Maybe, Maybe not? Admittedly, This is vehicle related; but have we not experienced from time to time, how CARB has not reared its head in discussions about problems with various diesel locomotives? Not to mention how California operations have implemented 'new' conforming 'types' of power to show how concerned they were about diesel locomotive emissions? Here is a C&P from an article concerning 'nonconforming' diesel trucks and automobiles operating in California.
FTA:"...The final rule in a set of regulations adopted 15 years ago takes effect this week, banning some 70,000 big rigs from California roads. A set of clean air regulations implemented by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) in 2008, and later signed into law as Senate Bill 1, states that any diesel vehicles weighing over 14,000 pounds and built before 2010 are banned from operating on California roads as of Jan. 1, 2023.
"Diesel exhaust is responsible for 70% of the cancer risk from airborne toxics," CARB states on its site. "Therefore, by January 1, 2023, nearly all trucks and buses will be required to have 2010 or newer model year engines to reduce particulate matter (PM) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx)emissions.."
Seems their focus is now aimed at the 'automotive side' of operations(operators?). How long before the railroads, and their 'power' are in C.A.R.B.'s sights ?
Hope, for a discussion, here.
The quote was from an on-line pub(?) SF GATE see Linked [paywalled(?)] @ https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sfgate.com%2Fpolitics%2Farticle%2Fcalifornia-ban-on-70000-vehicles-17694178.php
"California's ban on around 70,000 vehicles takes effect this week"Andrew Chamings, SFGATEJan. 4, 2023Updated: Jan. 4, 2023 2:38 p.m.
Think of it as democracy in action.
It will be interesting to see who attempts to overturn this law as unconstitutional restraint of interstate commerce. It obviously ignores actual pollution levels or whether operators of older trucks might cost-effectively meet CARB emission standards with older engines.
My personal opinion is that 'people deserve the democracy they elect' and, if California wants extra shipping cost or truck-line embargoes, they better not start trying to trot out the old common-carrier obligation line... truckers could simply standardize fleets on pre-2010 engines and parts and point out they are legally barred from running into California.
Just adding more fuel to the fire.
https://travelness.com/why-are-people-leaving-california
OvermodMy personal opinion is that 'people deserve the democracy they elect'
You, me, and H.L. Mencken.
Flintlock76 Overmod My personal opinion is that 'people deserve the democracy they elect' You, me, and H.L. Mencken.
Overmod My personal opinion is that 'people deserve the democracy they elect'
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.
samfp1943 Maybe, Maybe not? Admittedly, This is vehicle related; but have we not experienced from time to time, how CARB has not reared its head in discussions about problems with various diesel locomotives? Not to mention how California operations have implemented 'new' conforming 'types' of power to show how concerned they were about diesel locomotive emissions? Here is a C&P from an article concerning 'nonconforming' diesel trucks and automobiles operating in California. FTA:"...The final rule in a set of regulations adopted 15 years ago takes effect this week, banning some 70,000 big rigs from California roads. A set of clean air regulations implemented by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) in 2008, and later signed into law as Senate Bill 1, states that any diesel vehicles weighing over 14,000 pounds and built before 2010 are banned from operating on California roads as of Jan. 1, 2023. "Diesel exhaust is responsible for 70% of the cancer risk from airborne toxics," CARB states on its site. "Therefore, by January 1, 2023, nearly all trucks and buses will be required to have 2010 or newer model year engines to reduce particulate matter (PM) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx)emissions.." Seems their focus is now aimed at the 'automotive side' of operations(operators?). How long before the railroads, and their 'power' are in C.A.R.B.'s sights ? Hope, for a discussion, here. The quote was from an on-line pub(?) SF GATE see Linked [paywalled(?)] @ https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sfgate.com%2Fpolitics%2Farticle%2Fcalifornia-ban-on-70000-vehicles-17694178.php "California's ban on around 70,000 vehicles takes effect this week"Andrew Chamings, SFGATEJan. 4, 2023Updated: Jan. 4, 2023 2:38 p.m.
California can price itself out of the market..... However don't come begging the Feds for subsidy to keep them afloat.... Along these lines Tier V for DEL's is coming soon.. Thanks to input from California. Not sure how we are letting one state determine national emission policy...
SD60MAC9500Along these lines Tier V for DEL's is coming soon..
The other shoe in California is likely to be regulation of nanoparticulates (the PM below 2.5 micrometers). In this they'd actually be justified on public-safety grounds, in my opinion. Unfortunately I expect them to think they'll solve this with DPFs that have to be periodically replaced or regenerated, and filters that could trap even 2.5 particles reliably would be almost too large to fit on a truck even at current exhaust mass-flow rates. Whether this proves to be a stalking horse for the coming electric-truck fiasco will remain to be seen.
I wonder how the state of Calif plans to regulate nano-particles from wildfires? Along those lines, there hasn't been a lot of discussion as to the other sources of nanoparticles, e.g. direct injection gasoline engines, tire dust, cooking, etc...
With recent developments in gast turbines and batteries, maybe the low PM2.5 solution is a hybrid CNG turbine and battery. The goal is to have the gas turbine run at full throttle or shut down, using the battery for power during shutdown. The battery size would be an economic trade-off between the cost of the battery and the cost of cycling the gas turbine.
I suspect the solution for GDI engines will be some combination of increased CR/VCR and restriction on speed changes under load or high developed rpm. The problem is incomplete combustion in highly nucleated carbureted fuel when combustion time or available oxygen at the nucleate site is not available. An apparent issue with diesel exhaust is that the nanoparticles have dangerous biological potential, similar in some ways to asbestos; I don't know offhand if fine smoke from cooking poses the same danger. If you have studies of the composition of tire dust, particularly from tires with ceramic particles to increase tread life, let me know.
Small ceramic gas turbines as range extenders have considerable promise (I'm not violating a NDA by discussing them). The turbine requires a turning gear when not actively under power, and the compressor would be both spooled up and regeneratively braked electrically, a bit like a large EDF; where it gets interesting is if the compressor can be driven both off the turbine and an electric motor, so that the turbine is better at load-following.
It seems that people are abandoning California in droves. Perhaps the problem will be self-correcting?
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.