Emissions and the future of motorcycles | Page 2 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Emissions and the future of motorcycles

Electric is still a long way off for places like Canada with current technology, as distances driven regularly are long (including commutes), and temperature is an issue in much of the country. I could see bigger cities starting to do similar to Europe, though, and starting to institute a tax on IC vehicles. Distances in Europe are much shorter, weather is milder, and density is higher, so it makes a lot of sense there.

(Things are changing fast, too. My wife and I were watching a video shot in Rome recently, and there's a sudden proliferation of electric scooters there. We were there last in April of 2019, and there were hardly any. Now there's clusters on almost every corner in the city centre, in what appears to be some sort of ride share system. Getting rid of gas and diesel is an even more pressing issue in these older cities, as the exhaust is rapidly destroying many of the old stone structures.)

I used to be among the "you'll pry my gas motor from my cold, dead hands" crowd, influenced by idiots like Jeremy Clarkson. Electric felt very threatening to the idea of vehicles as something fun rather than purely utilitarian. But as time has gone by, I can see a day fast approaching where electric in some form, be it with improved batteries or some type of fuel cell (especially if someone figures out how to harvest hydrogen in volume), is how we all get around. It offers all sorts of torque benefits, so if they can get the weight down, it could actually be better. I've also come to believe the environment is by far the most important issue of our times, and it's time we all started making sacrifices. Western consumption is unsustainable at our current rate, and we can't just demand that India and China make sacrifices first.

For the medium future, though, I think it'll be incremental change and things like Euro regs driving manufacturers to update designs. Nothing will be made illegal to own, just sell. It'll become more and more difficult to use the old bikes day-to-day until it's the preserve of old nerds and beardo hobbyists. Whatever new technology fits the bill will dominate, hopefully powered by something Canada has in abundance.

That's a ways off, though. The F-150 is by far the best selling vehicle in North America, and easily 95% of them on the road are used for nothing more intense than getting groceries. Gas still needs to get a lot more expensive before we're collectively willing to give up our big rigs...
 
Electric is still a long way off for places like Canada with current technology, as distances driven regularly are long (including commutes), and temperature is an issue in much of the country. I could see bigger cities starting to do similar to Europe, though, and starting to institute a tax on IC vehicles. Distances in Europe are much shorter, weather is milder, and density is higher, so it makes a lot of sense there.

(Things are changing fast, too. My wife and I were watching a video shot in Rome recently, and there's a sudden proliferation of electric scooters there. We were there last in April of 2019, and there were hardly any. Now there's clusters on almost every corner in the city centre, in what appears to be some sort of ride share system. Getting rid of gas and diesel is an even more pressing issue in these older cities, as the exhaust is rapidly destroying many of the old stone structures.)

I used to be among the "you'll pry my gas motor from my cold, dead hands" crowd, influenced by idiots like Jeremy Clarkson. Electric felt very threatening to the idea of vehicles as something fun rather than purely utilitarian. But as time has gone by, I can see a day fast approaching where electric in some form, be it with improved batteries or some type of fuel cell (especially if someone figures out how to harvest hydrogen in volume), is how we all get around. It offers all sorts of torque benefits, so if they can get the weight down, it could actually be better. I've also come to believe the environment is by far the most important issue of our times, and it's time we all started making sacrifices. Western consumption is unsustainable at our current rate, and we can't just demand that India and China make sacrifices first.

For the medium future, though, I think it'll be incremental change and things like Euro regs driving manufacturers to update designs. Nothing will be made illegal to own, just sell. It'll become more and more difficult to use the old bikes day-to-day until it's the preserve of old nerds and beardo hobbyists. Whatever new technology fits the bill will dominate, hopefully powered by something Canada has in abundance.

That's a ways off, though. The F-150 is by far the best selling vehicle in North America, and easily 95% of them on the road are used for nothing more intense than getting groceries. Gas still needs to get a lot more expensive before we're collectively willing to give up our big rigs...
Never thought exhaust could destroy old stone structures etc
 
Never thought exhaust could destroy old stone structures etc
I don't know much about it except that the particulate builds up on the stone, staining it black. At a minimum, this requires cleaning, which inevitably does some damage, but things like sulfur also react with some stone, breaking it down. This is particularly noticeable with statues, where the faces lose their shape.

Rome has banned tour buses from the city centre, partly because of the diesel exhaust (made easier because they also offend sensibilities), and Paris is planning the same...
 
...Trudeau's carbon tax is just an excuse to raise taxes and buy more elections. ....

I can understand the need for a carbon tax, but I don't agree with the way it's being administered at all.
Personally, think they should take all the carbon tax "income" and redirect it to cover the CERB/Covid benefits and keep it that way until they've reduced that debt load by at least 75%.

Otherwise, it will be a while before ICE has a proper contender. The overall electric infrastructure and battery tech just isn't quite there yet.
That being said, I'd love to drive one of those CyberTrucks - even if only for the experience.
 
ch3E9dQ.jpg
 
That's a bit misleading. EVs are considerably more efficient than combustion engine vehicles, and a central power plant is considerably more efficient than a mobile one, and the difference is large enough that even if the central power plant is coal-fired, the net result is still more efficient than a conventional combustion-engine vehicle. The engine in a motor vehicle spends most of the time in operating conditions where its efficiency is very poor (light load or idle).

In Ontario, that EV is about half nuclear-powered, about a quarter hydroelectric, a little bit of wind and solar, and most of the rest natural gas. A good combined-cycle natural-gas-fired central power station has a thermal efficiency of at least 50% and can be closer to 60%. No mobile combustion engine can come close to that.
 
There's actually some truth to this for countries with coal as their primary electricity source (and assuming you replace the moped with a car). For the rest of the world, though, electric appears to be much better over the life cycle of a vehicle. This also assumes no improvement to generation and distribution systems. The irony is that the threat of emissions has far outstripped the risk of waste, so nuclear power is an excellent solution (at least in places with low seismic risk). Unfortunately, most countries have turned power generation into privatised or semi-privatised entities, and nuclear doesn't really work in that system.

There are other untested issues with widespread battery power, including the waste issues for all those packs. But at the moment, it's an improvement, and we need every incremental improvement we can get. One of the greatest PR victories the oil companies have achieved is separating improved/different energy sources from economic prosperity in the minds of the public. The debate has turned into an either/or discussion between reducing emissions and having jobs, completely bypassing the idea that different energy models could create an equivalent economic benefit with the right investment. Of course, that leads to people's resistance to change, particularly if they stand to benefit from the established order...

Which leads to all sorts of fascinating stuff about why we seem so profoundly ill-equipped psychologically to cope with the complexity of climate change/the environment etc. I saw a thing recently describing it as a 'hyperobject', something so vast in scope and diverse in consequence that we become blind to it due to our inability to fully conceive it. There is no one approach, no guaranteed solution, no unassailable truth, no final 'victory' at the end. The overwhelming temptation is to deal with the cognitive dissonance by dismissing the issue outright. Covid suffers from the same problem.

The reality is the problem is not going away, no matter how much we want it to. Waiting for perfect solutions will get us nowhere, so all we have left is trying imperfect solutions to see what works best. Many potential solutions will create other issues, and multiple changes of approach will be required. But the worst thing we can do is nothing, because we know that we have a problem, and doing nothing only perpetuates that...
 
Last edited:
Lots and lots of forced induction

Eventually EVs and Hydrogen fuel cell bikes

Eventually get banned outright because of self driving cars ....
 
There's actually some truth to this for countries with coal as their primary electricity source (and assuming you replace the moped with a car). For the rest of the world, though, electric appears to be much better over the life cycle of a vehicle. This also assumes no improvement to generation and distribution systems. The irony is that the threat of emissions has far outstripped the risk of waste, so nuclear power is an excellent solution (at least in places with low seismic risk). Unfortunately, most countries have turned power generation into privatised or semi-privatised entities, and nuclear doesn't really work in that system.

There are other untested issues with widespread battery power, including the waste issues for all those packs. But at the moment, it's an improvement, and we need every incremental improvement we can get. One of the greatest PR victories the oil companies have achieved is separating improved/different energy sources from economic prosperity in the minds of the public. The debate has turned into an either/or discussion between reducing emissions and having jobs, completely bypassing the idea that different energy models could create an equivalent economic benefit with the right investment. Of course, that leads to people's resistance to change, particularly if they stand to benefit from the established order...

Which leads to all sorts of fascinating stuff about why we seem so profoundly ill-equipped psychologically to cope with the complexity of climate change/the environment etc. I saw a thing recently describing it as a 'hyperobject', something so vast in scope and diverse in consequence that we become blind to it due to our inability to fully conceive it. There is no one approach, no guaranteed solution, no unassailable truth, no final 'victory' at the end. The overwhelming temptation is to deal with the cognitive dissonance by dismissing the issue outright. Covid suffers from the same problem.

The reality is the problem is not going away, no matter how much we want it to. Waiting for perfect solutions will get us nowhere, so all we have left is trying imperfect solutions to see what works best. Many potential solutions will create other issues, and multiple changes of approach will be required. But the worst thing we can do is nothing, because we know that we have a problem, and doing nothing only perpetuates that...
Interesting
I was reading an article about companies wanting to mine the sea floor and couldnt help but wonder about the ramifications...
and something you touched upon, the complexity of the problem...and making incremental progress etc etc

I cant help but see the common denominator...humans

Maybe agent smith was right all along...**** rona, human beings are the virus

 
Looking at that pic of the power plant spewing dark clouds, there's a natural gas plant just south of hwy 7/Queen on Goreway in Brampton that on a cold day I'll see puffy white clouds of what I assume is water vapour coming out the stacks.
 
Looking at that pic of the power plant spewing dark clouds, there's a natural gas plant just south of hwy 7/Queen on Goreway in Brampton that on a cold day I'll see puffy white clouds of what I assume is water vapour coming out the stacks.
I haven't seen visible emissions from a power plant in a very very long time (they may still be spewing toxic particles, but gov't cracked down hard on ones you can see as that got them angry phone calls). There is (was?) a standby diesel generator on Merton St that almost rolls coal since new. They seem to think that is functioning properly. It's obviously not.
 
What's visible will be water vapour. Modern central power plants have extremely good emission control. NOx, CO, and HC will surely be measurable by parts-per-million only. The bigger environmental issue with natural gas generation is the impact on where it's produced, e.g. "fracking".

There is no free lunch.
 
I haven't seen visible emissions from a power plant in a very very long time (they may still be spewing toxic particles, but gov't cracked down hard on ones you can see as that got them angry phone calls). There is (was?) a standby diesel generator on Merton St that almost rolls coal since new. They seem to think that is functioning properly. It's obviously not.
Yeah the conditions need to be right for the water vapour to show ... as I recall now, on a very cold day, which makes sense.
 
Interesting
I was reading an article about companies wanting to mine the sea floor and couldnt help but wonder about the ramifications...
and something you touched upon, the complexity of the problem...and making incremental progress etc etc
That's Japan and Cobalt. Cobalt's rarity makes it a problem considering how necessary it is for current battery tech and what sources there are for it. It's currently not an environmental issue but an ethical one (see: The Democratic Republic of the Congo).
 
it's cool seeing different characteristics of todays bikes like inline 4s or triples or twins or v4s etc etc
the future will just be oh that battery is more powerful than this one :ROFLMAO:

True.

But on the positive side, motorcycle design has been pretty constrained with having a large ICE lump sitting smack dab in the middle of the bike. not to mention heat management/dissipation of the engine and waste gases. When battery technology becomes dense and compact enough that you can hide the power source within the frame, swingarm, or even have hub-centric power, it could lead to some very novel and interesting shapes.

tron-lightcycle.jpeg


Just for instance...
 
Last edited:
We couldn't even pull off an overnight changeover to an all-electric fleet if we wanted to. We don't have enough generating and distribution capacity.

Hydro One didn't seem particularly concerned about it when they were asked in 2016 (saying they could handle a million EV's coming online overnight without any issue) and things have only got better since then with increased capacity and reduced demand.

I think it will be surprising how well the grid handles things, particularly with the reality that most people charge overnight when demand is low and we're often paying other areas to take our surplus energy regardless. Win win.

Until I can pull up to a "CHARGING" station and exchange batteries in the time it takes to refuel i won't be buying an electric car. I'm still driving to Montreal Windsor and all over Ontario.
I don't need a two hour fuel stop.

So you buy a vehicle appropriate for the trip, not something that requires you stop every hour for a charge.

And fast charging is getting better and better. Our Ioniq for example can charge at up to 70kw, so we can go from low battery to 80% in around 20 minutes - in the time you to stop at a rest stop every few hours, take a piss, grab a coffee, and stretch a little.

Some of the bigger battery Teslas can go north of 600km on a charge currently and can charge to full in about an hour on a supercharger. The new 250kw superchargers will do it in about a half hour for another 600km.

We're in EV infancy right now. In 10 years I would fully expect to see 500km range recharges in 10-15 minutes. Then the arguments like yours don't hold true anymore as nobody is driving 500+km without stopping for at least 10-15 minutes.

If the manufacturers could agree on a suitable coolant for battery packs, I could see a fast charging station with a coolant loop feeding cooled coolant in to better suck heat out of the cells.

Built in cooling is more than adequate to do the job without needing external systems. Tesla takes it a step further and lets you select a manual preemptive "super cool" of the batteries on your way to a supercharger. Others just actively cool while charging.

Electric is still a long way off for places like Canada with current technology, as distances driven regularly are long (including commutes), and temperature is an issue in much of the country.

Once you have an EV that can go 1000km on a charge (which won't be very long to become reality) that argument is moot with few exceptions.

I don't know much about it except that the particulate builds up on the stone, staining it black. At a minimum, this requires cleaning, which inevitably does some damage, but things like sulfur also react with some stone, breaking it down. This is particularly noticeable with statues, where the faces lose their shape.

Here's a photo of the old Genosha hotel in Oshawa during one phase of it's restoration. Power washing many decades of grime and pollution off the building was pretty eye opening.

1608690140704.png
 

Back
Top Bottom