By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Personally I wish it was the other way around. I wonder what the ratio in the EU for diesel to hybrid sales. Maybe 100/1 in favor of diesel. I don't see many going the hybrid route once there is a choice. In spite of some that are so eat up with the techno geek aspects of HSD, it is VERY complex. The biggest problem being it will be many years before we see independent shops able to work on them. I would imagine that Toyota guards the code very tightly. There are already Prius owners that have experienced the "Rip-off" Toyota has waiting for them. $600 to replace a 50 cent sensor for example. I know you do not fear Toyota service as you are an insider. How about the rest of us? I have experienced their ability to GOUGE and do not plan to give them another chance. They are not the reliability juggernaut they were in the 90s. Granted the TCH seems pretty good aside from the squeaks and rattles. I think replacing the ICE with hybrid only would never happen. Not all of us are that gullible to give the automakers a blank check.
"Diesels for Europe...hybrids for the US. Let the market speak and supply it accordingly"...
It is also commonly known hybrids do NOT sell well in Europe. However this is not due to any regulatory bias in terms of banning or stated long time "anti" diesel stances as some of the regulatory agencies in the USA CLEARLY have. It might be true because of consumer demand or lack there of. Anti diesel regulations AND bias do affect effect the supply of diesels in the USA. However it is still telling that the ACTUAL diesel population is indeed INXS of 2.7 to one despite the heavy promotions and massive fed state and local tax credits,incentives, write offs FOR HYBRID. Remove the ban and regulatory bias, let the market speak for itself. Again DIESEL'S 37% advantage is hard to ignore. If you combine it with the 20% hybrid advantage 57% is even harder to ignore. But the other thing I have been saying all along is fuel savings which mathmatically would translate to lower demand which COULD translate to lower demand for foreign oil is really not a REAL priority. Symbolic Lip syncing however IS.
UPSHOT: I know for example I would not mind say $2.75 per gal diesel to cost 30-40% less, or $1.65 per gal.
BUT WAIT it gets better (or worse) depending on ones position. To get bio diesel from already produced materials (used fryer oil for example) less than .75 cents per gal!!!
Toyota has already had 3 to 5 years of hybrid production to reduce the hybrid premium. Toyota has not reduced the hybrid premium to $1000 or $2000, let alone zero.
To put it in a macro way, while the sales of suvs (larger consumption {gasser} vehicles) were NOT good during this period, the 25% passenger vehicle fleet population of SMALLER CARS did NOT grow appreciable from its 25% of the passenger vehicle fleet.
What Does One Barrel Of Crude Oil Make?
QUICK STATS
- The US imports about 50% of it's required crude oil and about 50% of that amount comes from OPEC countries
(what this statement converts to is: 25% of so called "foreign" oil comes from OPEC) So if we are able to cut 32%..., what does that mean?
One barrel of crude oil contains 42 gallons
- About 46% of each barrel of crude oil is refined into automobile gasoline
9.83 gal/42 gallons = 23.4% DIESEL
http://www.sanjosegasprices.com/crude_products.aspx
So up to 23.4% of diesel demand in say 23.4% of the passenger vehicle fleet would cut oil demand a MINIMUM of 23.4%??? If you factor in the 37% advantage over unleaded regular it is more like 32%. Evidently cutting foreign oil demand a min of 32% is NO big priority.
to STRUCTUALLY CUT CONSUMPTION
The other way to put it, that is HIDDEN in plain sight, is the reason why our consumption is app 32% higher (than it has to be) is because 97.1 to 97.7% of the vehicles use unleaded regular!!!!!!
SO REGARDLESS of what the current (it can and will change obviously) AVG MPG WILL BE: we STRUCTURALLY chose to consume 32% MORE because we REFUSE to make the passenger vehicle fleet diesel (23.4%)
the recent MBenz bluetec fiasco is another example which reinforces the idea: "never believe preannouncements for light-duty USA diesel vehicles".
my skepticism about 2008 & later prompted me to buy another 2006 TDI instead of waiting to see what will happen in 2007/8 & beyond. i cross-shopped the saturn VUE hybrid but ruled it out due to it having neither stability control nor rollover control.
i think that CARB's influence is increasing rather than decreasing and that CARB is very much anti-diesel !
also i think that the urea canister system is a ridiculous hack and agree with CARB/EPA's refusal to certify it.
