My dad used to use Gasoline to soak his der. and chains and misc bike parts. Is there anything more enviro-freindly? I was thinking of alcohol or one of the new natural cleaners.
Zog The Undeniable 31 March 2005 14:38:20 [ permanent link ]
Les wrote:> My dad used to use Gasoline to soak his der. and chains and> misc bike parts. Is there anything more enviro-freindly?> I was thinking of alcohol or one of the new natural cleaners.>
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 11:38:20 +0100, Zog The Undeniable <hrothgar19@yahoo.com> wrote:
Les wrote:>> My dad used to use Gasoline to soak his der. and chains and>> misc bike parts. Is there anything more enviro-freindly?>> I was thinking of alcohol or one of the new natural cleaners.>>
Diesel fuel is much safer!
Diesel is good for chains, but citrus oil seems to be both green and highly effective as a degreaser for other parts.
Kinky Cowboy*
*Batteries not included May contain traces of nuts Your milage may vary
Les wrote:> My dad used to use Gasoline to soak his der. and chains and> misc bike parts. Is there anything more enviro-freindly?> I was thinking of alcohol or one of the new natural cleaners.>
thanks,> les
Growing up in the oilfield, we did a lot of things with gasoline back then that I would not do now. I'd never use it casually as a cleaner because it is too dangerous. It ignites too easily.
Soaking with Simple Green and flushing with water has been recommended here. How green is that? (Serious question)
"catzz66" <dingdong@rammalamma.net> wrote in message news:3b2jtsF6denmhU1@individual.net...>
Soaking with Simple Green and flushing with water has been recommended > here. How green is that? (Serious question)
Looks to be pretty green... I couldn't find information on the production of the product, but disposal looks safe:
"Simple Green® is readily decomposed by naturally occurring microorganisms. The biological oxygen demand (BOD), as a percentage of the chemical oxygen demand (COD), after 4, 7, and 11 days was 56%, 60%, and 70%, respectively. Per OECD Closed Bottle Test, Simple Green® meets OECD and EPA recommendations for ready biodegradability. In a standard biodegradation test with soils from three different countries, Butyl Cellosolve reached 50% degradation in 6 to 23 days, depending upon soil type, and exceeded the rate of degradation for glucose which was used as a control for comparison."
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 05:03:08 -0800, Les <non@sequiteur.org> may have said:
My dad used to use Gasoline to soak his der. and chains and>misc bike parts. Is there anything more enviro-freindly?>I was thinking of alcohol or one of the new natural cleaners.
Gasoline is an extreme fire hazard, and the current formulations have many nasty skin-absorbable carcinogenic fractions. It's just not safe to use as cleaning fluid. In general, anything used as a motor or pressurized lantern fuel is too hazardous to use as a cleaning solvent.
Mineral spirits, sold commonly in hardware stores as paint thinner (NOT lacquer thinner, which is much more volatile), is safer, but on a hot day may still be ignitable; used with appropriate caution, it's generally not going to be too much of a hazard, but use it outdoors and away from open flames only. There are high-flash-point cleaning solvents available from companies like Safety-Kleen which are better, but the difference for the casual user may not be worth the hassle and expense of locating them.
Butyl-based degreasing cleaners are effective but may damage paint. Citrus-based degreasers have the same drawback, but are more environmentally neutral. Simple Green is neither a butyl-based nor a cirtus-based cleaner, and is not as effective as either of the other two[1]. The cheapest widely-available butyl-based cleaner of my experience is Power Clean sold at Autozone stores across the US.
Alcohols are readily absorbed through the skin, they don't do much about removing greasy crud, and they also tend to attract water and leave it behind on the surface as they dry, promoting corrosion. Ergo, they're not useful for cleaning solvents.
[1] In my experience, Simple Green is simply atrocious; it takes much more of it to do the same job that a little of any of the others will do, it smells worse, and it's more expensive. I don't even take the free samples anymore when they're promoting it.
-- My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail. Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature. Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 05:03:08 -0800, Les <non@sequiteur.org> wrote:
My dad used to use Gasoline to soak his der. and chains and>misc bike parts. Is there anything more enviro-freindly?>I was thinking of alcohol or one of the new natural cleaners.
Almost everything's more green than gasoline.
I like mineral spirits, AKA paint thinner. Reusable and not as hard on the hands and lungs, much less volatile.
"RonSonic" wrote: (clip) much less volatile. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I saw a fire department demo once, where they put a small container of gasoline at the head of the stairs, in a little "doll house." At the foot of the stairs they put a lighted candle. The background was black velvet. You could actually watch the vapors flow down the stairs to the candle, and then blow the roof off the house.
Another vote for paint thinner. Find a small, powerful magnet and you can remove 3/4 of the crud from chain washings since it is disintegrated chain and attracted to the magnet. Since the other dirt will also settle out, this will help trap the majority of the dirt without filtering it.
