Enviros trying to ban our Kubotas?

[jtn]

The new emissions standerds for diesels, known as Tier II, do not come into effect on compact tractors for another year (I think). Tier II is being phased in by horsepower and higher power construction and farm equipment is being hit first.

Manufacturers are scrambling to find ways to make cleaner burning engines. Mostly what you will see for Tier II is electronically controlled engines. Similar to what has happened in cars, electronic engines presisely monitor engine timing and fuel injection. Of course Tier II engines will burn more fuel and produce less power. As some of you may remember last year (or was it 2 years ago) Cummins, Cat, and Detroit Diesel all got in trouble with the EPA because they were changing fuel maps in thier truck engines. The engine would burn less fuel and produce more power but it was no longer emissions compliant. For those of you with a Ford truck with the 7.3l Powerstroke, you can acheive a similar result by buying an aftermarket chip for the engine computer. The chip will give you from 30 to 100 additional horsepower and 6 more miles per gallon (reported to me by somebody who "chipped" his truck). Of course your engine will no longer be emissions compliant.

I am not sure when Tier II kicks in for compacts but when it is getting close look for updated tractors with emissions engines. The manufacturer websites and product lit will most likely be touting Tier II compliance when this occurs. Several construction machines are already boasting Tier II compliance.

JT

 

[hazmat]

<font color=blue>As it is, I am investigating sources of bio-diesel in my area for use in my tractor, and considering making my own bio-diesel. </font color=blue>

John, Have you seen the <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.biodiesel.org/default2.htm>bio-diesel web site</A>

If you click the "manufacturers producers" link, there is a place near Boston, MA that will ship it to your house.

Have you tryed it yet? I am considering ordering some B-100 and mixing it with local petro-deisel to the recommended b-20 blend. Regarding making your own, are you planning on using it "pure" or blended?

I think it would be cool to have exhaust that smells like french fries.

 

[John_Mc]

Re: Bio-Diesel

<font color=blue>John, Have you seen the bio-diesel web site</font color=blue>

I had not seen that one. Thanks for the link. Here's one for you, if you are interested: <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.veggievan.org/>http://www.veggievan.org/</A> Among other things, they sell a decent beginners book on the subject.

<font color=blue>If you click the "manufacturers producers" link, there is a place near Boston, MA that will ship it to your house.</font color=blue>

Is that the "Yellow Brand" Bio-Diesel? I've heard of them, somewhere in MA, but not contacted them. There is an individual near Montpelier, VT who makes bio-diesel that I've been meaning to catch up to... he's usually on the "Solar Home Tour" each year.

<font color=blue>Have you tryed it yet? I am considering ordering some B-100 and mixing it with local petro-deisel to the recommended b-20 blend. </font color=blue>

I've not run it in my own tractor, but have seen it run in other tractors and cars/trucks (B-100) with good results. The only problems reported were with engines that had run petro-Diesel for a long time. The bio-D loosens the deposits in the fuel tank and can cause the fuel filter to clog until all the old stuff gets out of the system. In this situation, people recommend getting a cheap aftermarket filter and putting it in-line ahead of the factory fuel filter. Once you've run the crud out, you can remove the extra filter.

<font color=blue>Regarding making your own, are you planning on using it "pure" or blended?</font color=blue>

I would be using it pure. It runs cleaner (both emissions and internal engine parts are cleaner), engines last longer (if the biodiesel is properly made). The B-20 blend also provides most of these benefits... more so than you'd think from a 20% blend. The only concern I have is in winter months the anti-gelling stuff sold for petro-diesel does not always work with bio-diesel. With a few extra steps in the process of making bio-D, you can avoid this, but I will probably start small and simple. May end up switching to petro-D (or B-20 blend) for the winter.

John Mc

 

[k8ny]

John Mc

I respectfully disagree with your brand of environmentalism.

Bob

 

[John_Mc]

<font color=blue>I respectfully disagree with your brand of environmentalism.</font color=blue>

Bob -

Nicely put. I appreciate the fact that I did not get flamed. I don't try to force my opinions (environmental or otherwise) down anyone's throat, and neither do I blindly follow someone else's lead.

