Time to talk freon12/ecology
07-01-2012, 06:46 AM
#17
Rennlist Member
Just an FYI...
Had a 90 GT. Put on an RMB. best sounding car I've owned. Made the hair stand up on the back of my neck from the sound of going up through the gears.
In the quest for power (pre x-pipe) I bought a junk yard stock cat, gutted it and swapped em. It changed the sound dramatically. It was really loud and instead of the musical tone of the exhaust it sounded like Friday night down at the dirt track. Put the rear muffler back on and the sound level was acceptable, but it just sounded like I was a couple of blocks away from the dirt track instead of in the stands. Did not sound nearly as good as cats and RMB.
When I did the X-pipe on my GTS, because of my experience with the 90GT I opted to add sport cats and RMB. It sounds great and am doing the reduced emissions thing despite not having emissions testing in Oklahoma.
Saw show on Speed where some street rod builders were working with Chevrolet to build a completely emissions legal street rod. Despite the fact it had all the current emissions technology and lower emissions than most new cars, it was not approved to be EPA legal.
Had a 90 GT. Put on an RMB. best sounding car I've owned. Made the hair stand up on the back of my neck from the sound of going up through the gears.
In the quest for power (pre x-pipe) I bought a junk yard stock cat, gutted it and swapped em. It changed the sound dramatically. It was really loud and instead of the musical tone of the exhaust it sounded like Friday night down at the dirt track. Put the rear muffler back on and the sound level was acceptable, but it just sounded like I was a couple of blocks away from the dirt track instead of in the stands. Did not sound nearly as good as cats and RMB.
When I did the X-pipe on my GTS, because of my experience with the 90GT I opted to add sport cats and RMB. It sounds great and am doing the reduced emissions thing despite not having emissions testing in Oklahoma.
Saw show on Speed where some street rod builders were working with Chevrolet to build a completely emissions legal street rod. Despite the fact it had all the current emissions technology and lower emissions than most new cars, it was not approved to be EPA legal.
07-01-2012, 01:25 PM
#19
Rennlist Member
One of the discussions that does not get had has to with diminishing returns. Often, getting the last 1% is as or more difficult and expensive as getting the first 99%. Is it worth it? It's hard to have that discussion in an innumerate society where memory is short and individual contribution to the problem is relatively miniscule, even if you're pouring your old oil into the storm sewer. It's made more difficult by the resistance of those willing to spend liberally on propaganda to avoid spending (perhaps even more) on pollution control.
I'm 65. I remember it was unusual to see the mountains from Pasadena in the 60's and 70's. Every now and then I'll be in traffic in my Ohio small town and catch a whiff of somebody's crapmobile running rich. That whiff takes me right back to what traffic smelled like for the first half of my life. I like it better now. I like my seatbelts better, too.
One of the good things a government can do is drive technology with imposed standards. Modern engine management systems owe more to the EPA than the technological adventurousness of Detroit. They were dragged, kicking and screaming, into doing that engineering work.
Is the perfect the enemy of the good? Do huge bureaucracies often overreach beyond what's necessary for a "good" or optimal result, wasting effort and treasure? Is government oversight difficult to accomplish and often a blunt instrument? Are there idealists, ideologues and cynical users on both sides of any issue, the latter using the former to generate hysteria to push their own agenda? Do these things mean one will always be justified in being unsatisfied with any public program? Yes to all.
I'm 65. I remember it was unusual to see the mountains from Pasadena in the 60's and 70's. Every now and then I'll be in traffic in my Ohio small town and catch a whiff of somebody's crapmobile running rich. That whiff takes me right back to what traffic smelled like for the first half of my life. I like it better now. I like my seatbelts better, too.
One of the good things a government can do is drive technology with imposed standards. Modern engine management systems owe more to the EPA than the technological adventurousness of Detroit. They were dragged, kicking and screaming, into doing that engineering work.
