There used to be a cigarette manufacturer that had the picture of its product producer on the packet.
Dave
The Emerald Isle
Ban on small engines in California
- Thread starter SmithDoor
- Start date
Help Support Home Model Engine Machinist Forum:
- Status
There used to be a cigarette manufacturer that had the picture of its product producer on the packet.
Dave
The Emerald Isle
Richard Hed
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2018
- Messages
- 2,380
- Reaction score
- 615
x
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,332
- Reaction score
- 343
The biggest problem in the US is that half of the public does not believe that climate change is even happening. That is premaritally a political problem and a media source problem. Also many of the objections are because no one solution is going to solve the problem. Gasoline powered cars were not practical until we developed refineries and delivery points. If we had not allowed those developments we would still all be driving horses. We need a variety of solutions. If I want to loose 30 pounds and by cutting out doughnuts only will make me loose 10 pounds that does not mean that I should not cut out doughnuts. Maybe I have to also cut soft drinks and potato chips and big macs.
maybach_man
Member
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2012
- Messages
- 22
- Reaction score
- 9
Interesting then, that most of the biggest polluters are communist, or dictatorships.......
Camel cigarettes?
I found this rather amusing article from the BBC on flying a Cessna Slowtation (Citation to some hehe):
"If we were to consider the journey from Rome to Glasgow on a private jet - a journey that some of the G20 leaders made to get to COP 26 - that would take around two hours and 45 minutes, requiring 2,356 litres of jet fuel.
The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) says 2.52kg of carbon dioxide is emitted for every litre of aviation turbine fuel burned. Therefore this flight would produce 5.9 tonnes of CO2."
I think I burn about 4 gallons of fuel a year max for my mower, weed-wacker, and slowblower combined. That's around 34 kg a year (per EIA). For sixty years, I will have unleashed 2000kgs of CO2 from my small engines. The tree in my yard is very large, larger than average, so it's safe to say it averages to absorb 21kg of CO2 a year (first number that came up on Google-fu, whatever folks). I have several other trees. I would now like to virtue signal my carbon supremacy.
"If we were to consider the journey from Rome to Glasgow on a private jet - a journey that some of the G20 leaders made to get to COP 26 - that would take around two hours and 45 minutes, requiring 2,356 litres of jet fuel.
The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) says 2.52kg of carbon dioxide is emitted for every litre of aviation turbine fuel burned. Therefore this flight would produce 5.9 tonnes of CO2."
I think I burn about 4 gallons of fuel a year max for my mower, weed-wacker, and slowblower combined. That's around 34 kg a year (per EIA). For sixty years, I will have unleashed 2000kgs of CO2 from my small engines. The tree in my yard is very large, larger than average, so it's safe to say it averages to absorb 21kg of CO2 a year (first number that came up on Google-fu, whatever folks). I have several other trees. I would now like to virtue signal my carbon supremacy.
Last edited:
As I said, I don't pretend to know what the answer is.
I certainly don't think it's dictatorship or communism.
Pete.
At the risk of trying to take over the moderators' job - steady on, people. This is a model engine forum. Please read this:
https://www.homemodelenginemachinist.com/threads/heres-the-rules.9065/
https://www.homemodelenginemachinist.com/threads/heres-the-rules.9065/
While this thread has taken some turns that have gone too far at times (IMO, of course), it's also relevant to a model engine forum.
If small IC engines are outlawed, doesn't that outlaw our model IC engines, too? I asked pages and pages ago, and the answer I got is that nobody knows. Which means all it takes is for a neighbor or someone else to complain to the authorities who then arrest you and charge you with breaking that law. Then either you pay some penalty and give up the hobby, or you put your life's savings into cases that wind their way through the courts until some decision comes down one way or the other. I think it was a fictional cop in California (Dirty Harry) who said, "do you feel lucky?"
This history of California smog laws.
The president that gave California the right to control the smog Laws is RR the twist most do not know.
This only history please keep history
. Dave
Richard Carlstedt
Well-Known Member
Sorry Dave , but California had SMOG laws long before he was president
I know, I moved there and my PU truck could not comply
remember Air injectors ?
Rich
I know, I moved there and my PU truck could not comply
remember Air injectors ?
Rich
JLaning427
Active Member
Yes, the Clean Air Act of 1963 and the 1955 Air Pollution Control Act both preceed Reagan's presidency by a fair bit. And the EPA was created in 1970, under Reorganization Plan No 3 submitted to congress by Tricky Dick, also a fair bit before Ronnie's time in the oval office. And Ronnie was Governor of CA, but that didn't start until Jan 2, 1967 and emissions controls for vehicles started for the 1966 model year (so Sept 1965). Again before RR time. However, Ronnie did sign the Mulford-Carrell Act, which created CARB during the time he was Governor. So, he had a part in the current issue, but smog laws obviously started in CA before hand.
