mreric
Site Supporter
'MythBusters' asks: Are motorcycles greener than cars?
- Thread starter mreric
- Start date
MZ5
Well-Known Member
Don't even have to read the article:
NO. MOTORCYCLES ARE GROSS POLLUTERS.
Sorry, kids, that's just the reality. EPA is forcing m/cs to catch up to cars now, and that's choking the performance people have previously expected from m/cs, but m/cs are still gross polluters.
NO. MOTORCYCLES ARE GROSS POLLUTERS.
Sorry, kids, that's just the reality. EPA is forcing m/cs to catch up to cars now, and that's choking the performance people have previously expected from m/cs, but m/cs are still gross polluters.
Don't even have to read the article:
NO. MOTORCYCLES ARE GROSS POLLUTERS.
Sorry, kids, that's just the reality. EPA is forcing m/cs to catch up to cars now, and that's choking the performance people have previously expected from m/cs, but m/cs are still gross polluters.
Well at least we NC'ers are step in the green direction, what with the half a car engine and all. Seriously, I don't know how emissions on the NC700 compare with other motorcycles, but I'd have to think the low rpm, high efficiency engine would pollute less than most.
Getting off topic a bit, but I'd guess Briggs and Stratton lawn mower engines probably win the prize for worst polluters in the 4 stroke class. If nothing else, just because they burn so much oil.
Last edited:
zirconx
New Member
The NC700X has extremely low emissions.
Honda NC700X and S are economical and green, unlike most motorcycles - Wheels.ca
"The NC was mandated to have fuel consumption on par with Honda’s CBR250 (around 3.5L/100 km) and also to be one of the “greenest” motorcycles available. The NC produces less than half the emissions allowed under current Euro 3 motorcycle standards and it easily meets the much stricter Euro 5 standards, due to take effect in a few years."
Old Can Ride
Active Member
The government rules govern emissions standards at the manufacture. Once the motorcycle hits the roadway, how many folks change the exhaust system?
zirconx
New Member
I would say no more than 25%, at the most. The majority of motorcycles I come across have stock exhaust systems.
bamamate
Elite Member
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2012
- Messages
- 2,360
- Reaction score
- 52
- Points
- 48
- Location
- Allford, FL/Dothan, AL
Exhaust changes after the cat normally don’t change the emissions. Only change the sound and sometimes the power.
Probably depends on the area. I live in the Little Rock area. I have not seen many sport bikes with the stock exhaust. Nearly all of them have modified the exhaust. I have no idea with the Harley's since I've never been a fan but hehy are really loud so my assumption is they are modified too.
Brillot2000
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2014
- Messages
- 1,485
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 36
- Location
- Sun Valley, CA, U.S.A.
Don't even have to read the article:
NO. MOTORCYCLES ARE GROSS POLLUTERS.
Sorry, kids, that's just the reality. EPA is forcing m/cs to catch up to cars now, and that's choking the performance people have previously expected from m/cs, but m/cs are still gross polluters.
Let me hit the "High Points" of the article that we all have a better understanding.
The Air Resources Board estimates there are 600,000 motorcycles in active use in California, which account for less than 1% of vehicle miles traveled in the state. Those 600,000 motorcycles, however, account for 13% of the state's hydrocarbon emissions from passenger vehicles, Swanton said.
3 of which of those are mine.
Despite the MythBusters' findings, emissions are only part of the story of a vehicle's true greenness. According to the Motorcycle Industry Council, motorcycle manufacturing requires thousands fewer pounds of raw materials than automobiles. They require less fossil fuel, so they require less energy to pull that fossil fuel out of the ground. They use fewer chemicals and oils than cars. And motorcycles produced today are 90% cleaner in California than they were 30 years ago.
"NaNCy", my 2013 NC700X has far better emissions than my 1975 CB360T. I guess that NaNCy and my ST1300 will be getting some more ride time than the "360" these days.
anglachel
Member
The euro 5 and the American emissions for cats are both available online. I started doing the math once, I recall the euro 5 being stricter then the U.S. standards for Low emissions vehicles.
