JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

UPDATE: Malcolm Roberts, One Nation replies the two-stroke mower *change* is about real pollution, not CO2

Thanks to Malcolm Roberts for contacting me tonight with more information. CLARIFICATION: It’s not a complete ban on two-strokes, but a change to increase standards on motors. (It appears it will reduce real pollution, and the legislation also claims it will reduce CO2, though no CO2 limits are mandated as far as I can tell. It will stop the sales of most conventional two-stroke outboards and mowers, but not “direct injection” outboards. Gory details below)*

From Malcolm Roberts:

 Re: Genius Plan to ban two-stroke motors

Please note that Soichiro Honda himself banned his company from making 2-stroke outboard motors in the 1970’s after he visited Lake Tahoe and was shocked to see oil film on its waters. That pollution was produced by 2-stroke outboard motors.

He had the courage to do the right thing so despite the inherently higher weight and lower power of 4-stroke motors at the time. He put the real environment ahead of profits and as a result the new path led Honda to designing and building superior motors.

Sadly, Cory’s mischievous claims as reported on your blog misrepresent the situation.

I am pleased to discuss this with you or anyone copied hereto.

Before voting we checked on the bill and our staff advised clearly that the bill did not cover the so-called ‘greenhouse gas’ CO2. The bill covered real pollution.

I made a speech on this bill and it is available through the parliamentary website.

Regards,

                      — Malcolm Roberts, Senator for Queensland.

All his speeches are available here.

Roberts has been doing an excellent job of holding the CSIRO to account, and I look forward to sharing more details on that as it unfolds.

As for two-stroke motors, I’m all for cutting real pollutants and am not going to pick sides between the two giants of Bernardi and Roberts who are both doing great work.

No doubt this has been pushed by the Eco-worriers for CO2 reduction purposes, but there are also real pollutants involved.  The relevant question is always “how much” and is there a better way to reduce them than banning them? Is it worth the loss of choice and performance? I don’t know those answers. Where was that national discussion?

Crickets from the ABC?

On an issue that’s obviously so close to many Australian men’s hearts I can’t find a single story from our billion dollar National Broadcaster. The ABC has time to discuss how Kath and Kim show exactly how Australia can accept same-sex marriage, but the iconic mowers and tinnies are about to change and who knew?

Obviously it’s only an issue for suburban deplorables who mow their own lawns.

 TO CLARIFY:
Further to Malcolm’s email the legislation DOES NOT ban 2 stroke engines, it increases the standards on 2 stroke engines to decrease particulate pollution.

From 2019 all products must comply to the new standards. Many of the products on the market already comply with these standards. There will be no wiper sniper amnesty or chainsaw buy back Scheme. This was a genuine attempt by Malcolm to do something positive for the environment and human health to show we (climate sceptics) are not anti-environment.

Summary of legislation

Malcolm’s speech

Regards

Paul Evans
Senator Malcolm Roberts

New Media Advisor

_________________

Gory details

UPDATE #3:  The Legislation mentions both real pollutants and mentions CO2 and the UNFCCC.

To give Cory his due, the legislation is designed to reduce carbon emissions (as well as noxious pollutants). Though I don’t know whether this is an accidental byproduct. Does it add unnecessary costs, or is just empty bragging.

“…contribute to meeting Australia’s emission reductions obligations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

“Footnote 9: For instance, the standards are estimated to result in a reduction in combusted fuel in Australia of over 40 megalitres per year, resulting in a reduction of greenhouse gases by around 95 000 CO2e tonnes per year over the period 2016 to 2035.

______________

UPDATE #4  But it does look like “conventional two stroke lawn mowers and generators” will be rare

From AMEC (Marine Council) *Dec 2015* – there will be not many two stroke mowers left

“Asked if that meant no more two stroke lawn mowers or outboards after July Gary was quick to point out “let’s be clear, these laws are not an attack on any one technology: we will still have quality hand held products like STIHL and Husqvarna chainsaws, and of course Direct Injection two stroke outboards like E-TEC, but yes, four strokes will be the more common engine type in future especially for lawn mowers and generators.”

AMEC May 2016:

The proposed standards are performance rather than technology-based. In general, four-stroke and direct-injection two-stroke engines will meet the standards, as will a range of low-emitting two-stroke handheld equipment (e.g. some chainsaws and brush cutters). Conventional two-stroke outboards and non-handheld equipment such as mowers would not meet the new standards.

More than you ever wanted to know about mowers. Me too :- (

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.5/10 (54 votes cast)
UPDATE: Malcolm Roberts, One Nation replies the two-stroke mower *change* is about real pollution, not CO2, 9.5 out of 10 based on 54 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/ybrlgzqo

79 comments to UPDATE: Malcolm Roberts, One Nation replies the two-stroke mower *change* is about real pollution, not CO2

  • #
    bobl

    I often agree with Sen. Roberts but in fact I think he is wrong here. While the legislation might be about real pollution, the emissions from a small engine burning 250g of petrol once a fortnight are literally inconsequential to the environment but the pollution control gear will drive up the price significantly. Once again this is simply a feel good sop to political correctness that has some basis but on the whole utterly pointless. Your original conclusion is correct, expensive do-nothing legislation driving up the cost of living for ordinary Aussies.

    Senator, you’ve been duped – Sen. Bernardi didn’t fall for it.

    252

    • #
      Yonniestone

      Its always the thin edge of the wedge with any legislation that involves “greenhouse gasses” most people will agree to stopping outright pollution of the environment but with the zealots everything is bad including people.

      90

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        Agreed.

