The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
What I meant was that, would Vossloh be incapable to produce the proper extra equipment to fit on the EMD engine (new radiators, engine motor cooling, stricter temperature control, exhaust filters), it could go shopping for suppliers.
However, let's at last have a look at European and US emissions standards in comparison. The Euro 4000 complies with EU Stage IIIA (2004/26/EC). For locomotive diesels above 2000kW, that standard is HC: 0.4 g/kWh, CO: 3.5 g/kWh, NOx: 7.4 g/kWh, PM: 0.2 g/kWh. Converted to the units of the US standard, that's HC: 0.3 g/bhp-hour, CO: 2.6 g/bhp-hour, NOx: 5.5 g/bhp-hour, PM: 0.15 g/bhp-hour.
EPA Tier 2 for line-haul locos is HC: 0.3 g/bhp-hour, CO: 1.5 g/bhp-hour, NOx: 5.5 g/bhp-hour, PM: 0.2 g/bhp-hour. The near-identity is not by accident (from the first link above):
Regulatory authorities in the EU, USA, and Japan have been under pressure from engine and equipment manufacturers to harmonize worldwide emission standards, in order to streamline engine development and emission type approval/certification for different markets. Stage I/II limits were in part harmonized with US regulations. Stage III/IV limits are harmonized with the US Tier 3/4 standards.
(However, for switchers, interestingly, the US standard is less strict while the EU one is more strict than for line-haul - must be due to the many downtown freight yards and passenger station service here.)
If my short read-up was correct, the primary emission effect of air intake temperature reduction/regulation is in NOx emissions, with the second effect being a general one in improved fuel efficiency. Can you tell me what part of the locomotive machinery impacts the one emission in which the US standard is (much) stronger, CO?
Finally, I found this Vossloh presentation on development to meet new emissions standards (unfortunately a technologically shallow 'managerial' one), which confirms something I read earlier in a non-authoritative source: that the NJT PL42AC is homologated for EPA Tier 1, but designed for Tier 2 (p13).
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by Migeru - Dec 7 114 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 10 38 comments
by Oui - Dec 12 29 comments
by Oui - Dec 8 32 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 4 25 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 2 39 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Nov 27 74 comments
by Oui - Dec 1 5 comments
by Oui - Dec 1229 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 1038 comments
by Oui - Dec 832 comments
by Migeru - Dec 7114 comments
by Oui - Dec 7
by Oui - Dec 42 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 425 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 239 comments
by Oui - Dec 15 comments
by gmoke - Nov 283 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Nov 2774 comments
by fjallstrom - Nov 269 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Nov 2619 comments
by Oui - Nov 267 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Nov 2555 comments
by Oui - Nov 222 comments
by Oui - Nov 21
by Migeru - Nov 1744 comments
by Oui - Nov 17
by Oui - Nov 152 comments