Lister Engine Forum

Alternative fuels => Straight Vegetable Oil => Topic started by: kyradawg on June 12, 2006, 04:22:21 PM

Title: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: kyradawg on June 12, 2006, 04:22:21 PM
http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/ncnu02/v5-029.html

Guy, Here's some info to digest.

The 2005 average Rape seed crop yielded 32.6 bushels per acre.

There are 50 pounds in a bushel of rape seed 42% being oil.

@ 32.6 bushels per acre there are 684.6 pounds of oil.

There 7.6 pounds of oil in a U.S. gallon.

Which leaves us with 90.07 gallons of oil per acre @ the 2005 average of 32.6 bushels/acre.

In 2003 the total U.S. crude oil consuption was 2,057,000,000 barrels of crude.

One barrel contains 42 U.S. gallons.

863,940,000,000 Gallons of crude were consumed in the U.S. in 2003.

It would take 959,187,298 acres to meet ALL of the U.S. annual oil demand.

There 640 acres in a square mile.

It would take 1,498,730 square miles to meet 2003 U.S. Total oil demands.

There are 587,000,000 acres of available pasture/grasslands in the U.S. which total 9,171,875 square miles.

Still dont think we have the land to support organic fuels and lubes?

If only taking into account the pasture land NOT farmland we have 83% more land than is needed to support ALL of the U.S. annual demand.

It will only take 17% of the 587,000,000 acres of U.S. pasture land to produce 100% of the demand.

That includes 100% of gasoline usage

100% of the heating oil usage

100% of the jet fuel used

100% of the petro chemical usage

100% of the diesel fuel usage

ALL of the above land data come's straight from the USDA government census.

Ill do some more reasearch so we can figure the percentage each industry consumes.


Peace&Love :D, Darren
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: mobile_bob on June 12, 2006, 05:36:42 PM
i didnt take time to do much more than parruse thru the article, but

are you supporting the idea of using vegi oils as lubrication oils?

i thought your interest lies in their use as fuels

looks like alot of modification would have to be done to vegie oil to make it suitable for lubrication oil

bob g
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: kyradawg on June 12, 2006, 07:29:16 PM



Peace&Love :D, Darren
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: Dail R H on June 13, 2006, 05:59:16 AM
   Where does one buy this magic fluid?
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: oldnslow on June 13, 2006, 06:29:57 PM
Lots of potential here. I had no idea that over time (like in the postal vehical study) it would dissolve out the sludge and heavy metals. Even without the zinc additive, it has a favorable coefficient of friction in the crankcase. Amazing if true, still reading.

I guess if anyone had the nerve to fill their trans with it, it would be you because you worked for GM. Good for you, glad it worked.

AFAIK, Canola is cost competetive to produce. The demand for Canola could easily revive the farms in the midwest. If I lived there, I would be out scouting for farms for sale right now.
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: rgroves on June 13, 2006, 07:01:39 PM
AFAIK, Canola is cost competetive to produce. The demand for Canola could easily revive the farms in the midwest. If I lived there, I would be out scouting for farms for sale right now.

Take a look at "High Plains Journal" or "Grass and Grain", any issue.  There is a staggering number of farm auction sales, from retiring farmers or the estates of them who didn't get to retirement. I wish somebody was buying this land, other than the big players.  Better yet, I wish there was another generation of guys willing to take over the farm from dad. But that's not happening.  Vegetable oil might end up saving the farm economy out here, but for the moment all I see is same same.

Sorry for the digression and the rant. 

Russell Groves
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: oldnslow on June 13, 2006, 10:21:10 PM
Russell I wish I lived out there. I work for a company owned by one of the largest co-ops in the USA and they sell crop inputs. The fuel used in some of our trucks is blended with canola and the savings are considerable.

We have some of the best farmland and climate worldwide for producing these types of oil crops. If it works well and is cost competetive perhaps now is the time to produce more and sell it for fuel/lubricants ie non food markets. The longer crude and gas stay high, the more viable it becomes. Hmmm did the price of gas just level off and drop a penny or two recently? I guess we are in the middle of the growing season.

Some might think, hell these guys need some grant money.... but really, farmers are extremely resourceful and don't need no "stinkin" grant money. If a crop can be grown in a way that produces a viable return they can take it from there.

I am guessing but I bet many farms that went under did so because of debt mismanagement. They were chasing markets that were being manipulated by subsidies that didn't come through. Are ther any articles in the "Grass and Grain" about alternative uses for vegetable oils? It's hard to see a way out when there is no money, no jobs and you struggle just to live. Been there. I need to look at those two mags you mentioned.

Later.......

Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: rgroves on June 14, 2006, 01:22:45 AM
Some might think, hell these guys need some grant money.... but really, farmers are extremely resourceful and don't need no "stinkin" grant money. If a crop can be grown in a way that produces a viable return they can take it from there.

I am guessing but I bet many farms that went under did so because of debt mismanagement. They were chasing markets that were being manipulated by subsidies that didn't come through. Are ther any articles in the "Grass and Grain" about alternative uses for vegetable oils? It's hard to see a way out when there is no money, no jobs and you struggle just to live. Been there. I need to look at those two mags you mentioned.

What these guys DON'T need is grant money.  They've spent so many years growing cheap cereal grains at a loss, waiting for the subsidy check, and bitching about the government and the local banker-- they don't know any other way.  There are some counties in western KS where the average age of a farmer is 72, and it's a rare person that age who will change anything. 

Debt mismanagement, yes, combined with hidebound tradition, lack of curiosity about anything, and the willingness to buy new machinery whenever the old stuff gets a scratch on it.  It is TOTALLY contrary to any business principles.

Once in a while you'll see an article in a farm magazine about renewable energy.  That's how farmers know it's always ten years away from being practical.

I have a few customers who are farmers, who are growing oilseeds and using my presses to extract the oil.  It is my deepest hope that their example will generate some imitators.  Upcoming issue of Farmshow will profile one of those guys, and I'll post the link to it when it shows up.

rg
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: Halfnuts on June 14, 2006, 02:46:36 AM
Russel,

I was driving through west Kansas and E. Colorado on a state highway south of I-70 last summer and saw lots of fields of small yellow flowers.  I figured they might be an oil seed crop of some sort.  Didn't look like much else was growing in that area except some wheat and an occasional pronghorn. 

Halfnuts
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: mobile_bob on June 14, 2006, 04:05:57 AM
likely sunflowers

bob g
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: kyradawg on June 14, 2006, 04:40:15 AM


Peace&Love :D, Darren
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: Halfnuts on June 14, 2006, 03:03:21 PM
Yeah, saw a bunch of sunflower fields, too.  These were low-growing plants with very small bright yellow flowers.  Canola's pretty common, so I guessed that might be it. 
Saw more than a few oil wells out there, too. 

