| Author | Message | ||
| Nellie Wilson (Vivianellie)
Registered Member Username: Vivianellie Post Number: 171 Registered: 11-2008 Posted From: 70.52.103.80  Rating: N/A |
Okay, I'm sticking my neck out here... my Dad would say, 'So, what's new?' Ian might even scratch me from the board (I LOVE Ian, by the way). But, for once, I'm gonna get cereal (Lord, oh Lord, I can't resist the glib one-liner). I'll cut-and-paste (below) an article I wrote. I won't reveal for who, but I can say that truckers (much as I love 'em) have weakened considerably since the old 'Cannonball Run' days. I won't say they've all become outright puss*** but they're definitely listing towards wuss. Sorry, Bob and Sylvain and Neil and Sonny and Steve, but I've told you to your face... Limpo Wimpos! NOT the case with Mick Moriarity and Nick DeFalco, the Chicago Triplets and Guido Cardinelli. Righteous! Okay, moving on. I wrote this piece but it was too volatile, too disturbing, to 'incitive' (whatever that means) for human consumption. But, honestly, I get that. These wussy truckees daren't step on toes. Their livelihood demands they remain doormats... even though (collectively) thay could dictate the path of this country (at least domestically). Anyway, I had nowhere to voice my strange belief... this idea that a few dozen people (no matter how powerful) should be allowed to wreck (or certainly diminish) the livelhood and dreams of millions. You see, my dream was toddering on collapse. With fuel prices soaring I could not afford to drive my bus... anywhere. At the same time, my bus (my prinary asset) was being devalued with every increase in fuel price. Couldn't use it, couldn't sell it... nice. But I cut the retailers some slack (I refrained from killing anyone). Though everyone knew the high prices were a scam (just as they are now), the price of crude supplied some justification. That is not the case now. The price of crude has plummeted while - for the last two weeks - the price at the pump has been rising. There is no longer any justification for this (assumung there ever was); it is clear the oil companies are determined to gouge us, regardless of the price of crude. They have become accustomed to bloated quarterly reports and the country (all of us) be damned. As I said, I didn't know where I might present my idea but now I do. Right here. BusNuts are unique: they travel, they communicate extensively via internet and are beholden (so far as I can tell) to nobody. One final thing: A few of us have tried this locally and it works. The ONE gas station that we frequent is 12 cents cheaper than the nearest competitor. So here goes: Only We, The People, can change the course of our country (as always): - Our ‘so-called’ elected representatives are doing nothing to lower the price of fuel; and WE, as individuals, have no power whatsoever. There is, however, a very simple and immediate solution: - Beginning today, and until fuel prices come down to a reasonable level, do not purchase anything other than fuel from your local petroleum outlet. That means: no chips, no beer, no soft drinks, and no nothing... except fuel. - Think about it: these outlets rely upon peripheral sales to make their rent. They’ve never made money on fuel, and they never will. They make all their money in what we buy in ADDITION to the fuel. And most of them, if they fly an EXXON or MOBIL (or whatever flag) are lessees / subsidiaries / franchisees of that company. - All those oil companies rely upon their retailers to sell their fuel. Just as we are at the mercy of the oil companies, the oil companies are at the mercy of the retailer. - But if we simply buy only fuel from those retailers, they cannot make a living. - Okay, this might be hard… many of these retailers might be friends, maybe even own the place we hang out. But if ‘Joe Buck’ (or whomever) is sticking it to you (whether retailer, dentist or lawn boy) how long do you ride with it? If we pulled that on a ‘friend,’ how long would he (or she) ride with us? Look at it this way: We love our kids too, but sometimes ‘tough love’ is our only option. - We cannot, as individuals, put pressure on the big oil companies. But their retailers can – and will – when they notice customers have stopped buying their goods (other than fuel). They will not stay afloat without peripheral sales. - We cannot fight the fuel companies, but we CAN put upward pressure on them through their retailers. - This is not a big inconvenience to any of us. In fact (besides lowering the price of fuel) we save (up to 200%) by simply buying at the nearest market or restaurant or ‘fast food’ joint. We save a busload of cash and, if everyone does the same thing, the gas stations won’t see a cent on the food and drinks we normally buy. - And what happens? They demand that their oil company reduce price or they (the retailer) will close up shop or take on a different oil company. I need not belabor this further… except to say, it works. And if we BusNuts wish to preserve our way of life, we’d best begin an offensive… because this sad creature we call ‘our government’ has proven to be of no help whatsoever. Thanks for the soapbox, Nellie Wilson | ||
