Newbie Question
The E320 Bluetec is the 2007 World Green Car, and even aside from that it is an extremely clean and efficient car. Much more so than almost every car being sold in California today. The Hybrid producing companies, mainly Toyota, have spent unimaginable amounts of money on lobbyists to persuade Arnie. I cannot understand why MB still has his S600 in the museum, he is perhaps their single worst enemy.
It seems there are many bad tempered woody nuts and not enough good people posting these days.
Perindopril, Allopurinol, Colchicine & Sildenafil PRN.
Why, so that my daughter can grow up athsmatic and develop lung damage? No thanks. Your environmental perspective is so moronic, it makes me want to puke. If you think breathing diesel fumes is such a great goddamn thing, try this: go out into your garage, turn the thing on, and leave it on.
You only have one female offspring to puke on? I would not advocate suicide to anyone. I am pro-life.
So if you hate Canada so much, why don't you emigrate to China where there is no environmental regulation? There, you can breathe unregulated, unfiltered, polluted air, drink polluted untreated water, and die a happy idiot from cancer. Idealogues.....always doing your damndest to screw up this world.
I like Mao Say Dung even less than Canada. I would like to drive dirty cars there though. Do not worry. I am not the one to "screw up this world". There are billions of Chinese and Indians doing it right this minute while you are saving the world. Please dismount from your high horse.
You are a joke, and a bad one at that. Please: take my advice on the car/garage thing, or at least stfu about matters of which you know nothing and comprehend less.
You're such a pathetic dweeb that you don't even have the courage of your convictions to defend your lunatic fringe ideology. You argue that any and all government regulation is bad, but won't answer simple, valid questions about the consequences of no government regulation, even in cases where a valid public health issue can be clearly demonstrated. Instead, blinded by your ideology, you simply take cheap potshots at science, and any and all government regulation, even when the science clearly shows that a lack of such regulation would clearly endanger the health of the public.
Just yesterday in Brazil, we saw the tragic results of what happens when government does *not* intervene in matters of public safety: pilots had been warning for years of the inherent danger of that runway but the government had taken no action to lengthen it; further, after recent resurfacing the airport, uninhindered by pesky safety inspectors, rushed to open the runway prematurely without properly finishing with the grooves needed for proper water drainage.
Result: a plane landed on the too-short, improperly-finished runway in a driving rainstorm, skidded off the runway, and nearly two hundred people are now dead.
Now, a pragmatist would look at the situation preceeding this tragedy and say that a larger public interest would have been served here by government intervention, and (gasp) action to lengthen the runway to make it safer to land there, to delay the opening until the runway had been properly grooved to drain water off during rainstorms.
An idealogue, on the other hand, viewing each and every situation in
black-and-white terms and thus unequipped with any sense of pragmatism and unencumbered by reality, would instead have looked at the situation and said that government has no business intervening, even when there is a clear unequivocal health hazard, that government intervention is always bad, that government regulation of private industry is always wrong.
Sadly, we now see the results of this type of unrealistic, myopic thinking today: nearly two hundred charred bodies. And if you had your way, there would be more bodies piling up, from the air and water pollution which would immediately result if pollution control regulation was abandoned.
Your philosophy is nothing more than reckless, worthless claptrap that totally disregards the need for government to intervene when the health and well being of its citizens are endangered.
Last edited by Improviz; Jul 19, 2007 at 12:03 AM.
You're such a pathetic dweeb that you don't even have the courage of your convictions to defend your lunatic fringe ideology. You argue that any and all government regulation is bad, but won't answer simple, valid questions about the consequences of no government regulation, even in cases where a valid public health issue can be clearly demonstrated. Instead, blinded by your ideology, you simply take cheap potshots at science, and any and all government regulation, even when the science clearly shows that a lack of such regulation would clearly endanger the health of the public.
Just yesterday in Brazil, we saw the tragic results of what happens when government does *not* intervene in matters of public safety: pilots had been warning for years of the inherent danger of that runway but the government had taken no action to lengthen it; further, after recent resurfacing the airport, uninhindered by pesky safety inspectors, rushed to open the runway prematurely without properly finishing with the grooves needed for proper water drainage.
Result: a plane landed on the too-short, improperly-finished runway in a driving rainstorm, skidded off the runway, and nearly two hundred people are now dead.
Now, a pragmatist would look at the situation preceeding this tragedy and say that a larger public interest would have been served here by government intervention, and (gasp) action to lengthen the runway to make it safer to land there, to delay the opening until the runway had been properly grooved to drain water off during rainstorms.
An idealogue, on the other hand, viewing each and every situation in
black-and-white terms and thus unequipped with any sense of pragmatism and unencumbered by reality, would instead have looked at the situation and said that government has no business intervening, even when there is a clear unequivocal health hazard, that government intervention is always bad, that government regulation of private industry is always wrong.
Sadly, we now see the results of this type of unrealistic, myopic thinking today: nearly two hundred charred bodies. And if you had your way, there would be more bodies piling up, from the air and water pollution which would immediately result if pollution control regulation was abandoned.
Your philosophy is nothing more than reckless, worthless claptrap that totally disregards the need for government to intervene when the health and well being of its citizens are endangered.
Lighten up. You may live to my age someday.
The Best of Mercedes & AMG

Seriously, if you get tired of bouncing boobies, I can't help you. However, you can try clicking here:
I'm interested in learning more about the engine damage waste oil causes.
I'm interested in learning more about the engine damage waste oil causes.
SVO and WVO have much lower combustion temperatures than diesel or bio diesel since the longer chain hydrocarbons have not been removed (as glycerin). The longer chain hydrocarbons do not combust as easily (or at all). If you are set on running on renewable fuel, I would advise you buy biodiesel or set up a mini-refinery in your garage (this is not too hard) to make your own bio-diesel out of WVO.



