Why are Ontario's HOV lane rules different? | Page 2 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Why are Ontario's HOV lane rules different?

caboose483 said:
Your argument loses merit when one considers that a vast majority of motorcycles are owned in addition to a normal car. They are not a the sole means of transportation for the owner.

Bearing that in mind, 100% of the "well to wheel" impact of such a vehicle is superfluous.
Click to expand...

Precisely the reason why EPA has allowed for such relaxed regulations. If the market moved towards using motorbikes as a sole means of transport the regulations would likely be revised accordingly. Pretty unlikely to happen up here with all the white stuff.
 
NP6000 said:
Really they have no emissions? Where does this pollutant free coal fired energy come from? Do you know how energy intense the production of batteries (especially Li batteries) are? Barring that, the discussion at hand is highway HOV - where hybrids offer little to no benefit over a gasoline equivalent.
Click to expand...

Most commutes do require some amount of driving on surface streets where HOV lanes are impractical/impossible. You are correct in the logic that the highway segment of the commute isn't advantageous for a hybrid but any segment before or after that is where a hybrid can make a noticeable difference.
 
NP6000 said:
Precisely the reason why EPA has allowed for such relaxed regulations. If the market moved towards using motorbikes as a sole means of transport the regulations would likely be revised accordingly. Pretty unlikely to happen up here with all the white stuff.
Click to expand...

Now you're getting into a chicken versus egg debate.

If environmentalism was a genuine concern.. commuting on a motorcycle would be frowned upon not encouraged as the OP seems to think it should be.
 
caboose483 said:
Most commutes do require some amount of driving on surface streets where HOV lanes are impractical/impossible. You are correct in the logic that the highway segment of the commute isn't advantageous for a hybrid but any segment before or after that is where a hybrid can make a noticeable difference.
Click to expand...

Actually, with current full-electrics and plug-in hybrid-electrics offering 40 to 60 km range or more on battery power, the highway segment of the commute can still be very advantageous to electrics and hybrids. The off-highway city street advantages is gravy.
 
caboose483 said:
Most commutes do require some amount of driving on surface streets where HOV lanes are impractical/impossible. You are correct in the logic that the highway segment of the commute isn't advantageous for a hybrid but any segment before or after that is where a hybrid can make a noticeable difference.
Click to expand...

I agree - but you can see where some may have issue with and dedicated hybrid HOV on the highway. Where is the dedicated diesel engine HOV lane? Where is the dedicated 40+ MPG HOV lane?

Going further, why do hybrid owners get all the perks? The fact that a hybrid can plug into the wall doesn't make it more efficient. The fact it has regenerative braking, stop-start capability, electric FEAD accessories, etc are what make it advantageous. Manufacturers like BMW are making these technologies on their gasoline powered engines. Does that mean we need to make a BMW HOV lane?
 
turbodish said:
Actually, with current full-electrics and plug-in hybrid-electrics offering 40 to 60 km range or more on battery power, the highway segment of the commute can still be very advantageous to electrics and hybrids. The off-highway city street advantages is gravy.
Click to expand...

Care to substantiate that claim? Please explain how the highway segment can be advantageous to a full electric of plug-in hybrid?
 
caboose483 said:
Now you're getting into a chicken versus egg debate.

If environmentalism was a genuine concern.. commuting on a motorcycle would be frowned upon not encouraged as the OP seems to think it should be.
Click to expand...

Depends on how you look at it. If you believe in global warming, then the carbon footprint of a motorcycle is many times less than an automobile - so you could argue that point in favour of motorbike commuting. If you look strictly at pollutants - it is obvious that they are dirty.

Commuting on a motorcycle could be an environmentally friendly choice if 3-way catalysts were mainstream. It isn't (yet) because the masses aren't willing to pay a few dollars extra to be green. That part will have to mandated/regulated, the free market won't drive it there on its own.
 
NP6000 said:
Care to substantiate that claim? Please explain how the highway segment can be advantageous to a full electric of plug-in hybrid?
Click to expand...

A vehicle with sufficient battery range can do typical GTA highway commuting distances fuel-free and without tailpipe emissions. Given that reduced emissions is one of the goals for HOV lanes, that full-electric or plug-in hybrid travel range capability fits in with the stated HOV goals.
 
NP6000 said:
I agree - but you can see where some may have issue with and dedicated hybrid HOV on the highway. Where is the dedicated diesel engine HOV lane? Where is the dedicated 40+ MPG HOV lane?

Going further, why do hybrid owners get all the perks? The fact that a hybrid can plug into the wall doesn't make it more efficient. The fact it has regenerative braking, stop-start capability, electric FEAD accessories, etc are what make it advantageous. Manufacturers like BMW are making these technologies on their gasoline powered engines. Does that mean we need to make a BMW HOV lane?
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with you on any of this.

NP6000 said:
Care to substantiate that claim? Please explain how the highway segment can be advantageous to a full electric of plug-in hybrid?
Click to expand...

As you previously mentioned.. a gas/electric hybrid offers no real advantage on the highway as it is the gas motor doing all the work. A full electric car uses no gas on the highway so whether or not its highway or suface streats... the car emits zero-emissions. How that car attained the battery charge is another matter.

NP6000 said:
Depends on how you look at it. If you believe in global warming, then the carbon footprint of a motorcycle is many times less than an automobile - so you could argue that point in favour of motorbike commuting. If you look strictly at pollutants - it is obvious that they are dirty.

Commuting on a motorcycle could be an environmentally friendly choice if 3-way catalysts were mainstream. It isn't (yet) because the masses aren't willing to pay a few dollars extra to be green. That part will have to mandated/regulated, the free market won't drive it there on its own.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't depend..

