[Rhodes22-list] Marine Glurge Was Confused and Stupid

[Michael Meltzer]

you are right, maybe I am saving some woman breast from cancer, and woman brests is something I do care about :-)

MJM

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve" <rhodes2282 at yahoo.com>
To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Marine Glurge Was Confused and Stupid


> Now Michael, you don't want to live forever do
> you!!!!!
> Steve
> 
> 
> --- Michael Meltzer <mjm at michaelmeltzer.com> wrote:
> > Bill Rodger is right, For a two stoke to work with a
> > carbonator, both the intake value and the exhaust
> > value have to be open at the
> > same time in the cycle, and unburnt fuel go straight
> > out, no debate and no way around it. That why they
> > never meet the new EPA regs
> > and their last year for sale is 2006(except CA where
> > they are banned now). What some manufactures are
> > doing to work around is
> > replacing the carbonator with a fuel injector so the
> > gas does not enter until the values are closed.
> > Those injector pumps are not
> > cheap and they have a computer control system with
> > allot of sessiors. It make sence to install on a
> > large engine but not one the
> > small ones. that why they are going 4-stoke.
> > 
> > Bill remeber what the problem is here, take a 6
> > gallion fuel tank and dump 2-3 gallions of it right
> > in the water, I knowe you and
> > you would never do it, but the 2-stoke is doing
> > execty that.
> > I only know what I read in the news papers about the
> > crap in modern gas, but it not good at all for you
> > to drink :-)
> > 
> > 
> > MJM
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Bill Effros" <bill at effros.com>
> > To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list"
> > <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> > Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2003 12:09 PM
> > Subject: [Rhodes22-list] Marine Glurge Was Confused
> > and Stupid
> > 
> > 
> > Glurge is the sending of inspirational (often
> > supposedly "true") tales that conceal much darker
> > meanings than the uplifting moral
> > lessons they purport to offer, and that undermine
> > their messages by fabricating and distorting
> > historical fact in the guise of
> > offering a "true story."" -snopes.com
> > 
> > Roger--
> > 
> > The marine engine industry has concocted this glurge
> > and you keep repeating it.  They are trying to sell
> > more motors, they don't
> > give a damn about marine pollution.  2-cycle engines
> > have not been banned.  More stringent regulations
> > have been established.  The
> > marine engine industry has now developed 2-cycle
> > engines that are cleaner than most 4-cycle engines.
> > 
> > People on this list have constantly complained about
> > the reliability of their 4-cycle engines--we read,
> > year after year, elaborate
> > rituals performed before and after every use by
> > 4-cycle engine owners--what's more, the engines
> > exhaust raw fuel into the water
> > every time they fail to start; owners dump multiple
> > "additives" directly into their fuel; they run their
> > engines twice as long as
> > they need them to drain all the fuel after every
> > use; they dump the old oil into the water with every
> > oil change; their engines leak
> > oil directly into the water...
> > 
> > The population density of wretched excess
> > conspicuous consumption boats is amazingly high
> > wherever there is money.  Here on Long
> > Island Sound I see 100 multi-engine gas guzzlers in
> > operation for every PWC.
> > 
> > I know you are genuinely concerned about the
> > environment, and your engineering background
> > concentrated on removing pollutants
> > emitted by internal combustion engines.  No one
> > questions your competence in the technical aspects
> > of this conversation.  However,
> > with regard to the larger point of swapping in a
> > reliable 2-cycle engine (which will be sold to and
> > used by someone else) for a less
> > reliable, brand new 4-cycle engine (which exacted
> > additional environmental costs in its manufacture)
> > to be used occasionally on a
> > sailboat, I think you have allowed your technical
> > expertise to cloud your common sense judgment.
> > 
> > Bill
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: Roger Pihlaja
> > To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
> > Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 6:53 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] I'm Confused Was
> > (Stupid People Tricks)
> > 
> > 
> > Steve & Rummy,
> > 
> > Look, I'll be the 1st to agree that double & triple
