In article <mLx5k.10092$uE5.2939@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com>, Mike <cigarmikeBAND@sbcglobal.net> wrote: "Bruce Watson" is wrong yet You're the only one in the world to believe that. Shower curtains harbour over 100 toxic chemicals http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14695135 Count these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_additives_in_cigarettes Acetanisole Acetic Acid

mail@atics.co.uk wrote: On 18 Nov, 11:34, AJH <n...@sylva.icuklive.co.uk> wrote: On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 09:45:09 +0000, Tim Lamb <t...@marford.demon.co.uk> wrote: There is an expert in here somewhere.....AJH? Idontdoexpert! For what it is worth, my experience of closed wood burning appliances is that the high exit temperature leads to condensation of unburned

It isn't the type of wood that you burn that makes or doesn't make a chimney fire. Its the amount of combustible residue left in the chimney that makes the difference. Burning almost any wet wood is worse in this regard because as the water in the wood vaporizes, it takes up heat from the "smoke" and that cools the flue gases, which in turn makes those (sometimes unburned and volatile

The methanol was a component of the "pyroligneous acid" phase, an acidic layer that floated on the tar, so that the distiller was left with two phases. The methanol was a component of the top acidic layer but would have required very careful distillation to separate it. Most likely this top layer would have been discarded. Ethyl alcohol would have served the Medieval world just