Obama administration publishes Phase II of GHG plan

[kscarbel2]

Fleet Owner / June 19, 2015

Trailers added to fuel efficiency standards for trucks

The long-awaited next phase of the federal government’s plan to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by setting fuel efficiency standards for commercial vehicles was released Friday.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) are jointly proposing the standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles meant to reduce the impacts of climate change, while bolstering energy security and spurring manufacturing innovation.

The proposed standards are expected to lower CO2 emissions by approximately 1 billion metric tons, cut fuel costs by about $170 billion, and reduce oil consumption by up to 1.8 billion barrels over the lifetime of the vehicles sold under the program.

Putting those numbers into perspective, the government says these reductions are nearly equal to the GHG emissions associated with energy use by all U.S. residences in one year. The total oil savings under the program would be greater than a year’s worth of U.S. imports from the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC).

Medium- and heavy-duty vehicles currently account for about 20% of GHG emissions and oil use in the U.S. transportation sector, but only comprise about 5% of vehicles on the road.

“Once upon a time, to be pro-environment you had to be anti-big-vehicles. This rule will change that,” said U.S Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. “In fact, these efficiency standards are good for the environment—and the economy. When trucks use less fuel, shipping costs go down. It’s good news all around, especially for anyone with an online shopping habit.”

The product of three years of testing and research, the proposed vehicle and engine performance standards would cover model years 2021-2027, and apply to semi-trucks, large pickup trucks and vans, and all types and sizes of buses and work trucks.

They would achieve up to 24% lower CO2 emissions and fuel consumption than an equivalent tractor in 2018, based on the fully phased-in standards for the tractor alone in a tractor-trailer vehicle.

In this next phase, the EPA and NHTSA are also proposing efficiency and GHG standards for trailers for the first time. The EPA trailer standards, which exclude certain categories such as mobile homes, would begin to take effect in model year 2018 for certain trailers, while NHTSA’s standards would be in effect as of 2021, with credits available for voluntary participation before then.

Additionally, EPA notes that the proposed standards are:

• Grounded in rigorous technical data and analysis.
• Reflect extensive outreach with industry and other stakeholders.
• Rely on cost-effective technologies to enhance fuel efficiency and reduce GHG emissions that are currently available or in development.
• They do not mandate the use of specific technologies. Rather they establish standards achievable through a range of technology options, and allow manufacturers to choose those technologies that work best for their products and for their customers. (These technologies include improved transmissions, engine combustion optimization, aerodynamic improvements and low rolling resistance tires).
• Phased in over the long-term, beginning in model year 2021 and culminating in standards for model year 2027 – giving manufacturers the time and flexibility to plan.
• Flexible, by allowing banking and trading emissions credits for most manufacturers, and providing businesses the opportunity to choose the most cost-effective path to meet the standards.

The American Trucking Assns. announced that it supports the proposal, but remains concerned that the rule may result in the use of certain technologies on vehicles before they can be fully tested.

“Fuel is an enormous expense for our industry – and carbon emissions carry an enormous cost for our planet,” said ATA President and CEO Bill Graves. “That’s why our industry supported the Obama Administration’s historic first round of greenhouse gas and fuel efficiency standards for medium and large trucks and why we support the aims of this second round of standards.”

Since the first round of efficiency standards were announced in 2011, ATA has been working to evaluate their impact on the trucking industry, and the agency said it has been in constant dialogue with the EPA and the NHTSA to make sure the second round of standards can be effectively implemented by the industry.

“ATA has adopted a set of 15 ‘guiding principles’ for Phase II,” said ATA Vice President and Energy and Environmental Counsel Glen Kedzie, “and based on conversations with regulators and a preliminary review this proposal appears to meet 14 of those.

“We believe this rule could result in the deployment of certain technologies that do not fully recognize the diversity of our industry and could prove to be unreliable. This unreliability could slow not only adoption of these technologies, but the environmental benefits they aim to create,” Kedzie said. “To prevent this, truck and engine manufacturers will need adequate time to develop solutions to meet these new standards.”

Kedzie said fuel is typically a fleet’s first or second largest operating expense and most fleets seek a return on their investment in new equipment within 18 to 24 months.

A public comment period will be open for 60 days after the proposal is published in the Federal Register. In addition, NHTSA and EPA will host two public hearings and continue to meet with stakeholders over the course of the comment period, the agencies said.