Now if you want to filter it, a Mityvac brake bleeder setup can be used. This is a small hand operated vacuum pump with a 100 ml reservoir. Ordinary bath tissue can be folded 4 times and rolled into a "pill" which fits snugly in the tubing. Drawing a vacuum on the reservoir will draw the dirty thinner through the tube and clean thinner goes into the reservoir. Once you have a good vacuum, it does it automatically to the last drop. The filter is dirt cheap and very little thinner is lost.
"RonSonic" wrote: (clip) much less volatile.>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^>I saw a fire department demo once, where they put a small container of >gasoline at the head of the stairs, in a little "doll house." At the foot >of the stairs they put a lighted candle. The background was black velvet. >You could actually watch the vapors flow down the stairs to the candle, and >then blow the roof off the house.
Leo Lichtman wrote:> "RonSonic" wrote: (clip) much less volatile.> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^> I saw a fire department demo once, where they put a small container of> gasoline at the head of the stairs, in a little "doll house." At the> foot of the stairs they put a lighted candle. The background was> black velvet. You could actually watch the vapors flow down the> stairs to the candle, and then blow the roof off the house.
Kerosene (paraffin to our British readers) is reasonably safe if you don't mind the icky smell, but it's not a very effective solvent. You'll need to do a LOT of scrubbing if kero is your choice.
Sheldon "Citrus For Me" Brown +----------------------------------------------------------+ | Climate is what we expect, weather is what we get. | | --Robert A. Heinlein | +----------------------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 http://harriscyclery.com Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide http://captainbike.comhttp://sheldonbrown.com
I know several people with horror stories regarding gasoline. One was a friend of the family who set his carpet on fire trying to get a gasoline assist in lighting his fireplace. Luckily he did not burn the house down.
Gasoline (and some other solvent) soaked rags can catch fire by spontaneous combustion. I would stay away from these materials if there was something else that worked and was more friendly to the environment.
Squid-in-Training Phil 1 April 2005 02:12:21 [ permanent link ]
kantspel wrote:> Scott Ehardt wrote:>> "catzz66" <dingdong@rammalamma.net> wrote in message>> news:3b2jtsF6denmhU1@individual.net...>>
Soaking with Simple Green and flushing with water has been>>> recommended here. How green is that? (Serious question)>>
Looks to be pretty green... I couldn't find information on the>> production of the product, but disposal looks safe:>>
"Simple Green® is readily decomposed by naturally occurring>> microorganisms. The biological oxygen demand (BOD), as a percentage>> of the chemical oxygen demand (COD), after 4, 7, and 11 days was>> 56%, 60%, and 70%, respectively. Per OECD Closed Bottle Test, Simple>> Green® meets OECD and EPA recommendations for ready>> biodegradability. In a standard biodegradation test with soils from>> three different countries, Butyl Cellosolve reached 50% degradation>> in 6 to 23 days, depending upon soil type, and exceeded the rate of>> degradation for glucose which was used as a control for comparison." >> http://www.simplegreen.com/pdfs/04_msds_simple_green.pdf>>
I've had good luck with soaking parts in a bowl of warm simple green> (just use hot water to dilute it) and setting it on top of the dryer> or the washer during spin cycle. The adgitation from the> washer/dryer does a decent job of getting gunk out of the hard to> reach areas.
Squid-in-Training Phil 1 April 2005 02:12:22 [ permanent link ]
Leo Lichtman wrote:> "RonSonic" wrote: (clip) much less volatile.> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^> I saw a fire department demo once, where they put a small container of> gasoline at the head of the stairs, in a little "doll house." At the> foot of the stairs they put a lighted candle. The background was> black velvet. You could actually watch the vapors flow down the> stairs to the candle, and then blow the roof off the house.
Likely a stoichiometric mixture... I'm willing to bet Barbie and Ken would have suffocated pretty hard by that time, at least on a scale model basis...
But back to the topic: don't use gasoline! -- Phil, Squid-in-Training
My dad used to use Gasoline to soak his der. and chains and misc>> bike parts. Is there anything more enviro-freindly?
I'd also think "user-friendly".
Gas is nasty stuff safety-wise.
It also contains lighter fractions that penetrate human skin easily and are retained by the body. It is bad stuff all around for use other than automotive fuel. If you want to use a petroleum derivative, paint thinner is the least expensive and does at least as good a job as other such liquids.
Les wrote:> My dad used to use Gasoline to soak his der. and chains and> misc bike parts. Is there anything more enviro-freindly?> I was thinking of alcohol or one of the new natural cleaners.>
thanks,> les
I couldn't find a link, but I use a 'green' cycling degreaser available at Mountain Equipment Coop (a MEC brand product). It's actually green, costs about $12CDN for 4L, available in smaller sizes, and when you're done with it you leave it out and it dries to a biodegradable solid that goes in the trash.
It works well compared to other cleaners I have used at the shop. I use it for soaking, wiping down, etc.
Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:> kantspel wrote:>> Scott Ehardt wrote:>>> "catzz66" <dingdong@rammalamma.net> wrote in message>>> news:3b2jtsF6denmhU1@individual.net...>>>
Soaking with Simple Green and flushing with water has been>>>> recommended here. How green is that? (Serious question)>>>
Looks to be pretty green... I couldn't find information on the>>> production of the product, but disposal looks safe:>>>
"Simple Green® is readily decomposed by naturally occurring>>> microorganisms. The biological oxygen demand (BOD), as a percentage>>> of the chemical oxygen demand (COD), after 4, 7, and 11 days was>>> 56%, 60%, and 70%, respectively. Per OECD Closed Bottle Test, Simple>>> Green® meets OECD and EPA recommendations for ready>>> biodegradability. In a standard biodegradation test with soils from>>> three different countries, Butyl Cellosolve reached 50% degradation>>> in 6 to 23 days, depending upon soil type, and exceeded the rate of>>> degradation for glucose which was used as a control for comparison.">>> http://www.simplegreen.com/pdfs/04_msds_simple_green.pdf>>>
I've had good luck with soaking parts in a bowl of warm simple green>> (just use hot water to dilute it) and setting it on top of the dryer>> or the washer during spin cycle. The adgitation from the>> washer/dryer does a decent job of getting gunk out of the hard to>> reach areas.>
Neil Brooks wrote:> "Leo Lichtman" <l.lichtman@worldnet.att.net> wrote:>
"RonSonic" wrote: (clip) much less volatile.>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^>> I saw a fire department demo once, where they put a small container>> of gasoline at the head of the stairs, in a little "doll house." At>> the foot of the stairs they put a lighted candle. The background>> was black velvet. You could actually watch the vapors flow down the>> stairs to the candle, and then blow the roof off the house.>
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 22:47:06 GMT, jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:>
Pete Cresswell writes:>>
My dad used to use Gasoline to soak his der. and chains and misc>>>> bike parts. Is there anything more enviro-freindly?>>
I'd also think "user-friendly". >>
Gas is nasty stuff safety-wise.>>
It also contains lighter fractions that penetrate human skin easily>>and are retained by the body. It is bad stuff all around for use>>other than automotive fuel. >
It's quite bad stuff even as an automotive fuel. Diesel and alcohol> are safer to handle from the fire hazard aspect. Both are hard to> ignite, and alcohol fires can be safely put out with plain water. LPG,> CNG or Hydrogen are less toxic to users and innocent bystanders. With> the right production methods, Hydrogen, alcohol, CNG (as biologically> produced methane) and bio-diesel can all be used without any net> addition of CO2 to the atmosphere.
I strongly disagree with the characterization of alcohol as "hard to ignite." I routinely use denatured alcohol ( > 90% ethanol) for cooking and heating water while touring. It lights very very easily with any open flame. I think alcohol is pretty safe because it will not explode, but it is in a whole differant league than diesel in terms of flamability. Additionaly, alcohol flames are invisible in sunlight. It is good to have a healthy respect for the flamability of alcohol. Didn't Richard Pryor get in trouble using a torch around some Bacardi 151?
"Zog The Undeniable" <hrothgar19@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:424bd1bc.0@entanet...> Les wrote:> > My dad used to use Gasoline to soak his der. and chains and> > misc bike parts. Is there anything more enviro-freindly?> > I was thinking of alcohol or one of the new natural cleaners.> >
Diesel fuel is much safer!
I find that penetrating fluids like liquid wrench seem to work pretty good on chains, I remove the chain put it in a container, spray the heck out of it, let it sit for like 15 or 20 minutes, turn chain over and repeat this proccess several times. When the fluid at the bottom gets really nasty looking I stop, hang chain up over the container, let drip then rinse in hot water, reinstall on bike, and relubricate. This seems to work well for me.
Michael Dart wrote:> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:>
kantspel wrote:>>
Scott Ehardt wrote:>>>
"catzz66" <dingdong@rammalamma.net> wrote in message>>>>news:3b2jtsF6denmhU1@individual.net...>>>>
Soaking with Simple Green and flushing with water has been>>>>>recommended here. How green is that? (Serious question)>>>>
Looks to be pretty green... I couldn't find information on the>>>>production of the product, but disposal looks safe:>>>>
"Simple Green® is readily decomposed by naturally occurring>>>>microorganisms. The biological oxygen demand (BOD), as a percentage>>>>of the chemical oxygen demand (COD), after 4, 7, and 11 days was>>>>56%, 60%, and 70%, respectively. Per OECD Closed Bottle Test, Simple>>>>Green® meets OECD and EPA recommendations for ready>>>>biodegradability. In a standard biodegradation test with soils from>>>>three different countries, Butyl Cellosolve reached 50% degradation>>>>in 6 to 23 days, depending upon soil type, and exceeded the rate of>>>>degradation for glucose which was used as a control for comparison.">>>>http://www.simplegreen.com/pdfs/04_msds_simple_green.pdf>>>>
I've had good luck with soaking parts in a bowl of warm simple green>>>(just use hot water to dilute it) and setting it on top of the dryer>>>or the washer during spin cycle. The adgitation from the>>>washer/dryer does a decent job of getting gunk out of the hard to>>>reach areas.>>
Nice!>
Subsonic parts cleaner. ;^)>
Actually it's quite sonic Especially the first time the wife sees a bowl of bike parts soaking in greasy green juice near her freshly washed delicates. Then comes the subsonic treatment.
<jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org> wrote in message news:K5%2e.12900$m31.129987@typhoon.sonic.net...> Pete Cresswell writes:>
My dad used to use Gasoline to soak his der. and chains and misc> >> bike parts. Is there anything more enviro-freindly?>
I'd also think "user-friendly".>
Gas is nasty stuff safety-wise.>
It also contains lighter fractions that penetrate human skin easily> and are retained by the body. It is bad stuff all around for use> other than automotive fuel. If you want to use a petroleum> derivative, paint thinner is the least expensive and does at least as> good a job as other such liquids.>
Jobst.Brandt@stanfordalumni.org
Agree with using paint thinner as a cleaning fluid, but doesn't paint thinner penetrate the skin easily? I always wear surgical gloves when using paint thinner. -tom
My dad used to use Gasoline to soak his derailleur and chains>>>> and misc bike parts. Is there anything more enviro-friendly?
I'd also think "user-friendly".
Gas is nasty stuff safety-wise.
It also contains lighter fractions that penetrate human skin easily>> and are retained by the body. It is bad stuff all around for use>> other than automotive fuel. If you want to use a petroleum>> derivative, paint thinner is the least expensive and does at least>> as good a job as other such liquids.
Agree with using paint thinner as a cleaning fluid, but doesn't> paint thinner penetrate the skin easily? I always wear surgical> gloves when using paint thinner.
It doesn't contain the higher volatility fractions and does not penetrate skin nearly as gasoline or some of the more dangerous solvents like lacquer thinner or benzene/benzol. Use it with care. I use an stiff bristled paintbrush to clean parts and avoid longer contact with the solvent.
Zog The Undeniable 1 April 2005 19:13:15 [ permanent link ]
Kinky Cowboy wrote:
Yes, it's much easier to light alcohols than diesel, but still much> harder than lighting gasoline.
<pedantic mode on> Gasoline doesn't actually burn, because alkanes only burn in the vapour phase. Not that this makes much practical difference to the ease of torching yourself when cleaning a chain in gasoline.
Neil Brooks wrote:> Jacobe Hazzard <fakeaddress@mousepotato.com> wrote:>
Les wrote:>>
My dad used to use Gasoline to soak his der. and chains and>>>misc bike parts. Is there anything more enviro-freindly?>>>I was thinking of alcohol or one of the new natural cleaners.>>>
thanks,>>>les>>
I couldn't find a link, but I use a 'green' cycling degreaser available >>at Mountain Equipment Coop (a MEC brand product). It's actually green, >>costs about $12CDN for 4L, available in smaller sizes, and when you're >>done with it you leave it out and it dries to a biodegradable solid that >>goes in the trash.>>
It works well compared to other cleaners I have used at the shop. I use >>it for soaking, wiping down, etc.>
Here's the one I've been using. USD$7.58 a gallon at ye olde Home> Depot. Seems pretty green, though it's actually orange.>
Plus, you can add it--directly from the web page--to your bridal> registry >
The URL didn't yield anything in my browser that appeared relevant to the discussion. Given your description of the product however, I am assuming that you are referring to Zep Citrus Cleaner.
The label on the gallon jug of Zep Citrus Cleaner I have in my garage states that it should not be used on aluminum surfaces. That is something one might want to take note of when working around bike components. However, I am unable to find such a warning on Zep's website. The information on their website does list some surface incompatibilities, but AL is not among them. Does anybody know if the formulation of this product has changed (my jug is a couple of years old)? Maybe the formula is the same, but the concern related to contact with AL has since been determined to be unfounded?
I couldn't find a link, but I use a 'green' cycling degreaser >>> available at Mountain Equipment Coop (a MEC brand product). It's >>> actually green, costs about $12CDN for 4L, available in smaller >>> sizes, and when you're done with it you leave it out and it dries to >>> a biodegradable solid that goes in the trash.>>>
It works well compared to other cleaners I have used at the shop. I >>> use it for soaking, wiping down, etc.>>
Here's the one I've been using. USD$7.58 a gallon at ye olde Home>> Depot. Seems pretty green, though it's actually orange.>>
Plus, you can add it--directly from the web page--to your bridal>> registry >>
The URL didn't yield anything in my browser that appeared relevant to > the discussion. Given your description of the product however, I am > assuming that you are referring to Zep Citrus Cleaner.>
The label on the gallon jug of Zep Citrus Cleaner I have in my garage > states that it should not be used on aluminum surfaces. That is > something one might want to take note of when working around bike > components. However, I am unable to find such a warning on Zep's > website. The information on their website does list some surface > incompatibilities, but AL is not among them. Does anybody know if the > formulation of this product has changed (my jug is a couple of years > old)? Maybe the formula is the same, but the concern related to contact > with AL has since been determined to be unfounded?>
-- > Greg Estep
FWIW I have a citrus degreaser from home depot, quite possibly the one in question, that warns not to use it on aluminum.
I can't recommend the MEC stuff highly enough to anyone who can get to a store. It's a cycling specific product, and MEC is leading the field in economically priced, ethically sourced, environmentally sound products. They also have great prices on a lot of brand name bike stuff.
