In order to reduce emissions from diesel engines (PDF)
Environment Canada has established strict new emissions standards for new on-road, heavy-duty diesel vehicles and engines. Starting with the 2007 model year, compliance with these emission standards will effectively require that new heavy-duty diesel engines be equipped with the next generation of advanced emission control systems. These systems are very sensitive to sulphur levels in the diesel fuel, and cannot tolerate the levels of sulphur allowed in the current on-road LSD. Therefore, Environment Canada has established regulations to significantly lower the maximum allowable amount of sulphur in diesel fuel and thereby enable the effective operation of advanced emission control systems.”
Alberta’s diesel supply crunch — expected to continue into next month — could result in a shortage of everything from produce to electronics on store shelves, warns the province’s trucking industry.
Reflecting something I was told about refinery difficulties while in the province’s southeast oil patch last week, where a shortage of diesel is forcing a slow down in activity –
“…low sulphur demands make the [refining] system more fragile to loss of output. Not only in more units but also critical paths.”
But we have a number of industry experts among our readers, so perhaps they can shed more light on this.
It is true, but has more to do with EPA. Environment Canada simply followed their lead. In order to reduce sulfur from 500 ppm to 15 ppm(engine makers actually wanted 0) you need hydrogen, and that’s what broken down at Suncor, was their hydrogen plant. If this had been a few years ago, it wouldn’t have been a problem. The industry (in Canada at least) has been using ULSD since 3rd quarter 2006.
In the states, stations are still allowed to sell some LSD(low sulphur, 500 ppm) so they’re not as vulnerable.
Also, ULSD (15 ppm sulphur) has less energy content, is more expensive, and some say is more vulnerable to “gelling” in winter.
So while it is true the production of ULSD is more sensitive, there should be safeguards against this type of problem.
What happens is every fall(and spring) the refineries start switching diesel blends. During this switch, they all do maintenance around the same time. Makes sense, why do it in the middle of a season, when you can do it when you need to shut down anyways? Unfortunately during this time, the supply chain is extremely sensitive.
Also, coupled with heating fuel demand(similar to our winter blend) down south, we usually see a spike in diesel prices around this time. Especially across the line.
Also, I have to add….
ULSD is required, absolutely 100% required in 2008 model engines, those equipped with DPF’s(diesel particulate filters). You cannot run LSD in these engines.
Thanks Allan, in the pdf it mentions that Environment Canada was aligning with EPA standards.
Allan
What are the consequences of lower energy content in ULSD? I have heard stories of fuel consumption increases of up to 20% over LSD. Is this correct?
Syncro
synchro:
I haven’t heard of econmy losses as bad as that but there is some. More significant and somewhat related to ulsd is thatcthe new engines do not handle deep demand for power underload as the old engines do. I have head that this has been largely dealt with however.
What is another significant part of the problem is hoarding of supply in anticipation of the opening of the ice roads to supply the rush of tankertrucks hauling a years worth of diesel supply to those mining sites in the space of a few months. The number of sites is growing and this so is demand.
This is only personal observation, but diesel powered pickup trucks are quickly losing their appeal. The fuel economy is getting worse in every new model. The price of diesel is harder to predict, and the complexity of the new engines makes them less reliable than past models. I think the big three will respond with a new, smaller diesel engine. I won’t be buying another diesel pickup in their current configuration.
Diesel might return to it’s rightful status as an industrial fuel. That would make it easier to regulate, and maybe truckers could get a break.
dp:
all of the full-size p-up makers will have 1/2 ton models available with diesel within 2 months. I expect they will be very popular in the west where high mileage use make the economics of diesel power very compelling.
I run a Cummins in my yr 2000 pickup.
How will ULSD affect the performance/general well being of an engine designed when higher sulphur content was the norm? Should one seek an aftermkt additive to counter this?
Would hate to have to buy a new truck…only use this one a few months a year.
Fuel mileage, may be a result of a problem already within the engine. Weak injectors may be more apparent with the less lubricious ULSD.
