Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Monday May 30, 2016
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
Vancouver Impreza Club
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC Chapters > Vancouver Impreza Club Forum -- VIC

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads. 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-09-2010, 01:47 AM   #26
Zefy
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 105104
Join Date: Jan 2006
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Coquitlam, BC, Canada
Vehicle:
1979 BRAT / 01 RSTI
99 2.5TS (DEAD)

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010 WRX Limited View Post
Anyways, the science of catalytic converters is even beyond me a little and I'm just paraphrasing what I've read elsewhere. So far, it seems that nobody has brought any actual science forward to disprove what I have been reading. But if it's out there I am open to it and I don't even care that much either way.
you've gotten bored and don't wanna play anymore?

you should really read the fine print. taken from the article that you posted and cited information from:

Quote:
NOTE: The New York Times reporter's statement that nitrous oxides now comprise 7.2 percent of the gases that cause global warming appears to be wrong. If N2O is 7.2 percent of the greenhouse gases, and it's 300 times more potent than CO2, that would make it the primary greenhouse gas. The primary greenhouse gas is water vapor. Either the EPA has omitted water vapor altogether in its calculations, which would be very wrong, or the reporter misread the report and what the EPA actually meant was that N2O accounts for 7.2 percent of a putative warming effect. Quite different. The N2O figure should not be cited until verified.
You have to look beyond the new york times. They are doing exactly what you just did by paraphrasing information.

We do not need to disprove what you have been reading (and stating as truth). You need to back up what you've been stating.

also stated in the same article was this quote:

Quote:
Car industry experts, however, favor less drastic changes. They propose cutting nitrous oxide production by adjusting catalytic converters in future models. They suspect that the gas is produced when the converter is warming up, and believe the converters could be redesigned to reach optimum temperature faster. That would also help them destroy other pollutants better.

Weaver said that measurements on more kinds of cars and light trucks would be needed to be certain about the size of the problem. But Weaver said, "It is quite clear that you produce nitrous oxide in a catalyst, in some circumstances."
interesting points i think. They 'suspect' that it happens when it is warming up.

Interesting finds, but more information is needed. These articles can not be taken to be 100% correct.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010 WRX Limited View Post
No I wasn't saying that it is it's own independent heat source. Only that the cat only functions by the engine being purposely tuned to have rich pulses.
this is incorrect. At idle, the AFRs will be bouncing back and forth between lean and rich causing these 'rich pulses'. This is a result of o2 sensor reading and the ecu interpreting the results causing 'lag' between the reading and the reaction. It is the only way for the engine to run smoothly. A car with no cats that has been 'tuned' to run without them for 'maximum performance' will still do this.

With that in mind, lots carbed cars had cats in them. They (when tuned correctly) would not run rich and did not have 'rich pulses' yet the cats still functioned perfectly.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Zefy is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Old 08-09-2010, 03:04 AM   #27
2010 WRX Limited
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 217458
Join Date: Jul 2009
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Langley BC
Vehicle:
1989 Mazda Miata
Classic Red

Default

Do catalytic converters help with global warming or not? Well no they don't. I have already backed this up with volumes of evidence. And I did read the part at the bottom too (it wasn't exactly fine print)

I found an article for those that are interested that does a good job of summarizing the costs and benefits:

http://indianhillmediaworks.typepad....-concerns.html

Last edited by 2010 WRX Limited; 08-09-2010 at 03:15 AM.
2010 WRX Limited is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2010, 03:52 AM   #28
notjustforshow
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 143277
Join Date: Mar 2007
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Richmond
Vehicle:
05 STI PPP OBP
1098, Z1000

Default

All very good points, but for the daily driver, isn't the "informed" decision to simply run a catalytic converter?

Even if you rationalized that having a test pipe all the way through is the best course of action, you still need to deal with everyone else, including the law giving you a hard time.

