That all depends on how the fluids are manufactured. Are they made with "green" methods or is the impact on our environment too high? Although it does sound promising.

I think a lot of people fail to realize that any hydraulic fluid will biodegrade over time. By making fluids that biodegrade faster they are simply assuring a faster cycling time which will make someone more money supplying more fluid.

Follow the money.

I often get annoyed when folks make claims about some product or equipment being "GREEN". Example: Home Brew Wind turbine. This kind of application is only green because it makes use of recycled/scrapped/discarded materials. If one calculates the energy and costs to create all of the materials to construct such an item, it certainly will not be green. However, I do agree that the concept promotes green as we are not simply throwing away something that still has a useful life span, are extending it and as the result are saving energy.

As for the bio-degradable hydraulic fluid, I would first have to see the cost analysis to create such a fluid. Further I would have to know that the raw materials were not robbing society of another food source. If we are getting the raw materials from some alien plant source like the Brazilian Pepper tree, or the Eucalyptus trees that were planted to absorb the water in Florida low lands, and the extraction of the raw materials was indeed cost effective, like using the waste from the source as a fuel to generate the energy need to get the end product extracted, and it also served to reduce the spread of these kinds of plants, and the life span of the end product was comparable to other hydraulic fluids, then a certification of "GREEN" is certainly acceptable. However one would also like to know that the spread of this fluid through down wind spraying from Industrial Grade Wind Turbines as the result of leaking seals etc. Would also not destroy the flora and fauna effected.

As for "GREEN" being a passing fad, not likely, though thru increased knowledge, many of the current opinions will certainly be adjusted accordingly.

TooMuchFun

It seems that many users are behind on the knowedge of evironmentally safe hydraulic fluids already in existance. Most of these are glycol based and the percentage of glycol used in water depends on temperature of the application. Needless to say, some glycol must be used in the system for lubricity purposes. North sea requirements for hydraulic rams and blowout prevention equipment for the oilfield in subsea applications have used enviromentally safe fluids for many years now in valves, piston operated devices etc. Texaco and Oceanic have produced these fluids for subsea oilfield use.

Environmentally safe promotes connotations of being "Green", no doubt about the intent. However: The question arises as to just how much energy from all sources are required to be incorporated into the total effort to create the substance from beginning to the end product.

The point I wish to make is simply this. How much energy from all sources is required to create the environmentally safe product and what does the description of "Environmentally Save" really mean. Ex; does it mean that it absolutely will not harm any sea life at all? Or does it mean that over some lengthy period of time it will degrade to the extent that is is considered benighn. Does it mean that less energy is used to create this "Green Hydraulic Oil" than a petroleum counter part. Even biodegradable is a good start, but that alone may not be enough to consider the substance "Green". It is a good start in the correct direction though it may need substantial improvement to be really considered truely "Green".

TooMuchFun

Hydraulic fliud is intentionaly produced so that is doesn't degrade.

Hello again Milo,

I had a hunting buggy that was steered with a double action cylinder that was mounted to a cross member that permitted it to eliminate the Tie rod connecting the two front wheels. This made it a hell of a lot easier to steer the two front tractor wheels on the front of said buggy. One day while crashing the heavy palmetto under growth , trying to flush out some wild hogs, I managed to mess up one of the hydraulic hoses, hung up on a litered stump, the oil went every where including on the hot exhaust manifold, where it experienced spontaneous ignition/combustion.

Fortunately, I had two fire extinguishers handy or the entire buggy would have been a total loss, About $10,000 worth.

I am not ready for all of these industrial wind turbines, I prefer NG fired steam turbines that produce 99.5% as opposed to somewhere between 20% and 38% energy on a best day. It is simply wasteful to have to install 4 times the equipment to realize equal performance.

By the way, I gave you a GA.

TooMuchFun

In the European union there is a rule that hydraulic systems must be designed as safe as possible, the manufacturer has the responibillity to do so.

Although nothing is mentioned in the rules (EN 12100 f.e.) regarding the biodegradable oil, you can imagine that an oil spill in a lock where a lot of hydraulic equipment is used, could lead to high costs to clean it all up. There is the money factor again. A way to minimize the cost effect, biodegradable oil is used as a standard.

Ofcourse an oil spill should always be prevented as much as possible and that is mere a sensible thing to do.

So Fad or future? In the first place, oil spills should be prevented as much as possible and biodegradable oil should be used in places where a spill can not be prevented by means of drip pans and could lead to severe pollution affecting the environment and human life. (The costs are always tightly linked)