| FAST FRED (Fast_fred)
Registered Member Username: Fast_fred Post Number: 644 Registered: 10-2006 Posted From: 64.241.37.140 Rating: N/A |
We cannot fight the fuel companies, but we CAN put upward pressure on them through their retailers. Utter nonsense,, the US companies control less than 7% of the worlds supply/production , including contract oil. To lower oil prices it would be far better to simply increase supply. With congress locking up 85% of the US energy , its EZ to stop price hikes. Talk to congress.Free ANWAR , Free the Gulf Coast ,,,,, The Air Farce has done great work in bringing forward the conversion of coal into Jet Fuel. It has flown in many varieties of AF equipment . Congress deems this ILLEGAL , as CO2 is created by the Fischer Topschis process. Solution? Happily the "man made global warming religion" is being shown as a media (and Sorros) construct. CO2 may help the coming ice age (little or big). FF | ||
| Tim Brandt (Timb)
Registered Member Username: Timb Post Number: 257 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 66.165.176.62  Rating: N/A |
The other issue is that refineries are weighted toward producing gasoline so far less diesel ber barrel than gas. Add the growing demand for diesel overseas and it becomes a supply demand thing with pricing it's just harder for us to see since the diesel is going across the pond | ||
| john w. roan (Chessie4905)
Registered Member Username: Chessie4905 Post Number: 1300 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 71.58.110.9  Rating: N/A |
If you have the space,( and extra money ), try to get some spare supply when the price is low, like now. At least fill up your fuel tank. Just remember to allow for expansion when the weather warms. | ||
| James Robinson (Jjrbus)
Registered Member Username: Jjrbus Post Number: 185 Registered: 12-2000 Posted From: 99.207.32.76 Rating: N/A |
I'll join the boycott!! Of course I have not bought anything in a gas staton convienience store in 15 years. Jim | ||
| Nellie Wilson (Vivianellie)
Registered Member Username: Vivianellie Post Number: 182 Registered: 11-2008 Posted From: 70.52.107.72 Rating: N/A |
Well, Jim, if everyone followed your lead we wouldn't be getting gouged. The retailers (refineries) have seen they can slug us as hard as they want and we'll keep coming back for more. But take away the retailers' cash cow (the over priced crap we can get anywhere else - for less $$) and they'll soon get the picture. Especially if we tell them point blank WHY we're taking our non-fuel business elsewhere. I've seen this first hand and it works. Fuel has always been a loss-leader and now, suddenly, they're trying to turn it into a profit item. We gotta let 'em know they can't have their cake and eat it too. Gouge us for fuel? Okay, we're stuck... but we ain't buying anything else. And the 'anything else' is where these stations make their real money. I don't get this fatalistic mind set, propped up by some half-baked macro-economics argument ("... the US companies control less than 7% of the worlds supply/production...'). That's like saying Walmart controls less than 7% of China's production output. Who cares? If we stopped buying their stuff they'd lower their price - regardless of what they 'control.' Though I'm not particularly focused on diesel (Well, I am personally but my thesis is not), Tim is right whwn he says "refineries are weighted toward producing gasoline so far less diesel ber barrel than gas." That's always been true (but is rapidly changing) yet diesel has always (until lately) been cheaper than gasoline. As it should be... it's right next to kerosene in the cracking process. Maybe it's time to nationalize the petroleum industry (along with the banks, mortgage lenders, insurance and auto companies)? Screw it. I'm just sick and tired of getting gouged. And even sicker of people that whine and complain but do absolutely nothing to stop it. Nellie's soap box is over and out. Nellie | ||
| R.C.Bishop (Chuckllb)
