source:
http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=5480&sid=175&n=156
California court battles are keeping the semi-green machines out of many new vehicles.
by TCC Team 11/4/2002
Related Articles:
2003 Ford F-350 Power Stroke by John Pearley Huffman (11/4/2002)
Backers of the new light-diesel technology got some good news and bad news recently. The good news was that the cars powered by diesel engines showed up at the top of the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) list of fuel-efficient vehicles, proving again the diesel’s superior fuel efficiency.
The effort to bring new light-diesel engines into the U.S. motoring mainstream, though, suffered a nearly simultaneous, and serious, setback. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a lower court ruling in a case involving engine makers and the South Coast Air Quality Management District, which sets air quality standards in Southern California. A three-judge panel ruled that SCAQMD had the right to impose air-quality rules that could bar diesel engines in Southern California.
Jed Mandel, the general counsel for the Engine Manufacturers Association, said the EMA was disappointed in the court's decision. The plaintiffs now have the option of asking for a review by all the judges of Ninth Circuit, a cumbersome procedure, to review the decision or appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court and hope the court agrees to accept the case.
“This is not a debate about clean air in Los Angeles,” said Mandel. "The clean diesel technology banned by the fleet rules can be as clean or cleaner than those limited number of options that are allowed," added Mandel, who noted the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has indicated recently that the clean diesel technology could help limit the emissions of greenhouse gases.
Clean diesels
Vehicles equipped with clean diesels go further on less fuel and thus emit less “greenhouse” gas, which has been linked by some scientists and environmental activists to global warming. The real issue is whether a local air district or government can arbitrarily select a preferred vehicle technology and force the public into vehicles, even though both the U.S. EPA and CARB have certified that other vehicles meet all stringent air pollution control requirements, Mandel said.
The auto industry has long battled against such local pre-emption. "Clearly, allowing each locality across the country to establish its own separate emissions and purchasing requirements would create a chaotic and inefficient patchwork of multiple standards that would force the nation's engine and vehicle manufacturers into an impossible situation,” he added. “Manufacturers simply cannot cost-effectively create an infinite variety of engines to meet the whim of every locality across the country. This is exactly what Congress intended the Clean Air Act to prevent, and the fleet rules are directly contrary to the intent of Congress to establish uniform mobile source standards to help clean the air," Mandel said in a statement issued after the appeals court issued its ruling.
The air quality district, however, traditionally has had a great deal of leeway and it tended to focus on the health hazards associated with diesel emissions. Regulators in the U.S. have taken a much harder line on the potential the health hazards of the particulates found in diesel emissions than regulators in Europe, where light-diesel engines are found in 40 percent of the new cars sold in the past couple of years.
Tough time in California
The ruling also underscores the difficulty carmakers face in challenging California's tough environmental regulations in court. The Ninth Circuit, which covers the state up and down the West Coast, has long been sympathetic to environmentalists and its orientation is not expected to change any time soon.
The ruling also adds to the uncertainty now hovering around diesel technology. The uncertainty has already slowed the development of new diesel engines for American consumers and prompted European automakers such as BMW to shelve plans for bringing new diesel technology to the United States. The uncertainty also has stunted investment in the new technology. Navistar, the truck and diesel engine maker that works closely with the Ford Motor Co., quietly announced last week it was writing off part of its investment for a V-6 diesel that would have been used in vehicles such as the new Ford F-150 pickup truck.
Ford and Navistar had signed and extended an agreement that called for Navistar to supply V-6 diesel engines for F-150 pickup trucks, Econoline 150 vans, Ford Expeditions and Lincoln Navigators.
"In fiscal 2000, the company and Ford finalized a contract for the supply of these engines commencing with model year 2002 and extending through 2012. The contract provides that the company is Ford's exclusive source, and the company would sell these engines only to Ford for these vehicles. To support the program, the company constructed an engine assembly plant in Huntsville, Ala., and developed a V-6 diesel engine. Introduction of these engines was delayed beyond model year 2002," Navistar's announcement noted.
