p. 1


# OAR Box 1170 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



## Document

Number: 

# 54 ) ll-A- 1 Docket Number: 

# A-88-2 3

Printed 4/30/200810:49:05AM

Sheet 54 of 182P. 2 

# RADIA N /?-"- « CORPORATIO N 

# 01-/9- / 258-012-25-0 1 ; / DCN : 87-258-012-25-0 2

FEASIBILIT Y AN D COST-EFFECTIVENES S O FCONTROLLING-EMISSION S FRO M DIESE LENGINES 1 , I NRAIL . MARINE, CONSTRUCTION , FARM/ * AN D OTHE RMOBIL EOFF-HIGHWA

Y EQUIPMEN

T

Fina l Repor t

Unde r EP A Contrac t

No . 68-01-728 8

' Wor k Assignmen t

2 5 Prepare dfor : Offic e o f

Polic y Analysi s

. U.S . EPA , PM-22 1 40 1 M Stree t

S.W . Washington , D.C . 2046 0 Prepare dby : Christophe r

S . Weaver , P.E , Radia n Corporatio n 1039 5 Ol dPlacervill e Roa d Sacramento , C

A 9582 7

Februar y 198 8

1039 5 Ol d Placervill e Rd./Sacramento , Californi a 95827/(916)362-533 2P. 3

EXECUTIV

ESUMMAR

Y Diese l engine s i noff-highwa y vehicle s an dothe r off-highwa y mobil e equipment , whil e les s numerou s tha n thos e i n highwa y truck s an dbuses , ar e 

### stil l significan t

contributor s t o N O an dparticulat e inventorie s i n man y urba nareas . Thes e engine s ar e presentl y exemp t froman y emission s contro l requirements
. Consequently , the y produc e fa r more pollutio n(pe r uni t o f fue l inpu t o r wor k output ) tha n th e otherwis e simila r emission-controlle dengine s use di non-highwa y vehicles
. The recen t promulgatio no f

stringen t

N O an d particulat e emission s standard s fo r diese l engine s i non-highwa y vehicle s ha s draw nattentio nt o diese l emission s i ngeneral , an dha s raise dth e questio n o f whethe r simila r

emission s standard s migh t no t b e appropriat e fo r

off-highwa y diese l engines
.

Backgroun d Emission s fromdiese l engine s use di non-highwa y truck s an dbuse s hav e bee nregulate dwit hincreasin g stringenc y sinc e 1972 . Ne w Federa l regulation s adopte di n198 5 wil l limi t particulat e matte r

(PM ) emission s from heavy-dut y diese l engine s t o 0. 6 gram s pe r brak e horsepower-hou r (g/BHP-hr) , beginnin g i nth e 1 9 8 8 mode l year . Th e N O emission s limit , currentl y a t 10. 7 g/BHP-hr , wil l b e reduce dt o 6. 0 g/BHP-hr i n1990 , an dt o 5. 0 g/BHP-hr i n 1991 . A ne

w P M limi t of 0.2 5 g/BHP-h r

(0. 1 g/BHP-h r

fo r buses ) i s als o schedule dfo r

1991 , an daP

M limi t o f 0. 1 g/BHP-hr

fo r al l vehicle s i s schedule dfo r

1994 . Althoug hthe y ar e technicall y ver y simila r t o on-highwa y diese l engines , engine s use di noff-highwa y mobil e equipmen t suc ha s locomotives , farman dconstructio nequipment , boats , an dsimila r application s ar e presentl y exemp t froman y emission s controls
. Th e Clea nAi r

Ac t give s EP

A authorit y t o regulat e "stationar y sources " o f emissions , an d"moto r vehicles" , bu t

th e ter m "moto r vehicle " ha s traditionall y bee ninterprete dt o includ e on-highwa y vehicle s only
. Sinc e off-highwa y mobil e source s ar e neithe r "stationary " no rP. 4



### "moto r vehicles" , EP

A appear s t o hav e n o authorit y t o regulat e them
. I f regulation s wer e considere ddesirable , Congressiona l actio nwoul db e neede d t o provid e th e require dauthority
.

Scop e o f Thi s Repor t Radia nCorporatio nwas commissione db y th e U.S . EPA, Offic e of Polic y Analysi s t o stud y th e feasibilit y an dcost-effectivenes s o f emission s control s i noff-highwa y diese l vehicles
. Thi s documen t i s th e fina l repor t

o f tha t study
. Thi s repor t addresse s th e followin g majo r categorie s o f diesel-engine doff-highwa y equipment :

• Railroa d locomotives ;

• Marin e vessel s (excep t larg e oceangoing ships) ;

• Far mequipment ;

• Constructio n an

d industria l equipmen t (includin

g minin g an

d forestr

yequipment) ; an

d

• Mobil e Refrigeratio n Units . 

### Thes e categorie s includ e th e mos t significan t

classe s o f

mobil e diese l engine s excep t fo r on-highwa y vehicle s (whic har e alread y regulated ) an doceangoin g motorships
.

Result s an dConclusion s Base do nth e estimate s develope dfo r thi s report , tota l pollutan t emission s fro moff-highwa y diese l engine s ar e larg e bot hi nabsolut e term s an d i nproportio nt o thei r tota l numbers , powe r output , an dfue l consumption
. Tabl e E- 1 summarize s th e estimate dpopulation , annua l fue l consumption , an d emission s fo r

th e fiv e classe s o f off-highwa y diese l engine s considere di n thi s report . Estimate dpollutan t emission s ar e reporte dbot hi nton s pe r yea r an da s apercentag e o f th e estimate dtota l emission s o f tha t pollutan t

by al l source s nationwide
. Off-highwa y diese l engine s ar e estimate dt o produc e abou t

1 1TABL EE-1 . ESTIMATED NATIONWIDEPOPULATIONAN D EMISSION S FRO

M DIESE LENGINE S USE D I NOFF-HIGHWA

Y APPLICATION S
Tota l Fue l No . o f Horsepowe r

Consumptio n Engine s (1,000s ) (1,00 0 gal ) H C Emission s (tons/yr )

C O N

O Locomotive s Mediu mSpee d1 Percen t o f Nationwid e Marin e Vessel s Hig hSpee d Mediu mSpee d Tota l Percen t o f Nationwid e Far mEquipmen t 26,10 5

438.00 0 5.00 0 443.00 0 61,11 1

45,47 1 11,17 3 56.64 4

Hig hSpee d3.868.01 9 332.13 9 Percen t o f Nationwid e 3.409.47 6 30.99 9 308.55 8 0.13 % 0.40 %

915.67 1 917.60 7 1.833.27 8 14.65 1 54.48 2

18.81 1 85.79 6 33,46 2 140.27 8 0.14 % 0.18 %
3,021,56 1 108,60 3 274.66 9

0.46 % 0.36 % 199.61 6 244,54 2 444,15 8 2.05 %

688.87 4 3.17 % P

M

901.64 5 37.04 1 4.16 % 0.48 %

10.98 8 9.17 6 20.16 4 0.26 %

75.10 3 0.97 % 

# i i

Constructio nan dIndustria l Equipmen t Hig hSpee d1,047.80 5 124,05 6 Percen t o f Nationwid e 3.279.66 1 47.82 0 191.06 4 590.37 2 50,02 1 0.20 % 0.25 % 2.72 % 0.65 % Mobil e Refrigeratio n High Speed Percen t o f Nationwid e 203,00 0 9,51 8 494.16 7 10.92 1 44.34 7 0.05 % 0.06 % 115,52 0 4.99 1 0.53 % 0.06 % TOTAL S High Speed Mediu mSpee d Tota l Percen t o f Nationwid e 5.556,82 4

31.10 5 5.587.92 9 511.18 4

72.28 4 583,46 8 7,711,06 0 181,99 5 564.56 2 1.594.38 2 141.10 3

4.327.08 3 49.81 0 394.35 4 1.146.18 7 46.21 7 12.038.14 3 231.80 5 958.91 6 2.740.56 9 187.32 0

0.98 % 1.25 % 12.63 % 2.43 %

1 Percen t

o f nationwid e emission s inventor y fo r tha t pollutan t

base do nEPA (1986 )P. 6



### 2.7 5 millio nton s o f

N O pe r year , 187,00 0 ton s o f particulat e matter , 232,00 0 ton s o f unburne d HC

, an d959,00 0 ton s o f CO . Thes e value s ar e abou t 12. 6 percent , 2. 4 percent , on e percent , an d1.2 5 percent , respectively , o f estimate dnationwid e emission s o f thes e pollutant s fromal l source s (EPA , 1986) . Mor

e significan t

tha nth e off-highwa y diese l contributio n t o th e tota l emission s inventor y i s th e off-highwa y contributio nt o th e tota l fo r al l mobil e diese l engines , bot honan doff-highway
. Tabl e E- 2 show s thi s calculation
. A

s thi s tabl e indicates , off-highwa y diese l engine s ar e responsibl e fo r

adisproportionat e fractio no f th e total : accountin g fo r 5 6 percen t o f th e N O emissions , 5 7 percen t o f C O emissions , an d4 8 percen t o f H C emission s frommobil e diese l engines , bu t onl y 4 1 percen t

o f th e diese l fue l burned
. Thei r

contributio nt o P M emission s i s les s tha nproportionate , however , a t

36. 5 percen t

o f th e total
. Du

e t o limite ddata , th e number s i n Tabl e E- 2 ar e somewha t crude , bu t

th e conclusio ni s inescapable : off-highwa y diese l engine s ar e currentl y animportan t sourc e o f

emissions , comparabl e i n magnitud e t o on-highwa y diesels
.

Diese l engine s i non-highwa y vehicle s hav e bee nsubjec t t o emissio n regulation s fo r

man y years , an dhav e recentl y receive dagrea t dea l o f regulator y attention , whic hwil l lea dt o stil l lowe r emission s i nth e future
. Off-highwa y engines , sinc e the y do no t fal l unde r

EPA' s statutor y authority , hav e no t

bee nregulated
. Fo r thi s reason , pollutan t emission s pe r

uni t of wor k produce do r

fue l consume db y a naverag e off-highwa y diese l ar e muc h highe r tha nthos e fo r

a non-highwa y engine , an dth e potentia l fo r futur e reduction s i nemission s i s correspondingl y greater .

As describe di ngreate r detai l i nSection s Thre e throug hEigh t of thi s report , emissio ncontro l technolog y fo r on-highwa y diese l engine s i s wel l developed , an dthi s technolog y coul dreadil y b e transferre dt o mos t off

highwa y engines
. Off-highwa y diese l engine s ca nb e divide dint o high-spee d an dmedium-spee dclasses , havin g rate doperatin g speed s abov e o r belo w 130 0

i vP. 7

TABL E E-3 .

- Locomotive s N O HC 3 1 P M Marin e Vessel s Medium-Spee dEngine s N O HC 3 ' P M High-Spee dEngine s N O HC * P M Far mEquipmen t N O HC * P M Constructio nEquipmen t N O HC * P M Mobil e Refrigeratio n

. N O HC * P M EMISSION S STANDARD S ESTIMATE

D B Y EAC H CLAS S O

FOFF-HIGHWA

Y

j Int e Standar d (g/BHP-hr )

6. 0 0.5 0 0.5 0

6. 0 0.5 0 0.5 0
6. 0 0.5 0 0.5 0

8. 0 0.5 0 0.5 0

8. 0 0.5 0 0.5 0

6. 0 1. 0 0.5 0 rmediat e

Percen t Reductio n

55 % 52 % 1 %

55 % 52 % 1 % 45 % 38 % 17 %

30 % 72 % 60 %

12 % 32 % 36 %

49 % 10 % 2 % T O B EACHIEVABL E

DIESEL S Advance d Standar d (g/BHP-hr )

5 . 0 0.3 0 0.2 0

5 . 0 0.3 0 0.2 0
5 . 0 0.5 0 0.2 5

6. 0 0.2 0 0.1 5

6 . 0 0.2 0 0.1 5

5. 0 0.2 0 0.1 0 Technolog y

Percen t Reductio n

63 % 71 % 60 %

63 % 71 % 60 %
55 % 38 % 59 %

48 % 89 % 88 %

34 % 73 % 81 %

58 % 73 % 80 %
Source : Radia n estimate s

vi iP. 8

andfar

m equipmen t woul dals o requir e a slightl y highe r N O limi t thantha t



### x mandated fo ron-highwa y engines , du e t o th e limite dpotentia l fo r low-temperatur e charg e cooling
.

Th e reade r

i s warne dtha t

th e emission s limit s showni nTabl e E- 3 ar e engineerin g estimate s only , base do nver y limite ddata , an dintende donl y t o indicat e th e potentia l benefit s o f regulatio ni nthi s area . A s discusse d below , additiona l researc ht o confir mthes e estimate s woul db e essentia l befor e thes e o r

an y othe r

emissio nstandard s wer e incorporate dint o law
. Figure s E- 1 throug hE- 3 show th e potentia l effect s o f introducin g th e emission s standard s liste di nTabl e E- 3 o nN O , HC , an dP

M emission s from x eac hclas s o f

off-highwa y engines
. Th e leftmos t

ba r fo r eac hclas s represent s th e curren t

situation , wit hn o emission s control
. Th e middl e ba r represent s th e emission s tha t

woul db e experience di f al l existin g engine s me t th e "intermediate " emission s standards , an dth e rightmos t ba r th e emission s tha t woul dresul t

i f al l existin g engine s me t th e "advance dtechnology " standards
. Th e ne t reductio ni f

ever y off-highwa y engin e i nus e met th e "advance d technology " standard s woul db e abou t 1. 4 millio nton s o f N O , 162,00 0 ton s o f HC, an d146,00 0 ton s o f P M pe r year , o r

5 2 percent , 7 0 percent , an d7 8 percent , respectively , o f th e curren t

emission s o f

thes e pollutant s from off-highwa y diesels
. I nreality , o f cours e thi s woul dtak e aver y lon g tim e t o achieve , du e t o th e nee dt o tur nove r th e existin g engin e population
. The cost-effectivenes s o f controllin g off-highwa y diese l emission s t o a t leas t th e intermediate-ter mstandard s show ni s estimate dt o b e ver y favorabl e compare dt o th e cost s o f othe r availabl e emissio ncontro l measure s o f simila r

significance
. Estimate dcost-effectivenes s value s fo r anumber

o f specifi c equipmen t

type s ar e showni nTabl e E-4 . Whil e base don crud e preliminar y cos t

estimates , thes e value s ar e believe dt o somewha t conservativ e (i nth e sens e o f

over-statin g emission s contro l costs , an dthu s th e cost s pe r to no f pollutant s eliminated)
. Despit e this , th e cost-effectivenes s estimate s fo r contro l o f

N O an dH

C rang e fromafe

w hundre dt o abou t

thre e thousan d dollar s pe r

ton . vii iP. 9

U > > C O C o c n 

## 2 ° Z - H c u T 3 • H 3 C o • H 4- 1 cn z • H 2 0. 9 0. 8 0. 7 0. 6 0. 5 0. 4 0. 3 0. 2 0. 1 0 

## F T

^ ^ ^ 

# M VJ VA

^ ^

^ ^ ^ 

# 5

1 fc>



# s a P 7 

### :

^ 

# 5 1

^ 

### P 7 

### : ^
Locomotive s Marin e

Vessel s Far mConstructio n Mobil e Equipmen t Equipmen t Refrigeratio n


# \Z2 

# LX

3 ^ Uncontrolle d Int . Control s Adv . Control s Figur e E-1 . Estimate d Effec t o f Emission s Control s

o n Tota l Off-Highwa yN O Emission s x

i xP.1 0

11 0

u >* w c o T 3 o c S 3 c a 0 3 a > 3 T > O 5 H C ^ O ' • H 4-1 ffl Z 10 0 -

9 C - 8 0 - 7 0 - 6 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 ~ 3 0 - i 2 0 - 1 0 0 

# v_ ^



# 2 4 F 7 

## :

^ 

# M 3 1

0 3 VA. 

# 5 1 ^ 

### 22 3
Locomotive s Marin e

Vessel s Far mConstructio n Mobil e Equipmen t Equipmen t Refrigeratio n



## \ZJm- 

# S S ____\ Uncontrolle d Int . Control s Adv . Control s Figur e E-2 . Estimate d Effec t o f Emission s Control s

o n Tota l Off-Highwa yH C Emission sP.1 1

u >• c o c O /- v 4- 1 C O C 2 « C U C Q 3 Q J O

• d H c o ffl z 9 0 8 0 - 7 0
_ 6 0
_ 5 0
_ 4 0 - ;0 - 2 0 - 1 0 - 

# Z
_±^ 24 

# v 2 ^ 

# 5 1 ^ 

# M i ^

__^ 

# S !
3 5 ^ 

## P :

^ 

## r q



# 2 2 K^X L

Locomotive s Marin e

Vessel s Far mConstructio n Mobil e Equipmen t Equipmen t Refrigeratio n



# IZZ Uncontrolle d 

# S 3 Int . Control s 

# w& Adv . Control s Figur e E-3 . Estimate d Effec t o f Emission s Control s

o n Tota l Off-Highwa yP M Emission s

x iP.1 2

TABL EE-4 . ESTIMATE

D COST-EFFECTIVENES S O F"INTERMEDIAT

ELEVEL " EMISSION S CONTROL

S PO RDIFFEREN

T CLASSE

S O FOFF-HIGHWA

Y VEHICLES Cos t Effectivenes s ($/ton) " N O + H C P

M x Locomotive s Ne w Retrofi t $1,07 3 1.33 2 2 " 2 Marin e Vessel s Mediu mSpee d High-Spee d Propulsio n High-Spee d Generato r Far mEquipmen t Larg e 4W

D Tracto r Smal l Tracto r Combin e 67 2 88 8 61 6

84 5 2.96 0 84 8 2

" 2 ' 2

3,06 7 7,60 7 1,90 0 Constructio n Equipmen t Hydrauli c Excavato r Industria l Tracto r Concret e Pave r 74 8 1.56 7 2,04 5 8.96 9

5.32 3 3,96 1 Mobil e Refrigerato r Railca r Uni t Truck/Containe r

Uni t 22 9 1,90 9 2 " 2 Approximat e estimate s base do n engineerin g judgemen t an dlimite ddata
. Se e tex t Chapter s 4- 8 fo r

assumption s an dlimitations
. 2 P M reduction s a t

"intermediate " contro l leve l ar e estimate da s smal l o r negativ e fo r

thes e categories
. Thi s i s du e t o lo w P M emission s t o begi nwith , an dth e effect s o f

th e N O /P M tradeoff
.

x nP.1 3

Fo rcomparison , th e fue l cos t alon e fo r

reducin g th e 199 1 N O x standar d fo rheavy-dut y cn-highwa y engine s fro m5. 0 t o 4. 0 g/BHP-h r ( aste p whic hi s ofte n suggested ) i s estimate da t abou t $2,00 0 pe r

to n (assumin g a4 percen t fue l econom y penalt y an dfue l a t $0.8 0 pe r

gallo n excludin g taxes) . Th e incrementa l cost-effectivenes s o f th e 199 4 P

M standar do f

0. 1 g/BHP-h r

fo r heavy-dut y on-highwa y engine s ha s bee n estimate da t abou t seve n t o eleve n thousan ddollar s pe r to n (Weave r

an dKlausmeier , 1987a) . R e c omm e nd at i o n s 1 . Th e developmen t o f mor e accurat e an drepresentativ e dut y cycles , emissio n factors , an demissio n inventorie s fo r off-highwa y diese l vehicle s woul db e highl y desirable , a s woul d th e developmen t

o f suitabl y representativ e emission s tes t procedures
. Thes e dat aan dprocedure s woul db e valuabl e i n developin g an devaluatin g an y futur e regulation s i n thi s area . However , EP

A fundin g o f

emission s contro l experimentatio n i s no t recommende dbeyon daver y preliminar y level
. Experienc e ha s show n tha t

thi s typ e o f

wor k i s mor e appropriatel y lef t t o th e engin e manufacturers
. 2 . Wer e emission s regulation s t o b e establishe dfo r far man d constructio n equipmen t engines , carefu l consideratio n shoul db e give nt o phase-i nmechanism s i n orde r t o avoi dundu e burde no n th e industry
. A

naveraging , trading , an dbankin g approac hwit h "crawling " targe t

levels , suc ha s tha t discusse di nSectio n 6.5 , woul db e on e fairl y straightforwar dwa y t o d o this
. 3 . I nth e even t

tha t emission s regulation s ar e establishe dfo r ne w medium-spee dmarin e an dlocomotiv e engines , consideratio n shoul dals o b e give n t o establishin g retrofi t requirement s fo r olde r engine s i n thes e categories
. Thes e requirement s coul d mos t convenientl y appl y a t th e tim e o f

rebuild
.

xii iP. M



### Limitation s an dCaveat s Thi s repor t

present s th e result s o f apreliminar y investigatio no f controllin g emission s fro moff-highwa y diese l vehicles
. The principa l purpos e o f thi s investigatio nwa s t o determin e whethe r thes e vehicle s offe r sufficien t potentia l fo r

technicall y feasibl e an dcost-effectiv e emissio nreduction s t o justif y furthe r

attentio nfromEPA . Th e stud y result s indicat e tha t regulatio n o f off-highwa y emission s coul dpotentiall y resul t i nlarge , cost-effectiv e emissio nreductions
. Thus , furthe r investigatio nandpossibl e regulator y actio nar e indicated
. However , thi s investigatio ndoe s no t conclusivel y demonstrate , an dshoul dno t b e interprete da s demonstratin g tha t th e level s o f

emission s contro l assume dher e ar e technicall y feasible , o r achievabl e withi nan y particula r tim e frame , o r

a t an y particula r

cost . Man

y issue s remai nt o b e resolve dbefor e an y realisti c emission s standard s o r complianc e schedule s coul db e established
.

xi vP.1 5

TABL EO FCONTENT

S Sectio nPag e EXECUTIV ESUMMAR

Y i LIS T OFTABLE S xvii i LIS T O FFIGURES xx i 1 . 0 INTRODUCTIO

N1- 1 1. 1 Backgroun d1- 1 1. 2 Natur e an dScop e o f thi s Repor t

1- 2 1. 3 Guid e t o th e Remainde r o f th e Report... . 1- 4 1. 4 Limitation s an dCaveat s 1- 5 2. 0 DIESE

LENGIN ECHARACTERISTICS AN D CLASSIFICATION 2- 1 2. 1 Engin e Classificatio n 2- 1 2. 2 Engin e Technolog y 2- 5 2. 3 Diese l Emissio nFundamental s 2-1 0 2. 4 Emissio nRegulation s 2-1 4 3. 0 TECHNOLOG

Y FO REMISSION CONTRO

L3- 1 3. 1 High-Spee dEngine s 3- 1 3 . 2 Medium-Spee dEngine s 3- 9 4. 0 LOCOMOTIVE

S 4- 1 4. 1 Engin e Characteristic s an dOperatin g Condition s 4- 1 4. 2 Curren t

Emissio n Factor s 4- 3 4. 3 Engin e Populatio n an dEmission s Inventor y 4- 8 4. 4 Emission s Tes t Cycl e 4-1 0 4. 5 Feasibilit y o f Emission s Contro l 4-1 1 4. 6 Cost-Effectivenes s Analysi s 4-1 4

x vP.1 6 >«anii« > i pI Ji

TABL E O F CONTENT S (Continued ) Sectio n Pag e 5. 0 MARIN

EVESSELS 5- 1 5. 1 Engin e Characteristic s an dOperatin g Condition s 5- 1 5
. 2 Curren t

Emi s sio n Fac t

or s 5- 3 5. 3 Engin e Populatio n an dEmission s Inventor y 5- 6 5. 4 Emission s Tes t Cycl e 5- 9 5. 5 Feasibilit y o f Emission s Contro l 5-1 0 5. 6 Cost-Effectivenes s Analysi s 5-1 3 6. 0 FAR

M EQUIPMEN

T 6- 1 6. 1 Engin e Characteristic s an dOperatin g Condition s 6- 1 6. 2 Curren t

Emissio n Factor s 6- 2 6. 3 Engin e Populatio n an dEmission s Inventor y 6- 5 6. 4 Emission s Tes t Cycle s 6- 7 6. 5 Feasibilit y o f Emission s Contro l 6- 8 6. 6 Cost-Effectivenes s Analysi s 6-1 2 7. 0 CONSTRUCTIO

NAN D INDUSTRIA

LEQUIPMEN

T 7- 1 7. 1 Engin e Characteristic s an dOperatin g Condition s 7- 1 7. 2 Curren t

Emissio n Factor s 7- 2 7. 3 Engin e Populatio n an dEmission s Inventor y 7- 4 7. 4 Emi s sion s Te s t Cycle s 7- 7 7. 5 Feasibilit y o f Emission s Contro l 7- 8 7. 6 Cost-Effectivenes s Analysi s 7-1 0

xv iP.1 7

LIS T O F TABLE S Tabl e Pag e
E- 1 Estimate d Nationwid e Populatio n an d Emission s fro

m Diese l Engine s Use di n Off-Highwa y Application s E- 3 E- 2 Compariso no f Nationwid e Fue l Consumptio n an d Emission s Off-Highwa y VS . On-Highwa y Diesel s E- 5 E- 3 Emission s Standard s Estimate dt o b e Achievabl e b y Eac hClas s o f

Off-Highwa y Diesel s E- 7 E- 4 Estimate dCost-Effectivenes s o f "Intermediat e Level " Emission s Control s fo r Differen t

Classe s o f

Off-Highwa y Vehicle s E-1 2 1- 1 Deliverie s o f Diese l Fue l fo r

On

- an dOff-Highwa y Vehicle s an dEquipmen t 1- 3 2- 1 Characteristic s o f Som e Commo n Off-Highwa y Engin e Serie s 2- 3 2- 2 Federa l an dCaliforni aEmission s Regulation s fo r Heavy-Dut y Diese l Engine s 2-1 5 3- 1 Technique s fo r Diese l Engin e Emission s Contro l 3- 3 3- 2 Effec t

o f Engin e Modification s o n G M Electro-Motiv e Divisio n(EMD

) 16V-64 EEngin e Performanc e an dEmissions..
. 3-1 1 4- 1 Measure dLocomotiv e Emission s fro mPublishe dStudie s Expresse di nGram s Pe r Horsepowe r

Hou r o n Lin e Hau l Cycle s 4- 4 4- 2 Emissio n Factor s fo r RailwayLocomotive s 4- 5 4- 3 Population , Fue l Consumption , an d Estimate d Emission s fo r RailwayLocomotive s 4- 9 4- 4 Estimate d Achievabl e Emission s Contro l Standard s fo r Locomotiv e Engine s 4-1 3 4- 5 Estimate d Cost-Effectivenes s o f Emission s Contro l fo r Ne wRailwayLocomotive s 4-1 5 5- 1 Estimate d Curren t Emissio n Factor s fo r Diese l Engine s Use d i n Marin e Application s 5- 5

xvii iP.1 8

TABL E O F CONTENT S (Continued ) Sectio n " Pag e 8. 0 MOBIL

EREFRIGERATIO

NUNIT S 8- 1 8. 1 Engin e Characteristic s an dOperatin g Condition s 8- 1 8. 2 Curren t

Emissio n Factor s 8- 2 8. 3 Engin e Populatio n an dEmission s Inventor y 8- 4 8. 4 Emission s Tes t Cycle s 8- 4 8. 5 Feasibilit y o f Emission s Contro l 8- 6 8. 6 Cost-Effectivenes s Analysi s 8- 6 9. 0 SUMMARY

, CONCLUSION

S AN D RECOMMENDATION

S 9- 1 9. 1 Summar

y an dConclusions.... ' 9- 1 9. 2 Recommendation s 9-1 0 10. 0 REFERENCE

S 10- 1 APPENDI X A : DERIVATIO

NO FLOCOMOTIV

EEMISSION FACTOR

S

xvi iP.1 9 

# 1

LIS T O FTABLE S (Continued ) Tabl e Pag e 8- 4 Estimate dCost-Effectivenes s o f Emission s Contro l fo r Diese l Engine s Use di n Mobil e Refrigeratio n 8- 8 9- 1 Estimate dNationwid e Populatio n an dEmission s fro m Diese l Engine s Use dI n Off-Highwa y Application s 9- 2 9- 2 Compariso n o f Nationwid e Fue l Consumptio n an dEmission s Off-Highwa y Vs . On-Highwa y Diesel s 9- 3 9- 3 Emission s Standard s Estimate dt o b e Achievabl e b y Eac h Clas s o f

O f f-Highwa y Diesel s 9- 5 9- 4 Estimate dCost-Effectivenes s o f "Intermediat e Level " Emission s Control s fo r Differen t

Classe s o f

Off-Highwa y Vehicle s 9-1 1

x xP.2 0 ••M f Iff * Mil l

LIS T O FTABLE S (Continued ) Tabl e Pag e 5- 2 Estimate dNationwid e Populatio n an dEmission s fro m Diese l Engine s Uisedi n Marin e Application s 5- 7 5- 3 Estimate dAchievabl e Emission s Contro l Standard s fo r Marin e Diese l Eragin<e s 5-1 1 5- 4 Estimate dCost-Effectivenes s o f Emission s Contro l fo r Diese l Engine s Use di n Marin e Application s 5-1 4 6- 1 Emissio nFactor s fo r Far mEquipmen t

6- 4 6- 2 Estimate dPopulation , Fue l Consumption , an dEmission s fro mDiese l Engine s Useidi n Far mEquipmen t 6- 6 6- 3 Estimate dAchievabl e Emission s Contro l Standard s fo r Diese l Engine s Use di n Far mEquipmen t 6-1 0 6- 4 Estimate dCost-Effectivenes s o f Emission s Contro l fo r Diese l Engine s Use di n Far mEquipmen t 6-1 3 7- 1 Estimate dCurren t Emissio n Factor s fo r Diese l Engine s Use di n Constructio n an dIndustria l Equipmen t 7- 3 7- 2 Estimate dPopulation , Fue l Consumptio n an dEmission s fro mDiese l Engine s Use do n Constructio n an dIndustria l Equipmen t

7- 5 7- 3 Estimate d Achievabl e Emission s Contro l Standard s fo r Diese l Engine s Use d i n Constructio n an d Industria l Equipme nt 7-1 1 7- 4 Estimate dCost-Effectivenes s o f Emission s Contro l fo r Diese l Engine s Use di n Constructio n Equipmen t 7-1 3 8- 1 Estimate dCurren t Emissio n Factor s fo r Diese l Engine s Use dfo r

Mobil e R

e frig e ratio n 8- 3 8- 2 Estimate dNationwid e Population , Fue l Consumption , an d Emission s fro mDiese l Engine s Use dfo r Mobil e Refrigeratio n 8- 5 8- 3 Estimate dAchievabl e Emission s Contro l Standard s fo r Diese l Engine s Use di n Mobil e Refrigeratio n 8- 7

xi xLIS T O F FIGURE S

Figur e Pag e E- 1 Effec t

o f Emission s Control s o n Tota l Off-Highwa y N O Emission s E- 9 x E- 2 Effec t

o f Emission s Control s o n Tota l Off-Highwa y H C Emission s E-1 0 E- 3 Effec t

o f Emission s Control s o n Tota l Off-Highwa y P M Emission s E-l l 2- 1 Diese l Engin e Combustio n System s 2- 6 9- 1 Effec t

o f Emission s Control s o n Tota l Off-Highwa y NO Emission s 9- 7 x 9- 2 Effec t

o f Emission s Control s o n Tota l Off-Highwa y H C Emi s sion s 9-8 " 9- 3 Effec t

o f Emission s Control s o n Tota l Off-Highwa y P M Emi s sion s 9- 9

x x 1P.2 2

1. 0 INTRODUCTIO N Diese l engine s i n off-highwa y vehicle s an dothe r off-highwa y mobil e equipment , whil e les s numerou s tha n thos e i n highwa y truck s an dbuses , ar e stil l significan t

contributor s t o "N O an dparticulat e inventorie s i n many urba n areas . Thes e engine s ar e presentl y exemp t fro man y emission s contro l require

- ments . Consequently , the y produc e fa r mor e pollutio n (pe r uni t o f fue l inpu t o r wor k output ) tha nth e otherwis e simila r emission-controlle dengine s use di n on-highwa y vehicles
. Th e recen t promulgatio n o f

stringen t

N O an dparticulat e emission s standard s fo r diese l engine s i n on-highwa y vehicle s ha s draw natten - tio nt o diese l emission s i n general , an dha s raise dth e questio n o f whethe r simila r emission s standard s migh t no t b e appropriat e fo r off-highwa y diese l engines
. 1. 1 Backgroun d

Emission s fro mdiese l engine s use di n on-highwa y truck s an dbuse s hav e bee n regulate dwit hincreasin g stringenc y sinc e 1972 . Ne w Federa l regula

- tion s adopte di n 198 5 wil l limi t particulat e matte r (PM ) emission s fro m heavy-dut y diese l engine s t o 0. 6 gram s pe r brak e horsepower-hou r (g/BHP-hr) , beginnin g i nth e 198 8 mode l year . Th e N O emission s limit , currentl y a t 10. 7 g/BHP-hr , wil l b e reduce dt o 6. 0 g/BHP-h r i n 1990 , an dt o 5. 0 g/BHP-h r i n1991 . A ne w P M limi t o f 0.2 5 g/BHP-h r

(0. 1 g/BHP-h r

fo r buses ) i s als o schedule dfo r 1991 , an da-PM limi t o f 0. 1 g/BHP-h r

fo r al l vehicle s i s schedule dfo r 1994 . Althoug hthe y ar e technicall y ver y simila r t o on-highwa y diese l engines , engine s use di n off-highwa y mobil e equipmen t suc ha s locomotives , far m an dconstructio n equipment , boats , an dsimila r application s ar e presentl y exemp t fro man y emission s standards
. Th e Clea n Ai r Ac t give s EP

A authorit y t o regulat e "stationar y sources " o f emissions , an d"moto r vehicles" , bu t

EP A interpret s th e ter m"moto r vehicle " t o includ e on-highwa y vehicle s only
. Sinc e off-highwa y mobil e source s ar e neithe r "stationary " no r

"moto r vehicles" , EP

A

1- 1

### consider s tha ti t ha s n o authorit y t o regulat e them
. EP A doe s hav e authorit y t o regulat e emission s fromstationar y internal-combustio nengine s use dfo r cogeneration , emergenc y generators , irrigatio npumping , an ds o forth , bu t Ne w Sourc e Performanc e Standard s (NSPS ) fo r thes e engine s hav e no t been ? promulgated
. 1. 2 Natur e an dScop e o f Thi s Repor t Radia nCorporatio nwa s commissione db y th e U.S . EPA , Offic e o f Polic y Analysi s t o stud y th e feasibilit y an dcost-effectivenes s o f emission s control s i noff-highwa y diese l vehicles
. Thi s documen t i s th e fina l repor t o f tha t study
. Thi s repor t

addresse s th e followin g majo r categorie s o f

diesel-engine d off-highwa y equipment :

• Railroad locomotives ;

• Marin e vessel s (excep t larg e oceangoing ships) ;

• Far mequipment ;

• Constructio n an

d industria l equipmen t (includin

g minin g an

d forestr

yequipment) ; an

d

• Mobil e refrigeratio n units . 

### Thes e categorie s includ e al l larg e group s o f mobil e diese l engine s excep t fo r on-highwa y vehicle s (whic har e alread y regulated ) an doceangoin g motorships
. Engine s use dfo r generators , pumps , an dcompressor s an ddiese l law nan dgarde nequipmen t wer e als o include di nth e origina l scop e o f th e study , an dthes e (alon g wit hal l th e categorie s liste dabove ) wer e examine di n apreliminar y repor t

(Weaver

an dPugh , 1986) . The y wer e subsequentl y dropped , du e t o thei r

insignifican t

contributio nt o tota l emissions
. Tabl e 1- 1 give s anide ao f th e relativ e importanc e o f on-highwa y an d off-highwa y diese l engines
. Thi s tabl e list s U.S . Departmen t o f Energ y estimate s o f

th e amount

o f distillat e diese l fue l consume db y eac hequipmen t

1- 2TABL E1-1 . DELIVERIE S OFDIESE LFUE LFO RON

- AN

D OFF-HIGHWA

Y VEHICLE S AN

D EQUIPMEN

T

Clas s Annua l Deliverie s 1000 s o f Gallon s
Far m Locomotiv e Marin e Vessel s Constructio n an d Othe r Off-Highwa y Off-Highwa y Tota l On-Highwa y Tota l Tota l Mobil e Diese l Engine s Off-Highwa y a s Percen t o f Tota l 3,161,33 8

3,209.72 9 1.894,26 5 1,616,68 5 9,882.01 7 17.279,65 0 27,161,66 7 36.4 %

Source : EIA , 1985 ,

1- 3P.2 5



### categor y i n1985
. As thi s tabl e indicates , eac ho f th e individua l categorie s < f off-highwa y mobil e source s considere di nthi s repor t i s smal l compare dt o on-highwa y vehicle s (trucks , buses , an ddiese l passenge r cars) . Collectively , however , thes e source s ar e quit e significant
. A s canb e seen , tota l off-highwa y diese l fue l consumptio ni s equa l t o 5 7 percen t o f th e on-highwa y total
. Furthermore , som e o f th e fue l use di nth e on-highwa y categor y i s use d fo r powerin g mobil e refrigeratio nunits
. Emission s fromthes e unit s ar e unregulated , an dthe y ar e covere di nthi s report . I t i s apparen t

tha t off-highwa y an dothe r unregulate ddiese l emission s source s mus t accoun t

fo r a ver y significan t

fractio nof

tota l diese l engin e emission s i nth e Unite d States . 1. 3 Guid e t o th e Remainde r o f th e Repor t Thi s repor t

i s divide dint o nin e sections , o f whic hthi s Introductio n i s th e first
. Sectio nTwo , following , provide s th e technica l backgroun dfo r th e succeedin g sections
. I t discusse s th e classificatio nan dgenera l charac

teristic s o f

off-highwa y diese l engines , an dth e fundamental s o f diese l emissions
. Sectio nThre e discusse s th e curren t stat e o f

th e ar t

i n diese l emission s control , base dlargel y o non-highwa y engin e results
. Section s Fou r throug hEigh t

eac hdea l wit hon e o f th e equipmen t

categorie s liste di n Sectio n 1. 2 above
. Engin e characteristic s an doperatin g conditions , estimate s o f curren t emissio nfactors , an dadiscussio nof applicabl e emissio n contro l technolog y ar e give nfo r eac hcategory . Estimate s of th e tota l engin e popula

tion , fue l use , an dnationwid e pollutan t emission s fo r

eac hcategor y ar e als o presente di neac hsection
.

Followin g th e fiv e section s dealin g wit hindividua l engin e categories , Sectio nNin e summarize s th e result s o f th e stud y an dou r conclusions
. Thi s sectio nals o contain s ou r recommendation s fo r furthe r research , an dfo r

polic y action
.

1- 41. 4 Limitation s an dCaveat s Thi s report present s the result s o f a preliminar yinvestigatio n o f controlling emission s fro moff-highwa

ydiese l vehicles . Th e principa l purpos e o f thi s investigatio n wa s t o determin e whethe r thes e vehicle s offe r sufficien t potentia l fo r technicall yfeasibl e an d cost-effectiv e emissio n reduction s t o justif yfurthe r attentio n fro mEPA . Th e stud

yresult s indicat e tha t regulatio n o f off-highwa

yemission s coul d potentiall yresul t in large , cost-effectiv e emissio n reductions . However , thi s investigatio n doe s no t demonstrate , an d shoul d no t be interprete d a s demonstrating tha t an yparticula r leve l o f emission s contro l i s technicall yfeasible , o r achievabl e withi n an yparticula r tim e frame , o r a t an

yparticula r cost . Whil e thi s repor t present s som e approximat e estimate s o f th e emissio n level s achievable , an d th e cost s o f achieving them , th e reade r i s cautione d no t t o misinterpre t these . Thes e ar e preliminar yestimate s only , mad e fo r the purpos e o f assessing wha t migh t be achieve d throug h regulations—the yar e no t definitive . Man

yissue s remai n t o be resolve d befor e an yrealisti c emission s standard s coul d be specified . Thes e issue s include : representativ e tes t cycle s fo r th

e differen t off-highwa yapplications ; emission s level s fro m existing engine s using thes e representativ e tes t cycles ; effect s o f availabl e emissio n contro l technique s o n emissions''measure d ove r thes e tes t cycles ; actua l cost s o f vehicl e redesign t o accommodat e emissio n controls ; feasibilit y o f som e emissio n contro l technique s i n som e applications ; an

d th e potentia l fo r emission s complianc e throug h us e o f alternativ e fuel s suc h a s methano l an d compresse d natura l gas . Furthe r researc h an d muc h mor e detaile d evaluatio n o f eac h o f thes e issue s woul d be require d befor e an yregulation s coul d be adopted .

1- 52. 0 DIESE L ENGINE CHARACTERISTIC S AN D CLASSIFICATIO

N Thi s sectio n provide s a n overviewo f diese l engin e characteristic s an d technology , diese l pollutan t emissions , an d emissio n regulations . I t i s intende d t o suppl ybackgroun d informatio n fo r thos e previousl yunfamilia r wit h diese l engine s an

d emission s control , an d t o establis h definition s fo r th e mor e technica l chapter s whic h follow . 

### 2. 1 Engin e Classificatio n

Diese l engine s ar e conventionall y divide dint o thre e majo r classe s o n th e basi s o f

siz e an drotationa l spee d(Lilly , 1984) . Thes e classe s are : 1 . Slow-spee dengine s (0-60 0 RPM ) 2 . Medium-spee dengine s (600-130 0 RPM ) 3 . High-spee dengine s (130 0 RP M up ) Slow-spee dengine s ar e use donl y i nlarg e ship s (wher e the y ar e typicall y direct-couple dt o th e propelle r driveshaft) , an di naver y fe w stationar y applications
. They wil l no t b e considere dfurthe r i nthi s report . Medium-spee dengine s ar e use di nrailwa y locomotives , ship s an dlarg e boats , a s wel l a s stationar y generatin g an dpumpin g applications
. High-spee dengine s ar e b y fa r th e mos t

numerou s class , bein g use di nhighway truck s an dbuses , con structio nmachinery , boats , far mequipment , an dnumerou s othe r applications
. Du e t o th e economic s of mas s production , diese l engine s use di n mobil e off-highwa y application s ar e typicall y member s o f afamil y o r

serie s of engine s sharin g th e sam e basi c cylinde r

dimensions , bu t

wit hvaryin g type s of aspiratio n(naturall y aspirated , turbocharged , o r turbocharged/aftercooled ) an d number s of

cylinders
. Thus , awid e rang e o f power requirement s can b e satisfie dusin g th e sam e basi c combustio nsystem . A s a nextrem e example , th e

2- 1P.2 8



### venerabl e Detroi t

Diesel-Alliso n7 1 serie s engine s ar e availabl e i nroot s blow n an dturbocharge dversions , wit hair-ai r o r air-wate r

aftercooling , an dwit h2 , 3 , 4 , 6 , 8 , 12 . o r

1 6 cylinders
. Tabl e 2- 1 list s anumber o f th e more popula r

engin e series , alon g wit hsom

e o f thei r ke y technica l characteristics
. Thes e characteristic s ar e discusse di nSectio n2.2 .

As Tabl e 2- 1 indicates , off-highwa y diese l engine s ca nb e groupe d int o severa l genera l groups .

1 . Medium-spee dengine s use di nrailwa y locomotive s an dmarin e vessels
. 2 . Medium-sized , high-spee dengine s simila r t o thos e use di n heavy-dut y trucks
. Thi s i s th e larges t grou p o f

off-highwa y diese l engines
. Four , six , an deight-cylinde r engine s i n thi s clas s ar e commonl

y use di nagricultura l an dconstructio n machin

er y an d(i nemission-controlle dversions ) fo r highway trucks
. Large r 1 2 an d16-cylinde r

engine s i nth e sam

e serie s ar e use di n marin e an dheav y constructio napplications
. 3 . Larg e high-spee dengines , havin g size s an dpowe r level s greate r tha nthos e use di non-highwa y truc k applications
. Turbocharge d an dofte nintercooled , thes e engine s ar e use dmostl y i n marin e an dheav y earthmovin g applications
. 4 . Smal l high-spee dengine s (ofte nderive dfro mlight-dut y automo tiv e technology) , an dtypicall y rangin g fro m1 0 t o abou t 3 0 horsepower
. Thes e engine s ar e mostl y naturally-aspirated , an d ma y us e eithe r

direc t o r indirec t

injection
.

2- 2P.2 9

TABL E2-1 . CHARACTERISTIC S OFSOM ECOMMO

NOFF-HIGHWA

Y ENGIN

ESERIE S Engin e Disp
. Serie s (1/cyl ) Clas s 1 : Me d Bor e (in. ) ium-Spee d G M Electromotiv e Divisio n 56 7 9. 3 8. 5 64 5 10. 6 9. 1 71 0 11. 7 9. 1 Genera l Electri c FD L Caterpilla r 360 0 18. 5 Clas s 2 : High-Speed , Caterpilla r 320 0 330 0 340 0 Cummin s N H LI O B C G M Detroi t

D 9 2 7 1 Joh nDeer e 30 0 40 0 Clas s Three : Caterpilla r 350 0 30 0 1.3 1

1.7 5 2.4 4 2.3 3 1.6 7 0.9 8 1.3 8 11. 0

Truc k 4 . 5 4 . 8 5 . 4 5 . 5 4 . 9 4 . 0 4 . 5 iesel-Allisio n 1.5 1 1.1 7 4.2 5 0.9 8 4.1 9 1.2 7 4.5 6 Asp .

Type s

B.T A B.T A T A
N.T A
T A Typ e N.T.T A N.T.T A T.T A
T.T A T.T A N.T.T A N.T.T A Divisio n B.T.T A B.T.T A
N. T N.T.T A Larg e High-Spee dEngine s 4.3 1 4.0 3 6 . 7

6 . 3 T

A T A I n j
. Syste m

U I U I U I U I
U I

I L I L I L
U I U I I L I L
U I U I
D P D P

U I ID I V 8 V 8

6 L Config
. Offere d

V8.V12.V1 6 V12.V16.V2 0 V12.V16.V2 0 V8.V12.V1 6 .8L.V12.V1 6

4L.V 8 4L.6 L 6L.V8.V1 2 6L.V1 2 6 L 3L.4L.6 L 6 L V6,V8,V12,V1 6 2L,3L,4L,6L , V6.V8.V12.V1 6 3L.4L.6 L 6L

V8.V12.V1 6 V8.V12.V1 6 Horsepowe r

Rang e

600-27 5 0 800-390 0 1800-480 0 1800-360 0 1300-450 0

71-35 5 85-33 5 215-83 8 250-90 0 2 5 0-29 0 66-17 7 1 5 0-23 4 270-96 0 64-76 0 56-14 2 134-22 6

600-200 0 500-100 0 Applicatio n

R.B. G R.B,G, C R.B. G
R R,B, G

T.C. A T.C,A. G T.C.A.G. B T.A.C.B. G T.A.C.G ' T.A. C T.A. C T.A.C.B. G T.A.C.B. G C.A.(T) 1 C.A , (T M

C.B. G C.B. G (Continued )

2- 3P.3 0

TABL E 2-1 . (Continued ) Engin e Disp . Bor e Asp . Inj . Serie s (1/cyl ) (in. ) Type s Syste m Config . Horsepowe r Applicatio n

Offere d Rang e Cummin s K 3.1 4 6.2 5 T.T A G M Detroi t

Diesel-Alliso n Divisio n 14 9 2.4 5 5.7 5 B.T.T A Clas s Four : Smal l High-Spee dEngine s UI 6L,12V,16 V 450-200 0 C.B. G UI 8V,12V,16 V 530-180 0

Kubot a 3.23 " St . Yanma r TN8 2 T9 5 .37-.4 6

0.4 6 0.7 8 variou s

3.2 3 3.7 4 N. T

N. T N. T D P

D P D P 3L.4L.6 L

3L.4 L 3L.4 L 19-4 6

30-4 7 44-7 7 A.C. L

A.C. L A.C. L Aspiratio n N- naturall y aspirate d B - Roots-blow

n T - turbocharge d T A - turbocharged/aftercoole d Combustio nSyste m UI —D I w uni t

injector s I L—D I w in-lin e pum p D P— D I w distributo r

pum p ID I - indirec t

injectio n Application s T - On-highwa y truck s A - Agricultura l Equipmen t C - Construction/Mining / Industria l equipmen t B - Boat s L- Locomotiv e G- Generators/stationar y powe r R f - Mobil e refrigeratio n

Truc k version s o f

thes e engine s ar e unde r development
.

2- 4P.3 1

Thi s groupin g ha s importan t implication s fo r emission s control
. Engin e serie s i nGrou p 2 , fo r instance , typicall y hav e a t leas t on e member

use d i non-highwa y trucks
. A s wil l b e discusse di n Sectio n 3.1 , emissio ncontro l developmen t

fo r on-highwa y engine s i s alread y highl y advanced
. Transferrin g thi s technolog y t o th e off-highwa y engine s i n th e sam e serie s would , i nmos t cases , b e straightforward
. Similarly , engin e technolog y i n Grou p 3 resemble s (excep t fo r th e large r

numbe r o f cylinders ) tha t

use di n th e heavies t on-high

way trucks
. Th e smal l high-spee dengine s i n Grou p 4 resemble , i n man y cases , thos e use do r

bein g develope dfo r light-dut y automobiles , an dcoul dpresumabl y utiliz e simila r

emissio n controls
. Grou p 1 engines , o n th e othe r hand , hav e neve r bee nsubjec t

t o stringen t

emissio n contro l requirements , an dhav e no . clos e analog s whic hhav e been
. Developmen t o f emissio n control s for

- thi s grou p i s likel y t o b e mor e time-consumin g an dexpensiv e tha n fo r th e othe r

groups . 2. 2 Engin e Technolog y

Fro ma nemission s contro l standpoint , th e ke y technica l feature s o f a diese l engin e ar e th e following :

• combustio nsystem ;
• fue l injectio n system ; an d

• aspiratio n(ai r supply ) system . Thi s sectio n discusse s th e differen t type s o f

system s i n use . Combustio n Systems—Diese l engine s i n off-highwa y application s us e severa l differen t

type s o f

combustio n systems . Th e mos t fundamenta l differenc e i s betwee ndirec t

injectio n (DI ) engine s an dindirec t injectio n (IDI ) engines
. Figur e 2- 1 show s atypica l combustio n chambe r o f eac htype . D I engine s ca n als o b e divide dint o high-swir l an dlow-swir l (quiescen t chamber ) designs
. I n a n indirect-injectio n engine , fue l i s injecte dint o aseparat e "prechamber, " wher e i t mixe s an dpartl y burn s befor e jettin g int o th e mai n

2- 5P.3 2
• pI I WP P T'W^f

'

(a ) Indirec t injectio n

(b ) Direc t injectio n

Figur e 2-1 . Diese l Engin e Combustio n Systems . 2- 6

# RADIAf f

combustio n chambe

rabov e th e piston
. I nth e more commo ndirect-injectio n engine , fue l i s injecte ddirectl y int o acombustio nchambe r hollowe dou t

o f th e to p o f th e piston . Fuel-ai r mixin g i nth e direct-injectio nengin e i s limite d b y th e fue l injectio npressur e an dan y motio nimparte dt o th e ai r i n th e chambe r a s i t entered
. I nhigh-swir l D

I engines , astron g swirlin g motio ni s imparte dt o th e ai r enterin g th e combustio nchambe r b y th e desig no f

th e intak e port . Thes e engine s typicall y us e moderate-to-hig hinjectio npressures , an dthre e t o fiv e spra y hole s pe r

nozzle
. Lo

w swir l engine s rel y primaril y o nth e fue l injectio n proces s t o suppl y th e mixing
. They typicall y hav e ver y hig hfue l injectio n pressure s an dsi x t o nin e spra y hole s pe r nozzle
. I nth e indirect-injectio n engine , muc ho f th e fuel-ai r

mixin g i s du e t o th e ai r

swir l induce di n th e prechambe r a s ai r i s force dint o i t

durin g compression , an dt o th e turbulenc e induce dby th e expansio nou t of th e pre chambe r durin g combustion
. Thes e engine s typicall y hav e bette r high-spee d performanc e tha ndirect-injecte dengines , an dca nus e cheape r fuel-injectio n systems . Historically , ID I diese l engine s hav e als o exhibite dlowe r emissio n level s tha nD

I engines
. Wit

hrecen t

development s i nD

I engin e emissio n con trols , however , thi s i s n o longe r necessaril y th e case . Disadvantage s of

th e ID I engin e ar e th e extr ahea t an dfrictiona l losse s du e t o th e prechamber
. Thes e resul t i na5-1 0 percen t

reductio n i n fue l efficienc y compare dt o aD I engine , an dacorrespondingl y greate r loa don th e coolin g system . Becaus e o f thes e disadvantages , nearl y al l engine s i n Group s 1,2 , an d3 , no

w us e direc t

injection , a s d

o a nincreasin g number

o f thos e i n Grou p 4 . Fue l Injectio nSystems—Th e fue l injectio nsyste mi nadiese l engin e include s th e machiner y b y whic hth e fue l i s transferre dfromth e fue l tan k t o th e engine , the ninjecte dint o th e cylinder s a t th e righ t

tim e fo r

optima l combustion , an di nth e correc t amount t o provid e th e desire dpowe r output . The

2- 7P.3 4



### qualit y an dtimin g o f fue l injectio ndramaticall y affec t th e engine' s power , fue l economy , an

d emission s characteristics , s o tha t th e fue l injectio n syste m i s on e o f

th e mos timportan t

component s o f

th e engine
. Th e fue l injectio nsyste mnormall y consist s o f alow pressur e pum

p t o transfe r fue l fromth e tan k

t o th e system , on e o r more high-pressur e fue l pump s t o creat e th e pressur e pulse s tha t actuall y sen dth e fue l int o th e cylinder , th e injectio nnozzle s throug hwhic hfue l i s injecte dint o th e cylinder , an da governo r an dfue l meterin g system . Thes e determin e ho w muc hfue l i s t o b e injecte do neac hstroke , an dthu s th e powe r outpu t o f th e engine
. Thre e generi c type s o f fue l injectio nsystem s ar e i ncommo n use . Thes e are : 1 . System s wit hdistributor-typ e fue l pumps , i nwhic hasingl e

pumpin g elemen t

i s mechanicall y switche dt o connec t t o high

pressur e fue l line s leadin g t o eac hcylinde r i nturn ; 2 . System s wit hunitar y fue l pump s havin g on e pumpin g elemen t pe r cylinder , connecte dt o th e injectio nnozzl e b y high-pressur e fue l line s (ofte ncalle d"in-lin e pumps") ; an d 3 . System s usin g uni t injectors , i nwhic hth e individua l pumpin g elemen t fo r eac hcylinde r

i s combine di nth e sam e uni t wit hth e injectio nnozzle , eliminatin g th e high-pressur e lines
. Distributo r

pump s ar e relativel y inexpensive , bu t the y ar e limite di n th e injectio npressure s the y ca nachieve
. Fo r thi s reason , the y ar e use d mostl y i nindirect-injectio nengines
. In-lin e pump s ar e capabl e o f muc hhighe r injectio npressures , an dar e use di nman y Grou p 2 engines , especiall y thos e produce db y Europea nan dJapanes e manufacturers
. Uni t injecto r

system s ar e capabl e o f

th e highes t

injectio npressure s (exceedin g 25,00 0 PSI) . Thes e ar e use di nal l Grou p 1 an dGrou p 3 engines , an di na nincreasin g proportio n o f

2- 8

### Grou p 2 engine s a s well
. The large r Cummins engines , mos t Detroi t

Diesel

Alliso n(DDA

) engines , an dsevera l recently-introduce dCaterpilla r engine s us e uni t injectors
. Distributo r

an din-lin e injectio npump s ar e typicall y drive nby a specia l driveshaf t

fromth e engin e timin g gears . Thi s allow s th e injectio n timin g t o b e varie dby rotatin g th e pum p wit hrespec t

t o it s driveshaft , usin g aslidin g helica l spline
. Th e pumpin g element s i nuni t injecto r

system s ar e drive nb y th e engin e camshaft , i nth e sam e wa y a s th e intak e an dexhaus t valves
. Unti l recently , injectio ntimin g i nuni t injecto r

system s wa s fixe db y th e syste mgeometr y (excep t fo r th e effect s o f

wear) . Withth e additio n o f electroni c controls , however , thes e system s ca nprovid e ver y flexibl e contro l o f injectio ntiming , a s discusse di nSectio n3.1 .

Aspiratio nSystems—Th e aspiratio nsyste mi s th e syste mb y whic h combustio nai r

i s provide dt o th e engine
. Th e firs t four-strok e diese l engine s relie do nth e suctio ncreate db y th e intak e strok e t o dra w ai r int o th e cylin

der
. Thi s approac hi s know na s natura l aspiration , an di t i s stil l use do n man y smalle r

an dlower-powere dengine s today
. Sinc e th e pressur e forcin g th e a i r int o th e cylinde r

i s limite dt o tha t

o f th e atmosphere , th e ai r availabl e fo r combustio n(an dthu s th e maximu mpower

output ) fromthes e engine s i s limited
. I nth e earl y two-strok e engines , alseparat e Roots-typ e blower , drive n fro mth e crankshaft , provide dcombustio nai r a t pressure s slightl y ove r atmo spheric
. Thi s technique , again , i s stil l use di nman y smalle r

an d lower-powere dtwo-strok e engine s today
. Roots-blow ntwo-strok e engines , lik e four-cycl e naturally-aspirate dengines , ar e limite di nthei r power outpu t by th e atmospheri c pressure . Althoug hno t strictl y accurate , i t i s commo

n t o lum p thes e engine s togethe r wit hfour-strok e engine s a s "naturall y aspirated" , a practic e whic hwil l b e followe dhere
.

T o obtai nhighe r

powe r outpu t fro magive nengin e siz e an ddisplace

ment , manufacturer s hav e adopte dturbochargers
. A turbocharge r consist s o f

a
2- 9. , i p . nin w f

i f mm 9 y « 

# RADIA N
high-spee dcentrifuga l compresso r fo r th e intak e air , o nth e sam e shaf t a s an d drive nb y ahigh-spee dturbin e i nth e exhaust
. B y compressin g th e intak e air , th e turbocharge r

increase s th e amount availabl e i nth e cylinder , an dthu s th e maximu mpower output . Compressin g th e intak e ai r increase s it s temperature , increasin g th e therma l loadin g o npiston s an dothe r components . Coolin g th e compresse dai r i n ahea t exchange r

o r aftercoole r

reduce s th e therma l load , an ddecrease s th e ai r volume , furthe r

increasin g th e ai r

mas s availabl e i nth e cylinde r an dthu s th e maximu mpower output . Most

high-powere ddiese l engine s no w incorporat e turbo

chargin g an daftercooling
. Fo r mos t suc hengines , th e hea t sin k fo r th e aftercoole r

i s th e engin e coolin g water , a t atemperatur e o f

80-9 5 C . Th e nee d fo r lowe r intak e ai r

temperature s i nemission-controlle dan dhigh-outpu t engine s ha s resulte di nincreasin g us e o f low-temperatur e aftercooling , usin g eithe r air-to-ai r

o r air-to-low-temperature-liqui dhea t exchangers
. Thes e development s ar e discusse dfurthe r i nSectio n3.1 . 2. 3 Diese l Emissio nFundamental s

Diese l engine s emi t

significan t

quantitie s of

oxide s of

nitroge n (N O ) , sulfu r

oxide s (SO ) , particulat e matte r (PM) , an dunburne dhydrocarbon s (HC) . The N

O , HC , an dmos t

o f th e P M emission s fromdiesel s ar e forme ddurin g th e combustio nprocess , an dcanb e controlle db y appropriat e modification s t o tha t process . Th e sulfu r oxides , i ncontrast , ar e derive ddirectl y fromsulfu r i nth e fuel , an dth e onl y feasibl e contro l technolog y i s t o reduc e fue l sulfu r content . Mos t

S O i s emitte da s gaseou s S0„ , bu t asmal l fractio n(typicall y 2- 3 percent ) occur s a s particulat e sulfates
.

Diese l particulat e matte r consist s mostl y of

thre e components : soo t forme ddurin g combustion , heav y hydrocarbon s condense do r adsorbe do n th e soot , an dparticulat e sulfates
. I nolder-technolog y diesels , soo t i s typicall y 40 t o 8 0 percen t

of th e tota l particulat e mass . Development s i nin-cylinde r

2-1 0

### emission s contro l fo r on-highwa y engine s hav e reduce dth e soo t contributio n t o particulat e emission s considerably , however
. Mos t o f th e remainin g particulat e mas s consist s o f

heav y hydrocarbon s adsorbe do r condense do nth e soot . Thi s i s referre dt o a s th e solubl e organi c fractio no f th e particulat e matter , o r SOF . Th e SO Fi s derive dpartl y fro mth e lubricatin g oil , partl y fromunburne dfuel , an dpartl y fromcompound s forme ddurin g combustion
.

The particulat e SO

Fan dgaseou s hydrocarbon s fromdiese l engine s includ e man

y knowno r

suspecte dcarcinogen s an dothe r toxi c ai r

contaminants
. Thes e includ e polynuclea r aromati c compound s (PNA ) an dnitroaromatics , form

aldehyd e an dothe r

oxygenate dhydrocarbons
. Thes e las t ar e als o responsibl e fo r muc ho f th e characteristi c diese l odor
. N O /Particulat e Tradeoff—Diese l particulat e an dN O emission s resul t

— x r 

### x fromth e fundamenta l natur e o f th e combustio nprocess , makin g themespeciall y difficul t

t o control
. A

s oppose dt o spark-ignitio nengine s (whic hus e a more-or-les s homogeneou s charge ) al l diese l engine s rel y o nheterogeneou s combustion
. Durin g th e compressio nstroke , adiese l engin e compresse s onl y air
. Fue l i s injecte dint o th e combustio nchambe r i nliqui dfor

mnea r th e to p o f th e compressio nstroke
. Th e quantit y of fue l injecte dwit heac hstrok e i s determine db y th e engin e powe r outpu t required
. Afte r

abrie f

perio dknow

n a s th e ignitio ndelay , th e fue l i s ignite db y th e ho t ai r an dburns
. I n th e premixe dburnin g phase , th e fuel/ai r mixtur e forme ddurin g th e ignitio n dela y perio dburn s rapidly
. The subsequen t rat e o f

burnin g i s controlle db y th e rat e o f mixin g betwee nth e remainin g fue l an dair , wit hcombustio nalway s occurrin g a t th e interfac e betwee nth e two . Mos t o f th e fue l burne di s burne di n thi s diffusio nburnin g stage , excep t unde r ver y ligh t

loads
. The fac t

tha t fue l an dai r

mus t mi x befor e burnin g mean s tha t a substantia l amoun t

o f exces s ai r

i s neede dt o ensur e complet e combustio n o f th e fue l withi nth e limite dtim e allowe dby th e power stroke
. Diese l engines , therefore , operat e a t overal l air-fue l ratio s whic har e considerabl y lea n o f

2-1 1P.3 8

u 1 1 IIH H '. r* >m



### stoichiometric
. Th e air-fue l rati o durin g agive nstrok e i s determine db y th e engin e powe r

requirements , whic hgover nth e amount o f fue l injected
. Th e minimu

mair-fue l rati o fo r complet e combustio ni nadiese l i s abou t 21 , correspondin g t o abou t 5 0 percen t

exces s air
. Thi s rati o i s know n a s th e smok

e limit , sinc e smok

e increase s dramaticall y a t ratio s lowe r

tha n this
. The smok

e limi t establishe s th e maximu mamount

o f fue l tha t

ca nb e burne dpe r stroke , an dthu s th e maximu mpowe r outpu t o f th e engine
. N O i nth e diese l engin e i s primaril y NO, whic hi s forme da t hig h temperature s clos e t o th e flam e fron t i nth e presenc e o f exces s oxygen . Th e rat e o f N O formatio ni ndiesel s i s afunctio no f oxyge navailability , an di s exponentiall y dependen t o nth e flam e temperature . I nth e diese l engine , mos t o f th e N O emitte di s forme dearl y i nth e combustio nprocess , whenth e pisto n i s stil l nea r

top-dead-cente r

(TDC) . Thi s thi s i s whe nth e temperatur e an d pressur e o f

th e charg e ar e greatest . Recen t wor k by severa l manufacturer s an d consultant s (Wad

e e t al. , 1987 ; Cartellier i an dWachter , 1987 ; mfrs
. confiden

tia l data ) indicate s tha t mos t of thi s N

O i s actuall y forme ddurin g th e premixe dburnin g phase , an dtha t reducin g th e amount o f fue l burne di n thi s phas e ca nsignificantl y reduc e N O emissions
. N

O ca nals o b e reduce dby action s whic hreduc e th e flam e temperatur e durin g combustion
. Thes e action s include : delayin g combustio npas t TDC, coolin g th e ai r charg e goin g int o th e cylinder , reducin g th e air-fue l mixin g rat e nea r TDC , an dexhaus t

ga s recircu

latio n(EGR) . Sinc e combustio nalway s occur s unde r near-stoichiometri c condi

tions , reducin g th e flam e temperatur e b y "lean-burn " techniques , a s i n spark

ignitio nengines , i s impractical
.

Diese l soo t

i s forme donl y durin g th e diffusio nburnin g phas e of combustion
. Mos t

o f th e soo t

forme di s subsequentl y burne ddurin g th e late r portion s o f

th e expansio nstroke
. Soo t oxidatio ni s muc

hslowe r

tha n soo t formation , however , an dth e amount o f soo t oxidize di s heavil y dependen t o n th e availabilit y o f

hig htemperature s an dadequat e oxyge ndurin g th e late r stage s o f combustion
. Action s whic hdecreas e th e amount o f fue l burne di n th e

2-1 2

### diffusio nburnin g stag e ten dt o decreas e soo t emission s (a t

th e cos t

of a n 

### increas e i nN

O ) . Action s whic hreduc e th e availabilit y o f oxyge n(suc ha s EGR , o r operatio n a t

lo wair-fue l ratios) , o r whic hreduc e th e tim e availabl e fo r soo t oxidatio n(suc ha s retardin g th e combustio ntimin g o r reducin g th e air-fue l mixin g rate ) ten dt o increas e soo t emissions
. Diese l H

C emission s (a s wel l a s th e unburned-fue l portion s of th e particulat e SOF

) occu r primaril y a t

ligh t loads , a s aresul t o f excessiv e fuel-ai r mixing , producin g amixtur e to o lea nt o burn
. Othe r H C source s includ e fue l deposite do nth e combustio nchambe r wall s b y th e injectio n pro cess , fue l retaine di nth e orifice s o f th e injecto r

whic hvaporize s lat e i n combustion , an dpartl y reacte dmixtur e whic hi s subjecte dt o bul k quenchin g b y too-rapi dmixin g wit hair
. Advance dinjectio ntimin g (especiall y a t ligh t load s an dhig hspeeds) , highe r bul k ga s temperatures , an dlowe r injectio n pressure s ten dt o reduc e H C emissions ; hig hai r swir l rate s an dhig hinjectio n pressure s ten dt o increas e them
.

I t i s apparen t

fromth e foregoin g discussio ntha t ther e i s an inher

en t conflic t

betwee nsom

e o f th e mos t

powerfu l diese l N

O contro l technique s an dparticulat e emissions
. Thi s i s th e basi s fo r th e much-discusse d"tradeoff " relationshi p betwee ndiese l N O an dparticulat e emissions
. Thi s "tradeoff " i s no t absolute—variou s N O contro l technique s hav e varyin g effect s o nsoo t an d H C emissions , an dth e importanc e o f thes e effect s varie s a s afunctio n o f engin e spee dan dload
. Thes e tradeoff s d o plac e limit s onth e exten t t o whic h an y on e o f

thes e pollutant s ca nb e reduced , however
. T o minimiz e emission s of a l l thre e pollutant s simultaneousl y require s carefu l optimizatio no f th e fue l injection , fuel-ai r

mixing , an dcombustio nprocesse s ove r th e ful l rang e o f engin e operatin g conditions
.

Visibl e Smoke—Visibl e smok e i s du e primaril y t o th e soo t componen t o f diese l particulat e matter . Unde r mos t operatin g conditions , th e exhaus t plum e fromaproperl y adjuste ddiese l engin e i s normall y invisible , wit ha tota l opacit y (absorbtanc e an dreflectance ) o f tw o percen t

o r less
. Visibl e

2-1 3P.4 0 I' P «• ! I f.« V ' '



### smok e emission s fro mheavy-dut y diesel s ar e typicall y du e t o operatin g a t air-fue l ratio s a t

o r belo w th e smok

e limit , o r

t o poo r

fuel-ai r

mixin g i n th e cylinder
. Poo rmixin g ma y occu r durin g "lug-down " (high-torqu e operatio n a t lo w engin e speeds ) sinc e turbocharge r boost , ai r

swir l level , an dfue l injec

tio npressur e ar e typicall y poore r i nthes e "off-design " conditions
. Margina l air-fue l ratio s als o occu r i nfull-powe r

operatio no f

naturally-aspirate d engines , resultin g i nsom e visibl e smok

e unde r thes e conditions
. I nturbocharge dengines , lo w air-fue l ratio s ca noccu r durin g tran sien t accelerations , sinc e th e inerti ao f th e turbocharge r

roto r mean s tha t

th e a i r suppl y durin g th e firs t fe w second s o f

afull-powe r

acceleratio n i s les s tha nth e ai r

suppl y i nsteady-stat e operation
. T o overcom e thi s problem , turbocharge dengine s i nhighwa y truck s incorporat e anacceleratio n smok e limiter , whic hlimit s th e fue l flo w t o th e engin e unti l th e turbocharge r ha s tim e t o respond
. Thi s reduce s th e transien t powe r an dtorqu e availabl e from th e engine , however
. Fo r thi s reason , smok

e limiter s ar e no t

commonl

y use di n mos t off-highwa y applications
. 2. 4 Emissio nRegulation s

Emission s fro mdiese l engine s use di non-highwa y truck s an dbuse s hav e bee nregulate dsinc e 1972 . Du e t o th e variet y o f

heavy-dut y truc k

sizes , types , an dapplications , i t ha s bee nconsidere dimpractica l t o specif y heavy-dut y emission s limit s i nterm s o f pollutio npe r

uni t o f distanc e trav elle d(e.g . gram s pe r mile) , a s i s don e fo r light-dut y vehicles
. Instead , heavy-dut y emission s regulation s ar e writte nt o appl y t o th e engine , rathe r tha nth e vehicle
. Th e emission s limit s ar e expresse di nterm s o f gram s o f pollutio npe r

uni t o f wor k outpu t fromth e engine , a s measure dove r aspecifie d tes t cycl e o nanengin e dynamometer
. Th e specifi c unit s o f th e U.S . regula

tion s ar e gram s o f

pollutio npe r

brak e horsepower-hou r (g/BHP-hr)
. Federa l an dCaliforni aemission s limit s establishe dfo r heavy-dut y on-highwa y diese l engine s ar e showni nTabl e 2-2 . Regulate dpollutant s includ e

2-1 4TABL E 2-2 . FEDERA L AN D CALIFORNIA

EMISSIONS REGULATION S FO RHEAVY-DUT

YDIESEL ENGINE S

r o ^ _ i L n Federa l 1974-197 8 1979-198 4 1985-198 7 1988-198 9 199 0 1991-199 3 1994 + Californi a 1973-197 4 1975-197 6 1977-197 9 1980-198 3 1984-198 7 1988-199 0 1991-199 3 1994 + C O (g/BHP-hr )
4 0 2 5 15. 5 15. 5 15. 5 15. 5 15. 5
4 0 3 0 2 5 2 5 15. 5 15. 5 15. 5 15. 5 H

C (g/BHP

1. 5 1. 3 1. 3 1. 3 1. 3 1. 3

1. 0 1. 0 1. 3 1. 3 1. 3 1. 3 h r ) 1 6 a 

### io a

1 6 a 

### io a 6.0 a N

O (g/BHP^hr )

10. 7 10. 7 6 . 0 5 . 0 5 . 0

7 . 5 5 . 1 6 . 0 5 . 0 5 . 0 P

M (g/BHP-hr )
N R N R N R 0 . 6 0 . 6 0.2 5 0 . 1
N R N R N R N R N R 0 . 6 0.2 5 0 . 1 Tes t

Procedur e 13-Mod e 13-Mod e Transien t Transien t Transien t Transien t Transien t 13-Mod e 13-Mod e 13-Mod e 13-Mod e Transien t Transien t Transien t Transien t Smoke Opacit y

(Ace /Lug/Peak , Z ) 20/15/5 0 20/15/5 0 20/15/5 0 20/15/5 0 20/15/5 0 20/15/5 0 20/15/5 0 b b b b b b b b 

# 1

NR : No t regulate d Su mo f NO plu s HC emissions . x Federa l Smok e Standard applies .P.4 2



### carbo n monoxid e (CO) , hydrocarbon s (HC) , oxide s o f nitroge n(NOx) , an d(begin

nin g i nmode

l yea r1988 ) particulat e matte r (PM) . A

s apractica l matter , however , onl y th e N

O an dP M regulation s ar e o f

muc hsignificance , sinc e diese l H C an dC O emission s ar e muc

hlowe r tha nth e standard s (whic hwer e writte n fo r gasolin e engines)
.

A separat e regulatio nals o limit s th e maximu msmok e opacit y fo r on-highwa y diese l engines
. Thi s ha dsom e effec t

i nlimitin g particulat e emission s prio r

t o th e establishmen t o f th e P M standard
. However , complianc e wit hfutur e P

M emission s limit s wil l resul t i nsmok

e opacit y level s fa r belo w th e regulate dvalues , essentiall y renderin g th e opacit y regulatio nirrelevant
.

