[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (ET) (no subject)
Pieter;
The only thing we can really compare our ET useage with is what we would
do if we had to do the same thing with a gas tractor. In my case, it
took 5 gallons of gas to do my whole lawn in the old Simplicity with a
10hp Briggs on it. There are lots of 'bobbing and weavings' to be done
on this lawn, hills, backing in and out of the bullrushes etc. Never
mind the belt slip meaning places that gotta be done over. Or the yearly
oil changes. Or the darned Wal Mart battery that's gotta be replaced
every couple years. Or the wintertime, when the Simplicity got chains
and a plow. (which are now replaced with a GE snowblower, and on the
Wheelhorse, a plow for slushy stuff)
Ergo; positive factor; 5 gallons of gas not burned in each lawn
mow. And spinoffs for each snowstorm, and minor factors such as oil
changes and batts.
As to electricity; A couple or three yrs back there was a 3 page article
in Current EVents about solar powered ET's in New England. I am the New
England chapter EAA (NEEAA) secretary and wrote it. The cover pix was of
my own GE16 tractor. If I was on the other computer would send a scan of
it.
Seein as my electricity comes from used surplus PV cells (which none of
us EAA people seem to buy new ones, we look for decent recycles) going
into secondhand batteries (ditto) to drive a tractor which most of us (if
not all of us :>) rescued from the trash or from being scrapped, it
seems that this whole thing from the tractor, it's batteries, and it's
electric supply (not all electricity is made from fossil fuels) are
positive environmental factors. Recycling not being the least. And in my
case, the $15 per lawn mow I save on gasoline has already paid for the
panels, and will for an awful long time subsidize any parts, tires etc
that are needed by the tractors.
I concur with your observation about the 'gas tractor pollution' data,
which may be a misquote as it came to print - but likely meaning 'HC
emissions compared to a contemporary motor vehicle as read on an
emissions tester'. I can see that. And once smelled it on the
Simplicity. You get black smoke under sudden heavy load on those things
even if they are tuned up perfectly as the governor catches up to the
load.
As to battery gassing; Nobody has ever said anything about H2 being a
greenhouse gas. And of course the O part . . . . .
Will leave the rest for future data lookup. Battery pollution is covered
in the Fuel Saver's Guide. It is data well known to people who read EAA
publications.
Does anyone still use charcoal lighter fluid? I only know a couple of
people who still use a charcoal fire and they use 'light the bag' type
charcoal. Nobody likes the taste (taint) of raw kerosene. Can taste it
yet in the hot dogs of my youth.
Keep on Etackin
Dave
Weymouth MA
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 07:37:44 -0400 Pieter <pvcl plitch com> writes:
> I have heard the EPA is out to regulate mowers and BBQs for
> years. BBQ owners (the charcoal type anyway) release vast amounts
> of
> unburned hydrocarbons into the atmosphere while lighting
> them. seriously, that's the reason given. As for mowers, the
> numbers
> given are, I believe, the RATE of pollution, not the total
> amount. Do you walk behind your mower to work everyday? I
> don't. In fact, I would be hard pressed to say I mow my suburban
> lot
> more than an hour a week. I doubt that this level of use will
> pollute more than the auto milage racked up by the average American
> every week. I think the world would be better served if the EPA
> were
> bundled off to China where the "marginal gains" from regulation of
> the gross and increasing pollution there would be far more
> significant than the regulation of lawn mowers and BBQs here.
>
> It is also interesting to speculate on the total "pollution budget"
> of building, operating, and retiring an ET. Let's not forget that
> the fuel for an ET must be generated somewhere at some level of
> pollution. What about the gasses generated when the batteries
> cycle? Granted that it may be well regulated and a relatively minor
>
> amount per unit of "ET fuel", but using the tractor is associated
> with some level of pollution in energy generation elsewhere. In
> addition, we have a large number of batteries compared to the
> average
> lawn tractor with lots of lead. I wonder what pollution is
> associated with the manufacturer and recycling of batteries? If we
> want to compare the ET to a walk behind push lawn mower like mine (
> 4hp), then we have to wonder about the pollution (and $$ too) of the
>
> entire frame, wheels, molded rubber tires, transmission, additional
> oils, etc. In fact, if we want to argue that we are comparing the
> alternatives of the ET to a gravel "lawn" (no fertilizers used),
> then
> the costs of estate maintenance would make the ET look very bad.
>
> My point is simply to suggest that we shouldn't be too cocky and
> simplistic is dealing with solutions to pollution. The answers are
> not always as obvious as "I solved the pollution problem - I use an
> ET." After all, if we had a totalitarian government (no Bush jokes
>
> please), we could all be riding bicycles to "solve" the pollution
> problem. In fact, China is doing just the opposite as it becomes a
> more consumer oriented society, and our pollution problems are
> dwarfed by theirs in some respects. As ET owners, we need to
> understand that electric vehicles are only the tip of the iceberg,
> and may in fact have significant pollution and other societal costs
> associated with them.
>
>
>
>
> At 03:06 AM 7/11/2006, David C Robie wrote:
> >Hear Hear ! This lawn mowing info needs to get more public.
> >
> > Incidentally, speaking of pollution we ain't putting out, why
> don't
> >all you guys hit the NEEAA (New England chapter, Electric
> Automobile
> >Assn) website and download the 'Fuel Saver's Guide'. ET's are
> mentioned
> >in it. This is a 40 page public domain Ebook which will print out
> >properly on Win 98 computers with MS Office 7 but will need the
> front
> >page reformatted to paginate the whole thing properly with Win XP
> >computers. Some day someone will do it up in PDF so everyone can
> print
> >it on anything, even an Apple, with Acrobat. Get it at WWW.
> NEEAA.ORG
> > FSG has a dual purpose; To save a person money and to save
> the
> >planet's resources, IE underground petroleum and our atmosphere vis
> a vis
> >greenhouse gases.
> >At the local Earth day show, bout 50 CD copies were given out at
> the
> >NEEAA display to people who had computers but no internet.
> >Incidentally, FSG has a 'fuel saving tip' in it on lawnmowing - to
> do it
> >less often, let the grass grow higher between mows. Us ET people
> don't
> >have to worry about that. :>)
> >Dave
> >Weymouth MA
> >
> >On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 03:33:48 +0000 willaim att net writes:
> > > A recent newspaper article stated that the EPA is poised to
> offer new
> > > emission standards for lawn mowers. New push mowers emit
> pollution
> > > equal to 11 new cars and new riding mowers pollute equal to 34
> new
> > > cars. They propose that manufacturers be required to install
> > > catalytic converters which may reduces emissions by 80%. There
> are
> > > 52 million lawn mowers presently spewing pollution into our
> > > atmosphere.
> > > I offer this only as a feel-good note to all EV folks. As we hum
> > > around our lawns on our ETs, we are contributing very little to
> the
> > > causes of poor air quality or noise pollution...and none to gas
> > > price pollution. Maybe we deserve medals of freedom.
> > >
> > > Bill Alburty E-12 66206
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Elec-trak mailing list
> > > Elec-trak cosmos phy tufts edu
> > > https://cosmos.phy.tufts.edu/mailman/listinfo/elec-trak
> > >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Elec-trak mailing list
> >Elec-trak cosmos phy tufts edu
> >https://cosmos.phy.tufts.edu/mailman/listinfo/elec-trak
>
> NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS:
> pvcl plitch com
>
>
>