You May Not Have Electricity This Winter

[Silhouette]

You are apparently incapable of reading what I just said. So, are you stupid or just intellectually dishonest? Which one?

You overlooked bored and provocative. Understandable, caves being as dark as they are.

Do you believe that reducing the use of fossil fuels is a good idea? Yes or no?

 

[Jarlaxle]

You're still a lying sack of shit...entirely expected. One more time: You just CANNOT burn all the fuel in the cylinder. Just not possible...modern engines are damn close, but you can never get it all. Even with modern designs, you cannot eliminate all the crevice volume in the cylinder.

Keep rereading the bold text until it sinks in.

And once again, you the lying sack of shit who is projecting & attempting to switch the conversation from where those unburned hydrocarbons are best handled for the efficiency of pushing the car forward vs "the ability to completely burn all hydrocarbons".

Again: What unused hydrocarbons that CAN be burned SHOULD be burned IN AN AREA THAT PUSHES THE CAR FORWARD AND NOT IN THE TAIL PIPE.

WHACK, WHACK, WHACK! Getting this yet, *****? You just CANNOT burn all the fuel in the cylinder. Just not possible...modern engines are damn close, but you can never get it all. Even with modern designs, you cannot eliminate all the crevice volume in the cylinder. Modern engines have pretty much peaked as far as burning all the fuel in the cylinder...what little isn't burned has to be dealt with.

 

[Silhouette]

You're still a lying sack of shit...entirely expected. One more time: You just CANNOT burn all the fuel in the cylinder. Just not possible...modern engines are damn close, but you can never get it all. Even with modern designs, you cannot eliminate all the crevice volume in the cylinder.

Keep rereading the bold text until it sinks in.

And once again, you the lying sack of shit who is projecting & attempting to switch the conversation from where those unburned hydrocarbons are best handled for the efficiency of pushing the car forward vs "the ability to completely burn all hydrocarbons".

Again: What unused hydrocarbons that CAN be burned SHOULD be burned IN AN AREA THAT PUSHES THE CAR FORWARD AND NOT IN THE TAIL PIPE.

WHACK, WHACK, WHACK! Getting this yet, *****? You just CANNOT burn all the fuel in the cylinder. Just not possible...modern engines are damn close, but you can never get it all. Even with modern designs, you cannot eliminate all the crevice volume in the cylinder. Modern engines have pretty much peaked as far as burning all the fuel in the cylinder...what little isn't burned has to be dealt with.

So what does the catalytic converter do? Oh, that's right. It uses molecular platinum particles to more completely burn unused hydrocarbons.....a process that can also be done where it can push the car forward..

So, since you are so sure that modern cars have maxed out their performance [while American versions get pathetically inferior MPG than European cars to this day] you won't mind the re-introduction of platinum introduction into the intake, right? I mean, what could it hurt? You shouldn't act so afraid of it and it makes people wonder why you are... After all, it won't make a difference....right?

 

[HenryBHough]

Such overwhelming faith should logically lead to establishment of a new cult!

Oh, wait, it already HAS!

 

[Silhouette]

Such overwhelming faith should logically lead to establishment of a new cult!

Oh, wait, it already HAS!

Faith has nothing to do with it. Particulate platinum in the intake system does have something to do with reducing pollution while increasing mileage.

 

[HenryBHough]

Then invent a way to do it and patent it.

Otherwise, consider a career as a televangelist.

 

[Silhouette]

Then invent a way to do it and patent it.

Otherwise, consider a career as a televangelist.

ABD [Already Been Done]. As I said before, those products were on the market and were "disappeared" somewhere around the early 1990s...right in their infancy...

 

[HenryBHough]

ABD [Already Been Done]. As I said before, those products were on the market and were "disappeared" somewhere around the early 1990s...right in their infancy...

Ah, well then! Why are you not out raising funds to make those products magically reappear? If they're so beneficial surely you can get Algore to give you a few millions from the collection plate at his First Universal Church of Global Brouhaha and Slithering! Or are you just content to thump the mud floor of that cave (if you're not living in a cave you're part of the problem, not of the solution)?

