Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 84540	2007-11-09 17:18:00	Petrol Prices	Choker (12893)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
609899	2007-11-12 20:01:00	Chicken one Peice of piss in my old school then again Sir Ernest Rutherford went to it. C1 I've got no problem with Rutherford being the inventor of the atomic bomb or whatever, but for the "piece of piss" - yeah right!!!. As far as Rutherford inventing the process, please get your facts right - it's called the Fischer-Tropsch process, not the Rutherford process - Rutherford did not work on industrial chemicals. To educate you a bit more: The Fischer-Tropsch process is a catalyzed chemical reaction in which carbon monoxide and hydrogen are converted into liquid hydrocarbons of various forms. Typical catalysts used are based on iron and cobalt. The principal purpose of this process is to produce a synthetic petroleum substitute, typically from coal or natural gas, for use as synthetic lubrication oil or as synthetic fuel. Since the invention of the original process by the German researchers Franz Fischer and Hans Tropsch, working at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in the 1920s, many refinements and adjustments have been made, and the term "Fischer-Tropsch" now applies to a wide variety of similar processes (Fischer-Tropsch synthesis or Fischer-Tropsch chemistry) The process was invented in petroleum-poor but coal-rich Germany in the 1920s, to produce liquid fuels. It was used by Germany and Japan during World War II to produce ersatz fuels. Germany's annual synthetic fuel production reached more than 124,000 barrels per day from 25 plants ~ 6.5 million tons in 1944.[1] After the war, captured German scientists recruited in Operation Paperclip continued to work on synthetic fuels in the United States in a United States Bureau of Mines program initiated by the Synthetic Liquid Fuels Act. I hope you will be able to use the above enlightenment to further your school career. sarel	sarel (2490)
609900	2007-11-12 20:40:00	I said Senile member: 1. That the main Sasal plant in SA for coal to petrol is the single biggest polluter of CO2 in the world and thats from Sasol themselves. 2. The process could be replicated by a high school lab. 3. I went to same school in Brightwater as Ernie. What I was insinuating was if people at my school were clever enough to later on split an atom probaly clever enough to liquify coal. Where you worked out Ernie was working on the coal to petrol scheme I dont know, may never know. C1	chicken one (6501)
609901	2007-11-12 21:41:00	That the main Sasal plant in SA for coal to petrol is the single biggest polluter of CO2 in the world and thats from Sasol themselves Could you perhaps point me to this piece of information. As far as I know the biggest source point polluters in the world - from no1 to no.10 - are the new power stations in China. As I said before - you can try replicating the F-P process in the labs and good luck with it - but it won't be the F-P process because I don't think you can afford the catalyst. You will be able to liquify coal in the labs, but the process you will be using would never be economical. I went to same school in Brightwater as Ernie. What I was insinuating was if people at my school were clever enough to later on split an atom probaly clever enough to liquify coal. So they could have been clever enough to start up M$oft, for that matter - could have, would have, should have. Yeah yeah. If the guys working on liquifying pertol put their minds to the splitting of the atom they probably could have probably done the same as Ernie. sarel	sarel (2490)
609902	2007-11-12 23:11:00	That the main Sasal plant in SA for coal to petrol is the single biggest polluter of CO2 in the world and thats from Sasol themselves Could you perhaps point me to this piece of information . As far as I know the biggest source point polluters in the world - from no1 to no . 10 - are the new power stations in China . As I said before - you can try replicating the F-P process in the labs and good luck with it - but it won't be the F-P process because I don't think you can afford the catalyst . You will be able to liquify coal in the labs, but the process you will be using would never be economical . I went to same school in Brightwater as Ernie . What I was insinuating was if people at my school were clever enough to later on split an atom probaly clever enough to liquify coal . So they could have been clever enough to start up M$oft, for that matter - could have, would have, should have . Yeah yeah . If the guys working on liquifying pertol put their minds to the splitting of the atom they probably could have probably done the same as Ernie . sarel If Sasol say there own plant is the biggest single point spewer of CO2 at 7 million tons thats good enough for me . I am sure if the chinese has a plant that could better that sasol would amend their website . C1	chicken one (6501)
609903	2007-11-12 23:28:00	I cannot speak about NZ...but ya gotta remember that the US...and California in particular have some very diverse income levels. insert alot of text here what can i say? i'm genuinely impressed at that post! you illustrated perfectly why/how rising fuel costs are going to screw the western economies, and why a viable alternative to petrol needs to enter the market place asap (so the poorer can afford the early models when they really can't afford petrol) and you're right, NZ is nowhere near as screwed as the US over this one:lol: now, just a thought that sprung to mind: would a viable alternative lower petrol/oil prices? i mea, it would lower demand, and the oil companies would want to lower their prices to compete with the new technology if they can't buy it out....	motorbyclist (188)
609904	2007-11-12 23:32:00	Here's an interesting link about our colder Northern area. High Oil Prices Fuel Winter Heat Fears (biz.yahoo.com) interesting article.... funny how an initial investment in insulation would probably pay for itself in 5 years, but is probably too expensive for those in need to pay for:( owell - they could always just buy more blankets, it's what i do. never turn the heater on, i just chuck an extra blanket on for the winter. (but i cheat and use an electric one too:lol:) edit, yes i suspect auckland winter isn't that cold, but i got mates in dunedin and christchurch who do the same thing	motorbyclist (188)
609905	2007-11-13 00:17:00	and who cares who went to whose school totally irrelevant	motorbyclist (188)
609906	2007-11-13 02:09:00	I kind of agree Motorbyclist. They may produce 7 million tons of CO2 but they recover about 97% of that through the CO2 plant and scrubbing system. How do I know - easy, I've been part of the team that designed, built and operated the CO2 recovery plants. sarel	sarel (2490)
609907	2007-11-13 03:22:00	who really cares how much one factory makes? what matters is pollution per unit of energy i could have a factory producing 70 million tonnes of co2, but if that factory also produces a petawatt of power i think it would class as pretty damn clean, and if it produced a few watts that wouldn't be very good at all.	motorbyclist (188)
609908	2008-05-12 02:28:00	See BP stuck prices up to $193.9 today. All the others are still 188.9 at time of writing. Sods laws - all my petrol vouchers are for BP and Shell won't take them.	manicminer (4219)
1 2 3 4 5 6