I have a 99 volvo rig, very good fuel mileage. Didn’t notice a drop with ULSD, and I keep a close eye. I’ll try to keep this truck for another 10 years, its cost is so low compared to many other trucks out there, especially the new ones. More reliable, and parts are cheaper.
Simon, you should not have to run an additive. You should be fine.
Gord
I’ve been quizzing all the dealers, and not one of them will admit to any plans for a small diesel. I suppose they need to move their existing stock. If the new diesels have a ridiculous sticker price, they’ll still have trouble selling them. I’m more interested in proposed small, turbocharged, gas engines.
Simon
I can’t imagine they’d make millions of trucks obsolete overnight. Or would they? I seem to remember unleaded fuel forcing millions of people to either re-build their engines, or buy additives.
Both Dodge and GM have small V8 turbo-diesels due for introduction in the 1500 models. As for “dealers” not knowing what’s coming down the pipe, I suspect that’s from talking with sales staff who don’t generally pay much attention to the automobile industry in general. (I spent 4 years selling cars, and most of my co-workers were woefully ignorant of upcoming products that I was well aware of from reading magazines such as Car & Driver, etc.) One of the driving forces behind lower fuel economy and reliability behind today’s diesel pick-ups is the horsepower race going on. Unlike a gas engine that can see dramatic gains in power and economy from changes in cam, ignition, and injector timing, as well as variations in intake port size and shape that can now be adjusted during engine operation to reflect horsepower and torque needs, a diesel is far more limited. Valve events have a smaller window of variability, and the air intake is always wide open. Power gains are almost solely limited to more fuel and more boost, which largely means “turn up the wick until she blows up, and then back it off a quarter-turn.” With six liter diesels making 350 hp and some 600 lbs/ft of torque, you’re not exactly going to make ’em parsimonious with the dino juice.
come on you turkeys, banks run a damn ulsd on the flats, set a land speed record with the beast cuz it had gobs of power, good rpm, and could pass california emissions
it’s this ignorance of what a diesel is that keeps people from buying them
you can take a second generation cumming 5.9 and chip it for 400hp/600fpds torque, all the while increasing your load/towing mileage and losing marginally on no load mileage, which you can compensate for with a parallel computer in the sucker (that’s one were you can change the parameters with a flip of the switch you mounted on your dash)
BTW, there are also efforts on foot to develop a non throttled gas engine, there by increasing it’s mileage by reducing “internal” loses
Audi already has a gas engine like that.
One of my employees has a “chipped” Dodge diesel, and another had a chipped Chevy. Both admitted their fuel economy didn’t improve, but they could walk over a lot of sports cars from light to light. I drive a stock Ford diesel, and see no need for more power. I’ve had five Ford diesels and one Chev diesel. They had a great idea, but as Bill said, the horsepower war steered development in the wrong direction.
I agree it won’t be long before a new family of engines will appear.
For all my claims of never buying another diesel, my lifestyle will likely force me to keep one around. You just can’t pull a trailer with a gas engine truck.
I have been driving Dodge diesil sice 97. Used to make 780km to 850km per tank depending on idiling time. Since 2006 my km average per tank is 650 to 680km. The last year I have tried driving at different speeds. This is when they started to lower sulfur content. Have noticed power loss on both trucks.
Here’s some pretty-good low-down on the Dodge diesel – the first one to market probably in the spiffy-new model line – the v-8 gets 30mpg hwy and puts out 325 hp and 500 ftlbs according to the site – the perfect rig for towing lighter fifth wheels and bumper-hitch trailers (10000 plus lbs?) on occasion and still have the roadability of a half ton vs. 3/4 when you are not towing.
http://www.dieselbombers.com/latest-automotive-news-future-diesels-automotives/11841-dodge-1500-diesel-ram-diesel-durango-diesel-dakota.html
there is only one appropriate response to this.
Bwahhahahahahahhaahahaa
Bwhahhahahhhhaaaaahh
My how times have changed…Henry Ford and Rudolph Diesel invented their products before we were hooked on Oil .
