Any thoughts or comments about the feasibility of performing something like this?
Best regards,
Justin

Moderators: Head Monkey, kelvin, bigKam, skidesmond, chrismp
Hi,Juskin wrote: Any thoughts or comments about the feasibility of performing something like this?
Don't really see an advantage to this.Skammy wrote:Since this is along the same lines.. I recently saw a company making a press that uses glycol so it could be heated to temperatures higher than water.. Just thought it was interesting
Yves, I'd really like to see some pics of your system if you have them. This sounds to me like a good way to go.YvesSPDC wrote:...I did it last winter, reach 3 bars of 65 degrees Celcius water to start the reaction.Juskin wrote: Any thoughts or comments about the feasibility of performing something like this?
Works perfectly, go some failure at first with the sealing (my fault) and when it explode nothing happens, except some water in the room ...
In my opinion it is a best system than with air, more secure and easier to warm (and keep warm). Did 2 pairs with it last summer.
I can send some pics from home if needed.
Yves,
Coming from a biology major - Toxicity is a subjective word unless it's paired with a "dosage." For example, water is toxic... at a high dosage. Arsenic is toxic... at a very low dosage. Whenever you see the word toxic without accompanying figures, take it with a grain of salt!twizzstyle wrote:Toxic or not, it doesn't make much sense to add it for temps under 200 deg