Registered Member Username: Chuckllb Post Number: 435 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 75.210.250.120 Rating: N/A |
Whewwwww....Chihuahua.....Good Grief!!!! Hey Nel....better jump in a cold shower!  YOU go girl! RCB (Message edited by chuckllb on January 22, 2009) | ||
| Nellie Wilson (Vivianellie)
Registered Member Username: Vivianellie Post Number: 184 Registered: 11-2008 Posted From: 70.49.115.2 Rating: N/A |
Hey, RCB - that WAS a little over the top, wasn't it? I apologize for straying from my customary lady-like rhetoric. But, RATS, I'm disgusted with what's gomg on lately. It's like we don't have a country anymore, just a bunch of over-stuffed corporate louts feeding of our 'government' while we (real people) take it in the shorts. But, hey, that's just me. Nellie | ||
| FAST FRED (Fast_fred)
Registered Member Username: Fast_fred Post Number: 654 Registered: 10-2006 Posted From: 64.241.37.140 Rating: N/A |
"But, RATS, I'm disgusted with what's gomg on lately. It's like we don't have a country anymore, just a bunch of over-stuffed corporate louts feeding of our 'government' while we (real people) take it in the shorts." Wait till the BO socalist gang promotes enough inflation to "cover" the losses from Fanny & Freddy who demanded 50% of all loans be SUB par. The Employer of last resort and the employees of last resort have the "Cure" ,,borrow and spend ourselves "RICH". No job , no income , no money for rent? simply buy a house. Those that read Barrons and study the market should be scared as he-- with all the references to the coming Weymar Republic. The existing problems (credit market failure) was created and supported by the folks now using our credit to purchase "prosperity " , which has NEVER failed to FAIL. The normal US family was $35,000 in debt by 200+ years of politicans , we will be adding $7000 to each of our burden with in weeks. Feel good? FF | ||
| Nellie Wilson (Vivianellie)
Registered Member Username: Vivianellie Post Number: 187 Registered: 11-2008 Posted From: 74.13.197.170 Rating: N/A |
Loud and clear, Uncle Fred. I hear ya loud and clear. Nellie | ||
| Len Silva (Lsilva)
Registered Member Username: Lsilva Post Number: 194 Registered: 12-2000 Posted From: 24.164.20.23  Rating: N/A |
The biggest oil companies in the country are Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Barclays, and J.P. Morgan. See 60 Minutes 1/11/09 http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/08/60minutes/main4707770.shtml They are what drive oil prices, not supply, not demand, not refinery capacity, not China and India, but pure speculation. That's why oil prices have fallen so dramatically. Not because we are using less but because the banks are on their butts. Of course, the oil companies weren't complaining either. | ||
| R.C.Bishop (Chuckllb)
Registered Member Username: Chuckllb Post Number: 442 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 75.208.249.15 Rating: N/A |
Len...FWIW, I would guess most of us are using less....Certainly I am...in three vehicles and at home...haven't turned on the furnace yet. Using a pellet stove and have spent less than $100 since turning it on in November....but then, we live in the desert SW. Even so, usually heat goes on Nov 1 and off about April 1. That's my story... and I'm stickin' to it!... RCB | ||
| FAST FRED (Fast_fred)
Registered Member Username: Fast_fred Post Number: 657 Registered: 10-2006 Posted From: 64.241.37.140 Rating: N/A |
They are what drive oil prices, not supply, not demand, not refinery capacity, not China and India, but pure speculation. When the phony demand of no income , no job house sales collapsed "Money Managers" needed a place to create returns to justify million buck bonuses.. When ANY market gets 300% more participation , the price goes up. Happily what goes up goes down. FF | ||
| Robert Fischer (Rbt137)
Registered Member Username: Rbt137 Post Number: 12 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 71.111.78.153 Rating: |
