Yes it's physically impossible for our hemisphere to exchange
atmospheres. Unless you can make the water in your sink to drain
clockwise in our northern side.
And I say polar flip, as in magnetic north and south poles, it's
recorded in every rock:
http://www.classzone.com/books/earth...?chapter_no=08
Understand?????????
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Stephen Cowell wrote:
>
> The earth has not flipped over... the continents have
> drifted, but not that much since KT. BTW, when I
> say KT, that refers to the Cretaceous-Tertiary
> Boundary where the iridium layer is found.
> The KT boundary was formed 63 million years
> ago at the end of the Cretaceous era... watch the
> animation on the above link (you'll have to look
> carefully, the animation covers almost a billion
> year period).
>
> Hilarious! 'Crystallinks.com'... 'Psychic... Therapist...
> Reiki Master... Teacher'.
>
> Here's a big funny: "In my opinion - the Earth will loose
> its magnetics - the grids that form the consciousness
> of our reality will collapse - as we shift into the next
> level of consciousness".
>
> I wasn't aware that you were a devotee, Bill! What
> color is *your* aura? Had any psychic cleansing
> done lately?
> __
> Steve
> .

 

Except, the liberals have banned R-12, based on their ozone
theories from satellite inferred frequencies, that were not in place
until after we were grown and out of school. Like, maybe these holes
have been with earth all along, and are necessary, like it's time to
melt the Antarctica, change the ocean currents to start the coming ice
age. A time to be born and a time to die.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Jeff Strickland wrote:
>
> "JohnM" <eaotis@cbpu.com> wrote in message
> news:42a55327$0$14971$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.co m...
> > Jeff Strickland wrote:
> >> "JohnM" <eaotis@cbpu.com> wrote in message
> >> news:42a4c019$0$14970$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.co m...
> >>
> >>>Jeff Strickland wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>"JohnM" <eaotis@cbpu.com> wrote in message
> >>>>news:42a29c52$0$14983$9a6e19ea@news.newshostin g.com...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Jeff Strickland wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>I hadn't heard that there was any problem with making R134, and I am
> >>>>>>surprised that anybody is reporting trouble finding it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>And, I agree, going back to R12 isn't gonna happen. It's very
> >>>>>>expensive, and there are seriouis compatibility issues that add to
> >>>>>>the cost. I think one is going to spend the summer with the windows
> >>>>>>rolled down before one goes back to R12.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>R12 is cheaper to produce than 134. It's pretty non-toxic too, which
> >>>>>can't be said for 134. Political creatures have made 12 expensive.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>It doesn't matter that it is cheaper to make, it is essentially illegal
> >>>>to use in the USA. R12 eats the ozone layer, or whatever, and is a
> >>>>banned substance. It also does not play well with others in the
> >>>>neighborhood, R134 for example. If your system is designed to run on
> >>>>R134, it won't work right on R12 anyway, and if you want to convert your
> >>>>factory R12 system back to R12 after retrofitting it to R134, then it
> >>>>will be costly. You can't buy R12 on the open market, so you'll have to
> >>>>find a crook that will sell it to you, or pay to evacuate your system
> >>>>and refill it. You are not going to top off a low R134 system with R12,
> >>>>if for no other reason than the fittings are different sizes.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>Top off a 134 system with 12 and it's life will be measured in weeks, at
> >>>best.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Top off a 134 system with 12 and measure the life in hours - which is
> >> pretty
> >> much what I said earlier.
> >>
> >
> > Not to be disputatious, but that's not at all what you said earlier. I'm
> > not going to quote you, just go back and look.
>
> It is what I said. Well, I said that R12 and R134 do not paly well together.
> I did not give a time span for the failure to occur. The point is that R12
> and R134 can not be mixed.
>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>It does matter if it's cheaper to make, and it also matters if it's more
> >>>efficient (which it is). Laws being passed in the name of doing
> >>>something, anything, just to be seen to be doing something do not remove
> >>>the "mattering" of a subject which they address. The fact that
> >>>refrigeration now costs more, from every angle, for everyone, does
> >>>matter.
> >>>
> >>>As another poster pointed out, it's not at all illegal to use.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> It isn't illegal to use, but you can't simply open the valve and let it
> >> out,
> >> like was once the practice. It has to be captured now, and they make sure
> >> it
> >> is captured by raising the price. If they raise the price of the new
> >> refrigerant, then buy back the captured refrigerant, then the new
> >> refrigerant becomes reasonably priced.
> >
> > I'm not sure I agree with that. Market pressure does not always affect
> > price- when the circle of producers is small enough market pressure can
> > simply affect production; if the supply is high, sometimes it's more
> > profitable to decrease production and allow the price to remain high.
> > Eventually it'll sell. I'm not saying that you are absolutely wrong, I'm
> > saying that there are exceptions to the supply/demand law and it's never
