![[Valid Atom 1.0]](valid-atom.png "Validate my Atom 1.0 feed")
EGR vs. SCR DEBATE * USA - Heats up at Mid-America Trucking Show
“This may be the only time you see the world’s three largest producers of heavy-duty diesel engines in violent agreement about anything”
Louisville,KY,USA -Truck News (CAN), by James Menzies -19 March 2009: -- It was a rare sight: the CEOs of four major engine manufacturers sitting side-by-side on a panel and nodding in agreement as each of the others spoke. The scene was the SCR for 2010 - CEO Summit, hosted by FactsAboutSCR.com at the Mid-America Trucking Show... Included on the panel were: Chris Patterson, CEO of Daimler Trucks North America; Per Carlsson, CEO of Volvo Trucks North America;; Denny Slagle, CEO of Mack Trucks; and Jim Kelly, president of the engine business for Cummins. They were there to extol the virtues of selective catalytic reduction (SCR), the technology each of their respective companies will employ to meet EPA2010 emissions standards... “It strikes me as I sit here that even though we represent a very significant percentage of the world’s heavy-duty engine and truck production, we must not be very good leaders,” chided Volvo’s Carlsson. “And the thousands of engineers working for us around the globe must not be very bright, because we’ve selected SCR for EPA2010. And according to the sole adopter of massive EGR, we’ve all made the wrong choice.”... Daimler Trucks North America’s Patterson pointed out “This may be the only time you see the world’s three largest producers of heavy-duty diesel engines in violent agreement about anything.”... He suggested focusing on the benefits of SCR, including fuel economy improvements of about 5%. (Each of the engine OEMs represented cited similar fuel economy gains will be achieved with their versions of SCR)...
* ... And Navistar ? ...
Louisville,KY,USA -Truck News (CAN), by James Menzies -19 March 2009: -- Navistar's Tim Shick, director of marketing with Navistar’s engine group response, said Navistar is more confident than ever that it has made the right choice by carving its own path... Navistar will use emissions credits to slowly work its way down to the EPA2010 NOx limit of 0.2 g/bhp-hr, beginning at a level of 0.5 grams on Jan. 1, 2010. When asked for an explanation on how Navistar will meet the 0.2 g NOx limit once its emissions credits run out (expected to occur sometime in 2012), Shick said “If you put enough exhaust gas back into an engine, you can reach just about any level of NOx you want – that’s not the challenge.”... He continued: “The challenge at that level is to retain good performance, fuel economy and durability. And the way we ensure that is, every time we take the EGR rate up in the series of steps we’re making to the final 0.2 g emissions engine, we also take the fuel pressure up. We recalibrate to make sure that all those ingredients in the mix are optimized, and so far we’ve seen in the lab and we have trucks on the road today that show it definitely can be done, we are doing it and we will bring it out…the key to it is that high pressure common rail fuel system, that’s the magic ingredient.”...
* Navistar comes out swinging about "truly nutty" SCR alternative - International’s decision to stick with EGR rather than switch to SCR technology as forward thinking
Louisville,KY,USA -Truck News (CAN), by Lou Smyrlis -19 March 2009: -- Speaking before customers, dealers and the media at an exclusive night event at the Mid America Trucking Show, Navistar, not only defended its decision to be the only truck maker staying the course in meeting the 2010 emissions with EGR technology, it came out swinging... Dee Kapur, president, Navistar Truck Group, has been a vocal critic of SCR and he didn’t hold back, calling it “the truly nutty” alternative that asks truck buyers to deal with the “toxic agent” of urea... Jack Allen, president of Navistar’s North American Truck Group, said advanced EGR makes it easier for customers, and engine designs exceeded government standards, as the better way to go... Allen also questioned the environmental and operational impact of having to use urea with the SCR alternative. He said urea is going to prove expensive, using a figure of $35 a gallon... He added that availability of urea may also be a problem, arguing that even if 500 locations initially offer urea across the US, that’s a small portion of the 35,000 diesel locations across the US... Allen characterized International’s decision to stick with EGR rather than switch to SCR technology as forward thinking... (See Animated image about)
* Volvo says 'so long' to active DPF re-gens
Louisville,KY,USA -Truck News (CAN) -19 March 2009: -- Volvo Trucks North America announced today that it will no longer require active diesel particulate filter (DPF) regenerations on its 2010 engines with selective catalytic reduction (SCR)... In extensive field testing, engineers have noted highway trucks with Volvo’s 2010 engines and SCR have been able to regenerate passively 100% of the time. That’s significant, because active regenerations require a dose of diesel fuel... Ed Saxman, drivetrain product manager with Volvo Trucks North America, said the ability to regenerate the DPF passively each and every time is another compelling reason to embrace SCR in 2010...
* ENDINGLY: Denny Slagle, CEO of Mack Trucks urged everyone to do their due diligence when selecting an engine technology for 2010... (P.N. ... and we agree with !!!)
Labels: EGR vs SCR
posted by Unknown @ 7:03 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home