GAMI Unleaded gets approval

[jaylw314]

6 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

When I was a kid I had cousins who lived in Costa Mesa CA, so I ended up at Newport Beach a few times a year. I remember a few times where there were tar balls on the beach. We all had to be inspected before we got into the car and cleaned with paint thinner if we were contaminated. 

LOL, those were different times when you could just rinse your kids off in paint thinner! 

6 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

Most people seem to ignore the fact that oil is a natural organic product. A gift from mother nature. Some act like it is an evil daemon imported from another planet. 

Organic: relating or belonging to the class of chemical compounds having a carbon basis

I'm reminded of a line from George Carlin (though I can't remember which show):

"ALL foods are 'natural'!  The toxic waste that factory dumps in the river is 'natural'.  Dog s--t is 'natural, it's just not very good food!"

I miss you, George 

[jaylw314]

4 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

Natural gas destroys ozone?

I believe it burns far cleaner than oil or coal, what hydrocarbon source is cleaner?

I think it funny when I hear about gas stoves being banned, what are they going to replace them with? Electric? Where are they going to get that? Burn oil or coal? 

The arguments I've seen:

• Methane is far more potent than CO2 as a greenhouse gas, and there have been studies showing household leaks occur in typical installations even when unused.
• NOx production is high enough to be a factor in children's asthma exacerbations, and there have been studies supporting this
• Gas stoves are far less efficient than electric (you lose a lot of heat to the air).  This includes ovens, since they need an exhaust that loses heat.
• Electric stoves give at least the ability to convert to renewable sources later, even if it's a pipe dream now

I've always cooked over gas, but I have used induction tops a couple times and found them far superior.  The only reason I hadn't switched was due to cost at the time.  But the typical electric tops drive me nuts.

[A64Pilot]

57 minutes ago, jaylw314 said:

The arguments I've seen:

• Methane is far more potent than CO2 as a greenhouse gas, and there have been studies showing household leaks occur in typical installations even when unused.
• NOx production is high enough to be a factor in children's asthma exacerbations, and there have been studies supporting this
• Gas stoves are far less efficient than electric (you lose a lot of heat to the air).  This includes ovens, since they need an exhaust that loses heat.
• Electric stoves give at least the ability to convert to renewable sources later, even if it's a pipe dream now

I've always cooked over gas, but I have used induction tops a couple times and found them far superior.  The only reason I hadn't switched was due to cost at the time.  But the typical electric tops drive me nuts.

The vast majority of electricity isn’t renewable and likely won’t be, unless we become much more efficient, which there is very little pressure for that. 

The places banning hydrocarbon and forcing the shift to electric are already way behind in generation, California imports more electricity than any other State, but refuses to generate their own, because you know it’s bad for the environment, but I guess it’s OK to import it from another State’s coal burning plant?

They have banned fossil fuel vehicles in 12 years? They are going to have to double their electric supply at least to do that, how are they going to do that? They are already 30% in the hole and getting deeper.

If you really want to reduce pollution from cooking, you ban charcoal grills. As that’s a smoldering fire it’s much more polluting than Propane or natural gas, plus most just let the charcoal burn out, continuing to pollute hours after your done cooking.

Or have they banned them too?

As far as studies, you get what you pay for.

Heard the other day that most couples prefer a vacation when they get married over a diamond ring. Who commissioned the study? Sandals retreats, what did you expect the finding to be?

Bottom line though when you don’t have nearly enough of a resource to get by, like water for instance, only a fool does things to increase the use of the resource that your already short of.

California is way short of electricity now, banning natural gas and gasoline lawnmowers etc to say nothing of banning fossil fueled cars is planning to fail. It’s exactly like your income is less than your expenditures, so you get another credit card.

[jaylw314]

53 minutes ago, A64Pilot said:

As far as studies, you get what you pay for.

I didn't pay for it, the Harvard School of Public Health did:

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acs.est.1c08298

--If you really want to reduce pollution from cooking, you ban charcoal grills.

As to that question, it all depends on what you mean by "pollution".  If we're talking greenhouse gases, then natural gas is significantly worse.  I assume you're talking about the other stuff (particulates, odors, CO and other gases).  I haven't seen any good data actually comparing the two, but I suspect the differences are trivial since grills account for 0.0003% of the US carbon footprint. 

Edited January 24, 2023 by jaylw314

[T. Peterson]

1 hour ago, jaylw314 said:

The arguments I've seen:

• Methane is far more potent than CO2 as a greenhouse gas, and there have been studies showing household leaks occur in typical installations even when unused.
• NOx production is high enough to be a factor in children's asthma exacerbations, and there have been studies supporting this
• Gas stoves are far less efficient than electric (you lose a lot of heat to the air).  This includes ovens, since they need an exhaust that loses heat.
• Electric stoves give at least the ability to convert to renewable sources later, even if it's a pipe dream now

I've always cooked over gas, but I have used induction tops a couple times and found them far superior.  The only reason I hadn't switched was due to cost at the time.  But the typical electric tops drive me nuts.

