I need R-12
06-01-2007, 10:06 PM
#161
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: I need R-12= WARNING DEADLY ADVICE INSIDE!
Richard J Kinch wrote:
> Mike Romain writes:
>
>> Isobutane and propane 'EXPLODE' in the presence of a spark or flame.
>
> Not likely. Only in certain narrow limits, 2 to 10 percent for propane. A
> proper burner is actually quite hard to design.
You know what, I have seen a whole bunch of blown campers from propane
and have friend that lost parents from a propane bottle in the back seat
leak, know folks that survived one with the top of the camper opened
like a sardine can, deaf and burned, but alive, so the odds aren't
'that' bad.....
I'll bet if you Google hit it there would be lots too.
Mike
> Mike Romain writes:
>
>> Isobutane and propane 'EXPLODE' in the presence of a spark or flame.
>
> Not likely. Only in certain narrow limits, 2 to 10 percent for propane. A
> proper burner is actually quite hard to design.
You know what, I have seen a whole bunch of blown campers from propane
and have friend that lost parents from a propane bottle in the back seat
leak, know folks that survived one with the top of the camper opened
like a sardine can, deaf and burned, but alive, so the odds aren't
'that' bad.....
I'll bet if you Google hit it there would be lots too.
Mike
06-01-2007, 10:11 PM
#162
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: I need R-12= WARNING DEADLY ADVICE INSIDE!
In article <7651635sbvtl2d4tk2csum4voiaoup4h3q@4ax.com>,
SnoMan <admin@snoman.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 10:01:12 -0400, Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
> >Yo SnoJob, another of your seriously mentally deficient statements.
> >
> >Why not just tell him to fill it with freaking propane?
> >
> >You are once AGAIN giving life threatening advice in a public place!
> >
> >And 'you' have the nerve to call me on total -------- about pool lights
> >when you advocate an explosive gas in the AC?
>
> Magic Mike with the 3.31 power gears, lift and bigger tires and the
> 5speed with 4 usable gears and also recommands burning rubber in
> reverse to remove drive line bind in 4x4 drive.Also is finatical about
> beeing able to shift into 4x4 drive at high speeds (ego) and use 4lo a
> lot (because of his great power gears he needs to a lot) There is few
> here that preach more tripe than him. He shows you extreme lack of
> knowledge everytime he blows his cool.
I think it's fair to say that Mike's interest in 4X4 lends toward
recreational use while yours lends towards lawn mowing and snow
plowing. Thus, your pontifications are noted and pointless.
> BTW, there are many big
> commercail coolers/chillers that use Propane for cooling and have for
> many years.
And the building housing these systems move down the highway at
70 miles per hour?
> The biggest reason they are down on it here is because
> Duponts lobbying.
Absolute and utter --------.
> Isobutane or propane also weighs less and therefore
> takes less energy to cycle through system so compressor uses less
> energy and the coolant capured more heat per volume too so it is a win
> win.
It's not win-win if it can not and HAS NOT been demonstrated as
safe.
> If Mike ever really learns to get his head out of his **** and
> learn a bit he could maybe be more viable. BTW, with a R134 charge as
> I said before it is a compromise at best as a R12 replacement because
> R134 has a higher average pressure and it rate of pressure increase in
> not linear as tempatures rises (it climbs quicker) placing more strain
> on old R12 systems
You'd sacrifice human flesh to avoid "strain" on an old condenser?
> and Mike likely does not know that R134 is toxic
Everything is toxic. "dosis solo facit venenum", the dose makes
the poison. Even water is toxic.
> and quite deadly in consentration
Yes, a rat will die after exposed for 4 hours at 500,000 ppm
concentration. Wanna tell me where in the real world such
conditions could possibly exist WRT an automobile?
Then there's the little matter that R-134 is used as a propellant
in asthma inhalers. Hmmm... not even dangerous to someone who
suffers from a chronic breathing problem.
> while R12. R12a and propane is not
> toxic in native state and the only way breathing it can harm you is if
> you breath it pure and there is no oxygen with it and to slowly expire
> from lack of oxygen.
R-12 toxicity is 750,000 ppm, so it looks like you're wrong again.
> Burn R134 in a fire like a wreck and it is even
> more toxic yet.
So, in a wreck, the leak would likely be inside the passenger
compartment or external to the passenger compartment?
R-134 is more likely to extinguish a fire than it is to
contribute to it (unlike propane).
> The AirForce did a study on this several years ago for
> combat damage ad determined that the average R134 system have enough
> R134 in it to "dose" a fairly tight passenger compartment with a
> dosage that is about 5 times the lethal level.
More --------. If the lethal level equals a 50% concentration
(500,000 ppm) over 4 hours on a rodent, how does it become
possible to achieve this "5 times" level on a passenger?
> Dupont is pretty quiet
> about all of this of course.
And all the other R-134 manufacturers?
Where are all the dead bodies?
Why don't we read about this more frequently?
I've spent the better part of this work week replacing leaking AC
evaporators, how come none of my customers mentioned any adverse
symptoms other than 'no cold air?'
So, since you discount safety, why not Ether, or Sulphur Dioxide,
or Methyl Chloride, or Methylene Chloride, or Ammonia, or Carbon
Tet?? All have been used at one time or another as refrigerants.
Thank GOD there are people way smarter and with more common sense
than you in charge.
SnoMan <admin@snoman.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 10:01:12 -0400, Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
> >Yo SnoJob, another of your seriously mentally deficient statements.