Halfnuts
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: rgroves on June 14, 2006, 03:45:18 PM
Yeah, saw a bunch of sunflower fields, too.  These were low-growing plants with very small bright yellow flowers.  Canola's pretty common, so I guessed that might be it. 
Saw more than a few oil wells out there, too. 

Halfnuts

Sounds like canola to me too.  I have some oil press customers who grow a lot of it down in that part of the state, mostly under irrigation.

rg
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: SHIPCHIEF on June 16, 2006, 10:00:39 PM
Darren,
I noticed on the link that the marine industry was considered the most likely (75%) to use veg based lube oils. This is because of the legal ramifications of an oil spill. Lots of veggy hydraulic oil is used in dockside cranes, or any over water application. Golf courses use it in the mowers and grounds equipment. The problem here is that the US Coast Guard does not give regulatory relief during oil spill enforcement if veggy oil was used instead of petroleum oil. Europe does give a more lenient response because veggy based oils are 100% biodegraded in 28 days after a spill into the marine environment. The US will reduce spill mitigation (cleanup & damage) costs for veggy oil, but not the initial fine for the spill.
I had an application, marine steering and jetpumps that used hydraulic rams and SKF roller bearings under water. The company wouldn't go to bean oil based hydraulic oil because SKF wouldn't warrantee the roller bearings with it. I wanted to give it a try, but the regulatory environment wasn't good enough yet. I'd use veggy based chainsaw bar oil if it was available.
In "the day" castor bean oil was used in race car and motorcycle engines because it was the best. The old timers told me that they had to take the engines apart at the end of the season to clean out the scum that the oil left.
I suppose the modern formulations would be to control that. Darren, using pure rapeseed oil for lube may be good for you now, but it might behoove you to drop the oil pan after a while to see how clean your internals are. Sometimes you take the good with the bad and live with the difference. Most of us would feel better buying and 'official' veggy based motor oil in a jug.....could be a Madison Avenue thing, who knows.
Scott E
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: Thomas on June 17, 2006, 12:38:23 AM
We have been using Veg Hyd oil in elevators for a long time.  It just smells different and this is better in some of the places becouse of the stink of hot hydro oil   and it is much easer to get up when you do have a spill .  Tom T
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: GuyFawkes on June 17, 2006, 01:36:43 AM

In "the day" castor bean oil was used in race car and motorcycle engines because it was the best. The old timers told me that they had to take the engines apart at the end of the season to clean out the scum that the oil left.

We used to run Castrol R years ago, smelt beautiful, reason being that was before synthetic oils, and for high performance air cooled engines it was better than anything else available at the time, though as you say, every year you had to clean out the inside of the engine to get rid of the "varnish" and gunk, no great problem, especially for me, the BSA singles would blow big ends every six months anyway.

Another problem was mix *anything* with "R" and you made margarine slime inside the engine.

Now synthetic oils are used in them, because they blow away the old "R", though I have been known to add a capful to the petrol now and again "to lube the valves" but might just have been to get the smell again.

If there is one thing a Lister CS ain't, it is a high performance engine, at 3.75 BHP per litre it fell one hell of a long way short of the B44, which was less than 100 BHP / litre.

A B50, v similar bike
(http://www.b50.org/wilfried1.jpg)

These (suzuki 750) are now running about 170 BHP / litre in hot road trim.
(http://www.ukbike.com/reviews/bikes/images/gsxr750.jpg)

Don't forget, a huge job of oil is thermal transport, the old CBX 6 cylinder honda circulated the entire oild capacity every six seconds when "on song", 3.75 BHP / litre is so far away from all this it is a different planet, straight non detergent 40 weight will be instant death to one of these modern bike engines, but powered me all over europe one one of these
(http://zylstracycles.com/bikepics3/big_1975-FXE-2C21457H5-R.jpg)

with total reliability, but that was "only" 65 ish BHP from 1200 cc, so 55 per litre, only 14 or 15 times a CS, and only had issues needing an oil cooler or rest periods during things like summer in athens traffic, ticking over in 40 celcius ambient and no wind to cool her off.

Modern oils are too good, they don't perform adequately at the levels listers work at, that suzuki engine above puts out more bhp/litre at tickover than the CS, the HD was in the same ballpark which is why 40 weight worked well in it.

Most important point here is even back then (or now, cos you can still buy it) Castrol R was MOST CERTAINLY NOT straight oil from the press, it had a hell of a lot or refining and filtering.

There was a big scandal when I was in spain, these guys were selling straight veg oil as cooking oil, it's the same stuff, right?

Nope, caused huge health problems and caused more than a few fires and other problems, even though those using it couldn't tell by sight, smell or taste, that there was anything wrong with it.

Some day, with luck, we will have an oil technologist who was spent his working life in lube oil buy a lister and sign up here, and I will bet you anything including my lister he is not going to recommend straight veg oil as a lubricant, not because he is "big oil", but because it does not go anywhere near lube oil specs when put through the proper lab tests.

Look at the thread I posted about facts and figures, 5000 hours on a CS 6/1 will get you somewhere between 3 and 5 tons of fuel, and this is the lightest loaded engine you will find, when someone does a ___documented___ 5000 hours on their lister on straight veg oil for lube, then shells out 500 bucks for a full lab lube oil analysis and publishes results, and those results back up these claims, I will listen. Until then I'm listening to 70 years of lister experience, hey, they HAD all these oils back then too, and sticking with straight 40 weight mineral non detergent, same as the old HD.

Gonna close with a pertinent quote.

We are all entitled to our own opinions, but we are not entitled to our own facts.
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: rpg52 on June 17, 2006, 03:01:38 AM

Halfnuts quote:  "Yeah, saw a bunch of sunflower fields, too.  These were low-growing plants with very small bright yellow flowers.  Canola's pretty common, so I guessed that might be it."

My guess is safflower - short plant, about 1'+ tall, bright yellow flowers - sunflower relative.  Usually only grown in dryland farming areas (e.g. wheat).  Canola = rapeseed, a cabbage relative, usually needs summer water, usually dark green leaves like broccoli.

Used to grow it on dryland farms in California too.
Ray
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: Halfnuts on June 17, 2006, 05:42:39 AM
Sunflower, safflower, where will it all end?  Safflower.  That was probably it, because it was most assuredly dry ag.  Read the canola is usually irrigated and in that part of KS there wasn't any irrigation that I could see.  It was a pretty sight.  Kept thinking how happy the bees must have been in that field.