Ken wrote:> "Zog The Undeniable" <hrothgar19@yahoo.com> wrote in message> news:424bd1bc.0@entanet...>
Les wrote:>>
My dad used to use Gasoline to soak his der. and chains and>>>misc bike parts. Is there anything more enviro-freindly?>>>I was thinking of alcohol or one of the new natural cleaners.>>>
Diesel fuel is much safer!>
I find that penetrating fluids like liquid wrench seem to work pretty good> on chains, I remove the chain put it in a container, spray the heck out of> it, let it sit for like 15 or 20 minutes, turn chain over and repeat this> proccess several times. When the fluid at the bottom gets really nasty> looking I stop, hang chain up over the container, let drip then rinse in hot> water, reinstall on bike, and relubricate. This seems to work well for me.>
Liquid wrench is designed as an anti-sieze for undoing stuck threads, similar to WD-40 if I remember right. It does contain some petrolium solvents, but it's not designed to be used as a solvent and it is incredibly wasteful to use it this way. Especially out of a spray can. There are cycling specific, environmentally friendly solvents on the market that would probably be more effective, easier to use, and cheaper. (see my posts near the bottom of the thread)
My dad used to use Gasoline to soak his der. and chains and>>>> misc bike parts. Is there anything more enviro-freindly?>>>> I was thinking of alcohol or one of the new natural cleaners.
Diesel fuel is much safer!
I find that penetrating fluids like liquid wrench seem to work>> pretty good on chains, I remove the chain put it in a container,>> spray the heck out of it, let it sit for like 15 or 20 minutes,>> turn chain over and repeat this process several times. When the>> fluid at the bottom gets really nasty looking I stop, hang chain up>> over the container, let drip then rinse in hot water, reinstall on>> bike, and re-lubricate. This seems to work well for me.
Liquid wrench is designed as an anti-seize for undoing stuck> threads, similar to WD-40 if I remember right. It does contain some> petroleum solvents, but it's not designed to be used as a solvent> and it is incredibly wasteful to use it this way. Especially out of> a spray can. There are cycling specific, environmentally friendly> solvents on the market that would probably be more effective, easier> to use, and cheaper. (see my posts near the bottom of the thread)
Liquid wrench and WD-40 are not anti seize in any form and are merely oily solvents. Anti seize compounds contain flaked soft metals or graphite that prevent galling and welding through metal to metal contact of screws. With a soft metal between pressure faces of threads, a lesser shear force is required to induce motion (loosening) once the screw has settled and been put under tensile load.
<jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org> wrote in message newsQf4e.13268$m31.131648@typhoon.sonic.net...> Jacobe Hazzard writes:>
My dad used to use Gasoline to soak his der. and chains and> >>>> misc bike parts. Is there anything more enviro-freindly?> >>>> I was thinking of alcohol or one of the new natural cleaners.>
Well the op was asking about alternatives to gasoline for solvent purposes, and I find the liquid wrench to be effective for this.
Liquid wrench is designed as an anti-seize for undoing stuck> > threads, similar to WD-40 if I remember right. It does contain some> > petroleum solvents, but it's not designed to be used as a solvent> > and it is incredibly wasteful to use it this way. Especially out of> > a spray can. There are cycling specific, environmentally friendly> > solvents on the market that would probably be more effective, easier> > to use, and cheaper. (see my posts near the bottom of the thread)>
Liquid wrench and WD-40 are not anti seize in any form and are merely> oily solvents. Anti seize compounds contain flaked soft metals or> graphite that prevent galling and welding through metal to metal> contact of screws. With a soft metal between pressure faces of> threads, a lesser shear force is required to induce motion (loosening)> once the screw has settled and been put under tensile load.>
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 21:05:57 -0600, Jim Smith <3.141592six@gmail.com> wrote:
Didn't Richard Pryor get in trouble using a torch around>some Bacardi 151?
No, he got his face flamed when he lit up a spoonful of snort to freebase it. -- Typoes are a feature, not a bug. Some gardening required to reply via email. Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
Amoco used to sell unleaded ``white gas'' when everybody else was leaded, and housewives used the stuff on laundry, though this was discouraged in public by safety-minded handwringers.
