Is AB-1346 The Beginning To The End Of The GARDEN TRACTOR?

[DonaldP]

From the looks of most posts here I am gonna get lampooned mercilessly for this but here goes with my.25c worth. IMO for string trimmers brush saws pruners etc electric is just better. And to prove it I have been switching to battery as fast as possible. The positives for me are these. 1,Less noise of course. 2, not having to buy heart stopping expensive pre mix for my two strokes or premium for my 4 strokes in an effort to try and cut down on my repair maintenance time/costs. 3, no repair maintenance costs around ignition ,carburetors/fuel systems. 4, not having to go get fuel when time is short/the job is half done and I am out of gas. It is never just a quick run to the store....Should be max 15-20 min there and back. Though it seems to be tough to get that done in under an hour. 5, less fire hazard in the shop. 6, the tools I have are lighter and just as strong if not stronger than my previous gas powered ones. 5, if/when I decide to go for the 40v up grade I should be able to sell my 18v kit for a premium over gas powered to someone else looking to cut some cost as they green up their yard maintenance tools. 6, I do not spend the +/-50$ on gas annually. If my calculations are correct I spent +/-20$ on electricity this year. The down sides to switching. 1, when you get behind on your trimming it takes a little longer to catch up as the batteries will need to be charged or have a spare set. I get about 45min of continuous out of 2 5ah 18 volt string trimmer batteries. If I don't let the weeds in my 2ac you-pick berry patch get away from me I can clean up around the bushes with one set after the mower. I have gotten very behind on the trimming a time or two and found out the hard way how long the batteries last. 2, And this is more of a recommendation than a down side. Research what you need in the way of out door power tools and buy from one manufacturer ,Milwaukee Makita Dewalt etc to cut down on battery/charger costs that can be very significant when added up. IE buy one brand and stick with it. Most likely you ,like me, had some cordless drills/impacts already. That is what had me go to Makita the batteries are interchangeable. With two batteries coming with the first garden tool [string trimmer] and I had two 5ah batteries already from the drill driver/nut drive set. Adding up to a confirmed minimum of 1.5 hours of continuous use using both sets. 3, initial cost 2-3 times that of gas powered. Cry once and that is about it. For me the benefits out weigh the cost to switch. And I am in Canada [although I am living in BC that never seems to be very far behind California on these pollution/carbon reduction initiatives] where there has been no such ultimatum come down from the ivory towers of government. To each their own but times are changing and like it or not battery/electric is coming folks. I have found the benefits to exceed the negatives so far And small two stroke/4 stroke engines are some of the dirtiest made and there are many 10s of millions in use in North America. Lawn mowers are another thing altogether. But there have been some electric push and riding mowers coming onto the market over the last couple of years too. For me that is likely the next thing to be replaced as the one I have now is protesting a long and hard service life with me after being bought used .....it is tired and in need of retirement. A Ryobi Cub Cadet Ego or another may be in the cards in the next year or two. Sooner if the Huskvarna I have now grenades

If you have the money to change everything in 2 or 3 years over to electric, god bless you!

I’m not lampooning you, and technology is always changing, but splitting 40 or more face cords of wood to heat my home can’t be effectively done via electric at this time or for any foreseeable future. Yes, were it by available when it’s time to replace my wood splitter and L3560 (that supports those activities from pulling logs out of the woods to helping to split and then moving the filled with prepped and dried IBC totes to within use proximity to the fireplaces) … well I just don’t see that as a viable electric option for a long time to come.

Now, having said that- I can say that for an average 1/2 acre home owner with an electric lawn mower, weed whacker, and hedge trimmer or broom/snow blower and tiller… well other than the possible $5000 or more cost to “upgrade” all of that to electric, there isn’t much of a negative.

But who determines who gets a free pass to use a 25 or 35 HP unit for their own property and for income on the side if they want?

Its a scary proposition to hand those choices all over to someone you may not know, that doesn’t know you….