> > safe to assume otherwise.
> >
>
> The topic here is R12, a declining market in the USA. If the captured R12 is
> collected, then it has value that offsets the cost of new R12. This is the
> same as lowering the operating costs for the AC shops. If R12 was sold at a
> high price, and there was no credit given for the captured product, then the
> operating costs would be high. But if the captured product is credited
> against purchases of new product, then the actual cost of the new product is
> lowered. If somebody goes in and buys a 30 pound tank of R12, it will cost
> upwards of $900, but I have no idea what the captured product is worht in
> terms of a credit. What I will say is that the odds are good that the OP
> hasn't got a tank of used R12 to turn in, and he isn't going to use 30
> pounds of R12 in a single car in his entire life, and the life of his
> decendants. This means that he isn't going to get his hands on R12 anytime
> soon in a quantity that is actually useful to a guy working on his car in
> the driveway.
>
> >>When we were kids, we could buy a set
> >> of guages and a can or two of R12 and go home and service the A/C system
> >> in
> >> the driveway. We can't do that anymore because the R12 has gone up in
> >> price.
> >> If we could capture the R12 that we used to release, then the cost of
> >> self-service would come way down. We can't capture the R12, so the cost
> >> of
> >> self-service is very high. The equipment needed to capture and recycle
> >> the
> >> R12 is expensive, and the only way to justify the cost is to ammortize it
> >> over many operations.
> >
> > The reason why the recovery equipment is expensive is due to government
> > regulation. The cheapest recovery device I've heard of was a R12 tank,
> > with a line to the system, in a bucket; fill the bucket with liquid
> > nitrogen and give it a few minutes.. the refrigerant will not only
> > condense in the tank, it'll freeze. You won't get any more out with any
> > pump, no matter what. Pretty cheap, but not approved.
> >
>
> I don't give a rat's *** why the equipment is expensive. It is expensive,
> and most guys that work on the car in the driveway are not going to have the
> equipment that is needed. And nobody is going to have a bucket of liquid
> nitrogen that they can use to suck the R12 out of the family sedan with.
>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>As far as the ozone layer story.. I'm not convinced we affect it that
> >>>much. If we did, wouldn't it be in the Northern Hemisphere? I won't get
> >>>into politics here, I'll just say that there's some subjects which get a
> >>>lot of attention that I put little stock in. Global warming is another.
> >>>I don't want to argue about it, if someone wants to argue I suggest they
> >>>do some open-minded googling.
> >>>
> >>>John
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> It doesn't really matter what you think of the ozone depletion issue.
> >> There
> >> are rules that have been developed, and they arise out of the ozone
> >> depletion issue, and we have to live by the rules whether we agree with
> >> them
> >> or not. Personally, I think I suould be able to go into the vault and
> >> haul
> >> off a wheel barrel full of money, but there are bank robbing laws that I
> >> have to live by whether I agree with them or not.
> >
> > Of course it matters what I think about the issue. You would surrender
> > your opinions for a rulemaker who would tell you what to do, and how? Not
> > me.
> >
> > I disagree that the "rules that have been developed" have much at all to
> > do with the ozone issue. Perhaps that's just my natural skeptcism, but
> > that's my opinion.
> >
> > Now, don't go telling me that what I think doesn't matter, and then go on
> > to tell me what you think, which, based on your reasoning, doesn't matter?
> > Leave the bank's money alone..
> >
>
> What I think doesn't matter either. NOBODY is going to walk into an auto
> parts store inthe USA and buy a can of R12 and take it home and squirt it
> into his car.
>
> R12 and R134 do not mix. You can not revert back to R12 in a system that has
> been made to take R134, but you can still change an R12 system to take R134.
>
> R134 is readily available at any auto parts store, and if they don't have
> any it's only due to being out of stock at the moment.
>
> >>
> >> So, we are back to Square One. Somebody is looking for R134 that he is
> >> having trouble sourcing. He didn't say, but I gathered from post that he
> >> has a system that once took R12, but has been retrofitted to R134, and he
> >> wanted to know about switching back to R12. I do not think he CAN switch
> >> back, 1.) because the laws will not allow a conversion in that direction,
> >> and 2.) because there are serious chemical reaction issues that arise if
> >> a
> >> full evacuation is not accomplished.
> >>
> >> None of the pollitical issues make a bit of difference. We have a reality
> >> that says R134 is required.
> >
> > Yes.. but that reality is not my fault- I'm willing to have opinions that
> > aren't exactly politically correct. Join me, enough of us might be able to
> > restore some sanity to the world..
> >
>
> Nobody is blaming you for the situation. Have all of the opinions you want,
> and maybe something will change as a result. In the mean time, you have to
> play by the rules that are in effect. I may or may not share your opinion,
> but I still have to play by the same rules.
>
> The rules say we have to use R134 if we want to charge our own A/C system,
> and not spend a small fortune buying recovery equipment that will never be
> fully utilized working on our own car at home in the driveway.