Preface: I struggle mightily when I read stories carping about the price of fuel and oil companies gouging the public. I have spent the better part of a week not wanting to post the following because the whole discussion seems insane. So, I am going to post this with the wish that all of ya can buy fuel @ one dollar a gallon. lets not forget that we (USA) are too stupid to drill where we know we have oil (off either coast) and the oil on the west coast seeps into the ocean daily in excess of the (quantity) Valdez. as of this moment: shell oil has spent 200 million for "rights" to drill on Alaska shores where environmentalists are suing to block which is hung up in the ninth circus court since July of 2007. There is no reason why we cannot have dollar a gallon diesel except for the fact that we are too stupid to go get it. (The people who are so damn much smarter than the rest of us want alternative energy ((solar/wind)) which if you understand the numbers is absolutely insane) Interesting site for oil data: http://www.gravmag.com/oilold.html more stuff on oil: http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energy facts/sources/non-renewable/oil.html#How%20used Technical stuff for nuts: http://www.lloydminsterheavyoil.com/upgraderlaunch.htm another source; check out Byron King and his peak oil report. Other good oil data at this site as well: http://www.whiskeyandgunpowder.com/authors/ http://www.whiskeyandgunpowder.com/free-reports/oil-and-gas-infrastructure/ of course, going off the deep end here, the issue of oil and environment remind me of the history of R12 (refrigerant), currently outlawed (except in 3rd world countries). The ESA (European space agency) last year, issued a press release denoting the fact that R12 had far less impact on the Ozone than they had originally thought. Anybody think we’ll see R12 returning? Anybody have a clue what this has cost us ordinary citizens? Of course some are still asking how a molecule 4X heavier than oxygen and nitrogen can get wayyyyy up there by itself. Never mind. And of course not to hammer any nails home, the same phenomenon occurred to DDT; meaning that it was outlawed (Rachal Carlson; silent spring) with the direct result of 30 million women and children dead of malarial born disease. Nice. See junkscience.com for facts. All of these things have one thing in common. Government. Government run amuck if you will. Of course, sadly, responsibility for this is with the voters. There is something less than six hundred that control our government and cause high fuel prices. The most efficient companies to find/drill/pump/transport oil are American. Nobody does it better. If those six hundred or so (congress/president/judges) would just get out of the way.............Those just mentioned contribute zero to the process of putting that gallon of diesel in your coach while stealing (roughly) 48 cents. Those six hundred are the same ones that will not let the oil companies drill where we know we have a sixty year supply. Those six hundred are the same that subsidize solar/wind to the tune of $$34. Per KW ((actually, I have forgotten the actual number ....just remember it’s huge compared to coal))((coal is subsidized about $$$0.24 per KW. For all of you starting up the flamers, please don’t miss the leading zero)) Not that I really care much about all this BS, but back in the seventys I was buying gasoline for 25 cents. When you consider inflation (caused by those six hundred or so mentioned above) a gallon should be somewhere around eight dollars per gallon. Who is getting hurt here, the consumer or the exporters?? | ||
| FAST FRED (Fast_fred)
Registered Member Username: Fast_fred Post Number: 681 Registered: 10-2006 Posted From: 66.82.9.75 Rating: N/A |
Anybody think we’ll see R12 returning? Anybody have a clue what this has cost us ordinary citizens? Roughly 15% extra energy use on every single unit worldwide prevented from operating with efficient R12 rather than some PC trash. Thats a LOT ,for a " BS story" just in the USA , never mind the increase in the entire world!! FF | ||
| Kyle Brandt (Kyle4501)
Registered Member Username: Kyle4501 Post Number: 453 Registered: 9-2004 Posted From: 65.23.106.193 Rating: N/A |
Let's not forget the additional cost of refinement when more stuff has to be removed due to EPA requirements. Removing certain aromatic hydrocarbons to clean up the emmissions often requires other stuff to be added back in . . . that isn't free either. The elected officials were all to eager to pass laws against r12 so they could show the ignorant masses they were 'doing something'. Never mind the Dupont influence. . . | ||
| George M. Todd (George_mc6)
Registered Member Username: George_mc6 Post Number: 708 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 64.55.111.6 Rating: N/A |