Is the perfect the enemy of the good? Do huge bureaucracies often overreach beyond what's necessary for a "good" or optimal result, wasting effort and treasure? Is government oversight difficult to accomplish and often a blunt instrument? Are there idealists, ideologues and cynical users on both sides of any issue, the latter using the former to generate hysteria to push their own agenda? Do these things mean one will always be justified in being unsatisfied with any public program? Yes to all.
07-01-2012, 05:47 PM
#20
Three Wheelin'
Whatever happened to using ammonia as a refrigerant like they did back in the day? It's more efficient, more natural, and doesn't harm the environment.
07-01-2012, 06:54 PM
#21
Rennlist Member
Ammonia systems require a high pressure reservoir and control system, water removal system, and oil fill/drain as oil in the system must be drained and replaced regularly. More parts and maintenance.
Ammonia is still in use in large industrial systems, especially those for freezing.
Ammonia is still in use in large industrial systems, especially those for freezing.
07-01-2012, 10:21 PM
#22
Rennlist Member
Ammonia systems require a high pressure reservoir and control system, water removal system, and oil fill/drain as oil in the system must be drained and replaced regularly. More parts and maintenance.
Ammonia is still in use in large industrial systems, especially those for freezing.
Ammonia is still in use in large industrial systems, especially those for freezing.
07-01-2012, 11:07 PM
#23
Rennlist Member
Anhydrous ammonia is a very effective refrigerant but a good whiff of that stuff will kill you in a heart beat.
07-02-2012, 03:04 AM
#24
Pro
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Centennial, WY
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anhydrous ammonia is indeed a "little" toxic and can be even a decent refrigerant. So is hydrogen sulfide which we were considering using in a hush up military program that was finally given up on because we had trouble not having the stuff melt through the floors of our test labs.
I am a little amazed at how much response this thread got. Usually I never make it to page 2.
I wrote this thread pri8marily because I have observed comments on other threads about the environment and, yes, I realize it does not have a lot to do with "technical" matters. After over fifty years in the technical field (engineering) it does feel good to li9ghten up a bit.
Incidentally, where does one buy an "X" pipe?
For the fellow who wound up on me about skiing, I spent the first twenty years of my life skiing in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Just a little over 1000 feet of vertical but over 400 inches of snow so, yes, I do know what good snow is. Same here in Wyoming where I spent quite a few years teaching skiing at the Snowy Range Ski Area (small but comfortable). I lived for 35 years in (pitooooweee) Connecticut and, again, yes, I do know what ice skating on skis is all about. Also been a hockey coach (and player) since birth.
For those who live in (pitoooweee) California, I spent a sabatical at Lawrencr Livermore and you can certainly keep that part of the world. Unfortunately we have a lot of movie stars who have moved into Jackson Hole, messing up the local economy. People who are Wyomingites, native or not, do not live there for fear of bumping into some of the Hollywood libs. For those who bemoan the smog or any other nasty part of the state, you could move away. Come to Colorado but, please, not Wyoming. Colorado does seem to be a favorite destination for folks from the "Golden State" much to the chagrin of folks from south of us.
As for the polution in other parts of the country, my little town of Lake Linden, Michigan (population 800, record snow 398 inches) in the upper peninsula had some of the worst polution in the water that you might imagine. For the first seventy years of the 20th century, the local mining company dumped the "stamp sand" tailings in the local lake, a tributary of the beautiful Lake Superior. Included with the tailings was high grade ammonia and the sewage from the town. The tailings were so substantial that they formed a huge red desert almost 5 square miles in extent choking off a large part of the lake. Check Google Earth and you can see the result. Look way up in the farthest reaches of the upper peninsula. The town now has a sewage processing plant on the "desert". Am I happy for the clean up? Yes. But do you think residents of Lake Linden (not to forget all of the state of Wyoming) want a lot of these new EPA standards? Hell no! The upper peninsula of Michigan is totally unlike the lower peninsula and I'm sure the folks in the UP want to keep it that way.
