I am an environmental criminal!!!!! Options

[Dogmeat]

I rode an OFF-ROAD VEHICLE through the woods today and burt fuel thereby making Al Gore cry!

I shall say twenty hail Tippers and then eat 1/3 of a pount of tofu to redeem myself in the eyes of Ol' Jesus!

[Seeker]

ghey

[nickluto]

Snowmobiles add more CO emissions into the atmosphere in 1 hour of usage than a 2002 model car does driving 1,500 miles.

True story.








Which is why in the future all of the hardcore post-apocolyptic gangs will roll around on snowmobiles, snow or no.


Cause, you know they dont give a fuck.

[impala454]

Snowmobiles add more CO2 emissions into the atmosphere in 1 hour of usage than a 2002 model car does driving 1,500 miles.

I gotta call complete bullshit on this.

[Oasis]

can't you keep all your anti environmental crap in one thread instead of starting new threads every other day?

[FORSAKENR320]

Which is why in the future all of the hardcore post-apocolyptic gangs will roll around on snowmobiles, snow or no.
Cause, you know they dont give a fuck.

i've been trying to get dogmeat to mount a big ass belt fed gun on his snowmobile, but he keeps obsessing about whores instead

[nickluto]

I gotta call complete bullshit on this.

Eh. Im not an environmentalist, but I had to read the study as part of my Environmental Economics course I took this last semester and the studies report that it is true, whether you think it is bullshit or not. I dont have the exact study, cause my book is still at my apartment, but a quick google search pulled up this.

The EPA went even further to research individual ATVs: they showed that a two-stroke ATV or motorcycle could emit as much pollution as more than thirty automobiles operating in the same time frame. Even more shocking is that the ATV took a distant second from two-stroke snowmobiles, which can emit as much as nearly one hundred automobiles in the same time frame(USEPA 1996).

http://www.wildlandscpr.org/biblio-notes/o...ts-human-health

Im not trying to make a point environmentally. Actually, I could care less about the environment. I merely meant to be silly in my above post in line with dogmeat saying he made Al Gore cry by using an ATV. But since you took the 3 seconds to say that I was talking out of my asshole because it didnt "sound" like it could be true, I took the 3 seconds to search google to make you look stupid.

[Dogmeat]

Eh. Im not an environmentalist, but I had to read the study as part of my Environmental Economics course I took this last semester and the studies report that it is true, whether you think it is bullshit or not. I dont have the exact study, cause my book is still at my apartment, but a quick google search pulled up this.
http://www.wildlandscpr.org/biblio-notes/o...ts-human-health

Im not trying to make a point environmentally. Actually, I could care less about the environment. I merely meant to be silly in my above post in line with dogmeat saying he made Al Gore cry by using an ATV. But since you took the 3 seconds to say that I was talking out of my asshole because it didnt "sound" like it could be true, I took the 3 seconds to search google to make you look stupid.

Snowmobiles are the most environmentally friendly motorsport one can participate in, bar NONE.

I don't care how environmentally friendly you make automobiles, the sheer fact that they are hundreds of millions of them out there make them far "worse" for the environment than the exponentially small numbers of snowmobiles out there in comparison.

The people clamoring on and on about how harmful snowmobiles are are only doing so now based on "emissions" because their arguments that they used back in the 80's and 90's about snomowbiles harming wildlife lost their wind once people woke up and realized animals fucking hibernated in the winter .... It's roughly the equivelent of trying to pin global warming on people who mow their lawns, only even less so ...

[FORSAKENR320]

i find your opinion biased

[Dogmeat]

i find your opinion biased

That's because I actually know what the fuck I'm talking about, so yes, it is biased

[nickluto]

Snowmobiles are the most environmentally friendly motorsport one can participate in, bar NONE.

I don't care how environmentally friendly you make automobiles, the sheer fact that they are hundreds of millions of them out there make them far "worse" for the environment than the exponentially small numbers of snowmobiles out there in comparison.

