5 ms·

The EPA keeps lowering emissions requirements for future years based on speculation rather than existing tehcnology. IMO it was inevitable for this to happen. Y

The EPA keeps lowering emissions requirements for future years based on speculation rather than existing tehcnology. IMO it was inevitable for this to happen. You simply can't create a deisel clean enough to meet regulations. While emissions regulations have a noble goal we would be far better off regulating farm equipment, stationary generators, and boats at this point. A single farm tractor or lawn mower pollutes as much as hundreds of cars. A container or cruise ship, many thousands of cars. It reminds me of California approach to water regulations. Squeeze the populace when industry is using 90% of the water.

carlmr 7y ago
It's kind of like optimizing software without measuring a performance profile. We're optimizing cars for very little gain. While a lot of low hanging fruit isn't measured and could give us much larger gains. We're not looking at the hot-path.
- nullwasamistake 7y ago
  I think it's because, in the end, with cars you can pass the costs directly to consumers. With industrial and commercial engines you tax business. In our day they have greater political power than voting populace. Same deal with California and water. Easier to force residents to conserve, the businesses using 90% of the water are polically protected
Arbalest 7y ago
Worth keeping in mind that "emissions" targeted are actually somewhat localised. The initiatives are about reducing NOx emissions within the bounds of suburban areas, where it tends to become photochemical smog[0]. Yes CO2 is an issue, but a different issue, and frustratingly, thermal efficiency is correlated with NOx emissions[1], which is why we have these scandals coming up in the first place. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smog#Photochemical_smog https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smog#Photochemical_smog [1]https://www.alentecinc.com/papers/NOx/The%20formation%20of%20NOx_files/The%20formation%20of%20NOx.htm https://www.alentecinc.com/papers/NOx/The%20formation%20of%2... Edit: Worth clarifying that thermal efficiency and combustion temperature are also correlated, which is not plainly stated in [1]

carlmr 7y ago

It's kind of like optimizing software without measuring a performance profile. We're optimizing cars for very little gain. While a lot of low hanging fruit isn't measured and could give us much larger gains. We're not looking at the hot-path.

nullwasamistake 7y ago
I think it's because, in the end, with cars you can pass the costs directly to consumers. With industrial and commercial engines you tax business. In our day they have greater political power than voting populace. Same deal with California and water. Easier to force residents to conserve, the businesses using 90% of the water are polically protected

Arbalest 7y ago

Worth keeping in mind that "emissions" targeted are actually somewhat localised. The initiatives are about reducing NOx emissions within the bounds of suburban areas, where it tends to become photochemical smog[0]. Yes CO2 is an issue, but a different issue, and frustratingly, thermal efficiency is correlated with NOx emissions[1], which is why we have these scandals coming up in the first place. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smog#Photochemical_smog https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smog#Photochemical_smog [1]https://www.alentecinc.com/papers/NOx/The%20formation%20of%20NOx_files/The%20formation%20of%20NOx.htm https://www.alentecinc.com/papers/NOx/The%20formation%20of%2... Edit: Worth clarifying that thermal efficiency and combustion temperature are also correlated, which is not plainly stated in [1]