Gas prices
 

"jlrogers" wrote in message
om...
Yeah, until you have a crop failure, like they did acouple of years back.
Also, ethanol can't be transported by pipeline. You'll spend more energy
deliverying it than its worth.

Ethanol should have to be "piped" anywhere. Almost every place in the US
can grow corn.

Max

Gas prices
 

OzOne wrote in message ...
Add to that the fact that it requires almost twice as much
ethanol/mile travelled.
To run pure ethanol, cars will need fuel systems capable of supplying
twice as much fuel to the engine..fuel pumps and lines and injectors.

Why would cars run on pure EToH? Reducing gasoline (petrol, for you
down-under limeys) consumption by 10% would change the world oil consumption
dynamic radically. Reducing it by 20% would mean fierce competition for the
remaining 80% market among the oil-producing nations.

Max

Gas prices
 

It's recycled cloth.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
link.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
We use cloth. No recycling needed.

Right. You only killed a couple dozen cotton plants instead. g

Max

Gas prices
 

Maxprop wrote:
"katy" wrote in message
...

Yes. GR has a pro team (or had).

Really? Who were they?

Max


Can't remember....don't follow basketball....GR liked hockey and B
team baseball better....

Gas prices
 

Maxprop wrote:
"katy" wrote in message
...
SUZY wrote:
Speaking of Pro

I saw your pictures sailing Katy.
You are a hottie.
I'd like to get together.
Call me 718-757-7114

Suzy
35s5
NY

You're not my type. Sorry.

Joe isn't your type?

Max


Gag...

Gas prices
 

Maxprop wrote:
"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
We use cloth. No recycling needed.

Right. You only killed a couple dozen cotton plants instead. g

Max


You should hear all those plants scream come the end of November
when they kill them all off....fields and fields of shrieking plants...

Gas prices
 

Maybe I should go back to plastic. All the dinosaurs are dead.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"katy" wrote in message
...
Maxprop wrote:
"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
We use cloth. No recycling needed.

Right. You only killed a couple dozen cotton plants instead. g

Max
You should hear all those plants scream come the end of November when they
kill them all off....fields and fields of shrieking plants...

Gas prices
 

Capt. JG wrote:
Maybe I should go back to plastic. All the dinosaurs are dead.

We should stop embalming people and start using them for fuel...we
could simulate the process that turned all those dinosaurs into
sludge...that would also conserve on land usage for
cemertaries...plant some useful thing there instead...

Gas prices
 

Solyent Green is more efficent. And tasty too!

Suzy
35s5
NY

Gas prices
 

SUZY wrote:
Solyent Green is more efficent. And tasty too!

Suzy
35s5
NY

Nah...that's the sure road to Mad People Disease...

Gas prices
 

"katy" wrote in message
...
Maxprop wrote:
"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
We use cloth. No recycling needed.

Right. You only killed a couple dozen cotton plants instead. g

Max
You should hear all those plants scream come the end of November when they
kill them all off....fields and fields of shrieking plants...

Yes, and their white blood is seen splattered all over fields and the
highways. Just awful.

Max

Gas prices
 

"katy" wrote in message
...
Maxprop wrote:
"katy" wrote in message
...

Yes. GR has a pro team (or had).

Really? Who were they?

Max
Can't remember....don't follow basketball....GR liked hockey and B team
baseball better....

Van Andel had an arena football team as well.

Max

Gas prices
 

Maxprop wrote:
"katy" wrote in message
...
Maxprop wrote:
"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
We use cloth. No recycling needed.
Right. You only killed a couple dozen cotton plants instead. g

Max
You should hear all those plants scream come the end of November when they
kill them all off....fields and fields of shrieking plants...

Yes, and their white blood is seen splattered all over fields and the
highways. Just awful.

Max


I scraped some up....

Gas prices
 

Maxprop wrote:
"katy" wrote in message
...
Maxprop wrote:
"katy" wrote in message
...

Yes. GR has a pro team (or had).
Really? Who were they?

Max
Can't remember....don't follow basketball....GR liked hockey and B team
baseball better....

Van Andel had an arena football team as well.

Max


Still does, I think...

Gas prices
 

Katy,

I think it may be time for you to up-grade your thinking, along with
others.

