Which small engines (under 4 horsepower) are CARB certified for on highway usage?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Probably worse for the environment manufacturing catalytic converters than not even using them.
 
A replacement for precious metals in catalytic converters that is also reported to work at much lower engine temperatures and has been tested in the lab and with preliminary engine trials. The article reports they are currently looking at ways to get it manufactured at scale.


Venus atmosphere inspires new catalytic converters​


5th February 2021 7:30 am



Researchers at Leeds University have developed a synthetic compound for use in catalytic converters which is based on analysis of gases in the atmosphere of Venus.
AdobeStock_132942812-750x500.jpeg

The team believe their compound could be used in catalytic converters to reduce toxic emissions of carbon monoxide (CO) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) from diesel engine exhausts.
Limitations to current technology include the use of costly platinum group metals and ineffectiveness until the engine is very hot. According to the Leeds team, their technology has been demonstrated to be effective at much lower temperatures.
“Although the sale of new diesel vehicles is likely to cease in some countries by 2030, diesel engines will still be in use long beyond that,” said project leader Dr Alexander James, research fellow in the University’s School of Chemistry. “They are found in buses, trains and on ships and are used as backup for micro-grid electricity generation – so there is a need for efficient catalytic converter technology.”

Their idea was inspired by an investigation of the behaviour of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere of Venus: given its proximity to the sun, they wanted to know why carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere remained high. According to the principles of photochemistry, the carbon dioxide should break down to carbon monoxide and oxygen, researchers said.
Dr James said there must be another process going on which converts the carbon monoxide and oxygen back to carbon dioxide.
The team came to the conclusion that iron silicate, a meteorite material found in Venus’ atmosphere, must be acting as a catalyst, enabling the carbon monoxide and oxygen atoms to recombine. The process of creating carbon dioxide from carbon monoxide and oxygen is a key feature required of catalytic converters.
AdobeStock_315103976-799x500.jpeg

Based on this, the researchers wanted to form a synthetic material based on the chemistry of iron silicate which could act as a catalyst for converting nitrogen oxides intro nitrogen and oxygen. The scientists have developed a proof of concept and are now working on ways to manufacture it at scale.
“The funding from the Science and Technology Facilities Council’s Impact Acceleration Account has enabled us to make the crucial step from lab testing to preliminary engine trials,” said John Plane, professor of Atmospheric Chemistry at Leeds. “We are now in discussion with a company who manufacture catalytic converters to start full vehicle trials.”
The university has applied for a patent to cover the synthetic compound and researchers are working with Leeds’ commercialisation team to develop the technology to a point where it can be licensed to industry.
 
Last edited:
Since mopeds are certified for emissions via a driving cycle aerodynamics would be important.

This article points out even a simple fairing can make a big difference.


bicycle-with-partial-fairing.jpg


When used in combination with a road bike in touring position (with the hands on the handlebar), a partial fairing brings the power required to overcome air resistance at 35 km/h down to 157 watts. This compares to 220 watts for an unfaired road bike in touring position, and to 176 watts for an unfaired road bike in (a much less comfortable) crouched position and wearing tight clothing. A partial fairing on a road bike thus offers a similar advantage to that of an unfaired recumbent (148 watts). With a headwind, the advantage of improved aerodynamics becomes even larger.

Another article with the same numbers along with a picture of a more modern fairing:


18216422_10154322139436541_2680919883223208878_o-1497956013554-9hr4nuanwr79-0384f59.jpg
 
Last edited:
Since mopeds are certified for emissions via a driving cycle aerodynamics would be important.

This article points out even a simple fairing can make a big difference.


bicycle-with-partial-fairing.jpg




Another article with the same numbers along with a picture of a more modern fairing:


18216422_10154322139436541_2680919883223208878_o-1497956013554-9hr4nuanwr79-0384f59.jpg
Do you have a motor Bicycle yet?
 
Do you have a motor Bicycle yet?

