"karl" <ottokarl@cognisurf.com> wrote in
news:1138244926.039878.289660@g49g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com:

>> Date: Tues, Jan 17 2006 3:19 am
>> From: "TeGGeR®"


<snip>


>>
>> Guess it would if you took each molecule apart into its constituent
>> atoms, and then reassembled them into the molecules you wanted, no?
>>
>> But even if you could, what would be the point?
>
>
>
> This doesn't make sense: It was TeGGeR who argued that
> making "synthetic" from waste oil doesn't work BECAUSE
> OF THE HIGH COSTS OF CLEANING IT. Cleaning used oil, I
> responded, doesn't make synthetic oil. On the other
> hand, I believe it is economical to make motor oil by
> "rerefining" used oil. And if the used oil were ONLY
> synthetic then the "rerefined" oil would be synthetic oil.
>


I suspect a snippage problem here. The quote at top is mine. I was trying
to illustrate to the OP that in order to make synthetic from used oil you'd
need to clean it AND somehow separate the atoms and reassemble them
correctly into a synthetic. If I left the impression that you could make
"synthetic" just by cleaning old dino oil, that is not what I intended. My
post shown above should show that.

Chemically, as I understand it, just about anything's possible, but not
everything's economical.

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

 

"karl" <ottokarl@cognisurf.com> wrote in
news:1138244926.039878.289660@g49g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com:

>> Date: Tues, Jan 17 2006 3:19 am
>> From: "TeGGeR®"
>>


<snip>


>>
>> Guess it would if you took each molecule apart into its constituent
>> atoms, and then reassembled them into the molecules you wanted, no?
>>
>> But even if you could, what would be the point?
>
>
>
> This doesn't make sense: It was TeGGeR who argued that
> making "synthetic" from waste oil doesn't work BECAUSE
> OF THE HIGH COSTS OF CLEANING IT. Cleaning used oil, I
> responded, doesn't make synthetic oil. On the other
> hand, I believe it is economical to make motor oil by
> "rerefining" used oil. And if the used oil were ONLY
> synthetic then the "rerefined" oil would be synthetic oil.
>
>



Now that I think of it, what started it all was when the OP asserted that
recovering used oil would provide a "cheap" base stock with which to make
his "synthetic". I said it would hardly be a "cheap" way of getting ANY
kind of base stock. I don't recall saying that the cost of cleaning was the
only barrier to making synthetic from dino.



--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

 

This post is very long and has several quotes, which can
be confusing. For those who want to skip it and to make
it easier to find the end there is at the bottom a line
like this (saying END OF KARL'S POST).

================= XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX ================

> Date: Thurs, Jan 26 2006 3:16 am
> From: "TeGGeR®"
>
> > Date: Wed, Jan 25 2006 7:08 pm
> > From: "karl"
> >
> >> Date: Tues, Jan 17 2006 3:19 am
> >> From: "TeGGeR®"
>
> <snip>
>
> >> Guess it would if you took each molecule apart into its constituent
> >> atoms, and then reassembled them into the molecules you wanted, no?
> >>
> >> But even if you could, what would be the point?
> >
> >
> >
> > This doesn't make sense: It was TeGGeR who argued
> > that making "synthetic" from waste oil doesn't work
> > BECAUSE OF THE HIGH COSTS OF CLEANING IT. Cleaning
> > used oil, I responded, doesn't make synthetic oil.
> > On the other hand, I believe it is economical to
> > make motor oil by "rerefining" used oil. And if the
> > used oil were ONLY synthetic then the "rerefined"
> > oil would be synthetic oil.
>
>
> I suspect a snippage problem here. The quote at top
> is mine. I was trying to illustrate to the OP that
> in order to make synthetic from used oil you'd need
> to clean it AND somehow separate the atoms and
> reassemble them correctly into a synthetic. If I
> left the impression that you could make "synthetic"
> just by cleaning old dino oil, that is not what I
> intended. My post shown above should show that.
>
> Chemically, as I understand it, just about anything's
> possible, but not everything's economical.




There is no quoting problem on my part; thank you.
But snipping of pertinent information amounts to
trickery:

TeGGeR substituted "<snip>" for,

> There is a misconception, more clearly expressed
> in TeGGeR's message dated Tues, Jan 17 2006 12:18
> am: no matter how much is spent on cleaning "used"
> oil it is not possible to make synthetic out of it.
> This "interesting idea" is useless because it
> doesn't work.


The "synthetic oil from used oil" issue started with
a post by "T L via CarKB.com" in which he speculated
whether Walmart's tech 2000 is "reconditioned used oil."
"Rob B" then opined that sending used oil "back through
a refinement process" would be a cheap way to get
synthetic oil ("since it is engineered" he argues).
Here are the first posts, including mine:


> Date: Mon, Jan 16 2006 11:05 am
> From: "karl"
>
> > Date: Mon, Jan 16 2006 3:55 am
> > From: "Rob B"
> >
> > > Date: Mon, Jan 16 2006 3:54 am
> > > From: "T L via CarKB.com"
> > >
> > > isn't tech 2000 (walmart brand) [previously
> > > identified to be synthetic] reconditioned used oil??
> >
> >
> > from what i understand of synthetic oil production
> > that would be probably be a cheap way to get the base
> > oil used to mfg the synthetic, i presume they send it
> > back through a refinement process to gather the base
> > oil used for various grades and since it is engineered
> > oil then the oil produced is probably not suspect ( ? )
>
>
> ?? What does this mean? Make synthetic from recycled oil?