With the introduction of E85 as a fuel, rather than 100% fossil Fuel and
the advent of Flex-Fuel Vehicles; the days of private transportation may
have a long time to go.

Ford Motors, with its F 150 PU, Ford Crown Victoria, Mercury Marquis,
Lincoln Town car, & Explorer SUV all have the ability to operate on
less Fossil Fuel than most other Vehicles being manufacture today.

They are also helping to develop a E85 corridor from Illinois thru
Missouri to make that fuel available to motorist with Fuel-Flex Cars.

If we can reduce our fossil fuel usage by 85% and with our own Petroleum
reserve, Our fuel independence is assured.

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

Gas prices
 

JL,

BIG OIL used the Hurricane to up gasoline prices. I guess now is about
the right time to turn Oil's phony question on them; "How much should a
Gal. of Ethanol Cost?" Bootleggers made a profit selling for between $5
& $6 a gallon and that was using hidden stills, special Hotrod
transporters, and fear of Jail time. I'm sure with legal operation and
even tax breaks, it can be very competitive with todays Gasoline Prices.


Gas prices

Group: alt.sailing.asa Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2006, 12:47am (PDT+7) From:
(jlrogers)
Yeah, until you have a crop failure, like they did acouple of years
back. Also, ethanol can't be transported by pipeline. You'll spend more
energy deliverying it than its worth.

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

Gas prices
 

Huh? Thom, I totally believe in switching to veggie based fuel, not
only ethanol but soy-derived diesel. The letter you posted just
confirmed my suspicions that it is not the product at fault, but the
politics and money behind the oil industry. The specious argument
that switching won't work because vehicles will lose mileage and
create smog is ridiculous. There is smog, and there is SMOG.
Vegetable based smog would not carry the sulfurous fumes that
constitute the pollution we scrub from the fuel now. And losing
mpg? What a joke. All auto manufacturers have to do is put their
nose to the grindstone utilize their E&D departments, and come up
with a way to increase the mileage. After all, they did that very
thing with fossil fuels. Looking for answers with the fossil fuel
people is ridiculous. You actually think they're going to give way?
Too bad some enterprising person with speculative cash galore
doesn't just move right in and take over.


Thom Stewart wrote:
Katy,

I think it may be time for you to up-grade your thinking, along with
others.

With the introduction of E85 as a fuel, rather than 100% fossil Fuel and
the advent of Flex-Fuel Vehicles; the days of private transportation may
have a long time to go.

Ford Motors, with its F 150 PU, Ford Crown Victoria, Mercury Marquis,
Lincoln Town car, & Explorer SUV all have the ability to operate on
less Fossil Fuel than most other Vehicles being manufacture today.

They are also helping to develop a E85 corridor from Illinois thru
Missouri to make that fuel available to motorist with Fuel-Flex Cars.

If we can reduce our fossil fuel usage by 85% and with our own Petroleum
reserve, Our fuel independence is assured.

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

Gas prices
 

JL,

Pipelines are problem but not as much a problem as Crude by Tankers, all
the way from the Middle East. The raw material for Ethanol can be
transported by open bed Trucks (Even Horse and wagon) to the
fermentation stations. They can be harvested with out high pressure
wells and transported without fear of explosion and a spill of a load of
Corn doesn't damage the environment like a tank truck rollover, or a
ship running aground or a pipe line braking. Trade off seems to favor
Ethanol. Don't you think?

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

Gas prices
 

"katy" wrote...
Huh? Thom, I totally believe in switching to veggie based fuel, not
only ethanol but soy-derived diesel. The letter you posted just
confirmed my suspicions that it is not the product at fault, but the
politics and money behind the oil industry. The specious argument
that switching won't work because vehicles will lose mileage and
create smog is ridiculous. There is smog, and there is SMOG....

These arguments are hardly specious or ridiculous, they are factual.

Research had shown that the worst component of smog was Nitric Acid so, back in
1970, the gummymint dictated less efficient low compression engines to reduce
Nitric Oxide - the stuff that mixes with water in the air to form these acids -
acids that burn your eyes and rot your curtains and worse. Typical gas mileage
dropped by 30%. A mid-size sedan that had been getting 20mpg in 1969 only got
12 by the 72 model year. This was the primary cause of the gas shortages a few
years later when these "environmentally friendly" cars replaced earlier more
efficient cars. So, how can you get 12 mpg instead of 20 and make less smog?