> > engined muscle boats are
> > one of the most glaring examples of conspicuous
> > consumption & wretched
> > excess in the world today.  But, they mostly run
> > with 4-cycle engines & they
> > run mostly in deep water, far from shore, & their
> > population density is
> > usually pretty low.  Small 2-cycle outboards & PWC's
> > tend to be much more
> > numerous, used near shore, in estuaries, small bays,
> > rivers, etc.  In other
> > words, the small 2-cycle marine engines tend to be
> > emitting their pollution
> > into the waters that are the most productive & most
> > vulnerable in terms of
> > fish spawning grounds, insect larvae, crustaceans,
> > plant life, etc.  Make no
> > mistake, there is some BAD SHIT in 2-cycle exhaust
> > smoke & the oily film
> > that these machines lay down on the water; materials
> > like dioxins,
> > tetrahydrofurans (THF's) & other materials that are
> > biologically active at
> > parts per billion concentration & also tend to
> > bioconcentrate up the food
> > chain.  Gentlemen, this is a really bad deal!
> > 
> > Hey guys, I'm a sailor, just like you.  I'm also a
> > professional chemical
> > engineer, not some tree hugging environmentalist. 
> > I've seen the water
> > quality & biological sampling data & the supporting
> > analysis.  These reports
> > have convinced me that marine 2-cycle engines are a
> > problem.  Certainly the
> > small, low use, 2-cycle outboards used on our R-22's
> > are not the biggest
> > contributor to the problem; BUT, they are part of
> > the problem & not part of
> > the solution.  It's counterproductive to point your
> > finger at muscleboats &
> > say those folks should be banned until your own
> > house is in order.  The
> > environmental threat from 2-cycle marine engine
> > exhaust emissions is real &
> > not going away any time soon.  Which side of this
> > issue do you want to be
> > on?
> > 
> > Roger Pihlaja
> > S/V Dynamic Equilibrium
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Steve Alm" <salm at mn.rr.com>
> > To: "Rhodes" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> > Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 2:46 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] I'm Confused Was
> > (Stupid People Tricks)
> > 
> > 
> > > Rummy, I'm with you.  The heavy machinery is a
> > much bigger problem.  I
> > doubt
> > > I burn more than fifteen gallons a season.  It's a
> > goddang blowboat for
> > > chirstsake!  If they ban 2 cycles, I would hope
> > that they would put a cap
> > on
> > > it--like over 25 or something.
> > > Slim
> > > P.S. You're partying with the wrong people.
> > >
> > > On 7/17/03 6:54 PM, "John Tonjes"
> > <johntonjes at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Roger,
> > > > If 2 cycle engines are outlawed, there are going
> > to be a lot of unhappy
> > > > loggers, tree trimmers, grass maintenance
> > compamies and homeowners who
> > use
> > > > them for everything from blowing leaves to
> > mowing the lawn. Personally,
> > I
> > > > would prefer to see the 1000 hp cigarette boats
> > with blowers outlawed
> > long
> > > > before the 2 cycles are done in. I talked with a
> > guy a few weeks ago at
> > a
> > > > party with just such a boat. He can go in excess
> > of 100mph on the water.
> > I
> > > > didn't bother asking about fuel consumption, but
> > he did mention he
> > carried
> > > > 110 gallons of high test.
> > > >
> > > > Rummy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> [Original Message]
> > > >> From: Roger Pihlaja <cen09402 at centurytel.net>
> > > >> To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
> > <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> > > >> Date: 7/17/2003 5:22:54 PM
> > > >> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] I'm Confused Was
> > (Stupid People Tricks)
> > > >>
> > > >> Steve,
> > > >>
> > > >> Since 2-cycle engines are currently still legal
> > to operate on most
> > bodies
> > > > of
> > > >> water in the United States, everyone must
> > decide for themselves what
> > they
> > > >> want to do re this issue.  Certainly, PWC's &
> > large 2-cycle outboards
> > > >> generate lots more pollution & waste much more
> > fuel than the relatively
> > > >> small & infrequently used outboards on our
> > R-22's.  I realize replacing
> > an
> > > >> outboard engine is an expensive proposition.  I
> > myself did not switch
> > over
> > > >> to 4-cycle engines overnight.  The 2-cycle
> > Evinrude 6 came installed on
> > > >> Dynamic Equilibrium when the boat was purchased
> > in 1987 & we ran with