> >
> >Why not just tell him to fill it with freaking propane?
> >
> >You are once AGAIN giving life threatening advice in a public place!
> >
> >And 'you' have the nerve to call me on total -------- about pool lights
> >when you advocate an explosive gas in the AC?
>
> Magic Mike with the 3.31 power gears, lift and bigger tires and the
> 5speed with 4 usable gears and also recommands burning rubber in
> reverse to remove drive line bind in 4x4 drive.Also is finatical about
> beeing able to shift into 4x4 drive at high speeds (ego) and use 4lo a
> lot (because of his great power gears he needs to a lot) There is few
> here that preach more tripe than him. He shows you extreme lack of
> knowledge everytime he blows his cool.
I think it's fair to say that Mike's interest in 4X4 lends toward
recreational use while yours lends towards lawn mowing and snow
plowing. Thus, your pontifications are noted and pointless.
> BTW, there are many big
> commercail coolers/chillers that use Propane for cooling and have for
> many years.
And the building housing these systems move down the highway at
70 miles per hour?
> The biggest reason they are down on it here is because
> Duponts lobbying.
Absolute and utter --------.
> Isobutane or propane also weighs less and therefore
> takes less energy to cycle through system so compressor uses less
> energy and the coolant capured more heat per volume too so it is a win
> win.
It's not win-win if it can not and HAS NOT been demonstrated as
safe.
> If Mike ever really learns to get his head out of his **** and
> learn a bit he could maybe be more viable. BTW, with a R134 charge as
> I said before it is a compromise at best as a R12 replacement because
> R134 has a higher average pressure and it rate of pressure increase in
> not linear as tempatures rises (it climbs quicker) placing more strain
> on old R12 systems
You'd sacrifice human flesh to avoid "strain" on an old condenser?
> and Mike likely does not know that R134 is toxic
Everything is toxic. "dosis solo facit venenum", the dose makes
the poison. Even water is toxic.
> and quite deadly in consentration
Yes, a rat will die after exposed for 4 hours at 500,000 ppm
concentration. Wanna tell me where in the real world such
conditions could possibly exist WRT an automobile?
Then there's the little matter that R-134 is used as a propellant
in asthma inhalers. Hmmm... not even dangerous to someone who
suffers from a chronic breathing problem.
> while R12. R12a and propane is not
> toxic in native state and the only way breathing it can harm you is if
> you breath it pure and there is no oxygen with it and to slowly expire
> from lack of oxygen.
R-12 toxicity is 750,000 ppm, so it looks like you're wrong again.
> Burn R134 in a fire like a wreck and it is even
> more toxic yet.
So, in a wreck, the leak would likely be inside the passenger
compartment or external to the passenger compartment?
R-134 is more likely to extinguish a fire than it is to
contribute to it (unlike propane).
> The AirForce did a study on this several years ago for
> combat damage ad determined that the average R134 system have enough
> R134 in it to "dose" a fairly tight passenger compartment with a
> dosage that is about 5 times the lethal level.
More --------. If the lethal level equals a 50% concentration
(500,000 ppm) over 4 hours on a rodent, how does it become
possible to achieve this "5 times" level on a passenger?
> Dupont is pretty quiet
> about all of this of course.
And all the other R-134 manufacturers?
Where are all the dead bodies?
Why don't we read about this more frequently?
I've spent the better part of this work week replacing leaking AC
evaporators, how come none of my customers mentioned any adverse
symptoms other than 'no cold air?'
So, since you discount safety, why not Ether, or Sulphur Dioxide,
or Methyl Chloride, or Methylene Chloride, or Ammonia, or Carbon
Tet?? All have been used at one time or another as refrigerants.
Thank GOD there are people way smarter and with more common sense
than you in charge.
06-01-2007, 10:11 PM
#163
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: I need R-12= WARNING DEADLY ADVICE INSIDE!
In article <7651635sbvtl2d4tk2csum4voiaoup4h3q@4ax.com>,
SnoMan <admin@snoman.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 10:01:12 -0400, Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
> >Yo SnoJob, another of your seriously mentally deficient statements.
> >
> >Why not just tell him to fill it with freaking propane?
> >
> >You are once AGAIN giving life threatening advice in a public place!
> >
> >And 'you' have the nerve to call me on total -------- about pool lights
> >when you advocate an explosive gas in the AC?
>
> Magic Mike with the 3.31 power gears, lift and bigger tires and the
> 5speed with 4 usable gears and also recommands burning rubber in
> reverse to remove drive line bind in 4x4 drive.Also is finatical about
> beeing able to shift into 4x4 drive at high speeds (ego) and use 4lo a
> lot (because of his great power gears he needs to a lot) There is few
> here that preach more tripe than him. He shows you extreme lack of
> knowledge everytime he blows his cool.
I think it's fair to say that Mike's interest in 4X4 lends toward
recreational use while yours lends towards lawn mowing and snow
plowing. Thus, your pontifications are noted and pointless.
> BTW, there are many big
> commercail coolers/chillers that use Propane for cooling and have for
> many years.
And the building housing these systems move down the highway at
70 miles per hour?
> The biggest reason they are down on it here is because
> Duponts lobbying.
Absolute and utter --------.
> Isobutane or propane also weighs less and therefore
> takes less energy to cycle through system so compressor uses less
> energy and the coolant capured more heat per volume too so it is a win
> win.
It's not win-win if it can not and HAS NOT been demonstrated as
safe.
