A way to improve the environment... cheap

Demwit said:
I don't know, perhaps, but 2 stroke boat motors are pretty much history and so are 2 cycle lawnmovers and motorcycles.

What they should do is fine the heck out of those that crank up their injectors and spew black smoke everywhere. Some leave giant clouds of black smoke.

I would like to see the law if a mechanic finds an injector pump cranked up he is required to report it.
Click to expand...
Doesn't your state have e-check?
 
Superfreak said:
To be honest I have no idea if these conversion kits would work on lawnmowers. I don't know enough about engines to say that. But the two-stoke vehicles are the target that can be fixed and it is economically viable to do so.
Click to expand...

I was trying to make a comment on the diseconomies of environmentalism....do you think every lawnmower causes $300 in environmental damage?.....
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Over the life time of the lawn mower? It easily does more than that.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can be that flip with your response.....let's say you live in Chicago....you use your lawnmower once a week for 20 weeks....you run it for around an hour.....let's be generous and say your lawnmower is going to last for fifteen years....so you run it for 300 hours....

so, you are saying the environmental costs of using that lawnmower is "easily more" than $300?.......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I was trying to make a comment on the diseconomies of environmentalism....do you think every lawnmower causes $300 in environmental damage?.....
Click to expand...

I have no idea about lawnmowers.... again, that is NOT the two-strokes these converters were designed for. I do not know how much damage a lawn mower causes. Given that most are not run 7 days a week ten plus hours each day like the motorized vehicle two strokes in question, I doubt they are as damaging in total.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I don't think you can be that flip with your response.....let's say you live in Chicago....you use your lawnmower once a week for 20 weeks....you run it for around an hour.....let's be generous and say your lawnmower is going to last for fifteen years....so you run it for 300 hours....

so, you are saying the environmental costs of using that lawnmower is "easily more" than $300?.......
Click to expand...

well by looking at your numbers, then yes, I would agree with Mott. The emissions put out in an hour are certainly at the $1 in damage level per hour.

Now... why are you so focused on lawnmowers? That is NOT what this thread is about. If you want to talk lawnmowers, go start your own thread. This one is about the motorized vehicles you see on the website I linked in the first post.

It is most certainly economically viable and friendly to convert these vehicles. The savings in gas price alone would cover the costs. Not to mention the added savings in healthcare, oil and damage to the economy.
 
Superfreak said:
I have no idea about lawnmowers.... again, that is NOT the two-strokes these converters were designed for. I do not know how much damage a lawn mower causes. Given that most are not run 7 days a week ten plus hours each day like the motorized vehicle two strokes in question, I doubt they are as damaging in total.
Click to expand...

This thread does seem to have become focussed slightly more on lawn upkeep than you perhaps intended.

I have gravel, since you ask.
 
charver said:
This thread does seem to have become focussed slightly more on lawn upkeep than you perhaps intended.

I have gravel, since you ask.
Click to expand...

lol... here I thought I posted an article that everyone would be capable of a nice open discussion on how to get this done. It is something that is cost effective, easily converted, saves gas and oil consumption, reduces emissions across the board.... and what do we get....

a discussion on lawnmowers. Unreal.
 
Superfreak said:
lol... here I thought I posted an article that everyone would be capable of a nice open discussion on how to get this done. It is something that is cost effective, easily converted, saves gas and oil consumption, reduces emissions across the board.... and what do we get....

a discussion on lawnmowers. Unreal.
Click to expand...

C'mon Super.

Did you really and truly expect it NOT to turn out like this.
Just look at the way the majority of other threads end up.

At least you tried.
 
Superfreak said:
Now... why are you so focused on lawnmowers? That is NOT what this thread is about. If you want to talk lawnmowers, go start your own thread.
Click to expand...

dude....I didn't bring up lawnmowers....Mott did.....though I guess I talked about them because that's what I see.....I've never seen a three wheeled two cylinder taxi in my life, so I don't think much about them or how much they pollute.....

I am interested, however, in the valuation of diseconomies of pollution....how can you guys say with such assurance that running a two cylinder engine for an hour is going to cost a dollar in environmental cleanup....
 
Last edited:
Mott the Hoople said:
Doesn't your state have e-check?
Click to expand...

No and most states do not have emissions check.

When I lived in FL some areas of FL had Emissions check, but just the big metro areas.

that brings up a possibility for leglislation. All states should have emissions checks in order to liscense or re-liscence your vehicle.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
dude....I didn't bring up lawnmowers....Mott did.....though I guess I talked about them because that's what I see.....I've never seen a three wheeled two cylinder taxi in my life, so I don't think much about them or how much they pollute.....

I am interested, however, in the valuation of diseconomies of pollution....how can you guys say with such assurance that running a two cylinder engine for an hour is going to cost a dollar in environmental cleanup....
Click to expand...

again, I really really do not give a fuck about a god damn lawn mower. I could care less if you haven't ever seen a two stroke vehicle and are not willing to look at one on the website link provided. There is no fucking diseconomies of pollution that you continue rambling about.
 
Superfreak said:
There is no fucking diseconomies of pollution that you continue rambling about.
Click to expand...
???....do you understand what a diseconomy is?.....it is the unaccounted for cost of pollution to the environment....the cost of landfills, and cleaning up water and air....the very thing you are talking about.....you can fuck all the lawnmowers you want, I am merely asking you how you calculate the cost of cleaning up the air pollution caused by two cylinder engines....if you want to answer the question in relation to your three wheeled cycles instead of lawnmowers it ought not change your answer......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
dude....I didn't bring up lawnmowers....Mott did.....though I guess I talked about them because that's what I see.....I've never seen a three wheeled two cylinder taxi in my life, so I don't think much about them or how much they pollute.....