Tes t procedures—th e tes t cycle s an dothe r

procedure s unde r

whic h emission s ar e measure dar e a s importan t a s th e numerica l emission s limits
. Unti l 1985 , gaseou s emission s wer e measure do nth e "13-mode " cycle
. Thi s cycl e consiste do f

steady-stat e operatio na t te ndifferen t

power an dspee dsettings , wit hintervenin g period s o f idle
. Sinc e diese l HC, CO , an dP M emission s ar e heavil y influence db y transien t operation , th e steady-stat e 13-mode procedur e wa s considere dapoo r predicto r

o f in-us e emission s of thes e pollutant s b y highwa y vehicles
. Fo r thi s reason , i t

ha s bee nsupersede dby th e curren t Federa l Heavy-Dut y Transien t Tes t Procedure
. I nthi s procedure , engin e spee d an dloa dar e continuousl y varie daccordin g t o afixe dschedule , whic hi s intende dt o simulat e typica l urba ndriving
.

Unlik e highwa y trucks , mos t off-highwa y diese l application s includ e littl e transien t

operatio n(constructio nequipmen t i s th e majo r

exception)
. Thus , th e 13-mode cycle , wit hit s steady-stat e operation , ma y produc e more representativ e result s tha nth e transien t procedur e fo r

thes e engines
. Thi s i s fortunate , sinc e virtuall y al l of th e availabl e dat ao noff-highwa y diese l emission s ar e base donth e 13-mode o r som e othe r steady-stat e operatin g cycle
. Appropriat e tes t

cycle s fo r

individua l classe s of equipmen t

ar e discusse d furthe r i nSection s Fou r

throug hEight
.

2-1 63. 0 TECHNOLOG Y FO REMISSION S CONTRO

L Thi s sectio nsummarize s th e curren t stat e o f

th e ar t

i ndiese l emission s control
. Emission s contro l technolog y fo r high-speed , on-highwa y diese l engine s ha s advance drapidl y ove r th e las t

fe w year s du e t o recen t EP A an dCaliforni aAR

B regulation s imposin g "technolog y forcing " emission s stan - dard s fo r

th e 1988 , 1991 , an d199 4 mode l years . Thes e development s ar e describe da t

lengt hi n anothe r Radia n repor t

(Weave r

an dKlausmeier , 1987) , fro mwhic hmos t

o f Sectio n 3. 1 ha s bee n adapted
. Man y o f thes e development s a r e directl y applicabl e t o high-spee doff-highwa y engine s a s well
. Progres s i ncontrollin g emission s fro mmedium-spee dengine s ha s bee n muchmor e limited
. Thi s i s a t

leas t partl y du e t o th e lac k o f significan t

regulator y pressur e o n thi s engin e class
. Emissio n control s fo r thes e tw o engin e classe s ar e discusse dseparatel y below
. 

### 3. 1 High-Spee dEngine s

Virtuall y al l heavy-dut y diese l engin e manufacturer s hav e mounte d intensiv e researc han ddevelopmen t effort s i nemission s control , i norde r t o b e abl e t o compl y wit hth e 198 8 an d199 1 emission s standards
. Complianc e wit hth e 198 8 standard s ha s bee nattained , an dcomplianc e wit hth e fa r more stringen t 199 1 standard s o f

5. 0 g/BHP-h r

N O an d0.2 5 g/BHP-h r P M no w appear s withi n reac h(Weaver

an dKlausmeier , 1987a) . Sinc e on-highwa y an doff-highwa y engine s ar e identica l i nthei r underlyin g technologies , al l o f th e basi c researc hperforme di nthi s effor t shoul db e applicabl e t o off-highwa y engine s a s well
. Muc

ho f th e applicatio nan ddesig nwor k shoul dals o b e directl y applicabl e t o off-highwa y engine s i nGroup 2 , an d(t o alesse r extent ) Group 3 . However , muc

hdetaile ddevelopmen t an dapplicatio nengineerin g woul dstil l b e neede dt o adap t

thes e technologie s t o th e differen t requirement s an d operatin g pattern s o f off-highwa y service
. Overview—Diese l engin e emission s o f N O , PM , an dH C ca nb e reduce d b y carefull y tailorin g th e ai r induction , fue l injection , fuel-ai r mixing , an d othe r element s o f

th e combustio nprocess . Thi s in-cylinde r emission s contro l
3- 1P.4 4



### i s limite db y th e tradeoff s discusse di nSectio n2.3 . Diese l emission s ca n als o b e reduce dthroug haftertreatment—physica l o r chemica l treatmen t

of th e exhaus t gase s afte r

the y leav e th e cylinder
. Tabl e 3- 1 list s th e significan t emissio ncontro l technologie s i nus e o r unde r developmen t

i neac ho f

thes e categorie s fo r

on-highwa y engines
. Th e las t fe w year s hav e see ntremendou s progres s i nth e contro l o f diese l engin e emission s i nth e cylinder
. A s aresult , i t

no w appear s likel y tha t man y on-highwa y engines—especiall y thos e use di nth e larges t o r "heavy-heavy " truc k

class—ma y b e abl e t o compl y wit hth e 199 1 emission s standard s b y in-cylinde r mean s alone
. I f

certificatio n testin g wer e conducte d wit hlow-sulfu r

fuel , mos t

ne w heavy-dut y on-highwa y diese l engine s woul db e abl e t o mee t

th e 199 1 standard s withou t th e us e o f

atrap , althoug hsom e woul d requir e th e us e o f

acatalyti c converte r o r othe r non-tra p aftertreatmen t techniqu e t o reduc e particulat e emissions
. Thes e advance s hav e als o brough t th e 199 4 particulat e standard s o f 0. 1 g/BHP-hr

withi nth e rang e o f possibility , give na nefficien t

tra p an dlow-sulfu r fue l (Weaver

and Klausmeier , 1987a) .

In-cylinde r

emission s control—Recen t progres s i nin-cylinde r emis

sion s contro l ha s bee nmad e possible , i nlarg e part , b y improve dunderstandin g o f th e diese l combustio nprocess , an dof th e factor s affectin g pollutan t formatio nan ddestruction
. Pollutan t formatio nan ddestructio ni nth e cylinde r ar e determine db

y th e specifi c cours e of th e diese l combustio nprocess . Modifyin g thi s proces s t o minimiz e pollutio ninvolve s acomple x multi-dimen

siona l tradeof f

betwee nN

O , HC , an dP M emissions , fue l economy , powe r output , smoke , cold-star t

ability , cost , an dman y othe r considerations
. Thes e change s g o t o th e hear t

o f diese l engin e design , an dthe y hav e th e potentia l eithe r t o dramaticall y enhanc e o r dramaticall y degrad e a nengine' s performanc e relativ e t o it s competitors
. A s aresult , engin e manufacturer s hav e devote dth e bul k o f thei r researc han ddevelopmen t resource s t o thi s area . Mos t engin e manufacturer s hav e followe dabroadl y simila r approac ht o in-cylinde r

control , althoug hth e specifi c technique s use ddiffe r considerabl y
3- 2P.4 5



# RADIA N

TABL E 3-1 . TECHNIQUE S FO RDIESE LENGINEEMISSION S CONTRO L

IN-CYLINDE RCONTROL S Fue l Injectio

nSyste m Lo w sac/zero sa

c nozzle s Retarde d (fixed ) injectio

ntimin g Variabl e injectio

ntimin g Hig hinjectio

npressur e Transient smok

e limiter Governo r curv

e shapin

g Electroni c fue l rat e contro l Electroni c injectio ntimin g contro l Reduce d initia l rat e of injectio n Variabl e fue l injectio nrat e Ai r chargin

g syste m Turbochargin

g Intercoolin

g Jacke t Wate r Air-ai r Lo w flo w air-wate r Separat e circui t air-wate r Low-inerti a turbocharge r Variabl e geometr

y turbocharge r Externally-driventurbocharge r Turbocompoun

d engin e Mechanica l supercharge r Gas-dynami c supercharge r Combustio

nChamber Reduce dcrevic e volum

e Optimized compressio nrati o Optimize

d ai r swir l rati o Variabl e ai r swir l rati o Re-entran t bowl combustio nchamber Hea t insulatio

n Indirec t injectio

n Ai r cei l ReducedOi l Consumptio n Exhaus t Ga s Recirculatio n
Continue d 

### 3- 3P.4 6

TABL E 3- 1 (Continued )

AFTERTREATMEN

T CONTROL S Trap-oxidize r System s Trap s Cellular cordierit e cerami c monolit h Cellular mullit e fiber tra p Cerami c foa

m Conductiv

e Si C monolit h Wovensilica-fibe r "candle " tra p Preciou s meta l catalyze d wire-mes htra

p Regeneratio

nTechnique s Diese l fue l burner/bypas s Electri c heater/bypas s Exhaus t temperature increas e Catalyze

d tra p Catalyti c fue l additive s Catalys t injectio

ni nexhaus t Revers e flow/recyclin g Catalyti c Converter s Cellular monolit h Pellet-type Electrostati c Precipitator/agglomerator Selectiv

e Catalyti c Reductio n RapReNo xProces s



### 3- 4

# RADfA N

fro mon e manufacture r t o th e next . Thi s typica l approac ht o in-cylinde r emission s contro l include s th e followin g majo r elements
.

• Minimiz e parasiti c H C an dP M emission s (thos e no t directl y relate dt o th e combustio nprocess ) b y minimizin g nozzl e sa c volum e an dreducin g oi l consumptio nt o th e exten t possibl e

• Reduc e P

M emission s a t

constan t

N O b y refinin g th e turbo

charger/engin e matc han dimprovin g engin e "breathing " characteristics
. Man y manufacturer s ar e als o experimentin g wit hvariable-geometr y turbocharger s t o improv e th e turbocharge r

matc hove r

awide r

spee drange .

• Reduc e P

M an dN O (wit hsom

e penalt y i nHC

) b y coolin g th e compresse dcharg e ai r

a s muc

ha s possible , vi aair-ai r o r low

temperatur e air-wate r aftercoolers
.

• Furthe r

reduc e N

O t o mee t

regulator y target s by severel y retardin g fue l injectio ntimin g ove r mos t o f th e speed/loa d range . Minimiz e th e advers e effect s of retarde dtimin g o n smoke , starting , an dlight-loa dH C emission s vi aaflexibl e timin g syste mt o advanc e th e timin g unde r thes e conditions
.

• Recove r

th e P M increas e du e t o retarde dtimin g b y increasin g th e fue l injectio npressur e an dinjectio nrate .

• Improv e ai r

utilizatio n(andreduc e P M emissions ) by minimizin g parasiti c volume s suc ha s piston/cylinde r hea dclearanc e an

d pisto nto p lan dvolume
.

• Optimiz e in-cylinde r ai r motio nthroug hchange s i ncombustio n chambe r geometr y an dintak e ai r swir l t o provid e adequat e mixin g

3- 5P.4 8



### a t lo w speed s (t o minimiz e smok e an dPM

) withou t

over-rapi d mixin g a t

hig hspeed s (whic hwoul dincreas e H C an dN O ) .

• Contro l smok

e an dparticulat e emission s i nfull-powe r operatio n an dtransien t

acceleration s throug himprove dgoverno r curv e shapin g an dtransien t smok e limitin g (generall y throug helec

troni c governo r

controls)
. Withafe

w notabl e exception s (suc ha s air-ai r aftercooling) , thes e technologie s shoul db e applicabl e t o th e grea t majorit y o f

Grou p 2 an dGroup 3 off-highwa y engine s a s well
. Man y woul dals o appl y t o Grou p 4 engines , althoug hth e cost s o f som e technologie s (suc ha s turbochargin g an dafter

cooling ) migh t

prov e prohibitive
. I nadditio nt o thes e generall y use dapproaches , anumber o f othe r promisin g in-cylinde r contro l technique s ar e unde r developmen t

b y variou s manufacturers
. Thes e includ e variabl e ai r swir l device s fo r

improve dcontro l o f in-cylinde r

ai r motio nove r

arang e o f

speeds ; fue l injectio npump s wit h electroni c contro l o f th e fue l injectio nrate ; proprietar y technolog y t o minimiz e th e initia l fue l injectio nrate , thu s reducin g premixe dburnin g an d N O emissions ; an dinnovativ e superchargin g technologie s t o minimiz e o r elimi

nat e turbocharge r

lag
. Turbocompoun dengines , whic har e bein g develope d primaril y fo r

fue l econom

y reasons , wil l als o hel p reduc e emission s somewha t throug hincrease dengin e efficiency
.

I t i s strikin g tha t

mos t of th e in-cylinde r

emissio nreduction s attaine dt o dat e i non-highwa y engine s hav e com e frompainstakin g optimizatio n an dincrementa l improvement s t o engin e design , rathe r tha nfromth e applicatio n o f majo r ne w technologies
. Technologie s suc ha s electroni c timin g contro l an d governin g hav e playe dafairl y mino r rol e i nreducin g emissions , althoug hthe y hav e certainl y helpe dt o offse t som e o f th e deleteriou s effect s o f emission s contro l onengin e performance
. Thi s suggest s that—a s a ninteri m solution—fairl y substantia l improvement s i noff-highwa y engin e emission s migh t b e obtainabl e quickl y an da t moderat e cos t

throug hrelativel y mino r desig n an d
3- 6

### calibratio nchanges
. Thi s coul dresul t i noff-highwa y emission s level s comparabl e t o thos e i ntruc k engine s meetin g th e 198 8 standards
. T o attai n emissio nlevel s comparabl e t o thos e mandate dfo r 199 1 woul drequir e (i n mos t cases ) complet e redesig nan dre-optimizatio no f th e engine— aver y time-consumin g an dexpensiv e process .

Severa l technologie s ar e conspicuousl y absen t fromth e lis t

o f thos e unde r developmen t

fo r on-highwa y engines , du e t o thei r advers e effect s o n fue l econom y o r durability
. Th e mos t significan t

of thes e ar e exhaus t ga s recirculatio n(EGR

) an dindirec t

injection
. Properl y modulated , EG Rca n significantl y reduc e N O emission s wit haminima l increas e i nPM . Oi l contaminatio nan dengin e wear rate s ar e increase db y EGR , however , an d manufacturer s hav e bee nstrongl y resistan t t o it s use . Whil e relativel y low i n emissions , ID I engine s ar e 5-1 0 percen t les s fue l efficien t tha nDI-engines , an dhav e los t

marke t shar e a s aresult
. Th e primar y advantag e o f thes e tw o technologie s i s thei r lo w initia l cost . Thi s make s themwel l suite dt o th e smal l high-spee ddiese l engine s i nGrou p 4 , fo r whic hthei r

disadvantage s of increase dwear

an dfue l consumptio nar e leas t significant
. Aftertreatmen t

contro l technologies—Potentia l exhaus t aftertreatmen t technologie s includ e trap-oxidizer s an dflow-throug hcatalyti c converters , bot h o f whic hwoul daffec t

primaril y P

M an dH C emissions
. Du

e t o th e oxidizin g natur e o f

diese l exhaust , aftertreatmen t technique s fo r

N O requir e tha t

a separat e reducin g agen t b e supplied
. Despit e considerabl e publicit y give n t o on e suc hsystem , thi s approac hi s considere dinfeasibl e fo r genera l applicatio ni nvehicles
.

Mos t o f th e researc han ddevelopmen t activit y i ndiese l aftertreat

men t involve s trap-oxidizers
. A trap-oxidize r syste mconsist s o f adurabl e particulat e filte r

i nth e exhaus t

(th e "trap") , alon g wit hsom e mean s o f regeneratin g th e filte r b y burnin g of

f ("oxidizing" ) th e collecte dparticulat e matter . Developmen t

activit y i s concentrate donth e "oxidizer " portio n o f th e system , a s suitabl e filte r medi ahav e bee navailabl e fo r som e time
.

3- 7P.5 0 ^



### Progres s i ntrap-oxidize r developmen t

ha s bee nslow
. Thi s i s a t leas t partl y duj t o th e limite dresource s bein g devote dt o trap-oxidize r R&D . Onl y afe

w manufacturer s appea r t o hav e devote dmajo r effort s t o trap-oxidize r syste mdevelopment
. Foremos t amon g thes e i s Daimler-Benz , whic hha s place d5 0 prototyp e trap s onbuse s operatin g i nWes t German y (Hardenberg , 1987) . On e othe r U.S . engin e manufacture r ha s als o devote dconsiderabl e effor t t o trap-oxidize r

development , an dha s successfull y accumulate dmore tha n 123,00 0 mile s o naprototyp e system . Trap-oxidizer s hav e als o bee nteste dsuccessfull y i nanumber

o f undergroun dminin g application s (Bre v e t al. , 1987) . The feasibilit y o f

trap-oxidizer s i noff-highwa y application s woul d depen do nth e specifi c applicatio nan doperatin g conditions
. Th e applicatio n o f trap-oxidizer s i ntruck s ha s bee nslowe db y th e nee dt o ensur e regeneratio n unde r al l possibl e operatin g condition s (includin g prolonge dlow-powe r operation) , withou t

interventio nfro mth e driver
. Engine s i nman y off-highwa y application s ar e subjec t t o muc hhighe r an dmore consisten t loa dfactor s tha n thos e i nhighwa y trucks
. I naddition , off-highwa y equipmen t operator s ten dt o b e more involve di nmonitorin g an dmaintainin g thei r equipment
. A simple r (andthu s les s expensive ) regeneratio nsyste mwoul db e feasibl e unde r thes e circumstances—indeed , suc hsystem s hav e see ngoo dacceptanc e i nundergroun d mining
. O

nth e othe r

hand , safet y concern s (e.g . i nboats ) o r packagin g problem s coul drul e ou t trap-oxidize r

us e i nsom

e off-highwa y applications
. The succes s o f

in-cylinde r

particulat e contro l effort s ha s le d severa l manufacturer s t o investigat e th e feasibilit y o f flow-throug hcatalyti c converter s fo r

reducin g particulat e emissions
. Give nth e lo w engine-ou t particulat e level s see no ncurren t developmen t

engines , an dth e hig horgani c conten t o f th e particulat e matter , th e us e o f acatalyti c converte r no w appear s a s apossibl y viabl e approach
. B y oxidizin g muc

ho f th e particulat e SOF, a catalyti c converte r

coul dreduc e particulat e emission s b y 2 5 t o 3 5 percent , whic hwoul db e enoug ht o mee t th e 199 1 standard
. A catalyti c converte r syste m woul db e muc

hsimple r

an dles s expensiv e tha natrap-oxidizer , sinc e th e

3- 8P.5 1



### flow-throug hdesig no f th e catalyti c converte r avoid s th e proble mo f regenera tion
. Th

e majo rdrawbac k

t o th e catalyti c converte r approac hi ntruck s i s sulfat e production—the y woul dprobabl y b e feasibl e onl y wit hlow-sulfu r fuel
. Catalyti c converter s i noff-highwa y application s woul db e subjec t t o th e sam

e safet y an dpackagin g concern s discusse dabov e fo r trap-oxidizers
. 3. 2 Medium-Spee d Engine s



### Du e t o th e lac k

o f regulator y pressure , th e developmen t o f emissio n control s fo r

th e medium-spee ddiese l engine s i nGrou p 1 ha s lagge dconsiderabl y behin dtha t

fo r high-speed , on-highwa y engines
. Mos t emissions-relate dwor k o n medium-dut y engine s ha s focusse do ncontro l o f visibl e smoke , o r

o nimprovin g powe r outpu t an dfue l economy , wit hemissio nreduction s onl y aside-effect
. A limite damount

of wor k o nN O emission s contro l (primaril y fo r locomotives ) ha s als o bee nperformed , a s wil l b e discusse dbelow
. I naddition , som e studie s hav e examine dth e effect s o f alternativ e fuel s suc ha s methano l an dwater/fue l emulsion s onlocomotiv e emission s an defficiency
.

Smoke/particulat e control—Visibl e smok e fro mlocomotive s i s a n annoyance , an dha s bee nsubjecte dt o regulator y limit s i nvariou s jurisdiction s aroun dth e U.S . Poo r publi c relation s an dsoilin g of railroa dpropertie s an d rollin g stoc k

hav e als o le dt o pressur e t o reduc e smok e emissions
. A

t th e sam

e time , man

y technica l change s adopte dt o reduc e fue l consumptio nand/o r increas e power outpu t hav e als o helpe dt o reduc e smok e emissions
. Som

e o f th e change s sinc e th e earl y '70 s hav e included : us e of low-sa c injectio nnozzles , highe r fue l injectio npressure , increase dus e of turbocharging , highe r boos t pressures , increase dturbocharge r efficiency , more effectiv e aftercoolers , reduce dparasiti c volume , an dimprovement s i ncylinde r ai r flo w (Kotli nan d Williams , 1975 ; EMD , 1978) . Thes e hav e resulte di nvisibl e smok e level s (a t se alevel ) i nth e 3- 5 percen t opacit y rang e a t

ful l load
. Du e t o th e exhaus t

volume s involved , onl y afe w measurement s of medium-spee dengin e P M emission s hav e bee nperformed
. However , tw o set s of

3- 9P.5 2

measurement s o n moder n turbocharge dlocomotiv e engine s performe da t Southwes t Researc h hav e show n lo w t o moderat e P M levels
. ~Measure demission s range dfro m abou t 0.2 6 g/BHP-h rfo r a n EM D engin e t o 0.4 8 g/BHP-h r fo r aG Eengin e i na line-hau l operatin g cycle
. Fo r aswitch-engin e dut y cycle , emission s fo r th e G Eengin e increase dt o abou t 0. 8 g/BHP-hr , bu t

thos e fo r

th e EM

D engin e di dno t increas e a t

all
. Thes e dat aar e discusse da t greate r

lengt hi n Sectio nFour . Th e P M emission s fro molder-technolog y engine s ar e har dt o estimate
. Measurement s b y EM D o n a20-cylinder , turbocharged , 197 3 mode l engin e gav e cycle-averag e P

M emission s o f

0.44 5 g/BHP-h r

(EMD , 1978) . Thes e dat ama y no t b e full y comparabl e t o th e SWR I data , however , du e t o difference s i n measuremen t

technique
. Th e onl y othe r P M emission s dat aextan t fo r older-technolog y engine s come fro mSWRI' s Roots-blow n 2-56 7 engin e (Baker , 1980) . O

n 39-cetan e fuel , brake-specifi c P M emission s fro mthi s engin e range d fro m1.2 5 g/BHP-h r a t ful l loa dt o 0. 7 g/BHP-h r a t intermediat e loads , an d climbe dt o abou t

1. 0 g/BHP-h r

a t ligh t load
. I f

thes e laborator y dat aar e representativ e o f

comparabl e engine s i n th e field , thos e engine s mus t b e emittin g substantiall y mor e tha n 1. 0 g/BHP-h r average dove r

thei r dut y cycle
. NO x control—T o date , wor k o n N O control s fo r

medium-spee dengine s ha s bee nlimite dt o laborator y studies , o r t o modification s t o specifi c smal l group s o f

engines
. Actua l in-us e N O emission s fro mlocomotiv e an dothe r medium-spee dengine s ar e completel y uncontrolled , and—a s aresult—ver y high
. Typica l N

O emissio nfactor s fo r locomotive s an dmedium-spee dmarin e engine s a r e i nth e rang e o f 1 0 t o 1 6 g/BHP-hr
. Thi s i s tru e eve n fo r ver y highl y rate dturbocharged/aftercoole dengines , whic hwoul db e expecte dt o hav e lowe r N O emissions
. x Genera l Motors ' Electromotiv e Divisio n (EMD ) ha s experimente dwit h t h e us e o f

retarde dinjectio n timin g an dincrease dinjectio n rate s i nit s 645-serie s engines
. Dat afro mtest s o n thre e 16-cylinde r EM D engine s wit h thes e modification s ar e show n i n Tabl e 3-1 . A s th e tabl e indicates , N O x emission s wer e reduce db y 52-6 7 percen t (t o 6 g/BHP-hr) , a t acos t

i nfue l

3-1 0TABL E3-2 . EFFEC T O

FENGIN

EMODIFICATION S O N G M ELECTRO-MOTIVE DIVISIO N(EMD ) 16V-64 EENGIN EPERFORMANC

EAN D EMISSION S 

# i

s i
Mode l Applicatio n Max i mu m Rate d Outpu t (H p a t RPM ) Change s Gaseou s Emission s (g/bhp-Hr ) N O C O H C Fue l

Consumptio n (Lb/bhp-Hr ) Smok e Opacity (% ) E2 , E 8 Powe r Drilling

u > i E 7 Marin e Suppl y 220 0 a t 90 0 Non e 6 degre e retar

d 6 degre e retard , ad d turbo , change , piston , liner , an d camshaf t 287 5 a t 90 0 Non e

Modif yt o E7C , retard timing E9 C Oi l Wel l Drilling 340 0 a t 90 0 Non e 1 3 degre e retard , chang e injectors , an d camshaf t 18. 1 0. 8 0.3 9 0.40 0 11. 1 1. 9 0.3 9 0.41 0 6. 0 0. 5 0.3 0 0.42 7

12. 4 6. 0 15. 1 6. 1 0. 9 0. 6 0.3 8 0.5 0 0. 3 0.2 5 0.3 2 0.2 6 —

— 0.35 0 0.37 5 5. 0

6. 4 4. 0 6. 6

Source : Mr . Hug h Williams , EMD , cite d i n Sant a Barbar a APC D (1987) .P.5 4



### econom y o f abou t 7 percent . Smok

e opacit y wa s als o increase dsomewhat , bu t H C emission s wer e reduced
. P M emission s wer e no t measured , bu t

the y wer e probabl y affecte dfairl y little
. P M emission s consis t

o f soo t plu s heav y HC ; th e increas e i nsmok e an dreductio ni nH

C woul dten dt o offse t eac hother
. Anothe r N O reductio nstud y wa s conducte dunde r th e directio n o f

th e Sant aBarbar aAi r

Pollutio nContro l Distric t (1987) . I nthi s study , emission s fro mtw o EM

D 12-64 5 engine s o nth e suppl y boa t Chesapeak e Seahors e wer e reduce dfromanestimate d13. 9 g/BH Ph r i nth e uncontrolle dconditio n t o a n averag e 8. 3 g/BHP-h r a t ful l loa dwit hmoderatel y retarde dinjectio ntiming
. Us e o f room-temperatur e wate r (rathe r

tha nengin e coolin g water ) i n th e aftercoole r

o f th e starboar dengin e reduce dth e intak e temperatur e b y 9 C a t ful l load , an dgav e afurthe r N O reductio nfro m7. 8 g/BHP-h r t o 7.1 . Unde r cruis e conditions , th e reduce dcoolan t temperatur e gav e a1 2 C reductio n i n intak e ai r

temperatur e (t o abou t 6 2 C) , reducin g N

O emission s from9. 2 t o 7. 6 g/BHP-h
. Air-ai r

intercooling , o r

amore efficien t

air-wate r

intercoole r coul dhav e give n3- 4 time s thi s temperatur e reduction , an dwoul dlikel y hav e produce dN

O emission s i nth e 6 g/BHP-h r range . EP A ha s als o funde dstudie s of N O reductio ntechnique s fo r EM D engine s a t

Southwes t

Researc hInstitut e (Stormen t e t al. , 1974) . The SWR I dat asho

w tha t retarde dtimin g an dEG Rar e bot heffectiv e N O reductio n x techniques
. Retarde dinjectio ntimin g reduce dN O emission s b

y 2 6 t o 3 8 percent , whil e 3 0 percen t EG Rreduce dthemb

y more tha n5 0 percent , a t th e cos t of amoderat e increas e i nsmok e opacit y a t

ful l load
. Thes e studie s wer e conducte dwit haRoots-blow n2-cylinde r EM D 56 7 engine , however , an dma y thu s b e unrepresentativ e of th e turbocharged/aftercoole dEM D 645-serie s engine s whic hmak

e u p mos t

of th e curren t

population
. Onl y ver y limite ddat aar e availabl e o nN O emissio nreduction s i n four-strok e engines
. Th e mos t commo nfour-stroke s ar e th e G Elocomotiv e engines , whic hhav e N O emissio nfactor s i nth e 1 1 t o 1 9 g/BHP-h r rang e (Ingalls , 1985)
. N

o emissio ncontro l dat afo r thes e engine s ar e available
.

3-1 2

### Caterpilla rwa s abl e t o provid e som e limite ddat ao nth e effect s o f retarde d injectio n timin g i nit s 3600-serie s engines , however
. Thes e dat asho w a reductio no f

7. 2 percen ti nbrake-specifi c N O emission s a t

ful l loa d(fro ma bas e o f abou t 1 0 g/BHP-hr ) fo r

ever y degre e of

injectio ntimin g retardation
. Thi s i s achieve da t

th e cos t

o f a3. 7 percen t

reductio ni npower , 0. 9 percen t increas e i nfue l consumption , an dabou t .0 6 g/BHP-hr

increas e i n dr y particulat e matte r

(i.e
. soot ) emissions
. The dr y particulat e matte r increas e wa s calculate dfromsmok e opacit y measurements ; actua l tota l P M emission s wer e no t measured
. Alternativ e Fuels—Man y medium-spee dstationar y engine s ar e operate d eithe r wholl y o nnatura l ga s o r wit hdua l natura l gas/diese l fueling
. Experiment s wit hnatural-ga s fuele dlocomotiv e engine s hav e bee nundertake n (Wakenell , 1987) , an da t leas t on e locomotiv e fuele dwit hcompresse dnatura l ga s (CNG

) ha s bee nteste di nservic e (Olso nan dReed , 1987) . A t present , manufacturer s o f

stationar y natural-ga s engine s ar e routinel y guaranteein g N O emission s level s o f

2. 0 g/BHP-hr

o r less , usin g lean-bur ntechniques
. Th e sam e lean-bur ntechnolog y coul dconceivabl y b e applie dt o mobil e medium-spee d engines
. Som

e limite dexperimenta l wor k wit hmethano l us e i nmedium-spee d engine s ha s als o bee nundertake n(Woo dan dStorment , 1980 ; Baker , 1981) . Problem s wit hdamagin g combustio nknoc k a t hig hmethano l substitutio n level s hav e bee nfound , an dth e emission s benefit s hav e no t bee nlarge
. Feasibilit y o f

furthe r

emissio ncontrols—Althoug hlarge r and slower-running , medium-spee dengine s ar e fundamentall y simila r t o heav y truc k engine s i nthei r

basi c combustio nsystems . Thus , mos t o f th e in-cylinde r emissio ncontro l technique s develope dfo r truc k engine s shoul db e readil y adaptabl e t o medium-spee dengine s a s well
. Som e ke y emissio n contro l technique s applicabl e t o medium-heav y diese l engine s include : retarde d injectio ntimin g i nconjunctio nwit hincrease dinjectio npressure , electronically-controlle duni t injectors , low-temperatur e aftercooling , an d optimizatio no f

ai r flo w an dfuel-ai r

mixin g i nth e combustio nchamber
. 3-1 3P.5 6



### Give nequivalen t

level s of

emission s contro l developmen t and technology , medium-spee dengine s woul db e expecte dt o produc e lowe r emission s level s tha nhigh-spee dengines
. Mor e tim e i s availabl e fo r combustio n du e t o thei r lowe r rotationa l speed , s o tha t th e pre-mixe dburnin g phas e (whic h produce s muc

ho f th e N O ) shoul daccoun t

fo r asmalle r

fractio no f

th e total
. Fo r th e sam

e reason , th e tim e availabl e fo r th e burn-ou t

o f soo t particle s forme ddurin g combustio ni s muc hgreater , s o tha t

asmalle r

amount o f soo t shoul db e emitted
.

I naddition , lubricatin g oi l fromth e cylinde r wall s presentl y account s fo r

alarg e fractio no f P M emission s i nhigh-spee dengines
. Du e t o thei r greate r

cylinde r

volume s (resultin g i nahighe r powe r t o wal l are a ratio) , i t

shoul daccoun t

fo r asmalle r

fractio no f

medium-spee dP

M emissions
. Finally , medium-spee dengine s normall y operat e unde r stead y o r

quasi-stead y stat e conditions , a s oppose dt o th e highl y transien t operatin g condition s experience dby truc k

engines
. Assumin g tha t th e tes t

cycl e adopte dreflecte d thes e conditions , th e brake-specifi c P M an dH

C emission s frommedium-spee d engine s woul db e expecte dt o b e lowe r fo r tha t reaso nalone
.

3-1 44 . 0 LOCOMOTIVE S Railroa d locomotive s ar e overwhelmingl y diese l powered , an dthei r larg e number s an dlarg e powe r outpu t pe r uni t make the mon e o f

th e mos t

signif

ican t off-highwa y emissio n sources . Railroadin g ha s undergon e majo r change s i n th e las t decade , du e t o th e impac t o f highe r interes t

rates , hig hfue l prices , an dderegulation
. Thes e hav e resulte di n asmalle r numbe r o f locomotive s bein g use dmor e intensivel y tha n i n th e past , an di n considerabl e technica l upgradin g o f existin g locomotives
. Thes e trend s hav e probabl y ha dth e effec t o f lowerin g railroa demission s (a s wel l a s fue l consumption ) significantly
. However , sale s o f new locomotive s hav e droppe ddramaticall y sinc e th e lat e '70s , resultin g i n aslowe r

turnove r

o f th e existin g fleet
. 4. 1 Engin e Characteristic s an dOperatin g Condition s

Moder nrailwa y locomotive s ar e almos t exclusivel y diesel-electric
. I nthi s arrangement , th e diese l prim e move r drive s a n electri c generator ; curren t fro mwhic hdrive s th e individua l electri c tractio n motor s tha t driv e th e wheels
. Thi s ha s th e effec t o f isolatin g th e diese l engin e fro mchange s i n locomotiv e spee dan dload
. Th e locomotiv e contro l syste mprovide s fo r eigh t engine/generato r

powe r level s o r

"notches" , plu s idl e an ddynami c brak e (i n whic hth e whee l motor s ar e use da s generator s t o slo w th e train)
. I n an y give n notch , th e diese l engin e run s a t constan t

spee dan dload
. Engin e RP M an dpowe r outpu t chang e onl y a s aresul t o f change s i n th e notc hsetting
. Thus , transien t

effect s o n locomotiv e emission s ar e probabl y minimal
. I n 1982 , th e averag e horsepowe r fo r al l locomotive s wa s 2,34 1 (Sta

- tistica l Abstrac t

o f th e U.S. , 1985)
. Individua l locomotive s rang e fro munde r 1,00 0 h p t o ove r

7,00 0 hp (McDonald , 1986) . Unit s 1,50 0 hp an dbelo w ar e generall y use dexclusivel y fo r switchin g an dtransfe r purpose s (movin g smal l group s o f

car s aroun daswitchyard , o r deliverin g the mwithi n a n urba narea) . Switchin g locomotive s mak e u p approximatel y 1 9 percen t o f th e U.S . locomotiv e

4 - 1P.5 8



### populatio n(Ingalls , 1985)
. Large r general-purpos e locomotive s (typicall y 2,00 0 t o 4,00 0 hp ) ar e designe dprimaril y fo r line-hau l (intercity ) operation
. However , man

y large r general-purpos e locomotive s (especiall y olde r ones ) ar e als o use di nswitchin g an dtransfe r applications
. Base do ndat ai n Ingall s (1985) , Radia nestimate dtha t abou t 8,70 0 o f

th e 22,90 0 locomotive s use di n 198 6 b y U.S . Clas s 1 railroad s wer e assigne dt o line-hau l service , wit hth e res t bein g use di nswitchin g an dtransfe r applications
. Line-hau l operatio n i s estimate dt o accoun t fo r abou t 7 2 percen t

o f tota l railroa dfue l use , howeve r (calculate dfromIngalls , 1985)
.

The vas t

majorit y of

diesel-electri c locomotive s ar e powere db y medium-speed , large-bor e diese l engine s o f 1,00 0 t o 4,00 0 hp
. Ninety-fiv e percen t o f al l U.S . locomotive s i nus e wer e manufacture db y jus t tw o companies : Genera l Electri c (1 4 percent ) an dth e Electromotiv e Divisio n(EMD ) of Genera l Motor s (8 1 percent ) (Ingalls , 1985)
. Mos t of th e remainde r

wer e produce db y Bombardier , aCanadia ncompany , usin g Alc o engines
. Som e of th e recently-introduce dCaterpilla r 3600-serie s engine s hav e als o bee n use di n locomotiv e applications
.

