I knew that! More of my notes...

Lead intake has a small statistical link to juvenile crime. In the 1940’s lead tetraethyl (Pb(C2H5)4) was added to petrol to make it burn better.
Pb(C2H5)4 Pb(C2H5)4 + PbO (as exhaust gases)

C2H5(Cl,Br) is added to react with the PbO to prevent the PbO from clogging the engine, this results in the formation of a PbClBr particulate.

The pollutant effects of lead have decreased due to the phasing in of unleaded fuel and an increase in the use of diesel.

Lead levels are tested by measuring concentrations of PbClBr (solid particles) and Pb(C2H5)4 (gas) in moss, grass, soil, and woodlice. The sample is dried, dissolved in concentrated nitric or perchloric acid to form a lead nitrate, and finally analysed by atomic absorption spectroscopy.

Lead in woodlice comes from lead in decaying plant matter. Any lead in the carapace is subsequently shed.

 

By the way, there is a down side on ethanol in gasoline for some vehicles and boats. Ethanol is chemicly abusive to certain plastics used in older fuel systems. In boats with fiberglass fuel tanks (and to a degree at Gas Stations that use fiberglass storage tanks) the ethanol eats the resin putting it solution. Later if the fuel is allowed to evaporate, it leaves the resin on the injectors and jets, clogging the fuel system.

 

Another BTW, the documentary on oil politics is going to be on Sundance again tomorrow (Sunday) at 2:30 CST, the title is "Energy War".

It is quite interesting, I do not know who produced it, so watch it at your own risk.

 

Like I said I did not know until just yesterday that the Temperance Union as you say got the help of millions of dollars from the major oil companies who were just beginning their monopoly of the fuel industry. Its not fantasy these are the facts which you never seem to have any of except the ones that can be easily disproven just like the ones you put up earlier on this thread.

Also at the time Henry Ford predicted the future for fuel would be in biofuels and started growing hemp for that purpose. But the major oil monopolies had different ideas. That's how long they have actually been in control and manipulating and dictating to the American Public and not the world.

 

This is just the kind of argument I always just laugh at from conservatives. Free enterprise and the capitalist system is in their view the answer to everything until it comes to changing the status quo and then all of a sudden we can't trust those same systems to solve problems like you mention here.

Here's a few more to add to you watch list.

"Crude" on the history Channel

The formula. A great piece of fiction that has more truth in it than most people would ever believe.

I would also recommend catching 6 Degrees which is coming up on the Science Channel tomorrow I think.

 

Actually, those problems HAVE been solved on newer vehicles, have they not?

 

I'm pretty sure they have been, but I still get hung up on the fact that the way these plastic parts got into cars in the first place was the auto industries scam of "designed absolessence" in other words designing cars that would not last 10 years. That was also another hallmark of the 1970's.

 

You have been using too much hemp, the influx of cash from Standard Oil and Rockerfeller was due to his being a lifelong teetotaler and avid alcohol prohibition advocate due to that.

 

Yes they have, but not on older vehicles, which in the long run, should be off the roads. However, there are many folks who just can't afford the newer cars. The boat problem is rather unique in that it effects those who can afford boats with glassed in tanks, like some bass boats and mid size cruisers.

The retro fitting of them is almost cost prohibitive. Therefore, most marinas will not sell ethanol laced fuels.

 

Actually the plastic parts that are affected are on later than 1970'smodel cars with fuel injection, a devise that was required to meet mandated fuel economy.

 

OH Bullshit tenguy you obviously can't read with you head buried that far in the sand. See if this helps.

John D. Rockefeller, owner of Standard Oil (now Exxon-Mobil, Chevron, American BP and a dozen other oil companies), put 4 million dollars into alcohol prohibition

 

Something you might like to read, if you have a minute.
http://archive.rockefeller.edu/publications/resrep/pdf/dighe.pdf
Records show that:
1.) Rockefellers wife Laura was from Puritan stock, she was co-founder ot the WCTU.

2.) Rockefeller, Sr donated a total of under $500,000 to the ASL, the force behind prohibition.

3.) Rockefeller, Sr was an avowed and strict teetotaler

4.) Rockefeller, Sr. and other industrial leaders were convinced that the problems in productivity were caused by alcohol consumption by the workers.

Further this little piece talks about the devout religious beliefs of the Rockefeller family. Thus, reinforcing the claim of temperence as his driving force.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0080-4606(196011)6<247:JDRJ1>2.0.CO;2-Q
Now his Grandson, Nelson, was quite a different matter, while he made great contributions his political career was frought with ridicule. To be called a Rockefeller Republican was the greatest insult imaginable.

 

Put your glasses on there gramps your hearing horn won't help you here. Read the big red print and stop grasping at straws when your drowning in your own bullshit.

 

Wow, real intellegent response.

Back to Barney for you.

 

Einstein and Barney Fife you are a kinky little fellow aren't you. But this is the place for what ever turns you on because you are God awful terrible at debate.

 

Here wego again, you are unable to refute my argument, you simply try to debate with flawed data. This exactly what ole Barn would do, see the similarity.

Kimi I respect, because she makes valid statements and clearly advises when she is stating opinion. She also freely admits that can be two sides to any story and respects the others rights to hold those opinions.


You do not.

 

What argument tenguy? This whole tangent started when I made the comment that I was not aware until yesterday that the oil companies were taking steps to protect their monopoly on fuel clear back in the 1920's by contributing heavily to support prohibition of alcohol when Henry Ford had designed cars that would run on it but they didn't want to compete with that.

Now that point is well established on this thread with the site and quotes I put up, and then you launch into a big tangent on Rockefeller being a T totaler and his wife supporting prohibition while you ignore that fact the quote I put up says that Rockefeller and a dozen other oil companies put 4 million (1920's dollars) into making sure prohibition passed so they would not have to compete with alcohol as a fuel source.

And you call that an argument or a debate its nothing but bullshit nit picking when I have put up not only solid information but also refuted every point you have tried to make on this thread. Like I said before it's just phoniness on your part and clearly reveals your not interested in really discussing these issues its a personal thing and the name calling proves that.

 

Well Barn, I gave you three links to the supportive info. What you are quoting is rhetoric from an anti big oil, pro hemp organization.

You've failed again.

Andy take the bullet.

 

Sure rrriiiggghhhhtttt there tenguy I believe you and so does everyone else. Don't worry I completely defeated and you're just absolutely right. There's no reason to have a heart attack over this you're such a masterdebater no doubt about it. Anyone who reads this thread will just automatically know what an Ace you are.

 

Why thank you Barney, glad you finally see the light. Well my work is done here, guess I'll go watch the last 22 laps of the race.