The people clamoring on and on about how harmful snowmobiles are are only doing so now based on "emissions" because their arguments that they used back in the 80's and 90's about snomowbiles harming wildlife lost their wind once people woke up and realized animals fucking hibernated in the winter .... It's roughly the equivelent of trying to pin global warming on people who mow their lawns, only even less so ...

i never said anything about global warming. in fact, i think global warming is a farce. i just said that snowmobiles produce more C02 emissions and ambient particulate matter than cars do, which is a fact. I did not try to make a point with this fact, I just merely stated it.

in fact, if global warming were empircally proven to be true, cars only contribute to about 20% of the increase in greenhouse gas emissions, the rest of the 80% around the world comes from energy production and industrial factories. This means that all the smug treehugging, dirtworshiping hippies out there that think driving a toyota prius or reusing their plastic grocery bags will do anything to make a dent in the "global warming" that their assholes are so chapped and puckered about really doesnt mean dick. The only way hippies can prevent global greenhouse gas accumulation on a global scale that is even minutely measurable is to invade china and destroy their coal-burning factories.

[FORSAKENR320]

invade china and destroy their coal-burning factories.

climate aside, i still think this is a good idea on principal.

[Dogmeat]

i never said anything about global warming. in fact, i think global warming is a farce. i just said that snowmobiles produce more C02 emissions and ambient particulate matter than cars do, which is a fact. I did not try to make a point with this fact, I just merely stated it.

in fact, if global warming were empircally proven to be true, cars only contribute to about 20% of the increase in greenhouse gas emissions, the rest of the 80% around the world comes from energy production and industrial factories. This means that all the smug treehugging, dirtworshiping hippies out there that think driving a toyota prius or reusing their plastic grocery bags will do anything to make a dent in the "global warming" that their assholes are so chapped and puckered about really doesnt mean dick. The only way hippies can prevent global greenhouse gas accumulation on a global scale that is even minutely measurable is to invade china and destroy their coal-burning factories.

Explain your "fact". They produce more Co2 and particulate per gallon of fuel burned? If so, this is only valid for machines with two-stroke motors, which currently make up about %65 of the total amount of snowmobiles sold if I remember right. If you're claiming purley "they produce more Co2 and particulates" than cars do, you are smoking crack ... even if on a mass basis this is true, the fact that snowmobiles burn exponentially less fuel per year than automobiles do, there isn't even a comparison at all. This is another issue where a bunch of green freaks have a 'fact' that they distort in order to promote their agenda, nothing more. And, even BEFORE the "clean" sleds came out, I still have yet to see any negative environmental impact on any of the areas I've been riding, and I've been riding since I was 4 ...

The housing developments rich people seem to think they need in the mountains appears to have far more "environmental impact" than people riding snowmobiles through the trees

[nickluto]

Explain your "fact". They produce more Co2 and particulate per gallon of fuel burned? If so, this is only valid for machines with two-stroke motors

yes.

If you're claiming purley "they produce more Co2 and particulates" than cars do, you are smoking crack ... even if on a mass basis this is true, the fact that snowmobiles burn exponentially less fuel per year than automobiles do, there isn't even a comparison at all.

on a mass basis it IS true. because two stroke motors don't burn as efficiently, but provide marginally more power. (did you read the link?)

the statistic is "shocking" because you wouldn't think this is true. It doesn't take new cutting edge research to realize that two-stroke motors are one of the least efficient available. did you read my above post? a.) i was agreeing with you. b.) i never claimed that the sum of all snowmobile C02 > sum of all car CO2. c.) did you read the link at all? It was an EPA study...and was pretty straight forward. If you had trouble understanding it, well, i dont know if that's my fault or not. d.) I already said that even if global warming existed (which I disagree with) that cars and transportation dont make up a very significant part of the pie, so it's a moot point...Did you even read my above post? or did you skip it because it didnt have any boobs in it?

