Shade tree mechanic style around here. Me and my two mechanics that work for me all agree. Emissions=headache. Have you ever looked at a pre emission vehicle? all that garbage under the hood of new vehicles and added parts. These materials have to come from somewhere. Manufacturing companies produce more polluntants than cars. If cars ran on fuels that burn clean like propane you wouldnt need that crap.

 

It just sounds lazy to me. I put the engine in my truck with ALL the emissions systems on it, and it runs fine - like new. It was a lot easier to keep it all stock than to try to make it run right with "shady" modifications.

 

it is best to keep it all on and all functional for daily driving, it will free up some HP taking it off but not near enough to notice. So ill say again if its a street machiene for the mopst part keep it on, but if its a off roading truck where simplicity is a must (only reason i took mine off, try to field fix an emmisions/computer truck) just have it fixed right.

 

Have you ever looked at a pre emission vehicle?

Yes, I have owned several of them.

all that garbage under the hood of new vehicles and added parts.

Have you ever seen under the hood of domestic vehicle made in the last 5 years? I am cursed with working on mainly GM, but their Gen III Vortech has fewer vacuum tubes and hoses than my 68 Cougar or 73 Camaro.

These materials have to come from somewhere.

If they don't go into a car they will go somewhere else. They still end up getting made.

Manufacturing companies produce more polluntants than cars.

I doubt that. Even if they do, the Earth itself produces 800 times more pollutants than all of mankind. That's not even narrowing it down to cars, that's everything manmade everywhere.

If cars ran on fuels that burn clean like propane you wouldnt need that crap.

You would still need some of it. The current pollutant of the week is NOx and it is a byproduct of combustion, it can't be eliminated. Anytime you burn anything with air it is created. HC and CO are pretty much non issues with gas anymore due to the more efficient engine designs currently used. Propane also brings with it some issues of its own that make it just as much of a polluter as gasoline.

As a whole I think emmissions control is a joke. The Bourk engine runs on water and produces twice the power/lb of engine weight as gasoline. It's has no harmful emmissions and the patent has been expired for 25 or 30 years. If anyone was really interested in the environment they would be pushing the issue for something like this instead of relying on the old standby. If you get right down to it we don't put anything back in the ecosystem that wasn't there to start with. There is nothing we do that the planet doesn't do itself, and we have no way of knowing for sure that we are causing any real problems.

 

First off, NOx can be eliminated. Any hydrocarbon, we'll take methane for example (CH4), when burned (O2) should only produce Carbon Dioxide, CO2, and Water, H20. A simple reaction balance proves this: CH4 + 2*O2 -> CO2 + 2*H2O. We just don't have the technology or desire to make it perfect. Also, if the auto companies went to the Bourke engine, who would fund their research and development ventures? Certainly not the big oil corporations that do now, they would be out of business. Finally, and most importantly, do you really beleive that:

"There is nothing we do that the planet doesn't do itself, and we have no way of knowing for sure that we are causing any real problems."

Have you ever been to LA? Nature doesn't burn petroleum naturally. And certainly not at the rate at which we do every day. Now I'm no Eco-Nut or anything, Ive owned enough Classics to choke a small village. But I am aware that we are affecting the environment, and that alternative fuels, such as Propane and Hydrogen are viable alternatives.

 

...that in an automotive engine, there's a LOT more chemistry than can be expressed in one post. That equation doesn't include the energy required to start the reaction, or the energy released by the reaction, or where that energy goes, or what effect it has on the other chemicals present within the combustion chamber, or how they affect that reaction.

If it was "simple" to eliminate the production of NOx, the EPA would have mandated it years ago.

 

Nitrogen makes up like 70% of the air going into the engine, O2 only 25+%? I think. Also, sorry for touching a nerve

 

The little whizzmoes in the emissions system can be tested with a few tools mainly a vacuum tester. I've found so many simple little things like vacuum actuators (pots) that leaked and bad lines its not funny and of course a serious vacuum leak not only causes over lean conditions but will raise the NOX levels to the failure point. The little electric valves are controlled by the computer but you can unplug them and pull a vacuum on them apply 12 volts with jumpers and test them.
After going through my system and a little tweaking the second time I went through emissions it did real well. My wife until just a few days ago had an 88 F250, I went through it and the biggest thing was the pink vacuum line, for some reason pink just turns to crap, it was broke in about three places and every time you touched it, it broke again! If you have a noisy air pump the best thing to do is get another one, the later ones with air filters on them last longer.
I have an 84 with the 300 and the damn feedback carb and bad vacuum accessories kept me busy for a couple of days, Not only was the vacuum actuator on the EGR valve bad but the thing was leaky anyway, the valve seat or pintle were shot but I changed the exhaust system and the lines no longer reach the manifold. Unless EGRs are malfunctioning they wont steal any power as when you accelerate they close, they were just supposed to inject exhaust gas at steady power to reduce NOX by dropping the combustion temp, a vacuum leak causes lean conditions and higher temps but the exhaust gasses are oxygen depleted so they lean without raising the temp as there is no or very little oxygen. On later models the EGR valve is controlled by the computer so this operation is a bit more complex as they use a knock sensor and juggle timing, fuel mix and the EGR to reduce NOX and knocking, The EGR will actually cause less fuel consumption not more. And that air hose from the pump valve unit to the manifold from what I understand is supposed to dump air into the manifold during deceleration to reduce the unburned fuel amount that goes down the exhaust during heavy deceleration, and at the same time the EGR dumps wide open also so you just have less wasted fuel air mix.