 

Except, the liberals have banned R-12, based on their ozone
theories from satellite inferred frequencies, that were not in place
until after we were grown and out of school. Like, maybe these holes
have been with earth all along, and are necessary, like it's time to
melt the Antarctica, change the ocean currents to start the coming ice
age. A time to be born and a time to die.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Jeff Strickland wrote:
>
> "JohnM" <eaotis@cbpu.com> wrote in message
> news:42a55327$0$14971$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.co m...
> > Jeff Strickland wrote:
> >> "JohnM" <eaotis@cbpu.com> wrote in message
> >> news:42a4c019$0$14970$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.co m...
> >>
> >>>Jeff Strickland wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>"JohnM" <eaotis@cbpu.com> wrote in message
> >>>>news:42a29c52$0$14983$9a6e19ea@news.newshostin g.com...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Jeff Strickland wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>I hadn't heard that there was any problem with making R134, and I am
> >>>>>>surprised that anybody is reporting trouble finding it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>And, I agree, going back to R12 isn't gonna happen. It's very
> >>>>>>expensive, and there are seriouis compatibility issues that add to
> >>>>>>the cost. I think one is going to spend the summer with the windows
> >>>>>>rolled down before one goes back to R12.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>R12 is cheaper to produce than 134. It's pretty non-toxic too, which
> >>>>>can't be said for 134. Political creatures have made 12 expensive.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>It doesn't matter that it is cheaper to make, it is essentially illegal
> >>>>to use in the USA. R12 eats the ozone layer, or whatever, and is a
> >>>>banned substance. It also does not play well with others in the
> >>>>neighborhood, R134 for example. If your system is designed to run on
> >>>>R134, it won't work right on R12 anyway, and if you want to convert your
> >>>>factory R12 system back to R12 after retrofitting it to R134, then it
> >>>>will be costly. You can't buy R12 on the open market, so you'll have to
> >>>>find a crook that will sell it to you, or pay to evacuate your system
> >>>>and refill it. You are not going to top off a low R134 system with R12,
> >>>>if for no other reason than the fittings are different sizes.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>Top off a 134 system with 12 and it's life will be measured in weeks, at
> >>>best.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Top off a 134 system with 12 and measure the life in hours - which is
> >> pretty
> >> much what I said earlier.
> >>
> >
> > Not to be disputatious, but that's not at all what you said earlier. I'm
> > not going to quote you, just go back and look.
>
> It is what I said. Well, I said that R12 and R134 do not paly well together.
> I did not give a time span for the failure to occur. The point is that R12
> and R134 can not be mixed.
>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>It does matter if it's cheaper to make, and it also matters if it's more
> >>>efficient (which it is). Laws being passed in the name of doing
> >>>something, anything, just to be seen to be doing something do not remove
> >>>the "mattering" of a subject which they address. The fact that
> >>>refrigeration now costs more, from every angle, for everyone, does
> >>>matter.
> >>>
> >>>As another poster pointed out, it's not at all illegal to use.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> It isn't illegal to use, but you can't simply open the valve and let it
> >> out,
> >> like was once the practice. It has to be captured now, and they make sure
> >> it
> >> is captured by raising the price. If they raise the price of the new
> >> refrigerant, then buy back the captured refrigerant, then the new
> >> refrigerant becomes reasonably priced.
> >
> > I'm not sure I agree with that. Market pressure does not always affect
> > price- when the circle of producers is small enough market pressure can
> > simply affect production; if the supply is high, sometimes it's more
> > profitable to decrease production and allow the price to remain high.
> > Eventually it'll sell. I'm not saying that you are absolutely wrong, I'm
> > saying that there are exceptions to the supply/demand law and it's never
> > safe to assume otherwise.
> >
>
> The topic here is R12, a declining market in the USA. If the captured R12 is
> collected, then it has value that offsets the cost of new R12. This is the
> same as lowering the operating costs for the AC shops. If R12 was sold at a
> high price, and there was no credit given for the captured product, then the
> operating costs would be high. But if the captured product is credited
> against purchases of new product, then the actual cost of the new product is
> lowered. If somebody goes in and buys a 30 pound tank of R12, it will cost
> upwards of $900, but I have no idea what the captured product is worht in
> terms of a credit. What I will say is that the odds are good that the OP
> hasn't got a tank of used R12 to turn in, and he isn't going to use 30
> pounds of R12 in a single car in his entire life, and the life of his
> decendants. This means that he isn't going to get his hands on R12 anytime
> soon in a quantity that is actually useful to a guy working on his car in
> the driveway.
>
> >>When we were kids, we could buy a set
> >> of guages and a can or two of R12 and go home and service the A/C system
> >> in
> >> the driveway. We can't do that anymore because the R12 has gone up in
> >> price.
> >> If we could capture the R12 that we used to release, then the cost of
> >> self-service would come way down. We can't capture the R12, so the cost
> >> of
> >> self-service is very high. The equipment needed to capture and recycle
> >> the
> >> R12 is expensive, and the only way to justify the cost is to ammortize it
> >> over many operations.
> >
> > The reason why the recovery equipment is expensive is due to government
> > regulation. The cheapest recovery device I've heard of was a R12 tank,
> > with a line to the system, in a bucket; fill the bucket with liquid
> > nitrogen and give it a few minutes.. the refrigerant will not only
> > condense in the tank, it'll freeze. You won't get any more out with any
> > pump, no matter what. Pretty cheap, but not approved.
> >
>
> I don't give a rat's *** why the equipment is expensive. It is expensive,
> and most guys that work on the car in the driveway are not going to have the
> equipment that is needed. And nobody is going to have a bucket of liquid
> nitrogen that they can use to suck the R12 out of the family sedan with.
>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>As far as the ozone layer story.. I'm not convinced we affect it that
> >>>much. If we did, wouldn't it be in the Northern Hemisphere? I won't get
> >>>into politics here, I'll just say that there's some subjects which get a
> >>>lot of attention that I put little stock in. Global warming is another.
> >>>I don't want to argue about it, if someone wants to argue I suggest they
> >>>do some open-minded googling.
> >>>
> >>>John
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> It doesn't really matter what you think of the ozone depletion issue.
> >> There
> >> are rules that have been developed, and they arise out of the ozone
> >> depletion issue, and we have to live by the rules whether we agree with
> >> them
> >> or not. Personally, I think I suould be able to go into the vault and
> >> haul
> >> off a wheel barrel full of money, but there are bank robbing laws that I
> >> have to live by whether I agree with them or not.
> >
> > Of course it matters what I think about the issue. You would surrender
> > your opinions for a rulemaker who would tell you what to do, and how? Not
> > me.
> >
> > I disagree that the "rules that have been developed" have much at all to
> > do with the ozone issue. Perhaps that's just my natural skeptcism, but
> > that's my opinion.
> >
> > Now, don't go telling me that what I think doesn't matter, and then go on
> > to tell me what you think, which, based on your reasoning, doesn't matter?
> > Leave the bank's money alone..
> >
>
> What I think doesn't matter either. NOBODY is going to walk into an auto
> parts store inthe USA and buy a can of R12 and take it home and squirt it
> into his car.
>
> R12 and R134 do not mix. You can not revert back to R12 in a system that has
> been made to take R134, but you can still change an R12 system to take R134.
>
> R134 is readily available at any auto parts store, and if they don't have
> any it's only due to being out of stock at the moment.
>
> >>
> >> So, we are back to Square One. Somebody is looking for R134 that he is
> >> having trouble sourcing. He didn't say, but I gathered from post that he
> >> has a system that once took R12, but has been retrofitted to R134, and he
> >> wanted to know about switching back to R12. I do not think he CAN switch
> >> back, 1.) because the laws will not allow a conversion in that direction,
> >> and 2.) because there are serious chemical reaction issues that arise if
> >> a
> >> full evacuation is not accomplished.
> >>
> >> None of the pollitical issues make a bit of difference. We have a reality
> >> that says R134 is required.
> >
> > Yes.. but that reality is not my fault- I'm willing to have opinions that
> > aren't exactly politically correct. Join me, enough of us might be able to
> > restore some sanity to the world..
> >
>
> Nobody is blaming you for the situation. Have all of the opinions you want,
> and maybe something will change as a result. In the mean time, you have to
> play by the rules that are in effect. I may or may not share your opinion,
> but I still have to play by the same rules.
>
> The rules say we have to use R134 if we want to charge our own A/C system,
> and not spend a small fortune buying recovery equipment that will never be
> fully utilized working on our own car at home in the driveway.

 

Except, the liberals have banned R-12, based on their ozone
theories from satellite inferred frequencies, that were not in place
until after we were grown and out of school. Like, maybe these holes
have been with earth all along, and are necessary, like it's time to
melt the Antarctica, change the ocean currents to start the coming ice
age. A time to be born and a time to die.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Jeff Strickland wrote:
>
> "JohnM" <eaotis@cbpu.com> wrote in message
> news:42a55327$0$14971$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.co m...
> > Jeff Strickland wrote:
> >> "JohnM" <eaotis@cbpu.com> wrote in message
> >> news:42a4c019$0$14970$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.co m...
> >>
> >>>Jeff Strickland wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>"JohnM" <eaotis@cbpu.com> wrote in message
> >>>>news:42a29c52$0$14983$9a6e19ea@news.newshostin g.com...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Jeff Strickland wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>I hadn't heard that there was any problem with making R134, and I am
> >>>>>>surprised that anybody is reporting trouble finding it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>And, I agree, going back to R12 isn't gonna happen. It's very
> >>>>>>expensive, and there are seriouis compatibility issues that add to
> >>>>>>the cost. I think one is going to spend the summer with the windows
> >>>>>>rolled down before one goes back to R12.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>R12 is cheaper to produce than 134. It's pretty non-toxic too, which
> >>>>>can't be said for 134. Political creatures have made 12 expensive.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>It doesn't matter that it is cheaper to make, it is essentially illegal
> >>>>to use in the USA. R12 eats the ozone layer, or whatever, and is a
> >>>>banned substance. It also does not play well with others in the
> >>>>neighborhood, R134 for example. If your system is designed to run on
> >>>>R134, it won't work right on R12 anyway, and if you want to convert your
> >>>>factory R12 system back to R12 after retrofitting it to R134, then it
> >>>>will be costly. You can't buy R12 on the open market, so you'll have to
> >>>>find a crook that will sell it to you, or pay to evacuate your system
> >>>>and refill it. You are not going to top off a low R134 system with R12,
> >>>>if for no other reason than the fittings are different sizes.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>Top off a 134 system with 12 and it's life will be measured in weeks, at
> >>>best.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Top off a 134 system with 12 and measure the life in hours - which is
> >> pretty
> >> much what I said earlier.
> >>
> >
> > Not to be disputatious, but that's not at all what you said earlier. I'm
> > not going to quote you, just go back and look.
>
> It is what I said. Well, I said that R12 and R134 do not paly well together.
> I did not give a time span for the failure to occur. The point is that R12
> and R134 can not be mixed.
>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>It does matter if it's cheaper to make, and it also matters if it's more
> >>>efficient (which it is). Laws being passed in the name of doing
> >>>something, anything, just to be seen to be doing something do not remove
> >>>the "mattering" of a subject which they address. The fact that
> >>>refrigeration now costs more, from every angle, for everyone, does
> >>>matter.
> >>>
> >>>As another poster pointed out, it's not at all illegal to use.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> It isn't illegal to use, but you can't simply open the valve and let it
> >> out,
> >> like was once the practice. It has to be captured now, and they make sure
> >> it
> >> is captured by raising the price. If they raise the price of the new
> >> refrigerant, then buy back the captured refrigerant, then the new
> >> refrigerant becomes reasonably priced.
> >
> > I'm not sure I agree with that. Market pressure does not always affect
> > price- when the circle of producers is small enough market pressure can
> > simply affect production; if the supply is high, sometimes it's more
> > profitable to decrease production and allow the price to remain high.
> > Eventually it'll sell. I'm not saying that you are absolutely wrong, I'm
> > saying that there are exceptions to the supply/demand law and it's never
> > safe to assume otherwise.
> >
>
> The topic here is R12, a declining market in the USA. If the captured R12 is
> collected, then it has value that offsets the cost of new R12. This is the
> same as lowering the operating costs for the AC shops. If R12 was sold at a
> high price, and there was no credit given for the captured product, then the
> operating costs would be high. But if the captured product is credited
> against purchases of new product, then the actual cost of the new product is
> lowered. If somebody goes in and buys a 30 pound tank of R12, it will cost
> upwards of $900, but I have no idea what the captured product is worht in
> terms of a credit. What I will say is that the odds are good that the OP
> hasn't got a tank of used R12 to turn in, and he isn't going to use 30
> pounds of R12 in a single car in his entire life, and the life of his
> decendants. This means that he isn't going to get his hands on R12 anytime
> soon in a quantity that is actually useful to a guy working on his car in
> the driveway.
>
> >>When we were kids, we could buy a set
> >> of guages and a can or two of R12 and go home and service the A/C system
> >> in
> >> the driveway. We can't do that anymore because the R12 has gone up in
> >> price.
> >> If we could capture the R12 that we used to release, then the cost of
> >> self-service would come way down. We can't capture the R12, so the cost
> >> of
> >> self-service is very high. The equipment needed to capture and recycle
> >> the
> >> R12 is expensive, and the only way to justify the cost is to ammortize it
> >> over many operations.
> >
> > The reason why the recovery equipment is expensive is due to government
> > regulation. The cheapest recovery device I've heard of was a R12 tank,
> > with a line to the system, in a bucket; fill the bucket with liquid
> > nitrogen and give it a few minutes.. the refrigerant will not only
> > condense in the tank, it'll freeze. You won't get any more out with any
> > pump, no matter what. Pretty cheap, but not approved.
> >
>
> I don't give a rat's *** why the equipment is expensive. It is expensive,
> and most guys that work on the car in the driveway are not going to have the
> equipment that is needed. And nobody is going to have a bucket of liquid
> nitrogen that they can use to suck the R12 out of the family sedan with.
>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>As far as the ozone layer story.. I'm not convinced we affect it that
> >>>much. If we did, wouldn't it be in the Northern Hemisphere? I won't get
> >>>into politics here, I'll just say that there's some subjects which get a
> >>>lot of attention that I put little stock in. Global warming is another.
> >>>I don't want to argue about it, if someone wants to argue I suggest they
> >>>do some open-minded googling.
> >>>
> >>>John
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> It doesn't really matter what you think of the ozone depletion issue.
> >> There
> >> are rules that have been developed, and they arise out of the ozone
> >> depletion issue, and we have to live by the rules whether we agree with
> >> them
> >> or not. Personally, I think I suould be able to go into the vault and
> >> haul
> >> off a wheel barrel full of money, but there are bank robbing laws that I
> >> have to live by whether I agree with them or not.
> >
> > Of course it matters what I think about the issue. You would surrender
> > your opinions for a rulemaker who would tell you what to do, and how? Not
> > me.
> >
> > I disagree that the "rules that have been developed" have much at all to
> > do with the ozone issue. Perhaps that's just my natural skeptcism, but
> > that's my opinion.
> >
> > Now, don't go telling me that what I think doesn't matter, and then go on
> > to tell me what you think, which, based on your reasoning, doesn't matter?
> > Leave the bank's money alone..
> >
>
> What I think doesn't matter either. NOBODY is going to walk into an auto
> parts store inthe USA and buy a can of R12 and take it home and squirt it
> into his car.
>
> R12 and R134 do not mix. You can not revert back to R12 in a system that has
> been made to take R134, but you can still change an R12 system to take R134.
>
> R134 is readily available at any auto parts store, and if they don't have
> any it's only due to being out of stock at the moment.
>
> >>
> >> So, we are back to Square One. Somebody is looking for R134 that he is
> >> having trouble sourcing. He didn't say, but I gathered from post that he
> >> has a system that once took R12, but has been retrofitted to R134, and he
> >> wanted to know about switching back to R12. I do not think he CAN switch
> >> back, 1.) because the laws will not allow a conversion in that direction,
> >> and 2.) because there are serious chemical reaction issues that arise if
> >> a
> >> full evacuation is not accomplished.
> >>
> >> None of the pollitical issues make a bit of difference. We have a reality
> >> that says R134 is required.
> >
> > Yes.. but that reality is not my fault- I'm willing to have opinions that
> > aren't exactly politically correct. Join me, enough of us might be able to
> > restore some sanity to the world..
> >
>
> Nobody is blaming you for the situation. Have all of the opinions you want,
> and maybe something will change as a result. In the mean time, you have to
> play by the rules that are in effect. I may or may not share your opinion,
> but I still have to play by the same rules.
>
> The rules say we have to use R134 if we want to charge our own A/C system,
> and not spend a small fortune buying recovery equipment that will never be
> fully utilized working on our own car at home in the driveway.

