EPA Hits Two More Diesel Tuners With $10 Million Fine For Defeat Devices

[Lightflyer1]

Two Michigan-based diesel tuning companies have just been hit with $10 million worth of civil penalties for their role in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of diesel emissions defeat devices.

According to a report from The Oakland Press, Diesel Ops LLC and Orion Diesel LLC were found to be in violation of the Clean Air Act for their involvement with said diesel emissions defeat devices on August 29th, related to violations first discovered in December 2021.

EPA Hits Two More Diesel Tuners With $10 Million Fine For Defeat Devices

The EPA's crackdown on diesel emissions defeat devices has come to Michigan.

www.roadandtrack.com

 

[norbert77]

Its covid science math at the EPA

 

[turbobrick240]

This is NOT a political forum. Go cry about it on 4chan.

 

[x1800MODMY360x]

The thing I don't understand is the CR TDI is a cleaner burning than the old predecessor, yet with the EPA stringent regulations makes them use the EGR, DPF, and if applicable SCR. Those items make the car last not as long and also use more fuel for regen? Also threaten people if DEF shortages happens and can not start a car if it runs out.

In my area I see so many old semi vs new ones because of the stupid EPA.

 

[Steve Addy]

The thing I don't understand is the CR TDI is a cleaner burning than the old predecessor, yet with the EPA stringent regulations makes them use the EGR, DPF, and if applicable SCR. Those items make the car last not as long and also use more fuel for regen? Also threaten people if DEF shortages happens and can not start a car if it runs out.

In my area I see so many old semi vs new ones because of the stupid EPA.

That's actually happening everywhere, old semi tractors are being pulled out and fully refurbished because of the stringent EPA regulations. You will get a lot more miles (economical miles) from a fully overhauled older unit that isn't burdened with DPF's and costly DEF. It also won't shut down on you mid-trip if there's a failure in the emissions equipment.

Steve

 

[JELLOWSUBMARINE]

This is NOT a political forum. Go cry about it on 4chan.

E.Z. there greenpeace. All part of a diesel owners conversation.

 

[ticaf]

Lots of truck drivers have been burned by the cost of maintaining their emissions system (cost but also TIME to fix the truck). No wonders they are looking at alternatives.
I rather them have some kind of reasonable emission system meeting reasonable emissions limit, than cheating against absurd emissions policies.

 

[turbobrick240]

E.Z. there greenpeace. All part of a diesel owners conversation.

Don't be so emotional. This simply isn't an appropriate venue for political conspiracy theories. As far resurrecting older diesel semi tractors goes, I expect that is losing appeal as diesel prices hang in the $5+/gal range. The higher maintenance costs of the newer tractors is probably much more than offset by their better aerodynamics and fuel efficiency.

What is the Average MPG for a Semi-Truck? | AtoB

Wondering what is the average MPG for a semi-truck? Read on to find out what you need to know about semi-truck fuel efficiency.

www.atob.com

Reaching Class 8 truck peak fuel efficiency

With the right maintenance strategy emphasizing fuel efficiency, a fleet can have it all: better fuel economy, more uptime, and lower maintenance costs.

www.fleetowner.com

 

[1854sailor]

Let's keep this thread on topic. I'm deleting the political comments...

 

[Abacus]

I expect that is losing appeal as diesel prices hang in the $5+/gal range. The higher maintenance costs of the newer tractors is probably much more than offset by their better aerodynamics and fuel efficiency.

Not from the drivers I’ve spoken with. Their owners are overhauling or replacing older rigs with new motors specifically because it’s more economical due to the emissions and interlocks of the new ones. Granted, that will only last so long, but it’s obviously worth it to avoid the new technology for the time being.

 

[Danger Bay]

Has anyone ever seen comparison between delete mileage improvement and increase in pollution factors?

 

[jmodge]

I've wondered if there is a big overall difference in pollution. The filters catch the pollutants, clog, and are cleaned or discarded. It seems the pollutants still remain somewhere. In the case of the municipality I worked for, they ended up in the water when we would flush DPF's as manufacturer recommended at the time. But...., like I always figured, illeagle is a sick bird.

 

[JELLOWSUBMARINE]

I've wondered if there is a big overall difference in pollution. The filters catch the pollutants, clog, and are cleaned or discarded. It seems the pollutants still remain somewhere. In the case of the municipality I worked for, they ended up in the water when we would flush DPF's as manufacturer recommended at the time. But...., like I always figured, illeagle is a sick bird.

Very legitimate point. The total carbon footprint is huge as a result of unrealistic zero emissions. Kind of equivalent ro the saying "spend a dollar to save a penny".

 

[Windex]

I've worked in trucking (specifically fixing them, in large fleets) for a long time.

Long enough to remember the "smell" of the yard with the trucks starting up in the morning. My passat smells the same way at startup, as it is not equipped with a DPF. Years ago when I would walk through the yard of the trucking company I worked at, the only smell you could sense was that permeating diesel truck smell - it was everywhere. It was even comforting - to me it was the smell of gainful employment, of accomplishing something - that smell meant we were keeping trucks on the road, that I was part of the machine keeping the economy working. As the saying goes, Everything you eat, that chair you're sitting in, that screen allowing you to post your thoughts on the internet... All of it came in a truck.