EM D locomotive s ar e powere db y EMD-produced , large-bore , medium-spee d (900-1,00 0 RP

M maximum

) two-strok e diese l engine s drivin g electri c generators . Curren t EM D general-purpos e unit s ar e powere dby turbocharge d16-cylinde r engine s o f

64 5 an d71 0 cubi c inc hdisplacemen t pe r cylinder , an dhav e ahorse

powe r rang e from2,20 0 h p t o 3,95 0 hp
. EM D offer s switchin g locomotive s powere db y eigh t

an dtwelve-cylinde r version s o f

th e 64 5 engine
. Thes e engine s ar e typicall y Roots-blow nan dgenerat e 1,10 0 h p t o 1,65 0 hp
. The EM D 64 5 an d710-serie s engin e familie s ar e direc t descendent s o f th e EM D 567-serie s Roots-blow nlocomotiv e engine s originall y introduce di n 1938 . Thi s engin e famil y ha s bee ncontinuousl y improve dan duprate dove r th e year s wit hth e additio no f turbocharging , intercooling , increase ddisplacemen t pe r cylinde r

(t o 64 5 cubi c inche s i n1966 , 71 0 i n1985) , improve dcomponen t designs , an dhighe r

power ratings
. A

s aresul t

o f EMD' s desig nphilosophy , mos t of th e improve dcomponent s develope dove r th e year s canb e retrofi t t o
4- 2P.5 9



### existin g engine s whe n the y ar e rebuil t

(Kotli nan dWilliams , 1975)
. A s a result , man

y differen tversion s o f th e EM D engine s ar e no

w i nservice , incorpo

ratin g varyin g level s o f technolog y an dhavin g varyin g emission s levels
. Genera l Electri c line-hau l an dgenera l purpos e locomotive s ar e als o powere db y large-bore , medium-spee ddiese l engine s drivin g electri c generators . G Egenera l purpos e unit s ar e typicall y powere db y G EFDL-1 2 cylinder , 3,00 0 h p turbocharge dengine s an dhav e amaximu mspee do f

7 0 mph
. G

E(an dals o ALCO

) engine s diffe r

fromEM

D engine s i nusin g afour-strok e rathe r tha natwo-strok e cycle
. The G

EFD Lserie s run s froman8 cylinder , 1,80 0 h p uni t t o apai r

o f 1 6 cylinder , 3,60 0 hp unit s (Ingalls , 1985)
. Mos t curren t G Eswitchin g unit s ar e powere db y high-spee d(180 0 RPM ) diese l engine s purchase dfroman outsid e supplier—typicall y twi nCummins 6 o r 8 cylinder , 30 0 t o 55 0 hp , 4 stroke , turbocharge dengines
. 4. 2 Curren t

Emissio nFactor s Gaseou s emissio nfactor s (HC , CO , N O ) an doperatin g cycle s fo r locomotive s wer e addresse di narecen t repor t b y Southwes t

Researc h(Ingalls , 1985)
. Ingall s compile dan dcompare dgaseou s emissio nfactor s fromanumber o f publishe dreport s an dmanufacturer' s data
. Emissio nfactor s fo r anumber

o f specifi c engin e technologie s ar e showni nTabl e 4-1 . Ingall s the ncombine dth e emissio nan dfue l consumptio nfactor s show ni nth e table , usin g dat ao n locomotiv e populations , t o arriv e a t th e composit e emissio nfactor s show n i n Tabl e 4-2 . However , Ingall s faile dt o accoun t fo r th e fac t

tha t olde r locomotive s ar e likel y t o hav e bee nrebuil t usin g newe r

injecto r

an d combustion-syste mtechnology , an dtha t th e olde r

an dless-efficien t

locomotive s probabl y se e les s intensiv e use . A s aresult , th e composit e factor s show n i n Tabl e 4- 2 probabl y overestimat e H C an dC

O emission s somewhat , andma y underestimat e N

O . Possibl e malfunction s an din-us e deterioratio nwoul dten d x t o increas e H

C an dCO

, possibl y offsettin g thi s effect
.

4- 3TABL E 4-1 . MEASURE D LOCOMOTIV E EMISSION S FRO

M PUBLISHE D STUDIE S EXPRESSE D I NGRAM S PE R HORSEPOWE R HOU R O NLIN E HAUL CYCLE S 

# SJ O Engin e Descriptio n Numbe r Teste d Avg . Emissions , g/bhp-hr
. (range ) H C C O N O 

# a

e a FDL , ol d spee d schedul e 4 (195 7 t o approx . 1974 ) FDL , ne wspee d schedul e 5 (approx . 197 3 t o present ) FDL , ne wspee d sch . lowsa c injector s 1 Genera l Electri c Engine s 2. 2 (1. 7 t o 2.5 ) 2. 3 (2. 0 t o 2.6 ) 0. 6 4. 2 (3. 6 t o 4.5 ) 14. 0 (10. 9 t o 18.9 ) 2. 5 (2. 0 t o 3.0 ) 14. 2 (10. 4 t o 19.7 )
1. 8 10. 7

* * EMD 56 7 spherica l injector s pr e 195 9 1 EMD 56 7 needl e injector s 195 9 t o 196 6 1 EMD 56 7 lowsa c injector s (retrofi t 1 afte r 1972 ) EMD 645 E blown , needl e injecto r unknow n (196 6 t o 1972 ) EMD 645 E turbo , needl e injector s (196 6 t o 1972 ) EMD 645F3 B turbo , lowsa c injector s unknow n Electromotiv e Divisio n

2. 7 1. 2 0. 7 1. 1 0. 8 (0. 7 t o 0.9 ) 0.4 (a )
(a ) v'o n UIC/OR E cycl e Source : Ingall s (1985 ) 6. 4 10. 7 7. 4 10. 8 12. 1 9. 8 13. 0 12. 5 3. 2 (2. 5 t o 4.0 ) 11. 6 (8. 7 t o 11.6 ) 0. 6 (a ) 14. 1 (a )P.6 1

TABL E4-2 . EMISSIO NFACTORS FO RRAILWA

Y LOCOMOTIVES Sourc e H C C O N O P M X Ingall s (1985 ) Composit e Switc h47. 4 86. 6 46 8 Line-hau l 38. 9 22 6 55 8 Combine d41. 3 18 7 53 3 SWR I Studie s G E 12-7FD L Switc h Line-hau l Combine d EM D 12-645E3 1 Switc h Line-hau l Combine d Bes t Estimat e Switc h Line-hau l Combine d
Calculate db y Radia nusin g dat afro mSWRI . Thes e test s wer e describe db y Bake r et . al. , (1984 ) . 2 Radia nestimate , assumin g ami x o f ol dan dne

w locomotiv e engines
. 3 Radia nestimate , assumin g 80 % EM D an d20% G

Eengines
. 10 6 6 3 7 3 3 3 1 8 2 2 47. 4 38. 4 41. 3 22 9

16 2 17 7 10 4 9 5 9 7 86. 6 22 6 18 7 53 7

40 3 43 3
57 7 53 7 54 6 46 8 55 8 53 3 4 0

1 7 2 2
1 2 1 2 1 2

4 

## ° 3 13 J 2 0

4- 5P.6 2

T o obtai nmor e representativ e dat ao n railwa y emissions , th e Associa

tio n o f America n Railroad - ! (AAR ) commissione dmeasurement s o n 4 0 locomotive s i n th e earl y '80s . Althoug hthes e dat ahav e bee n release dt o EPA , the y hav e no t bee nmad e public , an dRadia n wa s unabl e t o obtai n acces s t o them
. Thes e data , i f available , woul dshe dadditiona l ligh t o n th e questio n o f appropriat e gaseou s emissio nfactor s fo r locomotives
. Du e t o th e difficult y o f buildin g a n appropriately-size ddilutio n tunnel , dat ao n particulat e emission s fro mdiese l locomotive s ar e extremel y scarce . Ou r

literatur e surve y turne du p measurement s o n onl y fou r engines , o f whic hthre e wer e conducte da t Southwes t

Researc hInstitut e (SWRI) . Th e fourt h wa s mad e b y EMD, usin g adifferen t procedure , an dma y no t b e comparabl e t o th e thre e SWR

I measurements . SWR I performe dgaseou s an dparticulat e emission s measurement s o non e EM D 12-645E 3 an don e G E12-7FD Lengin e a s par t o f astud y o f

th e effect s o f heav y blende dfuel s (Bake r e t al. , 1984) . Du e t o uncertaintie s i nth e mas s flo w measurements , Bake r e t al
. reporte dth e emission s dat ai n term s o f concen tration , rathe r

tha ng/BHP-hr
. A t Radian' s request , however , SWR I recalculate d th e moda l emission s dat afo r th e baselin e test s (usin g standar ddiese l #2 ) t o repor t g/BHP-h r

an dlb/100 0 gallons
. Fro mthes e data , Radia n wa s abl e t o calculat e cycle-weighte demissio n factor s fo r HC , CO , N

O an dparticulat e matter . Th e result s o f thes e calculation s ar e als o show n i n Tabl e 4-2 ; th e dat aan dcalculation s themselve s ar e give n i n Appendi x A .

A s Tabl e 4- 2 indicates , particulat e emission s fro mth e tw o modern , turbocharged/intercoole dlocomotiv e engine s teste db y SWR I ar e relativel y lo w compare dt o othe r

off-highwa y diese l engines—correspondin g t o abou t .2 6 an d .4 8 g/BHP-h r

fo r th e EM

D an dG Eengines , respectively
. Earlie r SWR I dat ao na n EM D 2-56 7 engin e sho w considerabl y highe r P M emissions , howeve r (Baker , 1980) . Thes e dat ashowe dP M emissio n factor s o n 39-cetan e fue l rangin g fro m0. 7 t o 1.2 5 g/BHP-hr , dependin g o n operatin g conditions
. A t th e highe r

BSF C o f th e

4- 6P.6 3



### 56 7 engine , thes e value s correspon dt o abou t 50-8 0 l b PM/100 0 gallons
. Hydro

carbon s were als o considerabl y higher , correspondin g t o abou t 10 0 lb/100 0 gallon s a t

maximu mpower . Th e 567-serie s engin e use di nthes e test s incorporate dolde r combus

tio nandinjectio ntechnology , an dthi s i s th e likel y caus e o f th e highe r emissions
. Substantia l reduction s i nlocomotiv e smok e emission s due t o im

provement s i nengin e technolog y hav e bee ndocumente d(Kotli nan dWilliams , 1975)
. I t

i s als o possibl e tha t emission s fromthi s laborator y 2-cylinde r engin e ma

y no t hav e bee ncompletel y representativ e o f thos e fromactua l locomo

tives
. Ou

r "best-estimate " emissio nfactor s fo r locomotive s ar e show n a t th e botto mo f

Tabl e 4-2 . Fo r

gaseou s emissions , th e factor s fo r switchin g an d line-hau l dut y cycle s ar e take ndirectl y fromIngall s (1985)
. Fo r particulat e emissio nfactors , w

e assume dtha t

virtuall y al l line-hau l operatio nwas per forme db y relativel y low-smoke moder nlocomotive s suc ha s th e two 12-cylinde r engine s teste da t

SWRI. Eight y percen t o f line-hau l operatio nwa s assume dt o b e by EM D locomotives , an d2 0 percen t by G Elocomotives
. Fo r switchin g applications , w e assume dtha t

5 0 percen t

o f th e fue l consumptio nwas b y older , high-emittin g engines , wit hth e othe r hal f spli t 8 0 percen t t o EM D engine s an d2 0 percen t t o G Eengines
. The olde r high-emittin g engine s wer e assume dt o emi t abou t 6 0 l b of

P M pe r 100 0 gallon s of

fue l consumed
. Th

e resultin g composit e P M emissio nfactor s ar e 1 3 lb/100 0 gallon s fo r line-hau l operatio nan d3 9 lb/100 0 gallon s fo r switching
. T o combin e th e line-hau l an dswitching-cycl e emissio nfactor s int o on e overal l factor , th e value s fo r th e two cycle s wer e weighte db y th e fractio n o f fue l consume di neac htyp e o f operation—7 2 percen t t o lin e hau l an d2 8 percen t switching
. Thes e fraction s wer e take nfromIngall s (1985) , wh o use d th e sam e fraction s t o weigh t emission s o f

HC , CO , an dN O i ndevelopin g hi s composit e emissio nfacto r estimates
.

4- 7P.6 4

4. 3 Engin e Populatio n an dEmission s Inventor y

Tabl e 4- 3 present s fue l consumption , population , an demission s estimate s fo r

diesel-electri c locomotive s use di n switchin g an dline-hau l service
. Thes e estimate s ar e calculate di n tw o ways : fo r Clas s I railroad s only ; an dfo r

al l locomotiv e engines , includin g thos e operate db y Clas s I I an d I I I Railroads
. Clas s I railroad s ar e thos e havin g gros s operatin g revenue s o f $87. 3 millio no r

greater . Thes e railroad s accoun t fo r abou t 9 0 percen t

o f al l railroa drevenue s an d9 7 percen t o f ton-mile s travelled
. (Assoc , o f Am . Railroads , 1986) . Clas s I I an dII I railroad s ar e primaril y switchin g an d freight-transfe r

operation s connecte dwit hmajo r citie s an dports , o r short-lin e operation s servin g alimite dgeographi c area . Becaus e o f thei r concentratio n i n an dnea r majo r cities , th e Clas s I I an dClas s II I railroad s includ e adisproportionat e amoun t o f switchyar doperation , an dma y thu s contribut e alarge r fractio n o f

th e urba n emissions
. Tabl e 4-3 ashow s th e fue l consumption , locomotiv e population , an d estimate demission s fo r Clas s I railroads
. Th e tota l fue l consumptio nan d populatio ndat afo r thi s tabl e ar e take n fro mth e statistic s o f th e Associatio n o f America nRailroad s (1986) , an dar e broke n down int o line-hau l an dswitchin g activitie s followin g a n assume d7 2 percent/2 8 percen t split
. Th e AA

Rfue l consumptio n dat ad o no t includ e AMTRAK

, s o w e adde d6 0 millio n gallon s fo r AMTRA K fue l consumptio n (U.S . Departmen t o f Transportation , 1985 ) t o th e AA R value
. AA

Rlocomotiv e number s do includ e AMTRAK , s o n o adjustmen t wa s necessary . Tota l emission s wer e calculate dfro mtota l fue l consumptio nusin g th e "bes t

estimate " emissio n factor s fro mTabl e 4-2 . Tabl e 4-3 b show s estimate s o f th e locomotiv e population , fue l consumption , an demission s o f Clas s I I an dII I railroads
. Locomotiv e populatio ndat afo r thes e railroad s wer e obtaine db y summin g th e number s o f locomotive s reporte dfo r thes e railroad s b y McDonal d(1986) . Al l Clas s I I an d Clas s II I railroa dlocomotive s wer e assume dt o operat e i n aswitchin g cycle , wit hannua l fue l consumptio n pe r locomotiv e equa l t o tha t o f switcher s use db y Clas s I railroads
. 4- 8P.6 5

TABL E4-3 . POPULATION , FUE LCONSUMPTION , AN D ESTIMATE

D EMISSION S FO

RRAILWA

Y LOCOMOTIVES

No . Typ e Unit s (a ) Clas s I Railroad s Line-Hau l 8,699 2 Switc h14.170 2 Tota l 22.869 1 (b ) Clas s I I an dII I Railr c Switc h3,236 4 Annua l Fue l Cons . (100 0 Gal. )
2.307,287 3 897,278 3 3.204.565 1
ad s 204,91l 2 H C
44,87 7 21,26 5 66,14 2

. 4,85 6 Emission s

C O
260,72 3 38,94 2 299,66 5
8,89 3 (Tons/Year) 2

NO x

643.73 3 209,96 3 853.69 6

47.94 9 P

M

14.99 7 17.94 6 32,94 3
4,09 8 (c ) Al l Railroad s Line-Hau l 8,69 9 Switc h17,40 6 Tota l 26,10 5 DO EFue l Cons . Est . 2,307,28 7 1,102,18 9 3,409,4 7 6 3,209,72 9 44.87 7

26,12 2 70,99 9 260,72 3

47,83 5 308,55 8 643.73 3

257,91 2 901,64 5 14.99 7

22,04 4 37,04 1

Sources : America nAssociatio no f Railroads , 1986 . 2Radia nestimates
. 3 Calculate dfro mdut y cycle s i n Ingall s (1985 ) McDonald , 1986 . Energ y Informatio n Admin. , 1985
.

4- 9 

# JP.6 6



# RADIA N

Fo rcomparison , Tabl e 4- 3 als o show s th e DO Eestimat e o f

railwa y fue l deliverie s fo r1985
. Thi s valu e was base do ndat aobtaine dfromth e Associatio no f

America nRailroads , an dthu s compare s wel l wit hth e dat ao n Clas s I railroa dfue l consumptio ntake nfromAA Rstatistics
. 4. 4 Emission s Tes t Cycl e Sinc e locomotiv e engine s operat e i nonl y afe w well-define doperatin g conditions , definitio nof a nappropriat e tes t

cycl e shoul db e relativel y straightforward
. The emissio nfactor s i nSectio n4. 3 ar e base do n two suc h tes t cycles : on e fo r

line-hau l operatio nan don e fo r switching
. Thes e cycle s consis t essentiall y of

two differen t

set s of

weightin g factor s fo r th e steady-stat e emission s measure dfo r eac hoperatin g mode
. Transien t effect s (i f any ) ar e thu s ignored
. Fo r line-hau l operation , thi s i s probabl y appropriate , a s th e tim e spen t

i nnotch-to-notc htransition s i s smal l compare dt o th e tota l operatin g time
. Switchin g dut y involve s muc hmor e transien t

operation , however , an dthu s ma y no t b e adequatel y modele db y asteady-stat e tes t sequence . Thi s i s aconcern , sinc e switchin g an dtransfe r operatio n ar e responsibl e fo r

alarg e fractio no f locomotiv e emission s i nurba n areas . Furthe r researc ht o clarif y thi s poin t i s recommended
. I nadditio nt o th e transien t emission s question , th e appropriat e weightin g of

differen t

operatin g mode s withi neac hcycle , an dof switc hversu s line-hau l operation , shoul db e re-examine di nth e ligh t o f recen t change s i n operatin g patterns . Qualitatively , railroad s appea r t o b e makin g mor e efficien t

us e o f equipment , an dt o b e shuttin g locomotive s of f mor e whe n the y wil l no t

b e use dfo r

asom e time
. Bot

ho f thes e trend s shoul dreduc e idlin g time , whil e increasin g th e tim e spen t i nnotche s 1- 8 an ddynami c brake
. Ingall s (1985 ) addresse dthes e issues , bu t withou t

dat at o resolv e them
. Acquisitio no f

actua l curren t

operatin g dat awoul db e neede dt o full y settl e thi s issue
.

4-1 04. 5 Feasibilit yo f Emission s Contro l H 

### Fro m th e dat apresente di nSectio n3.2 , i t i s clea r

tha t asubstan

tia l reductio ni nlocomotiv e emission s woul db e possibl e eve nwit hexistin g technology
. Wit

hadditiona l R&

D i nth e field , eve nlarge r emissio nreduction s coul db e expected
. I nthi s section , w e conside r

two differen t

level s o f emission s contro l fo r ne w engines : a

nintermediat e leve l attainabl e i n th e relativel y shor t

ter m(abou t

3 years) , an drelyin g essentiall y o n existin g technology ; an da

nadvance dleve l requirin g alonge r perio dfo r

researc han d development
. The firs t o f thes e contro l level s i s intende dt o b e comparabl e i n stringenc y t o EPA' s 198 8 standard s fo r on-highwa y diese l engines , whil e th e secon di s intende dt o b e comparabl e t o th e 199 1 standards
. The reade r i s warne dtha t

thes e ar e engineerin g estimate s only , base do nver y limite ddata , an dintende donl y t o indicat e th e potentia l benefit s of regulatio n i nthi s area . Additiona l researc ht o confir mthes e estimate s woul dbe , essentia l befor e thes e o r an y othe r

emissio nstandard s wer e incorporate dint o law
. Du e t o th e engin e manufacturer' s practic e o f makin g new-technolog y component s availabl e fo r rebuildin g olde r engines , muc

hof th e emissions-contro l technolog y discusse di nSectio n3. 2 woul db e applicabl e eve n t o existin g locomotives
. Thus , i nadditio nt o ne w engine s emissio n levels , estimate s o f

th e feasibl e emission s contro l leve l fo r existin g engine s ar e als o presented
. I nmos t

cases , achievin g thes e level s woul drequir. e rebuildin g th e engine , a t

acos t o f $80,00 0 t o abou t

$200,000 , dependin g onth e exten t o f th e modification s (Davis , 1986) . Thi s nee dno t presen t

amajo r

barrier , however
. I f th e engin e wer e bein g rebuil t anyhow , th e additiona l cos t du e t o th e emission s contro l modification s woul db e relativel y small
. Regulation s t o requir e best-availabl e contro l technolog y o nnew , rebuilt , o r substantiall y modifie dlocomotive s coul db e reasonabl e an dpractical , therefore
.

Intermediat e leve l controls—Feasibl e intermediate-ter memissio n control s fo r

locomotiv e engine s woul dinclud e retarde dinjectio n timing , cooling-syste mmodification s t o reduc e charg e ai r temperature , increase d

4-1 1P.6 8

injectio n pressure , an d optimizatio n o f combustio n chambe r geometry , ai r flow , an d locomotiv e notc h setting s fo r reduce d emissions . Base d o n th e dat a pre sente d i n Sectio n 3.2 , w e estimat e tha t thes e modification s coul d reduc e N O x emission s belo w6. 0 g/BHP-hr .

T o ensur e agains t a n unacceptabl e increas e i n P M an d H C emission s a t thi s lowNO level , a regulator yca p o n thes e emission s woul d be desirable . Give n th

e limite d dat a availabl e o n P M emission s fro mthes e engines , the exac t PM leve l achievabl e a t 6. 0 NO i s unknown . However , base d o n the P M dat a 

### x describe dabove , experienc e wit hth e on-highwa y truc k standards , an darela

- tivel y les s stringen t steady-stat e tes t

cycl e fo r

locomotives , aP

M emission s standar do f

0.5 0 g/BHP-h r

appear s readil y achievable
. Base do nTabl e 3-1 , a n H C emission s standar dof 0.5 0 g/BHP-h r

als o appear s reasonable
. Th e resultin g emission s standard s an dcorrespondin g emissio nfactor s ar e showni nTabl e 4-4 .

Advance demissio n controls—Sinc e s o littl e researc hha s bee n don e o n medium-spee ddiese l emission s controls , th e ultimat e for mo f advance demissio n control s fo r

thes e engine s i s difficul t t o project
. Som

e technologie s whic h clearl y coul db e applied , however , includ e electronically-controlle duni t injectors , reduce doi l consumption , highe r compressio nratios , reduce dinitia l rat e o f injection , an dfurthe r optimizatio no f

fuel-ai r

mixin g an dcombustion
. Vigorou s applicatio nof thes e technologie s shoul dmak e possibl e afurthe r reductio ni nN

O emission s t o abou t 4- 5 g/BHP-hr , togethe r wit hlowe r

P M emissions
. Fo r

thi s analysis , w

e assum e level s comparabl e t o th e 199 1 stan dard s fo r

on-highwa y engines , o r 5. 0 g/BHP-h r

N O an d0.2 0 g/BHP-h r

PM. Level s o f

emissio ncontro l wel l belo w thes e limit s coul dconceivabl y com e abou t throug hth e us e o f

aftertreatmen t

technologie s (i.e
. trap-oxidizers , catalyti c converters , o r selectiv e catalyti c reduction) , alternativ e fuel s (CN G o r methanol) , water/fue l emulsion s and/o r exhaus t ga s recirculatio n(EGR) . EG R i nconjunctio nwit hawater/fue l emulsio nha s bee nshownt o b e a nespeciall y effectiv e emission s contro l techniqu e fo r medium-spee dengine s (Wilso n e t al. , 1982) . Furthe r

researc ht o establis hth e effect s o f thes e technologie s on emission s an ddurabilit y i nactua l locomotiv e engine s i s required , however
. 4-1 2P.6 9

TABL E4-4 . ESTIMATE

D ACHIEVABL

EEMISSION S CONTRO LSTANDARD

S PO RLOCOMOTIV

EENGINE S

Emission s Limi t (g/BHP-hr ) Equivalen t Emissio n Facto r (lb/100 0 gal. )
Ne wEngine s Intermediat e Contro l Leve l NO x H C P M Advance d Technolog

y NO x H C P M 6.0 0 0.5 0 0.5 0 5.0 0 0.3 0 0.2 0 23 8 2 0 2 0 19 8 1 2 8 Existin g Engine s (retrofit ) NOx H C P M 8.0 0 0.5 0 0.5 0 31 7 2 0 2 0

Source : Radia n estimates ,

4-1 3P.7 0



### Existin g locomotives—Retrofi t emissio ncontrol s fo r existin g locomo

tive s woul dgenerall y resembl e th e intermediate-leve l control s describe dabove
. However , no tal l locomotiv e model s woul db e equall y adaptabl e t o low-emissio n technologies , s o som e relaxatio no f

th e intermediate-leve l standard s woul db e desirabl e fo r

existin g engines
. W e recommen

dtha t thi s relaxatio nb e i nth e N O standard , sinc e over-reducin g N O ca ncaus e larg e increase s i nP M an dH C emission s an dfue l consumption
. Researc hwoul db e require dt o identif y th e contro l level s actuall y achievable , bu t aN O standar do f

8. 0 g/BHP-h r

shoul d b e hig henoug ht o avoi dan y majo r deterioratio ni nfue l econom y o r P M emis

sions
. 4. 6 Cost-Effectivenes s Analysi s

Tabl e 4- 5 present s som e ver y roug hestimate s of th e cost-effectivenes s of controllin g locomotiv e emissions
. Tw o case s ar e considered : th e "intermediate " standard s fo r ne w engines , an dth e suggeste d retrofi t standard s fo r

existin g engine s whe nthe y ar e overhauled
. Bothof thes e involv e relativel y near-ter mtechnology
. The uncertaint y i nth e cos t an d effectivenes s of

advanced-technolog y emissio ncontrol s i s to o grea t t o allo w fo r an y realisti c cost-effectivenes s calculations
. Calculatio no f

cost-effectivenes s value s wher e mor e tha n on e pollutan t

change s pose s adifficul t cost-allocatio nproblem
. Th e value s i n Tabl e 4- 5 wer e calculate db y allocatin g al l th e cos t o f contro l t o th e reductio ni nH

C an dN

O emissions , wit hn o debi t fo r th e increas e i n PM . x Reduction s i n N

O an d H C ar e ofte n combine d i n thi s way , sinc e bot h pollutant s contribut e t o ozon e formation . Sinc e bot h th e "new " an

d the "existing " engin e considere d ar e turbocharged , wit h relativel ymodern technology , th e majo r effec t o f emissio n control s i n eac h cas e i s a reductio n i n N O , wit h a mino r x reductio n i n H C an

d a smal l increas e i n PM . Applicatio n o f simila r standard s t o a n olde r (highe r PM ) locomotiv e woul d resul t i n a P M decrease .

4-1 4P.7 1

TABL E4-5
. ESTIMATED COST-EFFECTIVENES S O FEMISSION S CONTRO LFO RNE WRAILWA

Y LOCOMOTIVES

EMISSION S Emissio n Factor s Baselin e NO x H C P M Wit h Control s NOx H C PM Annua l Emission s Baselin e NO x H C P M Wit h Control s NO x H C P M (lb/100 0 gal. )

(tons/locomotive

Emission s Reductio n NO x H C P M Co s t-E f fective n e s s NO x + H C year )

(tons/locomotiv e

($/ton ) ye a</> 52 3 3 2 1 4 23 8 2 0 1 8

36. 1 2. 2 1. 0 17. 2 1. 4 1. 3
r ) 18. 8 0. 8 -0. 3
1.07 3 Ne w Engin e Existin g Engin e EMISSIONCONTRO

LCOST S Initia l Cos t

$ 80,00 0 $100,00 0 Engin e Lif e (yrs ) 1 5 7 Amortize dCost/yea r @ 10 % $ 10,51 8 $ 20,54 1 Fue l Cons . Increas e 5 % 3 % Annua l Fue l Cons . (Gal ) Baselin e 138,00 0 140,68 0 Wit hcontrol s 144,90 0 144,90 0 Adde dFue l Cos t

@ $0.80/ga l $ 5.52 0 $ 3.37 6 Addl
. Ann . Maintenanc e $ 5,00 0 $ 5,00 0 Annualize dContro l Cos t $ 21,03 8 $ 28,91 7 Pe r Locomotiv e

53 3 4 1 2 0 23 8 2 0 2 0

37. 5 2. 9 1. 4 17. 2 1. 4 1. 4 20. 2 1. 5 0. 0 $ 1.33 2

4-1 5P.7 2



### Th e dat ai nTabl e 4- 5 ar e base do nrathe r hig hestimate s o f

th e cost s o f naetin g emission s standard s fo r medium-spee dengines
. Thes e reflec t th e grea t cos t o f th e engine s themselves , th e smal l sale s volum e (resultin g i n a greate r cos t pe r engin e fo r

developmen t

an dcertification) , an dth e smal l amoun t o f existin g wor

k o nmedium-spee dengin e emissio ncontrols
. Thes e value s ar e considere dt o b e somewha t conservativ e (i nth e sens e o f over-statin g th e cos t o f control)—actua l cost s pe r uni t migh t wel l b e less , bu t

ar e considere d unlikel y t o b e significantl y more . Despit e this , th e estimate dcosts-per-to n o f N O + H C controlle dar e rathe r lo w compare dt o mos t othe r significan t

ne w sourc e o f

N O reductions
. Thus , impositio no f intermediate-technolog y emissio n standard s bot honne w locomotive s an do nexistin g locomotive s whe n the y ar e rebuil t shoul db e ahighl y cost-effectiv e emission s contro l strategy .

4-1 65. 0 MARIN EVESSEL

S Marin e vessel s include di n thi s stud y includ e diesel-powere dtu g an d towboats , passenge r vessels , fishin g vessels , an dprivat e recreationa l craft , bu t no t ocean-goin g ships
. Worldwide , th e vas t majorit y o f

ocean-goin g ship s (a s wel l a s mos t

smalle r

non-recreationa l vessels ) ar e now diese l powered , du e t o th e superio r

fue l efficienc y o f th e diese l engine
. Thes e ship s ar e doubtles s significan t contributor s t o th e emission s inventorie s i n majo r por t citie s suc ha s Lo s Angele s o r Ne w York
. Fo r

historica l reasons , however , fe w U.S.-fla g ship s ar e diese l powered
. Acces s o f foreign-registere dship s (includin g motorships ) t o U.S . port s i s controlle db y treaty , an dwoul dthu s no t b e subjec t

t o regulatio n b y EPA , eve n i f othe r off-highwa y vehicle s wer e mad e subjec t

t o suc hregulations
. 5. 1 Engin e Characteristic s an dOperatin g Condition s

Excep t fo r thos e use di n oceangoin g ships , th e diese l engine s use di n marin e vessel s ar e primaril y high-spee dengine s fro mGroup s 2 an d3 , o r medium-spee dengine s classe di n Grou p 1 . High-spee dengine s ar e use da s th e mai npropulsio n i n smalle r craft , an dfo r

electri c generatio n o nlarge r vessels
. Vessel s suc ha s pleasur e craft , fishin g boats , smal l workboats , an d simila r vessel s ar e typicall y powere db y Grou p 2 engine s simila r t o thos e use d i nhighwa y trucks
. Th e large r Grou p 3 engine s ar e use di n many tugboats , towboats , an dsimila r vessels
. Man y o f th e smalle r

high-spee dmarin e engine s i n us e ar e naturally-aspirated , an dth e turbocharge done s ma y o r ma y no t b e equippe dwit h intercoolers
. Mos t o f th e mor e powerfu l Grou p 2 engine s an dmos t Grou p 3 engine s i n marin e application s ar e turbocharge dan daftercooled , however
. To increas e powe r

outpu t

stil l further , some engine s i n thi s grou p us e low-temperatur e aftercooling , coolin g th e hea t exchange r

wit hwate r

pumpe dfro m

5- 1P.7 4



### overside . However , man y engine s i nthi s clas s stil l us e jacke t wate r aftercooling , due t o t'* e possibl e corrosio nproblem s involve d(especiall y wit h sea-water) .

Mos t high-spee ddiese l engine s i nmarin e servic e i nth e U.S . wer e buil t b y Detroi t

Diese l Allison , Caterpillar , o r Cummins
. The majorit y o f thes e engine s ar e equippe dwit hdirec t injectio ncombustio nsystems , an dmos t us e uni t

injectors
. ID I engine s i nmarin e us e includ e th e Caterpilla r 300-serie s an dafe

w light-dut y engine s use dmostl y i npleasur e craft
. The 300-serie s ID I engine s hav e bee nsupersede di nCaterpillar' s produc t lin e b y th e direct-injecte d3 5 00 series
. They wer e extremel y popula r marin e engines , however , an dman

y remai ni nuse . Mainpropulsio nfo r

mos t large , powerfu l workin g vessel s suc ha s larg e tugboats , rive r towboats , an doffshor e oi l suppl y vessel s i s provide db y locomotive-derive dmedium-spee dengine s suc ha s th e EM D 56 7 an d64 5 serie s an d Alc o locomotiv e engines
. Thes e engine s ar e identica l i never y majo r respec t t o th e similar-mode l engine s use di nlocomotives
. Stil l large r medium-spee d engines , specificall y designe dfo r marin e service , powe r Grea t Lake s freighter s an dsimila r

vessels , includin g man y oceangoin g ships
. Slow-spee ddiese l engine s ar e use donl y i nlarg e ocean-goin g ships , wher e thei r ver y low rotationa l spee dallow s themt o b e direct-couple dt o th e propeller
. A s thi s repor t doe s no t

dea l wit hocean-goin g ships , slow-spee dengine s wil l no t b e discusse dfurther
.

High-spee dan dmedium-spee ddiese l engine s use dfo r vesse l propulsio n ar e normall y couple dt o th e propeller s throug hase t o f reducin g gear s o r "marin e transmission" , whic hprovide s forwar dan drevers e motion , bu t onl y on e reductio nratio
. The engin e spee di s thu s aconstan t multipl e o f

th e propelle r speed , whil e th e engin e powe r outpu t i s determine db y th e propeller' s powe r absorptio ncurve . The vessel' s helmsmancontrol s th e engine s throug hase t o f "throttles" , whic hchang e th e engin e spee dsetpoin t o f aconstant-spee d

5- 2

### governor . Fo ragive n"throttle " position , therefore , th e engin e RP M (andthu s propelle r

RPM ) i s hel dconstant , an dth e governo r adjust s engin e power outpu t a s neede dt o maintai nthi s RP M setting
. Propelle r

powe r absorptio nincrease s a s th e cub e o f th e rotationa l speed
. Thus , i f

th e engin e an dpropelle r ar e properl y matched , maximu mengin e powe r i s produce donl y nea r th e engine' s rate dspeed , an dth e powe r require d drop s of

f rapidl y a s RPM

s ar e reduced
. Muc

ho f th e engine' s operatin g time , an dmos t o f th e BHP-h

r produce doccu r

i n"cruise " mode
. Typica l "cruise " RP M i s abou t 80-9 5 percen t

o f rate dspeed , correspondin g t o abou t 40-8 0 percen t

o f maximu mpower . Lik e locomotiv e engines , marin e engine s als o spen dagrea t dea l o f tim e idling
. Thi s i s du e t o th e inconvenienc e o f startin g larg e diese l engine s whe

ncold , an dt o th e nee dt o hav e engin e powe r availabl e a t

shor t notic e unde r

man y conditions
. I nadditio nt o thei r mai npropulsio nengines , large r marin e vessel s us e smaller , high-spee ddiese l engine s t o driv e generator s fo r electrica l power . Thes e engine s (typicall y Clas s 2 o r Clas s 4 ) ar e governe da t synchronou s speed , whic hi s normall y 1,80 0 RP M fo r U.S . vessels
. T

o provid e electri c powe r

a s needed , the y generall y ru ncontinuously , eve nwhenth e vesse l i s docked , moored , o r otherwis e temporaril y inactive
. Sinc e thes e engine s ar e size dt o handl e th e maximu mexpecte delectri c powe r demand , the y ru n mos t o f th e tim e unde r

rathe r ligh t load
. Unlik e engine s use dfo r mai npropulsion , generato r

engine s ten dt o b e naturall y aspirated , an dhav e relativel y hig hN O emission s a s aresult
. 5. 2 Curren t

Emissio nFactor s Reliabl e emissio nfactor s fo r marin e vessel s equippe dwit heithe r hig ho r medium-spee dengine s ar e unavailable
. Whil e emissio nfactor s fo r thes e vessel s ar e liste di nEPA' s AP-4 2 compilatio no f emissio nfactors j arevie w o f th e derivatio no f

thes e factor s (Ingalls , 1985 ) showe dtha t the y wer e compute d incorrectly , an dtha t the y ar e base do nanarro w rang e o f engine s whic hi s n o

5- 3P.7 6



### longe rrepresentativ e o f thos e i nuse . I naddition , AP-4 2 provide s n o dat ao n particulat e emission s fro mmarin e engines
. Thus , w e wer e force dt o develo p ou r ow n estimate s o f

emissio nfactor s fo r high-spee dan dmedium-spee ddiese l engine s i nmarin e use .

Th e emissio nfactor s develope di nthi s repor t ar e intende dt o represen t

composit e emission s ove r th e entir e engin e dut y cycle , fo r abroa d rang e o f

engin e horsepowe r

ratings
. AP-42 , o nth e othe r hand , present s separat e emissio nfactor s fo r eac hoperatin g mode , an ddivide s themint o a number o f rathe r narro w horsepowe r

ranges . Fo r

thes e reasons , n o direc t compariso no f

th e Radia nan dAP-4 2 emissio nfactor s i s possible
. The grea t

majorit y o f

medium-spee ddiese l engine s i nmarin e us e i n th e U.S . ar e essentiall y seagoin g locomotiv e engines
. Sinc e th e emissio n factor s fo r

locomotive s ar e reasonabl y wel l defined , an dsinc e th e dut y cycl e fo r marin e engine s i s no t to o dissimila r

fromtha t

o f locomotives , i t

wa s decide dt o appl y th e "bes t estimate " emissio nfactor s develope dfo r locomotive s t o medium-spee dmarin e engine s a s well
. Thes e factor s (whic har e liste di n Tabl e 5-1 ) ar e th e sam e a s th e composit e o f th e line-hau l an dswitchin g dut y cycle s liste di nTabl e 4-3 .