Halfnuts
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: kyradawg on June 17, 2006, 05:56:53 AM


http://www.renewablelube.com/

Peace&Love :D, Darren
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: kyradawg on June 17, 2006, 04:42:05 PM
(PLEASE)

http://www.renewablelube.com/

Peace&Love , Darren
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: GuyFawkes on June 17, 2006, 05:57:08 PM
Shameful repost (killer veggie lube info)

Guy,

The new gsxr1000 is making 180hp @ the crank it's my dream bike!

Here's a slightly modified version of thr 05-06 http://www.bikepics.com/pictures/523816/

If that oil pro didnt reccomend veggie based oil he's an idiot!

Check out these folks, all veggie based lubes WITH lab testing results click on the pdf files.

There patents date back to the mid 90's and I have copies if anyone would like to help me de-cipher their formulations (PLEASE)

http://www.renewablelube.com/

Peace&Love , Darren

posting it twice don't make it any better.

In the real world a skilled rider riding my bike
(http://www.surfbaud.co.uk/Lister/gallery/image.php?twg_album=TR1&twg_type=small&twg_show=03.jpg&twg_rot=-1)

will wipe the ass of anyone riding a gixxer, simply because most people can't ride skillfully

I've had this argument with people back in the day when the Z1 was king, and over a 2000 miles "race" from the UK to athens there was nothing in it, and I was on a 1975 shovel with *tall* gearing.

New bandits have a petrol pump to petrol pump range of 80 miles, back in the day you had to do something really stupid like fit a 1.1 gall peanut tank to a bike to do that little.

Everyone round here knows my bike, they also know it is a LOT faster than it looks "like being slung down the road on a tea tray" because it is light and small and very very low COG with or without a rider, despite a "puny" 60 bhp and tall gearing, anywhere I stop people young and old will talk (young bikers ask WTF is it) and they also know it doesn't eat a set of expensive tyres every 3000 miles if you look after them, doesn't break down for a passtime, etc etc etc. Dirt cheap to run.

------------------------

The second link to the ace veggie oil gurus, looked at the pictures of their "lab" and laughed out loud, dude, a couple of hundred bucks worth of suprlus lab glassware from ebay would have the safe effect.

Their site reads like a couple of members posts, lots of breathless excited hype, complete and utter absence of documented test results, machine results were obtained on, machine calibration, etc etc

In the computer world we have shite like tom's hardware, they'll review anything they can get for free and wank all over how good it is, use graphs incorrectly to highlight insignificant points they are trying to stress, not a one of them counts calories or does proper industry grade tests of benchmarks.

oooh look, a thousand monkeys just flew out of my ass, and 85% of them said orange juice was better than DOT5 brake fluid.

I hear area 51 have alien technology batteries with a greater energy density than diesel, millions of charge discharge cycles, and superconductors to recharge em in the same time it takes to fill a tank, but thr rockerfeller illuminati are supressing this superior technology.

Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: SHIPCHIEF on June 17, 2006, 06:22:29 PM
Guy:
Nice, 920 SJ ? Rare here in the Pacific Northwet. I ride to work on the XS650, (The best twin the Brits never built). I totally agree with your philosophy of motorcycles.
Although I have a 18 yr old harley and a ural with a chair, I really love digging around town on my lightened $250 yamaha. Did I mention it was cheap? Not after I rebuilt the suspention and put new Metzler lazetecs on it. I'm adding dual discs on the front from an XS1100, etc. It's too fun!
Scott E
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: kyradawg on June 17, 2006, 06:28:01 PM


Peace&Love :D, Darren
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: bitsnpieces1 on June 17, 2006, 09:50:26 PM
  Gingerly, gingerly here.  At some point the ?10 million? year old petroleum will runout.  Absolute physical guarantee.  At some point ?10 million? year old coal to make synthetic oil from, will run out.  Absolute physical guarantee.  So, we need to be be working toward some type of renewable source for the the same type of lubricants.  Fuel's nothing big, we'll have "Back To The Future" fusion engines for everything.  But, you still need something to keep two pieces of metal from rubbing against each other and wearing out. 
  Dino based oils are preferable because they come from a known dependable source rather than something that will vary from acre to acre.  Makes it a lot easier to get same properties in each batch, whomever you buy it from.  Makes really good economic sense and allows for the 'idiot' factor.  All you have to do is convince them to keep an eye on the level and top it off, let the pros handle changing it. 
  Switching to bio-based will take a long time and a lot of effort plus using you noggin for something other than hanging your face on.
  That said, I think almost everyone here fits into the non-facehanger category.  I'm perfectly willing to use dino based while it's here but, will play with anything else.  I'm aiming at using the tallow from my steaks and the lard from my bacon plus whatever else is out there to power (fuel/lube) my mower and bike instead of stinking up a landfill.  Even the best electric motor still has bearings that need lubing.  My personal belief is that slower moving is better than faster moving, just try running everywhere you go instead of walking, gets old fast.  Remember it's E=MVsquared, faster takes the squared input of energy.  2,000 rpm piston energy dump is a whole lot more than twice 1,000 rpm piston energy dump is a whole lot more than twice 500 rpm piston energy dump. 
  End of rant.  I'm looking at doing what testing I can.  That's why I wanted a start on test equipment and procedures.  Les
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: GuyFawkes on June 18, 2006, 12:18:35 AM
-WHEN- dino fuel and lube runs out, pray we don't need replacements like veg based, because if we do we are still using the same tech, and if we are doing that then anarchy will rule, significant proportions of the population will die, and countries will cease to be.

We simply do not have the arable land on the planet to grow enough veg to replace dino at todays levels, not unless you wanna starve, which will be just as well because the more intensive you make agriculture the more energy inefficient it becomes.

I don't think anyone can do basic math any more, or understand simple english words like "finite"

I know for a fact everyone has a "me" centric world view, if you are a homeowner who works in an office and drives 40 miles to work you think that you and people like you account for "most" of the oil / energy consumed, not even close.

Run the numbers

USA uses in excess of 20 million barrels a day, barrel is 42 gallons, 840 million gallons a day, current USA population is 298 million, so that's near 3 gallons a day, except lots of those people don't drive, like babies etc, less than 1 in 10 drive, which is why there are 20 million vehicles registered in the USA, so that's 30 galls a day, every day, 7 days a week

Americans are not putting 210 gallons, or a ton of fuel, into each and every vehicle they own, every single week, an independent trucker would do it, just maybe

==========================

If you, as an individual, absolutely NEED say 25 gallons a week to do your essentail journeys, then you'll bitch all the way to the ten dollar gallon, but you will pay it, because you have no choice.

The cost is spread evenly across the population, because everyone can fill up, if you splash the cash.
You might not be avle to afford 25 gallons a week at 10 bucks a gallon, but 25 gallons are available.

