Batteries, again, sorry
 

Larry wrote:
Gogarty wrote in news:20090421-210944.92.0
@Gogarty.news.bway.net:

You make a very good point. Are there not emergency stills that work on
sunlight?




Yes. Only trouble is they are evaporators, not stills. Biology grows
right up to around 180F so these solar evaps are easily contaminated, a
source of nasty bacteria because they are just right inside in temperature.

If you don't see it boil, it just isn't safe.

Well, for most common pathogens, you are pretty much correct. However,
there are many spore forming thermophiles whose spores will just laugh
at you if you try to kill them with boiling water. Throw in 10 spores
of G. stearothermophilus in your boiling water. They'll still be happy
to grow up after boiling for 10 hours.

And you can throw in 10 B. subtilis/atrophaeus spores in your dry jar
and put in the oven at 250°F. They'll still be viable 600 hours later.
You'd need 10 minutes at 320°F. Dry heat sterilization is much less
effective than moist heat, for most all types of bugs, so jack up the
temp when you're trying to sterilize things in an oven.

Keith Hughes

Batteries, again, sorry
 

In article ,
says...
"Edgar" wrote in
:

Even if the dial on the dashboard is set to indicate 'recharge' when
the battery falls to, say, 70%, people out on the road are going to
discover that you can go on driving for quite a while after this so
the battery is likely to go much lower than planned on many occasions.
Current advertisements suggest battery life will be about 5 years but
I suspect this is optimistic for reason above.
When a large and complex battery needs replacing, say after 5 years,
the way auto spares are priced will ensure that it will be more
sensible to buy a new car and start afresh rather than spending as
much as a 5 year old car is worth in order to renew its battery. And
do not forget there is sure to be an 'environmental' charge to safely
dispose of the toxic substances in the old battery.



The outrageous cost of hybrid car battery replacement, beyond the car
company's masking warranty, will ensure these cars have near zero resale
value if the used car buyer is staring at a $4000 battery pack replacement
in the face in the used car lot. This must make new car dealers simply
elated. The ultimate used car is one that is worthless at the end of the
payment book. Hybrids will be the ultimate used car.

So, you actually save nothing buying a hybrid exoticar noone but a
$150/hour dealer jacking up parts prices 500% can repair. You either keeps
swapping cars, which is just STUPID at these outrageous car prices.....or
pay thousands and thousands at some point for a battery pack it MUST have!

It's why I'm driving diesel Mercedes cars, even if they weren't running on
free fuel from Chinese restaurants.....(c;]

UPS trucks are diesels for a reason, you know.....None of them are hybrids
or electric. Ask yourself why....


I'd rather ask why you didn't check with UPS before writing that:

"Hybrid Electric Vehicles
UPS has researched and tested hybrid electric technology since 1998. In
2000, the company deployed a hybrid electric vehicle in its Huntsville,
Ala. operations on a 31-mile route, making 150 pickups and deliveries
each day. UPS deployed a second-generation HEV that operated in
Kalamazoo, Mich. for several months during 2004. In 2007, UPS deployed
50 third-generation hybrid electric vehicles in Atlanta, Dallas, Houston
and Phoenix.

The company is in the process of deploying 50 third-generation hybrid
electric vehicles. These vehicles promise a 45 percent improvement in
fuel economy over the vehicles they are replacing. The 50 vehicles are
expected to collectively reduce fuel consumption by 44,000 gallons
annually. These trucks will reduce CO2 by 457 metric tons annually. UPS
recently announced an order for 200 hybrid electric vehicles - the
largest commercial order of such trucks by any company. The new HEVs
will be deployed in 2009 and are expected to save 176,000 gallons of
fuel and reduce CO2 emissions by 1,786 metric tons each year. "

http://www.pressroom.ups.com/mediaki...05,879,00.html


Mark Borgerson

Batteries, again, sorry
 

Batteries, again, sorry
 

Larry wrote:
wrote in
:


snip

My offer still stands to put sterile jars of your RO water and my
distiller water on the dock for the summer then we'll both drink what's
in it the last day of August.....