[kscarbel2]

GHG Phase II: 10 key points in the proposed truck standards

Fleet Owner / June 19, 2015

According to the government, heavy-duty trucks are the second largest and fastest growing segment of the U.S. transportation sector in terms of emissions and energy use.

Medium- and heavy-duty vehicles currently account for about 20% of GHG emissions and oil use in the U.S. transportation sector, but are only about 5% of the vehicles on the road.

The next phase of the federal government’s plan to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by setting fuel efficiency standards for commercial vehicles was released Friday.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) proposed the standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles meant to reduce the impacts of climate change. The proposed standards, for model years 2021-2027, are expected to lower CO2 emissions by approximately 1 billion metric tons, cut fuel costs by about $170 billion, and reduce oil consumption by up to 1.8 billion barrels over the lifetime of the vehicles sold under the program.

1. Why?

As National Highway Safety Administration Mark Rosekind opened the press conference to announce the standard, the Obama Administration is committed to act on climate change “before the planet is beyond fixing,” as the president promised two years ago when he revealed his Climate Action Plan.

The CAP was billed as a “blueprint” for reducing carbon emissions, and the administration has taken steps to use the power of the executive branch to enact a number of reforms. A fuel efficiency standard for commercial vehicles is one of those initiatives.

2. Why trucking?

According to the government, heavy-duty trucks are the second largest and fastest growing segment of the U.S. transportation sector in terms of emissions and energy use.

Medium- and heavy-duty vehicles currently account for about 20 percent of GHG emissions and oil use in the U.S. transportation sector, but are only about 5 percent of the vehicles on the road. And, as the industry routinely cites, trucking hauls about 70 percent of all freight in the U.S.

3. What does fuel consumption have to do with GHG?

Simply, burning diesel and gasoline puts CO2 into the atmosphere. The less fuel a vehicle burns, the less CO2 is emitted. The program would save approximately 1.8 billion barrels of oil, or 75 billion gallons of fuel, over the lifetime of the vehicles subject to these standards.

Those oil savings would exceed a year’s worth of U.S. imports from OPEC.

4. What are the trucking goals?

Peppered with questions from the press about what the Phase II standards mean in terms of improved MPGs, EPA Acting Asst. Administrator Janet McCabe insisted that such a measurement is meaningless for the many trucks and applications covered under the proposal. For highway tractors, the key is “freight efficiency,” or the amount of freight that can be hauled per mile, per gallon of fuel. In 2027, EPA estimates the average line-haul truck would achieve a 50% improvement, with that potentially rising to 90% with the development and adoption an new, more efficient technologies.

(Experts at the Environmental Defense Fund put the 2027 goal at about 9.5 mpg for highway tractor-trailers, compared to about 6 mpg in 2010.)

More precisely, the metric for compliance under the standard will be a grams/mile emissions rate. In 2027 when the standard is fully phased in, heavy-duty vehicles across all classes would achieve up to the following CO2 emissions and fuel use reductions:

• 24% for combination tractors designed to pull trailers and move freight when compared to Phase I standards

• 8% for trailers when compared to an average model year 2017 trailer

• 16% for vocational vehicles when compared to Phase I standards, and

• 16% for pick-up trucks and light vans when compared to Phase I standards.

5. Just where are these impressive improvements going to come from?

According to the proposal, the goals can be met with “cost-effective” technology that’s already available, or that is currently in development.

Additionally, the standards do not mandate the use of specific technologies. Rather they establish standards achievable through a range of technology options, and allow manufacturers to choose those technologies that work best for their products and for their customers, the government says.

Broadly, for example, these technologies include improved transmissions, engine combustion optimization, aerodynamic improvements and low rolling resistance tires.

6. How much is all of this going to cost a truck buyer?

The cost, arguably, is the good news for truck operators. Unlike EPA emissions regulations aimed at NOx and diesel particulates—for which costly new technologies had to be developed, and these negatively impacted reliability and fuel efficiency—the required improvement is expected to immediately begin to pay for itself in reduced fuel expense.

There are, of course, many details to come and some unforeseen market dynamics likely at work over the next decade—and that initial purchase price is still going to have to be financed.

Given rough estimates of $10,000 to $12,000 added cost to tractor-trailers, and less for smaller vehicles, EPA puts the payback in model year 2027 at

• Two years for a tractor/trailer combo;

• Three years for pick-ups and vans; and

• Six years for a vocational vehicles.

