[Rhodes22-list] Outboards

[Roger Pihlaja]

Bob,

Your summary is excellent!  I would only add a couple of points:

Two cycle exhaust has been shown to contain significant concentrations of
some really BAD SHIT!  Two cycle exhaust contains chemical species like
dioxins, tetrahydrofurans, & polycyclic aromatics that are biologically
active at causing cancer & mutations at frighteningly low concentrations, do
not readily biodegrade, & which tend to bioconcentrate up the food chain.
These facts are a matter of record & are not in dispute.  Humans sit at the
top of the food chain, so we tend to get the biggest dose of these chemicals
if we consume marine organisms.  Small two cycle outboards tend to be used
on small craft like fishing boats & sailboats that are used in near shore
waters, rivers, lakes, & estuaries.  Microorganisms in these bodies of water
are ecologically at the base of the food chain & tend to live in the upper
layers of the water column where the 2-cycle exhaust is emitted.  These
bodies of water tend to be the most productive in terms of the reproductive
cycles of many commercially important marine organisms, and therefore the
most sensitive to this sort of pollution.  Admittedly, each small 2-cycle
outboard does not emit much pollution.  However, the fact that there are so
many small outboards operating & they tend to emit their pollution directly
into the most vulnerable ecosystems in the upper portion of the water column
where these pollutants can potentially cause the most harm is why banning
small 2-cycle outboards is a really good idea.

Initially, the marine industry was strongly against any regulation of
2-cycle engines.  This industry had a tremendous investment to protect in
terms of in-place manufacturing capacity & marine engine market share all
based upon 2-cycle engine technology.  However, over a period of years, the
scientific evidence mounted & eventually, the marine industry got on board.
In the end, the major players in the marine industry actually helped craft
the emission regulations now going into affect.  I cited the major
scientific studies in my FAQ on the subject.  If Bill can show any solid
evidence that there was some sort of conspiracy; then, I welcome him to
present it.  Naturally, this quality of this evidence would need to rise
well above his usual anecdotal standard of simply repeating the
unsubstantiated words of other conspiracy theorists on the web or newspapers
like the New York Times.  Actually, the environmental standards now going
into affect appear to be one of the best examples of cooperation between
enviromental regulators and industry in US history.

Roger Pihlaja
S/V Dynamic Equilibrium

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Skinner" <robert at squirrelhaven.com>
To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 10:02 AM
Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Outboards


> Roger Pihlaja wrote:
> > Bill,
> > ...
>
> This looks like a classic case of engineer vs. liberal arts
> major, textbook vs. anecdote.
>
> Perhaps the audience has already made up their minds about
> the evidence, and is sitting back in ring-side seats for
> the clash of Titanic wills?
>
> The tally of at least partly substantiated generalizations
> so far seems to be as follows:
>
> 2-strokes are lighter
> 2-strokes are noisier
> 2-strokes are banned on some waters due to polluting output
> 2-stroke production is being limited
> 2-strokes are cheaper when you can find them
>
> 4-strokes are generally seen as less polluting
> 4-strokes, broken in and in good tune, are less polluting
> 4-strokes are still heavier than 2-strokes
> 4-strokes tend to be more expensive
> 4-strokes are quieter
> 4-strokes tend to vibrate more - 1/2 the power pulses
>
> Have I missed anything?  Is there any remaining disagreement?
> --
> Robert Skinner
> "Squirrel Haven", 9 Gateway Commons, Gorham, Maine 04038-1331
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>
>