Mobile Source Regulatory Program Update. Chet France, U.S. EPA STAPPA / ALAPCO Fall Membership Meeting October 26, 2004

Transcription

1 Mobile Source Regulatory Program Update Chet France, U.S. EPA STAPPA / ALAPCO Fall Membership Meeting October 26, 2004

2 Overview Heavy-duty highway engines 2007 implementation Onboard diagnostics On-Road testing Potential urea SCR for light-duty Tier 2 Mobile source air toxics rule Locomotive & marine engine advance notice Small gasoline nonroad engine rule Updating fuel economy estimates

3 Heavy Duty 2007 Engines & Fuel

4 HD 2007 Implementation Status -- Engines Manufacturers on track for 2007 using: PM filters Incremental improvements of 2004 technologies to meet 1.2 g/bhp-hr NOx averaging standard No plans to use SCR or NOx adsorbers in 2007 Customer fleet testing in 2005; some maybe even 2004 We will continue to monitor progress Met with manufacturers in Europe earlier this month Plan to meet w/ domestic manufacturers early 2005 Working with all manufacturers to ensure smooth implementation and certification processes for 2007 Truck/engine associations have set up "economic incentives task group for now gathering data

5 EPA 2007 Averaging Level / 2010 Standard PM, g/bhp-hr US2010 US2007 US PM (g/bhp-hr) 100% 0.01 NOx (g/bhp-hr) 50% NOx+NMHC % NOx 0.2 or 100% NOx ~1.2 (averaging includes 20% discount increasing environmental benefit) NOx, g/bhp-hr

6 HD 2007 Implementation Status Refiner Pre-Compliance Report Highlights 2004 Reports: A number of changes by individual refineries, but on balance little overall change; hence, the same general conclusions as 2003 report Highway diesel fuel production will be sufficient to meet demand 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel will be widely available nationwide Industry is on target for complying with the 15 ppm sulfur standard on time

7 Projected Production vs. Estimated Demand 3,500,000 Volume of Highway Diesel Fuel Produced/Imported (bbls/day) 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000, , ppm sulfur 15 ppm sulfur AEO 2004 estimated demand, bbls/day Year

8 HD 2007 Implementation Status Pipelines and Terminals The pipelines have begun testing systems: Finding it difficult to distribute 15 ppm without investment and operational changes to avoid significant contamination and downgrade Have begun asking about potential flexibilities Refiners and others expressing concern that contamination and downgrade may cause shortfalls We told them-- it s too early to make program changes there are a number of steps they can take we think they will be able to resolve this Workshop to work through issues

9 ULSD Implementation Workshop Sponsored by: EPA Refiners: API, NPRA Pipelines: AOPL Terminals: ILTA, IFTOA Distributors: NATSO, NTTC Marketers: PMAA, SIGMA, NACS End-users: ATA, AAR Focused on implementation of both the highway and nonroad diesel rules Progress, Studies, Findings, Recommended Practices, etc. Register at

10 Onboard Diagnostics for Heavy-Duty Highway >14,000 Lbs Memorandum of Agreement between CARB & EPA Signed in August 2004: Agreement to work together toward national Heavy-duty OBD program CARB & EPA staff are traveling together to manufacturer sites to discuss technologies & issues EPA/CARB Workshop tentatively planned for early 2005 EPA Proposal in Spring 2005 Final rules by December 2005 Implementation beginning in 2010

11 On-Road Testing For Heavy-Duty Highway EPA-EMA-ARB NTE Settlement Agreement Industry agreed to a manufacturer run, in-use, onroad testing program Builds on the not-to-exceed standard Focus is determining compliance in the real world Uses onboard emission measurement systems EPA oversight of program Proposal published in June 2004 Fully enforceable federal program begins in 2007 Pilot program begins in 2005

12 On-Road Testing For Heavy-Duty Highway (continued) Main issue raised-- PM instrument availability and measurement specifications Aiming to resolve via targeted design and timing of pilot test program Final rule by June 2005 Future nonroad in-use testing rule will follow

13 Urea SCR for Light-Duty Tier 2?

14 Urea SCR for Light-Duty Diesels Several manufacturers are considering developing SCRequipped Tier 2 vehicles -- in 2008/09 timeframe All are continuing development work on NOx adsorbers Asking EPA what needs to be done to qualify for more frequent scheduled maintenance (urea filling) than the standard 100,000-mile interval, as allowed for in EPA regs The objectives are the same as those laid out for heavy-duty: Adequate urea infrastructure available wherever needed Assurance that vehicle owners will maintain urea Aim is to ensure no vehicles emit above the standards They re now developing joint manufacturer plan (timing unclear) We will solicit public comment on their proposed plan before deciding whether or not to approve

15 Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSAT)

16 Mobile Source Air Toxics Actively developing MSAT proposal Evaluating options for additional control Fuels Including benzene and/or toxics standards Vehicles Evap and exhaust Gas cans Will reflect research on high-end exposure, hot spots Targeting publication of proposal in mid-2005 Other regulatory initiatives will also provide additional toxics benefits e.g., locomotive and marine, small gasoline equipment