7. Why trailers?

Simply, trailers pulled by combination tractors are part of that vehicle, and trailers contribute significantly to carbon pollution emissions, and to the vehicle’s fuel consumption, EPA says. Cost-effective technologies, including aerodynamic devices, low rolling-resistance tires, and automatic tire inflation systems can offer significant CO2 emissions and fuel use reductions for the vehicle.

Because EPA and DOT each have statutory responsibilities related to the matter, the agencies say they worked very closely to ensure that EPA’s CO2 proposed regulations and NHTSA’s proposed fuel efficiency regulations are fully harmonized. The agencies also propose that manufacturers would submit a single report to show compliance with both programs.

The proposed standards would apply to certain trailer types beginning in MY 2018 for EPA’s standards, and would be voluntary for NHTSA from 2018 to 2020, with mandatory standard beginning in 2021. The proposed standards would extend to more trailer types in MY 2021.

• The fully-phased standards would apply to five categories of trailers:

• Long (longer than 50 feet) highway box trailers - dry vans;

• Long highway box trailers - refrigerated vans;

• Short (50 feet and shorter) highway box trailers - dry vans;

• Short highway box trailers - refrigerated vans; and

• Non-box highway trailers.

8. Why engine standards?

As with the Phase I program, the agencies are proposing separate standards and test cycles for tractor engines, vocational diesel engines, and vocational gasoline engines—standards that some truck makers have suggested will complicate matters when it comes time to assess the complete vehicle.

For diesel engines, the proposed standards would begin in model year 2021 and phase in to MY 2027, with interim standards in MY 2024. They are also proposing a revised test cycle weighting for tractor engines to better reflect actual in-use operation.

The proposed diesel engine standards would reduce CO2 emissions and fuel consumption by up to 4% compared to Phase I. Technologies that could be used to meet the standards include: combustion optimization; improved air handling; reduced friction within the engine; improved emissions after-treatment technologies; and waste heat recovery.

9. Who wins?

The big picture benefits depend on how one feels about anthropogenic climate change, and how much one values the survival of civilization generations hence. But since global warming is an Obama administration priority, and since the White House gets to set the rules and do the math, here are the numbers used to justify the GHG proposal:

• The program would cut carbon pollution by about 1 billion metric tons, roughly equivalent to the GHG emissions associated with the electricity and power use from all U.S. residences for one year.

• The program would save vehicle owners $170 billion in fuel costs over the lifetime of the vehicles sold.

• When fuel savings bring down the costs of transporting goods, the average household could save nearly $150 a year by 2030 and $275 by 2040 assuming all savings and costs are passed through to consumers.

• In total, the program would result in about $230 billion in net benefits to society over the lifetime of vehicles sold under the program.

• The benefits to society outweigh costs over the lifetime of vehicles sold under the program by about 10 to 1.

10. Where are the details?

The notice has yet to be posted in the Federal Register, but the 1,300-page prepublication version is here.

Or, for those who prefer neatly organized summaries, EPA provides these:

• Overview Fact Sheet: Cutting Carbon Pollution, Improving Fuel Efficiency, Saving Money, and Supporting Innovation for Trucks (PDF) (3 pages)
• Detailed Fact Sheet: EPA and NHTSA Propose Standards to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Improve Fuel Efficiency of Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles for Model Year 2018 and Beyond (PDF) (6 pages)
• Fact Sheet on Trailers: Proposed EPA and NHTSA Regulation of Commercial Trailers Used with Combination Tractors: Frequently Asked Questions(PDF) (4 pages)
• Key Numbers Fact Sheet: EPA and NHTSA Propose Greenhouse Gas and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Trucks: By the Numbers (PDF)(3 pages)
• Proposed Rule (PDF) (1,329 pages)
  • Redline/Strikeout of EPA Proposed Regulatory Text Relative to Current CFR (PDF) (378 pages)
• Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) (PDF) (971 pages)
• See the GEM web page to read about the Greenhouse gas Emissions Model (GEM) for determining truck compliance.

[kscarbel2]

Trucking industry reactions to GHG Phase II vary

Fleet Owner / June 19, 2015

Reaction has been swift and varied to the Obama administration’s proposed second round of truck fuel efficiency standards: An environmental group is calling it “historic,” while an association of truck dealers isn’t so sure.

And many industry groups are taking a wait-and-see approach, as experts sort through the 1,300 page proposal.