Both have already signed off on it for the upcoming GM diesel engine. It will have to be filled with each oil change. Then I see no reason that a diesel engine needs to be any cleaner than the gas engines on the road. I think it is oil money paying off the EPA/CARB powers. They make a lot more off of gasoline than diesel. You need very low sulfur crude to meet the new ULSD standard. It is in short supply compared to the high sulfur stuff we are getting.
I'm curious as to why you think this is any more of a ridiculous hack than a great number of emissions "solutions" that carmakers have employed over that past 30 years. Please clarify.
The way I see it, the urea injection system is virtually no different than something that has become so basic to meeting emissions regulations, the catalytic converter. If regulators get their way and a vehicle won't run without urea, then this injection system will actually be MORE foolproof than a catalytic converter (which I can remove and still have a running vehicle).
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
The catalytic converter doesn't require anything extra to work.
If you don't refill the urea, emissions aren't cleansed. It's that simple.
PZEV certified vehicles are designed to provide maintenance-free operation for 150,000 miles. Urea refills will be required about every 7,500 miles.
That's one heck of a difference. What's the guarantee that urea will actually be refilled?
JOHN
Diesels do poorly on the typical daily commute. True, they thrive on high-speed only cruising. But since that isn't what the usual drive for the bulk of the population has to deal with, where's the benefit?
Hybrids on the other hand, match the diesel efficiency when cruising and increase significantly with the daily commute stop & slow conditions.
JOHN
the reason i think urea-canisters are a ridiculous hack is that it's yet another maintenance item that i don't want to deal with, or have to pay for, or consider whatsoever. also i am annoyed by the fact that D-C/Benz looks idiotic with their preannouncement of 50-state-bluetec and then their "oops, never mind".
also the idea that the car would not run if the urea canister became empty - WHAT A HORRIBLE IDEA. "as if" i'm going to risk that sort of intentional BS with a vehicle my family is travelling in. NOT HAPPENING.
another part of my opposition to urea-canisters is along the same lines that i think adding "additives" to diesel fuel at every fillup is a ridiculous hack. (thankfully it is not really necessary - although i do sometimes add powerservice when the high-temp will not exceed 10F or 15F for the day/week/whatever.)
btw, i don't think diesel exhaust should have to be cleaner than gasser exhaust. i think it is reasonable to have the same standards for each.
and i do enjoy your oil-money-paying-off-EPA/CARB conspiracy theory, but i think a wise person once said "do not attribute to malice what can be explained by ignorance". (that idea probably applies fairly well when you read my posts too!) TTFN!
your statement about diesels & typical daily commute is wrong, as far as i can tell. that's probably because your definition of "typical daily commute" is different than mine. my experience with TDIs in "suburban" driving shows they get great mpg there too, pushing 40 mpg. i rarely due "pure city driving" though!
also i don't believe your statement about hybrids matching diesel efficiency when cruising. my understanding is that all the battery & hybrid electronics turns into "dead weight" in an extended 80 mph highway cruise - actually hurting mpg rather than helping it. some prius folks have explained to me that my understanding is wrong but i seem to be stuck on one of those pesky laws of thermodynamics.
another factor in terms of efficiency of gassers vs diesels is independent of hybrid/nonhybrid - i understand it relates to the efficiency vs rpm graph - there are further diesel mpg advantages lurking in that graph - explaining why the real world mpg improvement with diesel goes above 28% - beyond the 28% additional energy content per unit diesel fuel compared to gasoline.
Wrong. It gets used up, just like the urea. And when its used up, the vehicle owner could cut it up and leave it on the shop floor. And I have news for you, gutting a catalytic converter so it passes visual inspection is a COMMON PRACTICE!
Granted, catalytics these days CAN last the typical life of the vehicle PROVIDED the car ran well and clean the entire time. However, let us not forget that back when catalytics were introduced, they were not nearly as long-lived. Every automotive innovation has to start somewhere.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
So just because you don't want to have to maintain something, its a "ridiculous hack"? I suggest you never own a european car of any kind, no matter the fuel type.