Now you can still have global production as high as today and fifty years before the oil runs out, but india and china etc come more on stream and global demand goes up 10%

-------------------------------
the sun goes down, and rises the next morning, doesn't matter what the exact date is, it is coming
-------------------------------

Now your limit per week is 22.5 gallons, same for everyone else, theoretically it is still ten bucks a gallon, and there are still fifty years worth left in the ground.

For every person that wants "his" 25 gallons, someone else is going to have to drop from his 25 gallons to 20.

Cars under 180 cubic inches will be worth ten times as much overnight, 500 cube monsters will be worth maybe a buck a cube

By the end of that week nobody will be in any doubt that the glory days are gone and they are never coming back, and the only way to secure a gas supply is outbid everyone else on the planet. The ten dollar gallon will be history, it'll be 20 bucks.

A week later and you will have fuel rationing and mandated car sharing, because you have a certain minimum fuel usage required for all the trucks and industry and agriculture, black market gas will be 50 bucks a gallon.

Six months later and fuel rationing will have bitten hard, non essential ( and that means YOU sucker) users get allocated 1.5 gallons per week, which is worth a round 200 bucks on the black market

think this is fantasy?
80% of americans don't even have passports, as gore vidal says when he goes abroad, his fellow countrymen are not stupid, far from it, they are just ignorant (please look up the dictionary definition) of the rest of the world.
I am typing this in a country where this has already happened, every country around me, this has already happened.

it was called world war two, and it wasn't just about audie murphy and p51 mustangs and pearl harbour and lend lease, that was the propoganda newsreels and hollywood.

down at the sharp end it meant even the armies who could and did shoot anything and everything with impunity was desperately short of gasoline and diesel and lubricants, desperately desperately short, the rest of the countries who were not on the front lines had to get by on almost fuck all.

WW2 might have been an artificial shortage, but it was a shortage, and peak oil was still 50 years away in the future, nobody had even thought about it, but it is impossible to have another shortage without the same things happening.

A lister will give you power for 5 tons of fuel a year, so find a nice isolated island and hole up there with a lister and another for spares and 50 tons of fuel, and make sure nobody with guns finds you.

--------------------

USAF and USN and the jarheads may be able to sieze and protect and utilise a fair amount of the worlds reserves over the next decade or so, but they ain't gonna ship it home so you can drive your hummer, they will keep it and use it for themselves, they will have to to keep going themselves.

---------------------

Mr Belk got it sussed, 1000 bucks says he has range markers set down the valley, and he is living in a hard a desolate place that has only ever sustained a low population, if he stocks up on brass and powder and diesel he can trade enough to live well for a long time when everyone else is back on a palomino

------------------------

We can avoid this, just start building nuke plants like there was no tomorrow, and screw toxic waste, zoning, and even worker safety and the odd chernobyl, it's better than the alternative, there is enough U235 in australia (if uncle sam invades and siezes those resources too) to build fast breeders and keep the world going until fusion comes online

africa, forget it, not a place to be except in a military industrial compound extracting natural resources, lots of asia the same, england will be glad of being an island again, ones to watch a china and japan and india and maybe brasil

Mr Belk, if you get spare time start playing with packet radio  http://www.tapr.org/.
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: kyradawg on June 18, 2006, 05:52:41 AM

Peace&Love , Darren
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: kpgv on June 18, 2006, 06:10:36 AM
Dawg,

And so once this 2 million or so square miles ;) are planted and in "production" for "oil", will it be a problem for you if it's (which it WILL be, sorry) run by "Big Corporate Interests"??? What if the price for their product is higher than you would "like"??? How long before YOU and your ilk brand them as "BIG VEGGIE", the "MURDEROUS BASTARDS"!!!
Just Curious.

Kevin
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: kyradawg on June 18, 2006, 07:28:54 AM

Peace&Love :D, Darren
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: fuddyduddy on June 18, 2006, 07:41:25 AM
Kur Dog,
Every so often you (and others) insult our intelligence to the point where someone MUST answer.

You have proven, once again, that liars can figure.

If you use the .nass.usda.gov/census #s for US land, you find that about 900 million acres are in farms.

And, total cropland acres are reported by them at around 400 million acres.

Also, please let us say that, for the sake of argument, we can indeed get 100 gallons of oil per acre.

Now can we also say that it is reasonable to assign 10% of that total acreage to oil production?

Hmm, let's see, this old fuddy duddy comes up with about 40 billion gallons of oil then.

Hmm, is that a little different than the 800 biillion gallons we consume each year? (here I am assuming your#s for THAT are correct)

Hmm, that won't work. let's use ALL our cropland for oil. We now have 400 billions of oil.

Hmm, that still is no good. Let's see, we have about 2.2 billion total acres in the US. Let's plant it all, the lakes, mountains, everything.

Tell you what, let's leave 90% of that highest producing ground in crop production so we can feed ourselves, and use 10% of it for oil, as in our original assignment.  Let's also leave the other 500 million acres reported as farmland alone, because it is planted in trees, cattle grazing land, etc, etc.

So we'll use the other 1.3 billion acres for oil. Now how much oil can we get? Let's say we can get 10% as much production as from
the GOOD cropland. We'll ignore small items like the land cities and towns take up, the lakes, mountains, deserts, etc. OK, Dog?  Still with me? Good.

Hmm, the other 1.3 billion acres then, is good for 13 billion gallons of oil at 10 gallons per acre.

Now we have 53  billion gallons of oil by my calculations. Would someone please check my math? You know how poorly old fuddy duddies do when calculating.

That is something less than 10% of what we use, and it would take a fair while to even get to that point. BUT, it would (and will) help!

NOW that we've gptten this sh** out of the way. let's discuss reality a bit.

You want solutions?  This is really an energy problem.

Put a premium on drilling for new oil HERE in the USA, and drill wherever you need to. If everyone paid a $1.00 premium per gallon  for this, rejuvinating stripper wells, and working on shale oil extraction, our oil production numbers would increase, and increase.

Build 1,000 or so Fischer-Tropsch coal gasification plants.

Build at least another 100 nuclear plants.

Continue to improve wind turbines, and put a 10¢/KW hour incentive on production to be paid from the government. The increase in numbers would astound us all.

Do the same with solar, and just maybe someone will build a better "mousetrap", or at least get the cost of the collectors down to where we can REALLY put some to work.

Yes, let's please continue to grow more oil, becaue Kur Dog is absolutely correct in his basic premise. Even Fuddy Duddy pays $3.25-$3.30 per gallon to run 100% biodiesel in his Chev pickups (walk the walk) because he believes in doing his part, and because he really does not have the time to grow and harvest his own vegoil. AND, those of us who REALLY study this subject know that algae oil production per acre is TRULY spectacular!

Oh, can we please build 100 or so really modern, efficient refineries please? It would REALLY help.