 

Except, the liberals have banned R-12, based on their ozone
theories from satellite inferred frequencies, that were not in place
until after we were grown and out of school. Like, maybe these holes
have been with earth all along, and are necessary, like it's time to
melt the Antarctica, change the ocean currents to start the coming ice
age. A time to be born and a time to die.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Jeff Strickland wrote:
>
> "JohnM" <eaotis@cbpu.com> wrote in message
> news:42a55327$0$14971$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.co m...
> > Jeff Strickland wrote:
> >> "JohnM" <eaotis@cbpu.com> wrote in message
> >> news:42a4c019$0$14970$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.co m...
> >>
> >>>Jeff Strickland wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>"JohnM" <eaotis@cbpu.com> wrote in message
> >>>>news:42a29c52$0$14983$9a6e19ea@news.newshostin g.com...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Jeff Strickland wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>I hadn't heard that there was any problem with making R134, and I am
> >>>>>>surprised that anybody is reporting trouble finding it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>And, I agree, going back to R12 isn't gonna happen. It's very
> >>>>>>expensive, and there are seriouis compatibility issues that add to
> >>>>>>the cost. I think one is going to spend the summer with the windows
> >>>>>>rolled down before one goes back to R12.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>R12 is cheaper to produce than 134. It's pretty non-toxic too, which
> >>>>>can't be said for 134. Political creatures have made 12 expensive.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>It doesn't matter that it is cheaper to make, it is essentially illegal
> >>>>to use in the USA. R12 eats the ozone layer, or whatever, and is a
> >>>>banned substance. It also does not play well with others in the
> >>>>neighborhood, R134 for example. If your system is designed to run on
> >>>>R134, it won't work right on R12 anyway, and if you want to convert your
> >>>>factory R12 system back to R12 after retrofitting it to R134, then it
> >>>>will be costly. You can't buy R12 on the open market, so you'll have to
> >>>>find a crook that will sell it to you, or pay to evacuate your system
> >>>>and refill it. You are not going to top off a low R134 system with R12,
> >>>>if for no other reason than the fittings are different sizes.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>Top off a 134 system with 12 and it's life will be measured in weeks, at
> >>>best.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Top off a 134 system with 12 and measure the life in hours - which is
> >> pretty
> >> much what I said earlier.
> >>
> >
> > Not to be disputatious, but that's not at all what you said earlier. I'm
> > not going to quote you, just go back and look.
>
> It is what I said. Well, I said that R12 and R134 do not paly well together.
> I did not give a time span for the failure to occur. The point is that R12
> and R134 can not be mixed.
>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>It does matter if it's cheaper to make, and it also matters if it's more
> >>>efficient (which it is). Laws being passed in the name of doing
> >>>something, anything, just to be seen to be doing something do not remove
> >>>the "mattering" of a subject which they address. The fact that
> >>>refrigeration now costs more, from every angle, for everyone, does
> >>>matter.
> >>>
> >>>As another poster pointed out, it's not at all illegal to use.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> It isn't illegal to use, but you can't simply open the valve and let it
> >> out,
> >> like was once the practice. It has to be captured now, and they make sure
> >> it
> >> is captured by raising the price. If they raise the price of the new
> >> refrigerant, then buy back the captured refrigerant, then the new
> >> refrigerant becomes reasonably priced.
> >
> > I'm not sure I agree with that. Market pressure does not always affect
> > price- when the circle of producers is small enough market pressure can
> > simply affect production; if the supply is high, sometimes it's more
> > profitable to decrease production and allow the price to remain high.
> > Eventually it'll sell. I'm not saying that you are absolutely wrong, I'm
> > saying that there are exceptions to the supply/demand law and it's never
> > safe to assume otherwise.
> >
>
> The topic here is R12, a declining market in the USA. If the captured R12 is
> collected, then it has value that offsets the cost of new R12. This is the
> same as lowering the operating costs for the AC shops. If R12 was sold at a
> high price, and there was no credit given for the captured product, then the
> operating costs would be high. But if the captured product is credited
> against purchases of new product, then the actual cost of the new product is
> lowered. If somebody goes in and buys a 30 pound tank of R12, it will cost