Emissio nfactor s fo r high-spee ddiese l engine s i nmarin e servic e ar e als o liste di nTabl e 5-1
. Thes e value s ar e Radia nestimates , base di npar t on th e dat ause di ndevelopin g th e AP-4 2 emissio nfacto r estimate s (Engineerin g Science , 1984 ) an dpartl y o nothe r dat asource s (Dowdall , 1987 ; Sant aBarbar a APCD , 1987) . The particulat e emission s factor s wer e base dprimaril y o n measurement s i nuncontrolle dheavy-dut y truc k engines , (Weaver , et . al. , 1984 ) whic hma

y no t b e full y applicabl e i nthi s case . Al l o f th e factor s show

n shoul db e considere donl y ver y roug happroximations—acquisitio n o f bette r dat a throug hactua l testin g i s strongl y recommended
.

5- 4P.7 7

TABL E5-1
. ESTIMATE

D CURREN

T EMISSIO NFACTORS FO RDIESE L ENGINE S USE

D I N MARIN

EAPPLICATION S
EMISSIO NFACTOR

S g/BHP-h r

lb/100 0 gal
.
Hig hSpee dEngine s

H C C O NO x P M 0. 8 3. 0 11. 0 0. 6 3 2 11 9 43 6 2 4
Mediu m Spee d Engine s H C C O NO x P M 1. 0 4. 7 13. 4 0. 5 4 1 18 7 53 3 2 0

Sources : Radia n estimate . 2 Fro mTabl e 4-2 .

5- 5 

# JP.7 8



### 5. 3 Engin e Populatio nan dEmission s Inventor y

Tabl e 5- 2 list s th e estimate dpopulatio nan dnationwid e fue l consumptio ndat afo r th e majo r

classe s o f

diese l powered , non-oceangoin g vessel s i nus e i nth e U.S . Thes e estimate s shoul db e understoo da s bein g ver y approximate—dat ao nmarin e vesse l population s an dusag e i nth e U.S . ar e fragmented , incomplete , an doccasionall y contradictory
. Tabl e 5- 2 wa s patche d togethe r from9 independen t

sources . W

e relie dmos t

heavil y o nth e Arm

y Corp s o f Engineer s Summar

y o f U.S . Fla g Passenge r an dCarg o Vessel s (Arm y Corp s o f Engineers , 1983) . Thi s repor t doe s no t

includ e al l relevan t vessels , however
. Dat ao nth e number

o f fishin g an dpleasur e craf t wer e obtaine dfromothe r sources . Th e breakdow nof th e tota l horsepowe r show ni nTabl e 5- 2 int o high-spee dan dmedium-spee dengine s i s base dononl y ver y limite ddata
. Description s o f

th e engine s andhorsepowe r rating s fo r

tu g an dtowboat s ar e give ni nth e Inlan dRive r Recor d(Owen , 1986) . Analysi s o f asampl e o f

thes e boat s showe dtha t

onl y 2 0 t o 2 5 percen t o f thes e boat s ar e powere db y medium-spee dengines , bu t tha t thes e engine s ar e responsibl e fo r abou t 6 0 percen t o f th e tota l horsepowe r fo r th e group . Extrapolatin g fromthi s limite d information , w

e estimate dtha t

abou t 6 0 percen t

o f dr y carg o and/o r

passenge r shi p horsepower , 5 0 percen t o f ferr y horsepower , an d2 0 percen t o f commercia l fishin g craf t

(ove r fiv e tons ) horsepowe r ar e generate db y mediu mspee d engines
. Tabl e 5- 2 show s a nestimat e o f th e tota l annua l fue l consumptio n b y eac hclas s o f

marin e vessels
. Thes e wer e calculate dfromth e engin e loa d factor s an dannua l usag e show ni nth e table , an da nassume dfue l consumptio n o f 0. 4 lb/BHP-hr
. Th

e loa dfactor s an dannua l usag e value s show nar e Radia n estimates , base dontypica l operatin g pattern s fo r eac hclass
. Thes e value s ar e onl y roug happroximations , a s actua l dat ao nloa dfactor s an dhour s of operatio nar e lacking
.

5- 6TABL E 5-2 . ESTIMATE D NATIONWID E POPULATIO NAND EMISSION S FRO M DIESE L ENGINE S USE D INMARINE APPLICATION S

Diese l Vessel s Tota l

Horsepowe r (1000s ) Loa d Usag e

Facto r (Hr/Yr ) Ann . Fue l Consumptio n (100 0 gal ) H C EMISSION S (TONS/YR ) C O NO x P M

L n I Dr yCargo/Passenge r 1,89 3 High-Spee d Medium-Spee d Towboat s an

d Tugboat s 5,41 8 High-Spee d Medium-Spee d 1.2.3. 4

1. 2

Railroa d Ferrie s 10 7

High-Spee d Medium-Spee d Genera l Ferrie s 1.00 0

High-Spee d Medium-Spee d Fishin g Craf t 115.80 0 > 5 Ne t Ton s 24,00 0 High-Spee d Medium-Spee d < 5 Ne t Ton s High-Spee d 91,80 0 Pleasur e Craf t

High-Spee d 97,00 0 1. 2

5. 6 5. 6
5. 6 1. 7 5.49 4

2,19 8 3.29 6 7.98 8 3.19 5 4.79 3 26 2 7 9 18 3 1.00 0 50 0 50 0 24.40 0 12.00 0 9.60 0 2.40 0 12,40 0 17.50 0 50 %

50 % 50 % 50 % 40 % 40 % 40 % 40 % 3.00 0 3.00 0 3.00 0 4.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0 2.00 0

30 % 30 % 30 % 50 % 1,50 0 2,00 0 50 0
20 0 457.83 3

183.13 3 274.70 0 798.80 0 266.26 7 532.53 3 11,64 4 3,49 3 8.15 1 44.44 4 22.22 2 22.22 2 423.33 3 320.00 0 240.00 0 80.00 0 103.33 3 97.22 2 8.56 1

2.93 0 5.63 1 15.17 7 4.26 0 10.91 7 22 3 5 6 16 7 81 1 35 6 45 6 7,13 3 5.48 0 3,84 0 1,64 0 1,65 3 1,55 6 36.58 1

10.89 6 25.68 4 65.63 5 15.84 3 49.79 2 97 0 20 8 76 2 3.40 0 1.32 2 2,07 8 27.90 8 21.76 0 14.28 0 7.48 0 6.14 8 5.78 5 113.13 1

39.92 3 73.20 8 199.96 6 58.04 6 141.92 0 2.93 4 76 2 2.17 2 10.76 7 4.84 4 5.92 2 96.16 7 73,64 0 52,32 0 21,32 0 22,52 7 21,19 4 4.94 5

2.19 8 2.74 7 8.52 1 3.19 5 5.32 5 12 3 4 2 8 2 48 9 26 7 22 2 4.92 0 3.68 0 2.88 0 80 0 1.24 0 1.16 7 Tota l 221.21 8

High-Spee d 218,71 8 Medium-Spee d2,50 0 DO E Fue l Cons . Estimat e 56,64 4 45,47 1 11,17 3 1.833,27 8 915.67 1 917.60 7 1.894..26 5 33.46 2

14.65 1 18.81 1 140.27 9

54.48 2 85.79 6 444.15 8

199.61 6 244.54 2 20.16 4

10.98 8 9.17 6

Radia n estimate
. 'Includin g a nestimat e o f unreporte dcraf t

(Crowell , 1986 ) ,U.S . Arm y Corp s o f

Engineers , 1983 . .U.S . Maritim e Administration , 1983 . Nationa l Marin e Fisherie s Service , 1984 . Joh n0'Donnell , 1986 . Moyat , 1986 .P.8 0



### Tota l fue l consumptio nb y al l classe s show ni nth e tabl e i s approximatel y 1. 8 billio ngallon s pe r year . A DO

Erepor t (Energ y Informatio n Administration , 1985 ) showin g th e tota l consumptio no f distillat e fue l oi l fo r vesse l bunkerin g a t abou t 1. 9 billio ngallons , serve dt o calibrat e ou r estimate
. The tw o number s ar e no t strictl y comparable , sinc e th e DO Evalu e include s distillat e fue l consume db y oceangoin g ships
. Thes e ship s bur n primaril y residua l fue l oil , bu t som e us e acertai npercentag e o f distillat e fue l oi l a s well
. Thi s i s offse t t o som

e degre e b y th e fac t tha t som e non-oceangoin g vessel s ca nus e residua l oi l o r distillate/residua l blends
. On e othe r sourc e o f

informatio no nmarin e fue l consumptio n was located
. Base donth e result s o f anationa l freigh t transportatio n model , Argonn e Laborator y (Milla r e t al. , 1982 ) estimate dtota l energ y consumptio n fo r tug s an dtowboat s i nth e U.S . a t abou t 14 7 trillio nBTU

, o r slightl y ove r

1 billio ngallon s o f

diese l fue l equivalent
. Eve nconsiderin g tha t thi s valu e include s som

e non-diese l energ y consumption , thi s i s somewha t highe r tha n th e estimate s i nTabl e 5-2
.

Estimate s o f

pollutan t

emission s fromth e variou s type s of marin e vessel s ar e als o presente dan dtotale di nTabl e 5-2
. Thes e estimate s were arrive da t

b y multiplyin g th e emissio nfactor s i nTabl e 5- 1 b y th e fue l consumptio ndat acalculate di nTabl e 5-2
.

I nterm s o f

regiona l distribution , 5 5 percen t o f dr y carg o and/o r passenge r

ship s ar e locate do nth e Mississipp i an dOhi o Rivers , 3 5 percen t alon g th e U.S . coastline , an dth e res t ar e situate donth e Grea t Lakes
. A considerabl y differen t situatio nexist s fo r railroa dferrie s wher e 9 0 percen t ar e locate do nth e coastlin e wit hth e remainde r onth e Grea t

Lakes
. Fo r towboat s an dtugboats , th e percentage s ar e 3 1 percent , 6 6 percent , an d3 percen t fo r th e coasta l areas , inlan dwaterways , an dGrea t Lakes , respectivel y (U.S . Arm

y Corp s o f

Engineers , 1983) . Thes e thes e statistic s indicat e tha t a larg e percentag e of domesti c vessel s operat e onth e Mississipp i an dOhi o

5- 8P.8 1



### 5. 5 Feasibilit y o f Emission s Contro l Estimate s o f

achievabl e emissio nstandard s fo r diese l engine s use di n marin e application s ar e showni nTabl e 5-3
. Fo r ne w engines , two level s o f emission s contro l ar e considered
. The "intermediate " contro l leve l i s intende d t o correspon di nstringenc y t o th e 198 8 on-highwa y emission s standards , whil e th e "advance dtechnology " leve l correspond s t o th e standard s schedule dfo r 1991 . I naddition , Tabl e 5- 3 show s ou r estimate s o f

achievabl e retrofi t emissio ncontro l standard s fo r existin g medium-spee dan dlarg e high-spee d engines
. Again , th e reade r i s warne dtha t

thes e ar e engineerin g estimate s only , base do nver y limite ddata , an dintende donl y t o indicat e th e potentia l benefit s o f

regulatio ni nthi s area . Additiona l researc ht o confir mthes e estimate s woul db e essentia l befor e thes e o r an y othe r

emissio nstandard s wer e incorporate dint o law
.

Hig hspee dengine s Intermediat e contro l level—High-spee dengine s ar e use dbot hfo r propulsio nan da s prim e mover s fo r electri c generation
. Althoug hth e dut y cycle s fo r

thes e tw o type s of

operatio nvar y somewhat , th e applicabl e emissio n contro l technologie s ar e essentiall y th e same . A t th e intermediat e contro l level , thes e technologie s include : turbochargin g wit hlow-temperatur e aftercooling ; increase dboos t pressure ; retarde dinjectio ntimin g (wit htimin g advance da t

ligh t load s t o reduc e H

C an dP M emissions) ; an dchange s i n airflow , fue l injection , an dcombustio nchambe r desig nt o minimiz e emissions
. Thes e technologie s hav e al l bee nwel l demonstrate di non-highwa y engines , an dth e combinatio no f

hig hboos t

pressur e wit hlow-temperatur e aftercoolin g ha s see n increasin g us e i nmarin e mai npropulsio nengine s a s well
. Applicatio n o f thes e technologie s acros s th e boar dshoul db e straightforward , therefore
. Th e emission s level s achievabl e wit hthes e technologie s shoul db e comparabl e t o th e 198 8 standard s fo r

on-highwa y diesels
. Thi s i s reflecte di nTabl e 5-3
.

5-1 0P.8 2



### Rivers
. Sinc e th e Mississipp i an dOhi o Valley s an dlowe r Grea t Lake s regio n ar e on e o f

th e denses t

cluster s o f

urbanize darea s i nth e Unite dStates , th e impac t o f thes e emission s o nhuman s coul db e significant
. Fishin g an dpleasur e craft , o nth e othe r hand , ar e locate d predominatel y alon g th e U.S . coastline
. Th e onl y majo r inlan dconcentratio n of fishin g craf t

i s o nth e Chesapeak e Bay , whic haccount s fo r 2 1 percen t

of fishin g craf t

(Nationa l Marin e Fisherie s Service , 1984) . Likewise , mos t inboar dpleasur e craf t ar e operate do nth e coast s wit hth e Grea t Lake s bein g th e onl y majo r

inlan dconcentration
. Abou t 25 percen t

of thes e boat s ar e operate do nth e grea t lake s (Cmdr
. Scarborough , 1986) . 5. 4 Emission s Tes t Cycl e Relativel y littl e investigatio no f marin e engin e dut y cycle s ha s bee n performed
. Fro

mth e fe

w studie s whic hhav e bee ndon e (e.g. , Sant aBarbar a APCD , 1987) , a s wel l a s discussio nwit hvesse l operators , i t i s clea r

tha t mos t o f th e fue l burne di nmarin e operation s i s burne di ncruis e mode , wit hvesse l maneuverin g an didl e makin g fairl y mino r contributions
. Idl e doe s accoun t fo r aver y significan t

fractio no f

th e operatin g time , however , whic hsuggest s tha t i t coul db e a

nimportan t

contributo r

t o H C an dP M emissions
. Full-speed , full-loa doperatio nma y als o contribut e significantl y t o P M emissions , sinc e som e vessel s "cruise " a t ful l power . Du

e t o th e dominanc e of steady-stat e operatin g modes , transien t effect s o nemission s ar e probabl y negligible
. Thes e fact s sugges t tha t anappropriat e tes t cycl e fo r

marin e propulsio nengine s coul dconsis t o f fou r steady-stat e operatin g modes : idle , ligh t load/lo w RPM

, "cruise" , an dful l load , wit hcruis e an didl e weighte dmos t heavily
. Fo r

generato r

engines , asingle-speed , multi-powe r leve l tes t

cycl e (e.g . 2 , 25 , 50 , 75 , an d10 0 percen t loa da t

180 0 RPM

) woul dgiv e th e mos t realisti c representatio no f in-us e conditions
.

5- 9TABL E 5-3 . ESTIMATE D ACHIEVABL E EMISSION S CONTRO L STANDARD S FO R MARINE DIESE L ENGINE S

Emission s Limi t (g/BHP-hr ) Equivalen t

Emissio n Facto r (lb/100 0 gal. )
HIGH-SPEE D MARINE ENGINE S Intermediat e Contro l Leve l NOx H C PM Advance d Technolog

y NOx H C PM Existing Engine s Ove r 30 0 H P (retrofit ) NO x H C P M 6.0 0 0.5 0 0.5 0 5.0 0 0.5 0 0.2 5 8.0 0 0.5 0 0.5 0 23 8 2 0 2 0 19 8 2 0 1 0 31 7 2 0 2 0
MEDIUM-SPEE D MARINE ENGINE S Intermediat e Leve l NO x H C PM Advance d NO x H C P M Existin g Technol c

Engine s D 

### 8 7

(r e trofit ) NO x H C P M 6.0 0 0.5 0 0.5 0
5.0 0 0.3 0 0.2 0
8.0 0 0.5 0 0.5 0 23 8 2 0 2 0
19 8 1 2 8 31 7 2 0 2 0

Source : Radia n estimates ,

5-1 1P.8 4



### Advance dtechnology—Th e lis t o f possibl e advance demissio n contro l

. .-chnologie s fo r

marin e engine s i s essentiall y th e sam e a s th e lis t

o f intermediat e contro l technologies , wit hth e possibl e additio no f electroni c timin g controls
. Exhaus t ga s recirculatio nwoul dprobabl y b e rule dou t fo r marin e engines , du e t o it s possibl e impac t o nengin e reliability ; whil e catalyst s an dtrap-oxidizer s woul dlikel y b e rule dou t b y fire-safet y considerations
. Th e emission s standard s i nTabl e 5- 3 reflec t thes e limitations
. The P

M leve l o f

0.2 5 g/BHP-h r

shownfo r

th e "advance dtechnology " standards—whil e numericall y identical—i s actuall y somewha t more lenien t

tha n th e 199 1 P

M standar dfo r

on-highwa y vehicles
. Thi s i s du e t o th e fac t tha t P M fo r marin e vessel s woul db e measure di nsteady-stat e operation , whil e th e on-highwa y standar di s base do nahighl y transien t operatin g cycle
. Retrofits—A s wit hlocomotiv e engines , high-horsepowe r marin e engine s ar e commonl

y upgrade dt o curren t technolog y level s whe nthe y ar e overhauled , an dthe y ca nachiev e a nindefinit e lifespa nthroug hrepeate doverhauls
. Thus , a s wit hlocomotives , i t woul dmak

e sens e t o conside r

requirin g retrofi t

o f emission s control s t o thes e engines
. The majo r change s require dwoul db e th e pistons , injectors , an dcamshafts , (mos t o r al l o f whic hwoul db e replace di n an y event) , plu s possibl e change s i nth e turbocharge r an daftercoole r

system . Sinc e th e engin e woul dalread y b e dismantle dfo r overhaul , th e adde dcos t o f thes e change s woul db e relativel y small
. Fo r cost-effectivenes s reasons , i t woul db e desirabl e t o limi t thi s requiremen t

onl y t o th e large r

engines , whic h ten dt o se e more intensiv e use . Fo r ou r purposes , w

e hav e draw nth e lin e arbitraril y a t

30 0 HP , bu t

furthe r

researc ht o determin e a nappropriat e leve l i s recommended
.

Medium-spee dengine s The estimate s of

achievabl e emission s contro l level s fo r medium-spee dengine s i nmarin e servic e ar e identica l t o th e estimate s previousl y presente dfo r locomotiv e engines
. Th e modification s require dt o

5-1 2thes e engine s woul dals o b e essentiall y th e sam e a s thos e require dfo r

locomotiv e engines : upgradin g engin e comp o lents , retardin g injectio n timing , increasin g th e injectio n rate , an dmodifyin g th e engin e coolin g syste mt o provid e low-temperatur e aftercooling
. Du e t o th e availabilit y o f th e ocea na s ahea t sink , thi s las t

modificatio n woul db e easie r an dles s expensiv e fo r marin e engine s tha n fo r locomotiv e engines
. 5. 6 Cost-Effectivenes s Analysi s

Tabl e 5- 4 show s some ver y roug hcalculation s o f th e cost-effectivenes s o f emission s contro l t o th e "intermediate " leve l fo r ne w diese l engine s o f

thre e types : medium-spee dan dhigh-spee dmai n propulsio n engines , an dahigh-spee dgenerato r engine
. Whil e the y ar e ver y roug han d approximate , thes e calculation s giv e some ide ao f th e potentia l cost-effectivenes s o f controllin g thes e engines , compare dt o othe r source s o f potentia l emissio n reductions
. A s wit hlocomotives , cost-effectivenes s i s calculate dbase do nth e reductio n i n N O an dH

C emissions , an dn o credi t o r x penalt y i s take n fo r P M emissio n changes
. N o cost-effectivenes s estimate s wer e mad e fo r

"advance dtechnology " emissio n control s o r fo r retrofits , du e t o th e uncertaint y (and , fo r retrofits , th e grea t variability ) o f

cost s i nthes e cases . Fo r

th e medium-spee dengine , th e cost s o f emissio n contro l assume di n thes e calculation s ar e les s tha n thos e assume dfo r asimila r

engin e i n locomotiv e service
. Thi s i s du e primaril y t o th e lowe r cost s assume dfo r th e low-temperatur e aftercooler
. I n alocomotive , thi s woul drequir e a n air-ai r aftercoole r

o r alarg e separat e air-wate r hea t exchanger , eithe r

o f whic hwoul d b e difficul t

t o enginee r

int o th e limite dspac e available
. I n marin e operation , a neffectivel y infinit e hea t sin k i s availabl e i n th e wate r clos e overside , s o tha t

th e cos t

o f low-temperatur e aftercoolin g woul db e relativel y small
. Maintenanc e cost s woul dals o b e lower , du e t o th e absenc e o f th e air-ai r hea t exchange r

an dth e les s intensiv e use . Th e othe r cost s assume dfo r thi s intermediat e contro l leve l ar e primaril y design , development , an d

5-1 3P.8 6

TABL E5-4
. ESTIMATE

D COST-EFFECTIVENES S O FEMISSION S CONTRO L PO RDIESE LENGINE S USE D I N MARIN

EAPPLICATION S
Mai nPropulsio nEngine s Medium-Spee dHigh-Spee d Generato r Engin e EMISSIO NCONTRO

LCOST S Engin e Horsepowe r Initia l Cos t Engin e Lif e (yrs ) Amortize dCost/yea r @ 10 % Fue l Cons . Increas e Annua l Fue l Cons . (Gal ) Baselin e Wit hcontrol s Adde dFue l Cos t

@ $0.80/ga l Addl
. Ann . Maintenanc e Annualize dContro l Cos t 2,50 0 $50,00 0 2 0 $5,87 3 5 % 160,00 0 168,00 0 $6,40 0 $3,00 0 $15,27 3 50 0 $3,00 0 1 5 $39 4 5 5 12,50 0 13,12 5 $50 0 $20 0 $1,09 4 20 0 $1,00 0 1 5 $13 1 5 % 16,00 0 16.80 0 $64 0 $20 0 $97 1 P e r Engin e EMISSION S Emissio nFactor s (lb/100 0 gal. ) Baselin e NO x H C P M Wit h Control s NO x H C P M 52 3 3 2 1 4 23 8 2 0 1 8 4 3 6

3 2 2 4 23 8 2 0 2 0 4 3 6 3 2 2 4 23 8 2 0 2 0 Annua l Emission s (pound s pe r engin e pe r year ) Baselin e NO x H C P M Wit h Control s NO x H C P M 83.68 0 5 2 12 0 2,24 0 39,98 4 3.36 0 3,02 4 5,45 0 40 0 30 0 3,12 4 26 3 26 3 6,97 6 51 2 38 4 3,99 8 33 6 33 6 Emission s Reductio n(pound s pe r engin e pe r

year ) NO x 43.69 6 2.32 6 H C 1 B 76 0 13 8 P M (784 ) 3 8 2,97 8 17 6 4 8 Cost-Effectivenes s ($/ton ) NO x + H C $67 2 $88 8 $61 6

5-1 4

### certificatio n costs , whic h(whil e large ) woul db e sprea dove r alarg e number

o f marin e an dlocomotiv e engines
. Th e additiona l manufacturin g cost s of refinement s i ninjectors , combustio nchambers , injectio ntiming , etc . ar e relativel y small
.

Fo r th e two high-spee dengines , th e approximat e emissio ncontro l cost s show

nwer e base do nexistin g technolog y fo r on-highwa y truc k

engines
. Technologie s assume dwere : turbochargin g (fo r engine s tha t

don' t hav e i t already) , low-temperatur e aftercooling , retarde dinjectio ntiming , increase d boos t pressure , an doptimizatio no f combustio nchambe r an dinjecto r characteristics
. The majo r cost s i nthi s packag e ar e fo r th e turbocharge r

an d aftercooler , an dth e desig nan dcertificatio ncost s fo r th e engine
. Thes e wer e assume dt o b e fairl y high , a s th e marin e marke t i s limited , an dCoas t Guardan d America nBureau o f

Shippin g regulation s pos e aformidabl e barrie r t o ne w technologies
.

A s Tabl e 5- 4 indicates , th e potentia l cost-effectivenes s of emission s contro l fo r

ne w marin e engine s i s abou t $600-$90 0 pe r

ton . Thi s i s quit e attractiv e whe

ncompare dt o th e cost s pe r to nfo r

othe r availabl e N

O an dH

C reductions
.

5-1 5P.8 8

6. 0 FAR

M EQUIPMEN

T Self-powere dfar mequipmen t include s tractors , combines , mowers , an d othe r self-propelle dmachiner y use di n agriculture
. Fo r th e las t

2 0 years , th e engine s use di n thes e vehicle s hav e bee n overwhelmingl y diesel , an dthe y ar e responsibl e fo r

mos t diese l fue l consumptio n o n farms
. Engine s i nno n self-propelle dequipmen t suc ha s irrigatio n pumps , engine-drive n blowers , conveyors , etc . ar e responsibl e fo r arelativel y smal l fractio n o f tota l fue l consumptio n an demissions , an dar e no t discusse dhere
. 

### 6. 1 Engin e Characteristic s an dOperatin g Condition s

Th e larges t

grou p o f

agricultura l diese l engine s ar e thos e use di n tractors . Tracto r

engine s ten dt o b e naturally-aspirated , direct-injected , 4-strok e engine s of

moderat e spee dan dpowe r outpu t (15-18 0 HP

) an dfou r

t o si x cylinders
. Engine s use di nsmal l utilit y tractor s ar e primaril y Group 4 engine s o f

15-5 0 H

Pan dJapanes e manufacture
. Simila r engine s ar e als o use di n law nan dgarde nequipment
. Large r tracto r

engine s i nth e 40-18 0 H Prang e ar e ofte nproduce db y th e tracto r builder , an dar e specificall y designe dfo r tracto r use . I nadditio nt o supplyin g motiv e power , thes e engine s ar e ofte n an integra l par t

o f th e structura l framewor k o f th e tractor , wit hspeciall y reinforce doilpan s andengin e block s t o carr y th e structura l load
. Thes e engine s ar e classe di nGroup II , an danumber o f themhav e bee nadapte dfo r us e (i nanon-structura l role ) i nhighwa y truck s a s well
. Example s includ e th e Joh nDeer e 30 0 an d400-serie s engine s an dth e For d6-cylinde r diese l engines
. Recen t year s hav e showna nincreasin g tren dt o highe r tracto r

power ratin g an dtractor s o f 40 0 H Pan dabov e ar e no

w availabl e i nfou r

whee l driv e tractors . Thes e high-powere dengine s ar e generall y adapte dfromthos e use di n on-highwa y trucks , an dar e ofte nturbocharge dan dintercoole dfo r increase d outpu t (Implemen t

an dTractor , 1986) . Truck-typ e engine s hav e als o see n increasin g us e i nsmalle r tractors , wit hmaker s suc ha s Perkin s an dIsuz u supplyin g engine s t o tracto r maker s suc ha s Masse y Ferguso nan dWhite
.

6- 1 

# JP.8 9



### Tractor s underg o avarie dan drigorou s dut y cycle
. I nadditio n t o plowing , .planting D 

### cultivating, , ha y baling , an dothe r heav y agricultura l work , tractor s ar e use dfo r mowing s pullin g wagons , front-en dloading , drivin g fenc e posts , blowin g snow , bulldozing ^ an deve nligh t earthmovin g jobs
. The smalle r utilit y tractors , a s thei r nam e implies , ten dt o se e agreate r variet y o f applications , whil e th e large r an dmor

e powerfu l tractor s ar e primaril y use d fo r heav y fiel dwork
. Combines, , windrowers „ cotto npickers , an dothe r specialize d non-tracto r

agricultura l equipmen t underg o ales s varie ddut y cycle
. Engine s fo r thes e vehicle s ar e ofte nequippe dwit hmedium-heav y dut y truc k engine s suc h a s th e Navista r

D T 46 6 an dth e Caterpilla r 3208 . Thes e ma y b e naturally-aspirate do r turbocharged
. I nothe r cases , adaptation s o f tracto r engine s o r

(i nafe

w cases ) specially-designe dengine s ar e used
. A weighte daverag e o f Harves t

Publishing' s 198 5 Tracto r Survey , th e larges t number o f tractor s i nus e wer e mad e b y Joh nDeer e an dInternationa l Harvester , bot ho f

whic hha dproduce dabou t approximatel y 2

7 percen t

o f th e total
. Othe r

significan t

tracto r

manufacturer s includ e Masse y Ferguson , Ford , Allis-Chalmers , White , an dJ„I . Case , al l o f who mha dproduce dfrom7 percen t t o 1 0 percen t

o f th e tractor s i nuse . Historically , Joh nDeere , International , Ford , an dCas e hav e produce dthei r ow ntracto r

engines , whil e Masse y Ferguson , Allis , an dWhit e ten dt o us e purchase dengines
.

The agricultura l equipmen t operation s o f

J.I . Cas e an dInternationa l Harveste r

wer e recentl y merged, , an dne w tractor s produce db y Case-I H wil l presumabl y b e designe daroun dth e "B " an d"C " engine s produce db y Cas e an d Cummins i najoin t

ventur e arrangement . Thes e engine s ar e als o targete dfo r th e light-heav y an dmedium-heav y truc k markets
. 6. 2 Curren t

Emissio nFactor s Th e bes t dat aonemissio nfactor s fo r far mequipmen t

ar e containe di n arepor t t o th e Californi aAi r Resource s Boar db y Environmenta l Researc hand
6- 2Technolog y (ERT) (1982) . Thi s repor t wa s sponsore db y th e far mequipment , constructio n equipment , an dengin t industrie s throug hthei r respectiv e associations , an dsummarize s massiv e amount s o f manufacturer-supplie ddata
. Althoug hth e repor t deal s specificall y wit hCalifornia , th e emissio nfacto r dat acontaine di ni t ar e th e bes t

availabl e fo r

remainde r

o f th e U.S . a s well
. Thes e dat aar e presente di n Tabl e 6-1 .

Th e dat ai n th e ER

T repor t

suffe r fro msevera l limitations
. Th e mos t importan t

o f thes e i s th e absenc e o f particulat e measurements . A s aresult , th e P M emissio nfactor s i n Tabl e 6- 1 wer e take n fro mAP-4 2 (EPA , 1985)
. Thes e factor s ar e base do nemission s measurement s o n alimite dsampl e o f far man d constructio nequipmen t engine s teste da t Southwes t

Researc hi n th e earl y 70' s (Har e e t al. , 1975)
. I n comment s o n ou r Tas k One interi mreport , th e Engin e Manufacturer' s Associatio n (EMA ) criticize dou r

us e o f thes e factors , statin g tha t the y ar e n o longe r representativ e o f far man dconstructio n equipmen t toda y (Young , 1987) . Thi s criticis mha s some validity , especiall y fo r th e large r truck-derive dengine s use di n higher-powere dequipment
. N o example s o f thes e engine s wer e teste di n th e SWR I program , an di t

i s no t

clea r tha t th e emissio n factor s develope dfo r th e smalle r

engine s ar e appropriat e here
. A s a result , w

e hav e substitute davalu e o f 0.8 0 g/BHP-h r

(base do n pre-contro l particulat e emission s fro mheavy-dut y truc k engines ) fo r

th e EP

A emissio n facto r fo r four-whee l driv e tractors . Fo r two-whee l driv e tractor s an dothe r agricultura l equipment , w e electe dt o retai nth e EP A emissio n factors
. Whil e i t i s tru e tha t

many o f

th e specifi c engin e model s teste db y Har e e t al
. ar e n o longe r i n use , ther e i s littl e evidenc e t o sugges t tha t th e ne w engine s tha t replace dthe mar e an y cleaner , an dn o mor e recen t emission s dat aar e available
. Researc ht o obtai n mor e recen t

an dapplicabl e emission s dat ai s strongl y recommended
. Anothe r limitatio no f

th e ER

T dat ai s tha t

the y ar e base do na n adaptatio n o f

th e ol d13-mod e steady-stat e tes t cycle , an dthu s d o no t accoun t

6- 3

# RADIA N

TABL E6-1 . EMISSIO N FACTOR S FO RFAR M EQUIPMEN

T P.9 1

HC 1 EMISSIO N FACTOR S (G/BHP-HR ) C O NO

x PM 2 Equipmen t

Typ e Tractor , 2W

D 100 + H

P Tractor , 4W

D Tractor , 2WD

, 20-9 0 H

P Combines , Self-propelle d Windrower , Self-propelle d Fiel dForag e Harvester s Cotto nPicker s Cotto n Sprayer s Orchar dSprayer s Compac t Loader s Fuel-Weighte dEmissio n Factor s

lb/100 0 ga l g/BHP-h r 1.8 4

0.8 9 2.1 6 1.9 0 2.2 1 0.9 6 2.2 3 2.2 3 2.2 3 1.1 3 7 2 1.8 1 4.2 3

3.2 8 6.4 2 3.2 5 6.8 5 2.8 4 3.7 8 3.7 8 3.7 8 4.2 9 18 2 4.5 9 11.5 9

10.9 8 10.9 4 13.3 6 10.5 0 9.9 8 7.7 8 7.7 8 7.7 8 9.6 9 45 6 11.5 0 1.2 8

0.80 J 1.2 8 1.5 1 1.5 1 1.5 1 1.5 1 1.5 1 1.5 1 1.5 1 5 0 1.2 5

Sources : 1 ERT , 1982 . 2 EPA , AP-42 , 1985 . 3 Radian estimate .

6- 4

# RADIAf l

fo ran y transien teffects . Thi s i s als o tru e o f th e P M dat adevelope db y Har e e tal . Thi s i s no taproble mfo r mos t categorie s o f

far mequipment , sinc e combines , windrowers , larg e tractors , etc . ten dt o b e use dprimaril y i nnearl y steady-stat e operation
. I t ma y b e aproble mfo r

th e smalle r

tractors , however , a s thes e unit s ten dt o experienc e afai r amoun t o f cycli c operation , an di t i s certainl y aproble mfo r th e compac t

loaders
. Thi s issu e i s discusse dfurthe r i nSectio n 6.4 .

Tabl e 6- 1 als o show s ase t o f "fue l weighted " emissio n factor s fo r far mequipment
. Thes e ar e simpl y th e averag e o f th e emissio n factor s fo r eac h equipmen t

class , wit heac hclass ' contributio n weighte db y it s estimate d fractio no f

tota l diese l fue l consumptio n b y far mequipment
. Th e estimate s o f diese l fue l consumptio n b y eac hclas s ar e show n i n Tabl e 6-2 . 6. 3 Engin e Populatio n an dEmission s Inventor y

Reasonabl y complet e informatio n o n far mequipmen t population s an d emissio ncharacteristic s i s available
. Populatio n dat aar e availabl e i n numerou s statistica l summarie s o f th e agricultur e sector , an di n estimate s develope db y th e Far mImplemen t an dEquipmen t

Institute , th e industr y association
. Tabl e 6- 2 show s ou r estimate s o f

tota l populations , usage , fue l consumption , an demission s fo r th e majo r

classe s o f

self-propelle dfar m equipment
. Thes e estimate s ar e base do n FIE I revision s t o USD A populatio n numbers , an dt o th e ER T estimate s o f

averag e horsepowe r an dhour s o f

usag e pe r yea r (Young , 1987) . A s th e tabl e indicates , th e grea t bul k o f agricultura l equipmen t

emissions—accountin g fo r abou t 8 5 percen t

o f th e total—ar e du e t o tractors , wit hcombine s th e onl y othe r majo r source . Tabl e 6- 2 include s a n estimat e o f th e tota l nationwid e fue l consump tio nb y agricultura l equipment , calculate dfro mth e FIE I dat aan dassumin g fue l consumptio no f

0. 4 lb/BHP-hr
. Als o show n i n th e tabl e i s th e Departmen t o f Energy' s estimat e o f tota l distillat e fue l deliverie s i n th e agricultura l secto r fo r 1985
. Thi s valu e i s closel y comparabl e t o th e valu e calculate dfro m th e FIE I data
.
6- 5TABL E 6-2 . ESTIMATE D POPULATION , FUE L CONSUMPTION , AND EMISSION S FRO

M DIESE L ENGINE S USED IN FAR M EQUIPMEN T

Equipmen t Typ a Tota l Pent . Diese l Usag e Populatio nDiese l Populatio n(hr/yr ) Avg. , H.P / Annua l

Fue l A Loa dConsumptio n Facto r (100 0 Gal ) H C EMISSION S (TONS/YEAR )

C O NO x P M

I CT Tractor , 2W

D 100 + H P 865,70 0 94 % 813,75 8 41 0 Tractor , 4W

D 85,47 5 100 % 85,47 5 53 0 Tractor , 2WD , 20-9 0 H P 3,597,50 1 70 % 2,518,25 1 30 0 Combines , Self-propelle d500,00 0 75 % 375,00 0 22 0 Windrower , Self-propelle d110,00 0 20 % 22,00 0 41 8 Fiel dForag e Harvester s 9,50 0 100 % 9,50 0 39 0 Cotto nPicker s 20,00 0 70 % 14,00 0 35 3 Cotto nSpreyer s 2,70 0 70 % 1,89 0 23 0 Orchar dSprayer s 20,62 9 10 % 2,06 3 10 0 Compac t Loader s 113.40 0 23 % 26,08 2 32 0 14 1 22 7 5 6 13 6 7 5 15 0 11 5 9 5 5 7 0 3 7 0.5 5

0.6 4 0.3 4 0.5 6 0.5 5 0.7 8 0.5 5 0.5 0 0.3 5 0.3 7 1

3 3 ,437,43 6 365,63 5 799,12 5 349,06 7 21,07 4 24,0B 3 17,36 6 1,14 7 28 1 6,34 8 ,021,56 1 ,181,338 6 52,43 2

6,45 1 34,21 8 13,14 8 92 3 45 8 76 8 5 1 1 2 14 2 108,60 3 120,53 6

23,77 4 101,70 4 22,48 9 2,86 2 1,35 6 1,30 1 8 6 2 1 54 0 274,66 9 330,28 2

79,58 6 173,30 8 92,44 9 4,38 7 4,76 5 2,6^ 8 •M 7 4 3 1.21 9 688,87 4 36,47 4

5,79 9 20,27 7 10,44 9 63 1 72 1 52 0 3 4 8 19 0 75,10 3 TOTAL DOE/EI A Fue l Con6 . Estimat e 3,868,01 9

FIE I adjustment s t o USD A (1985 ) [Young , 1987) . FIE I estimate s (Young , 1987) . FIE I adjustment s t o ER T (1982) . .Calculate dassumin g fue l consumptio no f 0. 4 Ib/BHP-hr . Radia nestimate . Energy Informatio nAdmin. , 1985 ,

- o C OP.9 4

Almos t b y definition , far mequipmen t emission s ar e concentrate di n rura l areas . Althoug hsom e farmin g ofte n occur s eve n i n highl y urbanize d regions , suc ha s th e Sout hCoas t Ai r Basi n o f

California , diese l far mequipmen t fo r onl y 0.2 5 percen t

o f th e N O inventor y i n th e SCAB . Fo r comparison , i n th e heavil y agricultura l Fresn o are a(which , lik e th e SCAB , i s no t i n attainmen t

o f t h e Federa l ozon e standards ) diese l far mequipmen t account s fo r

abou t 6 percen t o f th e N

O inventory
. Thes e estimate s wer e obtaine db y adjustin g simila r figure s fo r

gasolin e an ddiesel-powere dequipmen t (Ingalls , 1985 ) t o reflec t onl y diese l engine-powere dequipment
.