        Picture thus- 3 years from now you are a dude up a big tree working on cutting down sone big dangerous branches. The big heavy cumbersome battery on your chain saw dies……all the way to the ground to change it…

        Whether its CO2 driven or pollution driven, the effect will be the same – killing off parts of the economy. Now wait for farmers to get arrested for cutting up a big hefty log thats fallen across a road
        On a funny angle you couldnt use a 4 stroke engine to cut up.

        Its a religious war – Gaia worshippers vs humanity.

        111

    • #

      As I posted in the other thread, I think there’s much panic over nothing.

      Living in the bush and having travelled the bush for over four decades, I am acutely familiar with small petrol engines. Thirty years ago we were having discussions and wishing that we could get four stroke chainsaws and not have to carry around petrol mixes etc.

      If you go into any major store that sells petrol powered tools, you’ll find that at least 90% are all four stroke. We had a petrol mulcher that had a Honda four stroke engine. Most people don’t want anything to do with two stroke engines if they can help it. Even most trail bike riders are now opting for four stroke engines as they bring lots of benefits.

      Can anyone point out to me one issue that eventually getting rid of two stroke engines will introduce? It’s not like we have had nothing but two stroke engines until yesterday and suddenly we have to change to four stroke engines.

      I’m one of the biggest critics of most things government does, but in this instance I can’t see any downside to the idea itself. Everything has to do with the implementation.

      122

      • #

        The red thumbs make me laugh. Not more than a day ago I was conversing with an American friend via email and said that I’m on several conservative blogs and that:

        Conservatives can clearly listen to both sides of an argument, discuss things openly, debate with facts and not resort to feelings as a argument. There’s a lot more humour about as well.

        I’m not sure who the red thumbs belong to (though given the subject matter I can only assume), but if you have issues, debate them. Don’t behave like the cowardly and mentally torpid Leftists, Greens and Cultural Marxists (LGCM) that sit behind their keyboards, pressing the thumbs down button because they have no ability to debate issues and can only convey ‘feelings’.

        What supportive member of this forum would want to associate themselves with any of the LGCM?

        22

      • #
        CameronH

        You are correct with your comment on the decreasing number of 2 stroke engines available. This is a natural progression as the technology improves. 4 stroke engines offer many advantages and have been displacing 2 strokes in most areas for many years. My only concern with the government legislating this is that 2 stroke engines will naturally disappear from most applications without the government becoming involved. This can best be seen as just a bit of virtue signalling.

        00

    • #
      clive hoskin

      This has nothing to do with pollution and everything to do with control by the”Public Serpents”(who control the politicians)at the behest of the UN.Mr Roberts,I’m disappointed that you were deceived by the UN.The amount of pollution we are looking at is”Minuscule.”Imagine swinging up in a tree,trying to cut down said same with a 4 stroke,that would weigh twice what a 2 stroke does.

      93

      • #

        Oddly enough, four cylinder car engines can now put out as much power and torque as ye olden day V8s. People used to say that nothing beats cubes, but many V8 owners are moving to smaller engines because the ‘rice burners’ are trouncing traditional V8s. Certain small engines have been banned from the likes of Bathurst for being too light and powerful compared to the V8s.

        62

        • #
          greggg

          Ye olden day V8′s weren’t hotted up like newer engines are to compensate for emissions reduction reducing performance. Put efi, turbos, multiple valves etc onto an old engine and they’d have a heap more power too.

          11

    • #
      James

      I have used modern emissions controlled chainsaws, and older chainsaws, that were made for earlier standards. I have to say that the older equipment seems to run better, be easier to start. Parts availablity is great due to eBay. One saw that I own was on the scrap heap. I spent 20 dollars on parts from eBay, and I prefer it to the newer saw that I owned. I sold my new saw to a greenie type! I hope he does not cut his leg off, the chain brake is not functional.

      51

      • #
        Robert Rosicka

        My six month old Stihl is in the shop , been there for three weeks getting fixed , ahh modern two strokes where would we be without them .

        00

      • #

        I sold my new saw to a greenie type! I hope he does not cut his leg off, the chain brake is not functional.

        I’d put that attitude in the same basket as ‘greenie types’ hammering nails into trees for loggers to strike. Neither should be condoned.

        Also, I’d say your ‘newer’ saw was probably a cheep, poorly constructed one like many available from eBay for next to nothing. Proper chainsaws, new or old design, do not exhibit the characteristics that you describe.

        04

        • #
          Robert Rosicka

          Almost $800 Stihl saw is not cheap in construction or material , has had very little use .
          There are cheap knockoffs around and most are shitty .

          10

          • #

            I was responding to the post by James, but in regard to your post, there is always the chance of any product, no matter how well regarded, having an issue. One such example does not make it universal.

            To be honest, this hysteria over two stroke engines being phased out in some applications is akin to how the Greens would react over petrol being made cheaper (or pick a subject that would elicit hysteria in the Greens).

            02

            • #
              amicus curiae

              ok i am poor, my machinery is tip salvages i fix, i have 3 acres i need to mow by hand one acre round the house and whippersnip the boundaries and round sheds etc. i simply can NOT afford to buy new or even what most of you call cheap secondhand stuff..it gets done maybe 2x a yr pre fire/snake season, so how is making what i can afford to run n use illegal- going to make diddly difference to the environment?
              in comparison to the filth in the city air already this makes naff all difference overall.
              like the ozone scam, its going to mean a LOT of perfectly good equipment gets scrapped and a massive replacement cost.
              the cost of scrapping and of making new pollution wise?
              hmm?

              20

              • #

                Existing two stroke engines will not be banned, only new ones. Nothing is going to stop you from salvaging old engines, in fact there’s likely to be plenty on the second-hand market for years to come.

                You sound like you own a car that runs on leaded petrol. Did you have to sell that car when leaded petrol was phased out? No. So why this confected outrage over what is nothing more than a storm in a tea cup?

