In some areas of the country cars undergo rigorous emissions testing - good
for the environment, good for people and delaying the inevitable onslaught
of global warming. Why aren't boats tested annually? They burn much more
fuel than a car. In fact, boat exhaust has hurt people on the water:

http://havasumagazine.com/carbonmonoxide.htm

Even killed:

http://www.scma.com/news/dec03.pdf

And is common:

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/410537_3

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en... ndexed=google

http://www.dbw.ca.gov/PressRoom/2003/030606CO.aspx


Pollution from boats is extreme:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=5186090

The EPA wants to do something:

http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsst...te=30-Jun-2004

But the special interests of the boating lobby ($$$manufacturers$$$) are
working with payola to keep profits high at the expense of boater's health.
Is it unreasonable to require and annual emission test and follow up
remediation for every boat? I believe boaters should be responsible for
their carbon footprint as well as their impact on other's health. A great
thing would be a buy back of 2 cycle engines, similar to the buy back of
guns.

Phil Abuster wrote:
In some areas of the country cars undergo rigorous emissions testing
- good for the environment, good for people and delaying the
inevitable onslaught of global warming. Why aren't boats tested
annually? They burn much more fuel than a car. In fact, boat exhaust
has hurt people on the water:

http://havasumagazine.com/carbonmonoxide.htm

Even killed:

http://www.scma.com/news/dec03.pdf

And is common:

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/410537_3


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...6&cmd=showdeta
ilview&indexed=google

http://www.dbw.ca.gov/PressRoom/2003/030606CO.aspx


Pollution from boats is extreme:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=5186090

The EPA wants to do something:


http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsst...ate=30-Jun-200
4

But the special interests of the boating lobby ($$$manufacturers$$$)
are working with payola to keep profits high at the expense of
boater's health. Is it unreasonable to require and annual emission
test and follow up remediation for every boat? I believe boaters
should be responsible for their carbon footprint as well as their
impact on other's health. A great thing would be a buy back of 2
cycle engines, similar to the buy back of guns.

Be like the French. Don't use the engine. Sail everywhere, including docking
and anchoring. Believe me, they do!

Dennis.

"Phil Abuster" wrote
A great thing would be a buy back of 2 cycle engines, similar to the buy
back of guns.

You can take my little Yamaha, when you pry the tiller from my cold dead
hand...

"Ernest Scribbler" wrote in message
et...
"Phil Abuster" wrote
A great thing would be a buy back of 2 cycle engines, similar to the buy
back of guns.

You can take my little Yamaha, when you pry the tiller from my cold dead
hand...



Hahaha... good one!

Actually, while it's probably true that boat engines (I'm thinking diesels
in sailboats mostly) are not great for the environment, they're not used
nearly as much as car engines.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 12:27:05 -0500, Ernest Scribbler wrote:

"Phil Abuster" wrote
A great thing would be a buy back of 2 cycle engines, similar to the buy
back of guns.

You can take my little Yamaha, when you pry the tiller from my cold dead
hand...

Ladies and Gentlemen...Mr. Charlton Heston!

"Phil Abuster" wrote in message
...
In some areas of the country cars undergo rigorous emissions testing -
good for the environment, good for people and delaying the inevitable
onslaught of global warming. Why aren't boats tested annually? They burn
much more fuel than a car. In fact, boat exhaust has hurt people on the
water:

http://havasumagazine.com/carbonmonoxide.htm

Even killed:

http://www.scma.com/news/dec03.pdf

And is common:

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/410537_3

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en... ndexed=google

http://www.dbw.ca.gov/PressRoom/2003/030606CO.aspx


Pollution from boats is extreme:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=5186090

The EPA wants to do something:

http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsst...te=30-Jun-2004

But the special interests of the boating lobby ($$$manufacturers$$$) are
working with payola to keep profits high at the expense of boater's
health. Is it unreasonable to require and annual emission test and follow
up remediation for every boat? I believe boaters should be responsible for
their carbon footprint as well as their impact on other's health. A great
thing would be a buy back of 2 cycle engines, similar to the buy back of
guns.


While all your assumptions are incorrect..

If they were correct, wouldn't the sailboat owner get a rebate?

"Phil Abuster" wrote in news:1m6400.pqt.19.1
@news.alt.net:

A great
thing would be a buy back of 2 cycle engines, similar to the buy back of
guns.


Phil, Phil....open up, bud!

Go to the nearest lake that has had 2-stroke engines running 15:1 gas/motor
oil mixture running in them for over a hundred years.

Look out across the water very carefully and see if you detect any kind of
floating oil slicks from those old Western Auto Wizards or Evinrude
Sportwins that are STILL fishing in them! Those old motors were GREASY
with oil anyplace the gas-oil mix touched!

What? You say you don't see anything? It looks like a lake some town ****
into after the government bureaucrats forced the town to install an
approved EPA sewage plant to replace everybody's septic tanks and dry wells
they **** into since the PIlgrims stepped off the rowboats on the far shore
over there! There's no 3 foot thick oil slick completely choking off the
lake because it EVAPORATED WITH THE GAS I spilled into it since I was 8
(1954)!

The damned lake was teeming with FISH until the damned EPA showed up! Now,
it has so many algae blooms eating the **** the sewage plants pour into it,
the fish all died! Here's the report from MY HOMETOWN:

http://www.citizenscampaign.org/campaigns/owasco.htm

When I was polluting the lake with my 2-stroke Elto 1-horse covered in
Quaker State, we used to DRINK THE LAKE! NOT ANYMORE!

"Phil Abuster" wrote in news:1m6400.pqt.19.1
@news.alt.net:

A great
thing would be a buy back of 2 cycle engines, similar to the buy back of
guns.


http://www.co.cayuga.ny.us/wqma/owasco/owasco2000.pdf

Here's the "report".

Look at the color picture on the cover of the pdf file. In the lower right
corner, right where the lake takes a 90 degree turn in its SE corner, is
the little community of SE On Owasco at the end of a little dirt road.
That's where I was raised from the time I was a year old....(c;

It was a great place to be from....

This is a picture taken around the ONE day summer Central New York has
every year, almost....(c;

The town in Moravia. Dates way back before it was a country.

On Feb 29, 7:12 am, "Phil Abuster" wrote:
In some areas of the country cars undergo rigorous emissions testing - good
for the environment, good for people and delaying the inevitable onslaught
of global warming. Why aren't boats tested annually? They burn much more
fuel than a car.

Because there are vastly more cars than there are boats. Boats make a
tiny percentage of harmful emissions. Even if you totally eliminate
boat emissions you will not have made any significant impact on the
environment. Any competent computer programmer or anyone who passed
algebra can tell you why it is silly to spend resources on
optimizations that only effect a small portion a problem. Also, of
course, your assertion that boats "burn much more fuel than a car" is
silly. Some boats do compared to some cars, some don't, but as a
class boats burn an insignificant amount compared to cars do as a
group. Finally, are you sure the environmental cost of testing is
less than the cost of doing nothing?

-- Tom.

"Larry" wrote in message
...
"Phil Abuster" wrote in news:1m6400.pqt.19.1
@news.alt.net:

A great
thing would be a buy back of 2 cycle engines, similar to the buy back of
guns.


Phil, Phil....open up, bud!

Go to the nearest lake that has had 2-stroke engines running 15:1
gas/motor
oil mixture running in them for over a hundred years.

Look out across the water very carefully and see if you detect any kind of
floating oil slicks from those old Western Auto Wizards or Evinrude
Sportwins that are STILL fishing in them! Those old motors were GREASY
with oil anyplace the gas-oil mix touched!

What? You say you don't see anything? It looks like a lake some town
****
into after the government bureaucrats forced the town to install an
approved EPA sewage plant to replace everybody's septic tanks and dry
wells
they **** into since the PIlgrims stepped off the rowboats on the far
shore
over there! There's no 3 foot thick oil slick completely choking off the
lake because it EVAPORATED WITH THE GAS I spilled into it since I was 8
(1954)!

The damned lake was teeming with FISH until the damned EPA showed up!
Now,
it has so many algae blooms eating the **** the sewage plants pour into
it,
the fish all died! Here's the report from MY HOMETOWN:

http://www.citizenscampaign.org/campaigns/owasco.htm

When I was polluting the lake with my 2-stroke Elto 1-horse covered in
Quaker State, we used to DRINK THE LAKE! NOT ANYMORE!


Larry,

You have excellent points. The thing that gets rid of the oil on lakes are
microbes. The same type of thing that eats all the rubber that wears off car
tires on the roads. Ever notice that there are not mounds of rubber on the
side of roads?

http://microbes.wonderchem.com/

Sewage comes in several levels of treatment. If they put the equivalent of
rainwater (with a dash of grain alcohol) back into the lake there would be
no problem. These sewage treatment plants are also pumping human hormones
(mostly estrogen) into the water supply and turning males into girly men:

http://www.ehponline.org/docs/2007/10443/abstract.html

This is the most monstrous conspiracy since the fluoridation of water:

http://www.holisticmed.com/fluoride/

The introduction of hormones into the water, certainly without the knowledge
or permission of the individual smacks of government trampling of individual
rights. We must have pure water in our lakes to drink, but that is no longer
to be, so I suggest drinking only rainwater to protect the purity and
essence of our natural bodily fluids. When you look past the government
rhetoric (we are here to help!) you almost always find the government makes
things worse! Yet the majority clamor for more government intervention,
which I find so difficult to understand.