I am interested, however, in the valuation of diseconomies of pollution....how can you guys say with such assurance that running a two cylinder engine for an hour is going to cost a dollar in environmental cleanup....
Click to expand...
In south east asia their called "trikes" it's really just a small two stroke motorcycle with a side care welded to it. There a poor mans taxicab in SE Asian and a very common form of public transportation in rural areas.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I don't think you can be that flip with your response.....let's say you live in Chicago....you use your lawnmower once a week for 20 weeks....you run it for around an hour.....let's be generous and say your lawnmower is going to last for fifteen years....so you run it for 300 hours....

so, you are saying the environmental costs of using that lawnmower is "easily more" than $300?.......
Click to expand...
Certainly. Particularly if it's run by a two stroke engine. Modern engines covered under CAA regulation have combustion efficiencies well in excess of 95% where as a typical two stroke engine runs at around 65% combustion efficiency. You're 300 hours number is a lowball number that would be appropriate for a urban home owner in Chicago but not a suburban home owner in Charlotte who will have both larger yards and longer seasons so a 400 to 600 hours would be more accurate. But for the sake of argument lets use your 300 hours figure and assume that represents 1/2 gallon of fuel at todays price of around $2.50/gal. With a 30% inefficiency you can account for an initial cost of around $175. In addition these small engines represent about 25% of total emissions in urban areas for VOC's (volatile organic compounds aka hydrocarbons) NOx (responsible for ground level ozone and acid rain), carbon monoxide (a green house gas and a respiratory toxin) so your talking about a substantial reduction in the cost related to these pollutants which impact quality of life, health, agriculture, etc. Now that's just for small two stroke lawn mowers and weed wakers. The cost benefit for motor scooters and motorcycles would certainly be saved in fuel efficiencies alone.

In addition the $300 cost quoted is for retrofitting two stroke engines in small motorcycles which is arguably a difficult sell, particularly in places like SE Asia, where a working person might only be making a few hundred dollars a month but again is a cost that can be justified by increased fuel efficiencies. At the front end manufacturing of two stroke engines with direct injection is only around $5 to $7 per engine which, obviously, is easily compensated for by increased fuel efficiencies.

In the USA it's a moot point as regulation has been put in place by EPA where OEM's of small engines will be required to manufacture them with direct inject technology phasing in through 2011 and 2012 and required there after.
 
Last edited:
Mott the Hoople said:
In south east asia their called "trikes" it's really just a small two stroke motorcycle with a side care welded to it. There a poor mans taxicab in SE Asian and a very common form of public transportation in rural areas.
Click to expand...

The Tuk-tuks of Bangkok and elsewhere are invariably run on propane and are therefore very efficient.
 
tom prendergast said:
The Tuk-tuks of Bangkok and elsewhere are invariably run on propane and are therefore very efficient.
Click to expand...
I don't think so. I can't speak for Thailand as I've never been there. I have been to the Philippines, around the Caribbean, some of central America and Mexico and invariably they were some form of two stroke gas engine. Never saw that first propane vehicle.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Certainly. Particularly if it's run by a two stroke engine. Modern engines covered under CAA regulation have combustion efficiencies well in excess of 95% where as a typical two stroke engine runs at around 65% combustion efficiency. You're 300 hours number is a lowball number that would be appropriate for a urban home owner in Chicago but not a suburban home owner in Charlotte who will have both larger yards and longer seasons so a 400 to 600 hours would be more accurate. But for the sake of argument lets use your 300 hours figure and assume that represents 1/2 gallon of fuel at todays price of around $2.50/gal. With a 30% inefficiency you can account for an initial cost of around $175. In addition these small engines represent about 25% of total emissions in urban areas for VOC's (volatile organic compounds aka hydrocarbons) NOx (responsible for ground level ozone and acid rain), carbon monoxide (a green house gas and a respiratory toxin) so your talking about a substantial reduction in the cost related to these pollutants which impact quality of life, health, agriculture, etc. Now that's just for small two stroke lawn mowers and weed wakers. The cost benefit for motor scooters and motorcycles would certainly be saved in fuel efficiencies alone.

In addition the $300 cost quoted is for retrofitting two stroke engines in small motorcycles which is arguably a difficult sell, particularly in places like SE Asia, where a working person might only be making a few hundred dollars a month but again is a cost that can be justified by increased fuel efficiencies. At the front end manufacturing of two stroke engines with direct injection is only around $5 to $7 per engine which, obviously, is easily compensated for by increased fuel efficiencies.

In the USA it's a moot point as regulation has been put in place by EPA where OEM's of small engines will be required to manufacture them with direct inject technology phasing in through 2011 and 2012 and required there after.
Click to expand...

for one thing, your estimate of 25% of emissions seems both high and random....is there a source for this?......

second, I'm still trying to get a handle on the quick valuation of the diseconomy....you both seem quick to say that $300 is cheaper than the damage the engine will cause to the environment.....how do you value that damage?......can you show me a technology whereby we can eliminate YYY% of the emissions in the air for $XXX....so we can divide $XXX by your 25% and come up with a dollar amount per engine?.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top