Here’s a sampling of the reaction so far:

“Affordable transportation is the bedrock of the American economy, and adding—by the administration's own estimate –an average of just under $12,000 to the cost of a new truck through mandates based on potentially untested technologies is a great risk to a still-fragile economy,” said the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) and American Truck Dealers (ATD) in a statement. “Recent history has shown that mandates with underestimated compliance costs result in substantially higher prices for commercial vehicles, and force fleet owners and operators to seek out less-expensive and less fuel-efficient alternatives in the marketplace. The costs could even drive small fleets and owner-operators out of business, costing jobs and only further impeding economic growth. While supportive of affordable fuel-economy improvements, ATD is closely reviewing the proposal and the many potential impacts it will have on truck dealerships and their customers.”

“The proposed Clean Truck standards will move us miles down the road toward a cleaner, safer future,” said Fred Krupp, president of the Environmental Defense Fund. “The standards will sharply reduce climate pollution from the transportation sector and will reduce America’s reliance on imported oil. This week, Pope Francis called on all of us to live up to our moral obligation to help turn back the climate threat. Today’s proposal is the latest step this Administration has taken toward meeting that obligation.”

“Cummins supports the proposed Phase II rule and believes it will help our industry grow in a more sustainable way, which is a win for our customers and win for the environment,” said Tom Linebarger, Chairman and CEO, Cummins Inc. “The rule, which was developed through a collaborative effort with agencies and industry partners, builds on the emissions reductions and fuel efficiency gains that the Phase I standards helped make possible. We look forward to the process of finalizing these new standards. Cummins is committed to continuing to use our technological leadership to develop products that our customers rely on, while also reducing our environmental footprint.”

“Daimler Trucks North America (DTNA) and its subsidiaries have focused for decades on improving freight efficiency in order to lower customers’ total operating costs. As the market leader in fuel efficiency, and the first to certify all of our products to Phase 1 GHG standards, DTNA shares EPA and NHTSA goals to improve fuel economy and reduce greenhouse gases,” DTNA said. “We believe that the rule should reflect realistic vehicle production and operating conditions, and consider the cost-efficient, fuel-saving technologies in fleet operations in order to successfully meet our shared goals. We have provided the EPA and NHTSA with information about the fuel-saving potential of many technologies, as well as their relative cost and affordability for our customers. We are just beginning to review the details of the NPRM, and will continue to work with EPA and NHTSA on developing a final rule consistent with our goals of providing emissions and fuel economy benefits that reduce the Real Cost of Ownership for our customers.”

“As the largest semi-trailer manufacturer in North America, we will continue to work with the EPA and NHTSA as they finalize a trailer program intended to improve fuel economy in our industry,” said Richard Giromini, President and CEO of Wabash National. “As a leader in advanced trailer aerodynamic technologies, we want to ensure that the new rule offers multiple options, in an effort to simplify compliance, while maximizing environmental benefits and overall cost savings for the fleets.”

"As a power management company committed to increased fuel efficiency and reduced greenhouse gases, Eaton strongly supports the next phase of standards for medium and heavy duty commercial vehicles," said Alexander M. Cutler, Eaton Chairman and CEO. "These standards provide important incentives to help deploy the next generation of fuel efficient technologies. Eaton stands ready to provide cost-effective advanced drivetrain technologies that make vehicles more efficient while achieving significant operational savings for our customers' commercial vehicle fleets."

“We look forward to continue working with EPA, NHTSA and the Administration on this national Phase II program,” said Michael L. Ducker, President and CEO of FedEx Freight. “We need to ensure national harmonization of standards and compliance requirements in order to maximize environmental benefits and fuel cost savings for fleets so as to decrease U.S. dependency on oil. This would serve as an effective complementary approach with equipment improvements like the use of 33 ft. twin trailers, which can reduce fuel use by millions of gallons per year through up to an 18 percent improvement in operational efficiency. The use of 33 ft. trailers has the added benefit of enhancing safety and reducing emissions due to fewer truck trips needed to transport the same amount of freight.”

“With or without standards, we strive to be one of the most fuel efficient fleets in the country. Clearly, the Phase II rule is intended to further improve the efficiency of how we move goods throughout the United States,” said Doug Stotlar, President and CEO of Con-way Inc. “The devil is in the details, but we will continue to work with our partners to ensure the final rule is strong but still implementable for our industry.”