> > that
> > > >> engine for 9 years.  I replaced the 2-cycle
> > Evinrude 6 on Dynamic
> > > >> Equilibrium with the 4-cycle Honda 8 in 1996. 
> > However, in that same
> > > > year, I
> > > >> converted the long shaft Evinrude 6 back to a
> > standard length shaft &
> > ran
> > > >> the 2-cycle engine on our 10 foot inflatable
> > sport dingy until 2000,
> > when
> > > > I
> > > >> purchased the 4-cycle Honda 9.9.  I finally
> > sold the 2-cycle Evinrude
> > at a
> > > >> yard sale in the summer of 2001.  By that
> > point, the Evinrude was
> > getting
> > > > a
> > > >> little tired & looked pretty scruffy, but it
> > still ran reasonably well.
> > > >>
> > > >> The nearly 2X greater fuel consumption & more
> > than 10X greater exhaust
> > > >> emissions issues with 2-cycle marine engines
> > are real & well
> > documented.
> > > >> Their continued use does not represent good
> > stewardship of the planet.
> > > > The
> > > >> real question everyone must ask themselves is,
> > "Do you want to be part
> > of
> > > >> the problem or part of the solution?"  Long
> > term, I think 2-cycle
> > marine
> > > >> engines will either be saddled with so much
> > emissions control
> > technology
> > > >> that the cost, simplicity, & weight advantages
> > over 4-cycle engines
> > will
> > > > go
> > > >> away or the 2-cycle engine will be banned
> > altogether.  There is already
> > a
> > > >> small but steadily growing list of bodies of
> > water wherein it is
> > illegal
> > > > to
> > > >> operate 2-cycle marine engines.  That's
> > something to ponder when it
> > comes
> > > >> time to replace your current outboard.  If you
> > wait until 2-cycle
> > engines
> > > >> are outlawed; then, your current outboard won't
> > have much resale value.
> > > >> I've already voted with my checkbook.
> > > >>
> > > >> Roger Pihlaja
> > > >> S/V Dynamic Equilibrium
> > > >>
> > > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > > >> From: "Steve" <rhodes2282 at yahoo.com>
> > > >> To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list"
> > <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> > > >> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 2:37 PM
> > > >> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] I'm Confused Was
> > (Stupid People Tricks)
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>> Well, Roger, I am sure you saw this coming but
> > I like
> > > >>> my little 2 cycle motor.  Pollution & all:-)
> > > >>> Steve
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> --- Roger Pihlaja <cen09402 at centurytel.net>
> > wrote:
> > > >>>> Richard,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I can usually follow your line of reasoning;
> > but,
> > > >>>> this time I'm confused.  The discussion was
> > about
> > > >>>> the relative merits of 2-cycle vs 4-cycle
> > marine
> > > >>>> engines.  What do alcohol burning model
> > airplane
> > > >>>> engines have to do with gasoline burning
> > marine
> > > >>>> engines?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Roger Pihlaja
> > > >>>> S/V Dynamic Equilibrium
> > > >>>>
> > __________________________________________________
> > > >>>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> > > >>> www.rhodes22.org/list
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> __________________________________
> > > >>> Do you Yahoo!?
> > > >>> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> > > >>> http://sbc.yahoo.com
> > > >>>
> > __________________________________________________
> > > >>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> > www.rhodes22.org/list
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > __________________________________________________
> > > >> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> > www.rhodes22.org/list
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > __________________________________________________
> > > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> > www.rhodes22.org/list
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> > www.rhodes22.org/list
> > >
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > __________________________________________________
> > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> > www.rhodes22.org/list
> > 
> > __________________________________________________
> > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> > www.rhodes22.org/list
> > 
> > __________________________________________________
> > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> www.rhodes22.org/list
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> 
>