                00

            • #
              Robert Rosicka

              Is it bemused or confused ? The main issue here is the reason behind this legislation, save 1.9 million tonnes of Co2 by banning the sale of carbureted two strokes .
              As for them knocking on the door to confiscate your snipper or chainsaw I wouldn’t rule anything out with this lot .

              00

    • #
      Glen Michel

      As I posted on another thread the efficiencies and compliance for two-stroke motors has improved greatly. Senator Roberts story about Mr. Honda is an old one. There is virtually no difference between the two systems.Many two-strokes do not require mixing, but have a seperate repository for the purpose.Sorry, but Senator Roberts is half cocked on this and this is a kerfuffle about nothing.

      21

  • #
    TdeF

    If the parliament would address real issues like the massive debt run by Canberra instead of feel good banning things, there might be more point to parliament. Bans like this give environmentalism a bad name. Then so does the whole Global Warming fiasco. The people against everything are getting full support from One Nation with nonsense like this. It only passed the senate because it stops fishermen from fishing in tinnies. Apparently careless recreational fishermen are the biggest problem facing this government.

    It is unbelievable that while State Governments are banning gas exploration, coal mining, fishing, dog racing the Federal government is banning two stroke motors to save the planet while doing nothing about the $6Bn a year we have to pay to use our own coal power. It is not whether you can get an oil leak from a two stroke. It is about doing something meaningful on $200K salaries and all the perks to actually improve the lives of the people represented. This ban is a sad pointless joke on environmentalism. Defending it is doubly embarrassing.

    191

    • #
      Dennis

      Don’t forget the creation of Marine Parks offshore when Labor were in government, and them buying back commercial fishing licences, for “sustainability” reasons. And now we have seafood being imported and much less local quality seafood.

      Also, Marine Parks generally prohibit amateur fishing and has restricted considerable areas of fishing grounds coastal and lakes.

      It would not surprise me if the zealots are still planning new ways to restrict us from fishing.

      112

      • #
        Lawrie

        My B in L is a lobster fisherman out of the Great Lakes. Many of his friends are trap fishermen who have either to buy additional licences at 100s of thousands of dollars or cash in the one they have. Some mental giant polishing a chair in Macquarie Street worked out from the fishermens records that they effectively catch their years fish over 37 days. So a new licence allows the fisherman 37 days per annum to fish and he has to notify Fisheries 24 hours in advance of his next fishing day. If, as often occurs, the weather, tide or motor does not play ball he loses that day from his quota. Whereas he may have worked for a few hours to do a particular chore he is now obligated to spend the whole day because one hour or twenty four is all a day according to the bureaucrats. I wonder do they treat their overtime and holidays the same?

        70

      • #
        Lawrie

        My B in L is a lobster fisherman out of the Great Lakes. Many of his friends are trap fishermen who have either to buy additional licences at 100s of thousands of dollars or cash in the one they have. Some mental giant polishing a chair in Macquarie Street worked out from the fishermens records that they effectively catch their years fish over 37 days. So a new licence allows the fisherman 37 days per annum to fish and he has to notify Fisheries 24 hours in advance of his next fishing day. If, as often occurs, the weather, tide or motor does not play ball he loses that day from his quota. Whereas he may have worked for a few hours to do a particular chore he is now obligated to spend the whole day because one hour or twenty four is all a day according to the bureaucrats. I wonder do they treat their overtime and holidays the same?

        00

    • #
      Gee Aye

      I’ve heard rumours that parliament does more than one thing at a time

      15

      • #
        Robert Rosicka

        No they can only do one thing at a time , they can however do a lot of scheming and pocket lining that’s unlimited but when it comes to work they’re supposed to be doing it’s limited .

        41

    • #

      Agree with you TdeF. Parliament should be concentrating on important issues such as getting debt down and stopping subsidising and supporting socialisation.
      With regard to small motors and in fact the operation of any motor, people should get the facts correct. The 50 to 1 ratio in a 2 stroke is 2%. Putting too much oil in the fuel makes it hard to start and can cause problems with deposits in the fuel system, on the spark plug, in the cylinder and the exhaust. Note that a 4 stroke engine has an oil reservoir which needs to be topped up as some is burnt in lubrication of the cylinder.
      I do not believe the figures for the emission. NOx results from lean fuel mixtures burnt at high temperature. If there is CO and other unburnt fuel in the exhaust there will be no NOx. In industrial high temperature processes NOx can be eliminated by secondary burning behind the high temperature flames with fuel (eg coal, heavy oil, tyres) at temperatures around 850C. There is no NOx generated from fluid bed boilers operating in the range of 800 to 900C.
      On the other hand CO is a result of incomplete combustion. It is more prevalent with natural gas, LPG and short chain hydrocarbons especially when air is throttled at start up. Diesel engines give little CO nor do they give much NOx because they burn fuel at relatively low temperature.
      The averaging of emissions is nonsense. Like averaging the pregnancy of a group of women. Some are pregnant and some are not but none are half pregnant.
      Politicians only hear what they want to hear. Green socialists are the worst and have an agenda to impoverish the country.

      40

  • #
    pat

    i’m not getting into the motor argument.

    i have just posted some stuff found on NYT “climate” writer, Lisa Friedman’s Twitter page on jo’s previous thread, and intended to post this too, but think it’s better to post it here.