> If Mike ever really learns to get his head out of his **** and
> learn a bit he could maybe be more viable. BTW, with a R134 charge as
> I said before it is a compromise at best as a R12 replacement because
> R134 has a higher average pressure and it rate of pressure increase in
> not linear as tempatures rises (it climbs quicker) placing more strain
> on old R12 systems
You'd sacrifice human flesh to avoid "strain" on an old condenser?
> and Mike likely does not know that R134 is toxic
Everything is toxic. "dosis solo facit venenum", the dose makes
the poison. Even water is toxic.
> and quite deadly in consentration
Yes, a rat will die after exposed for 4 hours at 500,000 ppm
concentration. Wanna tell me where in the real world such
conditions could possibly exist WRT an automobile?
Then there's the little matter that R-134 is used as a propellant
in asthma inhalers. Hmmm... not even dangerous to someone who
suffers from a chronic breathing problem.
> while R12. R12a and propane is not
> toxic in native state and the only way breathing it can harm you is if
> you breath it pure and there is no oxygen with it and to slowly expire
> from lack of oxygen.
R-12 toxicity is 750,000 ppm, so it looks like you're wrong again.
> Burn R134 in a fire like a wreck and it is even
> more toxic yet.
So, in a wreck, the leak would likely be inside the passenger
compartment or external to the passenger compartment?
R-134 is more likely to extinguish a fire than it is to
contribute to it (unlike propane).
> The AirForce did a study on this several years ago for
> combat damage ad determined that the average R134 system have enough
> R134 in it to "dose" a fairly tight passenger compartment with a
> dosage that is about 5 times the lethal level.
More --------. If the lethal level equals a 50% concentration
(500,000 ppm) over 4 hours on a rodent, how does it become
possible to achieve this "5 times" level on a passenger?
> Dupont is pretty quiet
> about all of this of course.
And all the other R-134 manufacturers?
Where are all the dead bodies?
Why don't we read about this more frequently?
I've spent the better part of this work week replacing leaking AC
evaporators, how come none of my customers mentioned any adverse
symptoms other than 'no cold air?'
So, since you discount safety, why not Ether, or Sulphur Dioxide,
or Methyl Chloride, or Methylene Chloride, or Ammonia, or Carbon
Tet?? All have been used at one time or another as refrigerants.
Thank GOD there are people way smarter and with more common sense
than you in charge.
SnoMan <admin@snoman.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 10:01:12 -0400, Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
> >Yo SnoJob, another of your seriously mentally deficient statements.
> >
> >Why not just tell him to fill it with freaking propane?
> >
> >You are once AGAIN giving life threatening advice in a public place!
> >
> >And 'you' have the nerve to call me on total -------- about pool lights
> >when you advocate an explosive gas in the AC?
>
> Magic Mike with the 3.31 power gears, lift and bigger tires and the
> 5speed with 4 usable gears and also recommands burning rubber in
> reverse to remove drive line bind in 4x4 drive.Also is finatical about
> beeing able to shift into 4x4 drive at high speeds (ego) and use 4lo a
> lot (because of his great power gears he needs to a lot) There is few
> here that preach more tripe than him. He shows you extreme lack of
> knowledge everytime he blows his cool.
I think it's fair to say that Mike's interest in 4X4 lends toward
recreational use while yours lends towards lawn mowing and snow
plowing. Thus, your pontifications are noted and pointless.
> BTW, there are many big
> commercail coolers/chillers that use Propane for cooling and have for
> many years.
And the building housing these systems move down the highway at
70 miles per hour?
> The biggest reason they are down on it here is because
> Duponts lobbying.
Absolute and utter --------.
> Isobutane or propane also weighs less and therefore
> takes less energy to cycle through system so compressor uses less
> energy and the coolant capured more heat per volume too so it is a win
> win.
It's not win-win if it can not and HAS NOT been demonstrated as
safe.
> If Mike ever really learns to get his head out of his **** and
> learn a bit he could maybe be more viable. BTW, with a R134 charge as
> I said before it is a compromise at best as a R12 replacement because
> R134 has a higher average pressure and it rate of pressure increase in
> not linear as tempatures rises (it climbs quicker) placing more strain
> on old R12 systems
You'd sacrifice human flesh to avoid "strain" on an old condenser?
> and Mike likely does not know that R134 is toxic
Everything is toxic. "dosis solo facit venenum", the dose makes
the poison. Even water is toxic.
> and quite deadly in consentration
Yes, a rat will die after exposed for 4 hours at 500,000 ppm
concentration. Wanna tell me where in the real world such
conditions could possibly exist WRT an automobile?
Then there's the little matter that R-134 is used as a propellant
in asthma inhalers. Hmmm... not even dangerous to someone who
suffers from a chronic breathing problem.
> while R12. R12a and propane is not
> toxic in native state and the only way breathing it can harm you is if
> you breath it pure and there is no oxygen with it and to slowly expire
> from lack of oxygen.
R-12 toxicity is 750,000 ppm, so it looks like you're wrong again.
> Burn R134 in a fire like a wreck and it is even
> more toxic yet.
So, in a wreck, the leak would likely be inside the passenger
compartment or external to the passenger compartment?
R-134 is more likely to extinguish a fire than it is to
contribute to it (unlike propane).
> The AirForce did a study on this several years ago for
> combat damage ad determined that the average R134 system have enough
> R134 in it to "dose" a fairly tight passenger compartment with a
> dosage that is about 5 times the lethal level.
