[Rhodes22-list] Marine Glurge Was Confused and Stupid

Sat Jul 19 08:19:10 EDT 2003

Steve,

There is very little an individual can do re pollution, overpopulation,
dwindling resources, nuclear war, terrorism, & a host of other global
problems.  If you were to change your 2-cycle outboard for a 4-cycle unit,
the world would little note nor long remember the event.  But, it is a
change in the right direction & it's something you as an individual can do.

By the way, you mentioned shortage of potable water.  Contamination of
potable water supplies, primarily with methyltertiarybutylether (MTBE), was
one of the triggering reason why 2-cycle engines were banned in California.
MTBE was the component present in a large concentration in the water, does
not occur naturally, & was relatively easy to detect.  But, once they
started looking, they found a whole list of other 2-cycle exhaust components
in the water as well.  Removing MTBE from the fuel supply & banning 2-cycle
engines were two obvious, relatively easy steps, to help safeguard the water
supply.

We live in an incredibly dangerous time, much more unstable than the cold
war years.  Hopefully, we will find a way thru the minefield.  But, there
are multiple ways it could all go very crooked as well.  If you die due to
one of these other global crises before realising what a bad deal 2-cycle
engines are; then, you don't have to sing your song. :)

Roger Pihlaja
S/V Dynamic Equilibrium

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Alm" <salm at mn.rr.com>
To: "Rhodes" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2003 4:06 AM
Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Marine Glurge Was Confused and Stupid