    Lisa Friedman/NYT also retweets Andrew Revkin, whose tweet references the following articles. (Gail Collins is a NYT veteran, and an ultra “liberal/progressive”):

    12 Sept: NYT: The Best and Worst News of the Summer. Mostly Worst
    The Conversation
    By GAIL COLLINS and BRET STEPHENS
    Bret: Evil climate-change agnostic that I am, I think the appropriate way to deal with scientific uncertainty is more, not less, scientific research. If Harvey and Irma have a silver lining, my wish would be dramatic increases in the budgets of NOAA, NASA, the National Science Foundation and every other government agency engaged in doing or funding fundamental research…READ ALL FOR THE TRUMP BASHING
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/12/opinion/best-worst-news-summer.html?em_pos=small&emc=edit_ty_20170912&nl=opinion-today&nl_art=4&nlid=67303851&ref=headline&te=1

    2 May: Propublica: Andrew C. Revkin: There Are Lots of Climate Uncertainties. Let’s Acknowledge and Plan for Them With Honesty.
    A New York Times column on the climate set off yet another dangerous tempest of exaggeration and simplification.
    Last fall, I attended a meeting of the Society for Decision Making Under Deep Uncertainty, hosted by the World Bank. The small, somewhat ad-hoc organization has a quirky name but an urgent goal — helping governments, companies and international agencies grapple with complicated problems with enormous and enduring consequences, from forging climate change policy to avoiding the collapse of a financial system.

    Given that the workshop took place one week after the 2016 election, and given the dismissive stance on climate change of the president-elect, climate policy was a big theme, as were the limits of predictability.

    What was rare about the conversations and presentations was a full embrace of the unknowable along with the known, even amid demands for immediate and far-reaching policies. Think of that in the context of three decades of the public climate debate, in which discourse has so often been bracketed by proclamations of certain calamity — either environmental (the planet will overheat) or economic (regulations aimed at limiting carbon emissions will strangle businesses).

    ***Of course, no one there questioned the basic science identifying a growing human impact on climate from the buildup of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. But as is well known in the scientific community, while the climate basics have long been clear, many of the most consequential aspects of climate change remain shrouded in uncertainty…READ ALL
    https://www.propublica.org/article/climate-change-uncertainties-bret-stephens-column

    20

  • #
    Kev Metcalfe

    I still want to see a proposal for a viable 4 stroke brush cutter, getting by without decent small engines in rural areas is going to be a lot harder.

    130

  • #
    Eric Worrall

    A 2-stroke ban sucks. I’m a strong guy so I can handle a few extra kilos hanging off my arm, but that would make a real difference to my wife’s ability to handle a leaf blower or strimmer. Plenty of people don’t have the strength to lug about a 4 stroke outboard. This ban is heavy handed.

    122

  • #
    RAH

    2-stroke mowers in larger applications disappeared from the US long ago. The old Lawn Boy brand mowers with a magnesium deck were great push mowers. That is what I used as a kid to do the yard, but they’re are a thing of the past. Gradually over the years the 4 stroke outboards are taking over from 2 strokes in marine applications also. But to this day the applications using smaller engines such as chainsaws, mini-tillers, weed wackers, etc are 2 stroke.

    100

  • #
    RAH

    Since a person can order the 2 stroke powered implements and the oil for them on-line, how is the government going to stop people from getting them?

    70

    • #
      clive hoskin

      As soon as I heard about this latest round of”Stupidity”I went down to the local auto parts store and bought 2 twenty litre drums of 2 stroke oil.I would suggest that all those who have 2 strokes,do the same,before these”Dumb A$$es”ban the sale of said 2 stroke oil.

      41

  • #
    Pete

    If I had a choice between a 4-stroke and a 2-stroke engine I’d choose the 4-stroke one for the simple fact that 2-stroke engines are designed to burn a 95% gas-5% oil fuel mixture. The oil is meant to lubricate the engine’s moving parts but which ends up burnt inside the cylinders and exhausted straight into my face. I hate that smell of burnt lubricant, cough cough cough.

    A 4-stroke engine is designed to burn just gas resulting in water vapour and fertilising gas aka CO2

    53

    • #
      RAH

      But the power to weight ratio makes the 2-stroke the best choice for the implements you have to lift or hold up to use.

      I wonder how many people know the difference between a rotary and a radial engine in aviation? In the rotary engine, a type that was very common early in aviation history and especially during WW I, the drive shaft is fixed to the airframe and the whole engine, crankcase and pistons, spins at the same RPM as the propeller it drives. The radial engine is fixed to the airframe and the drive shaft is what provides the power to the propeller.

      Why did the radial take over from the rotary as the type of air cooled engine being used in aviation?

      The radial engine was used during WW I because it provided the best power to weight ratio of all engine types, was the simplest to produce, and would keep running even when severely damaged. But it had many disadvantages, the oil, usually castor oil, used for lubrication was spewed out as the engine ran and a good portion of it coated the airframe, and the exposed face of the pilot. That is why the faces of those pilots not protected from the slipstream were black. Throttle control of the rotary was limited and in most models relied upon arresting the spark so the engine was either on full or off full power. But the major problem was the engines practical application was eventually limited by the fact that the larger the engine was made the more torque that great mass of spinning engine imparted on the airframe. This torque was the very thing that made aircraft like the Spad, Newport, Sopwith, and Fokker aircraft that used them turn so tightly in the direction the engine spun but as the engines became larger the torque imparted grew and made control almost impossible.

      100

  • #
    TdeF

    Why ban things? Why not just tax the people out of existence as with petrol, diesel, LPT, alcohol, tobacco, coal, gas, electricity, the NBN and all the billions wasted on mad quangoes like the ABC/SBS and CSIRO and BOM? Then people can at least climb a tree to cut a branch without a four stroke engine on it, just to please someone in parliament? Ban ladders too, so no one can fall off. If you were parodying the environmental movement, you could not make this stuff up.