More --------. If the lethal level equals a 50% concentration
(500,000 ppm) over 4 hours on a rodent, how does it become
possible to achieve this "5 times" level on a passenger?
> Dupont is pretty quiet
> about all of this of course.
And all the other R-134 manufacturers?
Where are all the dead bodies?
Why don't we read about this more frequently?
I've spent the better part of this work week replacing leaking AC
evaporators, how come none of my customers mentioned any adverse
symptoms other than 'no cold air?'
So, since you discount safety, why not Ether, or Sulphur Dioxide,
or Methyl Chloride, or Methylene Chloride, or Ammonia, or Carbon
Tet?? All have been used at one time or another as refrigerants.
Thank GOD there are people way smarter and with more common sense
than you in charge.
06-01-2007, 10:11 PM
#164
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: I need R-12= WARNING DEADLY ADVICE INSIDE!
In article <7651635sbvtl2d4tk2csum4voiaoup4h3q@4ax.com>,
SnoMan <admin@snoman.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 10:01:12 -0400, Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
> >Yo SnoJob, another of your seriously mentally deficient statements.
> >
> >Why not just tell him to fill it with freaking propane?
> >
> >You are once AGAIN giving life threatening advice in a public place!
> >
> >And 'you' have the nerve to call me on total -------- about pool lights
> >when you advocate an explosive gas in the AC?
>
> Magic Mike with the 3.31 power gears, lift and bigger tires and the
> 5speed with 4 usable gears and also recommands burning rubber in
> reverse to remove drive line bind in 4x4 drive.Also is finatical about
> beeing able to shift into 4x4 drive at high speeds (ego) and use 4lo a
> lot (because of his great power gears he needs to a lot) There is few
> here that preach more tripe than him. He shows you extreme lack of
> knowledge everytime he blows his cool.
I think it's fair to say that Mike's interest in 4X4 lends toward
recreational use while yours lends towards lawn mowing and snow
plowing. Thus, your pontifications are noted and pointless.
> BTW, there are many big
> commercail coolers/chillers that use Propane for cooling and have for
> many years.
And the building housing these systems move down the highway at
70 miles per hour?
> The biggest reason they are down on it here is because
> Duponts lobbying.
Absolute and utter --------.
> Isobutane or propane also weighs less and therefore
> takes less energy to cycle through system so compressor uses less
> energy and the coolant capured more heat per volume too so it is a win
> win.
It's not win-win if it can not and HAS NOT been demonstrated as
safe.
> If Mike ever really learns to get his head out of his **** and
> learn a bit he could maybe be more viable. BTW, with a R134 charge as
> I said before it is a compromise at best as a R12 replacement because
> R134 has a higher average pressure and it rate of pressure increase in
> not linear as tempatures rises (it climbs quicker) placing more strain
> on old R12 systems
You'd sacrifice human flesh to avoid "strain" on an old condenser?
> and Mike likely does not know that R134 is toxic
Everything is toxic. "dosis solo facit venenum", the dose makes
the poison. Even water is toxic.
> and quite deadly in consentration
Yes, a rat will die after exposed for 4 hours at 500,000 ppm
concentration. Wanna tell me where in the real world such
conditions could possibly exist WRT an automobile?
Then there's the little matter that R-134 is used as a propellant
in asthma inhalers. Hmmm... not even dangerous to someone who
suffers from a chronic breathing problem.
> while R12. R12a and propane is not
> toxic in native state and the only way breathing it can harm you is if
> you breath it pure and there is no oxygen with it and to slowly expire
> from lack of oxygen.
R-12 toxicity is 750,000 ppm, so it looks like you're wrong again.
> Burn R134 in a fire like a wreck and it is even
> more toxic yet.
So, in a wreck, the leak would likely be inside the passenger
compartment or external to the passenger compartment?
R-134 is more likely to extinguish a fire than it is to
contribute to it (unlike propane).
> The AirForce did a study on this several years ago for
> combat damage ad determined that the average R134 system have enough
> R134 in it to "dose" a fairly tight passenger compartment with a
> dosage that is about 5 times the lethal level.
More --------. If the lethal level equals a 50% concentration
(500,000 ppm) over 4 hours on a rodent, how does it become
possible to achieve this "5 times" level on a passenger?
> Dupont is pretty quiet
> about all of this of course.
And all the other R-134 manufacturers?
Where are all the dead bodies?
Why don't we read about this more frequently?
I've spent the better part of this work week replacing leaking AC
evaporators, how come none of my customers mentioned any adverse
symptoms other than 'no cold air?'
So, since you discount safety, why not Ether, or Sulphur Dioxide,
or Methyl Chloride, or Methylene Chloride, or Ammonia, or Carbon
Tet?? All have been used at one time or another as refrigerants.
Thank GOD there are people way smarter and with more common sense
than you in charge.
SnoMan <admin@snoman.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 10:01:12 -0400, Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
> >Yo SnoJob, another of your seriously mentally deficient statements.
> >
> >Why not just tell him to fill it with freaking propane?
> >
> >You are once AGAIN giving life threatening advice in a public place!
> >
> >And 'you' have the nerve to call me on total -------- about pool lights
> >when you advocate an explosive gas in the AC?
>
> Magic Mike with the 3.31 power gears, lift and bigger tires and the
> 5speed with 4 usable gears and also recommands burning rubber in
> reverse to remove drive line bind in 4x4 drive.Also is finatical about
> beeing able to shift into 4x4 drive at high speeds (ego) and use 4lo a
> lot (because of his great power gears he needs to a lot) There is few
> here that preach more tripe than him. He shows you extreme lack of
> knowledge everytime he blows his cool.