Every morning I walk through the yard of the trucking company I work at, and you know what I smell these days? Nothing.

Rather I do smell the ambient smells of the surrounding vegetation (we border greenspace), the rotting leaves smell in the fall, the "new" smell of freshly fallen snow etc. Just normal smells.

The reason why I am able to smell those instead of the trucks is all of the emission equipment, most notably the DPFs.

That smell... in the absence of a DPF, is soot, or particulate matter / PM.

Particulate matter is long been correlated with many cancers: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6922579/

It's long, and I honestly don't understand a lot of it, even with a background in statistical analysis. It's a good one, as it aggregates together a number of previous studies, all looking to find the answer to the following - does PM cause cancer?

The answer is yes.

In this brave new world of increased complexity due to emissions equipment on cars and trucks, yes, these trucks are more complex, and have many equipped parts which can cause a shutdown if they fail. However, they don't fail any more often than an old Pete 389 with a CAT C15, they just go off to the side of the road for different reasons.

I have to pay more to repair and maintain my fleet, this requires me to employ more mechanics. Paying them for their work spurs the economy.

The increased cost gets added to the cost of business, and you pay a few cents more for that cup of coffee, or a few $ more for that Television.

The small increases are paid for by the reduction in overall healthcare costs not treating as many cancer patients, and I sleep a little easier each night knowing this is the case.

 

[Abacus]

Particulate matter is long been correlated with many cancers: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6922579/

It's long, and I honestly don't understand a lot of it, even with a background in statistical analysis. It's a good one, as it aggregates together a number of previous studies, all looking to find the answer to the following - does PM cause cancer?

The answer is yes.

The small increases are paid for by the reduction in overall healthcare costs not treating as many cancer patients, and I sleep a little easier each night knowing this is the case.

Everything causes cancer today as evidenced by the California Prop 65 warnings on literally everything. Not to get political, but it’s true.

I work in the water field and have for over 30 years, and everything in that field causes cancer as well, from the chemicals to treat the water, to minerals in the ground, and now to the water itself via PFAS (perfluoroalkyl substances: nasty man-made chemicals that are in everything). It causes everything from cancer to high cholesterol to birth defects and has been around since 1938.Here in the US the EPA has set the new health advisory limit for PFAS at 4 parts per quadrillion, which is 0.004 parts per trillion. There are 2 issues with this: 1) they’re setting regulations for a limit that cannot be achieved since the test methods can only reliably test down to 1 part per trillion, and 2) it’s the equivalent of 1/4 of 1 aspirin compared to the weight of all humans on the entire planet. No offense to the alarmists, but I just don’t care at that level. When I inquired about the discrepancy with the regulators, the answer I received was that they *hope* technology will catch up to provide reliable testing that that concentration.

So my points are that everything can be alarmist in some fashion and that governments don’t often set regulations with common sense in mind. Too that end, I take everything with a grain of salt and while we do certain things to help out the planet as a whole (installed household solar, we recycle, avoid most China products, etc), we’re not going overboard with it. There HAS to be some happy and common-sense medium and I’ll continue to run my B4V until the engine falls out of it or some idiot crashes into it, regulations and emissions be damned.

 

[JELLOWSUBMARINE]

The last 2 post sum it up well!

While windex's well writen post left me feeling all "Fabreezy", I wanted to sing it's a wonderful life, JK. The improvement example was taken from a very small saturated portion of this overall country. It truly is a much bigger picture than that IMO. I remember the skys of L.A. & San Jose inthe 70's. Just wwatch Adam12 or Chip's.

Abacus put it into great perspective with "science-based" facts. Its about balance. We've become so hyper sensitive, we've now tipped into ridiculous and obsessive and are "shooting ourselves in the foot".

Just sayin'

 

[IndigoBlueWagon]

"Don't worry about diesel particulates causing cancer because a lot of other things do, too" isn't an especially helpful perspective to take. I was slow to accept the fact that an efficient, non emissions controlled diesel engine does cause more harm than a less efficient, emissions controlled diesel. But it's true. The most extreme case of this I've heard about recently is the amount of pollution 2-stroke leaf blowers emit. It really is stunning in light of their small size.

We hear a lot about PFAs in water supplies around greater Boston these days. Abacus, your info on testing makes sense. Even though I'm not particularly concerened about them (I also have well water at my house), I do think it's good that cities and towns are paying attention. There have been enough exampes of aggregious harm caused by water supplies over the decades to be reassured that people are checking.

 

[oilhammer]

The newer regulations have been a boon to anyone dealing with older stuff, that's for sure. The local tractor dealer, that was a John Deere franchise, let it go because the business of restoring and refurbishing older ones had become better than selling new ones. And JD has a "quota" of new equipment sales that have to be met in order to keep the franchise. They found it just wasn't worth the effort. Plus the issues the owner/operators deal with (google that giant lawsuit against JD) wasn't helping.

Think about it: if the newer emissions compliance stuff was not so expensive, fragile, and generally troublesome, there literally would be nobody messing with it. The mere fact that there are SO MANY companies doing this speaks volumes.

