Cats on small engines?

My HOA requires a percentage of the property be grass, so I've Xerascaped as many expanded beds as I could, without violating the CC&R's and just put in low water grass in the back as an experiment. It uses less than half the water, stays greener longer and required less than half the cutting and it looks/feels really nice too. The only downside is that is is NON-rizomatic, meaning that it does not spread much by runners like regular lawn grass, so spots that get bare, need to be reseeded.

I'd turn the whole front lawn into a clump grass/succulent/rock garden if I could.

Jack

Nashco wrote: Personally, I hate that the EPA mandates this stuff, but it's about time they stopped ignoring small engines...passenger vehicles are UBER clean these days and even heavy trucks are very clean (and will be UBER clean come 2010). On road vehicles can't get much cleaner without it costing a ton of money, meanwhile a few minutes cranking with an old chainsaw puts out more emissions than your new car will in thousands and thousands of miles. It was finally becoming too hard to ignore small engines. On-road vehicles have been the EPA whipping boy for a long, long time while the off-road vehicles/engines have been largely ignored. Now that passenger vehicles are to the point of diminishing returns, the EPA needs a new whipping boy. This isn't new news, really, the EPA has been moving in this direction for a long time, just hasn't had much traction in the past. Bryce

Bryce While you do appreciate this rule, you have no idea how EPA makes rules. They do not madate a specific technology. They mandate that by X date, the production item shall emit less than Y emissions over a Z cycle. That's it.

They do work A LOT with the industry to clean up their act in an economic way. If there was a cheaper way, they would encourage it.

I know a lot of EPA people- they are car people just like you. Two different teams were planning Challenge projects before life got in the way.

Laws are written by Congress. EPA writes rules so that they can meet those laws that their bosses write. CARB is the same way.

Sorry about the rant.

On the plus side, my friends at EPA are very excited about this rule- apparenlty it's a very large reduction in emssions.

From what I hear, next up- Ships and bunker fuel.

Eric

rules like these look to be evil on the surface.. But think of them as innovation drivers..

After 2 smokes got banned in CA look what happened to 4 stroke motorcycle development. Those things can fly, and the torque is silly.

If a company could provide less emissions for cheap and make it reliable before another can do it than instant $$$$$$$$.. There is a reason why the big yellow kitty no longer makes over the road engines..

Tommy Suddard wrote: Just light it on fire periodically.

Let us know how that works for you next time your dad has you cut the grass.

^^ Hey, it worked for Burt Munro, didn't it?

About the EPA's emissions requirements: the EPA says 'you can't have over so many grams per mile but we don't tell you how to do it'.

The Honda XR650L is a road going bike and as such is subject to emissions regulations. All over the left side of the engine is what dirt riders call the 'octopus', it's a series of tubes and reed valves which link the airbox to the exhaust ports. Its only purpose is to feed fresh air into the exhaust stream to dilute the exhaust charge so the bike will pass EPA per mile regulations, just like the older AIR injection (air pump) systems did on carbed cars and before anyone starts screeching no it's not an 'afterburn' system unless there's a catalytic converter involved. It doesn't really reduce sh!t. But the EPA gives it a thumbs up.

So basically Honda just dilutes the exhaust air with fresh air prior to the tailpipe so the sniffer sees fewer parts per million and the EPA likes that?

Jensenman wrote: ^^ Hey, it worked for Burt Munro, didn't it? About the EPA's emissions requirements: the EPA says 'you can't have over so many grams per mile but we don't tell you how to do it'. The Honda XR650L is a road going bike and as such is subject to emissions regulations. All over the left side of the engine is what dirt riders call the 'octopus', it's a series of tubes and reed valves which link the airbox to the exhaust ports. Its only purpose is to feed fresh air into the exhaust stream to dilute the exhaust charge so the bike will pass EPA per mile regulations, just like the older AIR injection (air pump) systems did on carbed cars and before anyone starts screeching no it's not an 'afterburn' system unless there's a catalytic converter involved. It doesn't really reduce sh!t. But the EPA gives it a thumbs up.

Oh, so not true.

The system does measure exhaust volume, and then caclulates the total grams emitted. So even if you just dilute it, you count all the emissions that come out.

I'm sure what happens is some post oxidation, which will chemically reduce the emissions. More than likely, there's a catalyst and that does the reduction good enough to pass the standard.

But to repeat- it does not matter if you dillute the exhaust with air- the total volume is measured to properly measure the mass of exhaust emissions.

Eric

carguy has it exactly right. There is no net reduction in pollutants, merely a dilution. Sort of like the difference in dropping 1 oz. of food coloring in 1 gallon of water vs. dropping that same ounce in 10 gallons of water.

There is no 'post oxidation effect' because the engine has no catalysts. I have personally had my grubby digits in those motors, so I know first hand.

But it makes the EPA happy.

Jensenman wrote: carguy has it exactly right. There is no net reduction in pollutants, merely a dilution. Sort of like the difference in dropping 1 oz. of food coloring in 1 gallon of water vs. dropping that same ounce in 10 gallons of water. There is no 'post oxidation effect' because the engine has no catalysts. I have personally had my grubby digits in those motors, so I know first hand. But it makes the EPA happy.

What year was it?

I know for a fact that we are allowed to dillute our exhaust all we want, and it does not matter one iota. Every gram that comes out is counted, whether it's in 1 gal of air or 100 gal of air.

The rule is grams/cycle. Dilluting the mixture does not change that.

BTW, you can have post oxidation without a catalyst. We have used it before. Once the exhaust gets to 600 deg, it will start oxidizing the excess HC with enough raw air available. It will not reduce it enough for modern car standards, but it does work.

Eric

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2008/09/11/dnt.ca.cat.wedged.in.engine.kcal

>

alfadriver wrote:

Jensenman wrote: carguy has it exactly right. There is no net reduction in pollutants, merely a dilution. Sort of like the difference in dropping 1 oz. of food coloring in 1 gallon of water vs. dropping that same ounce in 10 gallons of water. There is no 'post oxidation effect' because the engine has no catalysts. I have personally had my grubby digits in those motors, so I know first hand. But it makes the EPA happy.

What year was it?

I know for a fact that we are allowed to dillute our exhaust all we want, and it does not matter one iota. Every gram that comes out is counted, whether it's in 1 gal of air or 100 gal of air.

The rule is grams/cycle. Dilluting the mixture does not change that.

BTW, you can have post oxidation without a catalyst. We have used it before. Once the exhaust gets to 600 deg, it will start oxidizing the excess HC with enough raw air available. It will not reduce it enough for modern car standards, but it does work.

Eric

Honda still builds that bike. Here's a pic of the .08 model:

And here's a pic of an earlier bike (I think it's an '06) showing the 'octopus'. It's the aluminum doohickey with all the hoses on it, just above the round left side crankcase cover.It uses the exhaust pulses to create a vacuum which draws filtered air from the carb's air intake through the 'octopus' and then to passages cast into the head which allow the filtered air into the exhaust stream.

Sorry for the humongous pics, they are the only ones I could link. Maybe there's a difference between automotive and motorcycle emissions testing, I dunno. Honda even said, when the bike first came out, that the octopus was for exhaust dilution.

Something which HAS changed: see the black canister below the left radiator shroud? That's an adsorption canister, just like a car. That was added in, I think, '05.

Anyone who has worked in the environmental industry knows. ..

The solution to pollution is dillution!

200 foot stack can emit more than 100 foot stacks, but not nearly as much as a 400 foot stack.

Go figure.

Jack

^^ My f-i-l worked in the environmental industry in California for several years, he said the same thing.