I think it's fair to say that Mike's interest in 4X4 lends toward
recreational use while yours lends towards lawn mowing and snow
plowing. Thus, your pontifications are noted and pointless.
> BTW, there are many big
> commercail coolers/chillers that use Propane for cooling and have for
> many years.
And the building housing these systems move down the highway at
70 miles per hour?
> The biggest reason they are down on it here is because
> Duponts lobbying.
Absolute and utter --------.
> Isobutane or propane also weighs less and therefore
> takes less energy to cycle through system so compressor uses less
> energy and the coolant capured more heat per volume too so it is a win
> win.
It's not win-win if it can not and HAS NOT been demonstrated as
safe.
> If Mike ever really learns to get his head out of his **** and
> learn a bit he could maybe be more viable. BTW, with a R134 charge as
> I said before it is a compromise at best as a R12 replacement because
> R134 has a higher average pressure and it rate of pressure increase in
> not linear as tempatures rises (it climbs quicker) placing more strain
> on old R12 systems
You'd sacrifice human flesh to avoid "strain" on an old condenser?
> and Mike likely does not know that R134 is toxic
Everything is toxic. "dosis solo facit venenum", the dose makes
the poison. Even water is toxic.
> and quite deadly in consentration
Yes, a rat will die after exposed for 4 hours at 500,000 ppm
concentration. Wanna tell me where in the real world such
conditions could possibly exist WRT an automobile?
Then there's the little matter that R-134 is used as a propellant
in asthma inhalers. Hmmm... not even dangerous to someone who
suffers from a chronic breathing problem.
> while R12. R12a and propane is not
> toxic in native state and the only way breathing it can harm you is if
> you breath it pure and there is no oxygen with it and to slowly expire
> from lack of oxygen.
R-12 toxicity is 750,000 ppm, so it looks like you're wrong again.
> Burn R134 in a fire like a wreck and it is even
> more toxic yet.
So, in a wreck, the leak would likely be inside the passenger
compartment or external to the passenger compartment?
R-134 is more likely to extinguish a fire than it is to
contribute to it (unlike propane).
> The AirForce did a study on this several years ago for
> combat damage ad determined that the average R134 system have enough
> R134 in it to "dose" a fairly tight passenger compartment with a
> dosage that is about 5 times the lethal level.
More --------. If the lethal level equals a 50% concentration
(500,000 ppm) over 4 hours on a rodent, how does it become
possible to achieve this "5 times" level on a passenger?
> Dupont is pretty quiet
> about all of this of course.
And all the other R-134 manufacturers?
Where are all the dead bodies?
Why don't we read about this more frequently?
I've spent the better part of this work week replacing leaking AC
evaporators, how come none of my customers mentioned any adverse
symptoms other than 'no cold air?'
So, since you discount safety, why not Ether, or Sulphur Dioxide,
or Methyl Chloride, or Methylene Chloride, or Ammonia, or Carbon
Tet?? All have been used at one time or another as refrigerants.
Thank GOD there are people way smarter and with more common sense
than you in charge.
06-01-2007, 10:11 PM
#165
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: I need R-12= WARNING DEADLY ADVICE INSIDE!
In article <7651635sbvtl2d4tk2csum4voiaoup4h3q@4ax.com>,
SnoMan <admin@snoman.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 10:01:12 -0400, Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
> >Yo SnoJob, another of your seriously mentally deficient statements.
> >
> >Why not just tell him to fill it with freaking propane?
> >
> >You are once AGAIN giving life threatening advice in a public place!
> >
> >And 'you' have the nerve to call me on total -------- about pool lights
> >when you advocate an explosive gas in the AC?
>
> Magic Mike with the 3.31 power gears, lift and bigger tires and the
> 5speed with 4 usable gears and also recommands burning rubber in
> reverse to remove drive line bind in 4x4 drive.Also is finatical about
> beeing able to shift into 4x4 drive at high speeds (ego) and use 4lo a
> lot (because of his great power gears he needs to a lot) There is few
> here that preach more tripe than him. He shows you extreme lack of
> knowledge everytime he blows his cool.
I think it's fair to say that Mike's interest in 4X4 lends toward
recreational use while yours lends towards lawn mowing and snow
plowing. Thus, your pontifications are noted and pointless.
> BTW, there are many big
> commercail coolers/chillers that use Propane for cooling and have for
> many years.
And the building housing these systems move down the highway at
70 miles per hour?
> The biggest reason they are down on it here is because
> Duponts lobbying.
Absolute and utter --------.
> Isobutane or propane also weighs less and therefore
> takes less energy to cycle through system so compressor uses less
> energy and the coolant capured more heat per volume too so it is a win
> win.
It's not win-win if it can not and HAS NOT been demonstrated as
safe.
> If Mike ever really learns to get his head out of his **** and
> learn a bit he could maybe be more viable. BTW, with a R134 charge as
> I said before it is a compromise at best as a R12 replacement because
> R134 has a higher average pressure and it rate of pressure increase in
> not linear as tempatures rises (it climbs quicker) placing more strain
> on old R12 systems
You'd sacrifice human flesh to avoid "strain" on an old condenser?
> and Mike likely does not know that R134 is toxic
Everything is toxic. "dosis solo facit venenum", the dose makes
the poison. Even water is toxic.
