Ventless propane heaters?
Scott Bershing
an RV?
Thanks,
Scott
Peter Pan
"Scott Bershing" <be...@chartermi.net> wrote in message
news:uou5cld...@corp.supernews.com...
Which sort of "ventless propane heater" are you referring too? There are
both "ventless" that have a flame and "ventless" that do not have a flame
(Also called Catalytic). Your use of the word "ventless" doesn't tell which
kind you refer too.
Mo
adequate ventilation open...
Finding someone stiff and cold in the morning - plus being discolored - not
something you want to do.
(Been there, done that - as a paramedic)
So - my answer is no, no reason other than it might nullify your insurance
coverage (for fire) - just make sure you have lots of ventilation.
Mo
"Scott Bershing" <be...@chartermi.net> wrote in message
news:uou5cld...@corp.supernews.com...
Mo
"Peter Pan" <PeterPan@NeverNeverLandNospam@Akamail.com> wrote in message
news:ujFj9.9924$k27.8...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> Which sort of "ventless propane heater" are you referring too? There are
> both "ventless" that have a flame and "ventless" that do not have a flame
> (Also called Catalytic). Your use of the word "ventless" doesn't tell
which
> kind you refer too.
Even the catalytic heaters burn up the oxygen and can cause a fire if a pet
knocks something against it.
Mo
Peter Pan
"Mo" <mo_drew...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:PqGj9.397347$Ag2.17...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca...
How can you say that catalytic heaters "burn up the oxygen" when they don't
have a flame?
From the coleman web site "Surface temperature of the Catalytic heater head
is below the ignition point of most flammable materials"
Are you sure you aren't confusing Catalytic heaters with a regular propane
heater with a flame?
Scott Bershing
realize that these work differently than the direct-vent furnace that is in
there now. If I install one of these I would leave most of the windows
cracked (which I do always do, even with the furnace).
"Mo" <mo_drew...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:kpGj9.397346$Ag2.17...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca...
Wade
problems with insurance coverage or finding anybody to have them installed.
Wade
Tom Marik
That catalyst just allows the same reaction (as a flame) to start at a lower
temperature.
If you're lucky, the little Cs combine with the Os to form carbon dioxide -- if
you have enough Os.
Tom
Dusty Bleher
...
> How can you say that catalytic heaters "burn up the oxygen" when they
don't
> have a flame?
into heat. The purpose of the catalyst is simply to continue the
"combustion" process so that toxic CO (Carbon Monoxide) is converted into
non-toxic CO2 (Carbon diOxide).
So, in actual practice, a catalytic heater consumes _more_ oxygen out of the
air than a simple open flame. The upside of that is that it doesn't emit
poisonous CO. At any rate, it's still a good idea to provide for at least
a little bit of ventilation...
> From the coleman web site "Surface temperature of the Catalytic heater
head
> is below the ignition point of most flammable materials"
I don't completely agree. I've observed many kinds of catalytic heaters in
operation. Some have a dull red glowing ceramic type element. Red heat = ~
7-900F... Some have a sort of woven "blanket" with embedded bits of
platinum and other reactor agents. While they don't (IIRC) "glow", they
have the occassional glimmering spots and do get hot--but probably not hot
enough to easily begin combustion on nearby materials. Still, I'd be leary
of touching one, or letting it contact anything flammable.
Usually the first thing I do in my RV's is rip out the idiotic forced air
heating and all of it's associated ducting, and install a flat plate
catalytic heater on a swing-out panel near the door. In the confines of an
RV, that's usually more than enough to keep Jack Frost at bay. Besides, it
uses far less electrical power (near zip!), and as such is more efficient.
And, SWMBO, gets some additional shelf space as an added bonus...
Later all,
Dusty Bleher
San Jose, Ca.
HHamp5246
<be...@chartermi.net> writes:
>Thanks for the info. I'm aware of the ventalation safety issues, and I
>realize that these work differently than the direct-vent furnace that is in
>there now. If I install one of these I would leave most of the windows
>cracked (which I do always do, even with the furnace).
You want a catalytic heater.
Hunter
bill horne
No - as long as you don't take naps, or go to bed, with it on. We had a
14-ft TT for 18 years that we heated (well, kept the chill off) with the
stove top burners when we didn't have electric hookup. But you'll have
to live with some additional interior condensation.
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
Scott Bershing
Thanks,
Scott
"Dusty Bleher" <du...@fsinc.com> wrote in message
news:uouk3hq...@corp.supernews.com...
Bob Giddings
<be...@chartermi.net> wrote:
>Any suggestions for models and sources of the catalytic heater?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Scott
>
>
https://secure.westhost.com/secure/rvsolarelectric/orderform.htm#Heaters
Harald
I had a balancing problem in my camper also. The furnace blew most air
straight out a large duct and so not much air went to the
bedroom/bath/holding tanks. I put a aluminum plate with numerous holes
drilled in it inside the duct to block some of the air coming out. I was
able to fine tune the amount of diversion by drilling more holes in my
blocker plate until the air was balanced. I haven't had any problems with
my modification and can't think of any possible problems.
Something to consider with the use of heaters other than the built in
furnace is holding tank heating in winter. My camper uses furnace air to
heat the insulated shell around my holding tanks. In below freezing weather
this is very important. If you shut off the furnace, you will freeze your
holding tanks.
--
Harald
Remove the words "IHATESPAM" to reply via email
"Scott Bershing" <be...@chartermi.net> wrote in message
news:uou5cld...@corp.supernews.com...
Thanks,
Scott
-----= Posted via Newsfeed.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeed.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== 100,000 Groups! - 19 Servers! - Unlimited Download! =-----
Frederick G Young
As someone has already mentioned, there are catalytic heaters and
non-catalytic heater. The concern I have with catalytic heaters is that you
have now introduce another factor into the combustion process. Incomplete
combustion produces the dangerous gas Carbon Monoxide. In a heater design,
you can accept the inefficiency of combustion from the main burner, then
introduce a catalyst to convert the CO into CO2. A far better way is to
improve the combustion process where the use of a catalyst is unnecessary.
If the catalyst is not there then it can't get fouled and not function,
thereby allowing CO to pass out in the flue gas. Another consideration is
what happens to the minute of particles which the catalyst element itself
sheds. The answer is it coats the outlet from the heater at best, at worst
you end up breathing it. In my view not a good thing.
So I would not buy a catalytic heater. There are heaters available that
have 100% combustion efficiency and only emit Carbon Dioxide and Water. CO2
from the carbon in the fuel, and H2O from the hydrogen in the fuel. In fact
I use two of them in my home and have done each winter for the last two
years. They are available down to about 15000 BTU's per hour The two I have
are 30,000 and 22,000 BTU. see:
http://www.comfort-glow-comfortglow.com/heaters/plaque_infrared.html
They call them flameless heaters and they have a number of flat ceramic
element which are about 8" X 4" each . The gas enters the bottom edge and
slowly moves up the ceramic matrix burning as it goes. The ceramic element
become quite hot reaching a bright red heat. Each element is about 6000
BTU's output, which is equivalent to two 1 kilowatt fires. The high
temperature element is the key to maintaining complete combustion.
