Pollution from a HT Engine

Well if the EPA said that ........ wait, they are part of the GOVERNMENT. This is also the same GOVERNMENT that said - STOP, dont eat that tomato !!!!!!!

The Food and Drug Administration is expanding its warning to consumers nationwide that a salmonellosis outbreak has been linked to consumption of round tomatoes, and products containing these raw, red tomatoes.

Then Later in August -

The Food and Drug Administration declared on Thursday that it is again safe to eat all tomatoes now on sale in the U.S., canceling its warning in June that some tomatoes were the cause of a still-unsolved outbreak of salmonella poisoning..............................

restaurants and supermarkets pulled tomatoes from shelves and refrigerators; the halt in sales has cost an estimated $40 million in lost purchases.

So excuse me if I don't blindly accept the 5000 mile comparison just because the E.P.A. threw some numbers out there. I do accept that Spookytooth did actually test a HT engine and got the certificate.

arceeguy - that is a great way to look at things and sounds like a great deal of common sense as far as the big picture.

D

The FDA was acting in the public's interest to protect our health. It overreacted to err on the side of caution and then launched one of the largest investigations to verify the salmonella cause. Stuff happens and yes money was lost but you know what, my wife is still alive because she avoided raw foods while they figured out the investitation. An infection would kill her due to her current health condition. An infection helped her to lose all of her kidney function...that was from a bad strain fo E.Coli she got from a catered buffet.

The same people who in one instance slam the EPA for poor or inadequate methodology or question their numbers/conclusions have no problem accepting global warming as truth when the "theory" isn't even been validated by the computer modelling currently used.

The same conspiracy theory folks who don't trust the EPA or FDA want the same government to manage their retirement, educate their kids, and otherwise run their entire lives from cradle to grave.

Where is thetaxpayer bailout for the oil companies? Oil prices have fallen 20% in 2 months! :)
 
Last edited:
Carbon footprint has to do with the amount of CO 2 being released into the atmosphere ,"pollution" pertains to ALL harmful engine emissions,HC's , nitrogen oxides etc including CO2.Three way catalytic convertors do a good job getting rid of most of these,with the exception of CO2.2 stroke engines are pretty bad in every department,they generally produce a lot of unburned HC's since they are not equipped with cat. convertors.But their total contribution is not large since there are not all that many around in the US, relatively speaking.Go to India or SE Asia or China and you have a totally different situation,zillions of small 2 strokes around messing things up.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The FDA was acting in the public's interest to protect our health. It overreacted to err on the side of caution and then launched one of the largest investigations to verify the salmonella cause. Stuff happens and yes money was lost

The same people who in one instance slam the EPA for poor or inadequate methodology or question their numbers/conclusions have no problem accepting global warming as truth when the "theory" isn't even been validated by the computer modelling currently used.
Where is thetaxpayer bailout for the oil companies? Oil prices have fallen 20% in 2 months! :)

Im not even going to respond to this as the FDA banned the wrong food item and if your wife had eaten peppers ( which was not banned) it would have been bad. Sorry if my faith in " THE GOVENMENT" is not 100% in all matters.
 
Oil prices have fallen 20% in 2 months! :)

Naturally, ther'e a choking on it !
"They" use oil/coal to make inferior products 20 times more than needed, cos it's planned to break and re-buy again ( spanners, foot pumps, vice etc)....so the factories are busy on this short sighted trip, and now due to beeing choked and the bosses not able to drive their brand new Beamers, cos they can't see where they going, cos the very factory that got them the Beamer is blocking the view due to it's pollution !
Therefoe the factory workers are off sick, no production means less demand for oil. When the "fog" clears, those who are still alive go back to work, by that time another set of spanners broke, another vice stripped it's threads and another footpump needs replacing somewhere else in the world!, and on it goes, the price of fuel will rise again.
It's the MiCh Phenomenon...MiCh: Made in C....
 
hahaha epa is a joke lol

use boidegradable oil such as redline an im sure the "pollution" isnt as bad as it seems and besides if the epa is going to make a big deal of little two strokes and do nothing for my 69 chevy c10 then they have no prioritys other than what gets them money.

my truck and my 67gtx drag car put a hole in the ozone every time they start ha and the EPA is concerned about two strokes? the thing is people dont drive muscle cars everyday and the epa knows for a fact that if the force any clasic car to meet an epa standered they are going to have thier building surrounded by cars and protesters! so they do whats easy and whats easy is banning china engines

and the EPA regulated china engines dont have any ANY differance other than the CEO of the company that produces them paid off the EPA

i have two motors that are two stroke ones pre 2006 ones 2008 and they are the SAME
 
Last edited:
Carbon footprint has to do with the amount of CO 2 being released into the atmosphere ,"pollution" pertains to ALL harmful engine emissions,HC's , nitrogen oxides etc including CO2.Three way catalytic convertors do a good job getting rid of most of these,with the exception of CO2.2 stroke engines are pretty bad in every department,they generally produce a lot of unburned HC's since they are not equipped with cat. convertors.But their total contribution is not large since there are not all that many around in the US, relatively speaking.Go to India or SE Asia or China and you have a totally different situation,zillions of small 2 strokes around messing things up.
The best estimates of indirect carbon footprint for autos that I've seen indicate that the indirect carbon is equivalent to about 25% more fuel usage, over the life of the vehicle. So, if a car was measured to emit 100 pounds of carbon a month, the total, including indirect amounts, would be about 125 pounds a month.

