EPA: Morons with a mandate, If you have ever delt with the "eco terorists" then you will understand. In my work I have had to file needless test and documentation, just to prove that I don't use the metals they say I use yet the metals that I do use (Silver) they have no intrest in testing for, MORONS.
I think this article is on a different scale than our puny little guns.. They are talking about huge factories and cars.
I would tend to think not as there are many companies and industries that use pressurized CO2 for a specific purpose at which point it is emitted as a different substance if emitted at all. The CO2 that these industries need comes from companies that specifically produce and pressurize CO2 for the intended purpose. If anything I could see the price of CO2 coming down as recent research is starting to show that CO2 can be used in a much wider range of capacities than previously thought. Plus, if the companies that are being restricted by the EPA start collecting and filtering emitted CO2, then their could be a "flood" of cheaper pressurized cannon power on the market. Of course that last part is all conjecture and a bit of wishful thinking, but hey who knows.
But we are saving the planet (I am being SARCASTIC here). Using fraud science to justify taking more money out of everyone's wallet. Al (I am satan) Gore will get rich off this scheme.
Doubt there will be a flood of Co2 on the market... but the point remains, Co2 is generated as a byproduct of whatever the facility is trying to do. That's what they are trying to reduce; I find it hard to believe the effect will be more wide spread than putting Co2 scrubbers on the factories chimneys.
I suspect the net effect will, at best, be a price increase in our compressed gasses (all of them) due to the additional costs that will be hoisted onto power generation plants (minimum. there are a whole host of supporting industries that will be affected, and those costs will be passed along to the end user). Add to that the increased transportation cost as this will drive up the cost of fuel and vehicles manufactured in the states (both large emitters)... No matter what gas one goes to, this will push the price up. And then there is raw material smelting mills, foundries, etc all of which will drive the cost of US procured raw material up. I say US procured because their ain't a snowball's chance in hell that the main non-us sources of raw materials, etc, will similarly restrict and actually enforce said restrictions on their power generation plants, factories, foundries, etc. That being said, considering that everyone and their cousin will be suing the EPA over this, I suspect it will be quite a few years before they can implement much of anything.
The article isn't talking about bottled CO2, but just in case, there's always the option of using HPA, or carrying onboard air compressors. Rob
Are these the same people that suggested to save the trees by not using paper but instead use plastic bags. Now we have to deal with the gazillion plastic bags in our landfills and forests. Yeah we saved some trees but now their choked with bags caught in the branches and piled up on the forest floor. Don't forget all the bags that end up in our oceans. Yep plastic bags sure was the way to go there.
You hit the nail on the head Curt but this might be the EPA's next brain child save one thing only to damage or kill another.
The drawback of using HPA is that a drier system is required to remove as much moisture as possible or everything freezes. Just look at when we get a CO2 leak, the reg etc. ices up nicely. J
Hmm...Are you sure we're talking about the same thing? HPA is compressed air. There's no freezing involved. That's why HPA has become an attractive alternative to CO2. Rob
If the air used is not dry, meaning very low humidity, the moisture will freeze when the air is released. This will plug up lines and fittings. We use HPA on the submarine every day and have a huge bank of dessicators to remove the moisture. J
CO2 bottles get cold (and moisture condenses on them and freezes) because the CO2 inside must boil from a liquid into a gas. This phase change consumes a lot of energy, which we observe as getting very cold. True, there is some temperature change due to the ideal gas law, and the expansion of said gas. However, most of the temperature change is due to that boiling. In a HPA bottle, there is no phase change, only expansion. Thus the largest contributor to freezing bottles and regulators is eliminated. While a HPA bottle can still get cold if vented fast enough, it doesn't freeze. Let me give you an example. I recently got one of my HPA bottles hydrotested. Upon completion of the hydrotesting, the licensed airsmith accidentally mixed up the two burst disks, putting the 1.8K disk on the bottle itself (instead of the 5k disk), and the 5k disk downstream of the primary regulator (800PSI). When I filled the bottle, the 1.8K burst disk blew right at 1,800 PSI, and very rapidly vented the bottle. The bottle, which had been slightly warm to the touch from filling, simply dropped back down to room temperature. CO2 displaces all the air in a CO2 bottle, so there is no moisture inside to freeze the system. Since CO2 bottles still freeze despite being perfectly dry inside, the freezing comes from another cause. I believe it actually comes from moisture condensing out of the air onto the cold bottle, regulator, and other components, which is then frozen. Moisture inside the tank is not the cause of freezing the system. The bank of desiccators on the submarine are there because moisture can cause other issues with compressed air systems, such as air tools and air-operated valves in the engine room, that might be undesirable in a submarine.
I think the crew of the Thresher might disagree that the dessicators are there due to engine room valves and air tools...
Sorry Gascan, I hate to disagree but we don't have any air operated valves ( hydraulic and manual only) and don't use air tools on our boats. Our hpa system runs at about 4000 psi and I have personnally stood with a heat gun in an attempt to thaw frozen lines that are plugged on the inside with ice when one of our reducers let go. That particular reducer is set to 780 psi. I suspect that the air used to hydrotest your bottle may already be dried. J
Let me try to clear this up. We use both HPA tanks and CO2 bottles in our battles. CO2 bottles ice up, occasionally. HPA bottles haven't, not once. I have found no evidence that a paintball-style HPA tank can freeze up. If it could, there would be no point in using HPA as an alternative to CO2. Not talking about submarines at sea, here, or any other application. But don't take my word for it. Google and try to find any evidence that HPA tanks freeze in either RC warship combat or paintball. If you find anything, please share it. Rob
I'm not that worried about it to be honest. I have never used HPA for RC combat, I was just passing on what learned from my experience on the boat. J
Hydrotest is an illuminating word! Hydro means water, Not water suspended in air. A Hydrotest is where a cylinder is filled with water and brought up to 5/3rds of it's working pressure. A very precise measurement is made of the expansion of the material in the cylinder when it is returned to an unpressurised state. Pressurizing a cylinder is fairly easy to do because water is basically a non-compressible material. The reason it is filled with water is that if it breaks at this point, there will be a short spirt of water and nothing else. If it was filled with compressed gas, the violently decompressing gas would have to be contained. HPA has to be filtered to remove water. This is a normal part of filling a scuba tank. Oxygen under pressure does a better job of rusting materials and causes other problems in a sealed system. That doesn't mean that the water removal systems are perfect! When they don't work as desired, there are negative side effects!