I was skeptical when I first bought one and was all prepared if
necessary cut out the back panel and install a vent, but after trying it,
and testing to see if there was any detectable CO in the outlet I was very
impressed. I couldn't detect any. If this type of heater has any danger, it
is that if it is knocked over, the ceramic element is so hot, it can easily
cause a fire. But since looking at the latest designs they appear to have
added a glass screen in addition to the grill guard. Secondly if you don't
have sufficient ventilation the area in which it is being used can become
short on oxygen, but to protect against this they have an auto shut down
using the constant pilot as a sensor.
When you burn a gas which has lots of hydrogen in it, you get a lot of
water produced. If you don't remove some of the air in the space and replace
it with lower humidity air then the moisture in the air will build up and
permit all the soft materials like upholstery and curtains, so ventilation
is essential to keep down the moisture level in the space.
I have a thermostatically controlled unit (four plaques) and a manual
one (five plaques). I wish I had bought both as thermostatically controlled.
The units made by Comfort Glow are not recommended for RV's. I believe
partly because they are not sure whether the plaques will take the
vibration, and partly because the volume of air is small. Some other
companies who make plaque ventless heaters make them in sizes that are
smaller and they can be used in an RV. I have a large 40ft wide body 5 th
wheel and I have used the 22000 BTU unit in it. The thermostat is an on/off
type. plaque units cannot maintain combustion efficiency at variable gas
flow rates. The 5 th wheel heats up extremely fast with the 22,000 BTU unit.
Like an electric fire, which many people think it is when it's operating,
you get all the heat you pay for.
Finally, I do not recommend the blue flame type, and I don't recommend the
catalytic type. You chose. Any questions? <G>
Frederick
footnote: Heating contractors hate ventless heaters and have succeeded in
getting them prohibited in the codes of four states. Why do they hate them?
The answer is that there is nothing it for them. No ducts, no flue vents, no
annual cleaning costs etc. If you change houses, you just take them with
you.
"Scott Bershing" <be...@chartermi.net> wrote in message
news:uou5cld...@corp.supernews.com...
Joe Gilbert
that came with our TT. We are looking at an innerspring mattress from
Camping World. Not being able to actually sit on it and such, we don't want
to make a $250 mistake. Does anyone have one of these mattresses?
Joe
DSteiner51
>adequate ventilation open...
>Finding someone stiff and cold in the morning - plus being discolored -
>not
>something you want to do.
>(Been there, done that - as a paramedic)
Now from the other side... My brother and I tried out a new catalytic heater
one nite when we were kids at home in an old farm house. needless to say, it
was trashed the next morning. During the nite my brother went down to use the
bathroom and collapsed. Our parents relized what was happening and the last I
remembered is sometime during the nite they rushed into our bedroom and grabbed
me by the arms and drug me out the door. I collapsed when I hit oxygen and
didn't regain conscienceness till the following pm.
DSteiner51
James Gemmill
Products" states
"Not for use in recreational vehicles"
Peter Pan
> Any suggestions for models and sources of the catalytic heater?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Scott
>
>
Look at the following website: http://www.uscatalytic.com/heater_index.html
Olympian WaveT Catalytic Safety Heaters are designed specifically for RVs,
trailers, motor homes, vans, campers and boats.
Ralph Lindberg & Ellen Winnie
"Scott Bershing" <be...@chartermi.net> wrote:
> Thanks for the info. I'm aware of the ventalation safety issues, and I
> realize that these work differently than the direct-vent furnace that is in
> there now. If I install one of these I would leave most of the windows
> cracked (which I do always do, even with the furnace).
>
Be aware that there are models that have O2 sensors and automatically
cut off when the O2 falls too low. They also will not operate above
about 5000 ft.
These are the only models I would buy
--
Ralph Lindberg personal email n7...@amsat.org
RV and Camping FAQ http://kendaco.telebyte.com/rlindber/rv
If Windows is the answer I would really like to know what the question is
Bob Giddings
<rlin...@kendaco.telebyte.com> wrote:
>In article <uougl28...@corp.supernews.com>,
> "Scott Bershing" <be...@chartermi.net> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the info. I'm aware of the ventalation safety issues, and I
>> realize that these work differently than the direct-vent furnace that is in
>> there now. If I install one of these I would leave most of the windows
>> cracked (which I do always do, even with the furnace).
>>
> Be aware that there are models that have O2 sensors and automatically
>cut off when the O2 falls too low. They also will not operate above
>about 5000 ft.
> These are the only models I would buy
I understand that you want to err on the side of caution. But if that
is the only choice, I would pass it by. Most of the places I want to
be, and am likely to encounter cold weather, are far, far above 5000
feet.
I installed an Olympian Wave 3000. Beyond testing, I have yet to use
it in the field, because I prefer the forced air in marginal
situations, or when batteries are easy to recharge. I intend to use
the ventless heater only in the daytime while I am awake, and when for
some reason it is necessary to conserve power. If you suspect that
you or someone who will use your RV will not be disciplined in it's
use, follow Ralph's advice. Better to be cold, than cold and dead.
My only objection to Ralph's suggestion is that a heater that won't
work at altitude is pretty useless. Who needs the aggravation?
Bob
Frederick G Young
I mentioned what you repeated in your post. I also mentioned that they
did not give any reason, which to me is as important as saying don't do it.
There are many reasons, besides your safety and welfare, why people will
recommend not doing something. Of course if you are a compulsive rule
follower then it certainly simplifies life, but you certainly fence yourself
in.
I had a cousin who visited Germany many years ago. He had been to a bar
and was walking back to his lodgings in the early hours of the morning. The
street was completely deserted. Not a vehicle in sight or audible. This
person was standing at a traffic light waiting for the pedestrian crossing
light to allow him to cross the street. As soon as it told him he could
cross, he faithfully crossed. A well trained Teuton. The street continued to
be deserted and still not a vehicle in sight.
There are times when rules are not applicable and it's up to the
individual to decide that. In a Teutonic State, that isn't allowed.
Sometimes you have to ask yourself, do the rules fit these circumstances. If
they don't then you have to decide for yourself. The Teutonic mind loathes
and despises that. Robots don't make decisions very well either. All their
decisions have to be pre-made for them. That's where man and his decision
making ability is indispensable.
If you put a heater in a small RV with a very hard sprung suspension it
will be subjected to a lot of high frequency vibration which could produce
fatigue in the aluminum tubing that is used internally, and perhaps even the
plaque. But if you put the same unit into a softer sprung RV it will not
experience that. The manufacturer can't discriminate between one and the
other so they say "Not for use in RV's" That clears them from liability. It
doesn't mean that it cannot be used, or is unusable. The same might be said
of using a range top or stove to provide heat, but if you have adequate
ventilation you can do it. Not advisable, but you can do it. If you don't
know what you a doing, life can be very dangerous, so "Know what you are
doing before you do it" and that goes beyond following the rules.
There are times when orders must be obeyed, or the success of the
endeavor is in jeopardy. That is a different situation to what I am talking
about, but there are those who would apply it to every situation. They also
seem to love to point out those who do otherwise.
Frederick
"James Gemmill" <gemmi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9rkvouotrf9vjmtjv...@4ax.com...