Aviation gasoline, available from a handy spigot at the low point of the fuel system on every airplane, was used for cleaning oil screens, leaded or not, by pretty much everybody. -- Ron Hardin rhhardin@mindspring.com
Yes, it's much easier to light alcohols than diesel, but still much>harder than lighting gasoline. An open flame is a very big source of>ignition which you can use to light almost anything vaguely flammable.>Ethanol just isn't volatile enough to produce ignitable mixtures over>an open container at room temperature, unlike gasoline. You can try>this test at home with a metal tray, a spark plug, coil and battery>and a selection of your favourite fuels. Place fuel in tray, mount>spark plug on bracket a few inches above it, make sparks (stand well>back if using gasoline)
Which alcohol are you speaking of? Ispropanol is hard to light, but both methanol and ethanol are fairly easily ignited by a spark in the right place (closer than you describe, but not far enough for safety) as long as there's not a breeze to disperse the gas. The difference is that their fumes are not as subject to pooling, so they don't have the same degree of hazard from ignition by distant sources; the spark needs to be in the area of the interface. It's also harder to reach an ignitable concentration in an enclosed area unless it has no ventilation at all; both methanol and ethanol disperse fast. Flip side: Both are rotten degreasers, both leave water behind when they evaporate, both are skin-absorbable (and methanol metabolizes to a nasty toxin), so they're essentially worthless for cleaning greasy parts. -- Typoes are a feature, not a bug. Some gardening required to reply via email. Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 15:00:34 GMT, jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
Tom Nakashima writes:>
Agree with using paint thinner as a cleaning fluid, but doesn't>> paint thinner penetrate the skin easily? I always wear surgical>> gloves when using paint thinner.>
It doesn't contain the higher volatility fractions and does not>penetrate skin nearly as gasoline or some of the more dangerous>solvents like lacquer thinner or benzene/benzol. Use it with care. >I use an stiff bristled paintbrush to clean parts and avoid longer>contact with the solvent.
The older formulations of Goop hand cleaner used some of the same fractions as are found in mineral spirits, emulsified with some water and other ingredients.
Although infrequent low-duration exposure to mineral spirits poses little hazard, gloves are still a good idea when using it as a parts cleaning solvent. Since it's usually neither difficult nor expensive to reduce the skin exposure to zero that way, it's worthwhile taking the extra step in my opinion. -- Typoes are a feature, not a bug. Some gardening required to reply via email. Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
Squid-in-Training Phil 6 April 2005 10:44:04 [ permanent link ]
"Ron Hardin" <rhhardin@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:425322C0.40BC@mindspring.com...> Amoco used to sell unleaded ``white gas'' when everybody else was> leaded, and housewives used the stuff on laundry, though this was> discouraged in public by safety-minded handwringers.>
Aviation gasoline, available from a handy spigot at the low point> of the fuel system on every airplane, was used for cleaning oil> screens, leaded or not, by pretty much everybody.
Too bad it all directly increases the greenhouse effect, hence the rubber shields on pump nozzles.
"Ron Hardin" <rhhardin@mindspring.com> wrote in message> news:425322C0.40BC@mindspring.com..> > Amoco used to sell unleaded ``white gas'' when everybody else was> > leaded, and housewives used the stuff on laundry, though this was> > discouraged in public by safety-minded handwringers.> >
Aviation gasoline, available from a handy spigot at the low point> > of the fuel system on every airplane, was used for cleaning oil> > screens, leaded or not, by pretty much everybody.>
Too bad it all directly increases the greenhouse effect, hence the rubber> shields on pump nozzles.
After cleaning your chain, the oil/gasoline mixture can be safely disposed of by the back fence. -- Ron Hardin rhhardin@mindspring.com
Squid-in-Training Phil 6 April 2005 17:38:37 [ permanent link ]
Ron Hardin wrote:> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:>>
"Ron Hardin" <rhhardin@mindspring.com> wrote in message>> news:425322C0.40BC@mindspring.com..>>> Amoco used to sell unleaded ``white gas'' when everybody else was>>> leaded, and housewives used the stuff on laundry, though this was>>> discouraged in public by safety-minded handwringers.>>>
Aviation gasoline, available from a handy spigot at the low point>>> of the fuel system on every airplane, was used for cleaning oil>>> screens, leaded or not, by pretty much everybody.>>
Too bad it all directly increases the greenhouse effect, hence the>> rubber shields on pump nozzles.>
After cleaning your chain, the oil/gasoline mixture can be safely> disposed of by the back fence.
Are you being facetious? Whether it be burned off to produce pollutants or dumped in the backyard, it all ends up back in the ecological system. Although minute, backyard dumping will end up back in yours and your fellow citizens' bodies through groundwater. -- Phil, Squid-in-Training
"Ron Hardin" <rhhardin@mindspring.com> wrote in message >news:425322C0.40BC@mindspring.com...>> Amoco used to sell unleaded ``white gas'' when everybody else was>> leaded, and housewives used the stuff on laundry, though this was>> discouraged in public by safety-minded handwringers.>
Too bad it all directly increases the greenhouse effect, hence the rubber >shields on pump nozzles.
The main problem with evaporative fuel emissions is photochemical smog generation, not greenhouse gasses. The fuel that gets burned is the big culprit for those. -- Typoes are a feature, not a bug. Some gardening required to reply via email. Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
Ron Hardin wrote:>> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:>>>
"Ron Hardin" <rhhardin@mindspring.com> wrote in message>>> news:425322C0.40BC@mindspring.com..>>>> Amoco used to sell unleaded ``white gas'' when everybody else was>>>> leaded, and housewives used the stuff on laundry, though this was>>>> discouraged in public by safety-minded handwringers.>>>>
Aviation gasoline, available from a handy spigot at the low point>>>> of the fuel system on every airplane, was used for cleaning oil>>>> screens, leaded or not, by pretty much everybody.>>>
Too bad it all directly increases the greenhouse effect, hence the>>> rubber shields on pump nozzles.>>
After cleaning your chain, the oil/gasoline mixture can be safely>> disposed of by the back fence.>
Are you being facetious? Whether it be burned off to produce pollutants or >dumped in the backyard, it all ends up back in the ecological system. >Although minute, backyard dumping will end up back in yours and your fellow >citizens' bodies through groundwater.