D-C/Benz looks idiotic with their preannouncement of 50-state-bluetec and then their "oops, never mind".
Well, of course this is because their car meets 50-state standards, so they thought it a no-brainer. Little did they know it would get rejected because, god forbid, someone has to take care of their darned car.
also the idea that the car would not run if the urea canister became empty - WHAT A HORRIBLE IDEA.
That's not DC's fault. As indicated above, their engine met the emissions standards, but they are being FORCED to come up with a way to break through the red tape.
Sounds to me like your complaints revolved around CARB, not DC.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
This one sentence has so much in it.
Yes the ACTUAL diesel population at last count gave a 2.7/1 ratio but again to achieve that one must include all diesel trucks else the ratio of light vehicles is 4/1 in favor of hybrid technology. But 2.7 is correct - at last count. By the end of this year it should be closer to 1.5/1.
However consider just 6 years ago the ration was INFINITY. There were no hybrids this time in 2000 in the US. The ration was 400,000+ / 0. When Honda sold the first Insight the ratio went to 400,000 / 1. By the end of 2000 it was likely 400 / 1. Now six short years later it's almost PARITY.
Heavy promotions. New innovative technology needs to be promoted. It's done in every industry for every product. Diesel manufacturers should have been as forceful in promoting their products and pushing the powers to be back in the 70's, 80's and 90's. However note that the main players in the hybrid innovation the Prius, HCH and now the TCH all have stood on their own merits and been sold at fair market prices.
..massive fed state and local tax credits,incentives,.. Diesels are also eligible for these massive credits and incentives... if only...etc. When they finally get their technological act together in 2008 or 2009 each and every manufacturer of diesels ( except Toyota and Honda ) will also be able to pass on to its clients these 'massive incentives'. They just have to do it.
The trend clearly favors the new innovative technology as viewed today. Now in three years will it reverse itself back in favor of diesel that's a great question. Despite their longer history I'd not bet on MB/DC or VW. I'd bet on Honda to lead a resurgence. MB's entries are liable to be directed to too small an audience. DC and VW have too much extra baggage to carry along. Honda has a world of goodwill already at it's disposal. If anyone can convince Mom to drive a diesel it's Honda. ( Honda has determined - and Toyota as well - that women make 80% of the buying decisions for its vehicles ).
Diesels do poorly on the typical daily commute. True, they thrive on high-speed only cruising. But since that isn't what the usual drive for the bulk of the population has to deal with, where's the benefit?
Hybrids on the other hand, match the diesel efficiency when cruising and increase significantly with the daily commute stop & slow conditions. "...
I think it is because you persist in bringing up a non issue, not to mention the fact it is not true.
So in a 27 mile/54 mile R/T commute the two figures that consistently come up are 38-42 vs 48-52 mpg. One way takes 45 min to 1.5 hours so it is easy to see that there are huge stop and go components. One vehicle is rated at 29/38 and the other 42/49 mpg EPA. Keep in mind the Prius engine is a 1.5 L, the Civic is a 1.8 L and the TDI is a 1.9 TDI.
So for example if I had a choice between a (gasser)2007 BMW 330 I or its diesel model D or even if they came out with a hybrid model. I'd still select the BMW 330 DIESEL. The same is true of the Civic: gasser, gasser/hybrid, diesel. But as you know and the diesel is banned from entry into the country.
This (mis)understanding is one of the most common about the Prius specificially. Actually in comparison to the artificial EPA value of 51 Hwy the Prius is almost dead on that value. The main reason it is not is due to the effect of high-speed and therefore drag. Drag being significantly greater at 75-80 on every vehicle than at 55. Even CR which has always been skeptical of the Prius FE claims states that on a typical 150 mi 65-70 mph highway trip one should expect about 48 mpg in a Prius. This is nearly the same value as reported by Prius owners on just about any site. It's my own value as well.
The Prius all day long, ALL day long, can achieve 48-50 mpg FE on highway driving from 60-75 mph.
There is no 'dead weight'
You are right and when it quits working you will not know until you have your smog check and it fails. Some of the newer vehicles tell you when it fails as does the Prius. Then you are faced with a $2000 bill from Toyota, to replace it, as at least two posters have experienced.
So what is the difference. There are literally dozens of sensors in new cars are tied with emissions. Each one represents a big repair bill if the warranty has expired. I just do not believe the end justifies all the smog crap on modern cars. The truth is it was mostly the gas formula that caused the problems. Same goes for diesel.
I don't have that option now.
What has occured in Europe is different that what has occured here. It's one reason that Honda and Toyota pursued hybrid technology here and diesel technology there. Diesel technology had a much firmer foothold in Europe since the 70's and it should be the dominant alternative due to that headstart. It's neither better nor worse than hybrid technology. Just as here, it achieves the same final goal as hybrid technology.
Just because hybrid technology is new doesn't make the older technology better. They both achieve the same goal.
You keep saying that hybrid technology is new. It has at least 100 years of trying to be accepted. It is still plagued with the same limitation. Too expensive for what you get.
You imply that your diesel vehicle defies the laws of aerodynamics in that there is magically no loss from drag or whatever drag loss there is ( well in excess of 20% ) is magically made up by higher fuel efficiency from the diesel? Hmmm, now there is a fairy tale to tell the children at night.
At 155-165 mph is the fuel economy 75-85 mpg?
It might be of interest to note the Prius has 110 hp where the TDI is an anemic 90 hp.
I was just trying to give you an idea of mpg at the same mpg!!
..."You imply that your diesel vehicle defies the laws of aerodynamics in that there is magically no loss from drag or whatever drag loss there is ( well in excess of 20% ) is magically made up by higher fuel efficiency from the diesel? Hmmm, now there is a fairy tale to tell the children at night. "...
Heavens no, that would be a totally incorrect read and intrepretation. I think the Prius has better aerodynamics than the Jetta. (TDI, but the wind does NOT know that) You mock the truth, for you probably fear what is true, is true !?.
The way I see it, the urea injection system is virtually no different than something that has become so basic to meeting emissions regulations, the catalytic converter
Unless you don't need an urea injection system. From an autoblog post:
The 2008 Jetta TDI, spotted at the AltWheels festival in Boston. In order to meet the new emissions standards in the U.S., Volkswagen developed a new 2.0-liter diesel engine that is clean enough for 50-state certification without the use of urea injection, which is no small feat. It does so by extensively treating exhaust gases with catalysts and particulate filters. The engine develops 140 horsepower and a robust 240 ft-lbs. of twist. The demonstration model was also decidedly upmarket with a nav system...
That's 40 more HP and nearly 60 more ft/lb of torque than the existing TDI.
That's 40 more HP and nearly 60 more ft/lb of torque than the existing TDI.
% wise that is like a 400 hp Corvette (which is already monster) compared to a 500 hp Z06 Corvette ( which is even more monster).
I'd be interested in comparison to 42/49 EPA what the 2008 is rated!
PZEV certified vehicles are designed to provide maintenance-free operation for 150,000 miles. Urea refills will be required about every 7,500 miles.
Really? So nothing on a PZEV vehicle needs to be refilled or changed for 150,000 miles? Seems my Toyota dealer has been ripping me off with these 'oil changes' then!
The oem has recommended 10,000 mile OCI's for the 2003 JETTA TDI. (back drop is 49 state old school #2 diesel) With the advent of the new ULSD and use of Mobil One Truck and SUV 5w40 aka Delvac One 5w40, I am seriously considering going from 25,000 mile OCI's to 30,000 mile OCI's. This cleaner fuel is cool!
As an FYI, The oem on the 2004 Civic gasser recommends 10,000 miles OCI's.
I average 60 MPG under the same conditions (suburb) with my 2004 Prius. The 2009 is suppose to do quite a bit better. How in the world will a diesel compete with that?
.
> my understanding is that all the battery & hybrid electronics turns into "dead weight" in an extended 80 mph highway cruise - actually hurting mpg rather than helping it.
The smaller than average engine still yields a higher MPG return. There is no hurt... especially when using the A/C, since it is electric which is more efficient than a belt-driven traditional A/C.
JOHN
And you accuse me of taking things out of context. Geez!