First off, I am a licensed Air Conditioning Contractor, and as such, I have to be EPA certified to buy or handle refrigerants. Unfortunately, Robert doesn't tell the whole story, when he states: "How can a molecule 4X heavier than oxygen and nitrogen get gey waaayyy up there by itself. Never mind" 1. OBVIOUSLY HE IS COMPLETELY IGNORANT OF WIND!! 2. He is also ignorant of basic chemistry, and has apparently never read the ingredients legally required to be printed in large letters on Freon cannisters. R-12 is DichloroDiFluoroMethane R-22 is ChloroDiFluoroMethane I have capitalized the first letters of the ingredients to make it a little clearer. Both R-12, and R-22 contain Chlorine, Fluorine, and Methane, R-12 contains TWICE as much Chlorine as R-22. Why do our tires crack and rot off before they wear out? Its called oxidation, and when the sun shines on leaked out Freon, it breaks down into Chlorine, Fluorine, and Methane again. Methane, (Natural Gas) IS lighter than air. Chlorine destroys ozone.... My discussion with Fast Fred on refrigerants is still active on the board, apparently he has quickly forgotten what is still posted! One of us works in the Refrigeration/Air Conditioning industry on a daily basis, one of us doesn't! R-410a, which replaces R-22, is MORE efficient than R-22, whether Fred thinks so or not, and it is published data, available in ANY refrigeration wholesale distributor. Fred can go right down to his local auto parts store, and buy all the 134a he wants to, without an EPA cert, and put it in his leaky bus. When it leaks out, it won't do any of us any harm! I'm done ranting, they've been BRAKES for over 200 years, but oh well.... G | ||
| Kyle Brandt (Kyle4501)
Registered Member Username: Kyle4501 Post Number: 454 Registered: 9-2004 Posted From: 65.23.106.193 Rating: N/A |
Please pardon my ignorance, but what of the chlorine used to treat swimming pools? Or is that a different chlorine? Also, wouldn't a molecule hevier than air sink into the ground at first chance? Sure some will get wind blown, but surely, not all . . . | ||
| H3-40 (Ace)
Registered Member Username: Ace Post Number: 936 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 70.222.200.109  Rating: N/A |
I@n I couldn't help myself! I really tried! Go George! ROFLMAO Ace | ||
| George M. Todd (George_mc6)
Registered Member Username: George_mc6 Post Number: 710 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 64.55.111.6 Rating: N/A |
Ace, Do you know how long I resisted saying anything? You also notice I didn't call any names, and posted only published facts. I will admit to poking obscure fun at people, such as a "One Horned Steer." A hint: There are two things it can't do, and two things it can. Kyle, Lets stop and think about this for a second. Chlorine is indeed used in swimming pools, to purify drinking water, and used to bleach clothes in laundry operations, and to bleach paper in industrial applications, etc. These are things we have to have, there isn't a cheap viable alternative, AND the amount of chlorine that evaporates from a swimming pool along with the water is way less than the amount released as a gas from A/C leaks. Changing the makeup of refrigerants was something that could be done easily, and has a large effect. What isn't widely known outside of the refrigeration industry, is that R-11, R-500, and R-502, were also replaced due to their Ozone Depleting Potential. Air conditioning units using R-22 will not be made after 2010, R-22 will be available for 10 years after for repairs. "Freon" is a trademark owned by DuPont, and refers to at least 50 different blends. The way I see it, they would much rather have gone on selling R-12 by the pounds and pounds to people with leaky cars and buses, than be forced to develop a chlorine free alternative. R-11 was used by the barrel in the electronics industry to clean printed circuit boards. Just spray it on, (it comes out under its own pressure) washes the board clean, and EVAPORATES, leaving no residue. THOUSANDS OF GALLONS of R-11 were evaporated worldwide using this method. No refrigeration mechanics owned a vacuum pump, they just purged the system with whatever refrigerant they were using, until all the air and contaminants were blown out. Freon sales are way down, due to the laws against purging, requirements for check valves on hoses, and the requirements to recover freon with a machine, and take it to a recycling center. Does it cost a whole lot more to maintain a vacuum pump, a recovery machine, and cylinders? Yep, but it is something that can be done. One more question for Robert: How does the Ozone layer get replenished? Couldn't be from the Ozone that is generated down here on the ground and rises up could it? ("How does heavy chlorine get waaayyy up there") Am I saying that ozone exposed to chlorine on the ground "dies" and never gets to the upper atmosphere? Hmmmm... Notice the signoff above? (We know where it came from.) G | ||
