Just have a quick question, when will polution standards for diesels tighten up more? I know 2004.5 did but my brother is talking about new truck maybe 06, so I wanted to warn him to buy before the sh#t hits the fan. Thanks for any info.

IIRC, it is '06...http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Ermm.gif


I've read somewhere that the LLY engine met those requirements, but GM had to import fuel from Sweden to do it. Apparently Sweden is known for high quality diesel fuel.


If I can figure out where I saw that, I'll post a link, but right now it seems like it was GM's media web site.


http://media.gm.com/

I thought I heard somewhere that diesel fuel pollution standards will be tightened up around '06..something about lowering sulfur content even more. Is this correct? Does this mean US diesel fuel will be more like European fuels then? (better quality?) I know it'll cost more if that's correct...http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Disapprove.gif


Tom http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Pig.gif

I think I've also heard 2006 but i remember reading somethin big about 2008 I'll check on it.

January 1, 2007 is the next step in diesel emission change.


In 2006, Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel fuel will be making its appearance nation wide (gradually phased in) in preparation for the 2007 emission standards.


So buy before model year 2007, if you want to avoid a lot of extra emission aparatus.Edited by: OC_DMAX

Thanks OC. Just curious, are we with LB7's going to have to use sulfur additives or the like? Similar to the Lead additives when no-lead came into being?


Tom http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Pig.gif

Some time during 2006, in most parts of North America, diesel fuel will only be allowed to contain 15 ppm of sulfur, in most areas (except California) it contains up to 500 ppm. Sulfur is used as a cheap lubricant, all this means is the oil companies will have to add other, environmentally friendly additives to meet the lubricity requirements the fuel needs. I think over all we can enjoy a cleaner better quality fuel than we are now getting. Unfortunately it will no doubt increase the price a little (just ask the guys in California). http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Geek.gif

Tom,


Excellent question. We will not need to add "sulfur" back into the fuel as an additive. However, during the refining process to lower the sulfur content, the lubricity of the diesel fuel is also lowered. This is the concern, since the lower the lubricity of the fuel, the more wear there could be on the high pressure fuel pump and on the injectors.


I have studied this in some depth on the California Air Resources website, as the lubricity issue has me a little worried in the years 2007 and beyond. At the CARB website, they post information on all the hearings they have had over the years. There have been several hearings dedicated to this issue. The last time I looked, they were debating what wear standards to adapt (which in turn can be used by the refiners to determine how to formulate their fuels). It appears right now that the refineries will have to include a lubricity additive at the tail end of their refining process to meet the wear standards being proposed.





The above is my understanding,


Alan

Dmaxcan,


Actually, we Californians have diesel fuel with an average Sulfur content of 150 ppm at the present time (in major metro areas). The side benefit is our fuel also has a average cetane number of 53. The other 49 states have an average cetane number of 45. So while the fuel costs a little more, it is the equivalent of premium diesel fuel in the other parts of the country.

Hey guys, thanks for the info.


BRUCE, this is far from being a quick, simple question. It is a very GOOD, very pertinent question, though!


Cost a little more?!? Weren't you guys in Cali complaining about $2+ fuel just a couple months ago? We're paying around $1.60. Yikes...just like gasoline costs. Thank goodness we get better fuel mileage than gassers. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Cool.gif


I figured the lubricity issue on the diesels would be similar to the valve seat issue in the gassers back in the late '70s/early '80s.


What I wonder is if we'll have to retrofit our "older" diesel's fuel delivery systems to deal with it. That is, if the oil companies do not "replace" the sulfur. I also wonder what other mechanical parts would possibly have to be replaced because of the lack of lube. It wouldn't be quite as easy as replacing exhaust valve seats, huh?


Hey, I'm just going to enjoy my awesome truck. We'll deal with the problems when they come, right guys?


Tom http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Pig.gif

IIRC, CA Clean Air Resources Board went to a lo sulfur fuel in very late 80's. It was done w/o hearings/consultation w/industries using diesel. Many units started experiencing seals/gasket failures ~ my rabbit did too. The repair industries had a great windfall and later, the State did reimburse those us who had repair bills. We're talking big $. Mine was 384 but OTR equipt repair was like 5000 (then year $) a pop.


