Emission standards, EC and USA/CDN, and the B Class

[Mike Tee]

Following from the discussion in BeeClass' introduction thread, there was some confusion regarding the differences between the European Community and the US/CDN emissions standards.

Broadly speaking, with the notable exception of California, US standards deal with conventional pollutants and not carbon dioxide. Europe deals with both carbon dioxide (under a voluntary program, and soon a mandatory one) and conventional pollutants.

The EC has different emission control standards for diesels and petrol powered vehicles, but in the USA and Canada it's one size fits all.

The presently in force EU-4 diesel standard has the following limits of conventional pollutants:

• Particulate Matter (PM) = 0.05 g/km
• Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) = 0.5 g/km

The DIRTIEST permanent classification of presently in force USA/CDN standards (Bin 8) has the following limits of conventional pollutants:

• PM = 0.0124 g/km
• NOx = 0.124 g/km

The fleet average classification for the 2009 model year under the USA/CDN system will be:

• PM = 0.0065 g/km
• NOx = 0.044 g/km

Back to Europe. The EU-5 standard is about to be introduced. Does it meet the North American standard?

EU-5 standard:

• PM = 0.025 g/km
• NOx = 0.25 g/km

So EU-5 is twice as dirty as the dirtiest USA/CDN standard!

OK, how about the proposed EU-6 standard:

• PM = 0.005 g/km
• NOx = 0.2 g/km

Still too dirty to slip in under the Bin 8 standard!

The problem that diesel engines face is that owing to their very high compression ratios, they create a lot of NOx, and scrubbing that from exhaust is apparently not feasible without an additive. In the case of Mercedes-Benz and VW, they are looking at a urea injection system to lower NOx to the US/CDN standard.

Only the E 320 CDI has been certified to such a standard over here, and I think it may have just nipped into the California standards a few weeks ago as well. But the BlueTec is an expensive addition to the North American models, which is nonetheless being introduced in Europe too. And even with BlueTec, the cars are certified among the dirtiest bins.

Bottom line: any diesel ceritified even to the proposed EU-6 standard would not necessarily meet the USA/CDN standards. The last year that EU-3 and EU-4 cars could be sold here was 2006, and the door slammed shut.

Light trucks and SUVs (like the GL, R and M-Classes) are not required to either meet the clean air standards that cars are, nor the mandatory fuel efficiency standards.

I hope that helps.

[kdbcom]

Strange how US & Canada seem to have opted out of the CO2 aspect of pollution which many people feel as the more important.

I did a quick random sample of US car manufacturers and found that none of them were displaying ANY form of pollution figures only ridiculously low MPG figures (this was on standard family salons). So much for pollution awarness.

In the UK all manufacturers are required to clearly display their CO2 levels in their advertising & brochures & Goverment Road Licence amounts are based on these figures with highly polluting vehicles paying considerably more than the lower ones.

Quote
Light trucks and SUVs (like the GL, R and M-Classes) are not required to either meet the clean air standards that cars are, nor the mandatory fuel efficiency standards.
Unquote

What lunacy probably the most gas guzzling & polluting vehicles of the lot.
This is type of vehicle we are trying to price (by taxation) off of the roads in the UK.

Give me our system any day of the week.

[Derek Lecours]

Mike,
Thanks for the time and effort in bringing all that info clearly to our attention.
It's interesting how VW has successfully had diesels in our Canadian market all these years.
With regulations presently becoming a lot stricter, I still hope the auto manufacturers can keep pace with it.
We do need reasonable alternatives.

[kdbcom]

Funny you should bring up the VW Diesel ,Derek, as a few years ago I had a diesel Vento but although it had the same size engine as the B the Vento was not a patch on it performace or economy wise. I have an idea that the emissions were much worse as well.

[Derek Lecours]

The urea injection system works but I think they're still working on a viable maintenance method for the change-out of the urea.
How can you keep proper tabs on all the vehicles with this urea and the timely maintenance they require? Lets hope they find a way.

[Misfit]

^^^

As I understand it so far - it will just be another line item on the existing service menu intervals

[Mike Tee]

My thoughts are that there is no excuse for having different emission standards for light trucks and SUVs and for cars....and that North America would be well advised to develop a carbon dioxide target (which is in effect a fuel consumption target) that will approach or match that of the EC.

However, I ALSO like the US/CDN emission standards for conventional pollutants a lot better than the EC standards. Particulate matter is a grave health concern, and NOx is a major component of smog. Paris or London are not fun places to be when it's hot and the air is still. Cutting the EC's NOx levels would be a good idea IMO.

So there is good in both systems, let's hope they get it together soon.

[kdbcom]

Yes I agree with that wholeheartedly

[Derek Lecours]

What do you think is the logic behind the lack of controls on medium and especially very large transports(semi's)?
If they can't join the club then pull them off the road!!

[Mike Tee]

The emission standards are measured in grams per mile or km, so larger engines are disproportionately penalized because they process more air and consume more fuel per distance travelled.

In the US, they have a grams per HP formula for large on road engines, and in Europe it's grams per kWh.