EPA and saws

[MuleyJ]

If you are interested in the motorcycle and automobile emissions info I can upload the pdfs to my server and post links.

I am sure that would be an interesting read but what I really would like to see is how that correlates to OPE emissions, but if you post it I will gladly give it a read. I have found a few articles relating two-stroke moped emissions to four stroke vehicles, but even there the two stroke emissions were referred to as being less than 2x in all cases, though they did not specify particular pollutants.

 

[Andyshine77]

I did not say that. I do believe that we may be edging more toward socialism at a semi-alarming rate.



Are you saying that a majority of individuals who want a small, limited government fear too much governmental control due to Civil War style propaganda? If I am understanding you correctly I am either wealthy or of lesser intelligence. I do not fear my government, I just wish they would refer to the constitution for their list of responsibilities instead of inventing them as the political motive arises.

No. I'm saying that's where much of the illogical fear of government comes from, it's deeply ingrained in their society, but I'm sure some take advantage of this with political propaganda. This is similar to what the liberal media does to many. I agree with you on flowing the constitution, however much depends on who interprets it.

We already are a socialist country, have been since President Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act in 1935.

 

[Andyshine77]

I am sure that would be an interesting read but what I really would like to see is how that correlates to OPE emissions, but if you post it I will gladly give it a read. I have found a few articles relating two-stroke moped emissions to four stroke vehicles, but even there the two stroke emissions were referred to as being less than 2x in all cases, though they did not specify particular pollutants.

It would be interesting to know the actual amount of emissions 2 cycle and other OPE engines produce. I can't see it really making much of an impact, but what do I know.

 

[joecool85]

I am sure that would be an interesting read but what I really would like to see is how that correlates to OPE emissions, but if you post it I will gladly give it a read. I have found a few articles relating two-stroke moped emissions to four stroke vehicles, but even there the two stroke emissions were referred to as being less than 2x in all cases, though they did not specify particular pollutants.

I'll see if I can get what I have up online tonight after I get home from work.

**edit**
Nevermind, no need. The EPA finally did something good and posted all the data on their site: http://www.epa.gov/oms/crttst.htm

 

[drkptt]

OK, here goes. From: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/certdata.htm#smallsi
I grabbed the certification data on a 2008 Stihl MS 260.

HC+NOx emissions: 111.6 g/kW-hr
CO: 457.3 g/kW-hr
Power: 2.32 kW

That's on the 85/15 test cycle (85% WOT, 15% idle). To get total emissions per hour you need to multiply by the power.

Total HC + NOx: 111.6 x 2.32 x .85 = 220 grams/hr
Total CO: 902 g/hr

From the link in the previous post I found the data on a Ford F150 pickup with automatic, 4WD, 5.4 liter engine.

CO: 1.2 g/mi
NMOG (non-methane organic gases--same as HC): .034 g/mi
NOx: .04 g/mi

So HC + NOx emissions are .034 + .04 = .074 g/mi.

The pickup truck has to drive 220/.074 = 2,970 miles to put out the same total HC + NOx emissions as the saw does running 51 minutes at WOT and 9 minutes at idle. Likewise, it needs to drive 752 miles to put out the same CO as the saw.

 

[rms61moparman]

OK, here goes. From: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/certdata.htm#smallsi
I grabbed the certification data on a 2008 Stihl MS 260.

HC+NOx emissions: 111.6 g/kW-hr
CO: 457.3 g/kW-hr
Power: 2.32 kW

That's on the 85/15 test cycle (85% WOT, 15% idle). To get total emissions per hour you need to multiply by the power.

Total HC + NOx: 111.6 x 2.32 x .85 = 220 grams/hr
Total CO: 902 g/hr

From the link in the previous post I found the data on a Ford F150 pickup with automatic, 4WD, 5.4 liter engine.

CO: 1.2 g/mi
NMOG (non-methane organic gases--same as HC): .034 g/mi
NOx: .04 g/mi

So HC + NOx emissions are .034 + .04 = .074 g/mi.

The pickup truck has to drive 220/.074 = 2,970 miles to put out the same total HC + NOx emissions as the saw does running 51 minutes at WOT and 9 minutes at idle. Likewise, it needs to drive 752 miles to put out the same CO as the saw.

And THAT looks like more proof that figures don't lie, but a liar (the E.P.A.) will damned sure figure!!!

I call B.S.!!!

Mike

 

[joecool85]

And THAT looks like more proof that figures don't lie, but a liar (the E.P.A.) will damned sure figure!!!

I call B.S.!!!

Mike

How do you figure it is BS?

From those facts, running a 260 for an hour is the same NOX + HC as almost 3,000 miles in an F150! That's still pretty bad any way you slice it. At 60mph it would take 50 hours to get 3,000 miles. So the saw is 50x less efficient than a truck in terms of hours run/NOX + HC output.

And keep in mind the truck's engine is 108x the size of the little chainsaw. Do the math and per cc the truck is 5,400 times more efficient in comparison to the 260.

 

[drkptt]

And THAT looks like more proof that figures don't lie, but a liar (the E.P.A.) will damned sure figure!!!

I call B.S.!!!

Mike

The EPA just specifies a test procedure; the manufacturers do their own testing and report the numbers to the EPA. So how is the EPA lying?

 

[drkptt]

How do you figure it is BS?

From those facts, running a 260 for an hour is the same NOX + HC as almost 3,000 miles in an F150! That's still pretty bad any way you slice it. At 60mph it would take 50 hours to get 3,000 miles. So the saw is 50x less efficient than a truck in terms of hours run/NOX + HC output.

And keep in mind the truck's engine is 108x the size of the little chainsaw. Do the math and per cc the truck is 5,400 times more efficient in comparison to the 260.

It is not accurate to use the term efficiency when comparing total emission rates. You're comparing the pollutants released when cutting X amount of wood versus driving Y miles--that's apples and oranges.

Also you shouldn't arbitrarily pick a speed. The vehicle emission test was done on a rolling road dyno over a specific drive cycle (start, stop, idle, city speed, highway speed, etc). That cycle has an average speed, I think it's in the range of 45mph (but I'm not sure), definitely not as high as 60. That's what you need to use to estimate the drive time corresponding to the total emissions.

 

[rms61moparman]

How do you figure it is BS?

From those facts, running a 260 for an hour is the same NOX + HC as almost 3,000 miles in an F150! That's still pretty bad any way you slice it. At 60mph it would take 50 hours to get 3,000 miles. So the saw is 50x less efficient than a truck in terms of hours run/NOX + HC output.

And keep in mind the truck's engine is 108x the size of the little chainsaw. Do the math and per cc the truck is 5,400 times more efficient in comparison to the 260.

The EPA just specifies a test procedure; the manufacturers do their own testing and report the numbers to the EPA. So how is the EPA lying?

Because I've seen test results slanted to prove an assertion before!

According to the E.P.A. cigarette smoke is a deadly poison that will kill you if you get within a mile of it.


Mike

 

[dingeryote]

Because I've seen test results slanted to prove an assertion before!

According to the E.P.A. cigarette smoke is a deadly poison that will kill you if you get within a mile of it.


Mike

The same EPA that just admited that thier Satellite thermal readings were erronious and skewed the models used in the Global warming scam.

The Same EPA that has plain old MILK categorized at the same level as Oil, as a environmental contaminant.

Nah.
1 pint of fuel burned= 1 pints worth of stuff going in the air.
You can swap things around a bit with 4 Cycle+Catalysts, but there's no way in hell 1 pint will produce double it's potential just cuz it went through a chain saw.

Political Mule fritters, and Hippie meadow muffins.

Stay safe!
Dingeryote

 

[drkptt]

Because I've seen test results slanted to prove an assertion before!

According to the E.P.A. cigarette smoke is a deadly poison that will kill you if you get within a mile of it.


Mike

Let me say that again slower so you can understand. Stihl tested their chainsaw and said it emitted that much HC, NOx, and CO. Why would they slant their results to claim their saw is dirtier than it is?

 

[rms61moparman]

Who set the guidelines for the tests???

You don't have to talk slower on my account, but apparently you are either very naive or a fan of the government.