 

I never said it was simple to remove NOx gasses from the emissions. It was just showing that a pure methane oxidization (burn) should only produce water and carbon dioxide. Also, the O2 represented in the equation is not just "air", that is how something being burned, or oxidized, is represented in Chemistry. I agree that ripping the emissions off the vehicle is a bit careless, but so is carrying the idea that, through automobiles, "we don't do anything that mother nature doesn't do herself".

 

First off, NOx can be eliminated. Any hydrocarbon, we'll take methane for example (CH4), when burned (O2) should only produce Carbon Dioxide, CO2, and Water, H20. A simple reaction balance proves this: CH4 + 2*O2 -> CO2 + 2*H2O.

Do you honestly think that the only thing involved in combustion is the fuel and oxygen? Everything that goes in through the intake side is going to bond with something during combustion. Like Steve said, around 70% of the atmosphere is nitrogen. If you have nitrogen and oxygen and heat them up some of them are going to bond. There is no such thing as complete combustion, which is another thing your equation leaves out. In a single molecule example like you provided there aren't many ways for things to end up, but if you increase the number of molecules by 10 you are going to get some unburned hydrocarbons and some carbon monoxide. Combustion with air will probably have 6 or 8 by products of combustion.

We just don't have the technology or desire to make it perfect.

We can't make anything perfect.

Also, if the auto companies went to the Bourke engine, who would fund their research and development ventures? Certainly not the big oil corporations that do now, they would be out of business.

Like I said, if there was legitimate concern for the environment they would be developing the Bourke engine. Unfortunately the only real interest at the automakers is filling their bank accounts. Same with the EPA. If we did everything cleanly they would all be out of work. It's about money and nothing else.


Finally, and most importantly, do you really beleive that:

"There is nothing we do that the planet doesn't do itself, and we have no way of knowing for sure that we are causing any real problems."

Yes I do. We might not go about things the exact same way the planet does, but the end result is the same.

Have you ever been to LA?

Yes I have. Have you ever seen the atmosphere around an erupting volcano or in the area of a naturally occuring gas release(I'm sure there is a fancy name for this, but I don't know what it is)? Thousands of times worse than LA.

Nature doesn't burn petroleum naturally.

Yes it does.

And certainly not at the rate at which we do every day.

Maybe not, but petroleim is only one way to "pollute" the atmosphere. CFC's are blamed almost solely for the depletion of the ozone layer. Chlorine is the ingredient that allegedly harms the ozone layer. Do you have any idea how much chlorine is emitted from the ocean everyday? If you open a can of R12 the refrigerant settles to the floor because it's heavier than air. Volcanoes emit massive quantities of sulfur.

But I am aware that we are affecting the environment

Why? Because some scientist somewhere that gets his paycheck from the EPA said so? We have occupied this planet for an insignificant period of time. Do you honestly believe that we can figure out everything there is to know about the planet in a few thousand years? For that matter environmental research has only been going on for the last century or so. If the Earth truly goes through cycles how do we know this isn't just part of the cycle? I won't deny that we contribute lots of so called waste to the Earth, but it was all here before we were and will be here after we're gone. There isn't a single thing man has ever made that wasn't made from materials that were already here. Most of the things we make use materials that are completely natural, although they are used in a highly refined state. Petroleum products are one of those things.

[/b]and that alternative fuels, such as Propane and Hydrogen are viable alternatives. [/B][/QUOTE]

Remember the Hindenberg? Have you ever operated a vehicle that runs on propane on a daily basis? It isn't all that great. The fuel might burn cleaner, but all the specialized equipment to use it has to come from somewhere. The engine even has to be substantially modified to use propane efficiently.

 

That depends on your definition of "materials" - there are elements that man has created that could NEVER occur naturally anywhere outside a black hole or at least a red giant star. Do think Bhopal and Chernobyl had no effects on the biosphere? I agree that Krakatoa & Tunguska had bigger effects, but the Exxon Valdeez can't be ignored. There are plenty of chemicals that exist naturally on Earth, but they only exist in certain places. Crude oil does NOT exist naturally in the oceans, so a large release DOES have a significant negative effect on all the life forms that aren't adapted to it. Same for NOx, CO, and even CO2. A few decades ago, a volcanic lake "burped" and killed a small town. The acids & toxins in the scalding plumes on the ocean floor would kill most fish, but there are fans & polyps that have adapted to survive in them. If you ran a pipe from there to your back yard, you'd die quickly.

Each of those "natural" materials has its own "natural" location, but man is moving them around and releasing them in UNnatural areas of the planet.

And Freon is lighter than air. The fog (condensed water vapor) that forms from the cooling effect is heavier than air, and that's what you see fall.