17 Exposure Research Mobile source hot spots and high-end exposure that are not reflected in national-scale modeling (NATA) Local-scale air quality modeling Shows spatial gradients associated with roads Near-roadway monitoring Elevated concentrations within meters of roadways Average roadside concentration 2.4 times higher than urban background can be up to 7x higher Indoor concentrations significantly related to traffic patterns on nearby roads Personal exposure, in-vehicle, occupational monitoring

18 Locomotive and Marine

19 Locomotive & Marine Diesels Current Tier 2 standards are phasing in through 2005 (locomotives) and 2009 (marine) Require application of 1990-era highway technologies 15 ppm sulfur locomotive/marine fuel required in 2012

20 Comparison of Established Standards for Locomotive/Marine Diesels and Diesel Trucks Trucks 2010 PM (g/hp-hr) Trucks 1991 Locomotives Tier Marine Tier NOx (g/hp-hr)

21 Mobile Source Inventories in 2030 Diesel PM 2.5 locomotive & marine 45% highway Potential reductions on the order of: ~25,000 tons/yr of PM ~900,000 tons/yr of NOx Compares to nonroad rule reductions of: ~129,000 tons/yr of PM 738,000 tons/yr of NOx Locomotive & marine 27% nonroad diesel NOx nonroad diesel highway

22 Locomotive & Marine Diesels Advance Notice ANPRM published June 29 Targets high-efficiency aftertreatment, as early as 2011 Comment period closed August 30 Comments on the ANPRM: State/local regulators: Federal controls a must to attain 8-hr ozone & PM2.5; expand remanufacture program to marine and pre-1973 locomotives; add market incentives Environmental groups: Port traffic growing; Tier 4-like standards ASAP; address existing fleet too Fuel Providers: No air quality case for new standards; wait on ULSD until engines need it (continued )

23 Locomotive & Marine Diesels Advance Notice Comments on the ANPRM (continued): Manufacturers: Fundamental differences from highway/nonroad diesels; far too premature to set standards; detailed safety and feasibility issues; align marine w/ EU; small sales will make for high costs Railroads: Separate locomotive and marine rules; detailed comments on feasibility of new standards; make idle shutdown voluntary Vessel Owners: Safety, feasibility concerns; don t regulate existing fleet

24 Locomotive & Marine Diesels Next Steps Starting to engage stakeholders NPRM planned for mid-2005 FRM mid-2006

25 Small Nonroad Gasoline Engines

26 Small Nonroad Gasoline Engines 2003 Omnibus Appropriations Bill had provisions for new standards on spark ignition engines <50 hp California ARB recently finalized Tier 3 for <25 hp exhaust (non-handheld) evap (non-handheld and handheld) projecting reductions of ~35% for exhaust and ~90% for evap

27 Small SI Fraction of Mobile Source Inventory (1996) NR SI and SI Rec Marine 19% NR SI and SI Rec Marine 1% Other Nonroad 25% Highway 67% VOCs Other Nonroad 14% Highway 74% NOx

28 Small Nonroad Gasoline Engines Current Activities We are actively engaged in technology and safety assessment for non-handheld engines Have had numerous meetings with all major engine and equipment manufacturers Identifying options for exhaust/evaporative emissions Expect proposal in early 2005 to include: Exhaust and evaporative standards for nonhandheld and recreational marine engines Evap standards for handheld engines

29 Light Duty Fuel Economy

30 Background on EPA s Fuel Economy Estimates Energy Policy and Conservation Act (1974) requires EPA to establish the test procedures used to measure FE for window stickers Allows consumers to compare FE of different vehicles This same information must be compiled annually and published in the Fuel Economy Guide, which dealers must provide to customers Window stickers reflect two FE estimates: City: Driving cycle represents urban driving in the 1970 s; stop & go, avg speed 21 mph. Same test used for emissions compliance (Federal Test Procedure). Highway: Driving cycle represents more rural driving; avg. speed 48 mph, max speed 60 mph. Test used just for FE, not emissions.

31 Need for Action Many driving conditions have changed since 1985 Higher speed limits, more congestion, more use of A/C and other accessories, more aggressive driving Many of these factors have been addressed through our emissions compliance testing programs, but not FE In 1996, EPA determined the FTP was not representative of factors affecting in-use emissions, and added two new tests (Supplemental FTP, or SFTP) Increased consumer awareness that actual FE is lower than sticker values More than 33,000 public comments on Bluewater Network petition support changes Goal: Provide consumers with more credible information about the FE they can expect from vehicles

32 Initial Analysis Examined FE results over supplemental test cycles used today for emissions compliance, but not FE stickers USO6: High speed/high load, aggressive driving SC03: Air conditioning, 95º F, higher humidity and sunload Cold FTP: City test at 20º F Average FE impacts High speed/high load cycle 23% lower than combined City/Hwy. Air conditioning cycle 16% lower than City cycle. Cold Temp. (20º F) test is 12% lower than City cycle (75º F).

33 Initial Data Observations Incorporating these factors into the FE estimates would lower the sticker values for most vehicles Relative rankings would also change FE values could be impacted most for hybrids, diesels, and other high FE vehicles

34 Schedule Fuel Economy Label NPRM: June 2005 FRM: Early 2006 Implementation for MY 2007

35 For More Information 2007 HDV Rule / Precompliance Reports HD In-Use Test Program - Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSAT) -