 

[Silhouette]

ABD [Already Been Done]. As I said before, those products were on the market and were "disappeared" somewhere around the early 1990s...right in their infancy...

Ah, well then! Why are you not out raising funds to make those products magically reappear? If they're so beneficial surely you can get Algore to give you a few millions from the collection plate at his First Universal Church of Global Brouhaha and Slithering! Or are you just content to thump the mud floor of that cave (if you're not living in a cave you're part of the problem, not of the solution)?

You can reply without ad hominems you know. It's no secret that "debaters" who habitually resort to ad hominems are trying to hide something.

 

[HenryBHough]

You can reply without ad hominems you know. It's no secret that "debaters" who habitually resort to ad hominems are trying to hide something.

This fails to address why you're not acting - just thumping.

Acting meaning "taking action" not just pretending to be intelligent.

 

[Jarlaxle]

WHACK, WHACK, WHACK! Getting this yet, *****? You just CANNOT burn all the fuel in the cylinder. Just not possible...modern engines are damn close, but you can never get it all. Even with modern designs, you cannot eliminate all the crevice volume in the cylinder. Modern engines have pretty much peaked as far as burning all the fuel in the cylinder...what little isn't burned has to be dealt with.

So what does the catalytic converter do? Oh, that's right. It uses molecular platinum particles to more completely burn unused hydrocarbons.....a process that can also be done where it can push the car forward.

It converts unburned fuel into carbon dioxide & water, and oxides of nitrogen into nitrogen & oxygen.

So, since you are so sure that modern cars have maxed out their performance [while American versions get pathetically inferior MPG than European cars to this day]

False premise! Many Euro versions have different (smaller) engines not available here. (Offhand, the Mercedes S-class was available with the little 2.8 litre six; the smallest US-market engine was the 3.2 litre six. The BMW 5-series had a 2 litre four standard there, with a 2.5 or 2.8 litre six here.) The Mazda 323 used a tiny 1300cc engine in Europe, the US version had 1.8 litres.

you won't mind the re-introduction of platinum introduction into the intake, right? I mean, what could it hurt? You shouldn't act so afraid of it and it makes people wonder why you are... After all, it won't make a difference....right?

Go for it...it will be exactly as useful as fuel line magnets! (Of course, being platinum, it will cost much more!)

 

[Jarlaxle]

Then invent a way to do it and patent it.

Otherwise, consider a career as a televangelist.

ABD [Already Been Done]. As I said before, those products were on the market and were "disappeared" somewhere around the early 1990s...right in their infancy...

Prove it. Patents are public record. Who, EXACTLY, bought the patent rights to EXACTLY which products? Be specific.

 

[Silhouette]

Many Euro versions have different (smaller) engines not available here. (Offhand, the Mercedes S-class was available with the little 2.8 litre six; the smallest US-market engine was the 3.2 litre six. The BMW 5-series had a 2 litre four standard there, with a 2.5 or 2.8 litre six here.) The Mazda 323 used a tiny 1300cc engine in Europe, the US version had 1.8 litres.

you won't mind the re-introduction of platinum introduction into the intake, right? I mean, what could it hurt? You shouldn't act so afraid of it and it makes people wonder why you are... After all, it won't make a difference....right?

Go for it...it will be exactly as useful as fuel line magnets! (Of course, being platinum, it will cost much more!)

You don't have a problem with expensive platinum in the catalytic converter. But when it pushes the car forward better while reducing pollution, then suddenly "it's too expensive".

More economical cars are not available in the US. Correct. And the reason for that for decades is lobbying by BigOil in Congress.

 

[HenryBHough]

To discuss is to diss the faith of a very devout individual.