> and quite deadly in consentration
Yes, a rat will die after exposed for 4 hours at 500,000 ppm
concentration. Wanna tell me where in the real world such
conditions could possibly exist WRT an automobile?
Then there's the little matter that R-134 is used as a propellant
in asthma inhalers. Hmmm... not even dangerous to someone who
suffers from a chronic breathing problem.
> while R12. R12a and propane is not
> toxic in native state and the only way breathing it can harm you is if
> you breath it pure and there is no oxygen with it and to slowly expire
> from lack of oxygen.
R-12 toxicity is 750,000 ppm, so it looks like you're wrong again.
> Burn R134 in a fire like a wreck and it is even
> more toxic yet.
So, in a wreck, the leak would likely be inside the passenger
compartment or external to the passenger compartment?
R-134 is more likely to extinguish a fire than it is to
contribute to it (unlike propane).
> The AirForce did a study on this several years ago for
> combat damage ad determined that the average R134 system have enough
> R134 in it to "dose" a fairly tight passenger compartment with a
> dosage that is about 5 times the lethal level.
More --------. If the lethal level equals a 50% concentration
(500,000 ppm) over 4 hours on a rodent, how does it become
possible to achieve this "5 times" level on a passenger?
> Dupont is pretty quiet
> about all of this of course.
And all the other R-134 manufacturers?
Where are all the dead bodies?
Why don't we read about this more frequently?
I've spent the better part of this work week replacing leaking AC
evaporators, how come none of my customers mentioned any adverse
symptoms other than 'no cold air?'
So, since you discount safety, why not Ether, or Sulphur Dioxide,
or Methyl Chloride, or Methylene Chloride, or Ammonia, or Carbon
Tet?? All have been used at one time or another as refrigerants.
Thank GOD there are people way smarter and with more common sense
than you in charge.
SnoMan <admin@snoman.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 10:01:12 -0400, Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
> >Yo SnoJob, another of your seriously mentally deficient statements.
> >
> >Why not just tell him to fill it with freaking propane?
> >
> >You are once AGAIN giving life threatening advice in a public place!
> >
> >And 'you' have the nerve to call me on total -------- about pool lights
> >when you advocate an explosive gas in the AC?
>
> Magic Mike with the 3.31 power gears, lift and bigger tires and the
> 5speed with 4 usable gears and also recommands burning rubber in
> reverse to remove drive line bind in 4x4 drive.Also is finatical about
> beeing able to shift into 4x4 drive at high speeds (ego) and use 4lo a
> lot (because of his great power gears he needs to a lot) There is few
> here that preach more tripe than him. He shows you extreme lack of
> knowledge everytime he blows his cool.
I think it's fair to say that Mike's interest in 4X4 lends toward
recreational use while yours lends towards lawn mowing and snow
plowing. Thus, your pontifications are noted and pointless.
> BTW, there are many big
> commercail coolers/chillers that use Propane for cooling and have for
> many years.
And the building housing these systems move down the highway at
70 miles per hour?
> The biggest reason they are down on it here is because
> Duponts lobbying.
Absolute and utter --------.
> Isobutane or propane also weighs less and therefore
> takes less energy to cycle through system so compressor uses less
> energy and the coolant capured more heat per volume too so it is a win
> win.
It's not win-win if it can not and HAS NOT been demonstrated as
safe.
> If Mike ever really learns to get his head out of his **** and
> learn a bit he could maybe be more viable. BTW, with a R134 charge as
> I said before it is a compromise at best as a R12 replacement because
> R134 has a higher average pressure and it rate of pressure increase in
> not linear as tempatures rises (it climbs quicker) placing more strain
> on old R12 systems
You'd sacrifice human flesh to avoid "strain" on an old condenser?
> and Mike likely does not know that R134 is toxic
Everything is toxic. "dosis solo facit venenum", the dose makes
the poison. Even water is toxic.
> and quite deadly in consentration
Yes, a rat will die after exposed for 4 hours at 500,000 ppm
concentration. Wanna tell me where in the real world such
conditions could possibly exist WRT an automobile?
Then there's the little matter that R-134 is used as a propellant
in asthma inhalers. Hmmm... not even dangerous to someone who
suffers from a chronic breathing problem.
> while R12. R12a and propane is not
> toxic in native state and the only way breathing it can harm you is if
> you breath it pure and there is no oxygen with it and to slowly expire
> from lack of oxygen.
R-12 toxicity is 750,000 ppm, so it looks like you're wrong again.
> Burn R134 in a fire like a wreck and it is even
> more toxic yet.
So, in a wreck, the leak would likely be inside the passenger
compartment or external to the passenger compartment?
R-134 is more likely to extinguish a fire than it is to
contribute to it (unlike propane).
> The AirForce did a study on this several years ago for
> combat damage ad determined that the average R134 system have enough
> R134 in it to "dose" a fairly tight passenger compartment with a
> dosage that is about 5 times the lethal level.
More --------. If the lethal level equals a 50% concentration
(500,000 ppm) over 4 hours on a rodent, how does it become
possible to achieve this "5 times" level on a passenger?
> Dupont is pretty quiet
> about all of this of course.
And all the other R-134 manufacturers?
Where are all the dead bodies?
Why don't we read about this more frequently?
I've spent the better part of this work week replacing leaking AC
evaporators, how come none of my customers mentioned any adverse
symptoms other than 'no cold air?'