> C'mon Roger, easy on the moral fiber thing--this just isn't a moral issue.
> Nobody here questions your authority.  You're not being attacked, just
> debated.  My boat partners and I tease each other when someone is wrong
> about something and we make them sing this song:
>
> You were right, you were right,
> You were right all along,
> You were right, you were right and I was wrong.
>
> If, within ten years you are proved right, I will sheepishly sing the
song,
> but no apologies will be necessary.
>
> Remember that it was you who claimed (in last year's thread about forest
> fires) that sustainable life on Earth will only last about another 30
years.
> I know you're no tree-hugger, but you certainly are a doom-sayer.  With
> respect to that claim, do you really think that 2 cycle vs. 4 cycle is
going
> to be a big issues in ten years?  Won't we be more worried about nuclear
> fallout/over-population/dwindling resources/etc.?  Sure, potable water
> supply will be a biggie, but will outboard engine design be the defining
> factor?
>
> Slim
>
> On 7/18/03 5:42 PM, "Roger Pihlaja" <cen09402 at centurytel.net> wrote:
>
> > Bill, Rummy, Et Al,
> >
> > Look, this discussion is getting old & boring.  I've tried to state my
case
> > logically & I keep getting attacked from all sides (MJM excluded).  You
guys
> > are obviously in denial, so go enjoy your 2-cycle outboards.  However,
I'll
> > make a fearless prediction.  Within 10 years, you will realise I was
> > essentially correct re this 2-cycle marine engine emissions issue.  On
that
> > day, I hope you will have the moral fiber to apologise.  If, on the
other
> > hand, it turns out that the issue is marine glurge, you can be certain I
> > will also apologise.
> >
> > Roger Pihlaja
> > S/V Dynamic Equilibrium
> >
> > ----- 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 3:28 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Marine Glurge Was Confused and Stupid
> >
> >
> >> Roger, (and Michael),
> >>
> >> Can you find the reports by respected marine biologists you refer to?
The
> > ones I saw were bought and paid for by the marine engine industry. (OMC
I
> > believe.)  They have been thoroughly discredited.
> >>
> >> 4-cycle engines simply do not get twice the fuel efficiency compared to
> > 2-cycle engines as anyone with a 2-cycle can tell you.  This statement
was
> > based on the notion that since the 4-cycle fired once every 4 strokes,
and
> > the 2-cycle fired on every other stroke, the 2 cycle must use twice as
much
> > gas, and dump half of it into the water.
> >>
> >> The 2 stroke people came back with a "ton-miles" statistic--since 4
> > strokes of equivalent power weigh more than twice as much as 2-strokes,
> > pound for pound the 2 stroke engines must be twice as efficient.
> >>
> >> In fact, the 4-cycles are slightly more efficient than the 2 strokes
for
> > the same amount of power.  Most of the difference is not "dumped into
the
> > water" as Michael would have it, but manifests itself in heat.  2-cycle
> > engines run hotter.
> >>
> >> Which brings us to Dave, Jay, Michael and Bruce who have all had
problems
> > with their 4-cycle cooling systems.  To bring 4-cycles up to operating
> > temperatures they must employ complicated intermittent cooling systems
with
> > thermostats.  There is an abundant supply of cool water in a marine
> > environment to cool the hotter running 2-cycles--no thermostats needed.
The
> > 2-cycles exhaust most of the extra gas in the form of non-polluting hot
> > water.  I have never had a problem with my cooling system.  My engine is
12
> > years old.  I'm moored a couple of hundred yards from Bruce.  Same salt
> > water.  I try to remember to flush my system at the end of each season.
> > (Last year I forgot.)
> >>
> >> The reports you refer to compared detuned 2-cycle engines with
specially
> > tricked up 4-cycles made by the same manufacturer who didn't want to
retool
> > its 2-cycle line.
> >>
> >> The Japanese make excellent low polluting 2-cycle engines, and were
> > already making them when these reports were written.  My engine calls
for a
> > 50-1 gas-oil mixture.  I put in more oil at the beginning of the season
to
> > make sure everything is lubricated, and when I first start my engines
there
> > is a puff of smoke, but after that there is no visible smoke coming out
of
> > my engine, and there is no oil slick trailing my boat.
> >>
> >> That is not true of many 4-stroke gas guzzlers that cross my path
leaving
> > rainbows of residue behind them.  The cylinders of 4 stroke engines must
be
> > lubricated just as 2 strokes must be lubricated.  Cylinder rings are
> > supposed to remove the excess, but not all of the oil--that's why you
check
> > your oil.  Where do you think the missing oil goes?  No one does a ring
job
> > until much more oil has been dumped into the water than my little
2-stroke
> > will ever put there.
> >>
> >> We have been around this bush too many times.  I believe the claims you
> > cite are glurge.  What are the original sources?
> >>
> >> Bill
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: Roger Pihlaja
> >> To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
> >> Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 11:50 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Marine Glurge Was Confused and Stupid
> >>
> >>
> >> Bill,
> >>
> >> The marine industry has been fighting the regulation & banning of
2-cycle
> >> engines tooth & nail.  The industry has a tremendous investment in
> >> production capacity for the current generation of 2-cycle engines.  The
> >> reports I am refering to were published by respected marine biologists,
> > not
> >> the marine industry.  I assure you, the issue is good science, not
> > "glurge".
> >>
> >> Also, if you reread what I have written, I did not advocate everyone to
go
> >> out & immediately trade-in their 2-cycle marine engines.  As I wrote, I
> >> myself switched over to 4-cycle outboards over a 4 year period & only
when
> >> it was appropriate to replace an engine.  However, 2006 is approaching.
> >>
> >> Nationwide, 2-cycle powered PWC's & small 2-cycle outboard powered
boats
> >> outnumber all other pleasure craft by wide margins.
> >>
> >> Other than the abuse heaped upon our Honda 9.9 by my son, Gary, our
> > 4-cycle
> >> Honda outboards have been bulletproof reliable for nearly 8 & 4 years
> >> respectively.  They don't leak oil, we don't use any additives in their
> >> fuel, they start on the 1st or 2nd pull with no rituals, & the % extra
> >> engine time involved in running their carbs out of fuel in between uses
is
> >> inconsequential.  Besides, I used to do the same thing with the gas in
the
> >> carb on the 2-cycle Evinrude.  I believe running the gas out of the
carb
> > is
> >> just good practice with an outboard that sits between uses.
> >>
> >> Roger Pihlaja
> >> S/V Dynamic Equilibrium
> >>
> >> ----- 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
> >> __________________________________________________
> >> 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
>