In most of this area, municipal drinking water wells are drawing from strata where the water is much older than the Eurpean settlements of the continent. Of course, somewhere down the road a few hundred or thousand years, the eventual byproducts or surface dumping and spills may become pollutants at that depth. However, the main hazard today is that the runoff produces estuary pollution which can end up in the drinking water drawn from reservoirs *now*, and it can also contaminate seafood. You're in Florida, where deep wells produce good flows of relatively recent-age water easily due to the porosity of the overlying strata. In much of the nation and world, however, deep well water is *old*, which is why it's not contaminated...while surface water is filthy. Before we got to the point where deep wells could no longer supply enough drinking water, the fact that rivers were sewers and waste dumps wasn't seen as a problem. Now, however, it is...and the number one source of current river contaminants in many areas is from *farming*. -- Typoes are a feature, not a bug. Some gardening required to reply via email. Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
Ron Hardin wrote:>>> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:>>>>
"Ron Hardin" <rhhardin@mindspring.com> wrote in message>>>> news:425322C0.40BC@mindspring.com..>>>>> Amoco used to sell unleaded ``white gas'' when everybody else was>>>>> leaded, and housewives used the stuff on laundry, though this was>>>>> discouraged in public by safety-minded handwringers.>>>>>
Aviation gasoline, available from a handy spigot at the low point>>>>> of the fuel system on every airplane, was used for cleaning oil>>>>> screens, leaded or not, by pretty much everybody.>>>>
Too bad it all directly increases the greenhouse effect, hence the>>>> rubber shields on pump nozzles.>>>
After cleaning your chain, the oil/gasoline mixture can be safely>>> disposed of by the back fence.>>
Are you being facetious? Whether it be burned off to produce>> pollutants or dumped in the backyard, it all ends up back in the>> ecological system. Although minute, backyard dumping will end up>> back in yours and your fellow citizens' bodies through groundwater.>
In most of this area, municipal drinking water wells are drawing from> strata where the water is much older than the Eurpean settlements of> the continent. Of course, somewhere down the road a few hundred or> thousand years, the eventual byproducts or surface dumping and spills> may become pollutants at that depth. However, the main hazard today> is that the runoff produces estuary pollution which can end up in the> drinking water drawn from reservoirs *now*, and it can also> contaminate seafood. You're in Florida, where deep wells produce good> flows of relatively recent-age water easily due to the porosity of the> overlying strata. In much of the nation and world, however, deep well> water is *old*, which is why it's not contaminated...while surface> water is filthy. Before we got to the point where deep wells could no> longer supply enough drinking water, the fact that rivers were sewers> and waste dumps wasn't seen as a problem. Now, however, it is...and> the number one source of current river contaminants in many areas is> from *farming*.
But that still doesn't have much to do with the fact that dumping such pollutants doesn't help *anybody*. -- Phil, Squid-in-Training
"Ron Hardin" <rhhardin@mindspring.com> wrote in message>> news:425322C0.40BC@mindspring.com...>>> Amoco used to sell unleaded ``white gas'' when everybody else was>>> leaded, and housewives used the stuff on laundry, though this was>>> discouraged in public by safety-minded handwringers.>>
Too bad it all directly increases the greenhouse effect, hence the>> rubber shields on pump nozzles.>
The main problem with evaporative fuel emissions is photochemical smog> generation, not greenhouse gasses. The fuel that gets burned is the> big culprit for those.
I said "greenhouse effect" not "greenhouse gases." -- Phil, Squid-in-Training
Straight biodiesel is an EXCELLENT degreaser BUT it will soften some plastics and finishes. It is safe on all drivetrain components but not all finishes or accessories. Look for 100% biodiesel.
If oyu use it to clean your chain, the biodiesel is now contaminated with your chain lube so dispose responsibly in any case. You also need to keep it dry because water will eventually cause it to become rancid. A bit of Epsom Salt (tablespoon) (magnesium sulfate), heated in the oven to 200 C for 30 minutes can be added to dirty biodiesel to absorb water. It will settle to the bottom and clump any sediment. It is perfectly safe...
Werehatrack wrote:>>....In much of the nation and world, however, deep well>> water is *old*, which is why it's not contaminated...while surface>> water is filthy. Before we got to the point where deep wells could no>> longer supply enough drinking water, the fact that rivers were sewers>> and waste dumps wasn't seen as a problem. Now, however, it is...and>> the number one source of current river contaminants in many areas is>> from *farming*.>
But that still doesn't have much to do with the fact that dumping such >pollutants doesn't help *anybody*.