Neon John
wrote:
>Is there a reason why one of the ventless propane heaters can't be used in
>an RV?
I use one of the Coleman BlackCat portable catalytic heaters as supplemental
heat in my small rig. This unit takes throw away cylinders but I have a high
pressure hose plumbed to the ICC tank to fuel it. It works wonderfully to
take the chill off or to keep my feet warm when I don't need any other heat.
Also got me through a very cold snowstorm when my regular furnace went on
strike.
To address the inevitable bleats of the safety nazis... this heater makes no
carbon monoxide, as would be expected from a catalytic heater. I have a
NightHawk CO monitor with the digital display. The indication never gets off
zero with the heater. Heating a pot of water on the stove for coffee, on the
other hand, produces a reading of from 20 to 25 ppm CO for a short period.
Regarding fire hazards, while I would not recommend this as a practice, I did
test mine by laying some paper on the protective grid. It charred and smoked
but did not catch on fire.
The built-in catalytic heaters made for RV use work the same way.
These heaters do use oxygen but unless your rig is airtight this isn't a
concern. I could only dream of my rig being that tight! If you really like
to worry I suppose you could install an oxygen monitor too.
John
---
John De Armond
johngdDO...@bellsouth.net
http://personal.bellsouth.net/~johngd (old)
http://bellsouthpwp.net/j/o/johngd/ (new)
Cleveland, Occupied TN
S. Bourg
> Scott,
> As someone has already mentioned, there are catalytic heaters and
> non-catalytic heater. The concern I have with catalytic heaters is that you
> have now introduce another factor into the combustion process. Incomplete
> combustion produces the dangerous gas Carbon Monoxide. In a heater design,
> you can accept the inefficiency of combustion from the main burner, then
> introduce a catalyst to convert the CO into CO2. A far better way is to
> improve the combustion process where the use of a catalyst is unnecessary.
> If the catalyst is not there then it can't get fouled and not function,
> thereby allowing CO to pass out in the flue gas.
Frederick, you are confused. A catalytic heater does not perform the
function of a catalytic converter in a vehicle. The entire combustion
process in a catalytic heater is catalysed. Without the catalyst, you
don't have CO, you have unburned propane gas. The catalytic process
occurs at a low temperature - about 600F - and is slow enough and
occurs over a large enough surface exposed to O2 that CO is a
negligible product.
If you have any heater whose manufacturer has conviced you it is 100%
efficient and produces no CO, you have been duped.
Steve
Frederick G Young
"S. Bourg" <sbo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1d0fc641.02092...@posting.google.com...
A catalyst is an element or compound that has the property of increasing the
speed with which a chemical process occurs, above that which would be
possible without it's presence. It can cause chemical processes to take
place that would not be possible without it, unless the conditions under
which the process occurs were different than normal ambient conditions. That
is true whether it is a car exhaust or wherever. The only difference is that
in the car exhaust it is changing NOX into something else, and in a heater
it is changing CO into CO2. So I doubt I am confused as you put it. Platinum
is a combustion catalyst. Vanadium is another and there are others. I'm a
firm believer in science fundamentals.
While not being exactly dupe proof, I assure you Steve, I don't dupe easily.
I have a CO monitor installed in my living room. First I tested the monitor
with an open flame to ensure it was functioning, then I took the monitor and
held it over the heater close enough to avoid dilution but not so close as
to impair the monitor operation. The reading was zilch for the heater, and
an indication for the open flame.
So I regret to advise you that of the two of us, the one being duped isn't
me, and John Neon's experiment seems to support me. <G>
The only problem with 100% combustion efficiency (or 99.99%0 if that makes
you more comfortable) is the amount of water produced by burning Hydrogen.
You've got to ventilate to hold the relative humidity down. I have a fresh
air make up fan for the living area.
Frederick
HLBRSMA
>an RV?
It's OK to use if you want to commit suicide. Stu
HLBRSMA
>> > both "ventless" that have a flame and "ventless" that do not have a
>flame
>> > (Also called Catalytic). Your use of the word "ventless" doesn't tell
>> which
>> > kind you refer too.
>>
>> Even the catalytic heaters burn up the oxygen and can cause a fire if a
>pet
>> knocks something against it.
>> Mo
>>
>>
>>
>
>How can you say that catalytic heaters "burn up the oxygen" when they don't
>have a flame?
>From the coleman web site "Surface temperature of the Catalytic heater head
>is below the ignition point of most flammable materials"
>
>Are you sure you aren't confusing Catalytic heaters with a regular propane
>heater with a flame?
>
Where the hell do you think the heat comes from, it comes from propane burning
using oxygen and producing carbon monoxide. Stu
Edgar S.
what is wrong with it?
Don't replace it if there's nothing specifically WRONG with it. Is it
thin? Place a second, thinner foam pad under it.
Does it bottom out? Insert a section of foam under the central area.
Foam is especially good for a bed 'cause the cells are closed: it
won't absorb a lot of moisture, and if spilled on, can be hosed off.
Water will run right through it.
"Joe Gilbert" <gilbe...@attbi.com> wrote in message news:<GQMj9.515353$me6.60434@sccrnsc01>...
Peter Pan
"HLBRSMA" <hlb...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020924222220...@mb-mf.aol.com...
Then why do they produce carbon DIOXIDE and water rather than what you
think?
Frederick G Young
enough you could kill someone with a spoon, but you would hardly call it a
lethal weapon.
Fredericknews:20020924221826...@mb-mf.aol.com...
Ralph Lindberg & Ellen Winnie
"Peter Pan" <PeterPan@NeverNeverLandNospam@Akamail.com> wrote:
> >
>
> Then why do they produce carbon DIOXIDE and water rather than what you
> think?
>
Because he actually doesn't -know- anything about them?
S. Bourg
> speed with which a chemical process occurs, above that which would be
> possible without it's presence. It can cause chemical processes to take
> place that would not be possible without it, unless the conditions under
> which the process occurs were different than normal ambient conditions.
Fred, you are overlooking the reason for the increased speed of
reaction - lower activation energy. This means lower temperature of
reaction.
> is true whether it is a car exhaust or wherever. The only difference is that
> in the car exhaust it is changing NOX into something else, and in a heater
> it is changing CO into CO2. So I doubt I am confused as you put it.
It appears you are. Think about the logic of it. If the catalyst were
there to convert CO into CO2, then the temperature of the oxidation of
propane process would produce a flame. If you have seen a catalytic
heater at work, you would know this is not the case. It would
certainly be possible to have a normal burner, then follow this with
an afterburner with an appropriate catalyst to further oxidize the CO.
This is of course not how these heaters are designed. The catalyst
used is designed to reduce the activation energy of the oxidation of
the propane to a point where combustion occurs at about 600F. The
reason for the low production of CO is simply the large surface area
of the reaction mat in contact with air, and the relatively low flow
rate of fuel - allowing complete oxidation to take place. Thinking of
the catalytic process as increasing the 'speed' of the reaction is
misleading in this case, and should not be interpreted as the actual
rapidity of fuel consumption. Note too, not all catalytic heaters
necessarily have low CO emissions. Cheaper designs that use a small
pad and have a high specific BTU ouput density will certainly not
oxidize as thoroughly. If you want to know the CO measurements of the
Olympian heaters, they will mail you independent lab test results.