Some one else can do the math to convert km to miles and grams to ounces, or what ever it was to confirm.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
mreric
Site Supporter
Don't even have to read the article:
NO. MOTORCYCLES ARE GROSS POLLUTERS.
Sorry, kids, that's just the reality. EPA is forcing m/cs to catch up to cars now, and that's choking the performance people have previously expected from m/cs, but m/cs are still gross polluters.
why not read? is good for you, is good for knowledge and maybe something changed from what you currently know. reading is also good for your health ( brain health)
MZ5
Well-Known Member
I like my motorcycle, and I most certainly agree that the NCX is a lower-pollution machine that MANY of the motorcycles out there. The same is true of our current Camry, however.
For reference, here are the tables of current EPA emissions standards for motorcycles vs. cars & light trucks:
Motorcycles
Cars & Light-Duty Trucks
And here is where you can see any individual vehicle's certification results:
EPA Certification test results
Careful! These spreadsheets might take a LONG time to download!
Basically, in North America motorcycles are allowed to emit over 5x the HC + NOx, and over 3.5x the CO on a lbs/mile (or g/km) basis as the most-polluting Bin in the current automobile & light truck standard. Now, just because they're _allowed_ to emit those amounts doesn't necessarily mean that they do. That applies to cars, too, so I think it's reasonable to conclude that the margins will be similar. Maybe cars under-shoot the limits by even more since they have to perform for so much longer? IDK.
NOTE: Take care to not try to compare European and American emissions numbers directly. Test procedures are extremely different, but the governing bodies agree that the current standards are roughly equivalent.
For reference, here are the tables of current EPA emissions standards for motorcycles vs. cars & light trucks:
Motorcycles
Cars & Light-Duty Trucks
And here is where you can see any individual vehicle's certification results:
EPA Certification test results
Careful! These spreadsheets might take a LONG time to download!
Basically, in North America motorcycles are allowed to emit over 5x the HC + NOx, and over 3.5x the CO on a lbs/mile (or g/km) basis as the most-polluting Bin in the current automobile & light truck standard. Now, just because they're _allowed_ to emit those amounts doesn't necessarily mean that they do. That applies to cars, too, so I think it's reasonable to conclude that the margins will be similar. Maybe cars under-shoot the limits by even more since they have to perform for so much longer? IDK.
NOTE: Take care to not try to compare European and American emissions numbers directly. Test procedures are extremely different, but the governing bodies agree that the current standards are roughly equivalent.
Grey1one
Active Member
One other thing that is rarely factored in is the amount of damage to driving surfaces, cars and trucks do much more damage.
Repairing the roads isn't cheap or environmentally friendly.
Repairing the roads isn't cheap or environmentally friendly.
MZ5
Well-Known Member
Arguing about the 'cost' in money is entirely different than arguing about the granola-munchy-ness of how polluting a thing is. Death rates per mile and hospital bills from 'minor' accidents are also rarely figured in to the car-motorcycle comparison. Now that the USA is being forced into socialist medicine like some other places, perhaps the money will be figured in to the regulators' calculations here, too. People cost a lot to fix. More than roads?
anglachel
Member
Complete combustion is powerful, efficient, and clean.
On a motorcycle the easy to get a powerful clean and efficient engine is to completely burn up everything.
Catalytic converter is only going to do so much cleanup, a complete burn means smaller cheaper cats.
Cars been legislated into having all sorts of emissions controls and sensors, if manufactures can deliver bikes that don't have complicated emissions systems, and deliver power and efficiency while exceeding the standards hopefully the legislation won't be needed and bikes can continue to have simple emissions systems.
Low emissions, high power, and efficient shouldn't have to be mutually exclusive, though so many people assume they are because that is what they have seen.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
On a motorcycle the easy to get a powerful clean and efficient engine is to completely burn up everything.
Catalytic converter is only going to do so much cleanup, a complete burn means smaller cheaper cats.
Cars been legislated into having all sorts of emissions controls and sensors, if manufactures can deliver bikes that don't have complicated emissions systems, and deliver power and efficiency while exceeding the standards hopefully the legislation won't be needed and bikes can continue to have simple emissions systems.
Low emissions, high power, and efficient shouldn't have to be mutually exclusive, though so many people assume they are because that is what they have seen.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
