most of the green extremists get grants from foundations representing the ruling class and their corporations so they will generate "reports" and "studies" that will be transmitted via the paper and electronic communication media owned by the ruling class etc etc etc.
Energy is a fat hog and they mean to keep control of it. No growing fuel in your back yard. The illusion of alternatives will be allowed--at a high price. You can generate hydrogen with photovoltaics instead of buying it from the 7 sisters. Any technology that is not economically competitive will be allowed. Biodiesel cogeneration is the state of the art in terms of initial capitalization and energy efficiency to the end user. Why is it still neglected? A university modifies a burner to combust chicken fat and it is front page news. I'll grant you it is a step in the right direction but as an effort from an engineering department it isn't impressive. Cogeneration would be a meaningful demonstration from a university. If they aren't cutting edge then they indulge in fraud billing themselves as an institution of "higher learning." Any time a fuel is burned in a box instead of an engine we have wasted resources. Certainly sometimes it is justifiable because of the application but when we do it in large stationary heating plants such as that school --and especially when students should be given first hand cogeneration experience--it makes me wince. My 2 cents. Kirk -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 2:26 PM To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [biofuel] California school buses hit for smog - Old diesels put state in... Keith: Take a look at the following article by Chuck Lapin. I have known that natural gas and MTBE were bad since about 1980. Do we get heard? No! Only the extreme environmentalists and their partners in the government. Richard TOXICOLOGIST 'APPALLED' AT IGNORING CNG RISK. Diesel Fuel News, April 16, 2001 By: Jack Peckham One of California's top industry toxicologists who has been involved in the diesel "toxic emissions" issues for more than a decade says he's "appalled" by a recent green-group study that selectively attacks diesel emissions for supposed school bus "cancer threats." Charles Lapin, former Arco Senior Toxicologist, now a private consultant to various clean-diesel technology promoters including International Truck & Engine, points out that the NRDC/CCA study (see Diesel Fuel News 2/19/2001, p7) used only one of the four test buses for health-risk calculations, instead of averaging the emissions. The worst-case 1986 bus used for the calculation "showed signs of disrepair and should not have been used to calculate risks," Lapin said. What's more, the risk estimates used methodologies not recognized by U.S. E.P.A. "This is a political rehash of earlier NRDC dump-diesel statements," Lapin told Diesel Fuel News. "As a toxicologist, the part I find troubling is not just the health effects calculation per se. The main thing that concerns me is that when you present data, then you don't call something a 'significant risk' unless it's statistically significant." "Even using the study's PM exposure calculation for this obsolete-technology, possibly defective school bus -- two hours/day, 180/days/year, for 10 years --that adds up to less than 0.6% of a child's assumed 70-year, 600,000 hour lifetime," Lapin points out. "That's really just a background risk" for cancer, he said, rather than a statistically significant risk. "Even if there's a tiny but potential risk, then the 'greens' are very selective in employing the 'precautionary principle' often used by environmental advocates, regulatory agencies and many industries," he said. Revoking Principals "It's been revoked in their minds for CNG," (Compressed Natural Gas) Lapin said. "University of California at Riverside published data two years ago analyzing CNG vehicle exhaust and found it contains PAH's (Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbons). CNG PM has carcinogens. That's a scary thing, because for a given weight of a particle -- one microgram of diesel PM and one microgram of CNG PM -- CNG has a higher percentage of PAH on a weight basis than diesel PM. So if we're comparing the two vehicles on an emissions weight basis, the CNG vehicle will have more carcinogens attached to PM than the diesel vehicle. The data has been there for two years and its being ignored." While some scientists suspect that lube oil PM could be a key source of PAH in CNG exhaust, other PAH's are formed by condensation of lighter CNG combustion products, "so maybe it's not [just] lubes," Lapin said. By contrast, a lot of the diesel soot PM is inert elemental carbon. The typically smaller size of CNG PM also ought to bother the "greens," because "the finer the [emissions] mist, the greater the surface area [of PM] and the greater the chance for a carcinogen to travel into the cell," he said. "People in the business of promoting and protecting public health should investigate that first before tilting toward one technology," he said. "I'm just appalled by the CNG tilt, and I'm not the only one." --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.323 / Virus Database: 180 - Release Date: 2/8/2002 ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get your FREE credit report with a FREE CreditCheck Monitoring Service trial http://us.click.yahoo.com/ACHqaB/bQ8CAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