"Ford has advised the company that their current business case for these vehicles is not viable. Although Ford is continuing to study this issue, the timing of the commencement of the program is no longer reasonably predictable," Navistar's statement concluded.
http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=5480&sid=175&n=156
California court battles are keeping the semi-green machines out of many new vehicles.
by TCC Team 11/4/2002
Related Articles:
2003 Ford F-350 Power Stroke by John Pearley Huffman (11/4/2002)
Backers of the new light-diesel technology got some good news and bad news recently. The good news was that the cars powered by diesel engines showed up at the top of the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) list of fuel-efficient vehicles, proving again the diesel’s superior fuel efficiency.
The effort to bring new light-diesel engines into the U.S. motoring mainstream, though, suffered a nearly simultaneous, and serious, setback. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a lower court ruling in a case involving engine makers and the South Coast Air Quality Management District, which sets air quality standards in Southern California. A three-judge panel ruled that SCAQMD had the right to impose air-quality rules that could bar diesel engines in Southern California.
Jed Mandel, the general counsel for the Engine Manufacturers Association, said the EMA was disappointed in the court's decision. The plaintiffs now have the option of asking for a review by all the judges of Ninth Circuit, a cumbersome procedure, to review the decision or appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court and hope the court agrees to accept the case.
“This is not a debate about clean air in Los Angeles,” said Mandel. "The clean diesel technology banned by the fleet rules can be as clean or cleaner than those limited number of options that are allowed," added Mandel, who noted the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has indicated recently that the clean diesel technology could help limit the emissions of greenhouse gases.
Clean diesels
Vehicles equipped with clean diesels go further on less fuel and thus emit less “greenhouse” gas, which has been linked by some scientists and environmental activists to global warming. The real issue is whether a local air district or government can arbitrarily select a preferred vehicle technology and force the public into vehicles, even though both the U.S. EPA and CARB have certified that other vehicles meet all stringent air pollution control requirements, Mandel said.
The auto industry has long battled against such local pre-emption. "Clearly, allowing each locality across the country to establish its own separate emissions and purchasing requirements would create a chaotic and inefficient patchwork of multiple standards that would force the nation's engine and vehicle manufacturers into an impossible situation,” he added. “Manufacturers simply cannot cost-effectively create an infinite variety of engines to meet the whim of every locality across the country. This is exactly what Congress intended the Clean Air Act to prevent, and the fleet rules are directly contrary to the intent of Congress to establish uniform mobile source standards to help clean the air," Mandel said in a statement issued after the appeals court issued its ruling.
The air quality district, however, traditionally has had a great deal of leeway and it tended to focus on the health hazards associated with diesel emissions. Regulators in the U.S. have taken a much harder line on the potential the health hazards of the particulates found in diesel emissions than regulators in Europe, where light-diesel engines are found in 40 percent of the new cars sold in the past couple of years.
Tough time in California
The ruling also underscores the difficulty carmakers face in challenging California's tough environmental regulations in court. The Ninth Circuit, which covers the state up and down the West Coast, has long been sympathetic to environmentalists and its orientation is not expected to change any time soon.
The ruling also adds to the uncertainty now hovering around diesel technology. The uncertainty has already slowed the development of new diesel engines for American consumers and prompted European automakers such as BMW to shelve plans for bringing new diesel technology to the United States. The uncertainty also has stunted investment in the new technology. Navistar, the truck and diesel engine maker that works closely with the Ford Motor Co., quietly announced last week it was writing off part of its investment for a V-6 diesel that would have been used in vehicles such as the new Ford F-150 pickup truck.
Ford and Navistar had signed and extended an agreement that called for Navistar to supply V-6 diesel engines for F-150 pickup trucks, Econoline 150 vans, Ford Expeditions and Lincoln Navigators.
"In fiscal 2000, the company and Ford finalized a contract for the supply of these engines commencing with model year 2002 and extending through 2012. The contract provides that the company is Ford's exclusive source, and the company would sell these engines only to Ford for these vehicles. To support the program, the company constructed an engine assembly plant in Huntsville, Ala., and developed a V-6 diesel engine. Introduction of these engines was delayed beyond model year 2002," Navistar's announcement noted.
"Ford has advised the company that their current business case for these vehicles is not viable. Although Ford is continuing to study this issue, the timing of the commencement of the program is no longer reasonably predictable," Navistar's statement concluded.