No.

.....but I do hope this will change in the future if a California street and smog legal motorized bike is offered by one of the companies (Grubee, Whizzer, Phatmoto, Bikeberry, Motoped, etc.)
 
Last edited:
No.

.....but I do hope this will change in the future if a California street and smog legal motorized bike is offered by one of the companies (Phatmoto, Bikeberry, Motoped, etc.)

Really, What ya worried about?
Is it that ya want to do your part and reduce your carbon footprint?
 
Since mopeds are certified for emissions via a driving cycle aerodynamics would be important.

This article points out even a simple fairing can make a big difference.


bicycle-with-partial-fairing.jpg




Another article with the same numbers along with a picture of a more modern fairing:


18216422_10154322139436541_2680919883223208878_o-1497956013554-9hr4nuanwr79-0384f59.jpg
I've been yammering on about fairings adding efficiency for years now. Higher mpg, acceleration at above 20 mph and ability to achieve higher mph with the lower drag coefficient letting you use lower gearing. Don't go full fairing unless indoor riding, wind hits full fairings like a sail from the side, shoving you into the next lane.
 
Here is an article where Edmunds (back in 2011) compared a 2 stroke 50cc leaf blower and a 4 stroke 30cc leaf blower to a 2011 Ford Raptor (411 horsepower truck) and a 2012 Fiat 500 ( a 2500lb car with a small 4 cylinder) using the EPA FTP-75 driving cycle.

Since EPA FTP-75 drive cycle obviously only works for engines powering wheels they had to make certain allowances and adjustments in the testing process for the leaf blowers. What they ended up doing was either running the leaf blower at full speed or at idle depending on what part of the drive cycle they were on.


Comparing Apples to Kumquats: Creating the Leaf Blower Test Cycle

The FTP 75 test simulates 11.04 miles driven over 31.2 minutes and includes idle periods, accelerations, decelerations and cruising. This driving cycle works great when testing things that boast driven wheels: less so for leaf blowers which, of course, don't.

Therefore we needed to come up with a test for the leaf blowers that provided a basis of comparison to the vehicles, yet still reflects the way lawn equipment is actually used in practice. Observe leaf blowers in the wild and you'll find they are very often operated at either full whack or idle. Our test would have to mimic this usage pattern.

It didn't have to be leaf blowers. We considered testing lawnmowers or string trimmers, but they introduce an element of complexity — load. To properly load those devices we'd need the resistance provided by grass and shrubs, and there wasn't time to grow a lush enough lawn in Auto Club's dyno cell. That's why we settled on leaf blowers — they have essentially one knob, and that's blower speed.

With these factors in mind, the test we crafted for the leaf blowers followed the FTP 75's duration and speed-up/slow-down pattern with a twist — we substituted vehicle speed with leaf blower speed. We gave the blowers full speed during the cruise periods defined by the FTP 75. The idle periods remained idle periods and boom, there's our leaf blower emissions test.

Here are the grams per minute of various pollutants collecting during the 31.2 minute 17.77 km FTP-75 drive cycle:

Screenshot-at-2021-03-15-20-29-36.png


So that means the 30cc 4 stroke has the following totals for the 17.77 km drive cycle:

5.68 grams NMHC
.97 grams NOx
115.75 grams CO

This works out to .32 grams NMHC per km, .055 grams NOx per km and 6.51 grams CO per km.

Compare this to figures below given by EPA for what I believe is tier 2 (i.e the old standard compaed to the current tier 3):


Screenshot-at-2021-03-15-20-38-34.png
 
Last edited:
Going by the figures below given by EPA for tier 2 that isn't too bad actually:
Still trying to be the champion of the "NO WIN SCENARIO" I see...Heres a link for you to show "scientifically" that all this crap is never going away and is here to stay no matter what you do...That is, if you REALLY believe in what is "passing for science" that they are all spouting...Just keep hugging that tree now...lol...DAMIEN

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top