I had a great time reading posted by John Rodgers. The fellow is definitely
in a wrong place. The post is a soup-mix of fantasy, imagination, stupidity
and lies. Not even a single proof - all written not on Friday.  We better
limit our posts to something technical, to practice of proper driving. At
least something to learn.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Felder" <jim.felder@GMAIL.COM>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 2:11 AM
Subject: Re: Is Wood/Gas Possible for For Vanagons

I have a booklet somewhere or another that describes such apparatus on
a trailer to be towed behind the wood-gas powered vehicle. I will make
a pdf of it if there is interest and time.

Jim

On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 7:55 PM, Zolly <zolo@foxinternet.net> wrote:
> I remember folks telling me that after the war, and maybe even during, the
> buses were equipped with a wood burning thing that produced wood gas. So,
> the municipality buses were driven by such way in Germany and other
> countries. It did last for awhile.
> Zoltan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dave Mcneely" <mcneely4@COX.NET>
> To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2010 5:15 PM
> Subject: Re: Is Wood/Gas Possible for For Vanagons
>
>
>> On the other hand, one can produce a kind of gasoline by destructive
>> distillation of biomass, initiating with very high temps, in a backyard
>> contraption. The stuff does work. I'll do some googling around and
>> probably find info online. David Mc
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 5:48 PM, David Beierl wrote:
>>
>>> At 11:23 AM 1/20/2010, John Rodgers wrote:
>>>>
>>>> adaptable to my van. Then I stumbled across this. Pretty interesting
>>>> stuff.
>>>
>>> Of course it's possible. But I promise you wouldn't like it. With
>>> the existing engine I sincerely doubt that a Vanagon could get up to
>>> the minimum speed (45 mph) to run on highways, although if you filled
>>> the entire interior with wood pellets and a stoking mechanism you
>>> could probably get decent range.
>>>
>>> Producer gas is 20-30% carbon monoxide which is ninety-five times
>>> more attractive to hemoglobin than oxygen is; small concentrations
>>> will sneak up and kill you because the oxygen can't compete, and high
>>> concentrations IIRC cause abrupt and total respiratory failure. Your
>>> relatives will have the consolation that your corpse will be a nice
>>> healthy pink, since carboxyhemoglobin is a much brighter red than
>>> oxyhemoglobin -- that's one of the diagnostic signs, in
>>> fact. Producer gas (made from coal, normally) used to be used as
>>> city gas, which is why suicide by oven was in favor at the time --
>>> quick, quiet, reliable, not too painful. It's rumored that in some
>>> Eastern European countries under Communism, the police would turn off
>>> the gas to an entire street before they made their raid, so you can
>>> imagine how fast the stuff must have acted.
>>>
>>> Until our cities are bombed out and/or some other terrific disaster
>>> strikes and we have to suddenly convert an existing fleet of
>>> IC-engine vehicles to direct-biomass fuel without replacing the
>>> engines, I officially suggest that using producer gas for vehicles is
>>> a Friday subject.
>>>
>>> The Stanley Steamer OTOH had a very nice flash boiler and I believe
>>> it could get up steam in about a minute from a standing start (using
>>> liquid fuel presumably). Twenty-five years ago or so Saab was
>>> thinking about a steam-powered vehicle and I believe they followed at
>>> least somewhat along the lines of the Stanley. I suggest not
>>> considering steam turbines -- they are extremely successful in large
>>> ships, but had an utterly disastrous history in railroads because of
>>> vibration and shock.
>>>
>>> Yours,
>>> David
>>> [/hat]
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.432 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2634 - Release Date: 01/20/10
> 09:12:00
>