Rudolph’s concept was based on his Farm experience to not rely on gasoline in the remote area he lived , so the High-Compression (17:1) idea allowed him to use vegetable/plant-Oils to run the motor while a high-heat Glow-plug ignited the first cycle to get the Diesel engine up and running so the combustion chamber can heat up to self-sustain the intake/exhaust cycle.
To stop the Diesel he merely cut off the fuel pump power or stopped the vegetable-oil flowing to the supply noozles.
FORD’s idea came from the same problem by using a vehicle that moved from remote areas to other remote areas that were void of gasoline , but in his case he remembered the Steam-Engine Cars and Trains that died a sudden death when a water-born illness caused a panic and fear for using the railway Water Towers that were only viable by the Publics use of them to subsidize the costs .
Railway Trains started to cost more as rail line services shut down as well, this because the Water Towers stopped being filled while the Engines had a limit to the distance travelled on a full tank of water from the last Depot fill-up.
Henry Ford had originally designed his cars to be a Flex-Fuel Model-T that could run on water , in fact if you look at one in a Museum there is a small lever with a groove-plate to adjust the Engine Timming while driving so the water mixture expands at the right point for maximum torque to drive the next exhaust cycle to start the nex intake cycle.
But Hughes Industries had not invented the Diamond-Head mining drill yet to bore through rock and find massive Oil deposits so the price of Gasoline was still a Rich mans world up to the mid 1930’s .
In the mean-time , small Oil-Wells popped up everywhere and the Oil-magnets were born once they pushed the Gasoline-agenda and fronted the gas-Stations across the Nation to lure buyers to the Automobles that slowly lost the Flex-Fuel systems because of the Water Towers ending the reign for the Steam-engine cars.
So today we have Oil-Monkey on out back alone with the Union-Monkeys that use the Government
to rob you at work right from your pay-Check which makes it legal and better than a B&E at your home.
Why even Felix Wenkel created his 3-piece Rotary engine back around 1928 , but the Auto Industry didn’t make money on a long-lasting car that didn’t need new parts and high priced labour repairs at dealerships since most Auto-makers also owned the Companies that built the parts for their assembly lines.
Don’t be fooled by the TTC Union that now rejects the Hybred Buses as defectives and too much money , they don’t want the Diesel-Mechanic jobs to be lost just like they want to keep the Energy-eating Monster streetcars so the track-replacements and Streetcar repairs secure future jobs at any cost because the Public is paying for them.
It’s so ironic that the GREEN-Leftists at City Hall claim that we CAN’T afford NOT to pay more to save the Earth and yet when the Unions fear the Job-loses by going GREEN the TTC NOW cares about the Taxpayers because GREEN-Buses to too expensive to run.
Toronto already uses close to 85% of the $8 billion dollar budget to pay for salaries & Benefits to employees which only leave less than .20 cents from each of a tax-bill dollar to
actually get a tangible service before any User-Fees that are now becoming common just to support the Inverted-Pyramid Ponzi scheme run by Toronto that has doubled the Budget deficit for every year Miller was in power.
not that I’m an automotive nut but wasn’t there at one time to push diesel as an alternative engine for consumer cars? I remember it was a lot cheaper than gas too. While the high torque power from diesels was great to pull a semi or locomotive, the Germans seemed to produce many diesels that only seemed to make a cloud of soot as they roared off.
For good debates on diesels vs gas, especially in the RV world, rv.net is a good one.
Or any of the various forums for the North American trucks.
I wouldn’t mind a diesel truck myself, but costs outweigh the benefits, considering we are only summer campers.
This is more or less watching a repeat of the year 1977 for gas prices, after the fake shortage. Again those who had invested in alternatives lost their shirts. That was when propane was the BIG answer.
Revnant dream:
I have a 1980 propane only F-150 with a 351 windsor block bored out to something in the area of 400 cu in. Starts and runs fine except when the temp gets below -30C. It has a 400+ litre tank – big enough to take out a whole city block if it ever went up.