Nitric Oxide does not come from gasoline, it come from air, which is some 70%
Nitrogen and 28% Oxygen IIRC. Normally the two don't mix. But they do if you
compress them inside an engine then set off an explosion in the chamber. And the
higher the compression pressure (ratio) the more mixes and becomes one of the
strongest acids known. That's why environmentalists were willing to trade poorer
gas mileage and more hydrocarbon emissions for less acid. Simple as that.

Ethanol requires even higher compression ratios than gasoline to burn
efficiently - to extract the most energy per gallon - and diesels depend on very
high compression ratios to run at all. Therefor, if one burns ethanol in a
relatively low compression engine like we have today, designed to minimize
emissions, they will definitely lose gas mileage. How much? Well, when 10%
"gasohol" was popular my cars got 10% poorer mileage, indicating that they were
not burning the alcohol at all, that it was just a filler. OTOH racing engines,
using ultra high ratios burn it fine. So we can switch to ethanol but only if we
redesign our motors to use it - and that means more acid smog. Ditto diesel, we
can use diesel engines, but that too means more acid smog. We cannot repeal the
laws of physics or chemistry.

Gas prices
 

"Thom Stewart" wrote
Pipelines are problem but not as much a problem as Crude by Tankers, all
the way from the Middle East. The raw material for Ethanol can be
transported by open bed Trucks (Even Horse and wagon) to the
fermentation stations. They can be harvested with out high pressure
wells and transported without fear of explosion and a spill of a load of
Corn doesn't damage the environment like a tank truck rollover, or a
ship running aground or a pipe line braking. Trade off seems to favor
Ethanol. Don't you think?

Transport is only part of the picture. Growing and transporting enough corn to
make a gallon of ethanol, then actually making it, consumes mucho energy
itself - some claim it takes more energy to produce than we can get back out of
it. I don't know if that's true but I do know that a tractor plowing a field,
or even just disking and planting "no-till" corn uses more fuel than most folk
can imagine. The exact figures escape me but maybe one of y'all know. Also,
farming is about as dangerous as mining.

Gas prices
 

Vito wrote:
"katy" wrote...
Huh? Thom, I totally believe in switching to veggie based fuel, not
only ethanol but soy-derived diesel. The letter you posted just
confirmed my suspicions that it is not the product at fault, but the
politics and money behind the oil industry. The specious argument
that switching won't work because vehicles will lose mileage and
create smog is ridiculous. There is smog, and there is SMOG....

These arguments are hardly specious or ridiculous, they are factual.

Research had shown that the worst component of smog was Nitric Acid so, back in
1970, the gummymint dictated less efficient low compression engines to reduce
Nitric Oxide - the stuff that mixes with water in the air to form these acids -
acids that burn your eyes and rot your curtains and worse. Typical gas mileage
dropped by 30%. A mid-size sedan that had been getting 20mpg in 1969 only got
12 by the 72 model year. This was the primary cause of the gas shortages a few
years later when these "environmentally friendly" cars replaced earlier more
efficient cars. So, how can you get 12 mpg instead of 20 and make less smog?

Nitric Oxide does not come from gasoline, it come from air, which is some 70%
Nitrogen and 28% Oxygen IIRC. Normally the two don't mix. But they do if you
compress them inside an engine then set off an explosion in the chamber. And the
higher the compression pressure (ratio) the more mixes and becomes one of the
strongest acids known. That's why environmentalists were willing to trade poorer
gas mileage and more hydrocarbon emissions for less acid. Simple as that.

Ethanol requires even higher compression ratios than gasoline to burn
efficiently - to extract the most energy per gallon - and diesels depend on very
high compression ratios to run at all. Therefor, if one burns ethanol in a
relatively low compression engine like we have today, designed to minimize
emissions, they will definitely lose gas mileage. How much? Well, when 10%
"gasohol" was popular my cars got 10% poorer mileage, indicating that they were
not burning the alcohol at all, that it was just a filler. OTOH racing engines,
using ultra high ratios burn it fine. So we can switch to ethanol but only if we
redesign our motors to use it - and that means more acid smog. Ditto diesel, we
can use diesel engines, but that too means more acid smog. We cannot repeal the
laws of physics or chemistry.