Now, with that out of the way, may I please be allowed just one more tiny rant, and an itsy- bitsy statement to finish?

This global warming crap, is just that, crap. IF mankind WERE really raising the temperatures (and I do not think we are), it would be reversing a cooling trend that has continued unabated for 2 billion years or so. The sun keeps putting out less heat, period.

If we WERE to warm up even 5 degrees, the amount of land that is Taiga and tundra now, that would be available for farming would be spectacular. Yes, the Earth would lose a little to desertification, but just as small %. Please look it up, it is not so hard to find the data.

One last bit about global warming; whenever we have a really hot spell, (or dry, etc, etc) we read or hear the pundits ranting , "temperatures are the hottest they have been in **** for the past 1,000 years. This proves global warming."

IF THAT IS SO, pray tell me what was mankind doing 1,000 years ago that made it even warmer then?!

Please let me thank Jack B, Scott E, Sid in Nevada, (Mobile) Bob, SawmillerTim, Russell G, John F, and so many others that post relevant, accurate data and information about the Listeroids and other subjects.

Kur Dog, please shut up and go to your room.

Fuddy Duddy
















Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: kyradawg on June 18, 2006, 07:52:48 AM

Peace&Love, :D Darren
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: fuddyduddy on June 18, 2006, 09:02:18 AM
OK Kur,
Sorry, we'll miss you. NOT!

Will have to go back a long way, about 24 minutes from your "mother earth" post to your promise, etc.

Let's go back to that wonderful post at 11:28 tonight, June 17, 2006. In part you say "mother earths vital tectonic plate luberacant be being tapped"

Now I WILL make a couple of assumptions here.

 I assume you mean that "mother earths vital tectonic plate luberacant" is oil. I will also assume that by "luberacant" you mean lubricant, and that your MEANING is that crude oil acts as a lubricant for "Mother Gaia" and her tectonic plates.

 Let us please harken back to our early school years, and remember that there are three types of tectonic plates.

The first are divergent, mainly under the oceans, and I don't think oil helps them when they are pulling apart. I also doubt that there is much oil there.

The second are convergent, which push into each other (meet), and one is subducted under the other. I seem to remember that these subduction zones start at around 50 miles depth and may go to as much as 500 miles in depth, which is into the mantle.  Sorry Kur, oil won't be of any help here, either.

The third type is transform fault, which are plates that slide past each other. Wow, this must be what you meant!! OOPS, sorry,
just remembered that the plates are around 50 miles thick, and the bottoms of those plates are very hot, well above oil's ability to stay oily. DRAT!

Kur, please let me tell you that tectonic plate motions have been around for some 2 1/2 BILLION years on this Earth, and that is well before we had a lot of oil being produced.

Perhaps you made that foolish comment (yes, lie), because you read somewhere that seismic instruments used for oil-field exploration are also used for geophysical studies to determine seismic reflection profiles (tectonic plate junctions, etc).

Let us please take one last example. The outer crust, or lithosphere, has volcanoes in some places. Ever hear of the "ring of Fire, Kur Dog? That volcanic action is caused by (mainly) under-sliding oceanic (tectonic) plates. If indeed, oil helped lubricate these volcanoes' plates, at least some would be present in the lava. OOPS, that can't be! Lava is around 2,000°F, and at that temperature, oil turns back to carbon. No "luberacant" there!

In short, it is crap, just llike a lot of what you say. You may mean well, but you "hijkack" this group and their reporting on many occasions. Am sure if I have mis-stated information on plate tectonics that there is a geologist or volcanologist who will correct me. That would be good, for they report truth, not innuendos, lies, and half-baked assumptions as you do.

Fuddy Duddy





Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: fuddyduddy on June 18, 2006, 09:08:59 AM
PS,
It takes a REAL man to post and not retract as you did, Kur Dog.
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: kyradawg on June 18, 2006, 02:49:03 PM



Peace&Love , Darren
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: mobile_bob on June 18, 2006, 02:58:12 PM
i am curious,,, if we plant all this land to oil seed, how much oil from either dino or vegie is it going to take to break out the land
disc it, prepare it, plant and harvest it?

perhaps in all the discussion there were figures state in the equation that i missed.

also i think what was stated was in a perfect world which we do not live in.

what about weather patterns?

what about some frigging bug, mold, or whatever that would likely mutate to take advantage of all this new oil crop and serve to
destroy it.

oh, and yes,,,, if this is an oil crop it stands to reason that it would be highly flammable in the field at near harvest time....
can you imagine the scale of a grass fire sweeping across very large expanses of land

i dont think in reality vegie oil (from seed)is ever going to reach over about 10% of our energy requirement,  sad but true.

what probably would work is a series of 10 percenter's,, all helping toward the goal of engery independance.

following on FD statements

increase neuclear to add an additional 10 percent.

increase coal gasification to add an additional 10

oil seed to add 10

maximise wind and maybe get another 10

work down the price of solar and get another 10

open up anwar, and get at least 10 for 30 years

open up off coast of california and florida get another 10

increase alcohol production and get another 10

give tax breaks to those that produce alt power
ie, methane, wind, cogeneration, etc
perhaps at peak might be equivalent to another 10

oh yes,,,, and make it mandatory that every house hold
has a listeroid, and tell the EPA to butt out
the result would be another 10   :)

bottom line is just as every thing else in life, no one source is going to save us
no matter how much we like it.

bob g
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: kyradawg on June 18, 2006, 03:53:16 PM

Peace&Love :D, Darren
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: mobile_bob on June 18, 2006, 07:01:28 PM
ok i will bite

"From my stand point If it took a billiontrillion gallons to harrow, seed , fertilize and reap but saved just ONE young soldier's life it would be more than worth it."

i understand the liberal view point as it pertains to fighting wars for oil, but that is only so much horse crap.
only a very simplistic outlook would lead anyone to assert that we are fighting for oil, sure it maybe part of the equation, but hardly the major
overriding component.

the radical left in this country beats the drum continuously about Bush waging war for oil, and in the second breath says no way to drilling in the anwar.

one soldiers life?  i too place a high value on human life, far higher than a snail darter or spotted owl for sure.

also you might take into consideration the mortality rate of young males in this country in or our of the military. i would hazard a guess that just as many single males die in accidents (both of their own making and not)  per capita in the civilian population as in the military action in iraq per capita.

i also doubt seriously that the prevailing attitude by those inlisted men and women think that they are there for oil and not to liberate the country and help to stabilize the region and also slow the senseless killing.

"I cant see the crops being anymore flamable than soybean or corn."

well alot of corn is processed green and the grain has a low oil content, and soy has a hard shell to help contain the oil in a fire.
also you are talking about a billion acres of rape seed, planted everywhere

you mention pastures and other available ground to plant the stuff.  pastures usually are very poor places to grow crops, they will support grass for grazing, but usually are too rocky, sandy, hilly or some other reason  or most farmers would have broken the ground out anyway long ago.

then of course you have a whole nother  group of enviro whacko's that will defy you the use of pasture or grasslands to plant your oil crop, don't believe me?
try putting up a windgenerator in chase county kansas, oh hell no!  not in their back yard! destroying their vista's

also in might be good to add, that there are cyclic droughts that leave you not only without a grain harvest but in worst case nothing to hold the soil, wind errosion leaves the ground barren,  just take a look at history of the dust bowl years.

"Coal strips our beautiful land screws up the water table and is just no good."

perhaps that was the case in years past, but i am sure with all the reg's now there are economically viable ways of doing it without leaving a shit hole.

"Wind is better than the other two but still takes about a decade to recoupe the energy used in making the turbine."

i dont understand how you balance your claim, somehow vegie oil is the cure all in your books. you fail to consider all that is involved in actually doing it on a large scale, although you seem able to understand all that is considered in energy from other sources.

in order to plant the billions of acres of oil seed to do what you support, there will be a huge, monumental outlay of money, energy, material and manpower, that not only will have first costs, but ongoing costs.

sure it doesnt seem to take much energy to raise an acre of rape seed, but when you consider all the costs as i have said before, in breaking out the land, preparing it, planting and harvesting. add to that all the fuel, depreciation on equipment, interest on the money either borrowed or invested, all the money, manpower, energy etc. etc.. in producing the equipment to plant and harvest, ship, store, process, reship, restore and distribute, etc. etc.  you should come to the conclusion that it isn't a panacea or a cure all.

vegie oil is an option but will be no more a significant player than hydrogen in our lifetime.

there just isn't enough ground to do the job, at least within reasonable economics.


"Canola oil is easier to harvest than crude MUCH less enviromentally destructive there are only two steps in refining rape seed to oil."

well i think the jury is still out on this one, first of all there already is good science behind crude, refining, and distribution.

we really don't know yet whether or not there are particulate that might be deemed cancer causing if not to human perhaps a spotted owl.
but believe you me, i would bet if vegie oil becomes even a 10 percent player in the nations energy source, there will be an enviro group that will find a
problem with it, and enlist the EPA to either ban it or severely regulate it.

you say its clean, i say it smells clean, and intuitively i would also say it appears to be cleaner than dino fuel, but i don't have the test equipment to say for sure
that it truely is, and i don't have a crystal ball that will tell me what sort of testing that might show something quite alarming in 10 years time.

Big vegie oil is not going to happen without alot of money being spent to research all the possible hazards before hand. So where is little veggie oil going to get the
money to research it and become big Veggie oil?

hmmmm

bob g








Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: rgroves on June 18, 2006, 08:02:18 PM
Gentlemen, I love watching the dawgpile building here.

But I would remind you that Gaia Boy's words are best characterized by William Shakespeare in Macbeth

"A tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing."


Very truly yours

Russell Groves
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: kyradawg on June 18, 2006, 09:07:55 PM


Peace&Love :D, Darren
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: Ironworks on June 19, 2006, 12:37:26 AM
Don't mean to horn in on the post, but did anyone see Dateline.....there was this Hindu guy saying he could get ethanol produced from praire grass here in the US for $.70 a gallon.  Guess he was one of the founders of Sun Microsystems.  He was suppose to have a meeting with Bush the week following the Dateline interview.  Funny I haven't heard anymore about it since....lol. 
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: SHIPCHIEF on June 19, 2006, 01:53:38 AM
I'm thinking about the great Irish potato famine.
Seems like anytime nature is pushed too hard one way, it pushes back. If the Environmentalists didn't freak out and stop the wholesale destruction of wild prarie lands for oilseed crops (and they would) Eventually some blight would attack them and a rear guard action to fight it would increase the cost by an amount no one can foresee. These are the unintended consequences I always rant about.
(I always laff when liberals fight liberals. When the Greenpeace activists were fighting the Macaw indians over the right to harvest whales I saw co-equal liberal forces at battle. Political correctness amok. The tone shifted against geenpeace when they ran their boat over a whale----until the Indians used a GUN!, then the media all shifted automatically to anti-gun mode.)
Guy posted earlier about the calorific input per unit of food produced. I forget all the details just now, but the jist of it was that the gallons of fuel per acre over the cropcycle are pretty high, and had increased steadily over the years with 'modern farming' and the machinery involved. 90 gallon havested oil (minus) (X) gallons cultivation, harvest, rendering, and transportation. So factor that into the bottom line and refigure the acreage required. Corn ethanol suffers from this as well.
We have had easy petroleum for all our lifespans, but in the past it was different. energy and lubricants were a wide variety of what was available and it was alot more expensive that oil, that's why oil took over. IT'S CHEAPER! But when it runs low, it will get more expensive, and the natural laws of economics will cause people to seek out new energy sources like they did before WW1. Maybe some of it will run in your Lister-oid. Rapeseed oil will find it's economic niche and Darren will eventually find out what it is really worth. Government meddling will upset the ballance of economic nature. Personal initiative and small buisnesses start the good stuff.
Ethanol from cheatgrass sounds OK as a portion of the wide spectrum of fuels that will make up our future. Perhaps it will be blended into gasoline and we will still buy it from the pump, pissing and moaning the whole while about big oil and politicians that require ethanol in fuel to support local farmers.
My point here is that the liquid fuel infrastructure is so well established that any new fuel will need to be taylored to fit the pipes / trucks / railcars / pumps / stations that we have spent the last century setting up. If breeder reactors powered the nations grid, they would use excess power to make synthetic gasoline and diesel so it could be distributed and used with out bankrupting the world to build a new distribution network.
Scott E
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: mobile_bob on June 19, 2006, 02:45:45 AM
one also has to consider the cyclic nature of harvest, we would have basically all this rape seed being harvested over a fairly short period (perhaps 3 months). Storage would be a huge problem not only for the mass amounts of grain but the bulk storage of the oil would be emmense.

unlike dino oil which is processed on a much shorter cycle, distribution closely follows production.

there are literally dozens of issues that would be very expensive to overcome.

all of these issues have energy requirements of their own.

alot of energy to build massive amounts of storage for grains and oils, massive amounts of energy to produce the impliments for cultivation, planting, harvesting and shipping the grain. massive amounts of energy required to build the presses and refineries to get the oil out of the grain, and then massive amounts of energy required to deal with the left over mash byproduct.

not saying it can't be done, just saying there is alot more to be considered.

bob g
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: Firebrick on June 19, 2006, 04:06:27 AM
kyradawg,
I hope someone or even a group of people that are active on the page live close to you to ***everyone please use his/her imagination, I certainly don't want this to be moderated***.  I served in this current war and lost two friends over there.   You are spitting in my face and on the graves of those who have died by saying this war is fought over oil.  To bad the media only shows the bad and not the millions men, women, and children that are happy to be out from the oppressive and sadistic leadership of the Sunni's.  Mobil bob is correct about the death rate to.  Statistically we were less likely to die in Iraq than we were in the US because of just auto accidents.