Let me explain it to you this way.
I want you to measure the emissions each time you exhale for the next three hours.
When you provide me with the results, I am going to pick out the worst "offenders" in the breath you emit and publish them alongside the results of a Toyota Prius to show that under 35 M.P.H you produce 100 times more pollution than an automobile.
Then I will publish the scientific "data" to every egghead Greenpeace geek publication on earth and when it becomes widely accepted that you are a filthy destroyer of the environment, I will ally myself with a scientist who is trying to obtain a 20 million dollar government grant to study the effect you have on the planet.
Several years from now when that money is about gone, we will apply for another "grant" to study what to do about you.
One study group wants you sealed in a bubble, another group thinks the best alternative is to make you breathe through a filter that you must carry everywhere you go.
We have to lobby a few politicians to create a government "agency" to regulate you.
Naturally no one is going to dispute the claim that you are an environmental hazard because the scientific community all agrees that you are.
The report is right here on page 26 of Mother Earth News so it must be true.

We can get the World Health Organization involved and they can confirm the findings and get a few million dollars for themselves, and each study will show that you are worse than we previously thought.
The fact is IT IS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY!!!

The environment will NEVER be clean!
The common cold will NEVER be cured!
There is just too much money at stake!

How clean do you think our air would be now if all of the money spent since the 70s was spent to plant trees instead of studying CO2?


Mike

 

[joe25DA]

I agree Mike. The same BS they tried preaching when I was in college

 

[joecool85]

Who set the guidelines for the tests???

You don't have to talk slower on my account, but apparently you are either very naive or a fan of the government.

Let me explain it to you this way.
I want you to measure the emissions each time you exhale for the next three hours.
When you provide me with the results, I am going to pick out the worst "offenders" in the breath you emit and publish them alongside the results of a Toyota Prius to show that under 35 M.P.H you produce 100 times more pollution than an automobile.
Then I will publish the scientific "data" to every egghead Greenpeace geek publication on earth and when it becomes widely accepted that you are a filthy destroyer of the environment, I will ally myself with a scientist who is trying to obtain a 20 million dollar government grant to study the effect you have on the planet.
Several years from now when that money is about gone, we will apply for another "grant" to study what to do about you.
One study group wants you sealed in a bubble, another group thinks the best alternative is to make you breathe through a filter that you must carry everywhere you go.
We have to lobby a few politicians to create a government "agency" to regulate you.
Naturally no one is going to dispute the claim that you are an environmental hazard because the scientific community all agrees that you are.
The report is right here on page 26 of Mother Earth News so it must be true.

We can get the World Health Organization involved and they can confirm the findings and get a few million dollars for themselves, and each study will show that you are worse than we previously thought.
The fact is IT IS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY!!!

The environment will NEVER be clean!
The common cold will NEVER be cured!
There is just too much money at stake!

How clean do you think our air would be now if all of the money spent since the 70s was spent to plant trees instead of studying CO2?


Mike

While I do agree that a TON of money has been wasted on environmental "research" and the like, I don't feel that ALL of it was a waste. Much/most of it, probably. As for the environment never being clean, at this rate, you're probably right. But that is a very sad thought.

 

[rms61moparman]

While I do agree that a TON of money has been wasted on environmental "research" and the like, I don't feel that ALL of it was a waste. Much/most of it, probably. As for the environment never being clean, at this rate, you're probably right. But that is a very sad thought.

Actually it isn't a sad thought at all!!!
For the environment to ever be totally clean there would be no humans left at all.
My whole point is that if we ever get to level 10 on a clean environment, they will just insist on getting to level 11.....then 12...etc.
Every time you get a first down they are just going to move the goal posts another 10 yards.
Too many careers depend on it staying that way.
Too many votes are bought by politicians "working to clean up the environment".

Mike

 

[THALL10326]

Who set the guidelines for the tests???

You don't have to talk slower on my account, but apparently you are either very naive or a fan of the government.

Let me explain it to you this way.
I want you to measure the emissions each time you exhale for the next three hours.
When you provide me with the results, I am going to pick out the worst "offenders" in the breath you emit and publish them alongside the results of a Toyota Prius to show that under 35 M.P.H you produce 100 times more pollution than an automobile.
Then I will publish the scientific "data" to every egghead Greenpeace geek publication on earth and when it becomes widely accepted that you are a filthy destroyer of the environment, I will ally myself with a scientist who is trying to obtain a 20 million dollar government grant to study the effect you have on the planet.
Several years from now when that money is about gone, we will apply for another "grant" to study what to do about you.
One study group wants you sealed in a bubble, another group thinks the best alternative is to make you breathe through a filter that you must carry everywhere you go.
We have to lobby a few politicians to create a government "agency" to regulate you.
Naturally no one is going to dispute the claim that you are an environmental hazard because the scientific community all agrees that you are.
The report is right here on page 26 of Mother Earth News so it must be true.