 

[DonaldP]

Unfortunatly you are very correct and in this age of information and disinformation almost nothing on this amendment was ever published in the news of hardy any media.

Yes… and that’s why I truly believe this is insidious and sneaky. Very unprofessional and an under handed way to run government.

 

[Hay Dude]

After reading these forums for years, I bet 98 out of 100 TBN members are homeowners and 2 out of every 100 make a living with fuel operated equipment.
Theres people out there trying to make a living with these new mandates dumped on us, too. Electric tools not all feasible for commercial companies.
Big difference between Homeowners and Commercial operators and the power needs on these tools.

 

[MossRoad]

If you have the money to change everything in 2 or 3 years over to electric, god bless you!

I’m not lampooning you, and technology is always changing, but splitting 40 or more face cords of wood to heat my home can’t be effectively done via electric at this time or for any foreseeable future. Yes, were it by available when it’s time to replace my wood splitter and L3560 (that supports those activities from pulling logs out of the woods to helping to split and then moving the filled with prepped and dried IBC totes to within use proximity to the fireplaces) … well I just don’t see that as a viable electric option for a long time to come.

Now, having said that- I can say that for an average 1/2 acre home owner with an electric lawn mower, weed whacker, and hedge trimmer or broom/snow blower and tiller… well other than the possible $5000 or more cost to “upgrade” all of that to electric, there isn’t much of a negative.

But who determines who gets a free pass to use a 25 or 35 HP unit for their own property and for income on the side if they want?

Its a scary proposition to hand those choices all over to someone you may not know, that doesn’t know you….

The thing that sticks out the most to me in this post is that you need 13+ cords of wood to heat your house?

 

[DonaldP]

I've been posting for more than a year and had to cut back as much of the feedback was negative as my postings were specific to CARB which has been adopted in many states in addition to California including the entire West Coast.

Right now it is already or soon to be illegal to even fire up a two stroke blower, trimmer, etc... in 21 cities and counting.

This covers Fire Suppression work with the alternative given battery or non mechanical abatement....

Even generators are to be phased out including propane and natural gas.

What I find particularly onerous is many laws apply to equipment already purchased and used in good faith... all done with the stroke of a pen...

Also included as companion legislation banning solid fuel combustion... such as wood and coal stoves.

Yes, well I’m not someone to hammer another on their individual belief or why they choose to adopt or support anything they choose. All I ask is that people recognize that not everything we see or hear today is reality… and that
Non reality comes from many sides of any issue.

The fact that you do post means you care, and caring at any level or in any direction is so much better than the alternative.

 

[plowhog]

if you run out of gas out in the boondocks, you can always ask your buddy to bring you a gallon of it so you can get back home.

But even that is screwed up based on government regulation. Because half the gas in the "new style" cans winds up on the ground instead of the gas tank.

Before the mandate about the "new cans," I rarely spilled any fuel. Now it happens all the time.

 

[DonaldP]

The thing that sticks out the most to me in this post is that you need 13+ cords of wood to heat your house?

Yes … I do… it’s an old home 1849 in fact.
folks look at reusability and sustainability. There is no question that this home, built in the 1840’s used NONE of the energy resources connected to oil or the types of fuel that today take first place in the carbon producing accolades.
Yes it takes 13 FACE cords, and some pellets too!

I suppose I could spend $100,000 to tear it down and rebuild it with high carbon footprint producing materials, but i’m thiking that would be taking a step backward no?

I can understand that there are those that may not understand that preserving an almost zero carbon footprint home over replacing it with a “modern day HIGH carbon footprint home would be taking a step backward.

It would be nice to see what the carbon footprint of a new 2400sq ft home would be over the cost of burning the 13 fave cords of wood per year (with pellets) over a 25 year period of time.

I suppose I could take down all the drywall, foam the exterior walls, replace the 2x4’s with 2x6’s and fill the rest with insulation, dig the basement to a 9ft depth over the 5.5ft current depth, and then replace the slanted roof to be a proper truss based roof that I can then properly insulate…. All at the cost, of course, of adding an additional carbon footprint that would have to be offset by the savings in the carbon footprint associated with burning the wood I do to heat it…

I could… and maybe I just will put together those numbers for personal gratification.

it’s an interesting thought.