I have no dog in the fight, but there are studies to prove anything you want to prove.

[jaylw314]

10 minutes ago, T. Peterson said:

I have no dog in the fight, but there are studies to prove anything you want to prove.

Well, Mark Twain was wrong when he talked about "lies, damn lies, and statistics."  He should have said "lies, damn lies, and bad statistics."  We're all smart enough to take the time and make the effort to evaluate the quality of the information around us

[A64Pilot]

2 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

I didn't pay for it, the Harvard School of Public Health did:

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acs.est.1c08298

--If you really want to reduce pollution from cooking, you ban charcoal grills.

As to that question, it all depends on what you mean by "pollution".  If we're talking greenhouse gases, then natural gas is significantly worse.  I assume you're talking about the other stuff (particulates, odors, CO and other gases).  I haven't seen any good data actually comparing the two, but I suspect the differences are trivial since grills account for 0.0003% of the US carbon footprint. 

Look it up, charcoal puts out about twice as much CO2 as gas and I’m sure much more CO 

https://ideas.ted.com/environmental-impact-of-charcoal-barbecue/

Read this, this quote is from that article, but charcoal is orders of magnitude worse than Propane or Natural gas for many reasons

To put that into perspective, if each of the 38.85 million owners of charcoal grills in the US decided to fire up their barbecue for just one hour on the Fourth of July, they would collectively release more than 427 million pounds of carbon dioxide into the air on that day alone. That’s equivalent to the annual greenhouse gas emissions from 42,211 gasoline-powered cars.

 The Oak Ridge National Laboratory estimates that gas grills emit about half as much carbon dioxide per hour as charcoal grills. Thinking of switching to electric? Unless it’s being powered by a renewable energy source like wind or solar, electric grills actually have a worse overall footprint than gas because electricity often comes from coal.

[Pinecone]

4 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

LOL, those were different times when you could just rinse your kids off in paint thinner! 

Or gasoline.

Leaded of course.

 

[jaylw314]

1 hour ago, A64Pilot said:

Look it up, charcoal puts out about twice as much CO2 as gas and I’m sure much more CO 

https://ideas.ted.com/environmental-impact-of-charcoal-barbecue/

Read this, this quote is from that article, but charcoal is orders of magnitude worse than Propane or Natural gas for many reasons

To put that into perspective, if each of the 38.85 million owners of charcoal grills in the US decided to fire up their barbecue for just one hour on the Fourth of July, they would collectively release more than 427 million pounds of carbon dioxide into the air on that day alone. That’s equivalent to the annual greenhouse gas emissions from 42,211 gasoline-powered cars.

 The Oak Ridge National Laboratory estimates that gas grills emit about half as much carbon dioxide per hour as charcoal grills. Thinking of switching to electric? Unless it’s being powered by a renewable energy source like wind or solar, electric grills actually have a worse overall footprint than gas because electricity often comes from coal.

So speaking about bad statistics, that's an example.  Not just because the data itself is bad (who the hell is Neel Danesha, why should I trust him, and why does he not provide analysis of the total carbon cost of natural gas grilling?), but because it does not answer the problem you posed, which was cooking on gas stoves vs cooking on charcoal grills.  Most bad statistics are not bad because the numbers are wrong (although I suspect there's no shortage of that either), but because people using them asked the wrong question.

[PT20J]

I got lost somewhere: Does G100UL work in my barbeque?

[T. Peterson]

12 minutes ago, jaylw314 said:

So speaking about bad statistics, that's an example.  Not just because the data itself is bad (who the hell is Neel Danesha, why should I trust him, and why does he not provide analysis of the total carbon cost of natural gas grilling?), but because it does not answer the problem you posed, which was cooking on gas stoves vs cooking on charcoal grills.  Most bad statistics are not bad because the numbers are wrong (although I suspect there's no shortage of that either), but because people using them asked the wrong question.

….or possibly there are agendas behind the statistics?

As was once noted in times past, “Figures don’t lie, but liars figure.”

[Pinecone]

Simple chemistry.

Natural gas is mainly methane.  That is CH4.  Fully combusted makes 1 molecule CO2 and 2 molecule of H2O.

Propane is C3H8.  Make 3x CO2 and 4x H20

Isooctane is C8H18.  Makes 8x CO2 and 9x H20.

The ratio of hydrogen to carbon goes down with more complex hydrocarbons, so more CO2 versus H20.

BUT, realize the number one green house gas is actually water vapor.

 

[T. Peterson]

5 minutes ago, Pinecone said:

Simple chemistry.

Natural gas is mainly methane.  That is CH4.  Fully combusted makes 1 molecule CO2 and 2 molecule of H2O.

Propane is C3H8.  Make 3x CO2 and 4x H20

Isooctane is C8H18.  Makes 8x CO2 and 9x H20.

The ratio of hydrogen to carbon goes down with more complex hydrocarbons, so more CO2 versus H20.

BUT, realize the number one green house gas is actually water vapor.

 

Oh no! Ban swimming pools! Ban the oceans! Arrest everyone with a charcoal grill!!

