And yet I remember how anemic and thirsty the first of the ‘smog control’ vehicle engines were when the original emission regulations took effect in the 1970’s. Forcing engineers to think in new ways brought about a revolution in engine performance, cleaner by far than any of the 1970’s engines ever dreamed of being and as much or more horsepower than the muscle cars of the 1960’s.
Tier 4 has been attained, initially, with engine systems that are less than desirable. The first solution to a engineering problem is never the last.
But by the same token, much of the improvement in automotive emission performance is attributable to things like Moore’s Law and pervasive semiconductor and robotics development in other fields, and to the acceptance of much higher vehicle purchase prices. And to competition from more effective overseas makers who actually valued American quality-control assurance.
The kind of kludging used cost-effectively in the early 1970s (including lowest-price EGR and those weird Thermactor systems, and a host of cheap vacuum-fluidic hoses to control and coordinate it, is no longer required when you have GDI and cost-effective staged turbocharging. To me the ‘bottom’ was not the emasculated large-displacement engines before 1976, it was the American response to the first rounds of stiff CAFE restrictions – see so much of what GM was producing at the start of the Chrysler K-car era. I had one of the last 1976 Cadillac convertibles, and in 1985 the ‘successor’ triple-white convertible was proudly brought in to our local dealership and I went to look at it. It was so shrunken that I actually looked under the dashboard to see where the pedals were – and things got worse until 1988. (That is not to say GM couldn’t build really nice tiny cars – I had a 1992 Saturn with the DOHC manual and loved it.)
He is, I think, using CAFE regs instead of just ‘emissions’ – the former were almost certainly involved in the popularity of light trucks and ‘SUVs’, and now preference for crossovers and the like to ‘commodity three-box sedans’.
Who’s going to PAY for that?, are you and the rest of society Willing to pay the price increases, people are crying about the possible price increases from tariffs, your idea will probably be more expensive
The AC/Heat systems in many trucks isn’t set up to be run by “Shore Power”
Even if all the trucks were set up to run HVAC from shore power, there isn’t enough truck stops as it is, we often have to park on customers lots, and all sorts of other creative places, I know that story all too well
I don’t know what PM size range, I have read in several sources, that the Tri-Pacs produce significantly less exhaust and PM, but because the percentage of PM is greater, CA won’t allow using Tri-Pac’s.
I have personally talked with drivers who have been hassled and ticketed for main engine idling, and using a Tri-Pac
Fortunately, I rarely run into that god forsaken state, and when I did, it wasn’t deep into it, and my deliveries were pretty quick In/out, and I didn’t need to idle
That’s exactly what I was thinking - your comments about the 1976 vs 1985 are in line with what I was thinking. One case in point is the late 90’s Chevy/GMC half ton 2WD Suburbans. Those not all that much different from the pre-CAFE station wagons in dimensions or weight.
What a lot if not most people writing regulations fail to take into account is peoples or corporations behavior will change. Increases in fuel consumption for locomotives will get a lot of push-back as the locomotive industry has generally been reducing fuel consumption over the last 8 decades.
Regulators need to try to predict unintended consequences. They rarely do. And worse they rarely go back to fix regs with unintended consequences. Why can’t they admit mistakes?
Easy the government never likes to admit they make a mistake. Hell the OTR industry proved they royally screwed up the HOS regulations when they rewrote them 20 years ago. The government response keep rewriting them losing in court and failing to address why they keep losing in court each time.
A perhaps stereotypical view of a “regulator” is that if the regulation doesn’t do what is intended, then the problem is with the people who are being regulated and not with the regulation itself. With regards to emissions regulations, replacing one Tier Zero lcomotive with a Tier III locomotive will much more good than replacing a Tier III with a Tier IV locomotive.
With the Tier IV emissions regulation, a fair question on where to set the limits is how much they could be reduced without adversely affecting fuel efficiency.
Truck Stops, being for profit businesses, may very well have power outlets where they have HOS parking spots for rest and a charge for using it. Highway Rest Area’s serving the general public, to my knowledge are not likely to be so equipped, in California or any other state.
There’s been several ideas tried to have like a shore power at truckstops for the OTR industry. The problem is that 1 the cost of the services to the driver most carriers don’t reimburse it. 2 the costs to the truckstop. The last big one was called idle aire basically used a central air conditioning system and mineshaft venting hoses to get the air into the cabs along with power. Well it was expensive something like 30 to 40 bucks a night to use. It took 3 spaces worth of parking for 2 of the setups. It recirculated the air so if the other drivers smoked you got that odor or if they were less hygienic that came into the truck. The systems couldn’t handle extreme hot or cold environments. Drivers would hit the rigging and tear down the system onto the trucks using it. It was a total cluster to use.
APU units have proven to work the best but California has gone full on anti interal combustion engines and is literally trying to ban anything that burns fuels. The battery powered systems don’t have the power to last 34 hours the length of the FMCSA required reset period that resets the HOS at most they’re worth 12 hours maximum. Plus the battery systems weigh in at around 900 pounds. The diesel powered systems weigh in at around 400 and don’t really require any special parts or pieces. Green APU one of the largest makers uses a 3 cylinder Kubota engine that is CARB certified unlike the tripac by Thermo King. Green APU for their AC side took the system off of a Honda civic from 05-15 for the compressor condenser and the evaporator is off the Odyssey minivan for the system in the bunk only. The charging system is same alternator from the Camary from the last decade rated at 120 amps.
It burns .2 gallons of fuel per hour keeping the truck cool and in the winter keeps the truck warm including the entire engine as it’s directly plumbed into the cooling system of the truck.
Oh yeah I’ve definitely been involved with lawyers in my past. I literally had one spend 5 hours in court arguing that I didn’t know what the difference a 22.5 tire and a 24.5 tire
Perhaps it’s time for truckers to sleep in beds in motels, bedding at truck stops. The z carriers should pay part of a safe business. And of course pass the cost along.
Of course that might swing some long haul business back to the rails.
You obviously have little to no understanding, never mind experience of/in the trucking industry.
Other than in the People’s Republic of Californicated, Tri-Pacs are well accepted in the rest of the country.
Adequate parking is already an issue, now you think that all truckers should stay in hotels?
Trust me, there is definitely not enough parking near hotels for that to be a solution. I’ve been spoiled by using more hotels than the vast majority of drivers, in the type of work I do, and finding hotels with adequate truck parking has been difficult at times, as it is, start having the majority of drivers in hotels, there simply isn’t enough hotels, never mind parking for that to be an option
Hotels are 100 a night or more and there’s more than 3 million trucks in service. If a driver idles the engine for his 10 hour mandatory sleeping break he might burn 8 to 10 gallons of fuel within an apu or 2 gallons of fuel with one. Plus if they are not in the truck the risk of cargo theft jumps massively or losses from a reefer unit failure.