The response was very specifically about the catalytic converter. That is certified (via PZEV) to last 150,000 miles using the gas currently available nationwide. And since that is all low-sulfur, it should easily last that long... unlike the past.
The point was that duration 20 times greater than the absurd urea requirement.
JOHN
No the point is you would not like any diesel PZEV or not, because it offers an alternative to the hybrids. Face it you are a vehicle racist. It will be interesting to see if the catalytic convertor in any of the PZEV rated cars lasts the 10 years or 150k miles. That is a requirement of CARB states. It was in itself a compromise reached when they pulled the rug out from under the EV-1 project.
How do we know that a Prius with 150k miles is living up to the PZEV rating? They are not required to have a smog check. I guess we just have to trust Toyota. The same Toyota that tried covering up the steering failures in a million vehicles. Or tried to cover up the fact that their hybrids were stalling at highway speeds and being towed by the score back to the dealership where nothing was found wrong with them. A real trustworthy bunch.
On the other extreme, you have the CAT (catalytic converter) in the hybrids. It is certified to deliver PZEV emissions for 150,000 miles... without the user needing to refill anything. After that duration, build up of sulfur will reduce cleansing effectiveness, causing emissions to drop into the ULEV zone. But even then, they'll still be cleaner than the urea system at its best.
In other words, this new cleansing scheme for diesel is a difficult sale. Why would someone want that extra burden? It most definitely does not qualify as KISS.
JOHN
Once the diesel vehicle runs out of urea
-end
Honda's new diesel engines do not use urea. Honda's diesels use a catalytic converter.
Bluetec is one choice, not the only choice.
We know you have a tough time understanding and accepting diesels John, however, there will be many, many more diesels in the near future for you to either accept and understand, or continue to hate.
Does that system reduce emissions all the way to the SULEV or PZEV level?
If not, you've completely missed the point. It is reduce emissions, not to just meet the minimum criteria.
JOHN
The technology marks a big step forward for Honda at a time when rivals are racing to come up with ways to clear the world's strictest emissions regulations, called Tier II Bin 5, that the United States will usher in next year.
Diesel engines, which now power half of Europe's new cars, are slowly gaining traction with fuel-conscious consumers around the world since they typically get 30 percent better mileage than gasoline cars. Their weakness has been the higher exhaust levels of nitrogen oxide (NOx), a greenhouse gas.
Honda said on Monday its new diesel drive train features a unique method that generates and stores ammonia within a two-layer catalytic converter to turn nitrogen oxide into harmless nitrogen.
Honda engineers said the technology is superior to a process pioneered by Germany's DaimlerChrysler because the latter requires a complex system and heavy add-ons to generate ammonia from urea-based additives.
Does that system reduce emissions all the way to the SULEV or PZEV level? -end
The initial information is that the Honda system will be SULEV. It is not yet certified by EPA and there are still hurdles for Honda to overcome.
The predictions in the industry based on what Honda has publicly stated or from industry news is that Honda will launch the engine in at least 3 vehicles in 2008 as 2009 models. This will include the Accord.
Honda has publicly stated it will likely license the technology to other automakers.
Honda has a rich history of far exceeding the minimum criteria, not just meeting the minimums and the diesels will be no exception. Honda diesels are being compared to Honda's introduction of CVCC in terms of technological innovation.
Quote-
Sometimes-stiff price premiums and disappointing real-world fuel economy are taking some of the luster off hybrids just as diesel engines are starting to shine, Global Insight Inc. forecaster Philip Gott said.
Gott, who previously predicted that hybrids of all types would account for as much as 90% of the U.S. auto market by 2025, said in a new report that they would rise in that time frame to no more than 12% of the global market, including 12% to 15% in the U.S. They currently account for less than 2% of the market here. -end
Diesel fuel economy equals or bests that of most hybrids, he said, and the engines add a smaller premium than hybrids do at dealer lots.
How will diesels compete with hybrids........LOL
If that becomes a reality, it is a welcome system. SULEV is part of the "better emissions & efficiency" goal. (It also makes the urea solution seem rather silly.)
If not, it is pointless... since many hybrids and non-hybrid gas vehicles already do deliver better emissions.