We can discuss how these things work, and how bad these things are for the environment etc, but bottom line "cost vs benefits" it will be better to run a catalytic converter in the GVA for a daily driven Subaru. This is the informed decision unless you like VI.
notjustforshow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2010, 04:20 AM   #29
dasnowman
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 125450
Join Date: Sep 2006
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Tricities, B.C.
Vehicle:
Gone 07 SWP STi LTD
07 Nissan Nismo 4x4

Default

This is a funny thread all I add is Cat's start forest and grass fires compared to it's non catted counter part.


Yes if you are looking to squeez every last whp out of your set-up an extra 5-10hp can happen from running cattless.

Noise wise I have had both and the inside cabin noise from running cattless is a LOT louder... Noise out the tail pipe seemed close to the same.

Last edited by dasnowman; 08-09-2010 at 04:43 AM.
dasnowman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2010, 04:33 AM   #30
Zefy
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 105104
Join Date: Jan 2006
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Coquitlam, BC, Canada
Vehicle:
1979 BRAT / 01 RSTI
99 2.5TS (DEAD)

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010 WRX Limited View Post
Do catalytic converters help with global warming or not? Well no they don't. I have already backed this up with volumes of evidence. And I did read the part at the bottom too (it wasn't exactly fine print)
my problem with it is you cited and paraphrased that "nitrous oxide is actually 300 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide."

whether or not this is actual fact is unknown based on the note i quoted above. It is almost worse that you did read 'the fine print' because you know it could be false information yet you made it one of your key points.

you will avoid much grief the next time you make a thread like this by citing and linking your sources. It's a pain in the ass to do but it avoids some of this extra crap that goes along with these threads. If you can show how you came to your decision instead of just posting the decision it helps readers understand the whole story.
Zefy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2010, 04:53 AM   #31
notjustforshow
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 143277
Join Date: Mar 2007
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Richmond
Vehicle:
05 STI PPP OBP
1098, Z1000

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zefy View Post
my problem with it is you cited and paraphrased that "nitrous oxide is actually 300 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide."

whether or not this is actual fact is unknown based on the note i quoted above. It is almost worse that you did read 'the fine print' because you know it could be false information yet you made it one of your key points.

you will avoid much grief the next time you make a thread like this by citing and linking your sources. It's a pain in the ass to do but it avoids some of this extra crap that goes along with these threads. If you can show how you came to your decision instead of just posting the decision it helps readers understand the whole story.
Nitrous Oxide is 300 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide is not an exact statement. This is why wiki and a lot of online sources fall apart when used as arguments.

C/N:

Greenhouse gas is any gas that traps heat in the atmosphere, however Nitrous Oxide is responsible for nitrogen loading, which in the end results in more acidic conditions, and not necessarily 300 times more heat retention than CO2.

Also, humans do not produce the most amount of N2O, which is at approximately 8:19 vs natural sources such as the ocean (dissipation into the atmosphere).

Source= me. I am a marine biologist, and not like George Costanza lol
notjustforshow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2010, 11:14 AM   #32
rs420
the cone killer
Moderator
 
Member#: 157784
Join Date: Aug 2007
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: victoria baby
Vehicle:
02 swapped bugeye
anthricite

Default

I am confused by this thread
Quote:
Once your catalytic converter reaches its operating temperature (known as "light off temperature" and usually between 400 and 600 degrees Fahrenheit) the catalyst compound coating the inner ceramics start to convert the three regulated harmful emissions into less harmful emissions. The three harmful emissions regulated by the EPA are Carbon monoxide (CO), Hydrocarbons (or VOCs for Volatile Organic Compounds), and Nitrogen compounds (NOx).

Carbon monoxide: Most of the used air leaving your engine is Carbon dioxide or CO2. But since combustion isn't always perfect or complete, some of the Carbon molecules only pick up one Oxygen to create carbon monoxide, a deadly, odorless gas. The catalytic converter creates a reaction between the CO and its surrounding air particles to create CO2 and H2O (water).