> While not being exactly dupe proof, I assure you Steve, I don't dupe easily.
>
> I have a CO monitor installed in my living room. First I tested the monitor
> with an open flame to ensure it was functioning, then I took the monitor and
> held it over the heater close enough to avoid dilution but not so close as
> to impair the monitor operation. The reading was zilch for the heater, and
> an indication for the open flame.
The reason for the low CO emission of these heaters is exactly the
same reason for the catalytic designs, and is as I described above.
The difference is the need for these home heaters to function at the
uncatalysed activation energy required for the gas oxidation, about
6000F, apparently. The catalysed reaction would perform the same, but
at the much lower temperature. Note the chemistry of the net reaction
is the SAME! There is no secondary reaction to oxidize CO in either
case. The significant difference between the two would be the much
higher danger of catching an errant combustible on fire with your home
heater.
Both your home heater and catalytics DO produce CO as an inevitable
component of the combustion process. As with ANY such oxidation, the
percentage of CO produced will go up as the oxygen available in the
air decreases, and thus present a health risk if precautions are not
taken. If you let the absence of a reading on your CO monitor as your
'scientific' lab test of it's absence, you are fooling yourself.
Misapplied science is without doubt worse than none!
Steve
Larry Daniels
a lot of discussion here before.
i looked at several options and finally took someone's advice on here
and went to WalMart and puchased a convoluted foam mattress cover
(just a couple of inches thick), trimmed it to size and simply put it
on smoothe side up. the bottom sheet holds it in place - it made a
world of difference, only cost a few bucks and fits like a glove.
one suggestion someone had that i really liked, but we could not do
because our bed is against the wall and "trapped" head and foot by
walls, was to scab on a piece of plywood to the base (to lengthen the
bed a few inches) and install a regular queen size residential
mattress at a tremendous savings. this way you can spend as much or
little as you like - even get one of those air comfort /nautilus beds
with individual firmness controls.
you can go to www.google.com, select "groups", put in the correct
words - bed, mattress, foam, confort, etc - (even limit the groups to
this rv group by advanced search if you wish) and pick up all the info
you need to make the right decision for your particular situation.
On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 22:45:58 GMT, "Joe Gilbert" <gilbe...@attbi.com>
wrote:
Frederick
I understand your explanation and the fact that the combustion process
is enabled to occur at a lower temperature. I was basing my comments on
another kind of heater where the catalyst was suspended over the heating
element. However, the use of a mat through which to diffuse the gas at a
slow rate surely is just a more effective way of bringing the gas into
contact with the catalyst. As you describe it, this allows the mat to
essentially be the radiating surface. In the Plaque type, the same thing is
done but without a catalyst and therefore combustion occurs at a higher
temperature. This is the one feature of the plaque heater that I enjoy. It
is a powerful radiant heat source, and the pleasure of baring ones derrière
to such a source on a cold morning cannot be described adequately. I suspect
that 600 DegF would not be quite the same. So it seems we are not talking
about the same thing. I would guess that about 90% of the heat output from
the plaque type is radiant heat. When we sit opposite it about ten feet away
we can feel the warmth on our exposed skin. body.
I would not agree that the production of CO is an inevitable factor in
the combustion process. It all depends on the efficiency of the process from
a heat conversion point of view. Granted you probably can't grab all the
CO's and make 'em CO2's, but as in all things technical, like that last bit
of dust that won't go into the dust pan, the question is, is what is left
just not enough to matter. CO will only poison you if there is enough of it.
When I talked to the company their comment was that there is less CO than
you would encounter in a cigarette, and that is all going into the lungs
undiluted.
What about the question I raised about the release of the catalyst
itself?
Many years ago it was found that the use of a vanadium compound
increased the efficiency of gas turbine combustion and hence the nasties in
the exhaust. However the public health people got all shook up, and probably
rightly too, about the release of vanadium into the atmosphere, so it was
never widely used. What about the catalyst release? I don't think the
platinum is there as a pure element and probably has a carrier itself, which
might vary from one manufacturer to another. That is where I can see the
possibility of some adverse effects. I make no claims to be an expert in
this, after all I'm a Mechanical Engineer not a Chemical Engineer, but
sometimes even the expert can miss something. Usually followed by the
expert, if he's an honest one, saying "Why the hell didn't I think of that"
With the exception of your comment about misapplied science, I thank you
for the change of tone in your post. Would that all posters were as
responsive. We have people who lurk and post who think that almost any
applied science is misapplied, and God rules all.
Mother Nature is a Bitch.
Frederick
"S. Bourg" <sbo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1d0fc641.02092...@posting.google.com...
Tom Marik
Frederick wrote:
> Steve,
>
Snip
>
> When I talked to the company their comment was that there is less CO than
> you would encounter in a cigarette, and that is all going into the lungs
> undiluted.
>
That has to be one of the weakest endorsements I've heard.
>
> What about the question I raised about the release of the catalyst
> itself?
>
> Many years ago it was found that the use of a vanadium compound
> increased the efficiency of gas turbine combustion and hence the nasties in
> the exhaust.
Snip
>
>
> Mother Nature is a Bitch.
>
> Frederick
Frederick, I know this not definite but platinum is so inert that I don't think
it's toxic.
Tom
Neon John
wrote:
>we were facing the same thing - restless unfulfilling sleep. there was
>a lot of discussion here before.
>
>i looked at several options and finally took someone's advice on here
>and went to WalMart and puchased a convoluted foam mattress cover
>(just a couple of inches thick), trimmed it to size and simply put it
>on smoothe side up. the bottom sheet holds it in place - it made a
>world of difference, only cost a few bucks and fits like a glove.
We did something similar in our rig. I posted previously about it so that
might be what you're thinking. We took two hunks of waffle foam from
Wallyworld and wifey made a sheet sock to fit around it. That gives us a foam
bed and lower sheet all in one easy-to-store package. Every few trips, unzip
the sock, take the foam out and wash the "sheet" normally. She sewed it up
from two sheets and a LONG zipper.
On the top we use a pair of the cheapest poly blankets K-mart sells. About
$4. We find that these are comfortable enough not to require a top sheet.
And when they get dirty, just drop 'em off at the Good Will and buy new ones.
Using these techniques I can have the couches knocked down and the bed ready
to sleep in inside of 5 minutes.
I had the bed/couches redone with the firmest foam available. That and the
waffle foam make a bed that sleeps better than any bed I've ever been on. I
sometimes sneak out to the RV to sleep when I'm restless. Wonderful bed.
Wendy Chatley Green
<johngdDO...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
:On the top we use a pair of the cheapest poly blankets K-mart sells. About
:$4. We find that these are comfortable enough not to require a top sheet.
:And when they get dirty, just drop 'em off at the Good Will and buy new ones.
Goodwill tosses them in the trash. Save a step and toss them
yourself.
--
Wendy Chatley Green
wcg...@cris.com
Neon John
> In the Plaque type, the same thing is
>done but without a catalyst and therefore combustion occurs at a higher
>temperature. This is the one feature of the plaque heater that I enjoy. It
>is a powerful radiant heat source, and the pleasure of baring ones derrière
>to such a source on a cold morning cannot be described adequately. I suspect
>that 600 DegF would not be quite the same.
