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 Frank Schnittger - Jul 19 34 comments
by Bernard - Jul 16 35 comments
by Oui - Jul 14 6 comments
by Oui - Jul 21 2 comments
by Oui - Jul 19 27 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 14 15 comments
by ARGeezer - Jul 10 19 comments
by eurogreen - Jul 8 8 comments
by gmoke - Jul 24
by Oui - Jul 2311 comments
by Oui - Jul 212 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 1934 comments
by Oui - Jul 1927 comments
by Oui - Jul 181 comment
by Bernard - Jul 1635 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 1415 comments
by Oui - Jul 146 comments
by ARGeezer - Jul 1019 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 1027 comments
by Oui - Jul 98 comments
by eurogreen - Jul 88 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 532 comments
by gmoke - Jul 439 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 252 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 26106 comments
by Oui - Jun 219 comments