Let's just all feign agreement and move on.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Many Euro versions have different (smaller) engines not available here. (Offhand, the Mercedes S-class was available with the little 2.8 litre six; the smallest US-market engine was the 3.2 litre six. The BMW 5-series had a 2 litre four standard there, with a 2.5 or 2.8 litre six here.) The Mazda 323 used a tiny 1300cc engine in Europe, the US version had 1.8 litres.

you won't mind the re-introduction of platinum introduction into the intake, right? I mean, what could it hurt? You shouldn't act so afraid of it and it makes people wonder why you are... After all, it won't make a difference....right?

Go for it...it will be exactly as useful as fuel line magnets! (Of course, being platinum, it will cost much more!)

You don't have a problem with expensive platinum in the catalytic converter. But when it pushes the car forward better while reducing pollution, then suddenly "it's too expensive".

I will give you one trillion dollars if you can link to the post where I said I "don't have a problem with expensive platinum in the catalytic converter." Aaaaaaaaaaand...go to it!

More economical cars are not available in the US. Correct. And the reason for that for decades is lobbying by BigOil in Congress.

No, because car companies CHOOSE not to sell them here...often because they expect they won't sell! It's simple: Americans don't want underpowered cars! (And also note that my stepfather's 300HP, 4000+lb, AWD full-size luxury car tops 30MPG highway!)

 

[Silhouette]

Read my last post in bold Jar Jar.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Translation: "I concede".

 

[Silhouette]

In the catalytic converter, there are two different types of catalyst at work, a reduction catalyst and an oxidation catalyst. Both types consist of a ceramic structure coated with a metal catalyst, usually platinum, rhodium and/or palladium. The idea is to create a structure that exposes the maximum surface area of catalyst to the exhaust stream, while also minimizing the amount of catalyst required, as the materials are extremely expensive. Some of the newest converters have even started to use gold mixed with the more traditional catalysts. Gold is cheaper than the other materials and could increase oxidation, the chemical reaction that reduces pollutants, by up to 40 percent [source: Kanellos]. HowStuffWorks Catalysts

As I previously stated the more minute the particles, the more the catalyst is effective in burning unused hydrocarbons. And the maximum surface area exposed around those minute particles is the best. Most products you see today for the intake look like they're engineered to fail. Meaning that their surface area exposure is too small and the platinum not made as available as in catalytic converters. All one would have to do is open up a catalytic converter and adapt its basic engineering to the combustion situation or to find a way for intake to pick up enough molecular platinum to burn, like what happens in your catalytic converter.

 

[HenryBHough]

..............All one would have to do is open up a catalytic converter and adapt its basic engineering to the combustion situation or to find a way for intake to pick up enough molecular platinum to burn, like what happens in your catalytic converter.

And you haven't done this yourself because _______________________________?

 

[Jarlaxle]

In the catalytic converter, there are two different types of catalyst at work, a reduction catalyst and an oxidation catalyst. Both types consist of a ceramic structure coated with a metal catalyst, usually platinum, rhodium and/or palladium. The idea is to create a structure that exposes the maximum surface area of catalyst to the exhaust stream, while also minimizing the amount of catalyst required, as the materials are extremely expensive. Some of the newest converters have even started to use gold mixed with the more traditional catalysts. Gold is cheaper than the other materials and could increase oxidation, the chemical reaction that reduces pollutants, by up to 40 percent [source: Kanellos]. HowStuffWorks Catalysts

As I previously stated the more minute the particles, the more the catalyst is effective in burning unused hydrocarbons. And the maximum surface area exposed around those minute particles is the best. Most products you see today for the intake look like they're engineered to fail. Meaning that their surface area exposure is too small and the platinum not made as available as in catalytic converters. All one would have to do is open up a catalytic converter and adapt its basic engineering to the combustion situation or to find a way for intake to pick up enough molecular platinum to burn, like what happens in your catalytic converter.

Actually, it's more that maximizing surface area results in something that is either very restrictive (like early pellet-type catalysts) or very expensive (like modern monolith cats).

I'm surprised to see gold used...it's melting point is much lower than platinum.