4 ms·

It takes a month to put together a software patch to limit the amount of regens a diesel engine has to do, or how much DEF it sprays into the exhaust. Suddenly

It takes a month to put together a software patch to limit the amount of regens a diesel engine has to do, or how much DEF it sprays into the exhaust. Suddenly the big three could have diesel trucks that perform 10% better on fuel economy because California isn't forcing EGR crap down their throats.

kstrauser 7y ago
By EGR, you mean the technology that keeps California's air breathable. Yeah, it's more expensive to do business here, because we want to be able to, you know, not die from air pollution.
- maerF0x0 7y ago
  Texas is 2nd largest population and doesnt have CARB. I'd guess wildfire emissions(smoke) are several orders of magnitude more dangerous than vehicles.
  - kstrauser 7y ago
    You mean Texas, that relatively flat, famously windy state where pollution can easily blow away, and yet still has some of the most polluted cities (https://www.click2houston.com/health/report-ranks-houston-among-most-polluted-us-cities https://www.click2houston.com/health/report-ranks-houston-am...)? It sounds like they could stand to have a CARB of their own. > I'd guess wildfire emissions(smoke) are several orders of magnitude more dangerous than vehicles. I can't take this seriously.
- masonic 7y ago
  Very little of "cleaner air" effect stens from the presence of EGR.
nradov 7y ago
Diesel particulate emissions are a proven killer with a direct, immediate risk to human health. Even low-sulfur fuel and DEF doesn't really solve the problem. I would prefer to see CARB phase in a gradual ban on almost all diesel engines. We can meet transportation needs (including cargo) with a mix of gasoline, natural gas, and battery electric vehicles. (There are a few limited cases such as medium sized marine engines where diesel is the only safe and practical option.)
SECProto 7y ago
> Suddenly the big three could have diesel trucks that perform 10% better on fuel economy because California isn't forcing EGR crap down their throats. I can't find any definitive evidence that exhaust gas recirculation reduces fuel economy, though a sourced statement on wikipedia says there was a 3% drop in fuel economy when EGR was first introduced. Quora[1] also doesn't mention anything about EGR lowering fuel economy. Regardless, environmental regulations are done for a reason. Reducing NOx is a very good thing. [1] https://www.quora.com/Does-the-exhaust-gas-recirculation-system-increase-or-decrease-fuel-economy https://www.quora.com/Does-the-exhaust-gas-recirculation-sys...

kstrauser 7y ago

By EGR, you mean the technology that keeps California's air breathable. Yeah, it's more expensive to do business here, because we want to be able to, you know, not die from air pollution.

maerF0x0 7y ago
Texas is 2nd largest population and doesnt have CARB. I'd guess wildfire emissions(smoke) are several orders of magnitude more dangerous than vehicles.
- kstrauser 7y ago
  You mean Texas, that relatively flat, famously windy state where pollution can easily blow away, and yet still has some of the most polluted cities (https://www.click2houston.com/health/report-ranks-houston-among-most-polluted-us-cities https://www.click2houston.com/health/report-ranks-houston-am...)? It sounds like they could stand to have a CARB of their own. > I'd guess wildfire emissions(smoke) are several orders of magnitude more dangerous than vehicles. I can't take this seriously.
masonic 7y ago
Very little of "cleaner air" effect stens from the presence of EGR.

nradov 7y ago

Diesel particulate emissions are a proven killer with a direct, immediate risk to human health. Even low-sulfur fuel and DEF doesn't really solve the problem. I would prefer to see CARB phase in a gradual ban on almost all diesel engines. We can meet transportation needs (including cargo) with a mix of gasoline, natural gas, and battery electric vehicles. (There are a few limited cases such as medium sized marine engines where diesel is the only safe and practical option.)

SECProto 7y ago

> Suddenly the big three could have diesel trucks that perform 10% better on fuel economy because California isn't forcing EGR crap down their throats. I can't find any definitive evidence that exhaust gas recirculation reduces fuel economy, though a sourced statement on wikipedia says there was a 3% drop in fuel economy when EGR was first introduced. Quora[1] also doesn't mention anything about EGR lowering fuel economy. Regardless, environmental regulations are done for a reason. Reducing NOx is a very good thing. [1] https://www.quora.com/Does-the-exhaust-gas-recirculation-system-increase-or-decrease-fuel-economy https://www.quora.com/Does-the-exhaust-gas-recirculation-sys...