[gacoon]

8 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

On edit, Way I see it is a very large part of the problem is just since my birth in 1958, there are now more than twice as many people in the US, so doing things now is simply way more volume than used to be, so the solution to pollution is dilution breaks down.

Bingo, someone getting close to the problem

[jaylw314]

18 minutes ago, T. Peterson said:

….or possibly there are agendas behind the statistics?

As was once noted in times past, “Figures don’t lie, but liars figure.”

That's probably a more accurate statement, although it's important to account for the fact that the biggest liar is usually the one between your ears

[T. Peterson]

5 minutes ago, jaylw314 said:

That's probably a more accurate statement, although it's important to account for the fact that the biggest liar is usually the one between your ears

It is certainly true that I would need to resist the temptation to support data that validates my premises rather than data that contradicts my premises. Of course I am sure that is just my personal shortcoming and not true of anyone else.

[ragedracer1977]

1 hour ago, PT20J said:

I got lost somewhere: Does G100UL work in my barbeque?

Finally someone asked the right question. Will I be able to throw G100UL in my powertow?

[T. Peterson]

32 minutes ago, gacoon said:

Bingo, someone getting close to the problem

Ahhh yes, humans are the problem. Too too many of us. The wise men have been complaining of this for decades. I find it interesting that some of these same wise men want to dictate my health choices. All in my best interests of course. They may be right. I don’t have any Harvard studies to validate my skepticism, just a gut instinct that maybe all is not as the cultural voices are proclaiming.

[ilovecornfields]

2 hours ago, PT20J said:

I got lost somewhere: Does G100UL work in my barbeque?

Yeah, but it won’t taste as good. You won’t get that sweet “Sugar of Lead” coating on the hot dogs that kids crave. Better stick to 100 LL. 

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/sugar-of-lead-a-deadly-sweetener-89984487/

[Canadian Gal]

4 hours ago, Pinecone said:

Or gasoline.

Leaded of course.

 

My father washed his hands in gasoline regularly, and us kids to if we were greasy from working in the shop.

As the youngest child, I started by greasing the trucks and trailers when about age 7, that took me most of Saturday, and I was filthy when done.

So outside we went where dad washed me up with gas.

What doesn't kill you makes you stronger...right.

[Canadian Gal]

3 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

So speaking about bad statistics, that's an example.  Not just because the data itself is bad (who the hell is Neel Danesha, why should I trust him, and why does he not provide analysis of the total carbon cost of natural gas grilling?), but because it does not answer the problem you posed, which was cooking on gas stoves vs cooking on charcoal grills.  Most bad statistics are not bad because the numbers are wrong (although I suspect there's no shortage of that either), but because people using them asked the wrong question.

Amen to that!

[Canadian Gal]

Here are some statistics.

 

100% of vegetarians will die.

 

100% of joggers will die.

 

Going to the gym is a good source of catching a cold and flu.

 

So eat meat, and don't work out or run.

 

That is how ridiculous most statistics are.

 

My work is in the health care field.

 

Some doctors are brilliant, some dumb as a bag of rocks, the majority are just regular women and men.

 

What I've noticed is that often the humblest ones, who are open to listening, are the most brilliant.

Those who are sure that they are always correct, and refuse to listen to both sides of a discussion, are the dumb ones.

My father told me this many times growing up " A man who is sure his way is the only way, is usually wrong ".

[Pinecone]

10 hours ago, ragedracer1977 said:

Finally someone asked the right question. Will I be able to throw G100UL in my powertow?

Yes.  And you can even use it in your car.

 

[Pinecone]

8 hours ago, Canadian Gal said:

Some doctors are brilliant, some dumb as a bag of rocks, the majority are just regular women and men.

 

What I've noticed is that often the humblest ones, who are open to listening, are the most brilliant.

Those who are sure that they are always correct, and refuse to listen to both sides of a discussion, are the dumb ones.

My father told me this many times growing up " A man who is sure his way is the only way, is usually wrong ".

You can say that about people in general.

[A64Pilot]

10 hours ago, Pinecone said:

Yes.  And you can even use it in your car.

 

I would approach that with caution if we are talking regular grocery getting car. There are quite a few sensors and devices that may or may not tolerate that particular blend of aromatics, or it may not bother the Cats and O2 sensors etc.

I used to race motorcycles, if you ran 100LL, you had to run slightly bigger jets or it would run lean, it was as if it were an oxygenated fuel, which I don’t think it is.

I don’t know why you had to go up a jet size or two on 100LL, but I had to on more than one bike.

Due to its very stable storage there is some advantage to putting it in your lawnmower for that last cut of the year.

RE the banning of gas stoves, charcoal grills, gas lawnmowers and chainsaws or anything else.

Personally I’m not comfortable with the thought of giving the Government that much control over my life and my choices.

Whether it be big gulps, fried chicken or all kinds of other fast foods, why not ban them too? How about tobacco and alcohol? 

Once you buy into giving the Government control, for instance free medical for all, doesn’t it make sense they should control our eating habits etc that impair our health? It’s for the greater good after all.