This is another issue where a bunch of green freaks have a 'fact' that they distort in order to promote their agenda, nothing more. And, even BEFORE the "clean" sleds came out, I still have yet to see any negative environmental impact on any of the areas I've been riding, and I've been riding since I was 4 ...

I know. Thats why I posted this. However, I did not make the 6 or 7 (il)logical leaps that the "green folk" do that gets me from snowmobiles ---->>> planetary ruin --> apocalypse. It was just supposed to be a joke.

Then Impala said I was wrong, so I provided a link and you, instead of fapping to skinny bitches with big fake sextits , are taking my words out of context. If anything this quote, to me, proves how little pollution cars do produce, relative to other things. I think most of the hippies out there that drive hybrids are actually doing so out of self-interest so they dont have to spend as much money on gas, yet they tell their friends and everyone else they come in contact with that it is because they are "saving the planet" because, as south park put it, they like the smell of their own farts.

[impala454]

But since you took the 3 seconds to say that I was talking out of my asshole because it didnt "sound" like it could be true, I took the 3 seconds to search google to make you look stupid.

Then perhaps you can re-read the article you found in 3 seconds more carefully, then come back and tell me how in the hell your statement:

Snowmobiles add more CO2 emissions into the atmosphere in 1 hour of usage than a 2002 model car does driving 1,500 miles.

holds up. so besides the fact that you're trying to make me look stupid, with an article that doesn't mention CO2 in the whole damn thing, you also failed to show just how stupid the article itself is. check out this part:

Putting it in sharper perspective, at 25 miles per hour, on-road vehicles (cars, trucks, etc.) emit around 45 gallons/mile of carbon monoxide, while snowmobiles emit 348 gallons/mile. This is an 87 percent difference in emission rates between the two vehicles and the engines that power them (Cain and Coefield 2001). Thus, the 720 snowmobiles that are currently allowed in Yellowstone National Park each day emit more carbon monoxide than 5000 on-road vehicles.

WTF!?!? The dude is comparing the vehicles going at 25 miles per fucking hour!? well no fuckin shit its gonna emit more POLLUTANTS because the snowmobile is rapped out and the car is barely above idle. notice the word POLLUTANTS and not CO2. they're two different vehicles, geared completely differently, for completely different purposes. And then somehow you pull outta your ass that one hour of a snowmobile = 1,500 miles worth of a car in CO2?? Dude you seriously need to go back to the drawing board with this bullshit. Seriously, use your damn brain. How much fucking gas would a snowmobile use in 1 hr? How much fucking gas would a car use in 1,500 miles? Now how in the flyin fuck would the amount of emmissions be even close, much less more on the snowmobile?

[nickluto]

I cant figure out if you people are retarded before or after you attend Tech. Is tech the cause or just the self-selective prone variable?

I told a joke. Now we are in the midst of an environmental sparring match in which you refuse to believe that I am agreeing with you

Impala, i don't really think I should or need to continue, because as long as I've been on this board, you've been pretty much the king of self-ownership. I stated that I did a quick google search and that my textbook citing the exact article is not with me.

Dogmeat, I need more pics of the playboy bitch in the lovecow thread.

End

[nickluto]

How much fucking gas would a snowmobile use in 1 hr? How much fucking gas would a car use in 1,500 miles? Now how in the flyin fuck would the amount of emmissions be even close, much less more on the snowmobile?

Two stroke engines (high specific power, low efficiency) v. 4 stroke engines (lower power, higher efficiency)

if less of the fuel is completely combusted, then more biproducts are released.

furthermore....

As they are currently designed, two-stroke engines - whether in a snowmobile or any other kind of vehicle or device - emit significant amounts of air pollution. One reason is that 20-33% of the fuel goes through the engine and out the tailpipe unburned. Another factor is that in standard two-stroke engines lubricating oil must be mixed with fuel. So lube oil makes up part of the exhaust, including most of the visible haze that snowmobiles produce. Snowmobiles are usually tuned "rich," meaning that there is a high ratio of fuel to oxygen. This improves cold starts and throttle response, but also contributes to emission problems.