> upwards of $900, but I have no idea what the captured product is worht in
> terms of a credit. What I will say is that the odds are good that the OP
> hasn't got a tank of used R12 to turn in, and he isn't going to use 30
> pounds of R12 in a single car in his entire life, and the life of his
> decendants. This means that he isn't going to get his hands on R12 anytime
> soon in a quantity that is actually useful to a guy working on his car in
> the driveway.
>
> >>When we were kids, we could buy a set
> >> of guages and a can or two of R12 and go home and service the A/C system
> >> in
> >> the driveway. We can't do that anymore because the R12 has gone up in
> >> price.
> >> If we could capture the R12 that we used to release, then the cost of
> >> self-service would come way down. We can't capture the R12, so the cost
> >> of
> >> self-service is very high. The equipment needed to capture and recycle
> >> the
> >> R12 is expensive, and the only way to justify the cost is to ammortize it
> >> over many operations.
> >
> > The reason why the recovery equipment is expensive is due to government
> > regulation. The cheapest recovery device I've heard of was a R12 tank,
> > with a line to the system, in a bucket; fill the bucket with liquid
> > nitrogen and give it a few minutes.. the refrigerant will not only
> > condense in the tank, it'll freeze. You won't get any more out with any
> > pump, no matter what. Pretty cheap, but not approved.
> >
>
> I don't give a rat's *** why the equipment is expensive. It is expensive,
> and most guys that work on the car in the driveway are not going to have the
> equipment that is needed. And nobody is going to have a bucket of liquid
> nitrogen that they can use to suck the R12 out of the family sedan with.
>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>As far as the ozone layer story.. I'm not convinced we affect it that
> >>>much. If we did, wouldn't it be in the Northern Hemisphere? I won't get
> >>>into politics here, I'll just say that there's some subjects which get a
> >>>lot of attention that I put little stock in. Global warming is another.
> >>>I don't want to argue about it, if someone wants to argue I suggest they
> >>>do some open-minded googling.
> >>>
> >>>John
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> It doesn't really matter what you think of the ozone depletion issue.
> >> There
> >> are rules that have been developed, and they arise out of the ozone
> >> depletion issue, and we have to live by the rules whether we agree with
> >> them
> >> or not. Personally, I think I suould be able to go into the vault and
> >> haul
> >> off a wheel barrel full of money, but there are bank robbing laws that I
> >> have to live by whether I agree with them or not.
> >
> > Of course it matters what I think about the issue. You would surrender
> > your opinions for a rulemaker who would tell you what to do, and how? Not
> > me.
> >
> > I disagree that the "rules that have been developed" have much at all to
> > do with the ozone issue. Perhaps that's just my natural skeptcism, but
> > that's my opinion.
> >
> > Now, don't go telling me that what I think doesn't matter, and then go on
> > to tell me what you think, which, based on your reasoning, doesn't matter?
> > Leave the bank's money alone..
> >
>
> What I think doesn't matter either. NOBODY is going to walk into an auto
> parts store inthe USA and buy a can of R12 and take it home and squirt it
> into his car.
>
> R12 and R134 do not mix. You can not revert back to R12 in a system that has
> been made to take R134, but you can still change an R12 system to take R134.
>
> R134 is readily available at any auto parts store, and if they don't have
> any it's only due to being out of stock at the moment.
>
> >>
> >> So, we are back to Square One. Somebody is looking for R134 that he is
> >> having trouble sourcing. He didn't say, but I gathered from post that he
> >> has a system that once took R12, but has been retrofitted to R134, and he
> >> wanted to know about switching back to R12. I do not think he CAN switch
> >> back, 1.) because the laws will not allow a conversion in that direction,
> >> and 2.) because there are serious chemical reaction issues that arise if
> >> a
> >> full evacuation is not accomplished.
> >>
> >> None of the pollitical issues make a bit of difference. We have a reality
> >> that says R134 is required.
> >
> > Yes.. but that reality is not my fault- I'm willing to have opinions that
> > aren't exactly politically correct. Join me, enough of us might be able to
> > restore some sanity to the world..
> >
>
> Nobody is blaming you for the situation. Have all of the opinions you want,
> and maybe something will change as a result. In the mean time, you have to
> play by the rules that are in effect. I may or may not share your opinion,
> but I still have to play by the same rules.
>
> The rules say we have to use R134 if we want to charge our own A/C system,
> and not spend a small fortune buying recovery equipment that will never be
> fully utilized working on our own car at home in the driveway.