| R.C.Bishop (Chuckllb)
Registered Member Username: Chuckllb Post Number: 473 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 75.211.175.70 Rating: N/A |
RCB | ||
| Kyle Brandt (Kyle4501)
Registered Member Username: Kyle4501 Post Number: 455 Registered: 9-2004 Posted From: 65.12.100.209 Rating: N/A |
while some can smell it & walk around, others step in it & spread it around. kinda sorta like ethonol saving us from opec. . . . kinda sorta like water for gas. . . . Guess it really doesn't matter anyways . . . . sheep will be sheep  (Message edited by kyle4501 on February 06, 2009) | ||
| Robert Fischer (Rbt137)
Registered Member Username: Rbt137 Post Number: 13 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 71.111.78.153  Rating: N/A |
Oooooo dear George. You make such a brilliant case for the lurkers. Did you know that or are you not certified for that? I am just a little concerned about your certification and how you wave it around like some kind of flag. Is your certification from the same folks who are currently spending us into prosperity? The same folks running the Social security ponzi scheme......The same folks responsible for liars loans and the subprime? The same folks who are so damn much smarter than the rest of us? You wouldn’t be part of that cabal would you? I have four comments on your “whole story”: 1) I am definitely ignorant on lots of topics, including the wind. Yesterday I repaired twenty four feet of cedar fence that was knocked down by a December storm. I have closely examined the entire damaged portion and it was all there, right on the ground. As far as I can tell, not a single cellulose molecule (you may extrapolate down to atomic particles if you wish) was missing. (I thought my initial posting was cost and excessive government regulation. What would my knowledge of the wind have to do with five dollar diesel?) 2) I did not spell out the molecular structure of R12 because I did not (in my ignorance) think it germane to the point at hand. You did but why stop there. Lets drive straight down into the mess of subatomic particles too. Can you spell quarks? Ooooo....and there’s now dark matter and dark energy to delve into too. Any of this stuff in your dangerous R12? 3) I am not only ignorant but not certified either. But I have examined the certification (the 609 spec) that you so gallantly wave and there’s not a single question about Boyles laws. So shine some light on my ignorance through your keyboard and expound. 4)In your “rant” you did not mention oxygen, one of the more dangerous and caustic substances on this planet. That stuff can kill you. Maybe the smarter than us crowd (you) can certify the rest of us to breath it. ((sadly, this isn’t so much a joke. Recent court decisions will have the EPA(((source of George’s certification) regulating carbon dioxide))(((to the intellectuals which peruse this board: you will read this as more taxation and government))) As I pointed out in the beginning, the discussion becomes insane. As my initial post mentioned, I made an issue about the cost of fuel and the government and I made certain points through out to support my thesis. George must have blown a certification gasket when he consciously chose not to address the ESA fact regarding R12 and then to focus his discussion on the wind and what I know of it. . I’m not sure but I believe the ESA one or five steps beyond a technicians certification. Same consideration for the DDT fact and excess government. I would imagine that George cannot see the elephant in the room because he is part of it. My dear George, I thought to include an entire paragraph of capitalized words and summarily dismissed the same. I thought it more to the point to code it in HTML and shrink it so you couldn’t read it .but I am way too lazy and you aren’t worth the effort. I fully expect you to respond with a slew of four letter words........but you will do so without my participation. Your contribution to my initial post has taken the conversation to the realm of little people and you will have to enjoy that accomplishment by yourself. As I looked at this thread this morning, I see additional comments authored by George regarding Chlorine (to Kyle) . While most of what George has stated on CFC’s is proper in terms of what we believe we know, his knowledge on the chlorine cycle in the troposphere is off the charts. For those interested, a search for HCL and troposphere should supply unlimited reading. His other comment concerning significant quantity of ground based ozone reaching the stratosphere must be a spoof. He cannot possibly believe what he writes. Enough. I have to go. My fingers are shouting at the top of their voices invoking rule #1. | ||
