Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

VIC VicRoads hybrid registration discount. What about motorcycles?

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by Sir Ride Alot, Jun 5, 2012.

  1. What the fcuk is going on in this state? Where is the discount for motorcycles?

    Hybrid & Low Emission Vehicles Low Emission Vehicles (LEVs) generate less greenhouse gas emissions compared to other vehicles. Around half of VicRoads vehicle fleet is is considered low emission, including hybrids, fuel-efficient four cylinder cars, and LPG powered vehicles.
    Hybrid vehicles which combine an electric motor with an internal combustion engine help save fuel and are eligible for a $50 registration discount. More than 3000 hybrid vehicles are currently registered in Victoria.


  2. Sounds like you need to get a crap load of signatures and pester your local MP. Throw in some congestion benefits, and the lower emissions of the mighty "carbon" during production. Even the TL has similar fuel consumption to a 4-cyl car.
  3. Motorcycles don't make good fleet vehicles so vicroads couldn't get any advantage out of including them.
  4. iirc, there was a real world test done on motorcycles. Sure they use less fuel but I believe they are dirtier.
  5. Cazzo is correct, they are not as clean as hybrids in terms of pollutant levels given off.
  6. Are those tests using pre-catalytic converters/O2 sensors? or were they using carbies?

    Genuine question. I would have thought a new FI motorcycle fitted with O2 sensor and a catalytic converter would produce some what cleaner air?
  7. I think it was done with a proper wide band lamba sniffer and other fancy gear up it's date.
  8. motorcycles are innefecient engine desighns....
    were talking about the fuel consumption of a small 2l hatchback... for lesss around a quarter of the capacity.

    they are desighned for power not fuel economy.
    and even more so when i put this to you...
    how many bikes keep the standard intake/exhaust.... as opposed to 99% of cars.
    while we may talk about our bikes being more appropriate for congestion etc..
    fact is emissions is just a dream... unless your talking about boring small single capacity 110 - 150cc commuter bikes...
  9. You have to talk about all bikes. One of those commuter bikes is still more efficient than a hybrid.
  10. I'm not convinced catalytic converters are that great for the environment.. Sure, they reduce the evil CO2 levels but they instead produce a hell of a lot more nitrogen oxides due to the higher temperature lean burns and the hot cat, which in my opinion, are far worse for the environment and for any humans who have to inhale any of the fumes (i.e. us).
  11. #11 Salty, Jun 6, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 24, 2015
    I thought the cat reduced nitrogen oxide, carbon monoxide and fuel in to carbon dioxide, nitrogen and water. Quite the opposite of creating oxides of nitrogen.


  12. That's not correct at all. It's the other way round, its more CO2 and less toxins.

    From wikipedia

    A catalytic converter (colloquially, "cat" or "catcon") is an exhaust emission control device which converts toxic chemicals in the exhaust of an internal combustion engine into less toxic substances. Inside a catalytic converter, a catalyst stimulates a chemical reaction in which toxic byproducts of combustion are converted to less toxic substances by way of catalysed chemical reactions. The specific reactions vary with the type of catalyst installed. Most present-day vehicles that run on gasoline are fitted with a "three way" converter, so named because it converts the three main pollutants in automobile exhaust: an oxidizing reaction converts carbon monoxide (CO) and unburned hydrocarbons (HC), and a reduction reaction converts oxides of nitrogen (NOx) to produce carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen (N2), and water (H2O).[1]
  13. It wasn't that crappy Top Gear test was it?

    Old bike vs new car.
    No traffic congestion with no filtering so they both spent the same time on the road, instead of working out emissions per km travelled.

    If it was another test that was done under real world conditions with same year vehicles, I would be keen to see the test.
  14. No it isn't when it comes to pollutants which is why hybrids are given the discount.
  15. Which 'pollutants' are included in that, and which (if any) excluded?
  16. the joke is that hybrids are only 'better' on paper because they are assessed on the cycle where the electic motor runs for a large proportion of the time. By any real world measure a hybrid is more polluting than a conventional internal combustion engine - expecially if you take the whole life costs (both financial and environmental)

    gotta hand it to toyota though - they've sold it lock stock and barrel to the greenies

    anyone remember the episode of south park where they got overwhelmed by the clouds of smug coming off the pious owners?
    • Like Like x 2
  17. the beehives increase weight thus fuel consumption. which is better?co2, for cloud, or beehives?
  18. what was to reduce or use it more efficiently is changed by changing the output of the color? sure...
  19. Do you want to source this?
  20. Heres an example Prius does more environmental damage than a hummer

    To maintain a clear conscience, I'd have to point out that that article assumes a hummer will last 300,000miles (i don't believe anything by GM-Daewoo can last that long) and research was conducted by a marketing firm.

    Based on the fact that it does disclose sources however, I'd accept that article as more reliable than anything that comes out of MUARC.