Second,   The majority of prairie/grassland/range/pasture in the united states is that because nothing, that is right, nothing else is more suitable to grow there.  Those numbers include most of the western united states, where cattle can be grazed only in the spring after the snow melts/spring rains(some places it takes 100 acres to graze one steer).  It is too dry to farm, tilling would make the soil moisture evaporate even faster. Most of the areas that grow winter wheat use this window of wet weather but other crops growth cycle do not match the weather.  Irrigation is not an answer as they are already pumping water out of the lakes, rivers, and ground faster than they can replace it.  Some places in California and Arizonian where they have irrigated, the government is shutting them down because they need the water for the huge amount of people that are moving to phoenix and san diego/LA.   It also includes millions of acres that are in hilly country, high mountains, and other areas that erosion would remove the top soil unless the grass is there to hold it in place.  The amount of natural gas used to produce nitrogen fertilizers is enormous and guess what, it comes from the oil wells.  The vegetable oil would go rancid and turn acidic in storage for more than a few months.  New pumps would have to be installed. People would not accept the inconveniences and it would require converting to biodiesel, making the energy inputs about equal with regular oil. 

Third, if you are such a "master" mechanic of 17 years then why cant you afford a lister.  Mechanics of all kinds are in high demand and the average salary is over 38000 dollars, which with your level of experience should be over that.  If we are to believe you about the major and expensive modifications you are doing to your motorcycle, truck, who knows what tomorrow, you surely have enough to purchase an inexpensive lister.  Are you positive you are not a 17 year old kid on summer break with to much time on your hands?

War&Hate  >:( firebrick  (not really, just being sarcastic)
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: GerryH on June 19, 2006, 04:50:29 AM
FuddyDuddy
You noticed the tectonic plate lubricants, eh?
I am in the mining industry, and not a geologist, but when we want a chuckle we view these posts.
You have purty well nailed it in the tectonic plates.Thank your lucky stars that NO oil is accumulated below 18,000 ft in the earth, a few good miles above the magma the plates float on. That would cause a few freaking earthquakes and when the volcanoes came up it would be fun, too. Notice I didn't say found or produced, thats another thread. As I live in both the richest oil area in North America, and one of the largest canola growing areas, I feel like commenting.
 I find your math solid, that said, I think alternative energy sources and veg oil are a way to augment a farm income. There is also opportunities to use non-edible oil producing plants, we don't need to eat it all. Some of these may produce more then canola.
Oil from a home source offers a price counterbalance and national security.
I always find it interesting that the environmental, liberal, great warming crowd has always carefully stated that " the earth is warmer today then it was 600 years ago"
True. Why careful?
It is colder today then it was 700 years ago. 700 years ago Lief Ericson sailed the Northwest passage and established a colony on Greenland that supplied food to Denmark for 125 years.( and carefully documented it) As the weather got COLDER, crops started to fail, and the Black plague killed 40% of Denmark Citizens (customers) the colony died out.
Today, we still can't sail the Northwest passage, and I sure don't think you gonna be farming in Greenland any time soon.
Piece,love and all that

Gerry
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: kyradawg on June 19, 2006, 05:13:04 AM

Peace&Love :D, Darren
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: rgroves on June 19, 2006, 10:55:24 AM
For anybody who's interested in real world information about canola as a farm product, here's a link to a story in Sunday's business and farm section of the Wichita Eagle.
http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/business/14843797.htm

Since I am in the business of selling oilseed presses,  I talk to a lot of guys who are getting interested in growing their own fuel crops.  There are damn few of them who can find their way to production, and even fewer of them who have any notions of getting large enough to supply the neighbors.  Even the biggest risk takers among farmers would not consider trying to grow oil crops by breaking out pasture, CRP, or marginal land.  The potential earnings are far outweighed by the potential losses in equipment, time  -- and especially, in tillable soil.  Highly erodible land can turn into waste land in a hurry if you try to till it.  At that point, you just as well strip mine it, or sell it for development. 

Quick note to Kyradawg.  Every few years, us here in flyover country hear some liberal pinhead agronomist or social engineer tell us how he knows better than we do how to manage our farm resource.  10 years back it was the Poppers, from fucking Rutgers in goddam New Jersey, who declared that we should all just move out of the Great Plains and let them turn it into a "Buffalo Commons"  Mostly it's blather, and we point and laugh.

Occasionally it looks more serious, like a property grab.  Then a lot of us, more than you will ever see on the news,  make silent plans to lock and load.

rg
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: kyradawg on June 19, 2006, 01:41:14 PM

Peace&Love :D, Darren
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: solarguy on June 19, 2006, 06:42:59 PM
While we're doing a little fact checking and refining, let's examine this statement:

"Solar seems like a free lunch until you realise how much energy goes into making just one cell." by K-dog.


Of course, we all know there is no such thing as a free energy lunch, unless you define the system in some creative way that physicists would scowl at.  It's the second half of the statement that I really take issue with.  K-dog, you are implying either that it takes more energy to make a cell than you ever get out, or you're implying that it takes so much energy to make a cell, that it's not very worthwhile.  Or maybe you are suggesting some third thing.  Certainly, there's been lots of internet gossip going around that says photovoltaic panels are a net energy loss.

Thoughtful scientists, lots of them, have studied this, a lot.  Here's summary by a guy who did a very sophisticated analysis of the underlying assumptions for many studies.  The bottom line is that a typical solar cell will return about 10X the energy invested in making it, including complete life cycle analysis, Ballance of System components, etc etc etc ad nauseum.


http://energybulletin.net/17219.html

By comparison, the EROEI for biodiesel is around 3 or 4 for virgin oil, and 5-7 for wvo (waste veggie oil).  Which is not to say I am in any way opposed to biodiesel, since I make it, use it and teach others to do the same.  It's just not the silver bullet that's going to fix all of our problems.

So I'm squarely in the group that says we're going to have to pull every trick in the book to make this work.  That means lots of conservation first, then all the assorted good ideas previously mentioned.  I do have reservations about lots of nuke, just because the long term EROEI just doesn't compute when you account for waste processing and storage for millenia.