That is the reason I think CARB won't make that mistake again. I'm confident that the upcoming change will not be problematic on existing/in-being equipt like before. Our local mech who also handles smog says 07 will be the model yr subj to inspection but as we know in CA, the first 5yrs are exempt (gassers anyway) ~ so biannual inspection for diesels in CA looks like yr 2012ish and expect my LB7 to be grandfathered.

What I wonder is if we'll have to retrofit our "older" diesel's fuel delivery systems to deal with it.


The answer is "no". Manufactures have known for the last 5 years or so what will happen in 2007. The diesel fuel with lower sulfur content will be a good thing, in my opinion.


By the way, the refining process that lowers the sulfur content in the fuel also lowers the lubricity of the fuel. Putting sulfur back into the fuel again will not raise the lubricity again.


The cost of fuel on the West Coast is far more complex than just the low sulfur diesel we have in the state. It has much more to do with refining capacity, maintenance of refineries and peaks in the demand for fuel ( plus a number of other variables).





On edit = CARB = California Air Resource Board !!Edited by: OC_DMAX

Unfortunately I do not believe the refiners have put in an additive to replace the lubricity lost. The 2006 fuel is being sold in Los Angeles right now.


My biodiesel supplier who happens to be fuel distributor says that additives are big oil industry trade secrets and the word is the lubricity is not enough in the new fuel.


But what is enough? I am not sure if there are standards.


Either way--the key point here is emissions. The additive used has to meet emissions--and cost.


I am sure our trucks need higher lubricity than older diesels. Are the oil companies producing fuel to meet our needs?


Probably not.


That is why I use both B20 and primrose additive.

The newer fuel is referred to as ULSD (ultra-low sulfer diesel). The good thing is that lubricity will be part of the national standard whereas today there is no standard for lubricity. In california, refiners "voluntarily" meet a SLBOCLE standard (Ball on cylinder lubricity test), this was after a bunch of diesel quit running when carb first forced refiners to put low sulfur diesel into the california market.


The bad news concerning the new fuel standards and lubricity, is that a good spec is not agreed upon. On the standards committees are representatives from
<UL>
<LI>Academia</LI>
<LI>The oil Industry</LI>
<LI>The Automotive (and fuel injection) Industry</LI>[/list]


Funny, everyone wants a lubricity standard with plenty of margin of protection, except for the oil companies who don't want to pay for additive or additization equipment.


The docs from Bosch themselves say that 450 micron wear scar diameter HFRR is needed to protect the fuel injection system on our trucks. The current proposed lubricity standard, also referred to as a compromise, states a spec of 500 micron wsd HFRR. Not enough to protect our fuel system (per bosch).


This is all based on what I have read - things may change - let's just say I think I'll be adding stanadyne lubricity formula for a damn long time...


- jeff

RonJT wrote: Unfortunately I do not believe the refiners have put in an additive to replace the lubricity lost. The 2006 fuel is being sold in Los Angeles right now.


As far as I know, the only petroleum company selling ULSD in CA (LA Basin) is ARCO (a true 15 ppm sulfur content fuel - that is my understanding - anybody with different info step forward). All other companies are selling something that averages out to around 150 ppm sulfur content. This fuel is labeled a "low sulfur diesel" fuel. Each company has had to qualify their blend of diesel fuel with the state (more than 25 qualified to date). As ShumDit mentions above, the 150 ppm fuel has been sold for a number of years in CA and initially had a rocky start.Edited by: OC_DMAX

Does anyone know if the new diesel fuel standards may cause Stanadyne, Primrose and the other diesel fuel additive companies to change their formulas to increase the lubricity factors? http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Ermm.gif

Valero--along with ARCO--at the Wilimington refinery is producing the new fuel.


I did not say it was everywhere--but it is being produced and distributed.

Thanks for the info, Looks like I'll tell my brother to get an 05 or 06. 2007 looks deadly, thanks again.

.......... The diesel fuel with lower sulfur content will be a good thing, in my opinion.





Agreed ~ still, there's the childhood memories of trains/buses w/the then characteristic aroma of high sulfur exhaust that brought images of far away places that I'll always miss. Now, can't smell (or is it age?) and instead of faraway places, stuck in hot dusty stinkin lincoln!