So, since you discount safety, why not Ether, or Sulphur Dioxide,
or Methyl Chloride, or Methylene Chloride, or Ammonia, or Carbon
Tet?? All have been used at one time or another as refrigerants.
Thank GOD there are people way smarter and with more common sense
than you in charge.
06-01-2007, 10:20 PM
#166
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: I need R-12
In article <4660bdcd$0$9960$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> Craig Christian wrote:
> > nrs wrote:
> >
> >> Real Jeeps donīt have no stinkin' air conditioning.
> >> Ha, ha. ;-) Ok, sorry, I just couldn't resist!
> >>
> >> Seriously though, if you are in a hot area you may be close to the US/
> >> Mexico border. Just take a trip south and get it.
> >
> >
> >
> > There's a reason it's illegal. And it's a *good* reason. There are
> > alternatives that are less destructive.
> >
> > Come on. Be good to the Earth. It's the only one.
> >
> >
> > :-)
> > Craig C.
> >
>
>
> SNORT! Yeah, there is a reason it's illegal alright, Duponts patent ran
> out so anyone could make the stuff, that's why it was so cheap. So this
> scare got cooked up that Freon was destroying the planet and it got
> banned and replaced by another Dupont product with a fresh patent.
Except that it was 40+ years between when the patent ran out and
the nuke the whales crap started.
Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> Craig Christian wrote:
> > nrs wrote:
> >
> >> Real Jeeps donīt have no stinkin' air conditioning.
> >> Ha, ha. ;-) Ok, sorry, I just couldn't resist!
> >>
> >> Seriously though, if you are in a hot area you may be close to the US/
> >> Mexico border. Just take a trip south and get it.
> >
> >
> >
> > There's a reason it's illegal. And it's a *good* reason. There are
> > alternatives that are less destructive.
> >
> > Come on. Be good to the Earth. It's the only one.
> >
> >
> > :-)
> > Craig C.
> >
>
>
> SNORT! Yeah, there is a reason it's illegal alright, Duponts patent ran
> out so anyone could make the stuff, that's why it was so cheap. So this
> scare got cooked up that Freon was destroying the planet and it got
> banned and replaced by another Dupont product with a fresh patent.
Except that it was 40+ years between when the patent ran out and
the nuke the whales crap started.
06-01-2007, 10:20 PM
#167
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: I need R-12
In article <4660bdcd$0$9960$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> Craig Christian wrote:
> > nrs wrote:
> >
> >> Real Jeeps donīt have no stinkin' air conditioning.
> >> Ha, ha. ;-) Ok, sorry, I just couldn't resist!
> >>
> >> Seriously though, if you are in a hot area you may be close to the US/
> >> Mexico border. Just take a trip south and get it.
> >
> >
> >
> > There's a reason it's illegal. And it's a *good* reason. There are
> > alternatives that are less destructive.
> >
> > Come on. Be good to the Earth. It's the only one.
> >
> >
> > :-)
> > Craig C.
> >
>
>
> SNORT! Yeah, there is a reason it's illegal alright, Duponts patent ran
> out so anyone could make the stuff, that's why it was so cheap. So this
> scare got cooked up that Freon was destroying the planet and it got
> banned and replaced by another Dupont product with a fresh patent.
Except that it was 40+ years between when the patent ran out and
the nuke the whales crap started.
Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> Craig Christian wrote:
> > nrs wrote:
> >
> >> Real Jeeps donīt have no stinkin' air conditioning.
> >> Ha, ha. ;-) Ok, sorry, I just couldn't resist!
> >>
> >> Seriously though, if you are in a hot area you may be close to the US/
> >> Mexico border. Just take a trip south and get it.
> >
> >
> >
> > There's a reason it's illegal. And it's a *good* reason. There are
> > alternatives that are less destructive.
> >
> > Come on. Be good to the Earth. It's the only one.
> >
> >
> > :-)
> > Craig C.
> >
>
>
> SNORT! Yeah, there is a reason it's illegal alright, Duponts patent ran
> out so anyone could make the stuff, that's why it was so cheap. So this
> scare got cooked up that Freon was destroying the planet and it got
> banned and replaced by another Dupont product with a fresh patent.
Except that it was 40+ years between when the patent ran out and
the nuke the whales crap started.
06-01-2007, 10:20 PM
#168
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: I need R-12
In article <4660bdcd$0$9960$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> Craig Christian wrote:
> > nrs wrote:
> >
> >> Real Jeeps donīt have no stinkin' air conditioning.
> >> Ha, ha. ;-) Ok, sorry, I just couldn't resist!
> >>
> >> Seriously though, if you are in a hot area you may be close to the US/
> >> Mexico border. Just take a trip south and get it.
> >
> >
> >
> > There's a reason it's illegal. And it's a *good* reason. There are
> > alternatives that are less destructive.
> >
> > Come on. Be good to the Earth. It's the only one.
> >
> >
> > :-)
> > Craig C.
> >
>
>
> SNORT! Yeah, there is a reason it's illegal alright, Duponts patent ran
> out so anyone could make the stuff, that's why it was so cheap. So this
> scare got cooked up that Freon was destroying the planet and it got
> banned and replaced by another Dupont product with a fresh patent.
Except that it was 40+ years between when the patent ran out and
the nuke the whales crap started.
Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> Craig Christian wrote:
> > nrs wrote:
> >
> >> Real Jeeps donīt have no stinkin' air conditioning.
> >> Ha, ha. ;-) Ok, sorry, I just couldn't resist!
> >>
> >> Seriously though, if you are in a hot area you may be close to the US/
> >> Mexico border. Just take a trip south and get it.
> >
> >
> >
> > There's a reason it's illegal. And it's a *good* reason. There are
> > alternatives that are less destructive.
> >
> > Come on. Be good to the Earth. It's the only one.
> >
> >
> > :-)
> > Craig C.
> >
>
>
> SNORT! Yeah, there is a reason it's illegal alright, Duponts patent ran
> out so anyone could make the stuff, that's why it was so cheap. So this
> scare got cooked up that Freon was destroying the planet and it got
> banned and replaced by another Dupont product with a fresh patent.
Except that it was 40+ years between when the patent ran out and
the nuke the whales crap started.
06-01-2007, 10:20 PM
#169
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: I need R-12
In article <4660bdcd$0$9960$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> Craig Christian wrote:
> > nrs wrote:
> >
> >> Real Jeeps donīt have no stinkin' air conditioning.
> >> Ha, ha. ;-) Ok, sorry, I just couldn't resist!
> >>
> >> Seriously though, if you are in a hot area you may be close to the US/
> >> Mexico border. Just take a trip south and get it.
> >
> >
> >
> > There's a reason it's illegal. And it's a *good* reason. There are
> > alternatives that are less destructive.
> >
> > Come on. Be good to the Earth. It's the only one.
> >
> >
> > :-)
> > Craig C.
> >
>
>
> SNORT! Yeah, there is a reason it's illegal alright, Duponts patent ran
> out so anyone could make the stuff, that's why it was so cheap. So this
> scare got cooked up that Freon was destroying the planet and it got
> banned and replaced by another Dupont product with a fresh patent.
Except that it was 40+ years between when the patent ran out and
the nuke the whales crap started.
Jeff DeWitt <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> Craig Christian wrote:
> > nrs wrote:
> >
> >> Real Jeeps donīt have no stinkin' air conditioning.
> >> Ha, ha. ;-) Ok, sorry, I just couldn't resist!
> >>
> >> Seriously though, if you are in a hot area you may be close to the US/
> >> Mexico border. Just take a trip south and get it.
> >
> >
> >
> > There's a reason it's illegal. And it's a *good* reason. There are
> > alternatives that are less destructive.
> >
> > Come on. Be good to the Earth. It's the only one.
> >
> >
> > :-)
> > Craig C.
> >
>
>
> SNORT! Yeah, there is a reason it's illegal alright, Duponts patent ran
> out so anyone could make the stuff, that's why it was so cheap. So this
> scare got cooked up that Freon was destroying the planet and it got
> banned and replaced by another Dupont product with a fresh patent.
Except that it was 40+ years between when the patent ran out and
the nuke the whales crap started.
06-01-2007, 10:25 PM
#170
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: I need R-12= WARNING DEADLY ADVICE INSIDE!
In article <Xns9942D40F0A9F9someconundrum@216.196.97.131>,
kinch@truetex.com says...
> Will Honea writes:
>
> > The more immediate problem is not a leak under the hood or in an accident
> > but that of a slow leak in an enclosed area such as a garage when parked
> > overnight or longer.
>
> The same might be said of the 13 oz propane torch bottles that nobody,
> including the fire department, worries about indoors.
Boy I swear... Place that bottle next to your cars hot engine and tell
me you feel safe.
Snoball has had his *** handed to him by aarcuda on this subject already
and yet he is still spews lies. When snoball can no longer spew his bs
in one group he moves to another. The problem is the facts do not change
and the dangers of HC's remain.
---------------------------------------
> http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...tml?page=3&c=y
> http://www.vasa.org.au/images/movies/hc_demo.mov
> The following pictures are a result of what happens when you fill
> your system with HC and things go awry under hood. it should be
> noted that the owner of this truck _is_ an AC service technician,
> he thought he was as smart as snoball also;
> http://members.shaw.ca/ronhovestad/P...ressor%201.jpg
> http://members.shaw.ca/ronhovestad/P...ressor%202.jpg
> http://members.shaw.ca/ronhovestad/P...densor%201.jpg
> http://members.shaw.ca/ronhovestad/P...from%20top.jpg
kudos to aarcuda for the research
---------------------------------------
kinch@truetex.com says...
> Will Honea writes:
>
> > The more immediate problem is not a leak under the hood or in an accident
> > but that of a slow leak in an enclosed area such as a garage when parked
> > overnight or longer.
>
> The same might be said of the 13 oz propane torch bottles that nobody,
> including the fire department, worries about indoors.
Boy I swear... Place that bottle next to your cars hot engine and tell
me you feel safe.
Snoball has had his *** handed to him by aarcuda on this subject already
and yet he is still spews lies. When snoball can no longer spew his bs
in one group he moves to another. The problem is the facts do not change
and the dangers of HC's remain.
---------------------------------------
> http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...tml?page=3&c=y
> http://www.vasa.org.au/images/movies/hc_demo.mov
> The following pictures are a result of what happens when you fill
> your system with HC and things go awry under hood. it should be
> noted that the owner of this truck _is_ an AC service technician,
> he thought he was as smart as snoball also;
> http://members.shaw.ca/ronhovestad/P...ressor%201.jpg
> http://members.shaw.ca/ronhovestad/P...ressor%202.jpg
> http://members.shaw.ca/ronhovestad/P...densor%201.jpg
> http://members.shaw.ca/ronhovestad/P...from%20top.jpg
kudos to aarcuda for the research
---------------------------------------