So you're saying we don't have the technology to do something about
that? Or is it the cost? At this point, cost no longer matters.
The fact is, we are going to run out of fossil fuel and we are not
doing enough to find a replacement. I still maintain that we have
the ability to make scrubbers, etc. that will clean the whatevers
out of vegetable based emissions. We're just not doing it because
of the hold the oil companies have on our economy.

Gas prices
 

Vito wrote:
"Thom Stewart" wrote
Pipelines are problem but not as much a problem as Crude by Tankers, all
the way from the Middle East. The raw material for Ethanol can be
transported by open bed Trucks (Even Horse and wagon) to the
fermentation stations. They can be harvested with out high pressure
wells and transported without fear of explosion and a spill of a load of
Corn doesn't damage the environment like a tank truck rollover, or a
ship running aground or a pipe line braking. Trade off seems to favor
Ethanol. Don't you think?

Transport is only part of the picture. Growing and transporting enough corn to
make a gallon of ethanol, then actually making it, consumes mucho energy
itself - some claim it takes more energy to produce than we can get back out of
it. I don't know if that's true but I do know that a tractor plowing a field,
or even just disking and planting "no-till" corn uses more fuel than most folk
can imagine. The exact figures escape me but maybe one of y'all know. Also,
farming is about as dangerous as mining.


So, Mr. Doom and Gloom...there's no answer in fossil fuel...and
there's no answer in vegetable fuel. Are you going to be the first
to offer yourself up in sacrifice or do you just advocate sitting
around watching as humanity collapses? Nah...don't answer that. I
already know your answer.

Gas prices
 

Vito wrote:


Nitric Oxide does not come from gasoline, it come from air, which is some 70%
Nitrogen and 28% Oxygen IIRC. Normally the two don't mix. But they do if you
compress them inside an engine then set off an explosion in the chamber.

Hmmm, not sure about your chemistry here Vito, Nitric acid, HN03, you
need hydrogen too, and that's not coming from the air.

I don't have the time to delve into it further but I wonder how much of
your argument is idle speculation and unsubstantiated rumor.

Cheers
Marty

Gas prices
 

Thom Stewart wrote:
Kate,

I wasn't aware of the fact that you have a diesel engine car and use
veggie fuel. Good for you. What Model do you have? Is it a truck or
foreign car?

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

O dpn't have a diesel fueled car. I do have a boat with a diesel
engine, though, and a tractor. I think all agriculturally based
states should offer veggie fuel for consumption by the general
public. Right now there is no choice. You get whatever's at the
pump. Which means, the oil company is once again making the
decision for you.

Gas prices
 

Oh----------------
I thought the Service Station back East had Diesel Pumps. They do here
in Washington.

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

Gas prices
 

Thom Stewart wrote:
Oh----------------
I thought the Service Station back East had Diesel Pumps. They do here
in Washington.

http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

They do here, too. But they have petro based diesel, not soy based
for the most part. Farmers who use soy based have their own tanks
on site.

Gas prices
 

On 3 May 2006 17:55:03 -0500, Dave wrote:

On Wed, 03 May 2006 17:08:11 -0400, katy
said:

Nope. More self-sufficiency on a state basis...if a state becomes
economically responsible for itself, then the burden is taken off
the Federal gommit.

Hey, sounds good to me. You folks out in the Midwest subsidize your farmers
to produce ethanol and run your cars on the stuff 100%. Meanwhile take off
that silly mandate that the rest of us burn 10% ethanol in our gasoline. New
York and NJ get first dibs on the foreign crude as it comes into the port,
refine it into gasoline and run our vehicles on that, and, if there's any
left over might send some out your way.


Sounds good to me. And we on the Gulf Coast get to keep all the oil
in the Gulf and all the output from Gulf State refineries.