[impala454]

You didn't answer the question.

oh and thank you for the completely irrelevant shot on texas tech and insult on my intelligence. as well as the same old bullshit "wahh impala is mean" crybaby responses.

[nickluto]

Snowmobiles are the most environmentally friendly motorsport one can participate in, bar NONE.

I don't care how environmentally friendly you make automobiles, the sheer fact that they are hundreds of millions of them out there make them far "worse" for the environment than the exponentially small numbers of snowmobiles out there in comparison.

there is an obvious logical fallacy in this statement. I'll let you figure it out.

[impala454]

I love how the guy comparing automobiles, which are designed and geared for roads, to snowmobiles, which are designed and geared for snow, comes and tries to point out "logical fallacies".

[impala454]

Hey I got an idea, how about I roll an 18 wheeler down a hill with the engine off, and you drive a prius uphill, and then I'll make the completely logical claim that an 18 wheeler puts out less emissions!

[chook]

Snowmobile output is not regulated, so emissions are pretty high. Its cheaper and more power/displacement.

[impala454]

Yeah it makes sense that it's higher. Is it 1 hr = 1,500 car miles higher though?

[Dogmeat]

yes.
on a mass basis it IS true. because two stroke motors don't burn as efficiently, but provide marginally more power. (did you read the link?)

the statistic is "shocking" because you wouldn't think this is true. It doesn't take new cutting edge research to realize that two-stroke motors are one of the least efficient available. did you read my above post? a.) i was agreeing with you. b.) i never claimed that the sum of all snowmobile C02 > sum of all car CO2. c.) did you read the link at all? It was an EPA study...and was pretty straight forward. If you had trouble understanding it, well, i dont know if that's my fault or not. d.) I already said that even if global warming existed (which I disagree with) that cars and transportation dont make up a very significant part of the pie, so it's a moot point...Did you even read my above post? or did you skip it because it didnt have any boobs in it?

I know. Thats why I posted this. However, I did not make the 6 or 7 (il)logical leaps that the "green folk" do that gets me from snowmobiles ---->>> planetary ruin --> apocalypse. It was just supposed to be a joke.

Then Impala said I was wrong, so I provided a link and you, instead of fapping to skinny bitches with big fake sextits , are taking my words out of context. If anything this quote, to me, proves how little pollution cars do produce, relative to other things. I think most of the hippies out there that drive hybrids are actually doing so out of self-interest so they dont have to spend as much money on gas, yet they tell their friends and everyone else they come in contact with that it is because they are "saving the planet" because, as south park put it, they like the smell of their own farts.

Yes. On a mass basis this is true.

Now figure how many BILLIONS of gallons of gasoline automobiles burn, and compare that to the thousands snowmobiles burn.

There is no comparison as far as total amount of pollution whatsover.

People mowing their lawns in the summer produce more pollutants than people who ride snowmobiles do in the winter time.

Snowmobiles contribute so little overall to pollution it's not even an argument anymore. The greenies realized they weren't gonna win that one, so they moved on to "noise pollution" ... that's now the rallying cry to ban snowmobiles

[chook]

Yeah it makes sense that it's higher. Is it 1 hr = 1,500 car miles higher though?

Unless he changes wikipedia, i wouldn't believe that.

[impala454]

right. that's really the only thing I was arguing. it's those "shocker" type statements that are obviously wrong that really...


not to mention that I think it's pretty pointless to argue 25mph in a snowmobile on snow vs 25mph in an automobile on a road

[nickluto]

In one hour, a typical snowmobile emits as muc hhydrocarbon as a 2001 model automobile emits in 24,300 miles of driving. Snowmobiles also emit as much carbon monoxide in an hour of driving as a 2001 model auto does in 1,520 miles.

Source: James E. McCarthy, Snowmobiles: Environmental Standards and access to National Parks, Congressional Research Service, July 16, 2004.