    131

    • #
      Yonniestone

      Let the open market decide, years ago if people wanted a bit of oomph from their transport they got a big V8 until the 1980′s when 4 and 6 cylinder turbocharged vehicles were found to be often faster and cheaper to run, the end of the V8 was predicted until car makers transferred computer technology to newer V8 designs making them popular again and so it goes until the next popular variation of powerplant.

      As an aside my personal gripe as a motorcyclist is diesel vehicles that don’t get serviced and pump black exhaust fumes all over you at certain rpms when you follow them, those fumes coat everything with an oily film that you also breathe in and its a bastard to get off. /endrant.

      40

  • #
    pat

    NY Daily News completely ignores the “we’ve had bigger storms” quote, & simply continues on with Trump bashing:

    14 Sept: NY Daily News: President Trump says Harvey and Irma haven’t changed his stance on climate change
    By Jason Silverstein
    Two monster storms aren’t enough for President Trump to budge on climate change.

    On his way back from the hurricane-ravaged Florida on Thursday, Trump assured that Hurricane Irma and Tropical Storm Harvey haven’t changed his skepticism about the consequences of climate change.
    “We’ve had bigger storms,” Trump told reporters on Air Force One…
    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/trump-harvey-irma-haven-changed-stance-climate-change-article-1.3496193

    still exploiting natural disasters for CAGW purposes, NYT talks to Democrats, as usual.

    note headline says “Harrowing Storms May Move Climate Debate” while printed version says “As Severe Storms Shift Climate Debate”. propaganda is NYT’s forte:

    14 Sept: NYT: Alexander Burns: Harrowing Storms May Move Climate Debate, if Not G.O.P. Leaders’
    Lisa Friedman contributed reporting.
    (A version of this article appears in print on September 15, 2017, on Page A13 of the New York edition with the headline: As Severe Storms Shift Climate Debate, G.O.P. Leaders Remain Unbent)
    For years, climate change activists have faced a wrenching dilemma: how to persuade people to care about a grave but seemingly far-off problem and win their support for policies that might pinch them immediately in utility bills and at the pump.

    But that calculus may be changing at a time when climatic chaos feels like a daily event rather than an airy abstraction, and storms powered by warming ocean waters wreak havoc on the mainland United States. Americans have spent weeks riveted by television footage of wrecked neighborhoods, displaced families, flattened Caribbean islands and submerged cities from Houston to Jacksonville.
    “The conversation is shifting,” said Senator Brian Schatz, Democrat of Hawaii. “Because even if you don’t believe liberals, even if you don’t believe scientists, you can believe your own eyes.”

    Despite consensus among scientists, not everyone is convinced that terrifying weather means climate change is an urgent threat. There is virtually no prospect of large-scale federal action on the issue in the near future, and President Trump has made a top priority of unraveling the Obama administration’s environmental policies, including the Paris climate accord. Republicans, who control the White House and Congress, remain broadly skeptical of climate science and rely heavily on the electoral support of oil- and coal-producing states…

    Jay Faison, a wealthy Republican donor who has made clean energy a personal cause, said he found Republicans increasingly open to engaging around the edges of the climate issue. Mr. Faison said he had reason to believe there was “some appetite” among congressional leaders for backing resilient infrastructure and energy research.
    “I’d like to see more, faster,” Mr. Faison said. “But we play the hand we’re dealt.”…

    Geoff Garin, a Democratic pollster who has studied climate as a campaign issue, said that it was most relevant to voters as a “reference point” to judge a candidate’s worldview, and that voters tended to see those who reject climate science as extremists. Mr. Garin said catastrophic weather could make certain hard-line views less acceptable.
    “The salience of climate change denialism grows at moments when the consequences of that are more abundantly clear,” Mr. Garin said, “such as when the country is hit by two exceptionally powerful storms, one right after the other.”…

    Is unclear whether climate will play a major part in the 2018 elections, when Democrats are defending a number of Senate seats in states that produce carbon fuel…
    And advisers to Tom Steyer, a billionaire investor who has spent millions supporting Democrats, said his political committee might seek to link Republicans in Florida, Nevada and California to environmental catastrophes in those states, like the summer hurricanes and wildfires out west…
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/14/us/irma-harvey-climate-politics.html

    20

    • #
      Spetzer86

      If two hurricanes in 2017 was Climate Change, what was the complete lack of hurricanes in the preceding 12 years? If the Warmists ever figure out statistics and weather we’ll be in trouble.

      70

  • #

    A quick further update just in from Malcolm Roberts media advisor – This is not a complete ban, it appears better upgraded two-strokes will be allowed (which rather changes the discussion).

    See the clarification in the post. At least now there are links to the legislation and Malcolm’s speech so people can get the details.

    82

    • #

      Thanks Jo for that update. At first glance it had sounded ominous, but on reflection & in light of Malcolm Robert’s explanation, I’m more comfortable with this Bill that targets real pollution as distinct to demonization of CO2.

      42

      • #
        Gee Aye

        It is not an update. An update is about new information. This is just you finally reporting the bits you didn’t research well previously.

        212

        • #
          Robert Rosicka

          Sorry troll you’ve got it wrong again , what was reported was the the interview with Cory Bernardi and what he was saying , Roberts was dragged into it because he is supposed to be a realist not a warmest and looking out for unscientific crap dressed up as legislation .
          I’ve seen his speech and read the blurb from Frydentruth and there is a discrepancy of 1.9 million tonnes of Co2 .
          Malcolm Roberts responding to all the claims is an update get a new dictionary and get a life.

          82

        • #
          Tim Hammond

          Did I miss the election where we put you in charge of how we use words?

          And if we did we should vote you out as you make no sense. New information is new information. Whether it is new because you were too lazy to get the whole story or because it has only now been discovered makes no difference. Here’s a sceptic saying their original story wasn’t accurate, yet you try and be clever instead of applauding honesty. You know how that makes you look, right?