Usin g regiona l sale s figure s fro mth e Jul y 1985 , Petroleu mMarketin g Monthl y (EIA , 1985) , agoo dnationa l distributio n o f far mequipmen t

emission s ca n b e determined
. I t shoul db e recognize dtha t thi s distributio n i s base do n t h e premis e tha t

agricultura l secto r fue l sale s an dengin e emission s ar e similarl y relate di nal l region s o f th e country . Usin g thi s tack , th e Ne w Englan dstate s accoun t fo r . 4 percen t

o f far mrelate demissions , Mid-Atlanti c state s accoun t

fo r 2. 8 percen t

and , th e res t

o f th e easter n seaboar dstate s make u p 8. 4 percent . Th e Midwes t account s fo r

alion' s shar e 49. 2 percen t o f far mgenerate dpollutants
. Th e Sout han dNorthwes t ad danothe r

16. 7 percen t an d6. 0 percent , respectively , t o th e far memission s total
. Finally , th e Wes t i s responsibl e fo r

th e remainin g 16. 5 percent . 6. 4 Emission s Tes t Cycle s A s note di nSectio n6-2 , mos t type s o f

self-propelle dfar mequipmen t ar e use di nessentiall y steady-stat e operation
. Fo r combine s an dothe r specialize dequipment , th e engin e generall y experience s onl y aver y limite d rang e o f

operatin g conditions
. Fo r tractors , th e rang e o f operatin g condition s i s larger , varyin g fro mhigh-speed , lo w loa drunnin g i n ligh t task s t o sustaine dnear-ful l powe r outpu t i n heav y work
. Fo r mos t tasks , however , th e engin e spee dan dpowe r requirement s d o no t var y greatl y fro msecon dt o second , s o tha t asteady-stat e tes t cycl e woul dprobabl y b e adequat e fo r measurin g emissions
. Althoug htractor s i n fiel doperatio n d o experienc e some cycli c operatio n (whe n turnin g a t th e en do f

arow , fo r

instance ) thes e cycle s ar e
6- 7 

# JP.9 5



### lon g enough tha tth e transien t effect s woul dprobabl y b e negligible
. However , transien t

emission s measurement s (usin g arealisti c cycle ) o nactua l tracto r engine s woul d b e desirabl e i norde r t o confir mthi s assumption
. A nexceptio nt o th e genera l rul e o f steady-stat e operatio nwoul d occu r i nth e cas e o f

compac t

loaders ; an do f

tractor s use dfo r

utilit y wor

k (suc ha s front-en dloading ) whic hinvolve s repeate dshort-cycl e operation
. Fo r thes e units , som

e sor t o f cyclic , transien t

dut y cycle , simila r t o th e constructio nequipmen t tes t cycle s discusse di nSectio n7.3 , migh t b e more appropriate
. A

t thi s point , th e actua l exten t an demission s effect s o f cycli c operatio ni nsmalle r

tractor s ar e unclear , an dfurthe r researc ht o resolv e thi s questio ni s recommended
. 6. 5 Feasibilit y o f Emission s Contro l A s note dabove , mos t

tracto r an dothe r

agricultura l equipmen t engine s ar e classe di nGroup 2 , wit hth e remainde r bein g classe di nGroup 4 . A s bot h o f thes e engin e group s ar e closel y relate dt o on-highwa y engines , mos t emissio n contro l technologie s develope dfo r on-highwa y us e shoul db e readil y adaptable
. Th e difference s i ndut y cycle , applicatio nrequirements , an denvironmenta l condition s betwee nth e tw o type s o f application s wil l impos e som e limitations , however
. I nparticular , th e clos e integratio no f th e engin e andth e equipmen t i ntractors , loaders , an dsom e othe r equipmen t

type s coul dresul t

i ndelay s o r larg e economi c penaltie s du e t o th e adoptio no f emissio ncontrols
. Tractors , loaders , an d(t o alesse r extent ) othe r

far mmachine s ar e literall y designe daroun dth e physica l dimension s an doperationa l capabilitie s o f th e engine
. Th

e physica l dimension s o f th e engin e determin e th e locatio n of th e tractor' s hoo dan dframe , an dan y change s t o thes e dimension s ma y requir e redesig no f

majo r portion s o f

th e structure . I nth e sam e way , gea r

andfina l driv e ratios , hydrauli c syste mcharacteristics , an dothe r desig nvariable s ar e determine db y th e torque/spee dcharacteristic s o f th e engine , an dan y majo r change s i nthes e characteristic s ma y involv e majo r

expense .

6- 8P.9 6

Unlik e passenge r

cars , whic hunderg o majo r desig n change s ever y few years , farm equipmen tdesign s hav e arathe r lon g lif e cycle
. Th e economi c lif e o f atracto ro r

combin e desig n i s o f th e orde r

o f te n years , afte r

whic hth e uni t wil l b e completel y re-engineere dan dre-tooled
. A t an y give n time , som e portio no f

amanufacturer' s produc t lin e i s undergoin g thi s re-engineering , s o tha t eac hmanufacture r typicall y bring s ou t som e ne w equipmen t design s eac h year . T o avoi dundu e financia l an dengineerin g burde n o n th e industry , i t woul db e desirabl e t o incorporat e an y majo r change s require dfo r emission s contro l i n ne

w model s a s the y ar e redesigned , rathe r tha n imposin g asingl e requiremen t

acros s th e board
. One approac ht o implementin g thi s requiremen t woul db e throug ha naveraging , trading , an dbankin g arrangement , suc ha s i s no w bein g considere dfo r heavy-dut y truc k

engines
. Beginnin g wit hsom e interi m emission s contro l leve l whic hcoul db e achieve dwithou t significan t

externa l change s t o th e engine , th e require dcorporat e averag e emission s level s coul db e reduce deac hyea r

unti l the y reache dth e ultimat e contro l level s desired
. I n thi s way , stringen t emissio n control s coul db e designe dint o ne w model s a s the y a r e released
.

Estimate s o f

th e achievabl e intermediate-ter man dlong-ter m(advance d technology ) corporat e averag e emissio n contro l level s fo r agricultura l engine s ar e show ni n Tabl e 6-3 . Tw o set s o f

standard s ar e presented : on e base do na steady-stat e tes t

cycle , an dth e othe r o n ates t

cycl e includin g transien t operation
. Th e forme r woul db e applicabl e t o combines , windrowers , larg e tractors , an dothe r equipmen t

operate dprimaril y i n steady-stat e conditions
. Th e latte r

woul dappl y t o loaders , an dpossibl y t o smal l utilit y tractors . Th e majo r difference s betwee n thes e tw o tes t cycle s ar e i n th e P M an dH C standard s achievable ; achievabl e N O emission s ar e littl e affecte db y transien t operatin g conditions
.

6- 9P.9 7

TABL E6-3 . ESTIMATE

D ACHIEVABL

EEMISSION S CONTRO LSTANDARD

S TORDIESE LENGINE S USE D I NFAR

M EQUIPMEN

T

Emission s Limi t (g/BHP-hr ) Equivalen t Emissio n Facto r (lb/100 0 gal. )
STEADY-STAT

ETES T CYCL

E Intermediat e Contro l Leve l NO x H C P M 8.0 0 0.5 0 0.5 0 31 7 2 0 2 0 Advance d Technolog

y NOx H C PM 6.0 0 0.2 0 0.15 ] 23 8 8 6

TRANSIENT TES T CYCL E Interme d NOx H C P M Advance d NOx H C PM Lat e Contro l

Technolog y Leve l 8.0 0 1.0 0 0.8 0
6.0 0 0.3 0 0.15 1 31 7 4 0 3 2
23 8 1 2 6

Source : 1 Radia nestimates
. Du e t o hig hloa dfactors , th e abilit y o f far mequipmen t

t o mee t

th e 0. 1 g/BHP-h r

standar destablishe dfo r highwa y truck s i s questionable
. W e hav e use damor e conservativ e estimate
.

6-1 0A s wit h th e previou s sections , th e reade r i s warne dtha t

thes e ar e engineerin g estimate s only , base do n ver y limite ddata , an dintende donl y t o indicat e th e potentia l benefit s o f regulatio n i n thi s area . Additiona l researc ht o confir mthes e estimate s woul db e essentia l befor e thes e o r an y othe r emissio n standard s wer e incorporate dint o law
. Near-ter memission s contro l technologie s applicabl e t o agricultura l equipmen t

include : retarde dinjectio n timing , increase dinjectio n pressures , improvement s i n ai r flo w an dcombustio n chambe r geometry , an dsimila r engin e optimizatio n measures . I n addition , turbochargin g woul db e feasibl e i nman y (bu t b y n o mean s all ) equipmen t model s whic har e currentl y usin g naturally

- aspirate dengines
. Additio n o f low-temperature , separat e circui t aftercoolin g woul dals o b e possibl e fo r some existin g turbocharge do r turbocharged/after

coole dengines , bu t again , no t

al l o f

them
. I t

shoul db e note dtha t al l o f thes e step s woul dinvolv e some economi c waste , a s th e vehicl e drivetrai nwoul d b e unable , i n mos t

cases , t o absor b th e increase dpowe r outpu t availabl e wit h turbochargin g and/o r aftercooling
. Thi s woul drequir e tha t th e engin e b e derate dt o matc hit s previou s powe r level
. Othe r near-ter mtechnologie s applicabl e t o agricultura l engine s includ e exhaus t

ga s recirculatio n (EGR ) and/o r

indirec t

injectio n i n th e smal l Grou p 4 engine s use dfo r utilit y tractor s an dcompac t loaders , an dpossibl y i n higher-powered , lo w usag e engine s suc ha s thos e i n combines
. EG Ri s unlikel y t o se e muc happlicatio n i n larg e tractors , du e t o it s advers e effect s o nengin e wea r an ddurability
. Trap-oxidizer s woul dals o b e applicabl e i n application s suc ha s combines , wher e th e hig han dpredictabl e engin e loa dwoul deliminat e regeneratio n problems
.

Advance demissio n contro l technologies , whic hcoul db e designe dint o ne w equipmen t

model s a s the y ar e produced , includ e turbochargin g wit h moderatel y low-temperatur e aftercoolin g i n mos t engines , electroni c injectio n timin g an dgoverno r control , furthe r optimizatio n o f

combustio n chamber , airflow , an dinjectio n characteristics , reduce doi l consumption , an dtrap -

6-1 1P.9 9

oxidizer s wit h precious-meta l catalyst s fo r H C control
. Thes e las t woul d requir e th e us e o f

low-sulfu r

fuel , bu t

EP A i s presentl y considerin g mandatin g thi s i n an y event . Due t o th e relativel y hig hloa dfactor s experienced , trap-oxidize r

regeneratio n woul db e muc hles s o f aproble mi n agricultura l application s tha n i non-highway ' trucks
. Fo r th e sam e reason , however , formatio no f

particulat e sulfate s b y th e catalys t woul db e mor e o f

aproblem
. Thes e consideration s ar e reflecte di n th e estimate s show n i n Tabl e 6-3 .

Becaus e o f

th e limite dspac e availabl e fo r hea t exchanger s an dth e advers e operatin g condition s impose db y fiel dwork , air-to-ai r hea t exchanger s woul db e infeasibl e fo r mos t agricultura l machines
. Thes e sam e condition s woul dlimi t

th e siz e an dpotentia l effectivenes s o f separate-circui t aftercooler s o r

othe r low-temperatur e aftercoolin g techniques
. Fo r thes e reasons , th e degre e o f N O reductio n achievabl e i n far mequipmen t woul db e les s tha ntha t

whic hcoul db e achieve di n on-highwa y truck s o r marin e engines
. Thi s i s reflecte di n th e highe r N O standard s show n i n Tabl e 6-3 . x 6. 6 Cost-Effectivenes s Analysi s

Tabl e 6- 4 show s some extremel y roug hcalculation s o f th e cost s an d cost-effectivenes s o f controllin g emission s t o th e "intermediate " leve l show n i nTabl e 6-3 . Due t o th e uncertaint y o f cost s an dtechnolog y involve di n reachin g th e "advance dtechnology " level , n o meaningfu l cost-effectivenes s estimate s fo r

tha t contro l leve l wer e possible
. Cost-effectivenes s estimate s ar e presente dfo r thre e differen t

type s o f agricultura l equipment : alarg e four-whee l driv e tractor , asmal l utilit y tractor , an dacombine
. Emissio n control s assume dfo r th e larg e tracto r includ e retarde dtiming , increase dinjectio n pressure , an dalow-temperatur e aftercooler , plu s combustio n chambe r optimization
. Thi s technolog y wa s assume d t o b e adapte dfro mon-highwa y version s o f th e same engine
. Fo r th e smal l tractor , retarde dinjectio n timin g retardation , combustio n chambe r an dairflo w optimization , an dmoderat e EG Rwer e assumed
. Fo r th e combin e engine , w e assume dth e us e o f

acommercially-availabl e truc k engin e ratin g rathe r tha nth e off-highwa y versio n o f th e engine , wit hacorrespondin g increas e i n cost .

6-1 2p. 1

TABL E6-4 . ESTIMATE

D COST-EFFECTIVENES S O FEMISSION S CONTRO L FO RDIESE LENGINE S USE D I N FAR

M EQUIPMEN

T Larg e 4W

D Tracto r Smal l

Tracto r Combin e
COS T O F EMISSIO

NCONTROL S Engin e Horsepowe r Initia l Cos t o f Control s Engin e Lif e (yrs ) Amortize d Cost/yea r @ 10 % Fue l Cons . Increas e Annua l Fue l Cons . (Gal ) Baselin e Wit hcontrol s Adde dFue l Cos t

@ $0.80/ga l Addi
. Ann . Maintenanc e Annualize dContro l Cos t Pe r Uni t EMISSION S 22 7 5 6 $1,50 0 1 5 $19 7 $30 0 1 5 $3 9 2% 4,30 0 4.38 6 $6 9 $10 0 $30 6 5 % 22 0 23 1 $ 9 $3 0 $5 8 13 6

$50 0 1 5 $6 6 5 % 70 0 73 5 $2 8 $5 0 $10 4 Emissio nFactor s Baselin e NO x H C P M Wit hControl s NO x H C P M Annua l Emission s Baselin e NO x H C P M Wit hControl s NO x H C P M (lb/100 0

(lb s pe r

Emission s Reductio n NO x H C P M Cost-Effectivenes s NO x + H C P M (lb s

($/to n g a l

u n i

pe r

) . )

t pe r ye s

uni t pe r 43 5

3 5 3 2 31 7 2 0 2 0
r ) 1.87 1 15 1 13 8 1.39 0 8 8 8 8 year ) 48 0 6 3 5 0 $84 5 $3,06 7 $ 2

$ 7 43 4 7 5 5 1 31 7 4 0 3 2

9 5 1 7 1 1 7 3 9 7
2 2 7 A ,96 0 ,60 7 53 0 8 6 6 0 31 7 2 0 2 0

37 1 6 0 4 2 23 3 1 5 1 5
13 8 4 6 2 7 $84 8 $1,90 0
6-1 3

### Th e cost-effectivenes s o f emission s contro l fo r agricultura l equipmen t

wa s calculate db y allocatin g (more o r les s arbitrarily ) 75 percen t o f th e contro l cos t

t o reducin g N

O an dH C emissions , an dth e remainin g 25 percen t t o reducin g PM. Th

e resultin g cost-effectivenes s value s o f $84 5 t o $3,00 0 pe r to nof N O plu s HC, an d$1,90 0 t o $7,60 0 pe r to nof diese l P

M ar e i n th e low-to-i n i ddi e portio no f th e cos t

rang e fo r

othe r emission s contro l strategie s tha t hav e bee npromulgate dt o date
. The exten t t o whic hthes e strategie s ar e trul y comparabl e i s debatable , however , sinc e th e majo r effec t o f emissio n control s o nagricultura l equipmen t woul db e t o reduc e emission s i nrura l areas , wherea s mos t

othe r emissio ncontro l strategie s ar e aime da t urba nsources .

6-1 4P. 3



# RADIA N

7. 0 CONSTRUCTIO N AN D INDUSTRIA

LEQUIPMEN

T Constructio nequipmen t include s earthmovin g an drelate dmachiner y suc ha s bulldozers , graders , scrapers , loaders , cranes , backhoes , an d off-highwa y trucks
. Industria l equipmen t suc ha s front-en dloader s an d industria l tractor s i s als o include di n thi s category , a s ar e specialize d minin g an dloggin g machine s suc ha s lo g skidders
. 

### 7. 1 Engin e Characteristic s an dOperatin g Condition s

Diese l engine s use di nconstructio nandindustria l equipmen t (CIE ) rang e fromles s tha n4 0 H Pfo r forklift s an dsmal l loader s t o mor e tha n 80 0 H

P fo r th e larges t

earthmovin g machine s andoff-highwa y trucks
. Mos t CI Eengine s ar e relativel y small , naturally-aspirated , moderate-spee dengine s classe di n Group s 2 an d4 . Man y o f thes e ar e generall y speciall y designe dfo r thei r applications , o r

adapte dfromengine s use di nsmal l agricultura l tractors . The large r engine s use di nlarg e earthmovin g an dsimila r machiner y ar e les s numerous , but—du e t o thei r hig hpowe r

outpu t an dgreate r

utilization—accoun t fo r asignifican t

fractio no f

th e tota l emission s fromthi s category . Thes e engine s ar e classe di nGroup s 2 an d3 , an dar e ofte nadapte dfro mtruc k engin e design s (o r

vic e versa) . Man

y o f thes e large r

engine s us e turbochargin g an d (sometimes ) intercoolin g t o increas e thei r powe r output . Usag e pattern s i nconstructio nan dindustria l equipmen t engine s ar e a s varie da s th e equipmen t type s themselves
. Hydrauli c pump s t o power th e booms , lifts , buckets , blades , an dothe r implement s are ' alarg e par t o f th e engin e loa di nmos t

type s o f

constructio nan dindustria l equipment , an di n som e case s (e.g . hydrostaticall y drive ncrawlers ) the y ar e nearl y th e entir e load
. Som e crane s an dlarg e earthmovin g machine s us e diesel-electri c system s lik e thos e i nlocomotives
. I nmos t constructio nequipment , however , alarg e par t o f th e engin e power

requiremen t

i s fo r

movin g th e machine , throug hadirec t mechanica l linkag e wit hth e wheel s o r tracks
.

7- 1Hydrostati c an ddiesel-electri c driv e system s allo w th e engin e t o

maintai n arelativel y constan t speed , althoug hth e engin e torqu e require da t tha t spee dma

y fluctuate
. Direc t mechanica l drive , o n th e othe r hand , impose s larg e transien t

change s i n spee dan dloa do n th e engine
. Th e nee dt o generat e ful l o r near-ful l engin e torqu e a t lo w engin e speed s i n many operatin g cycle s lead s t o hig htransien t smoke , an dprobabl y hig hparticulat e emission s a s well
. Diese l engine s i n constructio n machiner y mus t operat e i n abruta l physica l environment
. Thi s i s especiall y tru e o f engine s i n mechanical-driv e applications , wher e shoc k an dvibratio n load s ma y b e transmitte dthroug hth e drivetrai n t o th e engine
. Reliabilit y i s als o ver y important—failur e o f afe w larg e machine s coul dseriousl y disrup t aconstructio n schedule
. Thi s impose s stringen t

requirement s fo r

robustnes s an dreliabilit y o n th e engine
. T o b e commerciall y feasible , an y emissio n control s woul dhav e t o b e similarl y robus t an dreliable
. 7. 2 Curren t

Emissio n Factor s Th e bes t

dat ao nemissio n factor s fo r constructio n an dindustria l equipmen t

ar e containe di n arepor t t o th e Californi aAi r Resource s Boar db y Environmenta l Researc han dTechnolog y (ERT) (1982) . Thi s repor t wa s sponsore d b y th e far mequipment , constructio n equipment , an dengin e industrie s throug h thei r respectiv e associations , an dinclude s massiv e amount s o f manufacturer-supplie ddata
. Althoug hth e repor t deal s specificall y wit h California , th e emissio n facto r dat acontaine di n i t ar e th e bes t

availabl e fo r remainde r

o f th e U.S . a s well
. Thes e dat aar e presente di n Tabl e 7-1 . A s discusse di n Sectio n 6-2 , th e dat ai n th e ER T repor t

suffe r fro m severa l limitations
. Th e mos t importan t

o f thes e i s th e absenc e o f particulat e measurements . A s aresult , th e P M emissio n factor s i n Tabl e 7- 1 wer e take n fro mAP-4 2 (EPA , 1985)
. EMA' s criticis mo f thes e emissio n factors , an dou r response , hav e alread y bee n discusse di n Sectio n 6-2 . A s wa s als o th e cas e wit hfar mequipment , w e decide dt o retai n thes e factor s essentiall y fo r lac k o f

7- 2TABL E7-1 . ESTIMATE

D CURREN

T EMISSIO NFACTORS FO RDIESE LENGINE S USE D I N CONSTRUCTIO

N AN D INDUSTRIALEQUIPMEN T P. 5

HC J EMISSIO NFACTOR S (G/BHP-HR ) CO J NOx 'M 2
Equipmen t Typ e Trac k Typ e Tractor . 90 + H P Trac k Typ e Tracto r

20-8 9 H

P Trac k Typ e Loader , 90 + H P Trac k Typ e Loader , 20-8 9 H P Whee l Loade r

> 2-1/ 2 cubi c yar d Whee l Loade r

< 2-1/ 2 cubi c yard
. Industria l Whee l Tracto r Skid-Stee r

Loade r Whee l Tracto r

Scrape r Off-Highwa y Truck * Moto r Grade r Hydrauli c Excavator , Al l Trenche r Concret e Paver* * Bituminou s Pave r Rolle r Compactor , Vibrator y Rolle r Compactor , Stati c Crane , Whee l Crane , Crawle r Crane , Hyd. , Wheel , 1-Statio n Crane , Hyd. , Wheel , Multi-Statio n Lo g Skidde r Pip e Laye r Fuel-Weighte dEmissio n Factor s lb/100 0 ga l g/BHP-h r 0.3 7

1.3 3 0.4 7 1.8 0 0.6 0 1.2 9 1.7 6 1.7 6 0.5 5 0.3 7 0.3 6 1.2 2 1.1 0 1.1 0 0.9 9 • 1.0 6 0.8 8 0.5 9 0.5 9 0.8 0 0.6 8 0.6 1 0.5 9
2 9 0.7 4 1.6 5

2.9 1 1.5 6 3.0 2 2.0 7 3.2 6 7.3 4 7.3 4 2.4 5 2.2 8 1.5 4 3.1 8 4.5 7 4.5 7

- 5.1 9 6.7 2 5.3 3 4.9 9 4.9 9 7.8 0 3.7 1 3.1 8 4.9 9
11 7 2.9 4 6.6 0

9.6 3 7.7 6 10.9 7 8.3 1 9.2 4 11.9 1 11.9 1 7.4 6 8.1 5 7.1 4 11.0 1 10.0 2 10.0 2 11.1 8 14.2 7 11.8 4 12.4 5 12.4 5 14.6 9 12.4 7 9.8 2 12.4 5
36 0 9.0 8 0.6 9

0.6 6 0.6 6 0.6 9 0.8 1 0.8 1 1.2 7 1.2 7 0.7 9 0.5 0 0.6 3 0.9 0 0.9 0 0.9 0 0.9 0 0.7 8 0.7 8 0.9 0 0.9 0 0.9 0 0.9 0 0.9 0 0.9 0
3 1 0.7 7

* Als o whee l dozer , pavemen t col d planer . **Als o generators , pumps , compressor s Sources : 1 . ERT , 1982 . 2 EPA , AP-42 , 1985
.

7- 3P. 6

an y mor e applicabl e data
. A s th e P M factor s use dfo r constructio n equipmen t a r e generall y lowe r tha n thos e use di n far mequipmen t (reflectin g th e mor e modern , larger , an dcleane r engine s tested) , the y ma y b e considere dles s objectionabl e a s aresult
. Researc ht o obtai n mor e recen t an dapplicabl e emission s dat afo r

constructio n equipmen t i s strongl y recommended , however
. Als o show ni nTabl e 7- 1 ar e ase t o f "fuel-weighted " emissio nfactor s fo r constructio nan dindustria l equipment
. Thes e ar e th e weighte daverage s o f t h e emissio n factor s fo r eac hequipmen t

type , wit hth e weightin g proportiona l t o th e fue l consume db y eac htyp e o f machine
. Fue l consumptio n estimate s fo r eac hmachin e typ e ar e show n i n Tabl e 7-2 .

A majo r limitatio n o f

bot hth e ER

T dat aan dth e AP-4 2 particulat e factor s i s th e fac t tha t bot hwer e base do n th e ol d13-mod e steady-stat e tes t cycle , an dthu s d o no t accoun t

fo r an y transien t

effects
. Sinc e mos t constructio nequipmen t operatio n involve s ahighl y transien t dut y cycle , thi s i s amuc hgreate r

proble mfo r

constructio n an dindustria l equipmen t tha nfo r far mequipment
. Man y constructio n equipmen t operatin g cycle s requir e ful l o r near-ful l engin e torqu e a t lo w engin e speeds— asituatio n whic hca nproduc e ver y hig hparticulat e emissions
. Th e frequen t puff s o f

blac k smoke emitte db y many constructio nmachine s operate do n suc hcycle s ar e testimon y t o th e potentia l fo r

hig hemissions
. As aresult , th e H C an dP M emission s factor s show ni nTabl e 7- 1 ma y significantl y understat e th e rea l emissions
. Researc h t o resolv e thi s issu e i s recommended
. 7. 3 Engin e Populatio nan dEmissio n Facto r Dat a Populatio n an demissio n estimate s fo r constructio n an dindustria l equipmen t

ar e liste di n Tabl e 7-2 . Th e utilizatio n an dduty-cycl e dat ai n thi s tabl e wer e take n fro mth e ER T repor t

t o th e Californi aAi r Resource s Boar d (1982) . At

th e tim e ou r

Tas k 1 interi mrepor t

wa s prepared , n o national-leve l populatio n dat awer e availabl e fo r constructio n an dindustria l equipment
. As a result , nationa l population s wer e calculate db y scalin g u p th e Californi a

7- 4TABL E7-2 . ESTIMATED POPULATION , FUE LCONSUMPTIO

N AN D EMISSION S FRO

M DIESE LENGINE S USE D O NCONSTRUCTIO

N AN D INDUSTRIALEQUIPMEN T % 

# 1 Diese l Usag e Avg . Load Consumptio n Populatio n (hr/yr ) H.P . Facto r (100 0 gal ) H C EMISSION S (TONS/YEAR ) C O NOx P M

i Equipmen t Typ e Trac k Typ e Tractor , 90 + H P Trac k Typ e Tracto r 20-8 9 H P Trac k Typ e Loader , 90 + H P Trac k Typ e Loader , 20-8 9 H P Whee l Loade r > 2-1/ 2 cubi c yar d Whee l Loade r < 2-1/ 2 cubi c yar d Industria l Whee l Tracto r Skid-Stee r Loade r Whee l Tracto r Scrape r Off-Highwa

yTruc k Moto r Grade r Hydrauli c Excavator , Al l Trenche r Concret e Pave r Bituminou s Pave r Rolle r Compactor , Vibratory Rolle r Compactor , Stati c Crane , Whee l Crane , Crawle r Crane , Hyd. , Wheel , 1-Statio n Crane , Hyd.
. Wheel , Multi-Statio n Lo g Skidde r Pip e Laye r 84.00 0 36.00 0 36.00 0 28.00 0 74.00 0 56.00 0 212.00 0 112.00 0 16.40 0 20.00 0 74.00 0 63.00 0 50,50 0 11.30 0 12,00 0 14,00 0 29,00 0 38.00 0 14.30 0 34.70 0 6.10 0 25.455 , 750 ^ 135 0

86 5 117 5 85 0 143 0 103 5 55 6 50 0 75 0 294 0 103 5 143 0 57 2 50 0 82 0 108 5 85 0 76 0 108 5 108 5 76 0 145 0 132 5 21 6

6 3 14 6 6 7 22 9 8 7 5 6 4 0 28 9 62 3 4 3 20 0 7 5 18 5 12 0 14 0 6 7 9 0 15 0 15 0 9 0 10 5 17 5 0.4 1 0.3 8 0.4 4 0.5 0 0.4 0 0.3 2 0.3 8 0.3 2 0.4 2 0.2 8 0.4 1 0.4 9 0.4 9 0.3 8 0.3 0 0.2 5 0.3 8 0.4 0 0.2 5 0.2 5 0.4 0 0.5 3 0.2 3 557.92 8

41.41 6 150.96 4 44.29 4 538.50 6 89.64 5 139,54 8 39.82 2 82.94 3 569.83 7 75.01 6 490,49 0 58.97 6 22.06 6 19.68 0 29.53 6 34,86 6 57.76 0 32,32 4 78,43 6 9,27 2 114,11 3 2,22 2 4.09 2

1.09 2 1.40 7 1.58 1 6.40 5 2.29 2 4.86 9 1.38 9 90 4 4.18 0 53 5 11.86 3 1.28 6 48 1 38 6 62 1 60 8 67 6 37 8 1.24 4 12 5 1,38 0 2 6 18.24 9 2.38 9 4.66 9 2.65 2 22.09 8 5.79 3 20.30 5 5.79 4 4.02 8 25.75 6 2.29 0 30.92 0 5.34 3 1.99 9 2.02 5 3.93 5 3.68 4 5.71 4 3.19 8 12.12 8 68 2 7,19 4 22 0 72,99 8

7.90 6 23.22 3 9.63 3 88,71 1 16.42 0 32.94 7 9.40 2 12,26 6 92.06 5 10,61 8 107,05 4 11.71 5 4.38 3 4.36 2 8,35 5 8.18 4 14.25 6 7.97 8 22,84 2 2,29 2 22.21 4 54 8 7.65 4

53 8 1.96 0 60 8 8.59 4 1.43 1 3.51 3 1.00 3 1.29 7 5.67 1 92 9 8.77 0 1.05 5 39 5 35 2 45 6 53 8 1.03 3 57 8 1.40 3 16 6 2.04 0 4 0 TOTA L1.047.80 5 D0E/EI A "Off-Highway " Fue l Cons , 3.279.66 1 47.82 0 191.06 4 590.37 2 50.02 1 1,616.68 5 23.57 2 94.184 6 291,019 6 24.657 6 Sources : Constructio nEquipmen t Magazine , March-July , 1987 , Radia nestimate s base do nCaliforni adata
. 3 ERT . 1982 . -Calculate db y assumin g fue l consumptio no f 0. 4 lb/BHP-hr
. ?EIA . 1985
. "Fuel-weighted " emissio nfactor s time s DOE/EI A estimate
.P. 8

population s estimate da s a par t o f th e ER T study . Thi s wa s accomplishe d b y dividing th

e Californi a populatio n b yth e rati o o

J 197 9 Californi a sale s t o 197 9 U.S.'sale s o f constructio n an d industria l equipment . I n comment s o n our interi mreport , th e Engin e Manufacturer' s Associatio n accepte d thi s genera l approach , bu t suggeste d tha t th e estimate d population s b e adjuste d downward t o reflec t declining sale s o f constructio n an d industria l equipmen t sinc e 197 9 (Young , 1987) . Sinc e tha t time , however , Constructio n Equipmen t Magazin e ha s publishe d th e resul t o f a nationwid e surve y o f constructio n equipmen t users , including populatio n estimate s fo r nearl yal l majo r classe s o f constructio n equipmen t (Landers , 1987) . Thes e populatio n estimates , adapte d t o fi t the classification s use d i n the ER T report , ar e th e one s show

n i n Tabl e 7-2 . Although the equipmen t classe s i n thi s surve ywer e no t precisel ycoinciden t wit h thos e i n the ER T report , th e correspondenc e wa s clos e enough i n ever ycas e t o allowa reasonabl e allocatio n t o b e made . Severa l categorie s show n i n Tabl e 7- 2 requir e som e additiona l explanation . Th e Constructio n Equipmen t surveyestimate d th e numbe r o f backho e loaders , whic h the ER T repor t lumped wit h other , simila r machine s a s "industria l whee l tractors" . Th e Constructio n Equipmen t estimat e o f 189,00 0 backho e loader s wa s arbitraril yincreased b y4 0 percen t t o reflec t the presenc e o f othe r classe s o f industria l tractor s no t include d in th e survey . Thi s wa s the n reduce d b

y2 0 percen t t o reflec t the assume d fractio n o f gasolin e engine s i n th e population . Th e ER T repor t include d n o equipmen t categor yfo r skid-stee r loaders , althoug h thes e ar e extremel ycommo n smal l constructio n machines . W e assume d tha t the emissio n factor s an d usag e pattern s for thes e machine s woul d b e simila r t o thos e fo r industria l whee l tractors , an d furthe r assume d tha t 8 0 percen t o f th e skid-stee r loader s reporte d wer e diese l powered . Thes e estimate s ar e reflecte d i n Tabl e 7-2 . I n addition , th e Constructio n Equipmen t surveycontaine d n o dat a for log skidder s o r pipelayers . Populatio n estimate s fo r thes e equipmen t type s wer e carrie d ove r fro mou r Tas k 1 interi mreport .

