24 days to Al Gore’s ’10 years to save the planet’ and ‘point of no return’

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

I don't doubt the theory. I think we should prepare for it. I connect everything to food. Not just expensive, but low yields. We need to prepare.
We need zoning changes and awareness.

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

The FDA has already proven that Corn, Soybean, Safflower and some other vegetable oils when heated produce carcinogenic properties that cause more harm to you body, the earth and the atmosphere. Seems cooking with butter oil is healthier as is coconut oil and Canola oil.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

yes - it has been proven that biofuels do not burn as effeciently as fossil fuels. As a result, not only do we get less milage out of a tank of biofuel contaminated gasoline, we also get more pollution. Further, every litre of biofuel uses a litre and a half of fossil fuel to produce it.

And yet somehow global warming theory supports support this ineffecient waste of agricultural land.

And we wonder why food prices are rising

Tired of Control Freaks

originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
a reply to: ChesterJohn


And yet somehow global warming theory supports support this ineffecient waste of agricultural land.

And we wonder why food prices are rising

Tired of Control Freaks

No it doesn't. Biofuels were seen as a green and sustainable alternative to fossil fuels, which were supposedly running out. It was always known that it would never work if land was taken from food production.

However

Salt bush here in Australia has been suggested as a source for biofuel. It grows in arid land not suitable for farming and we have heaps of that over here. So on a small scale it could work. But as you mentioned, there are other disadvantages of the fuel itself.



www.dpi.nsw.gov.au...

CO2 removal stations would make better sense. We even have the technology to do it, but nobody wants to take a punt and pay to set some up on a large scale.

a reply to: markosity1973

the green and sustainable alternative fuels turned out to be more harmful to engines.

The biodiesel made from Corn actually caused more diesel engines to buildup with carbon in the firing chambers, pistons and pipes causing engines to wear quicker. this led to sooner than usual costly repair bills to rebuild diesel engines.

At one of our bases we had 6 diesel vehicles 4 we ran on Bio diesel derived from Corn, the other two we continued using fossil fuel diesel. 2004 to 2015 within four years (2007,08) all four vehicles using the biodiesel broke down all needed piston and ring replacement but also chambering as the piston chambers were totally ruined from carbon build up. to this date the two ran on fossil fuel are still running strong with no problems.

Yes the Biofuel put out less carbon but that carbon built up and destroyed the engines in just a few years.

We are seeing similar problems with our carburetored vehicles since the addition of Ethanol to unleaded Gasoline, we had to rebuild the carburetors on our older vehicles three times since 2006. And what every you do don't use any gasoline with ethanol in it to light a fire it will blow up in your face quicker than you can jump. Many people have been harmed and killed by ethanol gasoline since it came out.

so these biofuel are not all cracked up to be the replacement for fossil fuels just yet.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Yes the Biofuel put out less carbon but that carbon built up and destroyed the engines in just a few years.

No. No less carbon. But the carbon they produce is not fossil carbon. It is part of the carbon cycle and is thus, carbon neutral.

The main problem I've had with ethanol fuel is with fuel lines that got eaten by it. Second to that is its affinity for water. Leave it in the tank too long and you get a puddle of water at the bottom.

a reply to: Phage

Yes the water problem with ethanol is a valid one. they ruin fuel pumps as well. the ethanol also destroys the brass jets and the needles in your carbs.

the biofuels build up in the tail pipes also we had to replace pipes and mufflers because of the buildup of carbon from biofuel in our diesels as well.

originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
a reply to: Grimpachi

Actually, geothermal, in and of itself DOES NOT produce energy. Geothermal just allows for the circulation of water deep into the earth. The temperature undergound is cooler in the summer. By using a heat exchanger, the coolness can be used to lower the temperature in a building so that you don't have to rely so much on air conditioners. It SAVES energy but does not produce it.

In winter, the temperature underground is warmer than the atmosphere. The warmer water can be directed into a boiler that produces steam to turn turbines and produce electricity.

In both cases, by taking advantages of the temperature differences, energy can be SAVED but it doesn't produce energy, in and of itself.

If large geothermals are placed too close together, they would interfere with each other (such as geothermal units used for large condo projects. When the large condo units are across from each other and each are drilling 120 to 140 wells through which the water is circululated, they will interfere with one another.

Tired of Control Freaks

I am talking about Geothermal electric plants you seem to be talking about home heat pumps.

Geothermal electric plants do produce megawatts of electricity from manufactured and naturally occurring hydrothermal vents. These are placed in areas where the underground temperatures are HOT. Geothermal has the highest capacity factor
of known power sources.

Here this link can help you to famililiarize yourself on the subject of Geothermal Energy.

2014 Annual U.S. & Global Geothermal Power Production Report

a reply to: Grimpachi

oh ok - I see. Thank you.

Tired of Control Freaks

a reply to: ChesterJohn

That's interesting to hear your feedback on corn biodiesel.

I've heard from a number of people who run their diesel (old pre ccommon rail) engines on waste vegetable oil - the stuff that comes out of a deep fryer and they have reported no harmful effects.