You would be wrong. I have both. The catalyst blanket acts as an almost
perfect black body radiator. It glows a very dull red, visible in a dark
room. It radiates a LOT of heat. The difference between the surface
combustion heater and the catalytic heater is that your distance isn't so
critical. A little too close with the surface combustion heater and your
derriere is flambe'. The catalytic heater is much less critical in that
regard.
> Many years ago it was found that the use of a vanadium compound
>increased the efficiency of gas turbine combustion and hence the nasties in
>the exhaust. However the public health people got all shook up, and probably
>rightly too, about the release of vanadium into the atmosphere, so it was
>never widely used. What about the catalyst release? I don't think the
>platinum is there as a pure element and probably has a carrier itself, which
>might vary from one manufacturer to another.
The platinum is there in elemental form. Considering its nobility it would be
fairly difficult to have it any other way. It's typically applied as a very
dilute solution of platinic acid (sp) that is then fired. The firing reduces
the platinic acid to elemental platinum. There are only a few mg across the
whole heater element. If the platinum goes away the heater quits working.
>That is where I can see the
>possibility of some adverse effects.
Like what? Platinum is almost totally inert and is one of the few
biocompatible metals that can be implanted in the body. Hope you didn't
blister your hands while wringing them...
If I were going to worry about anything about a catalytic or surface burner
heater (and I'm not) I'd worry about the substrate subliming and emitting
micron sized particles of silicon dioxide. You know that white deposit that
plates out above a surface burner? Guess what that is?
John
Frederick
"Tom Marik" <tom....@oracle.com> wrote in message
news:3D936A6A...@oracle.com...
>
> > Frederick
>
> Frederick, I know this not definite but platinum is so inert that I don't
think
> it's toxic.
>
> Tom
It's not so much the platinum but the compound of which the platinum is
part. I doubt that it is there in it's elemental form.It's too damned
expensive for that.
Frederick
Frederick
"Neon John" <johngdDO...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:bev6pu4scvstleffl...@4ax.com...
John,
I just did a search on Google using the keywords "Platinum Toxicity"
this is what came up.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Platinum+toxicity&btn
G=Google+Search
Are you not thinking of Palladium?. I have a dental bridge which I have
had for at least 10 years that was made from Palladium. It replaced one
that was made of gold. I would have preferred Gold again, but the cost was a
strong compromise inducer<G> A you can see, platinum is certainly not free
from toxicity problems.
Frederick
Peter Pan
"Frederick" <fxy...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:an03to$a26ai$1...@ID-139090.news.dfncis.de...
Did you ever read any of the stuff your search found? Just for fun I looked
at two of them, one was the "environmental review" link and guess what
Platinum Toxicity - New York, NY I am concerned and looking for information
concerning platinum toxicity and/or poisoning, potential immunogenic
effects, and criteria for diagnosing toxicity reactions. Also, I am very
keen to read information concerning possible links of toxicity to
neuromuscular / Multiple Scerosis-like afflictions for patients suffering fr
om this exposure.
It's a message asking for info about it - not about what it is
and then there where a few articles about:
Title: Toxicity of platinum/paclitaxel combinations and co-morbidity in the
primary therapy of epithelial ovarian cancer. (Meeting abstract).
Sorry, but I don't think platinum in a catalytic heater has a whole lot to
do with "ovarian cancer treatment"
If anyone here wants a handy link for the elements, check out
http://www.chemicalelements.com
Frederick
"Peter Pan" <PeterPan@NeverNeverLandNospam@Akamail.com> wrote in message
news:maPk9.1864$t6.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> "Frederick" <fxy...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:an03to$a26ai$1...@ID-139090.news.dfncis.de...
> >
> > "Neon John" <johngdDO...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> > news:bev6pu4scvstleffl...@4ax.com...
> Did you ever read any of the stuff your search found? Just for fun I
looked
> at two of them, one was the "environmental review" link and guess what
> Platinum Toxicity - New York, NY I am concerned and looking for
information
> concerning platinum toxicity and/or poisoning, potential immunogenic
> effects, and criteria for diagnosing toxicity reactions. Also, I am very
> keen to read information concerning possible links of toxicity to
> neuromuscular / Multiple Scerosis-like afflictions for patients suffering
fr
> om this exposure.
>
> It's a message asking for info about it - not about what it is
>
> and then there where a few articles about:
> Title: Toxicity of platinum/paclitaxel combinations and co-morbidity in
the
> primary therapy of epithelial ovarian cancer. (Meeting abstract).
>
> Sorry, but I don't think platinum in a catalytic heater has a whole lot to
> do with "ovarian cancer treatment"
>
> If anyone here wants a handy link for the elements, check out
> http://www.chemicalelements.com
I read one article referring to the toxicity effects of the use of platinum
compounds to treat breast cancer, and the use of platinum in substances that
are emplyed during breast implants.
Lats clarify something. I am not saying that people should not use catalytic
heaters. I am saying that I preferr not to. If I did say I would not use one
it is purely my personnel preference because of the possible ill effects as
I perceive them to be. We each chose our own poisons in this world. Not
using a catalytic heater is just my exercise of that right. I may be wrong
and I might change my mind if faced with no other alternative. I didn't
think I would use a plaque type ventless heater but I using one and in fact
boughtanother. BTW, if a substance runs the risk of toxicity during a
medical treatment, does that mean it is not toxic outside of that treatment?
Obviously not. I rest my case.
Frederick
>
>
Peter Pan
Umm, you may want to reconsider that and "unrest your case", your logic is a
bit fuzzy.
Sodium and Chlorine are toxic by themselves, yet when chemically combined
they become NaCl or salt, and saline solution is not toxic.
Neon John
wrote:
Actually they hand them out to the street bums that are attracted to the
nearby soup kitchen. I am reconsidering the direct-to-dumpster option but for
another reason. It really pisses me to find one of those blankets, filthy and
usually with human excrement on it, left laying in my restaurant parking lot.
They can freeze into bum-sicles for all I care.
John
Neon John
> I just did a search on Google using the keywords "Platinum Toxicity"
>this is what came up.
>http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Platinum+toxicity&btn
>G=Google+Search
What you found (at least on the first two google pages - I lacked the patience
for any more) was regarding a platinum-containing chemotherapy drug called
cisplatin. Yes, that stuff is toxic - as my MIL's oncologist said, this stuff
is designed to poison the cancer just a little faster than it poisons the
host. Platinum metal is one of the most inert elements there is. An
indication of the difficulty of making platinum enter into chemical reactions
is the cost of platinic compounds. Cisplatin is running about $8k a dose, or
was last year when a friend was on the stuff for breast cancer. Certainly
nothing involved in a catalytic heater is going to make a platinum compound.
I've used a platinum crucible to concentrate HF acid, just to give you an idea
of its inertness. I've also used a crucible to fuse sodium fluoride, one of
the more active fused salts going.
If you go googling you'll find an MSDS barking the hazards of gold, water,
beach sand, table salt and probably plain writing paper. Awhile back I bought
some research-grade distilled water. It came with, you guessed it, an MSDS
listing all the hazards. The world has gone absolutely crazy.