If someday the climate changes and riding a motorcycle year round is practical, and emissions controls are such that bikes don't pollute orders of magnitude more than cars.. then you'd have a point. As it stands you don't.

As of now a motorcycle or scooter is not a practical year-round commuter. As i previously stated, most motorcycles are owned in addition to a cage of some sort. As such, the "carbon footprint" associated with production and disposition is 100% superfluous and given the choice of driving your cage or bike to work.. the cage is by far the more environmentally friendly choice. As things are right now only the ignorant believe that motorcycles or scooters are eco-friendly. You'll never win that debate against someone who knows what they're talking about.

One of my friends is very much eco-friendly, she's doing EWB work right now in Ghana, and i still remember the conversation i had with her telling her that if she was better off driving a Hummer H2 than the Vespa she had.
 
Last edited:
turbodish said:
A vehicle with sufficient battery range can do typical GTA highway commuting distances fuel-free and without tailpipe emissions. Given that reduced emissions is one of the goals for HOV lanes, that full-electric or plug-in hybrid travel range capability fits in with the stated HOV goals.
Click to expand...

Because it doesn't use fuel during a portion of its drive cycle doesn't mean its emission free. Again, that energy was generated from the grid and it didn't come without an environmental impact. So again, contrary to your statement there is no advantage of using a hybrid on the highway.
 
NP6000 said:
Because it doesn't use fuel during a portion of its drive cycle doesn't mean its emission free. Again, that energy was generated from the grid and it didn't come without an environmental impact. So again, contrary to your statement there is no advantage of using a hybrid on the highway.
Click to expand...

It still produces significantly less emissions than the average motorcycle, even one with a cat, and the use of electricity is source independent. You can operate it electricity from nuclear, solar, wind, and water source just as easily as coal or gas source. If you want to move towards zero emissions, then electric or hybrid is the way to go.
 
Englishj said:
http://powersports.honda.com/2010/vfr1200f/specifications.aspx

Cleary states that the bike meets Meets current California Air Resources Board (CARB) and EPA standards.

I know there was a newspaper piece a couple of years ago claiming that bikes were worse than suv's but i am not sure if that is the case with newer bikes.
Click to expand...

Federal standards for light vehicle HC+NOX and CO gr/km emissions are much more stringent than California's standards for motorcycle emissions. A new bike with all the latest mandated emissions controls will still spew two to four or more times the pollutants than a similar year SUV.
 
turbodish said:
A vehicle with sufficient battery range can do typical GTA highway commuting distances fuel-free and without tailpipe emissions. Given that reduced emissions is one of the goals for HOV lanes, that full-electric or plug-in hybrid travel range capability fits in with the stated HOV goals.
Click to expand...

There are no full electric cars in our market place to the best of my knowledge, the only car available right now is the Chevy Volt which was released in the USA a couple of months ago.

It's kinda false advertising for the current hybrid cars(prius/camry/escape) they are not fuel and emission free.
 
turbodish said:
Federal standards for light vehicle HC+NOX and CO gr/km emissions are much more stringent than California's standards for motorcycle emissions. A new bike with all the latest mandated emissions controls will still spew two to four or more times the pollutants than a similar year SUV.
Click to expand...

Do you have info on this, i went looking on the epa site and couldn't find anything?
 
NP6000 said:
Because it doesn't use fuel during a portion of its drive cycle doesn't mean its emission free. Again, that energy was generated from the grid and it didn't come without an environmental impact. So again, contrary to your statement there is no advantage of using a hybrid on the highway.
Click to expand...

As of end of 2010, less than 25% of Ontario's power was being generated from fossil-based coal, oil or natural gas fuels, and that segment will continue to shrink as the province shifts away from coal and oil-fire plants. The rest of Ontario's generating capacity came from non-polluting nuclear and hydroelectric water power plants, augmented by growing capacity in non-polluting wind and solar generation.

Even with regards to Ontario's current (but shrinking) fossil-fueled generating capacity, pollution controls can be much more efficiently and effectively implemented on a small number of large-scale relatively constant-output generating plants than they can on thousands of small-scale point-of-use internal combustion engines, such as those used in vehicles.
 
caboose483 said:
No it doesn't depend..

If someday the climate changes and riding a motorcycle year round is practical, and emissions controls are such that bikes don't pollute orders of magnitude more than cars.. then you'd have a point. As it stands you don't.

As of now a motorcycle or scooter is not a practical year-round commuter. As i previously stated, most motorcycles are owned in addition to a cage of some sort. As such, the "carbon footprint" associated with production and disposition is 100% superfluous and given the choice of driving your cage or bike to work.. the cage is by far the more environmentally friendly choice. As things are right now only the ignorant believe that motorcycles or scooters are eco-friendly. You'll never win that debate against someone who knows what they're talking about.

One of my friends is very much eco-friendly, she's doing EWB work right now in Ghana, and i still remember the conversation i had with her telling her that if she was better off driving a Hummer H2 than the Vespa she had.
Click to expand...


We won't see eye to eye on this - lets agree to disagree. Your approach is micro, my approach is macro. I could certainly argue that the Vespa is way more eco-friendly than the H2. Neither of us would be equipped with the facts to argue one's point and I have no interest in doing a Life cycle analysis.
 
turbodish said:
Federal standards for light vehicle HC+NOX and CO gr/km emissions are much more stringent than California's standards for motorcycle emissions. A new bike with all the latest mandated emissions controls will still spew two to four or more times the pollutants than a similar year SUV.
Click to expand...

I worked it out earlier - for 2010 it is 18X more for NOx... I didn't get around to HC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom