X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from fmailhost01.isp.att.net ([207.115.11.51] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4c3j) with ESMTP id 4983250 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 13 May 2011 23:56:57 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=207.115.11.51; envelope-from=bbradburry@bellsouth.net Received: from desktop (adsl-98-85-145-79.mco.bellsouth.net[98.85.145.79]) by isp.att.net (frfwmhc01) with SMTP id <20110514035622H01005s4rie>; Sat, 14 May 2011 03:56:22 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [98.85.145.79] From: "Bill Bradburry" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: 100LL in California Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 23:56:25 -0400 Message-ID: <75C772D9EC2A4068B5CDACCAEE9EA9A2@Desktop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01CC11C9.5EC68930" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: AcwRyle9Ck9qqRzbQxqc8M9+wos0CwAIHVJA X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6001.18049 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01CC11C9.5EC68930 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit And here I thought you were a lawyer! :>) Bill B _____ From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Chris Barber Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 8:02 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: 100LL in California I could never run for office and get elected.....I have OPINIONS!!! Chris Who is John Galt? Sent from my iPhone 4 On May 13, 2011, at 5:34 PM, "Dwayne Parkinson" wrote: There's a very simple way to deal with ethanol and I'm not being facetious. Every single EAA / AOPA / rotary group member should run for some kind of office in 2012. _____ From: Bill Bradburry To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 3:15 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: 100LL in California Years ago, when this govt funded boondoggle first started, I looked into building a still, er, ethanol processing plant. In order to avoid paying taxes, the white lightening, er, ethanol, had to be immediately denatured. The process of denaturing made the white lightening, er ethanol, unfit for drinking. This was done by pouring gasoline in it. The idea was that you could not remove the gasoline after it was introduced. If this was good enough for the Revenuers, I suspect that it would not be possible to remove the alcohol from the gas as well. Bill B _____ From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Mark Steitle Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 3:38 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: 100LL in California Well, if you don't blow yourself up in the process, you will now have low octane gas for about $4.50/gallon. Then you'll need a method to transport it to the airport, then pump/pour it into your fuel tanks, again without blowing yourself up. From a risk-analysis perspective, it doesn't wash (pun intended). I just don't see the benefit here. It would almost be easier to fly to Oklahoma whenever I needed fuel for the airplane. Mark On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Ernest Christley < echristley@att.net> wrote: Bill Schertz wrote: Charlie is right, you can extract the ethanol with water. Best practice would be multiple small washings to reduce it to a negligible level, but octane would suffer. Also, your price of auto fuel just went up, because you are sending some down the drain. Basically there is a partition coefficient for alcohol between gasoline and water. Each time you add water, x% moves to the water. Thanks, Bill. That chemistry class in college was a LONG time ago for me. So, how long will it be before someone starts selling a system that allows you to put contaminated gasoline in one end, have it add water and then centrifugally separate it, let the clean gasoline go out the other end, and distill the water to reuse it? The ethanol would drive the distillation, and the left-over could be mailed to the stupid politicians and lobbiest that keep adulterating our gasoline. ("Here! You like it so much, you can have it!") -- Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01CC11C9.5EC68930 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

And here I thought you were a lawyer!   :>)

 

Bill B

 

From: = Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Chris = Barber
Sent: Friday, May 13, = 2011 8:02 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = 100LL in California

 

I could never run for office and get elected.....I have = OPINIONS!!!

 

Chris

Who is John Galt?

Sent from my iPhone 4


On May 13, 2011, at 5:34 PM, "Dwayne Parkinson" <dwayneparkinson@yahoo.com&g= t; wrote:

There's a very simple way to deal with ethanol and I'm not being facetious.  Every single EAA / AOPA / rotary group = member should run for some kind of office in = 2012. 

 

From: = Bill Bradburry <bbradburry@bellsouth.net>=
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Friday, May 13, = 2011 3:15 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = 100LL in California

Years ago, when = this govt funded boondoggle first started, I looked into building a still, er, = ethanol processing plant.  In order to avoid paying taxes, the white = lightening, er, ethanol, had to be immediately denatured.  The process of = denaturing made the white lightening, er ethanol, unfit for drinking.  This = was done by pouring gasoline in it.  The idea was that you could not remove = the gasoline after it was introduced.

 

If this was good = enough for the Revenuers, I suspect that it would not be possible to remove the alcohol from the gas as well.

 

Bill = B

 

From: = Rotary motors in aircraft = [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Mark Steitle
Sent: Friday, May 13, = 2011 3:38 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = 100LL in California

 

Well, if you don't blow yourself up in the process, you will now have low octane gas = for about $4.50/gallon.  Then you'll need a method to transport it to = the airport, then pump/pour it into your fuel tanks, again without blowing = yourself up.  From a risk-analysis perspective, it doesn't wash (pun = intended).  I just don't see the benefit here.  It would almost be easier = to fly to Oklahoma whenever I needed fuel for the airplane.

 

Mark =  

Bill Schertz wrote:

Charlie is right, you can extract the ethanol with water. Best practice would be = multiple small washings to reduce it to a negligible level, but octane would = suffer. Also, your price of auto fuel just went up, because you are sending some = down the drain.

Basically there is a partition coefficient for alcohol between gasoline = and water.  Each time you add water, x% moves to the = water.


Thanks, Bill.  That chemistry class in college was a LONG time ago = for me.

So, how long will it be before someone starts selling a system that = allows you to put contaminated gasoline in one end, have it add water and then centrifugally separate it, let the clean gasoline go out the other end, = and distill the water to reuse it?  The ethanol would drive the = distillation, and the left-over could be mailed to the stupid politicians and lobbiest = that keep adulterating our gasoline.  ("Here!  You like it so = much, you can have it!")


--
Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub:   <= a href=3D"http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html">http:= //mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html

 

 

------=_NextPart_000_0006_01CC11C9.5EC68930--