2013-03-13 Wed

Clear Thinking

I am reading yet another Nitrogen-in-your-Tire pamphlet, and I still don't get it.

For starters, Nitrogen gas makes up 80% of the air we breathe at sea-level. (Snap Quiz 1: 80% by volume or by mass? Snap Quiz 2: Does it matter.) So if we compress air and pump it into our vehicle tires, the tire content is 80% Nitrogen already by definition.

This pamphlet tells us that high-performance vehicles (military, racing, construction and aircraft) has been used for years; The FAA apparently has mandated high-purity Nitrogen in all commercial aircraft in North America.

I assume they mean "licensed in North America", but they may mean "licensed to operate in north America", and anyway, it wouldn't be the first time a federal agency got it wrong by being distracted by lobbyists/salesmen across the dinner table or in the good seats at the ball game.

There follows a paragraph that tells me that Nitrogen is a safe, inert, dry gas. Last time I looked any gas could be dried, if by "wet" you mean "containing water vapour". Furthermore "Compared to Oxygen, Nitrogen is a larger molecule and diffuses through the tire wall at a slower rate".

If I thought this relevant, I'd plump for Argon, which is an inert gas, "more abundant in the earth's atmosphere than carbon dioxide" ("The periodic Kingdom", P.W.Atkins p8).

What's more the atomic number for Argon is 18, whereas the atomic number for Nitrogen is 7, which suggests that the atoms of Argon are way bigger than those of Nitrogen (atomic number is, roughly, a measure of the number of electron shells in an atom).

Now I grant you confusion between atoms and molecules, but the pamphlet introduced that confusion. Neither Oxygen nor Nitrogen is a molecule; they are chemical elements, atoms, and they combine with other atoms to form molecules. You might think that a molecule (several atoms) of Nitrous Oxide (NO2) is, by definition, larger than a single atom of Nitrogen (N) and larger than TWO atoms of oxygen (O2), so why not fill tires with laughing-gas., light a match, then remove the water (

There are quite a few indisputable statements - "under-inflated tires increase fuel consumption" - but I can't make the connection between Nitrogen and n on-under-inflation.

So I'm still of the belief that Nitrogen-in-Tires is a scam designed to make lots of money from gullible owners at the relatively low cost of extracting nitrogen from the air. And for all I know, they just add hydrogen (H), light a match to make water (H2O) and then evaporate the water.

Ka-Ching! And thank you ma'am.

SUFE

... which of course includes an interest in ecology-friendly practices.

I get unreasonably worried when I read ("Canadian Living" April 2013, p117) "Ditch toxic store-bought silver polish in favour of this environmentally friendly alternative ...

The wording conjures up horrible images of ditches with running water into which is leaching the contents of a "Silvo" tin.

Unreasonable-worried because most people know who use Silvo consider that the more money you spend on a cleaner the better, so they aren't likely to toss something they value.

Me, I don't own anything silver.

I do feel that we ought to use up the stuff we've bought, especially the bad products, before switching to green. Contributions of water, energy, mined chemicals and diesel transportation have already taken place to bring the crud to your home. Acknowledge the terrible cost by at least making use of what you purchased at the expense of the environment.

Then pledge not to buy it/them again.

I follow the same reasoning in my refrigerator when I find a healthier oleo-spread; I'll use up what I'd bought before buying the healthier version.

The TTC

What's a day without a complaint against the TTC?

Today it is "out-sourcing".

The TTC has, I believe, outsourced the business of shelters to a firm, "Astral", unless I got it wrong.

The shelters don't shelter; any sort of wind with rain sweeps raindrops under the gap in the roof and leaves the bench seat wet. If it's raining you don't get to sit down.

Today I was waiting for the 49B bus Eastbound at Mill Road, and thought to improve my knowledge of the bus routes while I waited.

Forget it.

The maps are pitched high above the bench. If there were someone sitting down I'd have to thrust my groin in their face to read the lakeshore routes.

I can't focus on the top of the map regardless, unless I stand on the bench.

I'm 5'6" and took the photo above at the horizontal.

Why, for the sake of sanity, can't the TTC's outsource put the maps at a height that average people (let alone children) could read.

Placing the map to the left of the bench would have given them all the vertical space they need, and allowed users to inspect the map without disturbing seated people.

The TTC doesn't really care about their users.