Neon John
BTW, if a substance runs the risk of toxicity during a
>medical treatment, does that mean it is not toxic outside of that treatment?
>Obviously not. I rest my case.
If I combine hydrogen with chlorine I get hydrogen chloride, hydrochloric acid
once it contacts water. If I combine hydrogen with fluorine, I get HF, an
acid that attacks glass. If I combine hydrogen with oxygen, carbon, and
phosphorus using the correct technique I get nerve gas. If I breath it in
high enough concentration I will die. So, is hydrogen toxic? By the above
logic it would be.
Ralph Lindberg & Ellen Winnie
"Peter Pan" <PeterPan@NeverNeverLandNospam@Akamail.com> wrote:
>
> Umm, you may want to reconsider that and "unrest your case", your logic is a
> bit fuzzy.
>
You're still learning about Fredrick... his logic and fuzzy are often
synonymous
Wade
"Ralph Lindberg & Ellen Winnie" <rlin...@kendaco.telebyte.com> wrote in
message news:rlindber-67EDAB...@news.fu-berlin.de...
> In article <emQk9.2060$t6.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> "Peter Pan" <PeterPan@NeverNeverLandNospam@Akamail.com> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Umm, you may want to reconsider that and "unrest your case", your logic
is a
> > bit fuzzy.
> >
> You're still learning about Fredrick... his logic and fuzzy are often
> synonymous
>
I like that fuzzy logic. LMAO
Wade
Edgar S.
bed than good, thick firm foam. It's what we use at home too
incidently. We've had the same foam mattress for 15 yrs, and it's
still going strong.
You can buy a used foam slab mattress, which we did, or new foam from
a foam shop.
As poly foam is closed cell, even an old used foam mattress does not
retain moisture or bacteria. The material is totally inert
biolgoically. The surface can get soiled, but this can be hosed off.
Once dry, the bed is as good as the day it was made.
Old cloth covers can be removed and destroyed. This leaves the firm
foam core as the base for your portable bed. This can be topped with a
thick wool blanket. The blanket need not be perfect, because you're
going to cover it. Just put a good, thick fitted cotton sheet over the
core and blanket. The thick wool breathes allowing a lot of
circulation, and the cotton sheet will be both smooth and absorbent.
The wool blanket can be cleaned in a washer on a very gentle setting
with minimal aggitation. Naturally, the sheet can be changed as
required. This makes for the easiest, and most sanitary bed anyone
could want... for next to nothing in cost.
Definintely a case where less investment will get you more.
Neon John <johngdDO...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:<pmu6pukj3v6uhegg2...@4ax.com>...
Wade
"Stan Birch" <bi...@netrver.com> wrote in message
news:3d95b8fe...@news.netrover.com...
> >On Fri, 27 Sep 2002 19:21:34 GMT, "Wade" <N...@home.com> wrote:
>
> As far as suicide goes, I've dealt with a number of them; but never
> with case that I figured could be defended or **proven** in a court of
> law.
>
> As far as I'm concerned, catalytic heaters are completely safe when
> provided with ever so little cross-ventilation. They do not produce
> CO, unless there is so little O left that they can no longer support
> the natural production of CO2 as a product of combusion/oxidation. By
> the time one of these units produce CO, the occupants of a of rig will
> already have already irretrievably succumbed to lack of O and
> excessive CO2.
>
>
Her would be scenario, catalytic heaters are basically illegal for use in
RV's in Canada except Quebec, albeit many RV stores do sell them. In the
event that something would happen, with this heaters and the insurer
determines the cause being the vent-less heater, what would the insurance
company do?
Wade
Frederick
"Peter Pan" <PeterPan@NeverNeverLandNospam@Akamail.com> wrote in message
According to your hypothesis drinking sea water should be OK. A steady state
of about 4% salinity in the blood is about right. Drink sea water and
steadily push that up and you get all sorts of things happening. Methinks
that there are a few complicated things in life that you tend to view as
somewhat simple. Arsenic is used therapeutically, but not very much more of
it can kill too. The best we can hope is that if we encounter things that
have the potential to do harm, unless we know conclusively that we get lots
of warning as to what is happening, or the body responds to protect itself,
we don't give the substance the benefit of the doubt. Life is full of risks.
Some are recognized by people, others chose to ignore the risk. Consider
smoking. We know it does lots of harm and can kill, but some people chose to
ignore the risk and do it. Along as what they do doesn't harm me I can't say
they shouldn't. Such is the case with catalytic heaters. I think smoking is
crazy behavior, as to catalytic heaters, if you thing I'm crazy, so be it,
it won't affect the course of my life. I have an alternative.
BTW: As to logic I might say that yours is not sufficiently visionary. You
can conclude that eleven equals ten, if you miss out 1.
Frederick
Frederick
"Ralph Lindberg & Ellen Winnie" <rlin...@kendaco.telebyte.com> wrote in
message news:rlindber-67EDAB...@news.fu-berlin.de...
Ralph,
I might say that Frederick has been learning a lot about Frederick for
the past 78 years. I have met many people, some of them in cyberspace, who
haven't learned anything about themselves for the major portion of their
lives. They still cling to half baked ideas and prejudices. I guess that's
the difference between 78 years of experience and 20 years of experience
that ceased at 20.
Frederick
Frederick
"Neon John" <joh...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:bqo7puca4jb1qpokh...@4ax.com...
All the elements and compounds you mention have a know history. I have
no concerns about the known. It's the unknown effects that I prefer to
avoid. When I was in my late teens my Mother bought me cigarettes for
presents. She thought there was no harm involved otherwise she would have
been horrified. She just didn't know. We thought DDT had no ill effects on
humans, and so it was widely used. Now we know better. And for that and
other reasons, we don't use it anymore except in rare and controlled ways.
Logic does not always lead to the right solution. It stands a good
chance if all the elements required to arrive at a solution are included.
That is the Achilles heel of logic. There is also such a thing as the
circular argument.
Finally if you take Hydrogen and fill a room with it, then enter, you
are going to be asphyxiated. So yes, under certain conditions it is toxic.
Even oxygen can be toxic. If it present in the blood in a high enough
concentration. Raptures of the Deep is a toxic reaction to high
concentrations of Oxygen in the blood.
Frederick
Frederick
John,
The other side of the coin is the case of about 11 workers that were
poisoned because at the time there was no requirement for the monster that
was their employer to advise them that they were handling an Arsenic
compound. So they just quit work and ate their lunch etc. without washing
their hands,,,,,,,,, and died. That of course was prior to the MSDS
legislation. Perhaps a little overkill that avoids killings is better than
underkill that kills.
Frederick
>
Just Me
139090.news.dfncis.de:
> Raptures of the Deep is a toxic reaction to high
> concentrations of Oxygen in the blood.
>
Sorry, Frederick, "Raptures of the Deep" (Jacques Cousteau's phrase) is
also known as "Nitrogen Narcosis" and is due to Nitrogen under pressure in
the bloodstream affecting the brain.
Nitrogen Narcosis is addressed by "Martooni's Law": for each atmosphere of
pressure the effect is that of consuming a Martini. For example, 66' (2
atm) = 2 swift drinks.
The deeper you go, the more effect upon observation and judgement.