I did mention the wolf problem here in Wyoming. For those unfamiliar with the state, it is truly cow country alothough some of the ranches have turned into subdivisions. When the wolf was re-introduced into Yellowstone, there was supposed to be a limit after which time the wolves would come off the "endangered" list (like all those wolves that were moved here from Canada were really endangered). At this point, some twelve years later, we are way over the planned population but the tree huggers have put up such court cases that the wolf problem is getting out of control. Incidentally, us Wyomingites (not including the tree huggers from New York) have made an amazing discovery: Wolves cannot read no-trespassing signs and also, wolves like hamburger (on the hoof) as well as we do.
Finally, I submit that the EPA is like a Wyoming wild horse (of which we have many) who cannot be trained. They had so much fun with the snail darter in Caleeforniay that they decided to take on every manner of species, whether endangered on not so that they can keep their jobs.
Don't get me started on oboobacare.
I am a little amazed at how much response this thread got. Usually I never make it to page 2.
I wrote this thread pri8marily because I have observed comments on other threads about the environment and, yes, I realize it does not have a lot to do with "technical" matters. After over fifty years in the technical field (engineering) it does feel good to li9ghten up a bit.
Incidentally, where does one buy an "X" pipe?
For the fellow who wound up on me about skiing, I spent the first twenty years of my life skiing in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Just a little over 1000 feet of vertical but over 400 inches of snow so, yes, I do know what good snow is. Same here in Wyoming where I spent quite a few years teaching skiing at the Snowy Range Ski Area (small but comfortable). I lived for 35 years in (pitooooweee) Connecticut and, again, yes, I do know what ice skating on skis is all about. Also been a hockey coach (and player) since birth.
For those who live in (pitoooweee) California, I spent a sabatical at Lawrencr Livermore and you can certainly keep that part of the world. Unfortunately we have a lot of movie stars who have moved into Jackson Hole, messing up the local economy. People who are Wyomingites, native or not, do not live there for fear of bumping into some of the Hollywood libs. For those who bemoan the smog or any other nasty part of the state, you could move away. Come to Colorado but, please, not Wyoming. Colorado does seem to be a favorite destination for folks from the "Golden State" much to the chagrin of folks from south of us.
As for the polution in other parts of the country, my little town of Lake Linden, Michigan (population 800, record snow 398 inches) in the upper peninsula had some of the worst polution in the water that you might imagine. For the first seventy years of the 20th century, the local mining company dumped the "stamp sand" tailings in the local lake, a tributary of the beautiful Lake Superior. Included with the tailings was high grade ammonia and the sewage from the town. The tailings were so substantial that they formed a huge red desert almost 5 square miles in extent choking off a large part of the lake. Check Google Earth and you can see the result. Look way up in the farthest reaches of the upper peninsula. The town now has a sewage processing plant on the "desert". Am I happy for the clean up? Yes. But do you think residents of Lake Linden (not to forget all of the state of Wyoming) want a lot of these new EPA standards? Hell no! The upper peninsula of Michigan is totally unlike the lower peninsula and I'm sure the folks in the UP want to keep it that way.
I did mention the wolf problem here in Wyoming. For those unfamiliar with the state, it is truly cow country alothough some of the ranches have turned into subdivisions. When the wolf was re-introduced into Yellowstone, there was supposed to be a limit after which time the wolves would come off the "endangered" list (like all those wolves that were moved here from Canada were really endangered). At this point, some twelve years later, we are way over the planned population but the tree huggers have put up such court cases that the wolf problem is getting out of control. Incidentally, us Wyomingites (not including the tree huggers from New York) have made an amazing discovery: Wolves cannot read no-trespassing signs and also, wolves like hamburger (on the hoof) as well as we do.
Finally, I submit that the EPA is like a Wyoming wild horse (of which we have many) who cannot be trained. They had so much fun with the snail darter in Caleeforniay that they decided to take on every manner of species, whether endangered on not so that they can keep their jobs.
Don't get me started on oboobacare.