Frank

Gas prices
 

OzOne wrote:
On Wed, 03 May 2006 10:34:51 -0400, katy
scribbled thusly:

So, Mr. Doom and Gloom...there's no answer in fossil fuel...and
there's no answer in vegetable fuel. Are you going to be the first
to offer yourself up in sacrifice or do you just advocate sitting
around watching as humanity collapses? Nah...don't answer that. I
already know your answer.

Worth a read.
http://www.issues.org/18.2/lave.html


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

Yep....good article. India is capturing methane from their pig
sties and using it for energy. Do you know how much methane is
produced by one silage pit? A lot. If we capped off all the silage
feed pits and siphoned off the methane, we would have another
renewable resource. Problem is, no one will get ricj doing any of this.

Gas prices
 

Dave wrote:
On Wed, 03 May 2006 17:08:11 -0400, katy
said:

Nope. More self-sufficiency on a state basis...if a state becomes
economically responsible for itself, then the burden is taken off
the Federal gommit.

Hey, sounds good to me. You folks out in the Midwest subsidize your farmers
to produce ethanol and run your cars on the stuff 100%. Meanwhile take off
that silly mandate that the rest of us burn 10% ethanol in our gasoline. New
York and NJ get first dibs on the foreign crude as it comes into the port,
refine it into gasoline and run our vehicles on that, and, if there's any
left over might send some out your way.

Nope...the other part of the equation is that no more foreign oil
comes into the country.

Gas prices
 

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"Thom Stewart" wrote
Pipelines are problem but not as much a problem as Crude
by Tankers, all
the way from the Middle East. The raw material for
Ethanol can be
transported by open bed Trucks (Even Horse and wagon) to
the
fermentation stations. They can be harvested with out
high pressure
wells and transported without fear of explosion and a
spill of a load of
Corn doesn't damage the environment like a tank truck
rollover, or a
ship running aground or a pipe line braking. Trade off
seems to favor
Ethanol. Don't you think?

Transport is only part of the picture. Growing and
transporting enough corn to
make a gallon of ethanol, then actually making it,
consumes mucho energy
itself - some claim it takes more energy to produce than
we can get back out of
it. I don't know if that's true but I do know that a
tractor plowing a field,
or even just disking and planting "no-till" corn uses more
fuel than most folk
can imagine. The exact figures escape me but maybe one of
y'all know. Also,
farming is about as dangerous as mining.


They use pull horses around here. Only pollution from them
is recycled into fertilizer.


--
Scott Vernon
Plowville Pa _/)__/)_/)_

Gas prices
 

Scotty wrote:
.

They use pull horses around here. Only pollution from them
is recycled into fertilizer.

The tree huggers won't leave them in peace either, they claim that
"bio-gasses", (animal farts for the normal folks) are a major source of
green house gasses. Some even say that the dinosaurs killed themselves
of in a bath of intense UV radiation caused by an ozone layer depleted
by uncontrolled reptilian flatulence! Probably smelled about as bad as
the interior of Boobie's wife's Benny after he's spent a night onboard
with the hatches battened down with the AC running while safely tied to
the dock!

Cheers
Marty

Gas prices
 

Scotty wrote:
"Vito" wrote in message
...
"Thom Stewart" wrote
Pipelines are problem but not as much a problem as Crude
by Tankers, all
the way from the Middle East. The raw material for
Ethanol can be
transported by open bed Trucks (Even Horse and wagon) to
the
fermentation stations. They can be harvested with out
high pressure
wells and transported without fear of explosion and a
spill of a load of
Corn doesn't damage the environment like a tank truck
rollover, or a
ship running aground or a pipe line braking. Trade off
seems to favor
Ethanol. Don't you think?
Transport is only part of the picture. Growing and
transporting enough corn to
make a gallon of ethanol, then actually making it,
consumes mucho energy
itself - some claim it takes more energy to produce than
we can get back out of
it. I don't know if that's true but I do know that a
tractor plowing a field,
or even just disking and planting "no-till" corn uses more
fuel than most folk
can imagine. The exact figures escape me but maybe one of
y'all know. Also,
farming is about as dangerous as mining.


They use pull horses around here. Only pollution from them
is recycled into fertilizer.


