Hey Pickles,
Glad you liked the article. For anyone that has the patience to read the entire EPA document you will find out that the EPA is not evil but was more than willing to work with the manufacturers to improve emissions. In fact it seemed that one of the Big 4 was dead set on moving to four-strokes... and one of the Big 5 was interested in two-stroke technology. I wonder which one is which? LOL
When looking at the snowmobiles and outboard engines you find that two-strokes are on the rise. Evenrude has built direct injection machines that meet and exceed the standards, while still being light and powerful. Direct injection has also been used in sleds as well with similar results.
I know for a fact that KTM has some prototype mxers with direct injection. The reports that I have heard is that it works amazingly well.
What's the hold-up? Who knows....
The other aspect to keep in mind with motocross only, is currently the EPA emissions do not apply to closed course racing. Although they do for trail riding and in this area California has been the most influential because the largest majority of dirt bikes are sold there, so it's a real concern for the manufacturers.
The main issue to keep in mind is that the rumors of the EPA banning two-strokes is marketing driven and not a true statement.
To put everything into better perspective buildings (Homes, offices and factories) produce a bit over 38% of CO2 emissions. And as far as I know no one has a catalytic converter on there home furnace...
For those that hate the idea of alternative energy, imagine having a home that used no oil or electricity from a power plant to supply heating, cooling and electricity?? Should the USA move in that direction, the cost of oil would drop and emissions would be much lower. This sounds like a great idea.
Before you go into saying that the alternative forms of power need huge subsidies to be installed, keep in mind a few thoughts. The government currently subsidizes the oil industry to the the tune of $15 to $35 billion dollars per year! You pay this in your taxes.
Add the outrageous costs of the Afganastan and Iraq war that experts believe cost somewhere in the neighborhood of 1 billion dollars a DAY! The only reason we are in these wars is for oil! We all pay for this in our taxes. You can not find a higher subsidized industry than oil. This is all during a period of time when the oil companies profits have been skyrocketing.
A bunch of people are making tremendous amounts of money, thanks to the American taxpayer.
Now imagine that this level of money was used to research and install alternative energy in large installations across the country. The benefits would be many, including not sending huge amounts of money to the countries that support terrorism and the destruction of the US... second the cost of oil would drop significantly.
All I say is to keep an open mind and look at the big picture. For an example to see how expenses could be cut, look at the upgrades being performed on the Empire State building. By intelligent design they can improve the efficiency of the building by nearly 40%. So the investment in upgrades will be paid back to the owners in 4 years!! Totally unheard of. After that, the cost savings of running the building are tremendous.
Kind of makes you wonder... could it be the fight for oil is the reason the US and the world is in such a bad place financially???
[/off soapbox]