          31

        • #
          AndyG55

          You really are a mean-spirited little non-entity, aren’t you gee.

          A dried leaf, without a skeleton or any viable substance..

          32

  • #

    From the legislation

    This is ALSO about CO2.

    The new emission standards will: [reduce pollution AND]

    …contribute to meeting Australia’s emission reductions obligations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

    Footnote 9 For instance, the standards are estimated to result in a reduction in combusted fuel in Australia of over 40 megalitres per year, resulting in a reduction of greenhouse gases by around 95 000 CO2e tonnes per year over the period 2016 to 2035.

    The pollutants named:
    Footnote 2 Key emissions from NRSIEE include particulate matter (mostly fine PM2.5), ozone (a secondary pollutant formed from post-engine exhaust), carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds (non-methane hydrocarbons).


    Footnote 4
    Spark Ignition (SI) includes petrol, Liquid Petroleum Gas, Compressed Natural Gas and Liquefied Natural Gas engines. It excludes manual powered equipment, diesel (compression ignition) engines, battery and electric powered equipment.

    64

  • #

    From AMEC (Marine Council)But from AMEC itself *Dec 2015* – there will be not many two stroke mowers left

    Asked if that meant no more two stroke lawn mowers or outboards after July Gary was quick to point out “let’s be clear, these laws are not an attack on any one technology: we will still have quality hand held products like STIHL and Husqvarna chainsaws, and of course Direct Injection two stroke outboards like E-TEC, but yes, four strokes will be the more common engine type in future especially for lawn mowers and generators.”


    AMEC May 2016:

    The proposed standards are performance rather than technology-based. In general, four-stroke and direct-injection two-stroke engines will meet the standards, as will a range of low-emitting two-stroke handheld equipment (e.g. some chainsaws and brush cutters). Conventional two-stroke outboards and non-handheld equipment such as mowers would not meet the new standards.

    More than you ever wanted to know about mowers. Me too :- (

    72

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      And how soon before we get Federal and State Departments to regulate small motors?

      Every piece of useless legislation these days seems to result in more public ‘servants’, more regulation and an increased appetite for more legislation. The comment that the Bill will result in every Australian reducing their fuel use by 1.4L per annum. Who is going to measure that?

      141

      • #
        Yonniestone

        The only stroke that matters is that one of a pen wielded by someone dedicated to be seen as doing the right thing by their peers, disaster is certain.

        71

  • #
    Curious George

    Australia is still in dark ages. Two-stroke or four-stroke? Neither. Follow Europe. Go all-electric ;-)

    212

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      George

      I use a battery powered mower and other assorted pieces of equipment.

      I can’t mow the whole lawn on one charge but that’s not a problem, I can do the rest next week.

      I can understand that battery mowers would not be useful for a professional who has to finish in one hit and move on.

      There are practical realities associated with battery powered equipment and safety issues that sit out of public view just waiting to be discovered.

      Perhaps Li Po’s are better than they used to be but you really need to be somewhere else when they go off.

      KK

      72

    • #
      Yonniestone

      Battery powered stuff are great in certain applications, we used them extensively in the building industry as it cut out a lot of power leads having to be run everywhere and could be carried anywhere in any position, the only gripe was battery charging and changing but even that improved as the market demanded.

      50

    • #
      sophocles

      My neighbour used a battery-powered mower for some years. I notice he has recently abandoned it in favour of a new ohv petrol powered motor mower.
      It does cut his lawns much more consistently…

      20

  • #
    KinkyKeith

    The first two comments by bobl and TdeF are right on target.

    Technically there is an issue with real pollution but it is quantitatively irrelevant compared with the vast quantities of materials processed by modern society.

    The image of a flea on an elephants back comes to mind, and the Australian Senate chasing it, trying to get at that damned flea with good old fly swatters.

    No cans of insecticide.

    Meanwhile the elephant heads for the next banana tree.

    KK

    ps, I appreciate the fact that Malcolm R. has gone into public life to combat the lies, stupidity and deceit surrounding the global warming issue. Thank you.

    60

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Those 2 stroke engines all burn oil, some of which ends up going out the exhaust. It’s necessary to put oil in th fuel by some means to keep the piston rings lubricated. Otherwise the engine seizes up before too long.

    Those “rotary” Wankel engines that I loved so much for their performance back in the ’70s had the same problem. Oil had to be pumped into the carburetor at the right rate to keep the rotor tip seals lubricated and some of that also went out the tail pipe. I was always adding oil because it was literally being intentionally burned with the gas in the certain knowledge that some of it would stick to the housing and the rotor tips and do the necessary lubricating job.

    I still wish I had one though. They were unbeatable in a drag race or a hill climb except by a big V8 with an automatic transmission. And even some of those had trouble getting ahead of me. Fun but long in he past now. :-(

    70

    • #
      Yonniestone

      The rotary engines were very popular here Roy with some very fast cars produced by enthusiasts, the Mazda RX series of cars were often the weapon of choice with a big rivalry on the drag strip between V8′s and Rotary’s or “chook cookers” as they were sometimes called here, a few managed to engineer 2 or 3 rotary’s joined inline to produce high horsepower beasts, the sound at high rpms as amazing.

      70

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        I had an RX2 sedan, 4 on the floor. It would do 90 MPH in 2nd gear before red line, 6,200 RPM — actually yellow line, I never went above that. Absolutely jet propelled if you could keep the RPMs above 4,000.

        I used to read complaints from people that they only got 6 MPG out of them. And that was the clue that told me they were either just running the RPM too high when not needed or showing off a lot because I could get 24 MPG from mine and still have no trouble keeping up with traffic most of the time.