--
Scott Vernon
Plowville Pa _/)__/)_/)_


They did a study of the Amish farmers in the southern Michigan and
northern Indiana area and found that for small farms, those under
300 acres, that Belgian horses were more efficient than tractors.
One of the factors was that a horses weight on the soil does not rip
it up like the heavy tread of a tractor.

Gas prices
 

Martin Baxter wrote:
Scotty wrote:
.

They use pull horses around here. Only pollution from them
is recycled into fertilizer.

The tree huggers won't leave them in peace either, they claim that
"bio-gasses", (animal farts for the normal folks) are a major source of
green house gasses. Some even say that the dinosaurs killed themselves
of in a bath of intense UV radiation caused by an ozone layer depleted
by uncontrolled reptilian flatulence! Probably smelled about as bad as
the interior of Boobie's wife's Benny after he's spent a night onboard
with the hatches battened down with the AC running while safely tied to
the dock!

Cheers
Marty
Ya know, I can't help but wonder that if the "treehuggers" (not
those who are genuinely concerned and looking for reasonable
answers) don't martyr themselves for the cause, do themselves in,
and release the world from their misery.

Gas prices
 

"katy" wrote
OzOne wrote:
scribbled thusly:
So, Mr. Doom and Gloom...there's no answer in fossil fuel...and
there's no answer in vegetable fuel. Are you going to be the first
to offer yourself up in sacrifice or do you just advocate sitting
around watching as humanity collapses?

Worth a read.
http://www.issues.org/18.2/lave.html


Yep....good article. India is capturing methane ....

But methane has the same problems as ethanol.

I'll no doubt quit "emitting" long before you do. Meanwhile, I'm going to watch
humanity collapse whether you or I like it or not. You see the gas shortage
and the problem Oz mentions, and 1000 others, are only symptoms. The real
problem is literally too many f'ing people!

If the world's population had not *doubled* since *1963* - just 43 years - we
would have NONE of these problems. There was no gas shortage or smog problems in
the US back in 1950 when our population was 151 million - but now it's 298.6
million and guess what - there isn't enough oil or clean air or clean water for
the extra 147 million fools and Oz is justifiably bitching about our excess
carbon emissions.

And yet we still encourage people to breed like cockroaches by giving tax breaks
and welfare payments when we ought to quit subsidizing foreign countries and
sterilize everybody with 2 or more kids.

http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/img/worldpop.gif

That's why I'm Mr. Doom and Gloom. Sure, we can switch to ethanol and methane
and even reduce our carbon emissions a bit - but only if we are willing to
accept burning eyes and rotting fabrics (sails) from the extra nitric acid that
will entail. Or we could switch but keep low compression and accept even more
carbon emissions.

These may seem like reasonable tradeoffs but neither one will help a bit by the
time they can be implemented unless we also adopt strict population controls.
Suppose we could reduce both oil consumption and carbon emissions by 25% by
2020 - an extremely optimistic estimate. By 2020 world population will have
grown from 6 to 7.5 billion (25%), negating even that optimistic gain! Then the
population will double again and the world will be even worse off than now!!
Meanwhile people will be seeking more magic band aids just like y'all are doing
now. Eventually the whole Earth will become another Easter Island, not because
we cannot prevent it but because we are too superstitious to admit the real
problem or do anything about it. So either pray for a plague or spend your
energy lobbying for population control instead of band aids!

That's why I oppose magic band aids. They'll cost me but in 20 years.we'll be
worse off than now anyway and I'll likely be dead. So it's "What? Me worry?"
for me.

Gas prices
 

"katy" wrote ...
Vito wrote:
"katy" wrote...
Huh? Thom, I totally believe in switching to veggie based fuel, not
only ethanol but soy-derived diesel. .... The specious argument
that switching won't work because vehicles will lose mileage and
create smog is ridiculous. ....

These arguments are hardly specious or ridiculous, they are factual.

Nitric Oxide does not come from gasoline, it come from air,

So you're saying we don't have the technology to do something about
that? Or is it the cost? ...

