chrismc wrote:
The original article and this thread are both inaccurate and inflammatory. Blaming the government and academic research institutions for this issue is simply political grandstanding. There is a very solid body of research showing that diesel particulates are known carcinogens [1], and the EPA only mandates maximum exhaust particulate levels. The EPA has nothing to do with the specific DPF systems that manufacturers have developed, except to verify that they meet the particulate exhaust levels.
Developed nations around the world have instituted maximum exhaust particulate levels similar to the EPA's (some are more strict). If you have ever spent much time somewhere that does not have particulate control measures in place, you will certainly appreciate them back at home. Many South American and Asian cities are great examples of why we have the standards here. In addition to the visible filth of the air (a white shirt will turn a shade of brown within one day outside), these place have MUCH higher than levels of respiratory illness [2][3], allergies, asthma, emphysema, and lung cancer than we have here.
As I mentioned, it is left up to the manufacturers as to how they choose to meet the particulate standards. There are many different types of DPF's and different regeneration mechanisms. Not all of them require a "timeout" during the regen process. In addition, there are even single-use (disposable) DPF's for use in applications where regeneration is simply not possible (hazardous atmosphere like mines). The blame placed on the government in the original article is a load of hogwash. The blame should be put squarely on the truck manufacturers and apparatus implementers for choosing a poor DPF design for a mission-critical application. There should also be a dose of blame on the purchasers (F.D's) of this equipment for not doing their due diligence in researching the DPF issue prior to buying the trucks. For them to complain now that its the government's fault is incredibly disingenuous. I think the article is nothing more than some people whining about their buyer's remorse.
[1]
http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/eleven ... 69dies.pdf[2]
http://www.bvsde.paho.org/bvsea/fulltext/ilabaca.pdf[3]
http://erj.ersjournals.com/content/17/4/733.fullWish I could find the link that tells where all the barrels left over LSD (Not Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel) are stashed for the creative souls to keep their inspiration in Academia, EPA, & CARB.
But why should I complain, my employer will make gobs of Money off all the new Waste Water Nutrient removal requirements in the next five years. Heck, I should encourage the Acid Head Hippies to keep popping their Sugar Cubes, even in their coffee.
As far as putting the Blame onto the Municipalities who buy the EMS Trucks, they are required by law to take bids and since the City Engineers (who check the bid specifications) are Civil Engineers and not Automotive Engineers, the truck specifications are left up to the Sales People and Maintenance department (who are not Automotive Engineers either). Common sense which is never part of Government Operation, would be to have a warning light come on, let the truck finish the emergency, and due the regen after the emergency. Again, the Lawyers write the laws and they listen to the Acid Head Hippies who could not get a job any where else.
BTW: If tree huggers would hug an Osage Orange Tree, they would ban them.
All kidding and ribbing aside, why do I care? I have a conscience.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
