The Evolution of Emissions Regulations
Harmful emissions from internal combustion engines include a wide range of pollutants: Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), Hydrocarbons (HC), Carbon Dioxide (CO₂), Carbon Monoxide (CO), Sulphur Dioxide (SO₂), Particulates (PM₁₀), and Lead (Pb). In the United States, motor vehicles account for over half of these pollutants. Although motorcycles and offroad vehicles are small contributors to the total, their output per unit is more than three times as much as cars, thus we have been "the bad guys" for some time. Two-strokes, with a basic design which causes as much as 30% of its fuel to bypass combustion, are especially bad. A carbureted personal watercraft engine produced in 1 day as much pollutant as a new car does in its lifetime), according to some have come.

U.S. lawmakers took control of internal combustion technology as early as 1955, when the first federal legislation was passed addressing automobile emissions. Revised in 1960, the Clean Air Act produced the first crankcase vapor control systems, and with its expansion in 1965, established the California Air Resources Board (CARB). More changes came during 1966 and 1967, and in 1969 then-President Nixon wrote the law which ultimately led to the 1970 creation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Immediately thereafter, Congress assumed the authority to coerce manufacturers to research new technology and establish national air quality standards, including a 95% reduction in emissions from new autos by 1975. The Clean Air Act’s 1977 amendment, effective on the following January 1, added tampering consequences such as $10,000 fines, and for the first time put motorcycles on an escalating standards timetable.

The stringency of 1980-1982’s regulations escalated faster than most manufacturers, with designs and tooling committed 2-4 years in advance, could accommodate, and their resulting stop-gap efforts created the period’'s legacy of some of the worst carbureting engines on the planet. Electronic ignition, stuffy cams and carbs and earnest engineering eventually triumphed, until 1984-1985'’s even stricter standards closed the doors of at least one manufacturer and closed the book on two-stroke vehicles over 100cc. 1990 brought reformulated fuels, 1995-1998 fuel injection and other engine management systems and California’s zero-emissions manifesto.

In 1999 the Feds established an emissions credit system. Under this plan, manufacturers were permitted to post a corporate average of their product’s' emissions levels each year. The difference between that average and the standard was then applied as a credit or deficit. Credits could be tendered, saved, traded with or sold to other manufacturers, or applied toward subsequent model years.

The Manufacturer'’s Point of View
The various levels of emissions regulations are confusing. Most states require emissions tests for vehicle registration, the regulation vehicle owners are most familiar with. But, even before the vehicle is sold, it must comply with other, separate emissions standards far more rigorous, imposed on the manufacturer by the federal government. These standards include not only exhaust emissions, but also crankcase emissions, evaporative emissions and (mechanical, intake and exhaust) noise levels. There are two types of federal standards: 49-state and California, due to the California Air Resource Board'’s autonomy from federal oversight (CARB’s standards often supersede--and occasionally override--the fed’s, and invariably anticipate future federal standards).

For federal exhaust emissions compliance, each vehicle model is "certified," a process which includes operating a representative vehicle on a loaded roller and driving within a predetermined rpm and wheel speed unique for that vehicle, while the emissions are routed into a room-sized, sealed plastic bag. Its contents are then measured and divided by the kilometers that the vehicle "traveled" on the roller. The rpm and shift points are determined jointly with the government, the driving pattern is filed as part of the testing procedure-to be used by the state test facilities, and the manufacturer "certifies"--that is, attests--that all of the units corresponding to that particular engine configuration also comply, though they aren’t independently tested. Certification is an expensive procedure, and although smaller manufacturers get a break, it can cost as much as $100,000 per engine type, which cost is passed on to the consumer as part of the price of the vehicle. Also, because it involves a certain amount of unsubstantiated testimony on the part of the manufacturer, the feds occasionally randomly test new vehicles and such testing has resulted in penalties being assessed, on top of the price of the certification itself. Due to the cost, hassle and political danger inherent in vehicle certification, manufacturers tend to be very reluctant--afraid, really--to discuss (and by implication, condone) any deviations from factory specification.