The big impediment to propane seeing urban use however is that since it is heavier than air vehicles that use it are banned from subterrainean parking garages as were they to leak whilst parked, the gas would accumulate at the lowest level and pose a huge explosion threat.
Thankfully, NG is lighter than air and could someday see widespread use. It will work better at low temps too.
Kate:
ULSD will do a lot to reduce air pollution once the diesel fleet moves to a more widespread changeover to the new ULSD-ready systems. Just as no-lead gas had lots of teething problems when it was first introduced in the 70s, so too is ULSD having some prblems today. And just as no-lead fuel had huge benefits air quality-wise, so to does ULSD.
Supply issues of late are due to a combination of woes happening at the same time. And in time they will be overcome.
And Roger, we have been “addicted to /hooked-on” oil for thousands of years. We used whale oil until we practically drove them to extinction and before that we used tallow and other animal and vegetable fats to provide light. Coal-gas was very difficult to transport and thus was confined to highly urbanized areas close to the coal fields
It was the discovery of drilling down into oil-rich zones that brought in the Drake well in PA that made fossil oil available for refining into lamp oil that was far better quality than all but the finest whale oil for a thousandth (or less) of the cost. The immediate benefit was that much of the world living at higher latitudes saw their productivity jump during the long nights of winter. Due to the magnificent coincidence of the industrial age and the invention of internal combustion engine happening just shortly after oil had become plentiful to the point where it was cheaper than water, highly portable gasoline and diesel made perfect partners to the new highly portable power source and thus they fueled the transportation boom.
For a fanastic and highly readable history of Oil I would highly recommend Daniel Yergin’s pulitzer prize-winning “the Prize”.
Some of us have seen this engine before—in a version of the E-Class mid-sized sedan offered for lease in California. Yes, despite the Golden State’s otherwise laid-back attitude, it’s notoriously picky when it comes to emissions. So Bluetec’s claim to be the world’s cleanest production diesel engine is pretty much on the money. How so? It starts off with clean fuel (low-sulfur diesel in this case) pumped into a common rail setup, then injected into an all-aluminum, turbocharged and intercooled 3.2-liter V6 engine. Technology has come far enough to enable a high degree of efficiency at every stage of compression and combustion. But it’s when those spent gases leave the chamber that Bluetec really comes into its own.
The catalytic converter does what it usually does, dealing with carbon monoxide and unburned hydrocarbons. Then a particulate filter captures microscopic, barely measurable pieces of soot. The final step is the AdBlue system. AdBlue is a euphemism for urea, which is more or less what it sounds like. Ammonia is the key ingredient, sprayed into the exhaust gases as they pass though an SCR (selective catalytic reduction) unit. This arrangement tackles nitrogen oxides, the one exhaust component that’s higher for diesels than for gasoline-powered engines. Eighty percent is converted into harmless nitrogen and water. Emissions are low enough for Bluetec-equipped cars to qualify for the same federal income tax credits as hybrids (these expire at the end of 2010, but, with another possible leap of faith, Mercedes hopes they’ll be extended). Anyone thinking long-term right now can rest assured: The urea tank needs replenishing every 10,000 miles or so and can be done during a routine service. The cost of the liquid is fairly cheap, but Mercedes has no exact figures at the moment.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/automotive_news/4271587.html
“The problem has forced some truckers to ration …. and that could have an impact on ………the flow of food to grocery stores”
Yes, we have no bananas. In fact we have lost our bananas.
Is there a real health or environmental concern that necessitates these fuels?
Or is it like the do good city councils than have banned the used of lawn herbicides with no justification except to allow themselves join the Garter of Green Knights of Gaia?
There is a new type of diesel fuel that was produced by a group of genetic engineers, featured in the November 2008 issue of Popular Mechnaics sorry, no link). The feedstock is a genetically engineered yeast and some other ingredients for the yeast to feed on, and the results are a pure diesel fuel that burns cleanly.
Found a link:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/research/4270240.html