“Since 2011, MEMA has worked closely with the administration in an open and constructive manner to provide feedback and data in the development of this proposed rulemaking on fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions for heavy trucks,” said Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Assn. (MEMA) President & CEO Steve Handschuh. “Our heavy vehicle supplier member companies will carefully review the proposed rule and we look forward to our continuing productive relationship with the U.S. EPA and the U.S. DOT’s NHTSA. MEMA and its members understand that a consistent national program will foster long-term investment, product reliability, validation and product cost-effectiveness.”

“On the home front, efficiency makes us more resilient. Just as important, technologies developed to improve fuel efficiency for the U.S. trucking industry will likely also improve military operational effectiveness and save lives,” said Gen. Ron Keys, USAF (Ret),CNA Corp. Military Advisory Board chairman. “As the world’s greatest innovators, the U.S. must lead global efforts to deploy advanced technologies that lower the demand for oil. To date, fuel economy standards for cars and trucks have proved to be powerful tools that have speeded innovation, decreased our dependence on oil and improved our nation’s overall security. The CNA MAB supports the next phase of rulemaking for medium and heavy-duty trucks as a matter of national security.”

And the American public seems to be support the proposal as well. The Consumer Federation of America (CFA) is releasing a new poll that finds a large majority of Americans favor requiring manufacturers to increase the fuel efficiency of heavy-duty trucks (71 percent) while less than one quarter oppose such a requirement (24 percent).

“Our poll found that Americans understand that big truck fuel costs are passed on to them, which means they understand that raising big truck fuel economy standards will save them money,” said Jack Gillis, CFA’s automotive expert. “As the federal government takes another step forward in addressing the nation’s energy challenges, today’s proposal to increase big truck fuel economy will not only further reduce our dependence on foreign oil, but reduce the cost of everyday consumer purchases.”

[41chevy]

Medium- and heavy-duty vehicles currently account for about 20% of GHG emissions and oil use in the U.S. transportation sector, but only comprise about 5% of vehicles on the road.

And move 95% of every item used.

So after all is said and done what measures are China, India and SE Asia taking to curb "green house" gases from coal fired plants with no emission controls, vehicles with late 70's type emission systems? Or does our EPA and the Big 'O' and Gina expect the U.S. citzens to carry the full punishment burden of clean air. I also wonder how much the coming Chinese LP heavy truck engine technology influenced the powers in DC ($$$$$$)

[kscarbel2]

Feds Claim Phase 2 GHG Rules Will Cut Pollution and Save Money

Heavy Duty Trucking / June 19, 2015

The federal government’s top vehicle and clean-air regulators on June 19 formally announced their proposal for extending fuel-economy and greenhouse-gas emissions rules, and predicted positive economic and health-benefit results.

Phase 2 of the regulations for 2021 to 2027-model trucks and tractors and 2018-to-2027 MY trailers would cover entire vehicles, and there will be separate rules for engines, said the Administrators of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, in a hurried press briefing today.

“The EPA trailer standards, which exclude certain categories such as mobile homes, would begin to take effect in model year 2018 for certain trailers, while NHTSA’s standards would be in effect as of 2021, with credits available for voluntary participation before then,” the agencies said in a joint press release issued prior to the briefing.

“Cost effective technologies for trailers – including aerodynamic devices, light weight construction and self-inflating tires – can significantly reduce total fuel consumption by tractor-trailers, while paying back the owners in less than two years due to the fuel saved,” the release said.

About $10,000 to $12,000 in new equipment would be needed by a tractor-trailer to meet the requirements, said Gina McCarthy, EPA’s administrator.

Much off-the-shelf existing technology now used to meet current Phase 1 economy and GHG requirements can extend into Phase 2, but “innovative technology” will also be required, she said.

“Some of the new technology is now in development,” said Mark Rosekind, who heads the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. “We heard from plenty of companies who say they will be available soon.” McCarthy added that, “Everybody will have lots of choice. “There will be no one path.”

The Phase 2 proposals resulted from “rigorous technical study” and more than 300 meetings with manufacturers, fleets, owner-operators, drivers, union leaders and others in the trucking industry, she said.

That’s why they know that the innovative technologies involving better engine combustion efficiency, among other things, are close to being ready, Rosekind commented.

The two officials declined to give mile-per-gallon estimates asked for several times by general media reporters during the call-in briefing. “There is no number to give,” Rosekind said, because medium- and heavy-duty trucks and combination vehicles vary greatly in configuration, weight and use.