As for model engine applicability of the new SORE law (AB1346), the law will apply to engines produced on or after Jan 1 2024 or as soon as CARB determines is feasible, whichever is later. And the law specifically prohibits engine exhaust and evaporative emissions of those engines.
What is not clear is exactly what language the CARB will draft in their regulations and what potential exclusions or exceptions may be included, to accommodate emergency generators (and hobbyist equipment although this is likely not on their radar). There will certainly be restrictions on what you can buy new in the State marketplace. Will those restrictions include purchased RC glow engines? Likely, again unless an exception is granted. How about home built stuff? That may be tough to say, Unless you make it easy for the governing agency to determine when you built the engine. If you sign and date it, or have a build blog showing it being constructed in 2025, then you might be subject to legal action, especially if you are annoying your neighbors.
James
As for model engine applicability of the new SORE law (AB1346), the law will apply to engines produced on or after Jan 1 2024 or as soon as CARB determines is feasible, whichever is later. And the law specifically prohibits engine exhaust and evaporative emissions of those engines.
What is not clear is exactly what language the CARB will draft in their regulations and what potential exclusions or exceptions may be included, to accommodate emergency generators (and hobbyist equipment although this is likely not on their radar). There will certainly be restrictions on what you can buy new in the State marketplace. Will those restrictions include purchased RC glow engines? Likely, again unless an exception is granted. How about home built stuff? That may be tough to say, Unless you make it easy for the governing agency to determine when you built the engine. If you sign and date it, or have a build blog showing it being constructed in 2025, then you might be subject to legal action, especially if you are annoying your neighbors.
James
Last edited:
Kasey
Well-Known Member
THEY COULD TRY BANNING CIGARTES ,PIPES AND CIGARS AS WELL!
timothysielbeck
Member
What!?!?!? And not get the tax revenue from them??? NEVER!!!
I have not read the entire thread - I have a life to live
but would comment
With the development of such good electric motors, the loss of liquid fuelled models should not be so detrimental to our hobby. I was at the field yesterday when a member turned up, plugged in his battery & was flying within 6 minutes of arrival- We had joked about it & timed him.
In that time I was still unloading fuel, starter, cleaner, rags etc. & all the ancilliary bits from my van. But somehow I much preferred my gas guzzler.
To digress from the thread I would rather the authorities would concentrate their minds on cleaning our rivers of chemicals, the rubbish dumped in them, that reaches the sea (one only has to see films of the clogged estuaries in places like Indonesia). This would cost far less. Would show immediate effect to the people, benefit nature, in particular the fish stocks ( less plastic in the ocean cannot be bad for us all) & would not saddle our young with huge debts due to decisions that WE made that ( in my mind at least) may not even be right. It would allow us to live in comfort. Future generations can deal with their situation & who is to say it will be worse than ours as technology developes. They will have far more difficult problems to overcome- One cannot rule out nuclear war, & that would waste everyones efforts. It is not in the media- at least in the UK- but it still poses a possibility.
Bear in mind that in my part of the world (the UK) the temperature was as high in Roman times as it is in the Mediterranean now. Climate change is cyclical & you cannot say that the Romans caused global warming in their reign. In the dark ages that followed the temperature plumeted. Do we thank the Huns that conquered Europe for that? I think not
So banning small engines is not really necessary. I do not know about the USA but here in the UK we cannot buy small 2 stroke engines, such as outboards, mowers etc. (does not affect our flying hobby engines). We can live with that as 4 stroke are very good, quiet & light. They are cleaner & quieter.
However, if the USA starts banning hobby engines it will follow that the UK will do the same- eventually- because that is what we always seem to do. That concerns me & that is why I want you hobbyists in the USA to kick back against such legislation if it ever came to fruition
If I have missed something & got it all wrong then, sorry, I will go away & cry in my beer
but would commentWith the development of such good electric motors, the loss of liquid fuelled models should not be so detrimental to our hobby. I was at the field yesterday when a member turned up, plugged in his battery & was flying within 6 minutes of arrival- We had joked about it & timed him.
In that time I was still unloading fuel, starter, cleaner, rags etc. & all the ancilliary bits from my van. But somehow I much preferred my gas guzzler.