 

[LouNY]

Yes … I do… it’s an old home 1849 in fact.
folks look at reusability and sustainability. There is no question that this home, built in the 1840’s used NONE of the energy resources connected to oil or the types of fuel that today take first place in the carbon producing accolades.
Yes it takes 13 FACE cords, and some pellets too!

I suppose I could spend $100,000 to tear it down and rebuild it with high carbon footprint producing materials, but i’m thiking that would be taking a step backward no?

I can understand that there are those that may not understand that preserving an almost zero carbon footprint home over replacing it with a “modern day HIGH carbon footprint home would be taking a step backward.

It would be nice to see what the carbon footprint of a new 2400sq ft home would be over the cost of burning the 13 fave cords of wood per year (with pellets) over a 25 year period of time.

I suppose I could take down all the drywall, foam the exterior walls, replace the 2x4’s with 2x6’s and fill the rest with insulation, dig the basement to a 9ft depth over the 5.5ft current depth, and then replace the slanted roof to be a proper truss based roof that I can then properly insulate…. All at the cost, of course, of adding an additional carbon footprint that would have to be offset by the savings in the carbon footprint associated with burning the wood I do to heat it…

I could… and maybe I just will put together those numbers for personal gratification.

it’s an interesting thought.

Heck to my mind that's not bad at all,
13 face cords to me would mean only about 4&1/3 full cords and some pellets.
I use just for the house approximately 1000 gallons of oil and 2-4 tons of coal,
the oil is also my hot water. And when the coal insert is fired up it provides a level of heat that my wife likes,
the front living area of the house will be mid 70's plus, the sleeping area will be just 60 or so.
And yes my house needs a bunch of energy saving expenditures also ripping down tearing out and replacing.
Many dollars and much material costs.

 

[DonaldP]

The thing that sticks out the most to me in this post is that you need 13+ cords of wood to heat your house?

I’m looking up a few things now….

http://www.carbonconstruct.com/pdf/comparative_carbon_footprint_analysis.pdf

 

[MossRoad]

Yes … I do… it’s an old home 1849 in fact.
folks look at reusability and sustainability. There is no question that this home, built in the 1840’s used NONE of the energy resources connected to oil or the types of fuel that today take first place in the carbon producing accolades.
Yes it takes 13 FACE cords, and some pellets too!

I suppose I could spend $100,000 to tear it down and rebuild it with high carbon footprint producing materials, but i’m thiking that would be taking a step backward no?

I can understand that there are those that may not understand that preserving an almost zero carbon footprint home over replacing it with a “modern day HIGH carbon footprint home would be taking a step backward.

It would be nice to see what the carbon footprint of a new 2400sq ft home would be over the cost of burning the 13 fave cords of wood per year (with pellets) over a 25 year period of time.

I suppose I could take down all the drywall, foam the exterior walls, replace the 2x4’s with 2x6’s and fill the rest with insulation, dig the basement to a 9ft depth over the 5.5ft current depth, and then replace the slanted roof to be a proper truss based roof that I can then properly insulate…. All at the cost, of course, of adding an additional carbon footprint that would have to be offset by the savings in the carbon footprint associated with burning the wood I do to heat it…

I could… and maybe I just will put together those numbers for personal gratification.

it’s an interesting thought.

In your original post you said 40 face cords.
In this post, you say 13 face cords, which is only 4 and 1/3 cords.

A cord is 4' wide by 4' tall by 8' long. A face cord is 1/3 of that.

Our house was built in 1921 and has no insulation in the walls either. We use 6 cords in a very cold winter, and the fire in the stove burned from October 1st through April 1st. It only went out 4 times. If I had to use 13 cords of wood, I'd be looking at updating the home. Now, with the winter being nowhere as cold as they used to be, we only use about 4 cords per year.