Oxygen poisoning occurs at far shallower depths when pure Oxygen is used.
Unless very expensive special equipment is used, pressurized pure Oxygen
use is limited to about 33'.
Ralph Lindberg & Ellen Winnie
"Wade" <N...@home.com> wrote:
>
> I like that fuzzy logic. LMAO
> Wade
>
Actually it's funnier then you think, fuzzy logic is a new control
theory and they are building control systems that operate off it.
Andy S
> In article <XXZk9.424594$Ag2.18...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca>,
> "Wade" <N...@home.com> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > I like that fuzzy logic. LMAO
> > Wade
> >
> Actually it's funnier then you think, fuzzy logic is a new control
> theory and they are building control systems that operate off it.
>
New in the sense of about 8 or 10 years old. :-)
Frederick
Oxygen breathing was known back in WW2 when the divers were used to plant
limpet mines on the hulls of ships and used a closed breathing system
breathing pure oxygen. No bubbles at the surface. That is the case I had in
mind when I mention "Raptures of the Deep". The WW2 divers were limited to
less than 30 ft.
Frederick
"Just Me" <s31924...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:upa455s...@corp.supernews.com...
Ralph Lindberg & Ellen Winnie
wrote:
>
> New in the sense of about 8 or 10 years old. :-)
>
Which are only now starting to see actually use
Frederick
It is a common misconception that an insurance company can deny a claim
because the claimant was either stupid or did not obey the law. Unless the
circumstances are included in the exclusions section of the policy, the
company is insuring against both your none compliance with the law and even
your stupidity. If you overload your vehicle and have an accident, and there
is nothing in the policy which specifically mentions the prohibition to
overloading then they have to pay. You might get some bamboozle from an
adjuster, but in the end they pay. You might also run the risk of having an
extremely high premium to insure again, but that's a risk that is none
insurable.<G>
Frederick
"Wade" <N...@home.com> wrote in message
news:HI3l9.425170$Ag2.18...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca...
Vito
>
> Wade,
> It is a common misconception that an insurance company can deny a claim
> ... You might get some bamboozle from an adjuster, but in the end they pay.
Reminds me of an experience with Allstate 20+ years ago. (Now ex)wife
backed into another car. A week later we got a letter refunding the
premium we'd paid 3 months earlier and explaining that they weren't
liable since they'd decided not to insure us. After working my way up to
their chief of claims in another state and getting the same BS I called
our state insurance commission. Man there gave me his name and said
"Call so-&-so back and tell him I said to knock it off!" As soon as I
mentioned his name the head man laughed and said "well, I guess we can't
do you today." then told me they'd pay for the accident. Oddly, they
were surprised when I didn't renew.
No Spam
They can't? It's done all the time. If not a downright denial then a gross
underestimation of damages. One Texas company just sent my daughter the
balance of a $4300.00 claim after the adjuster tried to BS her into
accepting <$500.00. (their insured was at fault).
Old boy had her in tears with his abusive treats not realizing that I was on
the extension. (If only I had taped the call)
Do a google search on key words Allstate and abuse (actually you can use
almost any insurance company)
Vito
>
> | It is a common misconception that an insurance company can deny a claim
> | because the claimant was either stupid <snip>
>
As one friend put it "You're a better engineer than I am because you do
it 8+ hours a day, 5+ days a week, etc.; but I'm a better lawyer than
you for the same reason. Now that claim adjuster doesn't earn brownie
points or raises by being fair; he does it by getting people to accept
the smallest settlements he can, any way he can. Fair doesn't enter the
equation. Worse, he does this to people 8+ hours a day, 5+ days a week,
et cetera. It follows that you are no match for him if we play by his
rules, and neither am I. You gotta give me a stick to beat him with. So,
if you ever have an accident, get your butt to an MD and complain about
back and neck pains ... get your 'injuries' on record so we can beat a
fair settlement on your car repairs out of him. Then you can get
better."
Neither he nor I am suggesting you defraud anybody, just that you may
need a stick to get a fair shake. If you don't end up needing it, so
much the better.
Dfrenchy
>if you ever have an accident, get your butt to an MD and complain about
>back and neck pains ... get your 'injuries' on record so we can beat a
>fair settlement on your car repairs out of him. Then you can get
>better."
>
What a bunch of crap. If you are dealing with someone else's insurance company
and don't like the deal, go to your own company and let them repair it and
collect from the other company. There are still companies that are hard to deal
with but most are looking to get your car fixed and close the claim. Most have
preferred body shops and will guarantee the work.
Also, most state regulators will impose heavy fines on companies found to be
low balling settlement offers.
I hear so few complaints against my insurance companies that sometimes I can't
believe it myself :~)
Allstate is a different subject :~(
Just Me
news:20021003161913...@mb-ml.aol.com:
Allstate and Kemper.
We've got State Farm.
Since a full recital would, possibly, be denounced as SPAM, I'll limit
my statement to the following:
After dealing with the Claims people at State Farm, I'll do everything
that I can to stay with them - they paid top dollar, they paid quickly,
and they were wonderful to do business with.
Believe me, that was an understatement!
Big....@hotmail.com
retired Military to get on with them.
BJ (USAF Fighter Pilot, Ret.)
----clip----
No Spam
| retired Military to get on with them.
|
| BJ (USAF Fighter Pilot, Ret.)
|
They still try to low ball the claims process. In my daughter's case they
are still holding two weeks of rent car payment and saying they only pay $23
per day where the rent company charges ~$31.00 per day. (USAA contact rate)
They b*tch about law suite abuse soon they are going to see some of that as
under Texas Ins Commission rules and Veron Texas Civil statues they will
have to pay that, attorny fees, court cost and loss wages for going to
court.
Vito
>
> What a bunch of crap. If you are dealing with someone else's insurance company
> and don't like the deal, go to your own company and let them repair it and
> collect from the other company.
Bad advise! You should never go to your own company unless you're at
fault or the other dude has no insurance. If the other guy is clearly at
fault then he is legally liable to fix whatever damage he caused, and
his insurer is liable to pay his cost of doing so. This means putting
your car back into the condition it was before he damaged it, renting
you a car while that happens, et cetera. OTOH, your own insurer's
liability depends on the policy, a contract between you and them that is
subject to interpretation. For example, they may quibble over how well
the paint has to match and won't loan you a car unless you paid for that
coverage.
> ...... There are still companies that are hard to deal with but most ...
Dunno about "most"; there are certainly good companies but it's the bad
ones you need a stick to deal with.
>
> Also, most state regulators will impose heavy fines on companies found to be
> low balling settlement offers.
First I ever heard that one. Anybody know of a company that got fined?
>
> I hear so few complaints against my insurance companies that sometimes I can't
> believe it myself :~)
>
> Allstate is a different subject :~(
I believe that. I'm more than happy with USAA .... so far ;o)
bill horne
> I believe that. I'm more than happy with USAA .... so far ;o)
So far, I'm happy with USAA, too - but I've only been with them for 39
years, so that could change at any minute.
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
Frederick G Young
Insurance consists of an organization betting that you will not have an
accident during the time they are underwriting the risks you are taking.
They make money by winning that bet. After they have lost, they then attempt
to define your losses in a way which minimizes their losses.
