Catalytic Converters On Sterndrive/Inboard ?

[Lazy Flamingo]

Catalytic Converters To Get Saltwater Testing
Story Released April 19, 2005

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the California Air Resources Board
have agreed to fund in-boat/in-water tests to determine the safety and performance
of catalytic converters on marine sterndrive/inboard engines in saltwater environments.

CARB had been attempting to issue rules requiring catalytic converters on all
sterndrive/inboard engines without testing the durability of the converters when
in contact with salt water.

“Because the National Marine Manufacturers Association members who produce
sterndrive/inboards are primarily small family-owned companies and lack the
resources to perform the tests themselves, these companies would have been
extremely burdened,” said John McKnight, NMMA director of environment and
safety compliance, in a statement.

NMMA lobbied CARB, the EPA, Congress and the Coast Guard to require saltwater
testing before any rules are issued, and to secure funding for those tests. The
tests are expected to supply engine manufacturers with the data necessary to
build durable catalytic converters for their marine engines.

“This is a classic example of how well-informed lobbying of officials makes a
difference to the bottom lines of marine manufacturers and the safety of the
boating public,” said NMMA vice president of government relations Monita Fontaine
in a statement.

The testing is scheduled to take place over the summer. At the invitation of EPA,
NMMA members will play an active role in determining how the tests are conducted,
including which boats and engines are used.

Biggest problem I can see on boats is the same they've faced on diesels for years. Unless you can get the temp VERY high inside that catalytic, the process is a waste of time. Since most boats run wet exhausts (for noise and cooling) it's gonna be tough. Going to dry exhausts would help catalytics wirk... but holy cow you're gonna have some fire hazards. I dunno... I can see something coming though eventually.

[Go Aweigh2452]

yeah,
1. I can see a nice hot cat setting a boat bildge on fire or melt a fuel line that comes in contact with it.
2. room is so tight inside the engine compartment...where the heck will you mount it? Not like its 10 feet to the end of the exhaust like a road vehicle...
3. You'll probably need two cats, one each side... twice the amount of heat... and they do get hot!

Unless they figure out a way to wrap a water jacket around it somehow. Still, I don't see that their numbers will work in practical useage. Most boats aren't cruising all day, but starting and stopping and hauling ass around a lake somewhere.

I dunno....

[Randygh]

What about the four cycle, high horsepower outboards? Don't they produce the same emissions as inboard engines?

I posted a link in BOC a while back with the study that CARB did and the boats they tested. The converters were water jacketed. The problem was that the did the typical CARB thing; they did a very short term test on fresh water and from that decided it was feasible.

This is why I think the idiots in Olympia are wrong in adopting CARB rules for cars sold in WA state. CARB is controlled by environmental radicals that want nothing more than to get us to quit using any type of internal combustion engine.

Raul

[heymagic]

I could see cats if you were boating in the LA River....I suspect that some problems will occur because of heat, a couple of boats will burn down and manufactures will find it more cost effective to not sell boats in California than to settle all the lawsuits. Someone at CARB needs a bullet between the eyes..not lead of course...

Like Gene said... all it's gonna take is for one of them to burn to the waterline to change their minds. I'm really surprised how many dry exhaust boats I saw at the show this year. That much heat in a compartment most people don't even look in once they leave the trailer could be dangerous.

Don't count on it. I lived in CA for years and saw the totally stupid things CARB and the LA Air Quality Management District have done. For example, a friend who had a motorcycle shop was told that he had to keep a daily, detailed log on any aerosol products used, including the amount used. He was supposed to do this by weighing cans before and after. If he exceeded a certain maximum of Volatile Organic Solvents (VOC) released, he had to pay a fine.

Occasionally something causes CARB to reverse itself, but this doesn't happen very often. For example, the zero emmission vehicle (ZEV) was a total flop. They mandated that any car manufacturer selling in CA had to sell a certain % of ZEVs by a certain year. This prompted GM to come out with the EV1, whose private leases were heavily subsidized by the CA taxpayers. In addition, the cars were a deathtrap. The science behind ZEVs was flawed. By using electric cars you moved the pollution source to an unregulated powerplant or you caused further drop in the Colorado River due to hydroelectric power requirements. Eventually CARB realized they were wrong, but only after a number of manufacturers said they would quit selling cars in CA by the implementation date.

The sad part about it is that the real improvements in air quality they achieve with their rules are almost unmeasurable.