| Robert Fischer (Rbt137)
Registered Member Username: Rbt137 Post Number: 14 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 71.111.78.153 Rating: N/A |
Oh, over ruling rule #1 for a moment: current news about what George knows absolutely. Chemists poke holes in ozone theory Reaction data of crucial chloride compounds called into question. Quirin Schiermeier As the world marks 20 years since the introduction of the Montreal Protocol to protect the ozone layer, Nature has learned of experimental data that threaten to shatter established theories of ozone chemistry. If the data are right, scientists will have to rethink their understanding of how ozone holes are formed and how that relates to climate change. Time will tell. Whatever the case, the EPA and its laws will remain. Creating the laws before we know the facts probably isn't too smart. | ||
| Robert Fischer (Rbt137)
Registered Member Username: Rbt137 Post Number: 15 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 71.111.78.153 Rating: N/A |
a further violation of rule #1. The ozone hole and depletion of the ozone layer is old news. We have had hard data on the layer for a more than 20 years and that data tells us, unequivocally, that the ozone layer is disappearing at a rate of about three percent per year. The process that drives this has also not been subject to much attention for sometime: we thought we understood it very well. In a series of four reaction steps, an unstable oxidated chlorine dimer (ClO) combines with a second dimer—a reaction that is mediated by collision with a third party molecule—to form Cl2O2. One of the chlorine molecules is split off by a high energy photon and the second chlorine is split off through collisions with other molecules. The two free chlorine atoms then react with ozone molecules to recreate the two dimers and over the whole cycle, converts two ozone molecules (O3) into three oxygen molecules (O2). The rates of each step needed to be determined before it could be concluded that chlorine based molecules have been responsible for the depletion of the ozone layer, and chemists thought they had that nailed. The weak link in our knowledge of the reaction rates has always been the light initiated cleaving of chlorine. Although various labs had attempted to measure this step, the reported reaction rates (more precisely, the absorption cross section of Cl2O2) varied by a factor of five, leaving this step poorly understood. It appears that atmospheric chemists weren't too concerned by this because even the lowest reported value was fast enough. Models based on this reaction chain, combined with a few other, less significant paths, accounted for the observed ozone depletion. Case closed, right? Wrong, apparently. Concerned over the wide distribution of values and the complacency of scientists, a crank, working in his garage, has managed to overturn 20 years of dogma in a blindingly simple experiment. Umm, no, that isn't correct either. In fact, a team of scientists from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory have put together a rather complicated experiment, one that allowed them to isolate the Cl2O2 molecule in a form that was much more pure than what had been previously obtained. They did this through a combination of laser induced reactions, cooling, and trapping. Having obtained a much more pure form, the researchers were able to use UV lasers to cleave the chlorine molecule and measure the rate of the subsequent reactions. To their shock, they found that the reaction rate was not just at the lower end of the published results, but about an order of magnitude slower than the average of previously reported values. Although this work needs to be replicated, it may have far-reaching consequences in both atmospheric physics and politics. Firstly, using the new reaction rate, scientists can no longer account for 60 percent of the observed ozone depletion. Although it is still thought that chlorine based catalytic reactions are the major cause of ozone depletion, we no longer have a strong link between theory, experiment, and observation. This may give policy makers all the excuse they need to begin (or continue) ignoring the Montreal convention. Most importantly, scientists had, based on chlorofluorocarbon emissions and the chemical reaction pathways, predicted a slow recovery of the ozone layer. We can no longer be confident about that either. Lastly, and this sounds like a bit of a stretch, we can't