Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help

Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > Mercedes-Benz Tech Information and Support > Diesel Discussion

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-21-2002, 10:29 AM
the_good_fellow's Avatar
07 E320 Bluetec 7 pistons
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 170

got this article in local newspaper. Have anyone heard of this PuriNOx
What modification/cost would be....what do you think?

New fleet fuel eyed by officials
Montgomery County seeking to avoid TNRCC-mandated pollution regulations
Copyright 2002 Houston Chronicle

CONROE -- Montgomery County commissioners looked at a new diesel fuel technology Monday that they said could help the county avoid pollution regulations they believe are unfairly harsh.

Montgomery is one of eight counties in the Houston area under state mandate to reduce ozone pollution to meet Environmental Protection Agency clean-air requirements by 2007.

Officials hope that if government and private fleets in the county can be persuaded to use PuriNOx, a milky white combination of diesel fuel and water, the county can be exempted from one of the most onerous of the regulations -- tailpipe emissions testing.

In an unsuccessful appeal earlier this year to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, County Attorney David Walker argued that emissions testing would cost Montgomery County residents $5.05 million annually and lead to "lines of automobiles waiting to be tested that might rival the gasoline shortage lines experienced in the late 1970s."

Representatives from Lubrizol Corp., makers of PuriNOx, and its distributor, JAM Distributing Co., told commissioners and transportation directors from the county's six school districts that PuriNOx could be used without modifying engines.

A chemical surrounds water droplets in a shell, allowing the diesel to burn cooler with less nitrogen oxide -- a main component of ozone -- and less particulate pollution, said Andre Serrano, worldwide commercial manager for Lubrizol.

The company says the fuel, which is 20 percent water, reduces nitrogen oxides up to 30 percent and particulates up to 50 percent. The TNRCC calculates a minimum reduction in nitrogen oxides of 19 percent and a 54 percent reduction in particulates, Serrano said.

JAM Distributing saleswoman Kim Olive said PuriNOx costs about 15 cents more per gallon than diesel, but the additional cost can be offset with federal subsidies.

Walker said he asked commissioners to hear the presentation after being told by the TNRCC that the county could avoid air-quality rules by coming up with alternatives to the plan.

He said the county would have to persuade enough school districts and private fleets to switch to PuriNOx to reduce 3.7 tons of pollutants per day. He said he didn't know how many vehicles would need to switch to achieve the reduction, but said it would require a large participation by privately owned diesel fleets.

County Judge Alan B. Sadler said the county and school districts would probably switch to PuriNOx if they could be assured the TNRCC would drop the emissions testing requirement.

"The question really ought to be, `Will the TNRCC accept that as an alternative?' " Sadler said.

Commissioner Ed Chance said he was impressed by Monday's presentation but needed more information before making a decision.

"I think it's a good idea," Chance said. "I think the county has to take the lead in it because we are the lead government agency with the TNRCC."

Mike Patterson, transportation director for the Conroe school district, the largest district in the county, said more than 60 of the district's 380 school buses could not use PuriNOx without an expensive conversion.

"I know our district would like to do things to help the county, but at what expense?" Patterson said.

He also worried federal subsidies could dry up, leaving the district to absorb the extra 15 cent per gallon cost.


09 GL320 Bluetec 65K+
07 E320 Bluetec 43k+
05 Nissan Frontier NISMO 4X4 72K+

07 Kawasaki Vulcan 900 5k+ gone
87 300SDL 158k+ gone
91 300D 113k+ gone
83 300SD 220K+ gone
89 300E sold
87 190E sold
83 380SEL sold
Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2002, 11:00 AM
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antone
Posts: 408
I came across the web site for the company making PuriNOx a while back when searching for info on another subject. As I recall (I was reading lots of info on that search) PuriNOx is only sold to fleet operations at this time and not to the public. It seemed there were no modifications needed to run PuriNOx, as the person quoted in your article stated. I also recall that performance was similar to or a bit better than regular diesel fuel. Do a search for PuriNOx and you'll find their web site and probably other info about this fuel from other sources.

America: Land of the Free!

1977 300D: 300,000+ miles

American Honda: Factory Trained Technician & Honor Grad.
Shop Foreman;
Technical Advisor to Am. Honda;
Supervisor of Maintenance largest tree care co. in US for offices in Tex.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2002, 02:22 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 325
It was my understanding that diesel powered vehicles are exempt from tailpipe emission testing.

'82 240D
'87 300SDL
Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2002, 04:49 PM
The Warden's Avatar
Certified diesel nut
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Pacifica (SF Bay Area), CA
Posts: 2,946

I think it depends on where you are.

California smogs g@$$ers that were built after 1973 every 2 years. They don't do diesels at all...unless they're starting to do new diesels. I've never been asked for anything for either of my '84's, other than $$ (for a commercial-plate 3/4 ton truck, a lot of $$ ).

I'v eheard that some states are starting to do opacity tests on diesels...basically shining a light through the exhaust and measureing how much light passes through the fumes. If not enough light goes through, you're in trouble...

Just another symptom of the general dieselphobia so obvious to most of America...too bad really; diesels are cleaner overall than g@$$ers...
2001 VW Jetta TDI, 5 speed, daily driver
1991 Ford F-350, work in progress
1984 Ford F-250 4x4, 6.9l turbo diesel, 5 speed manual
Previous oilburners: 1980 IH Scout, 1984 E-350, 1985 M-B 300D, 1979 M-B 300SD, 1983 M-B 300D
Spark-free since 1999
Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2002, 08:50 PM
Posts: n/a
I saw a news report on that stuff about 3 years ago. I believe that they called it the new fuel. Back then, the inventor was going through problems fighting the big oil companies trying to get his product out into the public. The stuff works. I've seen it work in big rigs and I'm sure it will work in cars too.

Reply With Quote


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 On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:39 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2018 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page