SteamyTea

I find a couple of rocks of crack better, and cheaper. Plenty down the City, it is what keeps the traders happy.

What is that force specified?

You can get the data about household crimes by type here: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/datasets/householdcrimeincidencecsewopendatatable Then decide if you need a more secure system. Personally just hiding a key is the simple answer. Superglued behind a drainpipe is going to be pretty hard to find by chance.

They are on it. EU plan for cutting emissions from planes could end up increasing them New legislation that would see planes forced to use "sustainable aviation fuel" might actually end up increasing emissions, depending on which fuels are included By Michael Le Page 27 April 2022 A plane landing at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol in the Netherlands Nicolas Economou/NurPhoto via Getty Images Proposed European Union aviation regulations could see greenhouse gas emissions from flying increase, even while they are claimed to be sustainable, if some nations get their way. The ReFuelEU regulations now being negotiated would require commercial flights in the EU to start using “sustainable aviation fuels”, with the proportion added gradually rising from 2 per cent in 2025 to 63 per cent by 2050. But the definition of “sustainable aviation fuels” is currently up for discussion – and may end up including fuels that lead to an increase in emissions. Under the original proposal put forward by the European Commission, sustainable aviation fuels would consist mainly of advanced biofuels derived from waste as well as synthetic fuels created using renewable energy. Biofuels made from food and animal feed wouldn’t count. Overall, this is good, says Chelsea Baldino at the International Council on Clean Transportation, a non-profit research organisation. But several suggested amendments to the legislation widen the definition of sustainable aviation fuels to include food-based biofuels, she says. That is a problem because such biofuels use land that is needed to grow food for people or farm animals to eat. To maintain food supplies, more land would have to be cleared for agriculture around the world. If the emissions from these indirect effects on land use are counted, they “could negate some or all of the [greenhouse gas] emission savings of individual biofuels”, a 2019 European Commission report states. Read more: Cutting biofuels can help avoid global food shock from Ukraine war And it isn’t just about the climate. The loss of habitat is the main driver of biodiversity loss around the world. “The main message is that there should not be any food and feedstock biofuels,” says Baldino. Food-based biofuels also push up food prices, hitting the poorest people hardest. “There is competition between land for fuel and land for food,” says Ciarán Cuffe, a member of the European Parliament, who is part of the Green group. “Particularly in light of the war in Ukraine, we must prioritise land for food.” Another proposed amendment is that only biofuels that reduce emissions by at least 55 per cent should be eligible. While that sounds good, the proposed method for calculating emission reductions excludes indirect land-use effects, says Baldino. “The devil is in the details when it comes to biofuels. Some do more harm than good,” says Matteo Mirolo at Transport & Environment, which campaigns for cleaner transport. “It’s very important that ReFuelEU gives the right signal and supports only the most sustainable biofuels.” While biofuels made from waste such as used cooking oil can provide genuine reductions in greenhouse emissions, there are limits to the amount of waste available. Read more: European airlines have been lobbying against EU climate plans “We simply don’t have the resources to create the quantity of biofuel needed to keep up with the rocketing demand,” says Cuffe. This can lead to fraud. For instance, Cuffe says it appears that some biofuels sold as being made from used cooking oil are actually being made partly from fresh palm oil. For these reasons, Cuffe, Baldino and Mirolo would all like to see caps imposed on the quantities of biofuels allowed. Instead of biofuels, Cuffe thinks ReFuelEU should prioritise the use of e-kerosene made using renewable energy, electrolysis and direct air capture of carbon dioxide. Companies are poised to ramp up production if policy-makers send a clear signal to investors, he says. ReFuelEU should also apply to private jets, not just commercial flights, says Cuffe. Negotiations on the wording will continue until the autumn, he says, and the final outcome is hard to predict. “The definition of sustainable aviation remains a hugely divisive topic and positions among member states vary greatly,” an EU official told New Scientist. Discussions are still ongoing, the official said, and the European Council hasn’t yet reached a common position. UK and Germany could lower fuel and food prices by cutting biofuels The G7 group of nations reportedly rejected a proposal from the UK and Germany to lower biofuel production, but the two European nations could still go it alone By Michael Le Page 28 June 2022 Grain used during a Greenpeace protest earlier this month in Germany against the production of biofuel from food crops Hannibal Hanschke/Reuters/Alamy To help ease soaring food and fuel prices after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the UK and Germany called for a temporary reduction in biofuel production at a meeting of the G7 group of nations on Monday. While this was reportedly rejected by the US and Canada, the UK and Germany could still have a big impact if they decide to unilaterally reduce the amount of biofuels they use. “The UK or Germany could just go it alone,” says Dustin Benton at Green Alliance, a UK-based environmental think tank. In many countries, ethanol made from foods such as wheat is blended with petrol and sold as, say, E10 