EPA Going a Little Too Far? - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

retmil46 · #1 09-12-2010, 12:31 PM

http://statter911.com/2010/04/18/the-regeneration-gap-a-fire-chief-wrestles-with-front-line-apparatus-time-outs-due-to-epa-diesel-emission-regulations/

#2 09-12-2010, 12:36 PM

Sounds like this FD needs to figure out how to schedule PM on their equipment.

Rahulio1989300E · #3 09-12-2010, 12:40 PM

Well, in this case, I think so... these DPF systems should not get in the way of emergency services at the very least.

I am more worried about CAFE at the moment. They seem hellbent on forcing us all into crappy, boring econoboxes...

MTUpower · #4 09-12-2010, 12:44 PM

Government is a entity, and like all entities it's ultimate goal is survival and growth. The EPA does not care if it regulates private peoples world or FD's world.

retmil46 · #5 09-12-2010, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craig

Sounds like this FD needs to figure out how to schedule PM on their equipment.

May be some truth to that. But from reading thru the comments as well, it seems that not all manufacturers are putting manual override switches, or providing the appropriate software, to help the FD/EMS units prevent this from keeping them from answering calls as needed.

And in the case of some localities, there may not be any reserve equipment available in these days of tight budgets, or the response call load may be such that it's well nigh impossible to schedule the required down time for regen. Along the "tight budget" line, it certainly doesn't help local budgets having to buy the extra diesel fuel when these beasts have to run for a half-hour or better just to burn the soot out of the particulate filter.

And at least with the Class 8 post-2007 rigs we built at Freightliner, there's going to come a point where after so many cancelled cycles, the ECM is going to force you to keep the truck idle at the side of the road until it does complete a full regen cycle.

I'd say the gent's overall argument does have some merit - just as it would be sheer lunacy to force an M-1 tank crew in a combat zone to have to worry about a requirement such as this, the FD/EMS units already have more than enough on their plates trying to respond to calls and save lives, not to mention often having to deal with situations that threaten their own lives, than to also have to deal with such bureaucratic nonsense.

Hatterasguy · #6 09-12-2010, 01:23 PM

This is a perfect example of the law of diminishing returns. Modern diesels are clean enough, they don't need this silly filters.

If I bought a new diesel MB I would figure out a hack to remove all this crap. I'm sure in a few years as they get older it will be pretty common.

#7 09-12-2010, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by retmil46

May be some truth to that. But from reading thru the comments as well, it seems that not all manufacturers are putting manual override switches, or providing the appropriate software, to help the FD/EMS units prevent this from keeping them from answering calls as needed.

And in the case of some localities, there may not be any reserve equipment available in these days of tight budgets, or the response call load may be such that it's well nigh impossible to schedule the required down time for regen. Along the "tight budget" line, it certainly doesn't help local budgets having to buy the extra diesel fuel when these beasts have to run for a half-hour or better just to burn the soot out of the particulate filter.

And at least with the Class 8 post-2007 rigs we built at Freightliner, there's going to come a point where after so many cancelled cycles, the ECM is going to force you to keep the truck idle at the side of the road until it does complete a full regen cycle.

I'd say the gent's overall argument does have some merit - just as it would be sheer lunacy to force an M-1 tank crew in a combat zone to have to worry about a requirement such as this, the FD/EMS units already have more than enough on their plates trying to respond to calls and save lives, not to mention often having to deal with situations that threaten their own lives, than to also have to deal with such bureaucratic nonsense.

I agree that the FDs need to specify equipment with the appropriate software so they can schedule maintenance before it interferes with emergency functions and/or bypass this function during an actual emergency. I would be concerned that such a system could be abused, so someone's job should depend on maintaining it correctly. Regarding "tight budgets," life's tough in the big city; they might need to buy extra equipment to meet this requirement, just like anyone else who depends on heavy equipment.

I don't really know/care about the limitations of military applications, they can go get whatever exceptions they need for their vehicles.

Kuan · #8 09-12-2010, 03:32 PM

I'd like to see a building regenerate after it burns down.

cmac2012 · #9 09-12-2010, 04:22 PM

Does seem whack all right. What struck me is business of warning light only. There ought to be a way to put on a gauge, so they can anticipate the need ahead of time. Or at the very least, have an over-ride for emergency vehicles that is good for a day or two.