7- 6P. 9

Tota l fue l consumptio n an dpollutan t emission s b y constructio n an d industria l equipmen twer e calculate dusin g th e sam e approac ha s fo r far m equipment , an d ar e als o reporte di n Tabl e 7-2 . A s thi s tabl e indicates , n o on e categor y o f

constructio n an dindustria l equipmen t i s dominant
. Th e fou r larges t categorie s ar e track-typ e tractors , larg e whee l loaders , hydrauli c excavators , an doff-highwa y trucks , bu t many othe r

equipmen t

categorie s ar e als o majo r

contributors
. Tabl e 7- 2 als o show s th e tota l fue l consumptio n calculate dfro mth e ER T dat aand , fo r

comparison , th e tota l fue l consumptio n fo r "off-highway " equipmen t

estimate db y DOE . A s th e tabl e shows , th e DO Eestimat e i s onl y abou t

hal f o f th e valu e calculate dfro mou r estimates
. Whethe r thi s i s du e t o a noverestimat e o n ou r par t (a s aresul t

o f unrealisticall y hig hloa d factors , usage - estimates , o r averag e horsepower , fo r instance) , o r

t o a n underestimat e o n DOE' s par t i s unclear
. A s amatte r o f interest , th e emission s whic hwoul dresul t

fro massumin g tha t th e DO

Evalu e i s correct , an dscalin g bac k th e ER T estimate s proportionally , ar e als o shown
. 7. 4 Emission s Tes t Cycle s A s discusse di n Sectio n 7. 2 above , th e operatin g cycle s o f many type s o f constructio nmachiner y includ e larg e transien t change s i n engin e spee dan d load
. A front-en dloader , fo r instance , cycle s betwee n ful l engin e powe r an d low-loa doperatio n a t leas t thre e time s i n th e cours e o f aloadin g cycle , whic h ma y tak e onl y 15-3 0 second s t o complete
. Hydrauli c excavator s an dothe r constructio nmachine s exhibi t simila r

larg e cycli c swing s i n engin e loa dan d speed
. Thes e ofte nresul t i n hig hvisibl e smoke emissions , an di t i s likel y tha t the y caus e hig hP

M emission s a s well
. Due t o th e larg e numbe r o f machin e design s an ddut y cycles , i t woul d b e impractica l t o develo p a n emission s tes t cycl e reflectin g eac hspecifi c operatin g pattern . However , b y recordin g spee dan dloa dmeasurement s o na larg e numbe r

o f engine s i n differen t type s o f

constructio n machines , i t migh t b e possibl e t o develo p a"generic " transien t tes t cycl e whic hwoul dresul t i n
7- 7P.1 0

adequat e contro l o f transien t emission s effect s ove r a wid e rang e o f cycles . A n engin e certifie d o n thi s tes t cycl e coul d the n be use d i n an yconjtructio n machine .
T o allowfo r th e fac t tha t som e constructio n machiner yengine s (thos e in paving machines , o r compressors , fo r instance ) d o no t experienc e larg e transien t speed an

d loa d changes , th e regulation s migh t permi t a manufacture r t o certif ya n engin e using a cycl e o f hi s ow n devising , a s lon g a s h e coul d showtha t th e cycl e wa s representative o f operatio n i n a specifi c equipmen t mode l o r models . Th e engin e woul d then be limited t o us e in tha t typ e o f equipment . Thi s woul d avoi d imposin g technologie s t o contro l transien t o r lo w speed/high load emission s o n engine s whic h d o no t experienc e thes e operating conditions . I t woul d als o encourag e manufacturer s t o develo p equipmen t design s whos e powe r requirement s ar e mor e compatibl e wit h lo wemissions . 7. 5 Feasibilit yo f Emission s Contro l

Mos t constructio n an d industria l equipmen t engine s ar e classe d i n Grou p 2 o r Grou

p 4 , wit h some high-powere d earthmoving machinerybein g equippe d wit h Grou

p 3 engines . Al l thre e o f thes e engin e group s ar e closel yrelated t o on-highwa

yengines , s o tha t mos t emissio n contro l technologie s develope d fo r on-highwa

yus e shoul d be readil yadaptable . A s wit h far mequipment , however , th e difference s i n dut ycycle , applicatio n requirements , an d environmenta l condition s betwee n th e tw o type s o f application s wil l impos e som e limitations . I n particular , the clos e integratio n o f th e engin e an

d the machin e a s a whole , alread ydiscusse d i n relatio n t o far mequipment , i s a

n importan t consideratio n fo r constructio n an d industria l equipmen t a s well . Lik e far

mmachinery , bulldozers , loaders , compactors , an d simila r machine s ar e literall ydesigne d aroun d th e physica l dimension s an d operationa l capabilitie s o f the engine , an d an ychang e in physica l dimension s o r torque capabilitie s ma

yrequir e redesign o f majo r portion s o f the equipment . A s wit h far mmachinery , th e economi c lif e o f a n equipmen t desig

n i s o f th e orde r o f te n

7- 8P.1 1

years , afte r

whic hth e uni t

wil l b e completel y re-engineere dan dre-tooled
. Thus , t o avoi d undu e financia l an dengineerin g burde n o n th e industry , i t woul d b e desirabl e t o phas e i n an y emissio n regulation s stringen t enoug ht o requir e significan t

engin e changes , usin g a n approac hsuc ha s th e averaging , trading , an dbankin g arrangemen t discusse di n Sectio n 6.5
. Estimate s o f

th e achievabl e intermediate-ter man dlong-ter m(advance d technology ) corporat e averag e emissio n contro l level s fo r constructio nan d industria l equipmen t engine s ar e show n i n Tabl e 7-3 . Thes e estimate s ar e identica l t o th e estimate s o f achievabl e far mequipmen t emission s standard s i n Tabl e 6-3 . Tw

o set s o f

standard s ar e presented : on e base do n asteady-stat e tes t cycle , an dth e othe r o n ates t

cycl e includin g transien t operation
. Th e forme r woul db e applicabl e t o pavers , compresso r motors , an dothe r engine s operatin g i nmore-or-les s steady-stat e conditions , whil e th e latte r woul d appl y t o th e grea t

majorit y o f

constructio n equipmen t type s an dmodels
. A s i n th e previou s sections , th e reade r i s warne dtha t

thes e ar e engineerin g estimate s only , base do n ver y limite ddata , an dintende donl y t o indicat e th e potentia l benefit s o f regulatio n i n thi s area . Additiona l researc ht o confir mthes e estimate s woul db e essentia l befor e thes e o r an y othe r emissio nstandard s wer e incorporate dint o law
. Near-ter memission s contro l technologie s applicabl e t o constructio n an dindustria l equipmen t ar e identica l t o thos e fo r far mequipment
. Thes e include : retarde dinjectio n timing , increase dinjectio n pressures , improvement s i nai r flo w an dcombustio n chambe r geometry , an dsimila r engin e optimizatio n measures . Turbochargin g woul dals o b e feasibl e i n some equipmen t model s whic h a r e currentl y usin g naturally-aspirate dengines , an dlow-temperature , separate-circui t

aftercoolin g woul db e possibl e fo r i n some model s currentl y usin g turbocharge do r turbocharged/aftercoole dengines
. As wit hfar m equipment , thes e step s woul dinvolv e some economi c waste , a s th e vehicl e drivetrai nwoul db e unable , i n mos t cases , t o absor b th e increase dpowe r outpu t availabl e wit hturbochargin g and/o r aftercooling
. Othe r near-ter mtechnologie s

7- 9P.1 2



# RADIA N
applicabl e t o constructio n an dindustria l equipmen t includ e exhaus t

ga s recirculatio n(EGR

) and/o r indirec t

injectio ni nth e Group 4 engines
. Advance demissio ncontro l technologies , whic hcoul db e designe dint o ne w equipmen t

model s a s the y ar e produced , includ e turbochargin g wit h moderatel y low-temperatur e aftercooling , electroni c injectio ntimin g an d governo r control , an dfurthe r optimizatio n o f

combustio nchamber , airflow , an d injectio ncharacteristics
. Sinc e man y constructio nmachine s requir e hig h torqu e outpu t

a t lo w RPM

. variable-geometr y turbocharger s woul dals o b e wel l suite dbot hfo r

emission s contro l an dfo r improvin g performance
. Finally , trap-oxidizer s wit hprecious-meta l catalyst s woul db e well-suite dfo r P M an dH C control
. Du

e t o th e relativel y hig hloa dfactor s experienced , trap-oxidize r regeneratio nwoul db e muc hles s o f

aproble mi nconstructio nequipmen t tha n i n on-highwa y trucks , an dtrap-oxidizer s hav e i nfac t bee napplie dt o som e undergroun dminin g machine s (Bre v e t al. , 1987) . The hig hloa dfactor s woul d produc e agreate r

proble mwit hparticulat e sulfat e formatio ndue t o th e catalyst , however
. necessitatin g th e us e o f low-sulfu r

fuel
. Thes e consideration s ar e reflecte di nth e estimate s show ni nTabl e 7-3 . A s wit hfar

mequipment , th e constraint s of physica l spac e an d operatin g environmen t woul drul e ou t

th e us e of

air-to-ai r

aftercooler s i n mos t constructio nan dindustria l equipment , an dwoul dlimi t th e applicabilit y o f othe r low-temperatur e aftercoolin g techniques
. Thus , th e N O reduction s achievabl e woul db e les s tha nthos e i non-highwa y truc k engines
. Thi s i s reflecte di nth e highe r N O standard s show

ni nTabl e 7-3 . x 7. 6 Cost-Effectivenes s Analysi s

Tabl e 7- 4 show s som e extremel y roug hcalculation s of th e cost s and cost-effectivenes s o f controllin g emission s t o th e "intermediate " leve l show n i nTabl e 7-3 . The uncertaintie s i nth e cost s an dtechnolog y involve di n reachin g th e "advance dtechnology " leve l wer e suc htha t no meaningfu l cost-effectivenes s estimate s fo r tha t contro l leve l wer e possible
.

7-1 0P.1 3

TABL E7-3 . ESTIMATE

D ACHIEVABL

EEMISSION S CONTRO LSTANDARD

S FO RDIESE L ENGINE S USE

D I N CONSTRUCTIO

NAN D INDUSTRIALEQUIPMEN T

Emission s Limi t (g/BHP-hr ) Equivalen t Emissio n Facto r (lb/100 0 gal. )
STEADY-STAT E TES T CYCL E Intermediat e Contro l Leve l NOx H C PM 8.0 0 0.5 0 0.5 0 31 7 2 0 2 0 Advance d Technolog y NO x H C PM 6.0 0 0.2 0 0.15 1 23 8 8 6
TRANSIEN T TES T CYCL E Intermediat e Contro l Leve l NO x H C P M Advance d Technolog y NOx H C P M 8 1 0 6 0 0 0 .0 0 8 0 0 0 3 0 0.15 ' 31 7 4 0 3 2
23 8 1 2 6

Source : 1 Radia nestimates
. Du e t o hig hloa dfactors , th e abilit y o f constructio nequipmen t t o achiev e t h e 0.1 0 g/BHP-h r

standar destablishe dfo r highwa y truck s i s questionable
. W e hav e use damor e conservativ e estimate
.

7-1 1P.1 4

Cost-effectivenes s estimate s ar e presente dfo r thre e differen t

type s o f constructio nequipment , ahydrauli c excavator , a n industria l utilit y tractor , an d aconcret e paver . Th e excavato r an dtracto r

represen t

transien t operatio na t

hig han dlo w powe r levels , respectively , whil e th e concret e pave r i s representativ e o f steady-stat e operation
. Excep t fo r th e transien t operatin g cycl e experience db y th e hydrauli c excavator , thes e machine s exhibi t ver y simila r

powe r

level s an doperatin g characteristic s t o th e thre e agricultura l equipmen t type s analyze di n Tabl e 6-4 . Emissio n control s assume dfo r th e hydrauli c excavato r include d retarde dtiming
. increase dinjectio n pressure , an daseparate-circui t o r air-ai r

aftercooler , plu s combustio n chambe r optimization
. Thi s technolog y wa s assume dt o b e adaptabl e fro msimila r on-highwa y engines
. Fo r th e smal l tractor , retarde dinjectio n timing , combustio n chambe r an dairflo w optimiza

tion , an dmoderat e EG Rwer e assumed
. Thes e contro l technique s (an dindeed , th e tracto r itself ) ar e identica l t o thos e assume dfo r th e smal l agricultura l tracto r i n Tabl e 6-4 . Fo r th e concret e pave r engine , a s wit hth e combine , w e assume dth e us e o f

acommercially-availabl e truc k engin e ratin g rathe r tha nth e off-highwa y versio no f th e engine
. Th e cost-effectivenes s o f emission s contro l fo r constructio n equipmen t

wa s calculate di n th e sam e wa y a s fo r

far mequipment
. W e allocate d 7 5 percen t

o f th e contro l cost , mor e o r les s arbitrarily , t o reducin g N O an d H C emissions , an dth e remainin g 2 5 percen t t o PM . Th e resultin g cost-effectivenes s value s o f $7 5 0 t o $2,05 0 pe r to n o f N O plu s HC . an d$4,00 0 t o $9,00 0 pe r

to n fo r

P M ar e als o i n th e low-to-middl e portio n o f th e cos t rang e fo r

othe r emission s contro l strategies , an dar e comparabl e t o thos e fo r far mequipment
. Unlik e emissio n reduction s fro mfar mequipment , however , thes e reduction s woul doccu r primaril y i n urba n areas . Thes e cost-effectivenes s estimate s ar e thu s directl y comparabl e t o thos e o f othe r urban-oriente dcontro l strategies
.

7-1 2P.1 5



# RADIA N TABL E7-4 . ESTIMATE

D COST-EFFECTIVENES S O FEMISSION S CONTRO L FO RDIESE LENGINE S USE D I N CONSTRUCTIO

NEQUIPMEN

T
Hydrauli c Excavato r lndust .

Whee l Tracto r Concret e Pave r
COS T O F EMISSIO

NCONTROL S Engin e Horsepowe r Initia l Cos t o f Control s Engin e Lif e (yrs ) Amortize d Cost/yea r @ 10 % Fue l Cons . Increas e Annua l Fue l Cons . (Gal ) Baselin e Wit hcontrol s Adde dFue l Cos t

@ $0.80/ga l Addi
. Ann . Maintenanc e Annualize d Contro l Cos t Pe r Uni t 20 0 5 6 $1,20 0 1 0 $19 5 $30 0 1 0 $4 9 2 % 7.80 0 7.95 6 $12 5 $15 0 $47 0 5 %

66 0 69 3 $2 6 $4 0 $11 5 18 5

$60 0 1 0 $9 8 5 % 2.00 0 2.10 0 $8 0 $6 0 $23 8
EMISSION S Emissio nFactor s Baselin e NO x H C P M Wit hControl s NO x H C P M Annua l Emission s Baselin e NO x H C P M Wit hControl s NO x H C P M Emission s Reduc t NO x H C P M (lb/100 0

(lb s pe r

io n(lb s

Cost-Effectivenes s ($/to n NO x + H C P M gal. )

uni t pe r

pe r uni t

) 43 7 4 8 3 6 31 7 4 0 3 2 year )

pe r 3,40 9

37 4 28 1 2,52 2 31 8 25 5 year ) 88 7 5 6 2 6 $74 8 $8,96 9 47 2 7 0 5 0 31 7 4 0 3 2

31 2 4 6 3 3 22 0 2 8 2 2
9 2 1 8 1 1 $1,56 7 $5,32 3 $ 2

$ 3 39 7 4A 3 6 31 7 2 0 2 0

79 4 8 8 7 2 66 6 4 2 4 2
12 8 4 6 3 0
.04 5 .96 1
7-1 3P.1 6



### I t i s wort hnotin g tha t th e cos t

pe r to nof particulat e emission s eliminate u i nTabl e 7- 4 ma y b e greatl y overestimate dfo r th e excavato r

an d industria l tractor , du e t o th e possibl e substantia l under-estimat e of th e emission s reduction
. Thi s i s du e t o th e fac t tha t th e baselin e emission s wer e calculate dfro mth e steady-stat e P M emissio nfactor s develope db y Har e e t al. , (1975) , whil e th e "controlled " emissio nleve l i s base do nengin e capabilitie s unde r transien t

conditions
. Sinc e uncontrolle dtransien t emission s ar e ofte n muc hhighe r

tha nthos e i nstead y state , th e emission s benefit s o f th e intermediate-leve l standard s ma y hav e bee nsignificantl y underestimated
.

7-1 4P.1 7

8. 0 MOBIL

EREFRIGERATIO N UNIT S Small , engine-powere drefrigeratio n unit s ar e use dt o provid e coolin g f o r refrigerate dtrailers , shippin g containers , truc k bodies , an drai l cars . Thes e unit s ar e overwhelmingl y diese l powered , du e t o th e hig hefficienc y o f t h e diese l engin e an dth e read y availabilit y o f it s fuel
. Althoug hthe y ar e individuall y smal l i npowe r output , th e larg e numbe r o f refrigeratio n unit s i n u s e an dth e larg e numbe r o f operatin g hour s pe r uni t mak e the ma not-inconsiderabl e contributo r t o tota l diese l emissions
. Mobil e refrigeratio nunit s hav e receive drelativel y littl e study , compare dt o th e othe r equipmen t

categorie s considere di nthi s report , an dth e fund s availabl e fo r thi s preliminar y stud y di dno t permi t

a nin-dept h investigation
. A s aresult , th e estimate s presente dher e are - eve nmor e uncertai ntha nthos e i n th e previou s sections
. Mor e extensiv e investigation , includin g actua l emission s testin g o f asampl e o f

refrigeratio n units , i s strongl y recommended
. 8. 1 Engin e Characteristic s an dOperatin g Condition s

Diese l engine s use dfo r mobil e refrigeratio n ar e typicall y small , naturally-aspirated , high-spee dengine s classe di n Grou p 4 . Powe r rating s rang e fro mles s tha n 1 0 H.P . u p t o aroun d7 0 H Pfo r some truc k

units , whil e railca r refrigeratio nunit s ar e reporte dt o hav e a n averag e o f 8 8 H.P . Bot h direct-injecte d(DI ) an dindirect-injecte d(IDI ) engine s ar e used , bu t th e marke t tren di s towar dincrease dus e o f D I engines
. Thi s i s du e t o th e greate r fue l efficiency , lowe r hea t losses , an deasie r col dstartin g o f

th e D I engines
. Diese l engine s i n mobil e refrigeratio n unit s typicall y ru n continuousl y whil e th e uni t i s i n use , bein g shu t of f onl y whe n th e ca r o r traile r wil l no t

b e use dfo r

a n extende dperiod
. I n mos t units , th e engin e an d compresso r

ar e size dt o dea l wit hth e maximu manticipate dcoolin g load
. Thi s

5- 1P.1 8



# RADIA N

ma y includ e coolin g dow n ajust-loade dcargo , a s wel l a s keepin g i t coo l unde r th e mos t

extrem e climati c condition s expected
. A s aresult , the y ar e substantiall y oversize dfo r norma l coolin g requirements
. Mos t mobil e refrigeratio nunit s handl e thi s b y cyclin g betwee n full-powe r operatio nwit h t h e compresso r

runnin g an dlettin g th e engin e idl e whe n th e compresso r i s no t needed
. Thus , dependin g o n th e coolin g requirement s o f th e load , th e engin e ofte nspend s th e grea t bul k it s tim e idling
. T o reduc e fue l consumption , som e newe r mobil e refrigeratio n unit s ar e incorporatin g amor e comple x contro l strategy—fo r instance , usin g full-spee d operatio n fo r

rapi dcooldow n whe n required , an daslower , mor e fuel-efficien t spee dfo r

keep-coo l operation
. System s allowin g automati c shutdow n an drestar t o f th e engin e whe n i t i s neede dar e als o available
. W e wer e unabl e t o determin e th e degre e o f marke t penetratio n o f

thes e systems , bu t i t i s believe d t o b e relativel y small
. 8. 2 Curren t

Emissio n Factor s Emission s dat afo r engine s use di n mobil e refrigeratio n ar e unavailable
. Tabl e 8- 1 show s som e roug hestimate s o f thes e factors , base do n dat afo r

simila r

engine s i n othe r applications
. Fo r railca r

refrigeratio n units , th e mos t

commo n engin e i s th e DD

A 2-71 . Th e emissio n factor s show n ar e base do n a6V-7 1 engin e (Har e e t al. , 1975)
. Thi s engin e ha s mor e cylinders , bu t i s otherwis e simila r t o th e 2-7 1 i n combustio n technology
. Th e K O x emission s fo r

thi s engin e reporte db y Hare , e t al
. hav e bee n adjuste ddownwar d somewhat , an dth e P M emission s adjuste dupwar dt o reflec t th e effect s o f wea r i nth e injecto r

linkag e an dchange s i nengin e technolog y sinc e 1975
. Eve n les s informatio n i s availabl e o n emission s fro mengine s i ntruc k an dcontaine r

refrigeratio n units
. Th e emissio n factor s show n i n Tabl e 8- 1 fo r thes e unit s ar e Radia n estimates , base do n typica l emission s performanc e fo r smal l D I an dID I diese l engines , an dma y wel l b e grossl y wrong . I t i s likel y tha t thes e emission s value s var y greatl y fro mmanufacture r t o manufacturer , s o eve nafe w emission s dat apoint s woul dno t hel p greatl y t o improv e th e estimates
. 8- 2P.1 9 — ^ |

TABL E8-1 . ESTIMATE

D CURREN

T EMISSIO NFACTOR S FO RDIESE L ENGINE S USE

D FO RMOBIL

EREFRIGERATIO N
EMISSIO N FACTOR

S g/BHP-h r

lb/100 0 gal ,

Railroa dCa r

Unit s HC 1. 0 4 0 CO 4. 0 15 9 NO x 16. 0 63 4 P M 0. 4 1 6

2 Truck/Containe r Unit s

H C 1. 2 4 8 C O 5. 0 19 8 NO x 8. 0 31 7 PM 0. 6 2 4 Sources : Radian estimate s base d o n DD A2-7 1 engine . 2 Radian estimate s base d o n typica l smal l D I an d ID I engines .

8- 3P.2 0

8. 3 Engin e Populatio n an dEmission s Inventor y

Estimate dnationwid e population , fue l consumption , an demission s fo r diese l engine s use di n mobil e refrigeratio n unit s ar e show n i n Tabl e 8-2 . Estimate s o f

th e nationa l populatio n o f truc k an dcontaine r

refrigeratio n unit s wer e obtaine db y summin g annua l sale s dat a(obtaine dfro mRefrigerate d Transporte r

magazine ) ove r

a n estimate d1 5 yea r usefu l life
. Th e numbe r o f refrigerate dtrai nunit s wa s take n fro mstatistic s o f th e Associatio no f America nRailroad s (1986) . Th e averag e horsepower , loa dfactors , an d hours-of-operatio nshow n fo r thes e unit s ar e Radia n estimates , base do nlimite d dat aan dconversation s wit hperson s involve di n th e industry
.

Lik e th e industrie s whic hus e them , mobil e refrigeratio n unit s shoul d ten dt o b e concentrate di n urba n area s an dthei r immediat e surroundings , a s thes e ar e th e majo r termin i fo r

refrigerate drailcar s an dtruc k trailers
. Th e degre e o f

urba noperatio n fo r thes e unit s i s probabl y simila r t o tha t

o f th e vehicle s whic htranspor t them : train s an don-highwa y trucks
. 8. 4 Emission s Tes t Cycl e Emission s fro mamobil e refrigeratio n uni t ar e affecte db y th e overal l desig n o f

th e unit , includin g th e compressor , heat-exchangers , an d contro l syste ma s wel l a s th e engine
. A n appropriat e tes t

procedur e shoul d therefor e measur e emission s agains t th e usefu l outpu t o f th e system : i.e
. BT U o f coolin g supplie dunde r specifie dcondition s (whic hshoul dinclud e cycli c operation)
. Thi s woul dresul t i n emission s credi t fo r shutdown/restar t

rathe r tha ncontinuou s idle , us e o f mor e efficien t

compressors , an dothe r desig n feature s whic hwoul dreduc e emission s i n th e rea l world
. Unfortunately , sufficien t

dat at o specif y suc hates t cycl e wer e unavailabl e fo r thi s preliminar y study
. Thus , th e discussio n o f achievabl e emission s standard s i n Sectio n8. 5 i s limite dt o g/BHP-h r number s only
.

8- 4TABL E 8-2 . ESTIMATE D NATIONWID E POPULATION . FUE L CONSUMPTION . AND _ . 0 | EMISSION S FROM DIESE L ENGINE S USE D FO R MOBIL E REFRIGERATION 

# n
%

• ' , Applicatio n Trai n Truck/Containe r Est . Pop . 30.OOO 1 173.OOO 2 Avg .

H P 8 8 2 7 3

Usag e (hr/yr ) 800 0 500 0 T A 3

Loa d Facto r 0. 2 0. 2 Fue l .

Cons . (100 0 Gal ) 234.66 7 259.50 0 H C

4.69 3 6,22 8 Tota l Emission s (Tons/Yr )

CO 18.65 6 25.69 1 NO x

74.38 9 41,13 1 P M * *

1.87 7 3.11 4 TOTAL 203.00 0 494.16 7 10.92 1 44.34 7 115.52 0 4.99 1

g . Sources : i i *- " Associatio no f

America n Railroads , 1986 . 2 Calculate dfro mannua l sale s data , assumin g 15-yea r life , 3 Radia nestimate
. Calculate dassumin g fue l consumptio n o f 0. 4 lb/BHP-hr
.

, T J 3 r °P.2 2

8. 5 Feasibilit y o f Emission s Contro l Emissio n contro l technique s applicabl e t o mobil e refrigeratio n engine s i n th e intermediat e ter minclud e indirec t injectio n o r

optimize d direct-injectio ncombustio n systems , retarde dinjectio n timing , combustio n chambe r optimization , an dexhaus t ga s recirculation
. Th e emission s standard s estimate dt o b e achievabl e throug hthes e technique s ar e show n i n Tabl e 8-3 . Thes e standard s ar e base do n th e 198 8 on-highwa y truc k standard s (adjuste dt o reflec t steady-stat e operation) , an dar e probabl y somewha t conservative
. Man y existin g ID I engine s ca n undershoo t thes e standard s b y aconsiderabl e margin
. Wad e an dco-worker s (1985 ) hav e als o demonstrate dth e capabilit y t o contro l smal l D I engin e emission s t o level s wel l belo w th e value s shown
. A s before , however , th e reade r i s cautione dtha t

thes e estimate s ar e preliminar y only , an d tha t additiona l researc ht o confir mthes e estimate s woul db e neede dbefor e thes e o r

an y othe r

emissio n standard s wer e incorporate dint o law
. Th e majo r

advance demissio n contro l technologie s applicabl e t o mobil e refrigeratio nengine s woul db e catalyti c trap-oxidizers , i n combinatio nwit h EG Ran da n electroni c engin e contro l system . Th e figure s fo r "advance d technology " i nTabl e 8- 3 reflec t thes e technologies
. Th e majo r proble mfacin g trap-oxidize r

developmen t

i n moto r

vehicle s i s th e unpredictabilit y o f th e operatin g conditions , whic hcomplicate s regeneratio n syste mdesign
. Sinc e th e engin e i namobil e refrigeratio n uni t i s unde r

complet e independen t control , th e regeneratio n syste mcoul db e simple
. Successfu l trap-oxidize r operatio n i n asimila r applicatio n ( adiesel-powere dheat-pump ) wa s demonstrate dsom e year s ag o b y Volkswagen
. 8. 6 Cost-Effectivenes s Analysi s

Tabl e 8- 4 show s som e ver y roug hestimate s o f th e cost-effectivenes s o f th e "intermediate " emission s contro l level s i n mobil e refrigeratio nunit s fo r railca r

an dtruck/containe r service
. Th e contro l cost s show n assum e th e applicatio n o f

engin e modifications , retarde dtiming , an deithe r EG Ro r

8- 6P.2 3

TABL E 8-3 . ESTIMATE D ACHIEVABL E EMISSION S CONTRO L STANDARD S

PO R DIESE L ENGINE S USE D INMOBIL E REFRIGERATIO N

Emission s Limi t (g/BHP-hr ) Equivalen t Emissio n Facto r (lb/100 0 gal. ) Intermediat e Contro l Leve l NOx H C P M 6.0 0 1.0 0 0.5 0 23 8 4 0 2 0 Advance d Technolog

y NO x H C P M 5.0 0 0.3 0 0.1 0 19 8 1 2 4

Source : Radian estimates ,

8- 7P.2 4

TABL E8-4 . ESTIMATE

D COST-EFFECTIVENES S O FEMISSION S CONTRO L PO RDIESE LENGINE S USE D I N MOBIL

EREFRIGERATIO N

Trai n ca r Truc k an d Containe r
COS T O F EMISSIO

NCONTROL S Engin e Horsepowe r Initia l Cos t o f Control s Engin e Lif e (yrs ) Amortize d Cost/yea r @ 10 % Fue l Cons . Increas e Annua l Fue l Cons . (Gal ) Baselin e Wit hcontrol s Adde dFue l Cos t

@ $0.80/ga l Addi
. Ann . Maintenanc e Annualize dContro l Cos t Pe r Uni t EMISSION S 8 8 $60 0 1 5 $ 7 9 3 % 7.80 0 8.03 4 $18 7 $ 8 0 $34 6 Emissio nFactor s Baselin e NO x H C P M Wit hControl s NO x H C P M Annua l Emission s Baselin e NO x H C P M Wit hControl s NO x H C P M (lb/100 0

(lb s pe r

Emission s Reductio n (lb s NO x H C P M Cost-Effectivenes s ($/to n NO x + H C g a l

u n i

pe r

) . )

t pe r

uni t ye a

pe r r )

year ) 63 4

4 0 1 6 23 8 4 0 2 0

4.94 5 31 2 12 5 1.91 2 32 1 16 1
3.03 3 (9 ) (36 ) $22 9 2 7 $40 0 1 5 $ 5 3 2 % 1.50 0 1,53 0 $ 2 4 $ 4 0 $11 7

31 7 4 8 2 4 23 8 4 0 2 0

4 7 6 7 2 3 6 36 4 6 1 3 1
U l 1 1 5 $1,90 9

8- 8P.2 5



### turbochargin g an daftercoolin g fo r emissio ncontro l purposes . Thes e cos t estimate s ar e highl y uncertain—muc hmor e investigatio no f

th e technolog y an d operatin g constraint s woul db e require dt o develo p reliabl e cos t estimate s fo r thes e engines
.

A simila r

leve l o f

uncertaint y surround s th e emissio nreductio n estimates
. Du

e t o th e absenc e of< dat ao ncurren t emissions , th e emissio n reduction s availabl e ar e uncertain , a s i s th e cost-effectivenes s of control
. A s Tabl e 8- 4 indicates , however , emission s contro l fo r thes e engine s coul d potentiall y b e highl y cost-effective , wit hacos t pe r to no f H C an dN O remove d rangin g from$22 9 t o $1,909
. Thi s broa drang e suggest s th e leve l of uncertaint y i nth e data
. Furthe r researc ht o arriv e a t amor

e precis e quantificatio n o f

thi s potentia l i s recommended
.

8- 99 . 0 SUMMARY , CONCLUSIONS AN

D RECOMMENDATION

S
Thi s sectio n pull s togethe r an dsummarize s th e result s detaile di n t h e precedin g fiv e sections , an dpresent s ou r conclusion s an drecommendations
. 9. 1 Summar

y an dConclusion s A s th e precedin g fiv e section s hav e shown , tota l pollutan t emission s fro moff-highwa y diese l engine s ar e larg e bot hi n absolut e term s an di n proportio nt o thei r tota l numbers , powe r output , an dfue l consumption
. Tabl e 9- 1 summarize s th e estimate dpopulation , annua l fue l consumption , an demission s fo r th e fiv e classe s o f off-highwa y diese l engine s considere di n thi s report . Off-highwa y diese l engine s ar e estimate dt o produc e abou t 2.7 5 millio nton s o f N O pe r year , 187,00 0 ton s o f particulat e matter , 232,00 0 ton s o f unburne dHC , an d959,00 0 ton s o f CO . Thes e value s are.abou t 12. 6 percent , 2. 4 percent , on e percent , an d1.2 5 percent , respectively , o f estimate dtota l emission s o f thes e pollutant s fro mal l source s nationwid e (EPA , 1986) .

Mor e significan t

tha n th e off-highwa y diese l contributio nt o th e tota l emission s inventor y i s th e off-highwa y contributio n t o th e tota l fo r al l mobil e diese l engines , bot ho n an doff-highway
. Tabl e 9- 2 show s thi s calculation
. A s thi s tabl e indicates , off-highwa y diese l engine s ar e responsibl e fo r

adisproportionat e fractio n o f th e total : accountin g fo r 5 6 percen t o f th e N O emissions , 5 7 percen t o f C O emissions , an d4 8 percen t o f H C emission s fro mmobil e diese l engines , bu t onl y 4 1 percen t

o f th e diese l fue l burned
. Thei r

contributio n t o P M emission s i s les s tha n proportionate , however , a t

36. 5 percen t

o f th e total
. Du e t o limite ddata , th e number s i n Tabl e 9- 2 ar e somewha t crude , bu t

th e conclusio n i s inescapable : off-highwa y diese l engine s ar e currentl y a n importan t sourc e o f

emissions , comparabl e i n magnitud e t o on-highwa y diesels
.

Diese l engine s i non-highwa y vehicle s hav e bee n subjec t t o emissio n regulation s fo r

many years , an dhav e recentl y receive dagrea t dea l o f

9 - 1v

O I r o TABL E9-1 . ESTIMATE

D NATIONWID

EPOPULATION AN

D EMISSION S FRO

M DIESE LENGINE S USE D INOFF-HIGHWA

Y APPLICATION S
Tota l Fue l No . o f Horsepowe r

Consumptio n Engine s (1.000s ) (1,00 0 gal ) Emission s (tons/yr ) H C C

O N

O Locomotive s Mediu mSpee d Percen t o f Nationwid e Marin e Vessel s Hig hSpee d Mediu mSpee d Tota l Percen t o f Nationwid e Far mEquipmen t 26,10 5

438,00 0 5.00 0 443.00 0 61.11 1

45.47 1 11.17 3 56.64 4

Hig h Spee d Percen t o f Nationwid e 3.868.01 9 Constructio n an

d Industria l Equipmen t 332.13 9

Hig hSpee d1.047.80 5 Percen t o f Nationwid e Mobil e Refrigeratio n Hig hSpee d203.00 0 Percen t o f Nationwid e 124.05 6

9.51 8 915.67 1

917.60 7 1.833.27 8 14,65 1 54.48 2

18.81 1 85.79 6 33.46 2 140,27 8 0.14 % 0.18 % 199.61 6 244.54 2 444.15 8 2.05 % P

M

3.409.47 6 30,99 9 308.55 8 901.64 5 37.04 1

0.13 % 0.40 % 4.16 % 0.48 %

10.98 8 9.17 6 20.16 4 0.26 %

3.021.56 1 108.60 3 274.66 9 688.87 4 75.10 3

0.46 % 0.36 % 3.17 % 0.97 %

3.279.66 1 47.82 0 191.06 4 590.37 2 50.02 1

0.20 % 0.25 % 2.72 % 0.65 %

494.16 7 10.92 1 44.34 7 115.52 0 4.99 1

0.05 % 0.06 % 0.53 % 0.06 % %



# i

TOTAL S Hig hSpee d5.556.82 4 511.18 4 Mediu mSpee d31,10 5 72,28 4 Tota l 5.587.92 9 583.46 8 Percen t o f Nationwid e 7.711.06 0 181.99 5 564.56 2 1.594.38 2 141.10 3 4.327.08 3 49.81 0 394.35 4 1.146.18 7 46.21 7 12.038.14 3 231.80 5 958.91 6 2.740,56 9 187.32 0

0.98 % 1.25 % 12.63 % 2.43 %
Percen t o f nationwid e emission s inventor y fo r tha t pollutan t

base do nEPA (1986) .TABL E9-2 . COMPARISO NO FNATIONWID EFUE LCONSUMPTIO NAN D EMISSION S OFF-HIGHWA Y VS . ON-HIGHWA Y DIESEL S
Fue l Consumptio n Emission s (tons/yr ) (1.00 0 gal ) H C CO N O P M x Off-Highwa

y Diesel s (mid-1980s) 1 Locomotive s 3,409,47 6 Marin e Vessel s 1,833.27 8 Far mEquipment

3.021.56 1 Const./Ind
. Equipt
. 3,279,66 1 Mobil e Refrigeratio n 494,16 7 10.92 1 30.99 9 33.46 2 108.60 3 47.82 0 10.92 1 308.55 8

140.27 8 274,66 9 191,06 4 44,34 7 901,64 5

444,15 8 688,87 4 590,37 2 115,52 0 • 37,04 1

20,16 4 75,10 3 50,02 1 4,99 1 Tota l Off-Highwa

y 12,038,14 3 231.80 5 958,91 6 2,740,56 9 187.32 0 2 On-Highway-Diesel s (calenda r 1984 ) Heavy-Dut

y Vehicle s N A 242,29 0 693,83 2 2,136.56 3 297.35 7 Light-Dut y Vehicle s N A 8.82 0 28.63 4 44,05 2 28.63 4 Tota l On-Highwa

y 17,279.65 0 251.11 0 722,46 6 2,180.61 5 325.99 1 Total : Al l Mobil e 29,317,79 3 482,91 5 1,681,38 2 4,921,18 4 513.31 1 Diese l Engine s Off-Highwa

y a s 41.1 % 48.0 % 57.0 % 55.7 % 36.5 % Percen t o f Al l Mobil e Diesel s

Source : Radian estimates , 2 Source : EP

A (1986) .

9- 3P.2 9

regulator y attention , whic hwil l lea dt o stil l lowe r emission s i n th e future
. Off-highwa y engines , sinc e che y d o no t fal l unde r

EPA' s statutor y authority , hav e no t

bee nregulated
. Fo r thi s reason , pollutan t emission s pe r

uni t o f wor k produce do r

fue l consume db y a n averag e off-highwa y diese l ar e much highe r tha nthos e fo r

a n on-highwa y engine , an dth e potentia l fo r futur e reduction s i nemission s i s correspondingl y greater .

