--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Now that Kieth has made it clear why he has a problem with some of > Dick's historical remarks, can we move on please? The issue of > standards as quality control and Standards as government regulation > are both important to me. Once a Standard is recommended in Australia > it will quickly become law. Without meaning to give offence, I > believe that Australian biodieselers, on their own, lack the > experience to advise the regulator on the proposed standard. > What I want to know is how the practical quality control refered to > (albeit in other words)by Dick transfers into the technical language of a formal Standard and vise versa. Quality control needs to be > simple, inexpensive and on-site. If my on-site quality control is > appropriate then I would expect that the fuel that I produce will > pass any test by a regulator. That requires that the Standard is > practical and designed only to protect the consumer-not protect the > petro-industry or the commercial intrests of a laboratory. > To that end, again, I ask for comment from all list members that I > can better judge the intention of the proposals put forward for the > Australian Standard. > If an unrealistic Australian Standard should be adopted, biodiesel > will join the black market fuel currently in use by many poorer > Australians, actually it will improve the properties of the heating > fuel and solvents currently in use. The problem though is that > biodiesel will get a bad name if it is involved in a warranty dispute > by that association. Your assistance would be appreciated. > REgards from Harry.
I think the US standard ASTM PS121-99 or the Austrian standard Entwurf …NORM EN 14214 make the most sense. They do not include factors which force the use of one feedstock. The German DIN 51606 standard, while widely recognised for quality fuel, unfortunately demands an iodine number that can only be achieved with canola oil. As others have said, that adds no real fuel value, but precludes the use of most other oils. UK govt is asking the same standards questions. Martin Steele and I have suggested we go for: # "Super" grade based on DIN 51606 (to be one day superseded by a pan European CEN standard) # "Blend" grade based on the US ASTM or Austrian standards. Both ASTM and Austrian standard fuels have delivered millions of vehicle miles with no problems, so my suggestion is not really compromising on quality. The dual standard allows new startups to make a Blend grade from used cooking oils. The Super grade allows the car makers to demand DIN 51606 on their warranties for 100% (B100) use - for those that can afford it. As the market for new startups will be hauliers with bunkered fuel running out of warranty trucks on B20 blends, this should keep us all happy. Hopefully, the CEN will drop the iodine factor (and any other feedstock specific factors) so the problem might well go away - eventually. David Elliott ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> FREE COLLEGE MONEY CLICK HERE to search 600,000 scholarships! http://us.click.yahoo.com/47cccB/4m7CAA/ySSFAA/9bTolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://www.webconx.com/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