        Coming up from the Pacific Coast Highway (state 1) the Santa Monica Mountains have some steep crooked roads you can use to get across to US 101 and I used to blast up those roads like a maniac. That’s where it was fun to have that rotary engine; also a good place to have real good driving judgment and keep practicing what you’re doing so it doesn’t leave you just at the critical moment. Skill goes downhill if not kept sharpened.

        But more fun than any other car I’ve ever seen.

        I’m really something other than what I project most of the time if I get the urge.

        30

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          Once I got myself cited by a cop I didn’t see. 80 in a 45 zone. He was good natured about it but wrote the ticket anyway.

          20

        • #
          KinkyKeith

          I’m afraid my second hand 1959 VW Beetle would have been no match. It was rated at 69 mph and would do exactly that.

          I was once booked for doing 35 in a 30 zone.

          I always viewed tickets as a reminder to be more careful but always hated parting with the cash.

          :-)
          KK

          10

          • #
            Roy Hogue

            Me too.

            I’ve racked up a grand total of 3 citations since I started driving my own car shortly after High School graduation in 1957. I make that out to be 0.049 citations/year.

            I probably should be able to say zero citations/year but still, it was so challenging and so much fun…

            00

          • #
            Roy Hogue

            About viewing the citations as a reminder to be more careful: you can look at that 2 ways.

            1. more careful to observe traffic laws, especially speed limits

            2. more careful to avoid doing anything out of line where the cops are hanging out

            I was always challenged by steep, or crooked roads to push it to the limit without going off the road. I must have succeeded because I never went off the road.

            00

          • #
            Roy Hogue

            I had a 1964 VW beetle. It could beat any snail on he road. It was always a love/hate relationship but I miss that elegant simplicity.

            I finally sold that thing with 130,000 miles on it to a kid who wanted to restore it. He had nothing he could pay me but I let it go for what he had. A couple of years later as I was exiting the freeway on my way home that same beetle passed me, still the same color and same license plate, which is how I knew it was the same car. So it still had some life in it when I let it go.

            It was on it’s second engine. Cooling for number 4, the farthest away from the cooling fan was always inadequate and around 100,000 it would inevitably suck in the exhaust valve and that was that. I’m not sure why I thought it was a good idea to put more money into another engine except that in those days they weren’t so bloody expensive. The dealer said he would prefer to rebuild it but upon removing the engine there was a hole in the crankcase which destroys the one thing he could guarantee to reuse. So the rod had broken off and knocked that hole before anything could be done to save it.

            00

  • #
    Michael Reed

    Mike Reed
    In my previous life I taught science(for 28 years).In my Uni student days I majored in zoology as
    well as botany.Learning about the biochemistry of photosynthesis taught me about the incredible
    importance of Co2 for sustaining life on this planet.In the course of time I taught Senior General
    Science one aspect of which was real pollution from oxides of nitrogen ,sulphur,,particulate matter
    and carbon monoxide.One thing that has become very apparent to me after I retired is how much
    propaganda (particularly via the MSM) has been spread about those real pollutants and the conflation of Co2 with them..All I have found is that people in general(evan educated academic friends and relatives )have been brain washed into thinking Carbon dioxide is a pollutant.Herein
    lies the huge crux of the matter ,the everyday person has been “re-educated” by thescientifically illiterate media.As for two stroke outboards I’ve used them for years but recently moved to a 4,
    stroke and for about the same price and greater starting reliability.Both produce life sustaining carbon dioxide.The real problem here is the dirty ignorant “carbon “lie everyone has been fed
    over recent years.

    150

  • #
    Kip Hansen

    The United States has banned the sale and importation for sale of two-stroke outboard motors for many years, and we are none the worse for it.

    When we were in the Virgin Islands several years ago, I traveled from the US Virgins to the British Virgins just to but a 9.8 h/p two-stroke outboard — because of the weight difference (as I have aged, mounting and dismounting the outboard to the dinghy, sometimes a daily activity, has become more of a chore).

    Two-stroke outboards vent the exhaust and unburned oil from the gas/oil mix directly into the water, and in close waters (those not subject to swift twice daily tides) the oil can build up on the surface before evaporating.

    So, I would support banning two-stroke outboards – particularly anywhere near the GBR.

    However, light-weight two-stroke powered yard tools should be improved to higher standards, especially in regards to NOISE pollution, in urban and suburban areas. . If they can’t be quiet, they should be replaced with less expensive electric models.

    Out in the country, electric won;t fly, so let them have light-weight two-strokes — the concentration of machines per square km is so low that can’t possibly make any difference — in your case in Australia.

    42

  • #
    Robert Rosicka

    It’s all about Co2 reduction and saving the planet , Roberts has dropped the ball plain and simple , what was his comment about two stroke fuel quality yesterday .
    Old two stroke outboards were leaving a slick on the water and even I can agree that’s not acceptable, most modern two strokes are more efficient but after doing some research apart from some outboards few motors conform to the new standard .
    An issue like this that’s been around since 2015 but the deplorables only hear about it after it gets passed in parliament says a lot about our current crop of politicians.
    Yes two stroke mowers are now rare to buy new , snippers are common ,four stroke is available but dearer and to me it’s chainsaws that I’m pissed about .
    I live where there are no gas connections , large house it would cost a fortune to heat any other way than with a wood fire .
    Exactly how much Co2 is being saved by all this and what is Australia’s share , the cost to regulate all this is how many million .
    Cost benefit for a non problem that no one will show .

    61

    • #
      Peter C

      Agree,

      This legislation will have a negligible affect on the environment.

      But it creates another set of rules which have to be complied with, it creates more bureaucracy, it reduces individual choice and it makes power tools more expensive.

      One Nation senators should have opposed it on all those grounds.