However, China uses lots of two-stroke motors, and right now, they're moving quite a few of the Olympic events away from their original sites, because of air pollution.
 
Last edited:
Carbon footprint has to do with the amount of CO 2 being released into the atmosphere ,"pollution" pertains to ALL harmful engine emissions.

Pardon my ignorance. I have not gone to see 'An Inconvenient Truth' so I am a bit behind on all the different ways the world will come to an end. I DID do a job next to old Al's house that uses 20 times more energy than the average american home and laughed when I saw that his new geothermal heating system he had put in had killed all the 100+ year old trees in his yard by destroying the roots and then his henchmen calling all the tree guys in Nashville trying to get them replaced before anyone noticed. You cannot replace 100 yr old trees due to the size btw. I got a great laugh about that.

Thanks for the clarification tho , I know Im ignorant..........
 
Its a point of known fact that a two stroke is more efficient for the same swept volume than a four stroke. Its also a proven fact that a ported two stroke is simpler.. and there I think is the rub.. As to china... I think someone forgot the large coal power stations and the badly adjusted VW Scirroccos and Austin Maestros rattling around the place using low quality petrol that a 1930's MB W124 would probably barf right back up

but lets say I buy a 2 litre 4 stroke car with electronic fuel injection which produces 120bhp. Theoretically I then get told I can have the same car with a schneurle ported two stroke of 2 litres which produces 240bhp and all I need to do is add 77mls of oil for every gallon of fuel?

which am I going to buy? personally - I would go for the second one. I get more power, which means the engine will be less stressed. The americans have been doing it for years ... its the reason for gutless behemoths like the Ford 408's and the like - it may not be fast, but by god its indestructable..

but think about the motors for a second ... one has more moving parts than the senate (most of which are about as necessary) and the other a grand total of 16 (3 per cylinder, and 4 throttle slides)... which is gonna need fixing more?

The majority of the money is made on spares and labour to fix the engines.. £46 an hour in some garages around here - and all they do is plug a computer in, anything more than that they are confused.

We whine and ***** about it yet we still allow ourselves to be led by the nose and buy the solution we are presented with.

When someone builds a 1 litre displacement 2-stroke with a cat and tuned exhaust and puts it in place of a 2 litre conventional engine with better reliability then people might realise that all of this is smokescreening anyway to make those who have money more money at our expense.

EPA/CARB etc are just rules for rules sake - its like, if you are stupid enough to try and change a hot lightbulb you are gonna be burned... but now we have to have rules to stop people doing silly things ... whereas in the past there would have been a few post watershed words and lesson learned - if it wasnt learned, well there is a shallow end to the gene pool for a reason...

Jemma xx
 
Last edited by a moderator:
China uses lots of two-stroke motors, and right now, they're moving quite a few of the Olympic events away from their original sites, because of air pollution.

From what I have read they banned cars - I wonder if this included 2 cycles ?

Chinese authorities took an estimated 1.3 million cars off the capital's roads during a China-Africa summit last August in something of a test run for the Olympics, and nitrogen dioxide levels dropped by 40%, agency data showed, although hazy conditions persisted
 
You're right, Jemma - there's lots of reasons for China's air pollution. Prolific use of old-technology two-stroke engines are a major contributor, though.

Two factors come into play when you're trying to figure out how much junk is going into the air from an engine. The total amount of fuel burned (inversely proportional to MPG) and the percentage of pollutants in the exhaust stream. Just comparing PPM between a car and a small engine doesn't take the effect of much lower fuel usage.

However, when both factors are taken into account, a motorized bike with a 2 HP motor which just meets CarbII emissions will pump about 6-8 times the amount of emissions (primarily hydrocarbon and CO) into the air per mile as a car which just meets EPA limits.

Granted, the bike/motor uses 1/10th the fuel to go the same distance as the car, but, because the emissions are proportionally so much higher for each gallon of gas used, the grams per mile are still substantially higher.

old technology two strokes pump about 25% of the fuel directly out the exhaust pipe. This is primarily due to the fuel-air mix short circuiting the cylinder when both intake and exhaust ports are open simultaneously

So, if you get 100 MPG, that means that over 100 miles, about a quart of fuel is put into the air with an old-technology 2-stroke engine. This means that about 800 grams of fuel are emitted over that 100 mile run, or about 8 grams of hydrocarbon emissions per mile. This makes the HC emissions alone double the EPA auto limits for all pollutants...

All is not lost from a 2-stroke viewpoint, though. A 2-stroke motor with an efficient scavenging system (like the Mitsubishi TLE43) or other design changes to reduces fuel short-circuiting, can drop the the unburned fuel to 5% or less. This, in turn, drops HC emissions by more than 80 percent, and, since that previously unburned fuel is actually burned, the motor will use less fuel to go the same distance. So, a motor which would get you 100 MPG with an old design would get about 120 MPG with a new design. Plugging the new numbers into the equation, over 120 miles, about 200 grams of HC are emitted, or, about 1.7 grams per mile. So, it's possible to have lower emissions than an auto with a 2-stroke engine on a motorized bike. You just have to pay a little more to get it. There's no such thing as a free lunch.
 
Back
Top