We can get the World Health Organization involved and they can confirm the findings and get a few million dollars for themselves, and each study will show that you are worse than we previously thought.
The fact is IT IS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY!!!

The environment will NEVER be clean!
The common cold will NEVER be cured!
There is just too much money at stake!

How clean do you think our air would be now if all of the money spent since the 70s was spent to plant trees instead of studying CO2?


Mike

Man you would make a great politician. Neat how you ignored his question, which stumped you 100%, which of course is why you chose not to answer it but instead rant.

So we are to believe your rant and whinning over government verses Stihl's multi million dollar test labs putting out actual measurements proving you don't have a clue what the hell your talking about. All your putting out is talking points heard everyday on right wing radio and cable, no wonder ole Rush is super rich, him and his sheep,LOLOLOL

 

[MuleyJ]

OK, here goes. From: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/certdata.htm#smallsi
I grabbed the certification data on a 2008 Stihl MS 260.

HC+NOx emissions: 111.6 g/kW-hr
CO: 457.3 g/kW-hr
Power: 2.32 kW

That's on the 85/15 test cycle (85% WOT, 15% idle). To get total emissions per hour you need to multiply by the power.

Total HC + NOx: 111.6 x 2.32 x .85 = 220 grams/hr
Total CO: 902 g/hr

From the link in the previous post I found the data on a Ford F150 pickup with automatic, 4WD, 5.4 liter engine.

CO: 1.2 g/mi
NMOG (non-methane organic gases--same as HC): .034 g/mi
NOx: .04 g/mi

So HC + NOx emissions are .034 + .04 = .074 g/mi.

The pickup truck has to drive 220/.074 = 2,970 miles to put out the same total HC + NOx emissions as the saw does running 51 minutes at WOT and 9 minutes at idle. Likewise, it needs to drive 752 miles to put out the same CO as the saw.

There we go. Thanks posting the data and taking the time to go through all that gents. I have to say that I was quite surprised by looking through some of those numbers. I did not happen to see any of the strato saw results, but I did not go through the Husky saws. Lots of material there.

Man you would make a great politician. Neat how you ignored his question, which stumped you 100%, which of course is why you chose not to answer it but instead rant.

So we are to believe your rant and whinning over government verses Stihl's multi million dollar test labs putting out actual measurements proving you don't have a clue what the hell your talking about. All your putting out is talking points heard everyday on right wing radio and cable, no wonder ole Rush is super rich, him and his sheep,LOLOLOL

Sounds like you have obviously been using corn cobs for something they were never intended chappy. Be careful you might slip, or already have. Speaking of sheep, just in case Stihl forgot to send you the memo they do make paper for that. I don't think they would mind if you used it without permission.

 

[THALL10326]

There we go. Thanks posting the data and taking the time to go through all that gents. I have to say that I was quite surprised by looking through some of those numbers. I did not happen to see any of the strato saw results, but I did not go through the Husky saws. Lots of material there.



Sounds like you have obviously been using corn cobs for something they were never intended chappy. Be careful you might slip, or already have. Just in case Stihl forgot to send you the memo they do make paper for that, I don't think they would mind if you used it without permission.

Well cuse me. The man posted a question and here came a bunch of whinning BS and theroy with no actual facts to back up any of it. The poster proved his point with actual data and the reply he got to his question was pure non-sense. You may overlook it, thats your choice. I decided not to and if you don't like it thats just too bad, for you, not me,LOL

 

[ropensaddle]

Actually it isn't a sad thought at all!!!
For the environment to ever be totally clean there would be no humans left at all.
My whole point is that if we ever get to level 10 on a clean environment, they will just insist on getting to level 11.....then 12...etc.
Every time you get a first down they are just going to move the goal posts another 10 yards.
Too many careers depend on it staying that way.
Too many votes are bought by politicians "working to clean up the environment".

Mike

I totally agree, they could do much better at cleaning the environment if they followed Arizona's lead. I wonder how many emissions come out of one space shuttle