But, the reality is this is irrelevant as a test, and totally
meaningless as any form of standard. The air you breathe is not
sterile, nor is the food you eat, nor is the finger you pick your nose
with. RO water is *not* guaranteed (nor likely) sterile...so what? The
container you store it in, and the glass you drink it from is not
sterile either. That's why you chlorinate water that's going to be
stored, because it will always have some baseline bioburden, and stored
under ideal conditions, without a biocide or preservative, will grow
out. When your fecal matter comes out sterile, then you can start
worrying about making sure your drinking water is always *sterile* (of
course, you'll be dead at that point, but...)

I'm sure DoD has some superbugs in their illegal arsenal of biological
warfare agents no distiller can kill.....But, when it comes to purifying
hose water from the sewage the city delivers as drinking
water....Distillers work much better than anything available, including
RO.

These are not superbugs, or DoD creations. G. stearothermophilus is
common in hot springs, and is used routinely for qualification of moist
heat sterilization processes. In fact, it won't even grow at all below
about 125°F. B. subtilis/atrophaeus is a common bacillus
species/subspecies (found in soils, grasses, and even used in gardens as
a fungicide), used routinely for qualification of dry heat and gamma
irradiation sterilization processes. Neither is considered a human
pathogen, which is why they are used as bioindicator (challenge) organisms.

Distillation works fine, and other than energy usage, doesn't have too
many downsides. But you need a lot more specificity when it comes to
defining "better" relative to drinking water production. Tens of
millions of people worldwide drink RO water without an issue. High
temperature distillate will typically have a lower bioburden *from the
still* than RO. But, when coupled with the charcoal bed needed to
remove volatile organics that carryover from the distillation process,
you have the same type of bioburden issues. Carbon beds are perfect
incubators, providing a marvelous substrate, far better than RO
membranes in fact, as well as a ready carbon source for bacterial growth.

The point is, both systems work fine for drinking water, as long as the
process is understood by the user, and the inherent process risks are
addressed through routine maintenance and sensible use. Long term
storage of water, without a suitable growth inhibitor, is just bad
practice irrespective of the purification process used.

And I *still* say you must have been bitten by an RO unit as a child... :-)

Keith Hughes

Batteries, again, sorry
 

On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 22:03:55 -0700, wrote:

And I *still* say you must have been bitten by an RO unit as a child... :-)

Keith Hughes

I think you're right, Keith! Larry is apparently just a tad fanatic
about drinking water :-)

Keith wrote in a previous post:
My
experience is with units in the 2000-3000gph range, typically running
24/7 with treated city water as feed. Still require routine cleaning,
and biocide treatment.

I'm curious. Do these systems use the same 10% recovery rate?

More curiosity points...

I wonder how surface area, volume, etc. scale up. That's about 1,000
times as much product water, so does that mean surface area of the
membrane is 1,000 times more?

What's the difference between seawater, brackish water and fresh water
membranes? I've read it's the permeability, but are the "holes"
smaller or larger for the seawater compared to the fresh water? Or the
same size; is it the pressure rating instead? Is the seawater more or
less prone to fouling than the fresh water?

No answers required. Just wondering.


The bottom line, in my opinion, is that an RO system on a cruising
boat, especially on one like ours that spend months "away from
civilization", is the best answer for all fresh water needs. We're a
sailboat with solar panels and a wind generator that keep the
batteries up.

Yes, it does require care and work. I would say it's more work taking
off the sailcover and replacing it than to maintain the RO system.
Like the sailcover, if you don't do it, you'll pay for it. In the case
of the sailcover, a new mainsail; in the case of the RO a new
membrane.

Rick Morel

Batteries, again, sorry
 

Batteries, again, sorry
 

"Larry" wrote in message
...
wrote in :

Tens of
millions of people worldwide drink RO water without an issue.