 

[JELLOWSUBMARINE]

I think most diesel owners are responsible, non coal rolling type, as am I. My point is everything in appropriate balance and the fact of the incredible progress and pollution reversal we have and continue to achieve. I watch chemical listings on tupperware, use glass as much as possible, don't smoke yada yada. Life is quit carcinogenic as it is. But what 60 years of life has taught me is without balance there will be no stability. Remind anyone of today? Ever follow a diesel government school bus not too many years back? One extreem to another. Sure change was needed... and implemented with great results. We've gone into the silly

 

[JELLOWSUBMARINE]

Think about it: if the newer emissions compliance stuff was not so expensive, fragile, and generally troublesome, there literally would be nobody messing with it.

Absolute truth. How else eliminate fossil fuel, implement electric only (until the dinger goes off that the electric carbon footprint calls for eliminating electric)

Fred Flintstone l@@k out! I driving my big block up your

 

[turbobrick240]

Here are some photos of LA before the EPA and the Clean Air Act starting regulating vehicle emissions:

Vintage photos show Los Angeles before the EPA regulated pollution

Before the EPA, the US environment was not federally protected. Here are 35 vintage photos showing Los Angeles before regulations limited the damage.

www-insider-com.cdn.ampproject.org

 

[oilhammer]

Which has little to do with the draconian NOx limits set on little diesels. Remember, these "cheating" TDIs had the PM and HC limits running at SINGLE DIGIT percentiles of the allowable limits. Also, the LA basin has a specific condition that much of the rest of the country does not. Geography and weather are a big problem there, add in a bunch of people that shouldn't be living there in the first place....

 

[IndigoBlueWagon]

add in a bunch of people that shouldn't be living there in the first place....

Amen to that. Why I chose to move back east years ago.

 

[oilhammer]

I don't think anyone is arguing against clean air. I'm certainly not. But it has to be something that is within reason, and right now the rules we have that allow a 12 MPG Suburban to be sold here and 50 MPG Golfs to not be has some of us scratching our heads. The NOx limits went from "tough, but doable", to "impossible within reason" almost overnight. The actual limits imposed have been posted here before somewhere, but it went off the charts the last go around. If the VEs were allowed say "100", and the PDs were allowed "75", the CRs were allowed something like "2" (just using whole numbers to make an analogy). The Bosch guy said it best, when he said clearly the legislators simply do not understand the combustion cycle of a diesel engine, and are trying to force it to behave like a gasoline engine (square peg --> round hole) yet nothing is being done to force the gas engine to use less fuel like the diesels do so easily. Of course, the diesels (primarily these domestic pickups.... the teeny peeny brigade... you know the ones) of the modern era have gone off the deep end in terms of power. It is quite ridiculous. 1000 pounds of torque? Really?

 

[JELLOWSUBMARINE]

Here are some photos of LA before the EPA and the Clean Air Act starting regulating vehicle emissions:

At least right here we're saying the same thing. 70's were a mouth full of gag.

I don't think anyone is arguing against clean air. I'm certainly not. But it has to be something that is within reason,

 

[turbobrick240]

The Michigan tuning company/s that were fined (see post #1) were selling DPF & SCR delete hardware and software. Without any emissions systems at all those altered diesels are gross polluters of both NOx and particulate matter. I don't think the EPA is out of line for cracking down on that sort of modification.

 

[JELLOWSUBMARINE]

The Michigan tuning company/s that were fined (see post #1) were selling DPF & SCR delete hardware and software. Without any emissions systems at all those altered diesels are gross polluters of both NOx and particulate matter. I don't think the EPA is out of line for cracking down on that sort of modification.

One size shoe doesnt fit all (post #27). Hell yeah crack down on the extreem abusers but dont f with the clean reasonable tunes/deletes. Its so insignificant a herd of vegetarian cow farts would outweigh 1000 lbs of diesel torque.

Perhaps im too sarcastic to hear and oilhammer is much clearer. Lets try it again.

I don't think anyone is arguing against clean air. I'm certainly not. But it has to be something that is within reason, .

If the VEs were allowed say "100", and the PDs were allowed "75", the CRs were allowed something like "2" (just using whole numbers to make an analogy).

The Bosch guy said it best, when he said clearly the legislators simply do not understand the combustion cycle of a diesel engine, and are trying to force it to behave like a gasoline engine (square peg --> round hole)

 

[turbobrick240]

Speaking as a reformed deleted tdi owner, there are no "clean" deleted TDIs or deleted diesels. It's a pretty cut and dry violation of law. I justified my delete in numerous ways to myself, but it's clear to me now that it was wrong. I'm glad the buybacks came around and gave me a good opportunity to make it right.

 

[JELLOWSUBMARINE]

Now I'm warm and fuzzy also.

Whats your definition of gross polluter anyway?

 

[turbobrick240]

Oh, I'd say if the vehicle emits more than 10x the level of a pollutant that it's certified to, then that qualifies as a gross polluter. A fully deleted commonrail tdi probably emits well over 100x the NOx and particulate matter of one that's intact and operating as it should.