predict how ozone chemistry and global climate change will interact. Basically, all these reactions are temperature dependent and are probably dependent on light from the sun. Previously, we thought the influence of climate change on ozone chemistry would be minor. Now the honest answer is that we don't know. I will finish by explaining the line about a crank in his garage overturning scientific dogma. All of my life, I have been exposed to people who believe that scientists are more attached to their theories than they are to data. They think that scientists, as a group, persecute and suppress anyone who tries to demonstrate that the existing theory is in any way flawed. This is especially true when science connects with politics and/or our beliefs. I cannot think of a finer immediate example to present as a counterpoint. Journal of Physical Chemistry, 2007, DOI: 10.1021/jp067660w | ||
| George M. Todd (George_mc6)
Registered Member Username: George_mc6 Post Number: 715 Registered: 8-2006 Posted From: 64.55.111.6 Rating: N/A |
Dear Robert: I wouldn't answer your last posts, except for my feeling that lack of a reply implies aquiescence and/or agreement. I am also not going to do what someone else here that I respect, has already cautioned againt, and step in what you put down, and spread it around. You violate the first law of effective discussion by what a marriage counselor describes as "laundry listing," (Bringing too many subjects into a discussion, without resolving any of them.) You have now brought DDT, blown over wooden fences, cranks in garages, The Montreal Protocol, scientific dogma, JPL, lasers, unstable oxidated chlorine dimers, cedar, and celulose molecules, into a discussion on fuel prices, and my reply to a non-qualified post. Unfortunately, you have lurked too long, and the effects are showing. Had you paid any attention to the last couple of years here, you would have noticed that I have never called anyone I disagreed with names, AND I AM NOT GOING TO START WITH YOU! I have also said many times that calling names doesn't take any talent, you are the one who mentions four-letter words. Does this mean that I disagree with you? Yes. Did I make ONE disrespectful, or personal comment, to or about you? No. Unfortunately, you didn't treat me with the same respect. Now I'm going to disappoint you even further, by not making any disparaging comments, four letter words, or body functions. Your last three posts could well be described as paranoid, and you have not listed ONE qualification of any sort. I'm done, and frankly I'm ashamed of myself for the first word in this reply. George | ||
| R.C.Bishop (Chuckllb)
Registered Member Username: Chuckllb Post Number: 476 Registered: 7-2006 Posted From: 75.209.14.2 Rating: N/A |
Not to be ashamed, George!....Succinct and with "heart"".... Survival of the fittest...as it were. You are a gentleman. RCB | ||
| FAST FRED (Fast_fred)
Registered Member Username: Fast_fred Post Number: 689 Registered: 10-2006 Posted From: 69.19.14.44 Rating: N/A |
"R-410a, which replaces R-22, is MORE efficient than R-22," BUT LESS efficient than the F-12, costing billions in extra electric, diesel et all. Some folks have wondered about the insane push for wind and solar , FOLLOW THE MONEY. A loss of alternative sources (no wind or night time) is no hassle for the base load to absorb , as long as its a few percent. Get the unreliable alt energy up to 10% and the base (coal & Nuke) cant respond fast enough. The natural gas powered gen sets (DC 10 engine and gen head) can come to full output in a few min. When oil went way up Nat gas rose , but no where as high. Boone Pickens , Nancy Pelosy and many others in congress have huge GAS holdings. Forcing a market for a supply in huge surplus, good use of Force and Fraud ...for them, as usual. For US , the usual , they get richer at our expense,, thru politics. FF | ||
| Kyle Brandt (Kyle4501)
Registered Member Username: Kyle4501 Post Number: 456 Registered: 9-2004 Posted From: 65.23.106.193 Rating: N/A |
Seems there is a push to disregard the laws of nature in favor of laws of MARKETING. While many may have the intelligence, few have the attention span required to follow a logical scientific process thru to its conclusion. It's too bad more & more are interested in the latest quick fix that marketing has come up with to allow them to 'feel good about themselves'. Nevermind the cost or the fact the results don't back up the reasoning behind the quick fix. With so many wanting to be sheep, we need to find a better shepard than the marketing department. |