JOHN
Are you beating the farm on a prediction... just like GM did? They predicted gas would remain cheap for many years to come. That turned out to be dead wrong.
So... where's the data used to formulate that predication? What did they believe a 2025 model-year hybrid would be capable of?
No one can even predict what battery technology will be like a few years from now. So a prediction for nearly 20 years in the future is totally unrealistic.
JOHN
The response was very specifically about the catalytic converter. That is certified (via PZEV) to last 150,000 miles using the gas currently available nationwide. And since that is all low-sulfur, it should easily last that long... unlike the past.
The point was that duration 20 times greater than the absurd urea requirement.
And I would love to hear your opinion as to why the urea tank couldn't be refilled during an oil change.
And just for you John, here's a scorecard of upcoming diesels and their urea requirments.
Mercedes Bluetec: Not 50 state certified, requires urea.
VW's TDI: To be 50 state certified, no urea.
Honda's Diesel: To be 50 state certified, no urea.
My only question is, who will Toyota source for their diesel engines? It's being talked about, as they know they need a diesel for the Tundra, but they don't have anything in house that fits the bill.
For Immediate Release
September 28, 2006
COLUMBUS, IND. - Cummins Inc. (NYSE:CMI) announced today the availability of its Dodge Ram Turbo Diesel engine for the 2007 Dodge Ram 2500 and 3500 models beginning January 2007, providing increased performance for outstanding towing capability and drivability.
The Cummins Turbo Diesel will feature increased displacement of 6.7 liters, with increased horsepower and torque. The all-new 6.7-liter Cummins Turbo Diesel engine, producing 650 lb-ft of torque, has a life-to-overhaul interval of 350,000 miles, providing more than a 100,000-mile advantage over the competition.
"We are very proud to be an integral part of carrying forward the reputation for the Dodge Ram Heavy Duty pickup truck for its strength and durability with the all-new 6.7-liter Cummins Turbo Diesel engine," said Dave Crompton, Cummins Vice President and General Manager of MidRange Engine Business.
The 6.7L engine delivers more horsepower and more torque in an envelope size comparable to the 5.9L engine it replaces. The horsepower and torque rating increase from 325 horsepower to 350 and 610 lb-ft to 650 lb-ft, respectively. The 6.7L engine offers improved combustion with the integration of Variable Geometry Turbocharging for air handling, next generation of Cummins-designed cooled EGR, upgraded High Pressure Common Rail fuel system and improved integration of engine and vehicle systems for best-in-class performance. At the same time, the new engine will provide owners with the quietest engine in the HD diesel pickup truck market. Improved vehicle control and lower operating cost are both enhanced on the new 6.7L Turbo Diesel with the addition of an integrated exhaust brake option, providing outstanding braking performance; in addition, the engine has been designed to operate on Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel (15-ppm sulfur) as well as B5 Biodiesel.
"The 18-year relationship with Dodge has proven to be a success for both Cummins and DaimlerChrysler," said Jeff Caldwell, Cummins Executive Director - DaimlerChrysler Business. "Dodge's diesel share of their Heavy Duty pickup truck segment exceeds both of the major competitors' in the marketplace, establishing the Turbo Diesel-powered Ram as the premier product in this critical market niche for DaimlerChrysler."
About Cummins
Cummins Inc., a global power leader, is a corporation of complementary business units that design, manufacture, distribute and service engines and related technologies, including fuel systems, controls, air handling, filtration, emission solutions and electrical power generation systems. Headquartered in Columbus, Indiana (USA), Cummins serves customers in more than 160 countries through its network of 550 company-owned and independent distributor facilities and more than 5,000 dealer locations. Cummins reported net income of $550 million on sales of $9.9 billion in 2005. Press releases can be found on the Web at cummins.com or everytime.cummins.com.
http://www.cummins.com/cmi/content.jsp?siteId=1&langId=1033&dataId=1115&newsInfo- - - =true&menuId=4
http://www.cummins.com/cmi/content.jsp?siteId=1&langId=1033&dataId=1117&newsInfo- =true&menuId=4
Cummins Hosts EPA Administrator for Introduction of Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel
New Diesel Fuel and Improved Engine Technologies to Result in Cleanest Diesel Engines Ever Starting in 2007
For Immediate Release
Oct. 10, 2006
COLUMBUS, IND. - Cummins Inc. (NYSE: CMI) played host today as U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Stephen L. Johnson formally kicked off the nationwide switch to ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel (ULSD), which takes effect Oct. 15.