 

It's the way you liberals harp about it, as if we could change
anything, delusions of grander.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Stephen Cowell wrote:
>
> Exactly... the CFC's didn't cause the vortex, but the vortex
> exacerbates the CFC problem. Glad to see you're finally
> coming around... :)
> __
> Steve
> .

 

It's the way you liberals harp about it, as if we could change
anything, delusions of grander.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Stephen Cowell wrote:
>
> Exactly... the CFC's didn't cause the vortex, but the vortex
> exacerbates the CFC problem. Glad to see you're finally
> coming around... :)
> __
> Steve
> .

 

It's the way you liberals harp about it, as if we could change
anything, delusions of grander.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Stephen Cowell wrote:
>
> Exactly... the CFC's didn't cause the vortex, but the vortex
> exacerbates the CFC problem. Glad to see you're finally
> coming around... :)
> __
> Steve
> .

 

It's the way you liberals harp about it, as if we could change
anything, delusions of grander.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Stephen Cowell wrote:
>
> Exactly... the CFC's didn't cause the vortex, but the vortex
> exacerbates the CFC problem. Glad to see you're finally
> coming around... :)
> __
> Steve
> .

 

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42A5F7F8.4182E7D9@***.net...
> Except, the liberals have banned R-12, based on their ozone
> theories from satellite inferred frequencies, that were not in place
> until after we were grown and out of school. Like, maybe these holes
> have been with earth all along, and are necessary, like it's time to
> melt the Antarctica, change the ocean currents to start the coming ice
> age. A time to be born and a time to die.



Nobody, especially me, is suggesting the rules are good, I am only
suggesting that they are in place. We have them for better or worse, and we
have to go by them until they change. I suspect they will never change
because the people that decide this sort of thing don't care that R12 is
really the cause of ozone depletion or not. They thought there was a link
once and crafted a stupid rule. There is no reason to uncraft the stupid
rule because R134 does the job. Maybe R134 doesn't do the job as
efficiently, but the load difference on an automotive system is negligible.
R134 makes your car cold enough that nipples stand erect and nuts shrivel,
what more do you need?