New EPA diesel restrictions contribute to global warming?

Question

I have heard that the new EPA limits on particulate emmision standards on over-the-road diesels have forced manufacturers to equip new diesel vehicles with equipment that increase fuel consumption by x2. Can anyone site proof of this, or is this a rumor? Key phrase: site proof. Include sources please.

Answer 1

hi

Answer 2

Older vehicles have problems--

http://www.helium.com/items/158390-infor...

2007 and newer diesels are engineered for the new fuel and can be damaged if it is not used.

It costs 4-5 cents per gallon MORE to manufacturer according to the EPA. Notice the current prices for diesel are MUCH higher than for gasoline. Guess they underestimated the costs involved with the new fuel.

Diesel used to be cheaper than regular gas.

Answer 3

100% increase?  That's absurd on it's face.

Here's what Caterpillar says:

"Caterpillar announced it will use its ACERT technology as “the foundation” to comply with the 2007 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) emission regulations for diesel engines.

We expect our heavy-duty engines with ACERT technology for 2007 will maintain the same fuel economy as today's engines, and our mid-range products will improve by approximately 4%," Gauger said."

http://fleetowner.com/news/cat_acert_epa...

Detroit Diesel:

"When you hit the road with a Detroit Diesel DD15, you're driving the first engine designed with integrated EPA 2007 technologies, and that is 2010-ready. And best of all, it meets EPA 2007 without the traditional trade-offs between lower emissions and worse fuel economy and power."

http://www.detroitdiesel.com/emissions/e...

GE:

"As with any new technology there remain a number of

unanswered questions. However, early indications from several fleets report the vehicles with 2007 engines have run as well, if not better, than previous engines in terms of performance, fuel consumption, reliability and maintenance."

http://www.worktruckonline.com/Channel/F...

Truckers are spreading all sorts of wild tales about this, because it WILL make trucks (slightly) more expensive.  But 100% increase in fuel consumption is utter nonsense.

Answer 4

No I don't know about the trucks,but they have already modified your car that  reduced the mileage under the pretense of reducing pollution.

Answer 5

Having worked for a distributor of off road diesel engines, there is some truth to that.  Plus I personally know truck drivers that have first hand experience, the engines cost more money and they are not has fuel efficient.  Bob is great a quoting sources however I doubt that he ever had  to work to earn a living. If he did he would not be caviler towards the working man.  The best evidence is to talk to the drivers, they know what fuel cost  and they know what that truck gets for mileage.

Answer 6

I know the new Ford Powerstroke diesels are getting terrrible fuel economy. I have a friend who owns one and it is only getting 12-15mpg.  His older Powerstroke would get around 18mpg.  I am hearing horror stories about the fuel economy. All of that stuff the EPA has caused everyone to add has done nothing but cost more money all the way around.  The new Volkswagens that are coming out on the other hand are going to get better fuel economy due to the injection system. The United States is more strict than Europe on Diesels.  Also I am not convince entirely that Global Warming exists. I think it is a scam for people like Al Gore and others to make money on creating Carbon Taxes and trading Carbon credits.

Answer 7

No, unfortunately black soot may contribute almost as much to the global problem as CO2, so we need to solve both problems at once:

Black carbon pollution emerges as major player in global warming - PhysOrg

http://www.physorg.com/news125500721.htm...

"Black carbon, a form of particulate air pollution most often produced from biomass burning, cooking with solid fuels and diesel exhaust, has a warming effect in the atmosphere three to four times greater than prevailing estimates, according to scientists in an upcoming review article in the journal Nature Geoscience."

"Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego atmospheric scientist V. Ramanathan and University of Iowa chemical engineer Greg Carmichael, said that soot and other forms of black carbon could have as much as 60 percent of the current global warming effect of carbon dioxide, more than that of any greenhouse gas besides CO2."

If soot can be reduced faster and more cheaply than CO2, EPA legislation to reduce particulate matter may be more effective in the short run than gas economy and other CO2-centric approaches.

Of course a 2X decrease in mileage would wipe out any benefit from a soot reduction, but I seriously doubt that this EPA would propose a 2X increase in transportation costs in this economy, so I suspect the rumor is untrue.

Answer 8

Given man has no effect on natural, global cycles:  The restrictions will have no effect on global warming, reducing or contributing.