or E15 fuel depending on the ethanol percentage. Some diesel is also made from vegetable oils. Because Ukraine was a major exporter of wheat and sunflower oil, the war has caused prices of these commodities to soar, causing more hardship for those struggling to pay for food. As New Scientist reported in March, so much food is now turned into ethanol and biodiesel that if the US and Europe cut biofuel production, it could more than compensate for the loss of exports from Ukraine. The US and Canada are reported to have rejected the calls to cut biofuels on the grounds that it would undermine efforts to reduce carbon emissions and also lead to higher fuel prices. Neither argument stands up, say experts. In the US, ethanol currently costs as much as petrol, says Tim Searchinger at Princeton University, so reducing ethanol production would have minimal or no impact on costs at the pump. But cutting biofuel production would have a big effect on food prices, he says, which depend on the expectations of markets as well as the actual supply. “It sends a signal,” Searchinger says. Read more: Global food crisis is leaving millions hungry, but there are solutions As for undermining efforts to limit global warming, many studies show that if the full impacts of growing food to turn into fuels are counted, most biofuels only slightly reduce emissions or even increase them. “Biofuels have never been a viable means of carbon reduction,” says Jason Hill at the University of Minnesota. In addition, land use changes to grow the required crops can also harm biodiversity, he says. Benton says the opposition of the US is really to do with domestic politics, as the country has strong lobbying groups representing farmers and biofuel-related industries. Especially with mid-term elections coming up in November, no president would want to lose voters by cutting biofuel production, he says. But for the UK government, cutting biofuels may be more appealing. “There are obvious political opportunities here,” says Benton. In the UK, biofuels cost more than petrol, so reducing the proportion of ethanol added to fuel could lower the cost of a litre of petrol by a few pence in addition to lowering food prices. Doing this would allow the UK government to claim it is tackling the cost-of-living crisis affecting its citizens. Internationally, it would help ease the global food crisis exacerbated by the Ukraine war. The UK alone turns enough food into biofuels each year to feed 3.5 million people, according to a Green Alliance analysis. That compares with 10 million or so people estimated to be at risk of not getting enough food due to the fall in crop exports from Ukraine, the analysis says. Adding more bioethanol to petrol is no way to go green Making “greener” fuels by adding bioethanol to petrol will wreck the environment, not save it. We need to focus on making electric cars work, says Michael Le Page By Michael Le Page 18 July 2019 Jason Bye / Alamy Stock Photo The UK should burn more alcohol to go greener, a group of MPs styling themselves the All-Party Parliamentary Group for British Bioethanol said this week. They want the UK government to increase the bioethanol in standard unleaded petrol from 5 to 10 per cent. Such “E10” fuel is already sold in many countries, including the US, Australia and several European nations. Yet it is a social and environmental disaster. Biodiversity is under threat, and we need to preserve habitats, not destroy them. But growing crops to make biofuel increases the global demand for farmland and results in the destruction of ever more wilderness. By pushing up food prices and encouraging land grabs, most biofuels also deepen poverty and social division. They aren’t even that great at limiting climate change. Growing them produces greenhouse gases in all kinds of ways, from carbon dioxide when fertilisers are manufactured to nitrous oxide when they are applied to fields. Add to that people cutting down forests that store lots of carbon to create more farmland. The official carbon footprint of petrol and diesel in the European Union is 84 grams of carbon dioxide or the equivalent for every megajoule of energy. According to a 2017 study by the Royal Academy of Engineering in the UK, producing bioethanol from wheat – the main crop used for this purpose in the UK – emits around 100g CO2 eq/MJ on average, once land-use change is taken into account. Sweeter option Other sources at least emit less than petrol and diesel. Bioethanol made from sugar beet – another crop used in the UK – comes in at around 50g CO2 eq/MJ on average, counting land use. But the UK’s official aim is to reduce its emissions to net zero by 2050. Even using only sugar-beet bioethanol for blending with petrol wouldn’t get us close to what is needed. Not all biofuels are bad. Those made from genuine waste really can tick all the boxes, but they are in limited supply. When it comes to petrol there is a far better alternative: electricity. So say the government’s official climate advisers. “We don’t see a long-term role for biofuels in surface transport given other low-carbon options available,” a spokesperson for the Committee on Climate Change tells me. “The shift to electric cars and vans is both low carbon and cost saving.” A pity, then, that while others such as China and Norway motor ahead, the UK is going backwards. If the UK is to meet its net-zero target, radical change is required, including ending the sale of petrol cars by 2030. Cutting emissions is admittedly not the main driver behind the MPs advocating for more biofuel. Instead, the key reason they give is to save “the British bioethanol industry” and prevent “the loss of thousands of jobs”. The saving jobs argument can be used to justify anything, from coal mining to whaling. Suffice to say that the all-out effort needed to get to net zero would generate a huge number of jobs. We need to get on with it instead of wasting time and money on E10 fuel.

Dropped a hot one.

Does that account for all the problems at CERN. The protons travel perfectly though the part in Switzerland, clockwork precision even, then grind to a halt and have lunch, some light sex with a mistress, a snooze and half a bottle of cheap brandy when they hit the French part. Probably why we left the maths to the French, they can only (expletive deleted) up a napkin. Oh shit, just remembered half my family is French.

I know that, but one is not meant to. The right types of fittings are meant to be used. I did have the diamond disk come off my little battery one, but that was because I only did it up finger tight. Soon sorted that with the spanners.

Ours got taken away and sold to Mitchell and Webber. In the olden days it went to farms, but swine fever, BSE and foot and mouth put a stop to that. Then it got dumped into landfill, or down the normal drains. Palm oil put a stop to that as it is a solid when cold, like beef dripping. We had paperwork for it shown how much was taken away.

Sorry, nodded off and woke up to a nightmare. Thought I was back at school doing chemistry lessons. Then realised I was still awake. I did not realise it was so different from making biodiesel from waste fats. Sounds more energy intensive.

There are ways around the disk fitting, but they involve having a selection of collets and sometimes washers. Thankfully having more angle grinders than in healthy, I can always get things to fit. Just get the Makita, you will be fine with it. It will all make sense when you bolt the disk down.

Thin disk slips on shaft. fatter disk does not slip.

Yes, and this is the problem. And huge environmental damage where it is produced. When I did my degree in Renewables, I wrote about the CO2 problem that biofuels create. That was 18 years ago. I got marked down quite badly because the lecturer 'could not follow my maths'. He stood to be a local Green Party MP. It really is dodgy carbon accounting and double counting. If it must be burnt, pour it untreated into a fluidised bed coal station, no point pissing about cleaning it up (which is quite energy intensive at it is heated to boil the water off), then chemically modifying it to remove the glycerine (which then needs disposing off), then cleaning it again in distilled/demineralised water (as if that just falls out the sky), then boiling off the water again, then mixing with ethanol. Package it up and transport it to end user. (expletive deleted)ing nonsense like a lot of 'recycling' or second usage.

Not sure if the video is too large at 160 MB to upload. So may be a Youtube one if it don't.

Those are for the fibrous cutting disks. Down to the length of the shaft Shall pop into shed and get my selection out.

You can also add random spot mass to it, that can be used to tune the absorption. I wonder how hard it would be to add a sound cancelling system to a heat pump. eBay have some noise cancelling headphone for less than 20 quid. But of modification and an old Amstrad stereo from a car boot sale should do it. Can always play your Bowie collection if not.

Can be turned into polymers, longer term sequestration that way. It could also be burnt in an waste to energy plant, without processing. That would be even more efficient, and improve local air quality.

Kehelland. Not just any hamlet. It is where the Met Office have the weather station. As for 90% CO2 reduction, all depends on how it is accounted for. Was the cutting down and burning of an Indonesian rain forest, to make way for a palm oil plantation taken into account? Was the long term effects of all carbon based combustion, regardless of source taken a into account? Was the difference in viable non combustion energy sources used as a comparison. Knowing the company that supply the oil, and sponsored the transition, I know it is green washing.

@Oxbow16 Any progress, or are you at A&E?

I don't know, hence the question. Again, I don't know. The problem could be overcome with PV diverters for each device, but was wondering if that was really necessary. Probably easier, and more consistent, to dump load into a battery, then get the energy back out when there is enough charge.

I have always been a fan of the OU. Really should see what else they are offering for free.

That is pretty precise.

Is it not covered in BS 40101:2022

My 1987 vintage house has a separate consumer unit for the E7 storage heaters and DHW. This is fed by separate tails from the smart meter. All that is quite normal. If I was to fit some PV, but with an 'islanding' inverter (and with a secondary safety grid isolator) and wire it into the E7 circuit, when the E7 off i.e. during the day, and the PV generating, would any of the power go back to the grid? Does the time switch in the smart meter know not to export from the E7 circuit?

Reticulated foam is what we made the air filters from. These could be tiny ones for old Minis to huge ones for mining. Take the air filter off your car and see how noisy it gets. If you want a cheap fish tank filter, use a bit of Scotchbrite, it is the same stuff.