“What matters is freight efficiency,” McCarthy said.

“Today’s proposal builds on the fuel efficiency and GHG emissions standards already in place for model years 2014-2018, which alone will result in emissions reductions of 270 million metric tons and save vehicle owners more than $50 billion in fuel costs,” the press release stated. “The current standards have been successful, with truck sales up in model years 2014 and 2015 due in part to improved fuel efficiency.

“The proposal also builds on standards that the Administration has put in place for light-duty vehicles, which are projected to reduce carbon pollution by 6 billion tons over the lifetime of vehicles sold, double fuel economy by 2025, and save consumers $1.7 trillion at the pump. These standards are already delivering savings for American drivers; new vehicles in 2013 achieved their highest fuel economy of all time.”

A 60-day public comment period will follow the proposal’s publication in the Federal Register, the Administrators said. And NHTSA and EPA will host two public hearings and continue an “open-door policy of meeting with stakeholders over the course of the comment period.”

[kscarbel2]

Tougher environmental rules effect heavy-duty pickups, vans

Automotive News / June 19, 2015

Carbon dioxide emissions and fuel consumption by heavy-duty pickups and vans would be reduced by 16 percent from the 2021 to 2027 model years under rules proposed today by federal regulators.

The standards, which would be phased in year by year during that period, would affect trucks such as the Ford Super Duty lineup, the Chevrolet Silverado HD range and Ram 2500 and 3500, as well as commercial vans such as the Ford Transit and E series.

Like the regulations for light vehicles, the proposed rules are a joint national program overseen by the EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. They are part of a second phase of rules to curb greenhouse gas emissions and fuel consumption by medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, including long-haul semitrailers, trailers, vocational vehicles such as cement mixers and garbage trucks, as well as heavy-duty pickups and vans.

Such vehicles account for just 5 percent of vehicles on U.S. roads, according to NHTSA, but 20 percent of all oil use and emissions from the transportation sector.

In a statement, the EPA and NHTSA said the proposed standards for all medium- and heavy-duty trucks would reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 1 billion metric tons, save $170 billion in fuel costs and reduce oil consumption through 2027 by as much as 1.8 billion barrels -- or more than a year’s worth of U.S. oil imports from the OPEC bloc.

Support from FCA

In a statement, Fiat Chrysler’s U.S. arm said it “supports and commends” the coordinated approach taken by the federal agencies.

“FCA US remains committed to the proliferation of clean technology and reducing vehicle operating costs, while ensuring our products deliver the performance and functionality our customers demand and deserve,” the statement read.

Matt Blunt, CEO of the American Automotive Policy Council, which represents FCA, Ford and General Motors, said the group will work with the EPA and NHTSA as the rules are finalized “to ensure our customers receive the maximum utility and functionality that these work trucks provide.”

Both FCA and the Policy Council said it was “imperative” that the rules continue to be aligned between the EPA, NHTSA and California’s Air Resources Board, as the current rules are.

American Truck Dealers, a division of the National Automobile Dealers Association, voiced concerns about the higher costs of compliance and the potential effect on the economy if prices for commercial trucks rise.

“While supportive of affordable fuel-economy improvements, ATD is closely reviewing the proposal and the many potential impacts it will have on truck dealerships and their customers,” the group said in a statement.

Manufacturers and the public have 60 days to comment on the proposed rules. The agencies expect to issue final rules next year.

[Dirtymilkman]

How much fuel is wasted in a year just on dpf regen's? They want trucks to use less fuel? Throw the dpf's away, quit recirculating so much exhaust back through a motor and just use scr. Once the rest of the world catches up to this we will be burning way less oil and polluting way less as a whole

[TeamsterGrrrl]

I skimmed through the NPRM, and this looks doable- The EPA is being quite flexible in the means that can be used to comply. There are also a bunch of exemptions for small businesses, fire trucks and other emergency vehicles, and they're even grandfathering in glider kit builders. And unlike the past 2007 and 2010 EPA standards, this is a win-win... Reducing greenhouse gases reduces fuel use and the profit stealing $$$ we have to spend on diesel!

[Dirtymilkman]

But adds how much $ to the cost of a new truck?

[TeamsterGrrrl]

About 10%, but with 16% to 24% better fuel economy that investment will be paid back in a couple years. For some owners the cost will be less because they're already buying fuel efficient options.