And why they couldn't just swap in a new filter and send the old ones to some station to be dealt with is beyond me. One hopes the EPA will quickly realize that this is a needless detriment to their public image.

I've not had experience with this setup. The filter can regenerate itself?

rscurtis · #10 09-12-2010, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

This is a perfect example of the law of diminishing returns. Modern diesels are clean enough, they don't need this silly filters.

If I bought a new diesel MB I would figure out a hack to remove all this crap. I'm sure in a few years as they get older it will be pretty common.

You are absolutely correct, my 2003 Dodge is 90% clean with no emission controls at all, and has excellent FE to boot. The oil stays clean almost indefinitely, and after a tank of fuel (which can last 800 miles), the exhaust stain on the bumper is a faint bluish-gold haze. Look at the Diesel Technology Forum's emission chart, and you'll see how much effort has been expended for very little improvement.

Hatterasguy · #11 09-12-2010, 08:34 PM

Yep, right now we need to focus more on fuel economy than emissions. 90% clean is good enough, the extra 10% costs to much and kills economy.

TimFreeh · #12 09-12-2010, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

90% clean is good enough, the extra 10% costs to much and kills economy.

I agree with the spirit of your post but your numbers are a bit off, its much worse than you state.

I don't think most people realize how clean today's modern cars are compared to vehicles of even 10-15 years ago, compared to vehicles of the 1960's the reductions in emissions are absolutely astounding.

Now with that as a backdrop I've got to say I'm a huge believer in getting the government out of things but in this case I'll admit that government regulations were a prime mover in creating technologies that have had a very beneficial effect on our environment. Well done EPA.

But here is the problem...... We've now reduced emission well over 99% from the days of the 1960's, rational people would say that at some point (and on Diesel technology I'd say we are there) that cost/benefit curve starts to reach a point where the rational person would say "Maybe enough, at least for awhile"

But of course at the EPA that would mean the bureaucracy would have nothing to do - so they mindlessly proceed to try to get the next 1/100th of a percent of a reduction.

The EPA doesn't give a damn about how much it costs or what the users have to do to live with the consequences of their emission new regulations. I'm actually surprised the military was able to get a waiver.

Angel · #13 09-12-2010, 10:33 PM

I work at a coal fired power plant (lolz !)

I recently attended a briefing given by the company's legal department - since I am in Engineering, they EPA routinely comes in (metaphorically, they arent knocking on the front door) and asks for *all* the data from *every* capital project in the last 10 years to make sure that nothing we did puts us afoul of any CAA requirements (google "BACT") - the law says that every time you do a 'major upgrade' to a power plant, you have to install the "Best Available control technology" for emissions.
talk about weasel words- there is a lot of interpretation here.
in this brief by the company lawyer, she quoted a judge in Alabama(?) who threw out an Alabama EPA suit (against a power plant) calling it "regulating for sport"

(these cases dont always get thrown out, but she painted the picture of a legal landscape that varies greatly from state to state, even though to basic language is the same...) She went so far as to advise us "do not use the words "will cause an outage if not repaired" in an email [company record] because if you prevent an outage, it could be interpreted as prolonging the life of the plant, and/or causing the plant to run more than it was designed. which would increase emissions... (her version of the EPA's words - not mine).

My point is, that in other cases, *it appears that* the EPA as a whole does not operate like other inspection/oversight agencies.

I am not sure of this (I'm relatively new there), nor can I say that the EPA has no right to this information (utilities are normally subject to this kind of regulation and have many other requirements we must meet (30-day rolling averages, opacity, NOx, SOx...)
I guess the analogy would be if OSHA came in and asked for the video feeds from all the camera's set up on site, and then screened them for violations and fined/sued you appropriately. Is this wrong ? not really- a violation was committed. Is it more extreme than any other agency I can name ? yes.
I cannot speak for my company, or any other electric utility (of any size) but this does seem a bit oppressive.

"regulation for sport"

-John

Txjake · #14 09-13-2010, 12:38 AM

the EPA has been out of control for years. they recently shelved plans to ban lead bullets. that is just a for instance. they are hard core greenies who don't give a s#$t about Joe everyman's wishes

rscurtis · #15 09-13-2010, 09:41 AM

You can also thank them for the demise of heavy manufacturing in this country (smokestack industries). I wonder how much the unemployed Ohio steel worker or Detroit auto worker is enjoying all the clean air and water as he/she sits on the front porch of their now worthless house.