Excellent.
They give many figures in
g / km, according to specific cycles. This is what interests me (and not in relation to hypothetical powers that are only partially used).
I recommend reading. At first, it's complicated, especially long, but towards the end, it becomes clear!
I may sum up another day. But already, the study confirms:
1) the spectacular progress of 2T
injection, which actually, even in hydrocarbon emissions, exceed 4T (
2) suspiciously, this places the 2 wheels (2T injection or 4T) roughly at the same level of pollution as the best cars (the "top ten") question CO, HC + NOx
3) for CO², there is no photo, this follows consumption, so a clear advantage for two wheels ...
A negative point: it dates! Since new standards have come into application, lambda sensors are becoming widespread, 3-way catalytic converters, etc ... I would like to know where we are!
For me,
1) I act what I doubted: that a 2T does not pollute more than a 4T (at the time of the study, the 2T with direct injection polluted even a little less - because 4T with fuel I suppose; remains to be seen l technological evolution since)
2) the project of driving on 2 wheels rather than in the car when you are alone remains a means of contributing to significantly reducing overhaul (
especially CO² emissions - for other pollutants, it is roughly kifkif; it's surprising, but it's like that) and its expenses (roughly a consumption cut in half, so the fuel budget by the same amount). I'm waiting for Santa Claus!