Hydrocarbons: A Hydrocarbon is any compound made of Carbon and Hydrogen that can be burned. Hydrocarbon emissions covers a range of harmful emissions, but they are all made up of unburned Carbon and Hydrogen. Hydrocarbons are harmful when breathed and contribute greatly to smog build up in urban areas.

NOxNitrogen compounds referred to as NOx have caused many an emissions test failure. NOx emissions are basically Nitrogen molecules that have combined with Oxygen and escape the engine unburned. NOx emissions cause smog and acid rain.

The compounds coating the inner structure of the cat literally strip, ram together, and otherwise muscle these emissions into less harmful gases and water, leaving the stuff that comes out of your tailpipe in much better shape.
so your telling us that the energy/environmental impact to make the catalytic converter that goes into cars vs the effectiveness of the cat reducing harmfull exhaust gasses is better to never have had cat's at all?

or your saying if you want to go catless there is no problem because you are not really letting more unburnt gas into the atmosphere by running no cats?

or that it wont change the decible level out the tail pipe, or change the smell at all?
rs420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2010, 12:13 PM   #33
j y
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 8829
Join Date: Jul 2001
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Vancouver
Vehicle:
GRB STI
SWP

Default

I have nothing to add to this thread, but I DID get a chuckle here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by tora View Post
... I just don't want factless facts posted unless they are in fact factual ...
j y is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2010, 07:09 PM   #34
codem
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 178560
Join Date: Apr 2008
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Vancouver
Vehicle:
2000 GC8

Default

Driving is bad for the environment, I am a driver, therefore I do not care about the environment or if you have a working Catalytic Converters.

Yes, I did just say that!

Last edited by codem; 08-10-2010 at 04:15 PM.
codem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2010, 07:31 PM   #35
Burnman
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 218087
Join Date: Jul 2009
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Burnaby
Vehicle:
95 Legacy
That ugly 'spruce' green.

Default

Another thing to think of with regards to removing the cat(s) can be safety. Since the cat is scrubbing out carbon monoxide, extra attention (more than usual) should be paid with a cat-less car running in an enclosed space like a garage.
Burnman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2010, 08:03 PM   #36
banman
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 12408
Join Date: Nov 2001
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Lotusland
Vehicle:
2006 Legacy GT
Silver

Default

My only comment on this thread is:
all else being equal (which it isn't), a car with cats will produce more CO2 than a car without - the catless car will just produce more CO and unburned HCs instead. That's about the only indisputable fact here. Is the (small) increase in CO2 emissions worth the benefits in urban air quality? Probably, but that's a pretty complex cost-benefit argument.

As for GHG potential of CO2 vs N2O, here's a chart from the IPCC 2007 Assessment Report:
banman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2010, 09:05 PM   #37
FunkMasta
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 66985
Join Date: Jul 2004
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Quick Wet Lamb, BC Canada
Vehicle:
2001 2.5RS sold
2012 2.0 Hatch

Default

finally, an actual scientist.


Stephen, you've been gone too long!
FunkMasta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2010, 09:20 PM   #38
2010 WRX Limited
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 217458
Join Date: Jul 2009
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Langley BC
Vehicle:
1989 Mazda Miata
Classic Red

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by j y View Post
I have nothing to add to this thread, but I DID get a chuckle here:
Ha, I was too busy debating to notice that. That was funny. As far as what decision one should make about buying a catted or catless exhaust part or system, I don't know. For someone in a newer car, they may never have to take it through aircare. But if it is against the law to use a catless exhaust then thats something to be aware of. The forest fire risk is actually a very compelling reason to use a catted system. Does anyone know if any of the fires we are fighting in BC right now were caused this way?
2010 WRX Limited is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2010, 12:20 AM   #39
Burnman
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 218087
Join Date: Jul 2009
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Burnaby
Vehicle:
95 Legacy
That ugly 'spruce' green.

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010 WRX Limited View Post
Ha, I was too busy debating to notice that. That was funny. As far as what decision one should make about buying a catted or catless exhaust part or system, I don't know. For someone in a newer car, they may never have to take it through aircare. But if it is against the law to use a catless exhaust then thats something to be aware of. The forest fire risk is actually a very compelling reason to use a catted system. Does anyone know if any of the fires we are fighting in BC right now were caused this way?
I thought the old diesels without particle traps were the fire-starters.

And I believe it is against the law to modify, change or remove a functioning factory cat.
Burnman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2010, 01:04 AM   #40
FunkMasta
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 66985
Join Date: Jul 2004
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Quick Wet Lamb, BC Canada
Vehicle:
2001 2.5RS sold
2012 2.0 Hatch

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dasnowman View Post
This is a funny thread all I add is Cat's start forest and grass fires compared to it's non catted counter part.
i have seen this.

A Friend of mine popped a tire and slid off a road onto some grass in his evo, called a tow truck and thought everything would be fine. A few minutes later the grass caught fire, and his entire car went up in smoke before he could move it.
FunkMasta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2010, 07:54 PM   #41
Jeff54
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 129503
Join Date: Oct 2006
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: reppin fort langleeey
Vehicle:
2002 It's resting
6 > 4?

Default



y'alls a bunch of pansy mofos
Jeff54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2010, 07:59 PM   #42
Burnman
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 218087
Join Date: Jul 2009
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Burnaby
Vehicle:
95 Legacy
That ugly 'spruce' green.

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff54 View Post


y'alls a bunch of pansy mofos
"Smells like... victory." (the sergeant guy from Apocalypse Now)
Burnman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2010, 08:04 PM   #43
Jeff54
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 129503
Join Date: Oct 2006
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: reppin fort langleeey
Vehicle:
2002 It's resting
6 > 4?

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burnman View Post
"Smells like... victory." (the sergeant guy from Apocalypse Now)



?
Jeff54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2010, 09:10 PM   #44
tryallzee
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 179947
Join Date: May 2008
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Langley B.C.
Vehicle:
1994 LS400

Default

AWESOME haha
tryallzee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2010, 12:05 AM   #45
2010 WRX Limited
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 217458
Join Date: Jul 2009
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Langley BC
Vehicle:
1989 Mazda Miata
Classic Red

Default

Thank you Jeff. As we all know, he who has the best visuals wins. I was thinking about this thread today as I was driving home smelling some RHD Land Cruiser Deisel for like 10 minutes before I even saw it. That can't be good for your lungs, but it was a mint looking truck.
2010 WRX Limited is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2010, 11:15 PM   #46
pedaltime
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 221903
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: CDA, ID
Vehicle:
2005 WRX
Java Black

Default

How much do really benefit do you from catless exhaust?
pedaltime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2010, 06:19 AM   #47
iRomey
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 254547
Join Date: Aug 2010
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: Vancouver, BC/Bellingham, WA
Default

iRomey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2010, 01:24 PM   #48
rs420
the cone killer
Moderator
 
Member#: 157784
Join Date: Aug 2007
Chapter/Region: VIC
Location: victoria baby
Vehicle:
02 swapped bugeye
anthricite

Default

rs420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tuner told me something I never heard before about catalytic converters..... sburck Newbies & FAQs 6 07-22-2010 05:11 PM
true or false about catalytic converters BriGuy Newbies & FAQs 7 10-16-2006 08:07 PM
Couple of questions about Catalytic Converters crxtls2 Normally Aspirated Powertrain 6 12-31-2005 11:27 PM
P and PGT Rally rules about Catalytic converter. Need help Rallyspec Motorsports 3 11-21-2001 03:38 AM
Some interesting facts about weight reduction Imprezer WRX Forum Archive 5 02-25-2001 10:33 PM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2016 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2016, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.