The Phase 2 program would reduce carbon emissions and improve the fuel efficiency of heavy-duty vehicles, helping to address the challenges of global climate change and energy security.  Photo courtesy of istock.com

The Phase 2 program would reduce carbon emissions and improve the fuel efficiency of heavy-duty vehicles, helping to address the challenges of global climate change and energy security. Photo courtesy of istock.com

The Environmental Protection Agency and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration recently released Phase 2 of the federal greenhouse gas emissions and fuel efficiency standards.

The proposed standards would go into effect in 2018 for trailers, 2021 for tractors and by 2027 result in an engine-truck-trailer standard for model year 2027 vehicles.

The regulations are expected to improve fuel efficiency by 24% by 2027 compared to 2018 and to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by a billion metric tons. Fuel costs are expected to be reduced $170 billion over the lifetime of the vehicles sold under the program and oil consumption reduced by 1.8 billion barrels.

While current technology used to meet today’s GHG and fuel economy standards can be extended into Phase 2, other technology will be required to meet the standards. EPA and NHTSA anticipate a cost increase of $10,000 to $12,000 per truck, but also say that fleets will recoup the cost in two years from the resulting fuel savings.

This is the first time trailers have been regulated for emissions and GHG, but EPA and NHTSA say they significantly contribute to fuel consumption and pollution. The trailer standards would be voluntary from 2018 to 2020 and become mandatory in 2021.

There are no specifics concerning which technologies truck, trailer and engine makers need to use to reach the new standards so manufacturers are free to choose technologies they believe work best.

Industry Reactions

To date, reaction to the proposal has been mixed, although all parties say they need to closely review the 1,329 page ruling. “Cummins welcomes the proposal with its goals to improve fuel efficiency and reduce GHG emissions, creating a win-win for both customers and the environment,” says Dave Crompton, vice president and president, engine business, Cummins Inc.

On the other hand, the Volvo Group took exception to the fact that there is a separate ruling for engines. “[That is] inconsistent with the Group’s interest in minimizing the complete, real-world environmental impacts of its products. A separate engine standard is at odds with the reduction in NOx, due to the natural trade-off between NOx and CO2 emissions from the engine. It also limits manufacturers’ flexibility to meet the regulated targets for each individual customer in a way that suits their specific needs, and it incentivizes optimization for engine test cell requirements versus real-world efficiencies.”

The American Truck Dealers division of the National Automobile Dealers Association was not pleased with the ruling and expressed concern about the impact of the technologies needed to meet the proposed rule. “Recent history has shown that mandates with underestimated compliance costs result in substantially higher prices for commercial vehicles, and force fleet owners and operators to seek out less-expensive and less fuel-efficient alternatives in the marketplace,” the association said in a statement. “The costs could even drive small fleets and owner-operators out of business, costing jobs and only further impeding economic growth.”

Allen Schaeffer, executive director of the Diesel Technology Forum, believes the rule will “challenge engine and truck manufacturers to go even further in saving fuel for customers.”

Comment Period Extended

Officials from EPA and NHTSA attended public hearings in August in which interested parties were able to present data, views or arguments concerning the proposal. Written comments can also be sent to the agencies and the last day of the comment period is Sept. 17, 2015. The comment period was originally set to end Sept. 17 but die to requests for an extension, the EPA and NHTSA extended the comment period for another two weeks.

Comments may be submitted via the www.regulations.gov web site by clicking here or by mailing to these addresses:

EPA: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, EPA Docket Center, EPA/DC, EPA WJC West Building, 1301 Constitution Ave., N.W., Room 3334, Washington, DC. NHTSA: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

Originally posted on Work Truck Online