To digress from the thread I would rather the authorities would concentrate their minds on cleaning our rivers of chemicals, the rubbish dumped in them, that reaches the sea (one only has to see films of the clogged estuaries in places like Indonesia). This would cost far less. Would show immediate effect to the people, benefit nature, in particular the fish stocks ( less plastic in the ocean cannot be bad for us all) & would not saddle our young with huge debts due to decisions that WE made that ( in my mind at least) may not even be right. It would allow us to live in comfort. Future generations can deal with their situation & who is to say it will be worse than ours as technology developes. They will have far more difficult problems to overcome- One cannot rule out nuclear war, & that would waste everyones efforts. It is not in the media- at least in the UK- but it still poses a possibility.
Bear in mind that in my part of the world (the UK) the temperature was as high in Roman times as it is in the Mediterranean now. Climate change is cyclical & you cannot say that the Romans caused global warming in their reign. In the dark ages that followed the temperature plumeted. Do we thank the Huns that conquered Europe for that? I think not
So banning small engines is not really necessary. I do not know about the USA but here in the UK we cannot buy small 2 stroke engines, such as outboards, mowers etc. (does not affect our flying hobby engines). We can live with that as 4 stroke are very good, quiet & light. They are cleaner & quieter.
However, if the USA starts banning hobby engines it will follow that the UK will do the same- eventually- because that is what we always seem to do. That concerns me & that is why I want you hobbyists in the USA to kick back against such legislation if it ever came to fruition
If I have missed something & got it all wrong then, sorry, I will go away & cry in my beer
That is absolutely what clean air, rivers and nature is all about - I wholeheartedly agree.
My digression is that CO2 is not a pollutant - The EPA by sleight of its own hand declared CO2 to be within its purview - thus giving them self appointed power to act against it.
CO2 is the "gas of life" - the EPA can now act against anything it might perceive as an infraction.
That can lead anywhere and I recognize the thin end of a wedge when I see one.
Where do we go from here ? Lets look at a few suggestions :-
Banning all non-essential burning of fossil fuels - end all motor racing, power boating and air shows.
Since the "carbon footprint" of spectators to and from major sporting events is equally massive we should terminate attendance - mandatory watching on TV instead.
I didn't even make those up, I have seen them mooted - I have pages of such hare brained ideas on how to save the world which I won't bore you with here.
The EPA and CARB have overstepped their mandate - thankfully I don't live there and when it all ends in tears, it will be hard not to gloat.
You have created a bureaucratic monster that is going to inflict the flagellation you apparently so desire.
So yes it is relevant to our hobby when the law is an invitation to meddling busybodies to report their neighbor's for running their model engines.
Poster from the fabulous Red Dwarf episode "Back To Reality"
Regard - Ken
Last edited:
California is trying redesign cows so do not produce pollution.
The electric cars are great till you need a new battery. Now you have a $40,000 object in front yard. But you are on feet again in the fresh air getting your new transportation system aka buss.
I think will know what everyone here would do , build a engine for object in front yard. On the road again.
Now your wife is happy for your hobby as she drives to store in AC or heat again.
Dave
The electric cars are great till you need a new battery. Now you have a $40,000 object in front yard. But you are on feet again in the fresh air getting your new transportation system aka buss.
I think will know what everyone here would do , build a engine for object in front yard. On the road again.
Now your wife is happy for your hobby as she drives to store in AC or heat again.
Dave
The fact that a brand is selling well is an indication that the brand is popular, not that what it's selling is the best solution to every problem. That could be due to any number of reasons, the simplest being simply that it's trendy.
When I was a new grad engineer, an old graybeard told me, "Engineering is the art of compromise. There is no one perfect solution for every situation. If there was, nobody would pay an engineer to design the solution." Examples are all around us. At the moment, there are too many situations in which electric cars aren't better and the barriers to exclusive use of electric cars are too high (quadrupling the worldwide power grid, for example).
A quote from engineering trade magazine Design News, May of '17.
"No one was ever more forthright about this matter than Sergio Marchionne, the refreshingly honest chief executive of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. Talking about his company’s all-electric Fiat 500e in 2014, he said , “I hope you don’t buy it because every time I sell one it costs me $14,000.” "
We tend to buy our cars for the expected uses even if the hardest use isn't very often. People expect to be able to get in a car and drive across the country - or a shorter trip of just a couple of days - even if it's once a year or every other year. This comes "for free" with a gasoline powered internal combustion engine. Gasoline or diesel are tremendously better at energy storage than batteries. While battery makers desperately try to figure out how to reach a specific energy of 450 Wh/kg (Watt*hours per kilogram), gasoline already offers 12,000 Wh/kg.
- Status