      70

  • #
    Robert Rosicka

    Roberts speech goes to pains to exclude Co2 and says it has no mention in this legislation, it’s mentioned alright .
    1.9 million tonnes of Co2 over the next 20 years makes me say bullshit Malcolm .

    41

  • #
    Mark

    Thin edge of wedge…first two stroke small engines, then four stroke small engines then bigger stationary engines unless certified at a cost…wiping out home gensets.

    Just try and stop two strokes….love the smell of burnt castor oil:) Too many days in the pits at motocross and enduro events. R30 yessssssplease. Can put up with fouled plugs, yucky stuff dripping out of the exhaust and trouble keeping the stuff in suspension in the fuel but love that smell.

    30

  • #
    Mark

    My post seems to have disappeared…solar electro-magnetic stream falling to normal, jet streams to LATITUDINAL not meridianal…hopefully, south to start basking in sub polar highs for a bit

    00

  • #
    Lance

    Two stroke engines serve ONE purpose: High power to weight ratio. That is it. A 4 stroke chainsaw weighs some 1 to 2 kg more than a 2 stroke. Try hefting the difference all day long. For mowers and boat engines, the weight difference is not relevant to the intended purpose. Regardless of the intentions of the legislation, there must be exceptions for equipment that is manually tasked. Tired arms make many horrific accidents. Two stroke diesel engined trucks are another issue. Mostly they are dump trucks and the like. Again, power to weight ratio advantage. The issue of oil traces from outboard motors has also the issue of leaky lower end / transmissions. As well, the motor exhaust can be vented to atmosphere rather than into the plied waters. End of engine oil slicks. Beginning of emissions controls. That said, 4 stroke boat engines are superior except for the light weight and small vessels. The suggestion above of going electric is only relevant to trolling motors on small boats, ie: light fishing expeditions. Electrics cannot economically compete for power to weight or to range with respect to petrol fueled engines for boats. 2 strokes serve a purpose. Rather than willy nilly regulating them out of existence, rather challenger the challengers to provide evidence they can do the same job at the same weight in areas where that is important. Broad brushes paint poor images.

    40

    • #
      amicus curiae

      yup im female and even with a full both shoulder harness i battle to use a snipper 4stroke. no way could i add another couple of kilos and be able to use it safely or move for days after.older n arthritic doesnt help.

      40

  • #
    Robert Rosicka

    Malcolm Roberts is being a typical politician here , his statement

    “Before voting we checked on the bill and our staff advised clearly that the bill did not cover the so-called ‘greenhouse gas’ CO2. The bill covered real pollution.”

    Does not match the 1.9 million tons of Co2 to be saved in the document from the minister of all things green .

    One nation have lost my vote .

    30

    • #
      voxUnius

      Well said Robert. I’m with you.

      Malcolm Roberts is indeed just like all typical politicians. They get to Canberra and suddenly lose all sense of reality, logic, rationality and common decency.

      He obviously didn’t even read the bill himself – “our staff advised”.

      Yep, One Nation gets the flick from me, no one left now except ol’ Capt Informal.

      10

  • #
    Peter Q

    4 stroke lawn mowers, generators, petrol fire pumps, etc. have been 4 stroke almost exclusively for many years, it’s not some new, you-beaut trend. Most current 2 stroke chainsaws, brushcutters, blowers, etc. already comply with these standards (not just those from Saint Stihl and His Holiness Husqvarna). This is a non-story, in the outdoor power equipment industry we’ve known about this for some years.

    20

    • #
      Robert Rosicka

      You better check your facts , my 6 month old Stihl is compliment for noise and vibration only , no mention of emissions anywhere .
      Yes most mowers are fourstroke and generators too but the point remains the same , all this to prevent the world from warming .

      20

  • #
    Robert Rosicka

    Something I missed earlier is the claim that this legislation will reduce fuel use by forty million litres a year , I’m suggesting horse hockey to that claim .

    21

    • #
      Robert Rosicka

      If this guy is in the industry and what he says is true the 40 million litres saved per year is a bit of a joke . And it might not be an issue to the industry but your customers just found out about it .

      Peter Q
      September 16, 2017 at 8:41 pm · Reply
      4 stroke lawn mowers, generators, petrol fire pumps, etc. have been 4 stroke almost exclusively for many years, it’s not some new, you-beaut trend. Most current 2 stroke chainsaws, brushcutters, blowers, etc. already comply with these standards (not just those from Saint Stihl and His Holiness Husqvarna). This is a non-story, in the outdoor power equipment industry we’ve known about this for some year

      00

  • #
    sophocles

    For the last seven years, I’ve wondered why two-stroke engines haven’t been ‘attacked like this. Four stroke “small engines” went through an `efficiency’ upgrade about five years ago, when all the American manufacturers went from side valve to overhead valve. Of course, prices went up too. The efficiency of the engines has improved with more power from the same capacities and less fuel consumption. Oh whoopy doo.

    The only two-stroke engine I’ve ever owned is the one powering my chain saw. It’s not used very often. All my life, all my lawn mowers, motorcycles and cars have been and are powered by four-stroke engines. Boats are pot-holes in the ocean into which one throws money so I’ve never been cared what engines are used there.

    So now two-stroke engines have been `done over.’ All this for so little? Some people have amazingly trivial minds.

    10

  • #
    Wally

    Don’t approve of green BS, but in this case I don’t have a problem.

    2 stroke engines are horrible unreliable stinky things. Hard to start, high maintenance, puffing smoke, pain in the neck.

    As I’ve upgraded things like mowers over the years I’ve been ditching the 2 stroke devices, simply because they give so much trouble. Gimme a nice 4 stroke that at least starts every time I want to use it, and does not need specially mixed fuel that leaves me stinking afterwards.

    10