ULSD, which contains 97 percent less sulfur than previous diesel blends, is a critical component of efforts by Cummins and other diesel engine makers to meet stringent new EPA emissions regulations that go into effect Jan. 1, 2007.
Cummins Engine Business President Jim Kelly and Chief Technical Officer, Dr. John Wall led Administrator Johnson on a tour of Cummins test facilities, where the group received a first-hand look at work being done to prepare Cummins to meet the 2007 emissions standards.
Following the tour, Johnson, U.S. Rep. Mike Sodrel (9th District), American Petroleum Institute President Red Cavaney and the Cummins executives spoke about the importance of the new ULSD standards to a group of Cummins employees, industry representatives and the media.
"America's pumps are primed to deliver on President Bush's goal of clean diesel and cleaner air," said Johnson. "Over the last century, diesels have been our nation's economic workhorse - reliable, fuel efficient and long lasting.
"Today, through the President's investment in clean fuel technology, America's economic workhorse also is becoming America's environmental workhorse."
ULSD, when used in combination with emission-reduction technology being developed by Cummins and other engine makers, will result in on-highway diesel engines that produce 90 percent less particulate matter than today's engines and will greatly reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx), making these engines among the cleanest on the road. ULSD also works with any diesel engine and is expected to result in a 10 percent emissions reduction in older diesel-powered vehicles.
Lower sulfur levels in the fuel are crucial to achieving reduced emissions, because sulfur hinders exhaust-control devices in diesel engines, much like leaded gasoline once did in gas-powered vehicles. As a result of the new EPA regulations, it would take approximately 60 2007-compliant diesel-powered trucks to emit the amount of soot produced by a single truck made in 1988.
"We're delighted that the EPA chose Cummins as the location for this important announcement," said Kelly. "Cummins is prepared to meet the 2007 EPA standards, thanks to the hard work of our employees over the last several years, and the unprecedented level of collaboration with the EPA, Congress, the petroleum industry and many others.
"Achieving the new, lower emissions levels would not have been possible without ULSD. This cleaner fuel allows Cummins and others to produce engines that are capable of meeting the new standards without sacrificing performance and reliability."
Cummins 2007 product line will feature the Company's proven cooled-Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) technology with the addition of an exhaust aftertreatment system.
Exhaust aftertreatment for the majority of Cummins customers will be produced by Cummins Emissions Solutions.
Cooled-EGR was Cummins technology solution to meet the 2002 EPA standards, and customers have logged more than 30 billion miles on Cummins cooled-EGR engines over the past four years.
"Cummins has proven that its cooled-EGR technology offers the right balance of power, reliability, fuel economy and low emissions, and we're confident that our updated version of the technology will be a perfect fit again in 2007," Wall said. "The 2007 product line will be the cleanest engines we have ever produced, and will offer the quality and dependability that are synonymous with Cummins."
About Cummins
Cummins Inc., a global power leader, is a corporation of complementary business units that design, manufacture, distribute and service engines and related technologies, including fuel systems, controls, air handling, filtration, emission solutions and electrical power generation systems. Headquartered in Columbus, Indiana, (USA) Cummins serves customers in more than 160 countries through its network of 550 Company-owned and independent distributor facilities and more than 5,000 dealer locations. Cummins reported net income of $550 million on sales of $9.9 billion in 2005. Press releases can be found on the Web at www.cummins.com.
Information provided and statements on the webcast and in this release that are not purely historical are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including statements regarding the company's expectations, hopes, beliefs and intentions on strategies regarding the future. It is important to note that the company's actual future results could differ materially from those projected in such forward-looking statements because of a number of factors, including, but not limited to, general economic, business and financing conditions, labor relations, governmental action, competitor pricing activity, expense volatility and other risks detailed from time to time in Cummins Securities and Exchange Commission filings.