A s discusse di n Section s Thre e throug hEight , emissio ncontro l technolog y fo r

on-highwa y diese l engine s i s wel l developed , an dthi s technolog y coul db e transferre dt o mos t off-highwa y engine s a s well
. Off-highwa y diese l engine s ca n b e divide dint o high-spee dan dmedium-spee dclasses , havin g rate d operatin g speed s abov e o r belo w 130 0 RPM

, respectively
. Excep t fo r railwa y locomotives , th e grea t majorit y o f

off-highwa y diese l engine s ar e high-spee d types . Thes e shar e man y desig n feature s wit hon-highwa y truc k an dlight-dut y vehicl e engines , s o tha t mos t emission s contro l technologie s demonstrate di n on-highwa y engine s woul db e readil y transferable
. Medium-spee dengine s ar e use di n railwa y locomotive s an dsom e marin e vessels
. Emission s contro l technolog y fo r

thes e engine s i s les s developed , bu t eve n th e littl e wor k tha t ha s bee ndon e show s th e potentia l fo r majo r reduction s i n emissions
. Section s Fou r

throug hEigh t

includ e acase-by-cas e discussio no f applicabl e emissio ncontro l technologie s an dachievabl e emission s standard s fo r diese l engine s use di n eac hclas s o f off-highwa y equipment
. Tabl e 9- 3 summarize s th e emission s standard s estimate dt o b e achievabl e b y eac hclass , a s wel l a s th e percentag e reductio n fro mpresen t level s represente db y thes e standards
. I n th e intermediat e term , engine s i n al l classe s excep t far m equipmen t

an dconstructio n equipmen t wer e estimate dt o b e capabl e o f meetin g emission s standard s comparabl e t o th e Californi a198 8 N O an dP

M standard s fo r off-highwa y vehicles
. Constructio n an dfar mequipmen t wer e estimate dt o requir e ahighe r

N O limit , du e t o th e limite dpotentia l fo r turbochargin g an d aftercooling
.

Give ntim e t o develo p advance demissio n contro l technology , i t wa s estimate dtha t

engine s i n railwa y locomotive s an dmarin e vessel s woul db e abl e t o compl y wit hemission s standard s comparabl e t o th e Federa l 199 1 standard s fo r 9- 4P.3 0 

# 1 RADIAf l

TABL E9-3 .

Locomotive s N O HC * P M EMISSION S STANDARD S ESTIMATE

D B Y EAC H aAS S O

FOFF-HIGHWA

Y

Marin e Vessel s Medium-Spee dEngine s N O HC * P M High-Spee dEngine s N O HC * P M Far mEquipmen t N O HC * P M Constructio nEquipme n N O HC * P M Mobil e Refrigeratio n N O HC * P M t

Source : Radia n estimate s Intermed i Standar d (g/BHP-hr )

6. 0 0.5 0 0.5 0

6. 0 0.5 0 0.5 0
6. 0 0.5 0 0.5 0

8. 0 0.5 0 0.5 0

8. 0 0.5 0 0.5 0

6. 0 1. 0 0.5 0 a t e

Percen t Reductio n

55 % 52 % 1 %

55 % 52 % 1 % 45 % 38 % 17 %

30 % 72 % 60 %

12 % 3 2 % 36 %

49 % 10 % 2 % TO B

EACHIEVABL

E DIESEL S Advance d Standar d (g/BHP-hr )

5 . 0 0.3 0 0.2 0

5 . 0 0.3 0 0.2 0
5. 0 0.5 0 0.2 5

6. 0 0.2 0

- 0.1 5

6. 0 0.2 0 0.1 5

5 . 0 0.2 0 0.1 0 Technolog y

Percen t Reductio n

63 % 71 % 60 %

63 % 71 % 60 %
55 % 38 % 59 %

48 % 89 % 88 %

34 % 73 % 81 %

58 % 73 % 80 %

9- 5P.3 1

on-highwa y vehicles , whil e thos e i n mobil e refrigeratio n unit s shoul db e abl e t o compl y wit h standard s comparabl e t o th e 199 4 on-highwa y limits
. Constructio nan dfar mequipmen t coul dmee t

P M standard s simila r t o th e 199 4 levels , but—du e t o thei r highe r

loa dfactors—migh t no t b e abl e t o achiev e th e leve l o f

0.1 0 g/BHP-h r

mandate dfo r

on-highwa y engines
. A s i s als o tru e o f on-highwa y engines , areductio n i n diese l fue l sulfu r conten t

migh t b e require dt o achiev e thes e lo w particulat e levels
. I n addition , constructio n an dfar mequipmen t

woul dals o requir e aslightl y highe r N O limi t

tha ntha t mandate dfo r

on-highwa y engines , du e t o th e limite dpotentia l fo r low-temperatur e charg e cooling
.

Th e reade r

i s warne dtha t

th e emission s limit s show n i n Tabl e 9- 3 ar e engineerin g estimate s only , base do n ver y limite ddata , an dintende donl y t o indicat e th e potentia l benefit s o f regulatio n i n thi s area . As discusse d below , additiona l researc ht o confir mthes e estimate s woul db e essentia l befor e thes e o r

an y othe r

emissio n standard s wer e incorporate dint o law
. Figure s 9- 1 throug h9- 3 sho w th e potentia l effect s o f introducin g th e emission s standard s liste di n Tabl e 9- 3 o n N O , HC , an dP

M emission s fro meac h clas s o f

off-highwa y engines
. Th e leftmos t ba r fo r eac hclas s represent s th e curren t situation , wit hn o emission s control
. Th e middl e ba r represent s th e emission s tha t

woul db e experience di f al l existin g engine s met th e "intermediate " emission s standards , an dth e rightmos t ba r th e emission s tha t woul dresul t

i f al l existin g engine s me t th e "advance dtechnology " standards
. Th e ne t

reductio n i f

ever y off-highwa y engin e i n us e me t th e "advance d technology " standard s woul db e abou t 1. 4 millio n ton s o f N O , 162,00 0 ton s o f HC , an d146,00 0 ton s o f P M pe r year , o r

5 2 percent , 7 0 percent , an d7 8 percent , respectively , o f

th e curren t

emission s o f

thes e pollutants
. I n reality , o f cours e thi s woul dtak e aver y lon g tim e t o achieve , du e t o th e nee dt o tur n ove r th e existin g engin e population
. Th e cost-effectivenes s o f controllin g off-highwa y diese l emission s t o a t leas t th e intermediate-ter mstandard s show n i s estimate dt o b e ver y favorabl e compare dt o th e cost s o f othe r availabl e emissio n contro l measure s o f
9- 6P.3 2

P-i tn c o •*•*/- s t o x c O o Z T H r-t ti) r-l •V " H C o C O z 0. 9 - |

0. 8 0. 7 0. 6 0. 5 0. 4 0. 3 0. 2 0. 1 - 1 0 

### T :

^ ^ ^


# m V

7%



# VI 

# V

^ 77 

# A 2 2 

## P :

^ ^

^ 

### IT : 

## 2 0
Locomotive s Marin e

Vessel s Far mConstructio n Mobil e Equipmen t Equipmen t Refrigeratio n


# (Z 2 

# X 3 

# wa Uncontrolle d Int . Control s Adv . Control s Figur e 9-1 . Estimate d Effec t o f Emission s Control s

o n Tota l Off-Highwa yN O Emission s

9- 7P.3 3

11 0

U > v OT C o U /— v wC O • a u c X C Q c n 4 > 3 T . O • H
_ C » H C ^ O • H 4-1 C O z 10 0 -

9 C - 8 0
_ 7 0 - 6 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 

# V ^

^ ^ 

# V,

^ 

# m 3 ]

^ ^ 

# 2 a 

# 5]
_

Locomotive s Marin e Vessel s Far mConstructio n Mobil e

Equipmen t Equipmen t Refrigeratio n



# £Z 2 SEI ^ Uncontrolle d Int. Control s Adv . Control s

Figur e 9-2 . Estimate d Effec t o f Emission s Control s

o n Tota l Off-Highwa yH C Emission s

9- 8

# RADIA N P.3 4

U >. tn c O <- v u tn c 2 C O O . C O 3 C U o • O yC • H H 3 ^ C o C O Z 9 0 " " 8 0 - 7 0
_ 6 0 - 5 0
_ 4 0 - 3 0 - 2 0 - 1 0 - 0 -

# i i i 

# i i •AA 

# w 

# I

\ 

# 1 

# n 33 33 33 

# III

Locomotive s Marin e Vessel s Far m

Equipmen t Constructio n

Equipmen t Mobil e

Refrigeratio n

Uncontrolle d 

# X S Int . Control s 

# vzz Adv
. Control s Figur e 9-3 . Estimate d Effec t o f Emission s Control s

o n Tota l Off-Highwa yP M Emission s

9- 9P.3 5

simila r significance
. Estimate dcost-effectivenes s value s fo r anumbe r

o f specifi c equipmen t

type s ar e show n i n Tabl e 9-4 . Whil e base do ncrud e preliminar y cos testimates , thes e value s ar e believe dt o somewha t conservativ e (i nth e sens e o f

over-statin g emission s contro l costs , an dthu s th e cost s pe r to no f pollutant s eliminated)
. Despit e this , th e cos t estimate s fo r

contro l o f N O an dH

C rang e fro mafew hundre dt o abou t thre e thousan ddollar s pe r ton . Fo r comparison , th e fue l cos t alon e fo r

reducin g th e 199 1 N O x standar dfo r

heavy-dut y on-highwa y engine s fro m5. 0 t o 4. 0 g/BHP-h r ( aste p whic hi s ofte n suggested ) i s estimate da t abou t $2,00 0 pe r

to n (assumin g a4 percen t fue l econom y penalt y an dfue l a t $0.8 0 pe r

gallo n excludin g taxes) . Th e incrementa l cost-effectivenes s o f th e 199 4 P

M standar do f

0. 1 g/BHP-h r

fo r heavy-dut y on-highwa y engine s ha s bee n estimate da t abou t seve n t o eleve n thousan ddollar s pe r to n (Weave r

an dKlausmeier , 1987a) . 9. 2 Recommendation s

• Muc

hresearc hremain s t o b e don e t o develo p amor e complet e understandin g o f

off-highwa y vehicl e emissions , contro l technology , an dcost . Th e followin g ar e some ke y area s fo r furthe r

research
. 1 . Improve ddut y cycl e characterizatio n fo r al l off-highwa y engin e classes , leadin g t o improve demission s measurement s an dt o th e developmen t

o f representativ e tes t procedures
. 2 . Developmen t

o f suitabl e emission s measuremen t technique s fo r off-highwa y vehicle s (suc ha s marin e vessel s an dconstructio n equipment ) fo r

whic hdynamometri c technique s ar e impractical
. Thi s wil l probabl y requir e portabl e samplin g equipmen t t o measur e diese l emission s durin g norma l operatio n o f th e vehicle
. 3 . Extensiv e emission s measurement s o n curren t productio nengines , an do n in-us e equipment , leadin g t o mor e accurat e emissio n factors
. 9-1 0TABL E9-4 . ESTIMATE

D COST-EFFECTIVENES S OF"INTERMEDIATELEVEL " EMISSION S CONTROL S FO RDIFFEREN T CLASSE S O FOFF-HIGHWA Y VEHICLE S P.3 6

Cos t Effectivenes s ($/ton ) N O + H C x P M Locomotive s Ne w Retrofi t $1,07 3 1.33 2 2 " 2 Marin e Vessel s Mediu mSpee d High-Spee dPropulsio n High-Spee dGenerato r 67 2 88 8 61 6 2

" 2 " 2 Far mEquipmen t Larg e 4W

D Tracto r Smal l Tracto r Combin e 84 5 2.96 0 84 8 3.06 7

7.60 7 1,90 0 Constructio n Equipmen t Hydrauli c Excavato r Industria l Tracto r Concret e Pave r 74 8 1.56 7 2.04 5 8.96 9

5.32 3 3.96 1 Mobil e Refrigerato r Railca r Uni t Truck/Containe r

Uni t 22 9 1,90 9 Approximat e estimate s base do n engineerin g judgemen t an dlimite ddata , tex t Chapter s 4- 8 fo r

assumption s an dlimitations
. Se e
P M reduction s a t "intermediate " contro l leve l ar e estimate d a s smal l or negativ e fo r thes e categories . Thi s i s du e t o lo wP M emission s t o begi n with , an d th e effect s o f the N O /PM tradeoff .

9-1 1P.3 7

4 . Developmen t

o f improve destimate s o f engin e populations , ag e an d technology , utilization , an dfue l consumptio n i n orde r t o provid e accurat e emission s inventories
. 5
. Assessmen t

o f urban-are aan dregional-scal e effect s o f off-highwa y vehicl e emissions
. 6 . Stud y o f

effect s o f

availabl e emissio n contro l technologie s i n individua l engine s an dvehicles
. I t i s recommende dtha t EP A perfor monl y preliminar y studie s i n ti s area , a s experienc e ha s show n tha t

detaile ddevelopmen t an doptimizatio n o f emission s control s i s bes t

lef t t o th e manufacturers
. 7 . Muc

hmor e detaile danalysi s o f th e cost s o f

control , includin g cost s o f

accommodatin g an y change s i n engin e performanc e and/o r transien t

response . 8 . Evaluatio n o f

in-us e deterioratio n i n emission s i n off-highwa y equipment , includin g th e effect s o f tamperin g an dmalmaintenanc e o f emission s controls
. A recen t stud y fo r

th e Californi aAR B (Weave r an dKlausmeier , 1987b ) conclude dtha t thes e effect s coul dresul t

i nheavy-dut y truc k P M emission s mor e tha n doubl e th e applicabl e standards , an dsimila r increase s migh t

b e expecte di n off-highwa y engines
. I n th e even t

tha t emission s regulation s ar e considere dfo r far man d constructio nequipmen t engines , carefu l consideratio n shoul db e give n t o phase-i n mechanism s i n orde r t o avoi dundu e burde no nth e industry
. A

n averaging , trading , an dbankin g approac hwit h "crawling " targe t

levels , suc ha s tha t discusse di nSectio n 6.5 , woul db e on e fairl y straightforwar dwa y t o d o this
.

9-1 2P.3 8



# RADIA N

I nth e even t

tha t emission s regulation s ar e considere dfo r ne w medium-spee dmarin e an dlocomotiv e engines , consideratio nshoul dals o b e give nt o establishin g retrofi t requirement s fo r

olde r engine s i n thes e categories
. Thes e requirement s coul dmos t convenientl y appl y a t th e tim e o f

rebuild
. .

9-1 3P.3 9 

# 1

APPENDIX Ao P J

UlUPUiuilnwyiUPWyiUiuiLnujUiyiuiu i ooooooooooooooooo o o

P-pp-*0000^J"^IOPO^P-nVPi.J>.WLOtON>p- * c o ra UPUIUIUPUIUIMMI O OoOOOOLnuiUiO O OOOOOOOO O O O O O OOOOOOOOO O

a a. OOMOPUI*'WH03UPHCOC_'>l s JOPOPUtUP*-J»WWION )

re re

I I i o i o i o i o i i o^ i U J i o o i w ooooo o O I £ - I C

O I 0 0 u u u u U P > UN*-OH U o o o i oooooooo^»^ « O v

t-»»-pp-»p-»»-p.-."^Jp-»p-p , v j l -_t__[s ) *-£-JSN)MO>^JVDO-VOvOC» 0 U1Ul^l^l/IUIvJ03HPhPQ ] O3H03UPUPHPO00(PJKU }

NMMNMNWl_i->a i (OtOOWtOOP —yr- *- r-t & OP>NJOPUP03POWUP^OM U (0(pj\Ots)tocDi-Oi-i'OPN'* ' U1MU1N3MOP-*P0050PP O *.OvfO^P-**"OvV*>OP^I0 0

US)U)l-K)tO£>^U1UI ^ M H H M M > U l U l M N COVOOroua v I C O t o | 00(BOOI-'P-PU>I_>£-£-OVO.VOOOV£ > UUMOPOOUUP|00»<'MOt'» ' UOP0>OOOUPO 9 0>OPOOHNh.OCJIP ^

UWUUU)(_UUUUUUUUU>II>UIP ) >£.WUUIUP£.^NJ03POPOMNJ00POG0P C > * . UP ^ M P P * •O P U P 0 0 M * * UJOvLnUlOOCv.fc.* H o o P O N u i £ - o

o ^ > O .£ . 0 0 * ^ W U

J -* J

S>tO_JCp)U^tOMUMK}MtOtOLp)U)l_WUU)>£.£-£<U ) U>OP03N^MQP>Nl_U)«>\OPOtO|OLncPVJMOHUI>N J .>UIOP^HUIOUJOO_U1OOU>U>1_)^JV0.C»U 1 ^HU)tO-U)VO(-.^J£.rOOLnt-.LJtOL-P\D^U)LnPO^OLn^^ . £~^JLnuJO''HCO.£»OPrOU>.>UJ.£»OU>00 0 KhPOOMUIOOWOtOMslCOOPOMMlPJPOOPOP-HIOU O

OOOOOOOOOOOOO O I I I i U>UUUUWU«.W4>>UI>£' U K l UUO P OP U 00 U l N K ) KU l yt U I UJUUUUIUI'WMODO.CDOOVOog N t pulplUHOUuNOiriMioiOP O

U>Ul»->p->OOOOOOl-'0«-'>-»>-'i-'»OS J UUU>fUOPlp>WOU>UUU»»«.»t->f't'>>U l >JUIOMPOIOODCOPOO>OPOHOU}HOPU > O-voOtovoi-p£*LnO9.^lvjvo**j.ov0O.£ » OPMOPhJU)U00MOPN)OP^M' s JP^HU'Ul s JUIU , >OPf' U OUIHPOCO^UH^OO)UOOI.OIOPO^OPP0PO9P H L n

I I NMUUUMBfcpHHMHhPP^M U UH-tH-U W I M * •I I I I . . I I I OMMNM«\JO,»MOOUf01 H IOUIU<OP<-l<fi W I I UIWUh-OUIL»POvJJ.t.OslOivj N t-Wi-UMi o I H W K.N>U>U>OVOV£-«-L-PLON>N>N>rOU I POPOMOOOUWOP'OMPO N f.t-COMMvlO'UlNlOUOlPOOPO i

UIUlUt9P0OOO0OMi.j.^>MKIUU)UlU I U J •- • u POK)MUPO0PtO00MsQ000OOOPCPHMVJ>JUIUIUIUl O 00-OUVO^l0v.fr*mOv.£.l_>UlOv_0.fr-O*t- » 00>D^M<>i00OO£.9>UltSOi-vJlp ) OUIUOH^UIMXSIOKJUI^UIUIUIIOPOODMHPIPJC- M POOOMPOPOOPCOOpUlHap^HOp'pJ>J>JOpO>ODUiOiO O cf l 3 o o 3 to

n

_ r



### 8 r

PI

o

o z •- . tf l V. 

### 3 r o

_ c o H < P J



### 2 5 0 H H « - . P J c n

Ofr' dOPER . ENGIN E HOURS

G E 0

0 SO O SO O SO O SO O SO O 50 0 25 0 50 0 NOTC H

1 2 3 4 6 8 7 8 IDL E BRAK E OF F EMISSIONS , LB/H R FUE L RAT E (lb/hr ) (gal/h r
51. 7 104. 8 205. 2 320. 4 464. 8 690. 2 887. 2 862. 1 88. 0 0. 0

EMISSIONS , La/100 0 GA L EH O 50 0

SO O 50 0 SO O 50 0 SO O 50 0 60 0 SO O SO O 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 a IDL E BRAK E OF F 56. 7 163. 0 227. 3 331. 4 410. 4 564. 0 748. 0 888. 0 88. 0 0. 0 7. 3 14. 8 29. 1 45. 5 64. 6 83. 8 88. 0 122. 4 4. 0 13. 8 0. 0

7. 8 23. 1 32. 3 47. 1 68. 3 78. 7 106. 4 126. 2 4. 0 13. 8 0. 0 EMISSION S ( LB/100 0 GAL l

NO x H C C O P N
680. 1 686. 2 638. 7 542. 1 601. 1 436. 8 408. 1 367. 7 414. 6 642. 1 0. 0

604. 7 608. 8 678. 0 614. 0 580. 8 530. 6 647. 3 622. 6 527. 3 614. 0 0. 0 83. 0 70. 3 61. 8 83. 3 66. 6 68. 0 68. 2 5S. 8 261. 0 63. 3 0. 0

38. 3 19. 5 17. 6 15. 8 13. 6 13. 0 14. 7 16. 4 88. 3 15. 8 0. 0 158. 7 82. 7 85. 6 142. 5 203. 0 268. 8 186. 1 141. 0 505. 3 142. 5 0. 0

83. 1 55. 2 42. 5 68. 2 70. 1 126. 3 134. 8 80. 4 241. 3 68. 2 0. 0 87. 0 41. 8 16. 8 12. 6 12. 6 14. 6 14. 4 14. 8 77. 8 12. 5 0. 0

8. 1 11. 2 10. 1 12. 4 16. 8 16. 0 18. 7 11. 5 13. 1 12. 4 0. 0 TABLE A-2 .

LIN E
4. 8 2. 4 1. 8 4. 6 1. 9 1. 9 2. 4 20. 1 23. 3 3. 9 32. 6 100. 0
4. 8 2. 4 1. 9 4. 8 1. 9 1. 9 2. 4 20. 1 23. 3 3. 9 32. 8 100. 0 CACLOJLATIO N O F

XDUT YCYCL E -HITC H
8. 6 4. 8 3. 8 1. 8 1. 0 1. 0 0. 0 0. 0 33. 2 0. 0 44. 8 100. 0
9. 8 4. 8 3. 8 1. 8 1. 0 1. 0 0. 0 0. 0 33. 2 0. 0 44. 8 100. 0 AVO .

7.7 6 3.8 9 3.1 0 3.0 1 1.3 2 1.3 2 0.8 2 7.6 0 29.4 4 1.4 6 40.1 4 100. 0
7.7 6 3.8 9 3.1 0 3.0 1 1.3 2 1.3 2 0.8 2 7.6 5 29.4 4 1.4 8 40.1 4 100. 0 I N

LIN E
0.3 5 0.3 8 0.6 6 2.1 8 1.2 4 1.8 1 2.3 8 24.8 4 0.8 3 0.5 3 0.0 0 34. 8
0.3 8 0.5 6 0.8 2 2.2 5 1.1 8 1.6 1 2.5 7 2S.4 1 0.9 3 0.6 3 0.0 0 35. 8 CYCLE - WERAG E
FUE L USE

D MOOE/H R (GAL l SNITC H AVG . 0.7 0 0.7 1 1.1 2 0.8 7 0.B 2 0.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 1.3 3 0.0 0 0.0 0 6. 2
0.7 6 1.1 1 1.2 4 0.9 0 0.S 8 0.7 5 0.0 0 0.0 0 1.3 3 0.0 0 0.0 0 6. 8 0.6 7 0.8 8 0.9 0 1.3 7 0.8 6 1.1 1 0.9 1 9.3 7 1.1 8 0.2 0 0.0 0 17. 0
0.6 1 0.9 0 1.0 0 1.4 2 0.7 7 1.0 4 0.9 8 8.6 6 1.1 9 0.2 0 0.0 0 17. B EMISSION S FO

R
NO . TH E SHR I
EMISSION S I N NOOE/H R (LB ) UN E SWITCH AVG . 0.2 0 0.2 6 0.3 8 1.1 8 0.8 2 0.7 0 0.8 8 9.0 8 0.3 9 0.2 9 0.0 0 14. 0 40 3 0.2 3 0.3 4 0.3 6 1.3 8 0.6 6 0.6 0 1.4 1 13.2 8 0.4 9 0.3 3 0.0 0 19. 3 53 7 0.4 1 0.6 0 0.7 1 0.4 7 0.3 1 0.3 6 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.6 6 0.0 0 0.0 0 3. 3 63 7 0.4 6 0.6 8 0.7 2 0.6 6 0.3 3 0.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 3. 8 67 7 0.3 3 0.4 0 0.6 8 0.7 4 0.4 3 0.4 8 0.3 7 3.4 4 0.4 9 0.1 1 0.0 0 7. 4 43 3 0.3 7 0.5 S 0.6 8 0.8 7 0.4 6 0.8 5 0.6 3 5.0 6 0.8 2 0.1 2 0.0 0 8. 7 64 8 LOCOMOTIV

E ENGIN E TEST

S
H C EMIS8I0N 8 I N LIN E
0.0 3 0.0 3 0.0 3 0.1 4 0.0 6 0.0 9 8.1 4 1.3 9 0.2 4 0.0 3 0.0 0 2. 2 8 3 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 4 0.0 2 0.0 2 0.0 4 0.4 2 0.0 8 0.0 1 0.0 0 0. 7 1 8 NODE/H R (LB I SNITC H AVG . 0.0 6 0.0 6 0.0 6 0.0 6 0.0 4 0.0 4 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.3 6 0.0 0 0.0 0 0. 7 10 6 0.0 3 0.0 2 0.O 2 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.1 2 0.0 0 0.0 0 0. 2 3 3 0.0 5 0.0 4 o.oe 0.0 8 0.0 6 o.o a 0.0 6 0.6 2 0.3 1 0.0 1 0.0 0 1. 2 7 3 0.0 2 0.0 2 0.0 2 0.0 2 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.1 6 0.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0. 4 2 2 C

O EMISSI0N 8 I N UN E
0.0 6 0.0 3 0.0 5 0.3 1 0.2 5 0.4 3 0.4 7 3.4 7 0.4 7 0.0 8 0.0 0 5. 8 18 2 0.0 3 0.0 3 0.0 3 0.1 6 0.0 8 0.1 8 0.3 6 2.3 0 0.2 2 0.0 4 0.0 0 3. 4 9 5 NOOE/H R (LB ) SNITC H
0.1 1 0.0 8 0.1 1 0.1 2 0.1 3 0.2 2 0.0 8 0.0 0 0.6 7 0.0 0 0.0 0 1. 4 22 8 0.0 8 0.0 8 0.0 5 0.0 8 0.0 4 0.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.3 2 0.0 0 0.0 0 0. 7 10 4 AV8 . 0.0 9 0.0 0 O.O B 0.2 0 0.1 7 a . so 0.1 8 1.3 2 0.6 0 0.0 3 0.0 0 3. 0 17 7 0.0 6 0.0 5 0.0 4 0.1 0 0.0 6 0.1 3 0.1 3 0.8 7 0.2 8 0.0 1 0.0 0 1. 7 8 7 P H EMI8SI0N 8

I N HW6/H P UN E SNITC H
0.0 3 o.o e 0.0 1 0.0 3 o.o e o.o e 0.8 3 0.3 6 0.0 7 0.0 1 0.0 0 0. 8 1 7 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 3 o.o e o.o e 0.0 6 0.2 8 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 0 0. 4 1 2 0.0 6 0.0 3 o.o e 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 o. e 4 0 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 0 0.0 0 o.oe 0.0 0 0.0 0 0. 1 1 2 (LB ) AVO . 0.0 6 0.0 2 0.0 2 0.0 2 0.0 1 0.0 2 0.0 1 0.1 4 0.0 9 0.0 0 0.0 0 0. 4 2 2 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 2 0.0 1 o.o e 0.0 2 0.1 1 0.0 2 0.0 0 0.0 0 0. 2 1 2P.4 2



# RADIA N

• * 10. 0 REFERENCE S Associatio no f

America n Railroad s (1986) , Railroa dFacts . Washington , D.C . Baker , Q.A . (1981 ) "Us e o f Alcohol-in-Diese l Fue l Emulsion s an dSolution s i naMedium-Spee dDiese l Engine" , SA EPape r

No . 810254 , Societ y o f Automotiv e Engineers , Warrendale , PA . Baker , Q.A . (1980 ) "Alternat e Fuel s fo r Medium-Spee dDiese l Engines" , SA E Pape r No . 800330 , Societ y o f Automotiv e Engineers , Warrendale , PA . Baker , Q.A. , S . Ariga , K.H . Rosegay , N.R . Sefer , B.K . Baily , J.Erwin , an d J.F . Wakenel l (1984 ) Alternativ e Fuel s fo r Medium-Spee dDiese l Engine s (AFFMSDE) Program : Fourt hResearc hPhas e Fina l Report , Repor t No . R-569 , Associatio n o f

America nRailroads , Washington , D.C . Brev , F. , R . Topp , an dB.E . Eng a(1987 ) "Applicatio nEngineerin g o f Particulat e Contro l System s fo r Undergroun dUse" , SA EPape r

No . 870255 , Societ y o f

Automotiv e Engineers , Warrendale , PA . Cartellieri , W.P . an dW.F . Wachte r (1987 ) "Statu s Repor t o naPreliminar y Surve y o f

Strategie s t o Mee t U.S . 199 1 H

D Diese l Emissio nStandard s Withou t Exhaus t

Ga s Aftertreatment" , SA EPape r

No . 870342 , Societ y o f Automotiv e Engineers , Warrendale , PA . Crowell , G . (1986) , persona l communication , Chie f o f th e Nationa l Harbor s an dWaterway s Office , Arm y Corp s o f Engineers , New Orleans , LA . Davis , W . (1986 ) persona l communication , Electromotiv e Division , Genera l Motors . Dowdall , D.C . (1987) , lette r date dJanuar y 29 , 198 7 t o C.S . Weave r o f Radian , Caterpilla r Inc. , Peoria , IL . Electromotiv e Division , Genera l Motor s (1978 ) "Statu s Repor t o nExhaus t Emission s Fro mNe w EM D Locomotives" , LaGrange , IL . Engineerin g Science , Inc . (1984 ) Emissio nFacto r Documentatio nfo r AP-42 : Sectio n3.2.3 , Inboar dPowere dVessels , Repor t unde r EP A Contrac t

No . 68-02-3509 , EPA-450/4-84-001 , U.S . Environmenta l Protectio nAgency , Researc hTriangl e Park , NC . Environmenta l Researc han dTechnology , Inc . (1982) , Feasibility , Cost , an d A i r Qualit y Impac t

o f Potentia l Emissio nContro l Requirement s o nFarm , Construction , an dIndustria l Equipmen t i nCalifornia , Lo s Angeles , CA . Euing , M . (1986) , persona l communication , Refrigerate dTransporte r magazine , Houston , TX .

10- 1Hardenberg , H.O . (1987 ) "Urba n Bu s Applicatio n o f a Cerami c Fibe r Coi l Particulat e Trap" , SA E Pape r No . 87011 1 i n Diest. 1 Particulates ; A n Update . SP-702 . Societ yo f Automotiv e Engineers , Warrendale , PA . Hare , C.T. , K.J . Springer , an d T.A . Hul s (1975 ) "Exhaus t Emission s fro m Farm , Construction , an d Industria l Engine s an d Thei r Impact" , SA E Pape r No . 750788 , Societyo f Automotiv e Engineers , Warrendale , PA . Harves t Publishing Co . (1985 ) Harves t 198 5 Tracto r Survey , Cleveland , OH . Implemen t an

d Tracto r Magazin e (1986) , Red Boo k Issue , Vo l 101 , No.4 . Ingalls , M . (1985) , Recommende d Revision s t o Gaseou s Emissio n Factor s Fro m Severa l Classe s o f Off-Highwa yMobil e Sources , repor t b ySouthwes t Researc h Institut e unde r EP AContrac t 68-03-3162 , Wor k Assignmen t 8 , U.S . EPA , Ann Arbor , MI . Kotlin , J.J . an

d H.A . William s (1975 ) "Lo wSmok e Diese l Engines : A Progres s Repor t o n Electromotive' s Emissio n Reductio n Program" , Electromotiv e Division , Genera l Motors , LaGrange , IL . Landers , K . (ed. ) (1987 ) "Machine s a t Wor k i n America" , serie s o f article s i n Constructio n Equipment . Februar y1 5 throug

h Jul y15 , 1987 . Lilly , L.R.C . (ed. ) (1984 ) Diese l Engin e Referenc e Book , Butterworth' s Ltd. , London , U.K . Moyat , R . (1986) , persona l communication , Nationa l Marin e Manufacturer s Association , Chicago , IL . Mcdonald , C.W . (1982) , Diese l Locomotiv e Rosters : Unite d States , Canada , an d Mexico , Kalmbac h Publishing Co. , Milwaukee , WI . Millar , M. , J . Bunch , A . Vyas , M . Kaplan , R . Knorr , V . Mendiratta , an d C . Sarick s (1982 ) Baselin e Projection s o f Transportatio n Energ yConsumptio n b yMode : 198 1 Update , ANL/CNSV-28 , Argonn e Natl . Laboratory , Argonne , IL . 0'Donnel , J . (1986) , persona l communication , Southwes t Marine , Alameda , C A Olson , L.E . an

d W.M . Reed (1987 ) "Overviewo f Compresse d Natura l Ga s fo r Rai l Locomotiv e Application" , presentatio n t o th e Sout h Coas t Ai r Qualit y Managemen t District , Clea n Fuel s Demonstratio n Workshop , E l Monte , CA , Novembe r 16 , 1987 . Owen , D.(ed ) (1986 ) Inlan d Rive r Record , Waterway s Journal , St . Louis , MO . Sant a Barbar a Count yAi r Pollutio n Contro l Distric t (1987 ) Crewan d Suppl y Boa t N O Contro l Developmen t Program . Sant a Barbara , CA .

10- 2

# RADIA N

Scarboroug

h(1986) , persona l communication , U.S . Coas t Guard Headquarter s Washington , D.C . Storment , J.O. , K.J . Springer , an d K.M . Hergenrothe r (1974 ) "NO x Studie s wit h EM

D 2-56 7 Diese l Engine" , ASM E Pape r No . 74-DGP-14 , Societyo f Automotiv e Engineers , Warrendale , PA . U.S . Arm

yCorp s o f Engineer s (1983) , Summar yo f U.S . Flag Passenge r an d Carg o Vessels , NewOrleans , LA . U.S . Bureau o f the Censu s (1985) , Statistica l Abstrac t o f the U.S. . U.S . Governmen t Printing Office , Washington , D.C . U.S . Dept . o f Agriculture , Agricultur e Statistic s 1984 , U.S . Governmen t Printing Office , Washington , D.C . U.S . Dept . o f Transportatio n (1985 ) Nationa l Transportatio n Statistics : Annua l Report . DOT-TSC-RSPA-85-5 , U.S . Govt . Printing Office , Washington , D.C . U.S . Energ

yInformatio n Administration , Petroleu mMarketing Monthly , "Annua l Repor t o n Sale s o f Fue l Oi l an d Kerosene , 1985" , U.S . Dept . o f Energy , Washington , D.C . U.S . Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y(1986 ) Nationa l Ai r Pollutan t Emissio n Estimates , EPA-450/4-85-014 , Researc h Triangl e Park , NC . U.S . Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y(1985 ) Compilatio n o f Ai r Pollutan t Emissio n Emissio n Factors , AP-42 , Vo l 2 . Washington , D.C . U.S . Maritime Administration , "Annua l Repor t - 1983" , Washington , D.C . U.S . Nationa l Marin e Fisherie s Servic e (1984) , Fisherie s o f th e Unite d States , U.S . Governmen t Printing Office , Washington , D.C . Wade , W.R. , C.E . Hunter , F.H . Trinker , an d H.A . Cikane k (1987 ) "Th e Reductio n o f N0 x an d p art i c u i a t e Emission s in the Diese l Combustio n Process" , ASM E Pape r No . 87-ICE-37 , America n Societyo f Mechanica l Engineers , NewYork , NY . Wade , W.R. , T . Idzikowski , CA . Kukkonen , an d L.A . Reams (1985 ) "Direc t Injectio n Diese l Capabilitie s fo r Passenge r Cars" , SA E Pape r No . 8505 5 2 , Societ yo f Automotiv e Engineers , Warrendale , PA . Wakenell , J.F . (1987 ) presentatio n a t the Societ yo f Automotiv e Engineer s 198 7 Internationa l Fuel s an d Lubricant s Meeting , Toronto , Ontario , Canada , Novembe r 2 , 1987 .

10- 3P.4 5

Weaver , C.S . an dB.S . Pug h(1986 ) Feasibilit y an dCost-Effectivenes s o f Emission s Contro l Fro mOff-Highwa y Diese l Vehicles : Tas k On e Interi m Report , Repor t

unde r EP A Contrac t

No . 68-01-7288 , Radia n Corporation , Sacramento , CA . Weaver,C.S . an dR.F . Klausmeie r (1987a ) A Stud y o f Exces s Moto r

Vehicl e Emissions : Tas k

1—Heav y Dut y Diese l NO ^ avA p.^,,,1., . p_. n ^ i Technologies , Repor t t o th e Californi aAi r Resource s Boar dunde r Contrac t No . A5-188-32
. Radia n Corporation , Sacramento , CA . Weaver,C.S . an dR.F . Klausmeie r (1987b ) Heav y Dut y Diese l Vehicl e Inspectio n an dMaintenanc e Study : Fina l Repor t ( 4 volumes) , Repor t t o th e Californi aAi r

Resource s Board , Radia n Corporation , Sacramento , CA . Wilson , R.P.Jr. . JJ . Mendillo , A . Genot , D.L . Bachelder , an dJ.H . Wasse r (1982 ) "Single-Cylinde r Test s o f

Emissio n Contro l Method s fo r Medium-Spee d Diese l Engines" , ASM EPape r No . 82-DGP-28 , America n Societ y o f Mechanica l Engineers , Ne

w York
. NY

„ Wood , CD . an dJ.O . Stormen t (1980 ) "Direc t

Injecte dMethano l Fuelin g o f Two-Strok e Locomotiv e Engine" , SA EPape r No . 800328 , Societ y o f Automotiv e Engineers , Warrendale
. PA . Young , T.C . (1987 ) lette r date dFebruar y 11 , 198 7 t o C.S . Weave r o f Radian , Engin e Manufacturer' s Association , Chicago , IL .

10- 4