Here is TeGGeR's first post regarding the costs of
refining used oil:


> Date: Mon, Jan 16 2006 7:34 pm
> From: "TeGGeR®"
>
> > Date: Mon, Jan 16 2006 3:55 am
> > From: "Rob B"
> >
> > from what i understand of synthetic oil production
> > that would be probably be a cheap way to get the base
> > oil used to mfg the synthetic,
>
>
>
> It is extremely expensive to recover post-consumer
> motor oil, just like it's extremely expensive to
> recover *anything* post-consumer except aluminum.
> That would NOT be a "cheap way" to acquire a base
> stock. Unless you ignore the millions it will/would
> cost in tax monies that are/would be required to
> cajole refineries into taking the stuff.


And here is TeGGeR's second post regarding the costs
of refining used oil:


> Date: Tues, Jan 17 2006 12:18 am
> From: "TeGGeR®"
>
> > Date: Mon, Jan 16 2006 3:12 pm
> > From: "Rob B"
snip
> > well by cheap i mean a recycler probably does not
> > have to pay for the used oil as in buying crude or
> > derivatives at some cost per barrel and may even get
> > some incentive or payed for recycling.
>
> The cost is in the recovery itself. The trucks, the
> personnel, the sorting, the elimination and disposal
> of contaminants, etc.
>
> Ever wonder what becomes of the tons of toxins
> removed every year from used motor oil? I have, too.
>
> > i do not know what if any cleansing would be required
> > before the refining process to remove various
> > contaminants ?
>
> Lots and lots. And lots and lots. And lots. Lots
> more besides. Motor oil picks up tons of crud, which
> is one of its jobs. ALL of it has to be removed
> before the waste is turned back into motor oil again.
> Also, polymer chains tend to get shortened with use,
> which decreases film strength, so the oil needs to
> be "fixed" to make the chains the correct length
> again.
>
> > anyways it sounded like an interesting idea,
> > "syntheticmfg from recycling used oil"


Clearly, "Rob B" explicitely talked of recycling,
refinement, and cleansing of used oil to transform it
into synthetic oil, and so did TeGGeR, who emphasized
that it is "extremely expensive to recover post-
consumer motor oil." It was only after my posting,


> Date: Mon, Jan 16 2006 7:01 pm
> From: "karl"
snip
> There is a misconception, more clearly expressed in
> TeGGeR's message dated Tues, Jan 17 2006 12:18 am: no
> matter how much is spent on cleaning "used" oil it is
> not possible to make synthetic out of it. This
> "interesting idea" is useless because it doesn't work.


that TeGGeR talked of chemical transformation. He may
had this in mind all the time but he didn't say so
until later.



================= END OF KARL'S POST ================



..

 

> Date: Thurs, Jan 26 2006 3:31 am
> From: "TeGGeR®"
>
> > Date: Wed, Jan 25 2006 7:08 pm
> > From: "karl"
> >
> >> Date: Tues, Jan 17 2006 3:19 am
> >> From: "TeGGeR®"
>
> <snip>
>
> >> Guess it would if you took each molecule apart into its constituent
> >> atoms, and then reassembled them into the molecules you wanted, no?
> >>
> >> But even if you could, what would be the point?
> >
> >
> >
> > This doesn't make sense: It was TeGGeR who argued
> > that making "synthetic" from waste oil doesn't work
> > BECAUSE OF THE HIGH COSTS OF CLEANING IT. Cleaning
> > used oil, I responded, doesn't make synthetic oil.
> > On the other hand, I believe it is economical to
> > make motor oil by "rerefining" used oil. And if the
> > used oil were ONLY synthetic then the "rerefined"
> > oil would be synthetic oil.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Now that I think of it, what started it all was when
> the OP asserted that
> recovering used oil would provide a "cheap" base stock
> with which to make
> his "synthetic". I said it would hardly be a "cheap"
> way of getting ANY
> kind of base stock. I don't recall saying that the
> cost of cleaning was the
> only barrier to making synthetic from dino.


That is correct, you also mentioned the costs of
collecting the oil. And what else you exactly wrote I
documented in my previous post.

Fact is that the discussion was about turning used oil
into synthetic by "cleaning" it. And if you remember
it differently then quote the relevant posts.



..

 

"karl" <ottokarl@cognisurf.com> wrote in
news:1138580662.216213.3840@g49g2000cwa.googlegrou ps.com:

<snip>


>
> Fact is that the discussion was about turning used oil
> into synthetic by "cleaning" it. And if you remember
> it differently then quote the relevant posts.
>
>


OK, you win. I guess I've killed too many memory cells with beer. It's not
that important anyway.


--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/