Finest regards,

troy
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: GuyFawkes on June 19, 2006, 06:57:24 PM

So I'm squarely in the group that says we're going to have to pull every trick in the book to make this work.  That means lots of conservation first, then all the assorted good ideas previously mentioned.  I do have reservations about lots of nuke, just because the long term EROEI just doesn't compute when you account for waste processing and storage for millenia.

Finest regards,

troy

waste processing is easy.

1/ lots of what is "waste" today will be "raw materials" in 20 years time

2/ encase it in concrete or glass and dump it in subduction zones, you won't see it again for tens of millions of years.

Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: solarguy on June 19, 2006, 08:47:31 PM

So I'm squarely in the group that says we're going to have to pull every trick in the book to make this work.  That means lots of conservation first, then all the assorted good ideas previously mentioned.  I do have reservations about lots of nuke, just because the long term EROEI just doesn't compute when you account for waste processing and storage for millenia.

Finest regards,

troy

waste processing is easy.

1/ lots of what is "waste" today will be "raw materials" in 20 years time

2/ encase it in concrete or glass and dump it in subduction zones, you won't see it again for tens of millions of years.



1.  To date, we have a pretty crappy record with nuclear reprocessing plants.  They were pretty smart engineers and you have often suggested that they're tried it all already.  I am not confident about betting the farm that they will get it all right the next time around.  I hope so.

2.  We have a time frame problem on this method.  If we dump it on the sea floor, at just the right spot, how long does it take before the material (which makes great dirty bombs) is totally reliably inaccessible to humans?

Glassification, even in situ, has had some promising results, but it takes an impressive amount of juice to melt all that sand to make glass to encase/entrain all that waste, even the low level/high volume stuff.

Finest regards,

troy
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: GuyFawkes on June 19, 2006, 11:10:41 PM


1.  To date, we have a pretty crappy record with nuclear reprocessing plants.  They were pretty smart engineers and you have often suggested that they're tried it all already.  I am not confident about betting the farm that they will get it all right the next time around.  I hope so.

2.  We have a time frame problem on this method.  If we dump it on the sea floor, at just the right spot, how long does it take before the material (which makes great dirty bombs) is totally reliably inaccessible to humans?

Glassification, even in situ, has had some promising results, but it takes an impressive amount of juice to melt all that sand to make glass to encase/entrain all that waste, even the low level/high volume stuff.

Finest regards,

troy

1/ even with the odd chernoby, global deaths are less than coal, it's like airlines crashes and road deaths, all the deaths happen on the roads, all the media focus on the airline.

2/ anyone with the tech to locate and recover to the surface multi ton blocks of non magnetic material while defending the surface vessels on station for days already has enough firepower to take on the USA

3/ with nukes, you have all the juice you want, ever seen the power a bauxite plant uses?
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: rpg52 on June 20, 2006, 12:57:26 AM
Yes, one wee problem I hesitate to mention - finding more energy sources isn't a fix if we continue with the assumption that our population can continue to grow indefinitly.  As long as our basic assumptions include perpetual growth, we will never meet our energy "needs". 

I have confidence (even as a skeptic about the viability of human society), that if we can control human population growth rates, we are clever enough to solve the energy thing.  However, I have very little confidence that our growth rate can be solved before we overshoot the earths carrying capacity and collapse into chaos.  It has happened too many times before to blithly ignore.

Hate to rain on this parade of technical flaming, just passing along my $0.02.   :-\
Ray
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: Andre Blanchard on June 20, 2006, 01:06:22 PM
1/ even with the odd chernoby, global deaths are less than coal, it's like airlines crashes and road deaths, all the deaths happen on the roads, all the media focus on the airline.

2/ anyone with the tech to locate and recover to the surface multi ton blocks of non magnetic material while defending the surface vessels on station for days already has enough firepower to take on the USA

3/ with nukes, you have all the juice you want, ever seen the power a bauxite plant uses?

Here is an achive of some older emails written by some people with actual experience, some interesting reading.
http://yarchive.net/nuke/index.html
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: lgsracer on June 20, 2006, 03:37:25 PM
I spent twenty years riding nuclear submarines, still have all the normal appendages. 150 feet was a far as you could get from the tea kettle. I picked more rem from the nuclear weapons than I did from the reactor. We are monitored very closely. Non-nuclear workers are only allowed 3 rem a year, nuclear worker 5. I never even came close to 3 rem a year. We had a saying you would pickup more lifetime living in Denver than on a boat.
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: GuyFawkes on June 20, 2006, 04:46:03 PM
I spent twenty years riding nuclear submarines, still have all the normal appendages. 150 feet was a far as you could get from the tea kettle. I picked more rem from the nuclear weapons than I did from the reactor. We are monitored very closely. Non-nuclear workers are only allowed 3 rem a year, nuclear worker 5. I never even came close to 3 rem a year. We had a saying you would pickup more lifetime living in Denver than on a boat.


yup, my old grantie cottage in corwall gave you a bigger dose than working in a nuke plant.

the one's I love are those that claim the radiation is dangerous AND it lasts a billion years.
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: SHIPCHIEF on June 20, 2006, 06:26:18 PM
Try:
http://www.kiddofspeed.com/default.htm
For a recent motorcycle trip thru the fallout zone of Chernobyl. I was impressed by the story, as well as the recovery in the area.
Scott E
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: rocket on June 20, 2006, 07:04:13 PM
for lgsracer.... the nuclear subs ran hot... 98 percent U235 compared to a commerical reactor that runs only 1.5% U235. must have been hard working on the sub with 4 foot concrete walls around the reactor (joking of course).

what happened to chernobyl is a lie... our government tricked them into running metallic uranium (all the easier to get metallic plutonium for bombs). the dumb potatoe farmers didnt take into consideration that the uranium would oxidize U + h2o = U0 + h2 when the free hydrogen reached about four percent all it took was a spark. nothing more than a hydrogen explosion

nuclear is safe, plentiful, renewable (when making plutonium from inert U238, U238 +N double beta (-e) decay over about 45 minutes = plutonium which is 8 times the energy as U235) and produces highly valuable isotopes.
Title: Re: AT LAST THE TRUTH!
Post by: lgsracer on June 20, 2006, 09:08:22 PM
Yes the reactors on subs use enriched uranium so they can go twenty years without refueling. The shielding is same as when they ran a more standard mix and had to be refueled every 8 to 10 years. Radiation is about the same remember time, distance shielding. The hottest thing I was ever around was the warhead on a subroc http://subroc.quickseek.com/. Missile launched nuclear depth bomb. Junior guys had to sleep in the torpedo room, where we kept the things, I slept over the warhead area. 34 millirem per hour on the warhead surface. Before they phased them out, they started installing lead sheets around the warhead or keeping them in the torpedo tubes. Damn things but out a lot of fast neutrons as well.