Not trying to start a big agument here, I think what prompted my response was the impression I got that some posters felt that all environmental regulation in any form is bad. If the regs on off-road diesel don't go too far, I believe thay could be a good thing. I guess the real question is whose definition of "too far" do you use. I worked for a lot of years for a manufacturing firm that is not exactly in a "clean" industry. I now serve as chairman of their their board of directors. I know what environmental regulations run amok can do to a business and its employees. I also know that if some of the OSHA regs were not in place, this company's workplace (and that of many other factories) would be a much less safe and healthy place. On the other hand, some of those regs are rediculous, and serve no purpose other than to perpetuate the OSHA bureaucracy.

 

[TresCrows]

I am sure I will get censored again but I am not anti-environment but I am anti junk science, anti urban legend, anti beauracracy, anti lawyer, anti left and don't remember voting for any of this stuff. I don't want some ill informed beuracrat who is not elected and left leaning to decide what is best for me--can we just stick with the Constitution please?---and nothing else. Frankly, I think the environment is the least of our immediate worries because if certain factions get a hold of the "bomb" or smallpox virus etc we won't be around to argue whether big government and big brother are good or bad cuz we will not be here. Hopefully wise men will prevail and all this will be a sad and someday forgotten footnote in history as hard as that may be to think now.
4 against 1 is liberal fun. J

 

[John_Mc]

TresCrows -

I hear you. I tend a bit in your direction myself, though maybe not quite as far on some issues. I used to generally vote republican, though I find myself at increasing odds with some of their issues. Now I tend to vote based on a person's character, rather than his/her political views (though there are some exceptions). This is a lot easier to do in local elections where you know the people than in national ones.

I still think that some regulations serve a very useful purpose (for example, I'm glad that zoning prevents my neighbor from setting up an all-night drag-racing strip just over the property line in my rural area, or turn his property into a storage site for nuclear waste.) I also agree there are times when regulations prevent someone from doing things better (federal funding for highway construction comes to mind - requires certain types of construction, even when others might cost 10% more but last twice as long).

John Mc

 

[AndyInPA]

Ahhhg....

Doughnuts, Snickers bars, Big Macs and Russian vodka kill more people every year than second-hand smoke, pollution from household waste, and fossil fuel emissions combined.

Alright, alright, I can't prove it. Just trying to make a point that it's easier, more politically fashionable, and generally correct to regulate things that are "outputs" or byproducts than it is to regulates things that are consumed. BTW, I consider safety or peril a byproduct of our equipment.

The point within the point is that perhaps "good" regulations on outputs and byproducts exhist because the "bad" byproducts impose on the unwitting and innocent.

My only opinion is that I think it's good to protect the unwitting and innocent, even though those terms are highly subjective and perennially exploited.

I'm not taking any questions /w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif
Andy

 

[mec650]

I think that we can now expect reasonable decisions from the administration in Washington, DC. The people now at the top apparently understand that we don't work hard to pay taxes so a government can then screw up our lives. That's the best anyone can expect from a republic. We won't now have decisions made to play to the media and we won't have decisions intended to cover up hanky panky (spelling?) in the oval office. But the reality of life today is that if you fly a small plane, own a gun, work in the private sector, or do just about anything beyond sitting in the library you need to weigh in during elections (with support and your vote) and during public processes that can impact your life.

The 2000 presidential election showed a remarkable split between rural and urban voters. I fear urban voters and the people they send to Congress much more than I fear the EPA today. The election this fall will be another contest between those of us who think the people who founded this nation got it right the first time and the urban voters who are willing to trade it all away for a promise that the government can and will take care of their every need and concern. Thanks.

 

[upgw]

Buck,
I think they would have eventually gotten here, but emissions regs surely speeded them along, probably by many years, if not decades. I think the whole point of this thread is that, lacking any government mandate, the big diesel manufacturers have not made big improvment overall. If Kubotal can make a clean tractor engine, CAT can too...

Tht said, I think the EPA's attempt to continue to tighten restrictions on cars is outrageous, they are incredibly clean already.

- Patrick W.