Insurance as a means of protecting you is secondary to it'd main purpose
of making money while minimizing the risk of the insurer. It's all a case of
perspective.
Frederick
"Vito" <vi...@crosslink.net> wrote in message
news:3D9D8960...@crosslink.net...
Vito
>
> Insurance consists of an organization betting that you will not have an
Theoretically, no. Insurance is based on the principle that no one can
predict when or if an individual will have a loss but can predict with
reasonable accuracy how many individuals in a given group will have a
loss and what the average cost will be. For example, there is no way to
guess if I will live another year but the number and percent of men my
age who will die this year is pretty well know. Thus individuals are
gambling when we buy insurance, or a lottery ticket, but insurance
companies and casinos are not. They can actuarily predict how much they
will have to pay in claims year by year. The squeeze comes between that
$number and premium income. It's easier to sell a cheap policy.
Something has to give to keep prices low and profit high and that's
where less than honest claim adjusters earn their keep.
Bob McNabb
complaints that are reported by claimants and policyholders. They
maintain a form of tabulation (by type of complaint) and it's a well
eaning kind of advocacy for fairness. It's hardly a program that has
"teeth".
Insurers live in dread of a cause of court action
that can expose their entire assets to judgement. Let's assume that the
responible party in an accident has $100,000 limits and the adjuster has
a chance to settle for $100,000 but refuses and then "plays hard-to-get"
until your attorney sees him in court. You win a judgement for $200,000
and then watch the feathers fly. The responsible party, their insured,
has a cause of action called "Bad Faith" against his insurer. It's not
limited to the excess ($100,000) that he has to pay out of his
pocket.....it's limited only to the asset value of the insurer. They had
an opportunity to settle for his limits and they decided to play games.
They lost, but so did the policyholder. Yes, there have been just enough
court cases (lost)
to give all insurers a sick feeling of a shot coming across their bow.
Most claims departments have strong direction from their Home Office to
not attempt to be daring.
I'm an old insurance broker and sometimes see an adjuster trainee doing
something dumb, but a phone call to the supervisor normally gets the
thing back on track. The industry is generally fair minded.
Bob McNabb
Frederick G Young
They are still gambling. What you are saying is that they believe they know
the odds. I am familiar with the principles of actuarial science. When it
comes to the individual, from his perspective, they are betting on him
staying alive. If he suddenly develops bipolar disorder and decides to take
his own life, they lose. Even actuarial calculations can be wrong. Not long
ago the name partners at Lloyds of London got a shock when they were called
on to pay in more money. Unheard of before. Natural disasters and several
other major calamities were not included in the odds for that year.
Frederick
"Vito" <vi...@crosslink.net> wrote in message
news:3DA19F1A...@crosslink.net...
Walter H. Klaus
your local camping world and buy a small inverter.
Walter H. Klaus
Stan Birch wrote:
> >On Fri, 27 Sep 2002 19:21:34 GMT, "Wade" <N...@home.com> wrote:
> >All right then, as vent-less heaters are illegal in Canada, and you are
> >aware of this fact . . . .
>
> Nope. Not aware of this "fact??". I have a couple catalytic heaters .
> . . both purchased in Canada; and used for decades. Time to call in
> the Mounties?
>
> > what is the probability of said insurance to pay off in
> >the event of any mishap? It is difficult enough to have insurance companies
> >pay on claims that are straight forward, with the exception of broken
> >windshields.
>
> I've never experienced the slightest problem in getting insurance
> companies to "pay off." I my experience, they have all been more that
> eager to accommodate. 'Course, I shop for my insurance; and don't tend
> to place my fate in the hands of the "Good Hands" people.
>
> I deciding whether or not a loss is covered, and insurer merely reads
> the policy; the criteria being:
>
> 1. Is it a peril covered under the terms of the policy, and;
>
> 2. Is coverage of the loss in any way excluded under the exclusionary
> clauses of the policy.
>
> The whole process is a no-brainer.
>
> >So Mister expert tell us how many years it would take to settle this one,
> >when they have adjusters like yourself that would immediately jump to the
> >conclusion that this was a suicide?
>
> The prescribed time frame for an insurer to settle a claim, is within
> 30 days of receipt of Proof of Loss. Failure to settle within that
> time places the insurer in the position of having to defend an ultra
> expensive lawsuit for punitive damages for "Failure to Act in Good
> Faith." Guess how many jurors direct their compassion toward the
> insurance company in preference to the Screwee?
Tom J
"cg" <cgrams7@yahoo.{removethis}com> wrote in message
news:465vtu8c408ba9fv2...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 23 Nov 2002 07:26:56 -0600, "Walter H. Klaus"
> <wkl...@gulftel.com> wrote:
>
> >Go to your local Walmart and buy a CO2 detector. If you
are boondocking, go to
> >your local camping world and buy a small inverter.
>
>
> Could you please remove the business card when posting to
this group.
> "rec.outdoors.rv-travel" is not a binary group.
It only takes one post by any dimwit that post anything but
plain text anymore for me to block them from ever showing up
on my screen again. That goes for colored pages, wiggle
sig. lines or anything else.
Life is a lot more enjoyable since I stared this about a
year ago.
Tom J
Bob Hatch
news:SVND9.21976$vM1.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
this nicest person around. If they post anything but plain text they are in
the filter.
I used to try to communicate with the web TV folks that build the stupid
colored pages with the dancing bears and loud obnoxious music. I would send
them an email and try to tell them how important it was to post in text
only. Got back rude insulting and multiple emails for my efforts. Now it's a
one step PLONK.
I never tell a person they are plonked, they just are. Once in the filter
they NEVER come out unless I have to reinstall the software and have lost my
newsgroup settings.
--
http://www.bobhatch.com
Our web site about RV Stuff
A work in progress
RVnNOW
<bobh...@go.com> writes:
>I'm with you Tom. I don't care if they have really good advice or might be
>this nicest person around. If they post anything but plain text they are in
>the filter.
>
>I used to try to communicate with the web TV folks that build the stupid
>colored pages with the dancing bears and loud obnoxious music. I would send
>them an email and try to tell them how important it was to post in text
>only. Got back rude insulting and multiple emails for my efforts. Now it's a
>one step PLONK.
>
>I never tell a person they are plonked, they just are. Once in the filter
>they NEVER come out unless I have to reinstall the software and have lost my
>newsgroup settings.
>
>
>--
>http://www.bobhatch.com
I never see anything but plain text. Why?
Lon
Bob Hatch
news:20021123142528...@mb-md.aol.com...
insisit on adding cards or posting in HTML will have their posts show up as
a lot of garbage to us. I prefer not to try to wade through the crap, so,
PLONK to them.
Peter Pan
> > Nope. Not aware of this "fact??". I have a couple catalytic heaters .
> > . . both purchased in Canada; and used for decades. Time to call in
> > the Mounties?
> >
So whats your point? A catalytic heater and a ventless propane heater are
two totally different things.
Don
> > Lon
> You have your newsreader set to read in plain text only. However those who
> insisit on adding cards or posting in HTML will have their posts show up as
> a lot of garbage to us. I prefer not to try to wade through the crap, so,
> PLONK to them.
>
wouldn't have to wade through the crap.
Don