[Rhodes22-list] I'm Confused Was (Stupid People Tricks)

Roger Pihlaja cen09402 at centurytel.net
Fri Jul 18 08:53:10 EDT 2003


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
>
>




More information about the Rhodes22-list mailing list