Biodiesel is old technology and can never be competitive on a large scale.
TCP is the future.

http://www.changingworldtech.com/home.html

"Joe" wrote in message .. .
Biodiesel is old technology and can never be competitive on a large scale.
TCP is the future.

http://www.changingworldtech.com/home.html

Are you saying that biodiesel is somehow inferior because it's older technology?
If that were true, then petroleum based products would be useless?

How about the wheel? That's old technology.

At least we have a renewable source of fuel, so when the oil runs out in
OPEC land, we can grow our own in farmlands, mostly from soybeans.
It is a good proven solution to the eventual loss of fossil fuel.

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"Joe" wrote in message
.. .
Biodiesel is old technology and can never be competitive on a large
scale.
TCP is the future.

http://www.changingworldtech.com/home.html

Are you saying that biodiesel is somehow inferior because it's older
technology?
If that were true, then petroleum based products would be useless?

How about the wheel? That's old technology.

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 08:05:34 -0500, Scott Downey wrote:

At least we have a renewable source of fuel, so when the oil runs out in
OPEC land, we can grow our own in farmlands, mostly from soybeans.
It is a good proven solution to the eventual loss of fossil fuel.

Not really. Modern agriculture is heavily petroleum intensive
(pesticides, fertilizers, etc). The harvest of most crops use more energy
than the potential return. We have become far to dependent on oil. If
there is even a small amount of truth in what the doomsayers are saying,
our grandchildren face a very serious problem.

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

"thunder" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 08:05:34 -0500, Scott Downey wrote:

At least we have a renewable source of fuel, so when the oil runs out in
OPEC land, we can grow our own in farmlands, mostly from soybeans.
It is a good proven solution to the eventual loss of fossil fuel.

Not really. Modern agriculture is heavily petroleum intensive
(pesticides, fertilizers, etc). The harvest of most crops use more energy
than the potential return. We have become far to dependent on oil. If
there is even a small amount of truth in what the doomsayers are saying,
our grandchildren face a very serious problem.

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/


Also see the book "Hubbert's Peak : The Impending World Oil Shortage" for
the original source.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...glance&s=books

Mark Browne

"Scott Downey" wrote in message
...
At least we have a renewable source of fuel, so when the oil runs out in
OPEC land, we can grow our own in farmlands, mostly from soybeans.
It is a good proven solution to the eventual loss of fossil fuel.


You could never grow enough to satisfy the demand. It is not a solution, it
is only "feel good" technology and a waste of money.

The beauty of TCP is that it coverts waste products into fuels, fertilizers,
minerals, and gases, and the whole process is powered by fuels produced in
the process.
The process is so clean that the plants do not even need permits.

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:46:46 +0000, Joe wrote:

Path:
uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!peer01.cox.net!cox.net!cyclone1.gnilink. net!spam
killer.gnilink.net!nwrddc01.gnilink.net.POSTED!d55 f7779!not-for-mail
From: "Joe"
Newsgroups: rec.boats
References:



Subject: use Biodiesel, OPEC get a life.
Lines: 18
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Message-ID:
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:46:46 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4.7.128.19
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: nwrddc01.gnilink.net 1077295606 4.7.128.19 (Fri, 20 Feb 2004
11:46:46 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 11:46:46 EST
Xref: uni-berlin.de rec.boats:640335
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



"Scott Downey" wrote in message
...
At least we have a renewable source of fuel, so when the oil runs out in
OPEC land, we can grow our own in farmlands, mostly from soybeans.
It is a good proven solution to the eventual loss of fossil fuel.


You could never grow enough to satisfy the demand. It is not a solution, it
is only "feel good" technology and a waste of money.

The beauty of TCP is that it coverts waste products into fuels, fertilizers,
minerals, and gases, and the whole process is powered by fuels produced in
the process.
The process is so clean that the plants do not even need permits.


Just like domestic garbage so-called recycling, it's a scam after mostly
tax payers money fromn weak govt & quasi govt instrumentalities.

Cost the GDP, jobs & the enviroment dearly, don't fall for it.

K

"K. Smith" wrote in message
...

Just like domestic garbage so-called recycling, it's a scam after mostly
tax payers money fromn weak govt & quasi govt instrumentalities.

Cost the GDP, jobs & the enviroment dearly, don't fall for it.

K

Tell that to Butterball, they power a whole factory solely on turkey innards
and bones.
They use NO electricity from any other source and have surplus power they
sell back to the local power company.
I'm sure there are many scams out there that promise energy from waste, but
this isnt one of them.

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 23:49:35 +0000, Joe wrote:


"K. Smith" wrote in message
...

Just like domestic garbage so-called recycling, it's a scam after mostly
tax payers money fromn weak govt & quasi govt instrumentalities.

Cost the GDP, jobs & the enviroment dearly, don't fall for it.

K

Tell that to Butterball, they power a whole factory solely on turkey innards
and bones.
They use NO electricity from any other source and have surplus power they
sell back to the local power company.
I'm sure there are many scams out there that promise energy from waste, but
this isnt one of them.

Joe,

I'm not familiar with that example but certainly wouldn't just accept their
claims.

If these people take in turkeys & produce processed (lots of steam &
heat??) product out the other end, then try to claim they do it without
any energy inputs??? indeed say they have excess?? well they certainly
know how to process investor turkeys that's for su-)

These claims never ever stand up to independant examinations, yes there
are the rare times when an expensive capital intensive arrangement can
"seem" to get something for nothing, but as with everything else in life,
that just doesn't happen. Reshuffles are easy but even a small net gain is very
tricky.

The best that can be expected is a shuffling on costs (economic &
environmental) from one location/payer/class to another.

A bit like how the democrats operate, they rob risk taker hard working
paul to pay lay about liar peter, then try to claim they've increased
the whole:-)

When it happens & I agree it will, then we'll all know about it because
they'll be a rush to adopt it.

K