There is still the short-sighted perception that dumping the out on the ground neatly solves the problem of what to do with it *for the dumper*, and doesn't seem to have any immediate ill effects *for them*. And indeed, this way of viewing things - ignoring the effects that either develop slowly or only happen to somebody downstream - is a good bit of what got us into the mess that we've been in for the past couple of hundred years in places. (Along the Rhine and the Thames, even longer.) -- Typoes are a feature, not a bug. Some gardening required to reply via email. Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 05:46:53 -0500, "Revision" <kentbetts@notechispspam.com> wrote:
Use charcoal lighter fluid. Then pour the remainder on some charcoal and>cook some steaks.
For that extra metallo-organic seasoning that lighter fluid by itself lacks?
(I just use mesquite in the big side-firebox grill, and get it going with oak leaves and twigs from the back yard, but then, that's what I have available...) -- Typoes are a feature, not a bug. Some gardening required to reply via email. Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
<jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org> wrote in message news:mmd3e.12958$m31.130298@typhoon.sonic.net...> Tom Nakashima writes:>
My dad used to use Gasoline to soak his derailleur and chains>>>>> and misc bike parts. Is there anything more enviro-friendly?>
I'd also think "user-friendly".>
Gas is nasty stuff safety-wise.>
It also contains lighter fractions that penetrate human skin easily>>> and are retained by the body. It is bad stuff all around for use>>> other than automotive fuel. If you want to use a petroleum>>> derivative, paint thinner is the least expensive and does at least>>> as good a job as other such liquids.>
Agree with using paint thinner as a cleaning fluid, but doesn't>> paint thinner penetrate the skin easily? I always wear surgical>> gloves when using paint thinner.>
It doesn't contain the higher volatility fractions and does not> penetrate skin nearly as gasoline or some of the more dangerous> solvents like lacquer thinner or benzene/benzol. Use it with care.> I use an stiff bristled paintbrush to clean parts and avoid longer> contact with the solvent.>
Not quite. White gas is actually LIGHTER than motor or aviation gasolines. It is high in hexane and heptanes and thusly, has a very low octane index. It is most commonly a heavy component of natural gas liquids.
Almost always caused by smoking. Probably never caused by cleaning chains. Very nasty disease.
i strongly recommend avoiding volatile fluids> staying downwind> and breathing deep i clean air> as an excercise> go paint thinner> rubbing rags go a long way> brushing> ect
i have emphysema> i strongly recommend ;life long avoidance of volatile cleaning fluids> detergent> rags> brushes> paint thinner> staying upwind> masks> aqua lungs> pumps> the lung is fragile> check your butcher> or open the dog
Unfortunately it is illegal for butchers to sell lungs in the US. The courts will frown on tinkering with the dog too. Makes it harder to celebrate Burns on the 25th too.
On 13 Apr 2005 04:54:05 -0700, "Sport Pilot" <hppilot001@cs.com> wrote:
Weisse Luft wrote:>> Not quite. White gas is actually LIGHTER than motor or aviation>> gasolines. It is high in hexane and heptanes and thusly, has a very>> low octane index. It is most commonly a heavy component of natural>gas>> liquids.>>
-->> Weisse Luft>
How do you intrepret that white gas is lighter? The low octane would>indicate that it is heavier not lighter.
Smaller molecules weigh less
Kinky Cowboy*
*Batteries not included May contain traces of nuts Your milage may vary
How do you intrepret that white gas is lighter? The low octane would>>indicate that it is heavier not lighter.
Not quite so fast. Oddly enough, while 100% octane has a theoretical octane rating of 100, 100% heptane is given an octane rating of 0. Octane testing engines are calibrated with such a mixture...
Octane index has very little to do with molecular weight or distillation point.
Weisse Luft wrote:>>>How do you intrepret that white gas is lighter? The low octane would>>>indicate that it is heavier not lighter.>
Not quite so fast. Oddly enough, while 100% octane has a theoretical> octane rating of 100, 100% heptane is given an octane rating of 0. > Octane testing engines are calibrated with such a mixture...>
Octane index has very little to do with molecular weight or distillation> point.
Agreed. Even with the octane and heptane used for octane level calibration, the major difference is not just the extra carbon, but that it's actually a particular highly branched form of iso-octane while the heptane used is the straight-chain form.
Weisse Luft wrote:>> >> Not quite. White gas is actually LIGHTER than motor or aviation>> >> gasolines. It is high in hexane and heptanes and thusly, has a>very>> >> low octane index. It is most commonly a heavy component of>natural>> >gas>> >> liquids.>> >>
-->> >> Weisse Luft>> >
How do you intrepret that white gas is lighter? The low octane>would>> >indicate that it is heavier not lighter.>>
Smaller molecules weigh less>>
Kinky Cowboy*>>
Read this MSDS sheet, this is heavier than gas, higher specific gravity>and high flash point.>
My comment was predicated on the earlier assertion that the "white gas" being discussed was a hexane/heptane mix. If it's an aromatic, all bets are off.
People seem to be mixing up a lot of different concepts within the terms "heavier" and "lighter", including molecular weight, density of liquid, flash point, vapour pressure, and (this is where iso-octane becomes relevant) resistance to pre-ignition in a spark ignition internal combustion engine.
Kinky Cowboy*
*Batteries not included May contain traces of nuts Your milage may vary
