Suburban: Beach Kit?

You have the idea. Heavy blanket work well too as tires will grab them and pull themselves out of the sand hole as the pull and stuff blanket under wheels (this saved me a few times years ago)

Have you considerd a large portable air tank with about 150 PSI in it? that would be enough to air the 4 tires back up 10 or 15 additional pounds each and get you road worthy quickly. Year ago when freon was cheap, I new a guy that used to carry a 20 lbs bottle of it to fill his tires. (it could fill a lot of tires but today not very cheap or environmental freindly)

----------------- TheSnoMan.com

How about a rolled up chunk of chain link fence. That might help in a situation where you're already stuck.

A bunch of the guys over on the Jeep group have air tanks mounted with compressors on board. There's even a kit to convert an old York a/c compressor to an air compressor. I've even heard of carrying a nitrogen bottle. Being a Suburban, you'd have lots more room for stuff like that than the Jeep guys.

-- Old Crow "Yol Bolsun!" '82 FLTC-P "Miss Pearl" '95 YJ Rio Grande BS#133, SENS, TOMKAT, MAMBM

Per Old Crow:

Yes and no. As a matter of principle, I don't carry anything in the cabin that I wouldn't want hitting me in the back of the neck in a minor crash.

Can you show us a scientific study with a few collaborating studies that actually shows that Freon does anything to the ozone? It was all over the papers, but never gave any scientific study to prove any link with Freon to ozone depletion. Come to think of it, I don't recall any consensus that the ozone layer is doing anything out of the ordinary cycle.

Mike D.

The Freon problem had more to do with DuPont's patent expiring than anything else. There have been no scientific studies shown to date to validate the claims of ozone layer damage from Freon. Economics, it is all about economics and control.

George

I think you kinda realy have your head in the sand on this one. What happens is well known and has been known about since 80's. The R12 is released into air it can take a few years to work its way up into ionosphere but being that it was realeased for years there was steady stream getting there for many years. The clorine in the R12 molecules reacts with UV light from sum and in the chemical procees that results, about 100 ozone molecules are destroyed for each R12 molecule. Last year they recorded the first decrease in theaverage size of the hole in ozone layer over poles since then have been monitoring it because the R12 cycle has been broken. The funny part is that car A/C's played a very small roll in this problem but suffered for it. Most of the contamination came from manufacturing because 10, of 1000;s of tons were release each year for making stryrofoam and like product plus it was used in propellants too for spray cans because it is not toxic or flamable. Another casulaty ofthis ban was R22 because even though it is only about 3% as harmfull as R12, it iwas scheduled for removal/banning too. R12 wa great stuff but not very ozone freindly.

----------------- TheSnoMan.com

OK, lets say that you have your head screwed on right, though I doubt it, and lets say that this phenomenon has been known since the 80s, then why did the mandate to get rid of R-12 coincide with the expiration of DuPonts patent????

The R12 is

Every study that I ever saw that was released was less than scientific and was sponsored by, guess who.... DuPont or one of their subsidiaries. Anything sound a bit fishy here, or do you suck down whatever the liberal news media releases???

Last year they recorded the first decrease in the average

No, wrong again here, WE the consumers suffered for it, not the inanimate cars. WE the taxpayers did the suffering and continue to do so.

Historically, the ozone hole over the poles has increased or decreased in a multi year cycle, it has nothing to do with what man is doing with chlorine. That has been documented by the scientific community, it just isn't politically correct to reveal the truth now days.

Not too long ago, before the banning of cfc refrigerants, there was a "study" released by the US gov't that showed that almost all (the vast majority) of the ozone damage was done by the pine forests in America, Germany, and other countries that are still heavily forested. And one of our pin head legislators tried to get a bill introduced to congress to have all forests cut down in the USA. Fortunately, cooler heads prevailed. I wish I had cut out the article and saved it. I would send it to you, but then that most likely would be a waste of time.

Think this stuff through for yourself snoman, you seem to be an intelligent guy, just think for yourself and don't let the media spoon feed you.

George

It didn't. DuPonts' patent on Freon (R-12) expired in the early

1950s along with the patents held by other companies who produced R-12.

Do you suck down every myth that you come across?

I stand corrected, I apologize.

George

YOu are looking for something more than there is here. Dupount has a lot of influence in US but limited in the world. This was a global ban, Dupount may have stalled it a bit politically but it was not banned to make them more profit. WHile dupount has ownership of R134a, Dupount has quelled its problems and the fact it is quite toxic. THe main fight against alternative refrigerants is lobbied by Dupont. Down in Austrailia R12a is very popular as Dupont has no clout there.

You really are clueless arent you. The process is well know and it was a global ban not a US one and the all signed on because of science. Axtually the US was kinda against it because of political influence against it but joined anyway.

Yes and no, we will have more ozone in future but be cause of political lobbying, the choosen replacement was not the best solution and consumers are paying more for it too.

Again head in the sand here. Yes there is yearly variations but the averge size of hole was increasing and density was decreasing untill last year or so when they were able to establish a begining of the trend reversal. I'll bet you do not believe in global warming either and that the 1000's of millions of tons of CO2 and NOx dumped into air every year has no effect on climate.

You have got to be a consevative Bushie. One that believe that man is never the cause for global demise and than profit take front row ver long term impact. Also I would these day question anothing report signed US government on environment because many of those are politically motived and not based on science. And people like you are taken in hook line and sinker.

----------------- TheSnoMan.com

Ok, snoman, consider the following;

and then this;

They are both good readidng reading, the second is deeper and not a US government scientist, which you apparently abhor to consider. Check out his sources, consider the whole argument. Can't get much more scientific than this.

All the best to you.

George