Tens of millions of people drink lake water, too, "without an issue".
But,
I don't think we're being honest with any of them over the LONG TERM what
these pathogens will do to them over time.....



--
-----
Larry
You can tell there's very intelligent life in the Universe
because none of them have ever tried to contact us.....


No one gets out alive.

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

Batteries, again, sorry
 

On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:02:50 +0000, Larry wrote:

wrote in :

Tens of
millions of people worldwide drink RO water without an issue.

Tens of millions of people drink lake water, too, "without an issue". But,
I don't think we're being honest with any of them over the LONG TERM what
these pathogens will do to them over time.....

I have to wonder about what was in the water that YOU drank.

Batteries, again, sorry
 

Hi, Wilbur,


You have a big problem, Skippy. The problem is you are trying to run what
amounts to the average size house ashore on batteries. Considering your
total power usage you need a battery bank of at least 20 (yes, I said
TWENTY) of those Trojan deep cycle six-volt batteries. Then you need a
separate battery bank of at least 2 heavy duty cranking batteries for your
starter.

You should do either of three things.

1) continue to be an energy hog and plan on running your diesel with heavy
duty alternator for at least 8 hours a day to properly charge the above
suggested battery bank.
2) invest in an 8KW diesel variable output genset and run it 24/7 and
reduce the size of the suggested battery bank by a factor of five.
3) get rid of 80% of the crap in your boat that runs on electricity that
you don't need anyway and start acting like a sensible cruiser and have a
battery bank of 4 Trojans plus two starter batteries and charge them using
photovoltaics (400 watts worth) plus wind generator and stick to using no
more electricity per day than these input.



Wilbur Hubbard

We have 880 AH, which does us very well. In a tropical envrionment, for
which the system was designed, the current 370W solar and a single KISS wind
will keep us up to full charge.

Here in lesser ideal situations, occasionally we run the Honda through the
shorepower link to make the 70A inverter-charger run. For the next couple
of months or so we'll be at a dock, and, of course, that all will become
moot..

Virtually everything other than miscellaneous small chargers (spotlight,
toothbrushes, coffee grinder, and a computer flatscreen - more on which
below) is 12 V. When I find a suitable monitor which will run on ship
power, I'll replace the one I have and the entire computer setup will be
12V.

If you look in the archives (or I could perhaps repost it) I put up a very
extensive look at everything we had aboard, and the anticipated usage. I'll
add more solar when we do the hardtop, but for now, the system works very
well.

And we have a 9* freezer and 33* reefer - all the comforts of home, which
our boat is, and, now, having made landfall, can say conclusively that it
suits us much better than anything we've been reintroduced to ashore, other
than the unlimited water and drying for laundry.

Meanwhile, the reason we're ashore is for Lydia's grandson's open heart
surgery, from which he comes home today. Prayers appreciated...

L8R

Skip and crew


--
Morgan 461 #2
SV Flying Pig KI4MPC
See our galleries at www.justpickone.org/skip/gallery !
Follow us at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheFlyingPigLog
and/or http://groups.google.com/group/flyingpiglog

The Society for the Preservation of Tithesis commends your ebriated
and scrutible use of delible and defatigable, which are gainly, sipid
and couth. We are gruntled and consolate that you have the ertia and
eptitude to choose such putably pensible tithesis, which we parage.

Stamp out Sesquipedalianism

Batteries, again, sorry
 

Larry wrote:
wrote in :

Tens of
millions of people worldwide drink RO water without an issue.

Tens of millions of people drink lake water, too, "without an issue". But,
I don't think we're being honest with any of them over the LONG TERM what
these pathogens will do to them over time.....

You're assuming that RO water *has* pathogens in it. Lake water
typically does. But the fact that so many do drink lake water "without
an issue" gives you a very good sense of the *scale* of the problem
you're so concerned with. As a practical matter, very few bacteria
present any problem at all in the stomach unless their population is
very high, and a well maintained RO systems generate very low bioburden
permeate.

Keith Hughes