I'm saying that there is no such technology. If we switch to methanol in
today's engines mileage will perforce suffer and carbon emissions will be even
worse. If we instead raise compression ratios to efficiently burn ethanol then
mileage won't suffer as much nor will carbon emissions be worse BUT we will have
much more nitric acid in our air. We could even continue to burn gasoline but
use less of it if we accepted more acids. These are the trade offs. Believe
what you like but I know of no magic "scrubbers" that will "eat" the nitric
oxide and we already have catalytic converters so it's simply a question of how
we'd rather have our kids and grandkids die - their lungs eaten by acid or drown
due to global warming. Maybe better that some of them not be born? Huh? Huh?

Gas prices
 

"Martin Baxter" wrote
Hmmm, not sure about your chemistry here Vito, Nitric acid, HN03, you
need hydrogen too, and that's not coming from the air.

Ah, but it is - in the form of water vapor (fog) which mixes with the nitric
oxide to mke acid.

Gas prices
 

A guy down the road from me uses 12, side by side ( single
row) for plowing. Looks cool!


--
Scott Vernon
Plowville Pa _/)__/)_/)_

"katy" wrote in message
...
Scotty wrote:
planting "no-till" corn uses more
fuel than most folk
can imagine. The exact figures escape me but maybe one
of
y'all know. Also,
farming is about as dangerous as mining.


They use pull horses around here. Only pollution from
them
is recycled into fertilizer.


--
Scott Vernon
Plowville Pa _/)__/)_/)_


They did a study of the Amish farmers in the southern
Michigan and
northern Indiana area and found that for small farms,
those under
300 acres, that Belgian horses were more efficient than
tractors.
One of the factors was that a horses weight on the soil
does not rip
it up like the heavy tread of a tractor.

Gas prices
 

Dave wrote:
On Thu, 04 May 2006 10:44:19 -0400, katy
said:

They did a study of the Amish farmers in the southern Michigan

Never trust anything called a "study," particularly if it's by someone
called "they." Study" is the current word for a propaganda piece dressed up
to in academic clothes.
The study I referred to was written a ways back, I think in the
"Draft Horse Journal" or some other trade publication at the time.
I tried to find it online but was unable to. I did find this,
though, and many other articles and articles like it.

http://www.ruralheritage.com/back_fo...ics_career.htm

Academic? There's plenty of valid literature out there regarding
small agribusiness (the family farm) and how worthwhile it would be
to pursue maintaining and increasing small farms. Do a Google
search....

Gas prices
 

"Thom Stewart" wrote

Transport is only part of the picture. Growing and transporting enough
corn to
make a gallon of ethanol, then actually making it, consumes mucho energy
itself - some claim it takes more energy to produce than we can get back
out of
it.

Who could that be. Could it be . . . oh, I don't know . . . maybe . . . BIG
OIL??!!!

I don't know if that's true but I do know that a tractor plowing a field,
or even just disking and planting "no-till" corn uses more fuel than most
folk
can imagine. The exact figures escape me but maybe one of y'all know.
Also,
farming is about as dangerous as mining.

Well, maybe we should be harnessing cow farts in order to offset the expense
and grave danger of raising corn.

Katy wrote:

So, Mr. Doom and Gloom...there's no answer in fossil fuel...and there's no
answer in vegetable fuel. Are you going to be the first to offer yourself
up in sacrifice or do you just advocate sitting around watching as
humanity collapses? Nah...don't answer that. I already know your answer.

Thom, the retired oil refinery worker, might be a bit biased, Katy. Then
again, he's maybe just counting on the fact that he won't be around to see
the disaster that dwindling petroleum reserves will eventually be for our
ancestors.

Max

Gas prices
 

OzOne wrote in message ...
On Wed, 03 May 2006 10:34:51 -0400, katy
scribbled thusly:


So, Mr. Doom and Gloom...there's no answer in fossil fuel...and
there's no answer in vegetable fuel. Are you going to be the first
to offer yourself up in sacrifice or do you just advocate sitting
around watching as humanity collapses? Nah...don't answer that. I
already know your answer.

Worth a read.
http://www.issues.org/18.2/lave.html

Noteworthy is that we passed the $2.70 per gallon barrier earlier this year.
A smart society or government would consider adopting a program of
progressive ethanol replacement, but my guess is that it's going to take a
miracle of some sort to convince our government to act. And of course we
face the constant barrage of lobbying and disinformation by Big Oil. Money
talks, logic walks.

Max