backtop


Print 64 comment(s) - last by EricMartello.. on Mar 12 at 6:24 PM

The goal is to help automakers meet new emissions standards, increase vehicle performance and improve public health

Gasoline is about to get a whole lot cleaner as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) looks to reduce the amount of sulfur in fuel with a new regulation. 
 
According to the EPA, it's finalizing new rules that will cut the amount of sulfur in gasoline by two-thirds starting in 2017. The goal is to help automakers meet new emissions standards, increase vehicle performance and improve public health.
 
A vehicle's catalytic converter primarily controls emissions, but over time, sulfur in fuel can disable auto technologies that work to eliminate emissions. 
 
Sulfur took a massive hit in 2000 when the EPA required the amount be lowered from an average of 300 ppm (parts per million) to 30 ppm. When these new rules are finalized, that number will drop further to 10ppm nationwide by 2017. 
 
The EPA estimates an 80 percent reduction in emissions for cars and trucks from today’s fleet average, and a 60 percent reduction for heavy-duty vehicles.


[SOURCE: Automobile Magazine]

"These standards are a win for public health, a win for our environment, and a win for our pocketbooks," said EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy. "By working with the auto industry, health groups, and other stakeholders, we're continuing to build on the Obama Administration's broader clean fuels and vehicles efforts that cut carbon pollution, clean the air we breathe, and save families money at the pump."
 
Automakers like the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers -- a trade group representing Detroit’s Big Three automakers, Toyota Motor Corp., Volkswagen AG and others -- have welcomed the rules because it lowers the cost of technologies needed to improve fuel economy and meet emissions standards. The auto industry will spend about $200 billion to double the efficiency of the fleet by 2025 to 54.5 MPG.
 
The program is estimated to cost less than a penny per gallon of gasoline, and about $72 per vehicle. The annual cost of the overall program in 2030 is estimated to be about $1.5 billion. 
 
Putting these new rules in place would also improve public health. According to the EPA, the rules will annually prevent up to 30,000 cases of respiratory ailments in children; 2,200 hospital admissions and asthma-related emergency room visits; 2,000 premature deaths, and 1.4 million lost school days and work days. 
 
Total health-related benefits in 2030 are estimated to be between $8 billion and $23 billion annually.

Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency





Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
By Reclaimer77 on 3/5/2014 8:20:23 AM , Rating: 1
If I'm anti-science you're anti-critical thinking!

You just blindly accept anything the Government does. Not once have I seen you be against, or even question, a Government plan or action. No matter how half-baked or Unconstitutional or wrong. Hell I bet deep down you think the NSA is just a-okay.

Here you are again blindly following your Federal masters without question. And flaming down anyone who questions them.


RE: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
By Mint on 3/6/2014 3:16:26 AM , Rating: 2
I've publicly expressed my dismay with gov't funded wind and solar power on DT and elsewhere. I think defense spending is ludicrously high.

I've been against the Patriot Act's section 215 (the part enabling the NSA's activities) since the beginning, but what am I going to do? Society is a flock of gutless sheep that is pathetically scared of the tiniest chance of terrorism. The best I can hope for is that the NSA doesn't let anyone access this data, like we see from corporations repeatedly.

There was a bill to end bulk collection in 2008:
https://www.google.com/search?q=bulk+collection+fe...
Did you give any of those senators hell for voting it down? Or praise those that supported it?

It's a complete joke that you accuse me of "anti-critical thinking". You blindly cheer completely bunk attempts at science if they support your views:
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=29884...
You haven't had a critical thought in your life.


RE: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
By Reclaimer77 on 3/6/2014 7:34:15 AM , Rating: 2
Mint I hate to shatter your world, but you are NOT a scientist. You are NOT Daily Techs arbiter of science, or science consultant.

Is there a peer reviewed paper of yours somewhere I can read? Oh there isn't? Then kindly shut the F up :)

quote:
You blindly cheer completely bunk attempts at science if they support your views:


Yup I did :) Hell I barely even read his post. It just went against the prevailing Liberal suckfest I'm apposed to, so I supported it. Proudly.

Besides, it was just one post you keep bringing up like a sick obsessed person. Do you have that bookmarked or something? Get a life! Your ENTIRE post history is you being a biased green party apologist and Musk PR spokesman. Not to mention Obama's nut huger.

Also TSS is a good guy and his heart is in the right place. You and your ilk? Go play in front of a bus.

Besides, who's to say he was wrong? You? Again, you aren't the arbiter of all science on Daily Tech.

So look, you keep carrying the water for the Obama Administration on every pie in the sky nonsense "green" idea, and I'll just keep fighting you on it. And all will be right with the universe.


RE: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
By Mint on 3/7/2014 1:41:22 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Is there a peer reviewed paper of yours somewhere I can read?

Yes there is, and DT even happened to write an article about it:
http://www.dailytech.com/Cranking+it+up+to+11+Prov...

quote:
Yup I did :) Hell I barely even read his post. It just went against the prevailing Liberal suckfest I'm apposed to, so I supported it. Proudly.

Reclaimer in a self described, anti-critical-thought nutshell. I rest my case.


"Can anyone tell me what MobileMe is supposed to do?... So why the f*** doesn't it do that?" -- Steve Jobs










botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki