Navistar receives EPA certification for MaxxForce mid-range diesel engine

[DriVer]

Navistar receives EPA certification for MaxxForce mid-range diesel engine

Kelly Cauthorn posted on April 06, 2011 11:23
Courtesy of RV Daily Report, Greg Gerber - Editor

WARRENVILLE, Ill. -- Navistar International Corporation announced yesterday that it has received certification from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for its 2011 model year MaxxForce ® DT mid-range diesel engine, at 0.39g/bHpHr NOx, using Navistar’s in-cylinder NOx reduction technology.

This certification represents a 22 percent emissions reduction from the original 0.50g/bHpHr certification and demonstrates progress to achieving the 0.20g/bHpHr standard through base engine and in-cylinder optimization.

“As we’ve said all along, we’re continuing on our path to meeting the latest emissions requirements with the most customer-friendly solutions in the industry,” said Ramin Younessi, group vice president, product development and business strategy, Navistar. “Our product development team has been laser-focused on our 0.20g NOx in-cylinder emissions solution for the past four years.”

Navistar has had continuous success in recent years producing progressively lower emissions diesel engines, phasing in these engines through a process that’s invisible to the customer. In just the past 18 months, Navistar’s MaxxForce engines have ratcheted down NOx emissions by more than 67 percent from 1.2g NOx to 0.9g to 0.5g and today down to 0.39g and beyond.

“Getting to 0.2g NOx through our in-cylinder technologies has always been part of our plan and remains so today,” Younessi added. “Our technology path continues to be a seamless process for our customers where the only thing that changes for them is the EPA label affixed on the engine.”
Navistar has also received 2010 emissions certification from the EPA and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) for its 2011 MaxxForce 15 big bore diesel engine. The company launched full-scale production of the MaxxForce 15 at its Huntsville, Ala., engine plant in mid-January and the first 2011 model year International ® ProStar ®+ units with MaxxForce 15 are now making their way into customers’ hands.

In addition, Navistar also recently submitted its MaxxForce 13 at 0.20g NOx for EPA certification, once again reiterating its prime technology path in meeting the 0.20g NOx standard through in-cylinder technologies. The company intends to phase-in its engines at progressively lower NOx emissions levels (0.4g NOx, 0.35g NOx, 0.3g NOx, 0.25g NOx, etc.) in the years ahead in an effort to make emissions compliance as seamless as possible to its customers.

SOURCE: Business Wire press release

[MonacoMama]

It is great to see some positive info coming from the RV community!!

[moisheh]

Driver: Could you please explain the standard that the new engines meet. Are they at the required level now or is this just an interim certification and the standard will have to be met in the future? I found the press release ambiguous but maybe it is just the way they worded it.

[DriVer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by moisheh Driver: Could you please explain the standard that the new engines meet. Are they at the required level now or is this just an interim certification and the standard will have to be met in the future?

Moisheh, I certainly don't want you to assume that I am preaching to the choir with my comments. I believe that you are quite knowledgeable in this field and I do expect that you have more than a casual understanding of what the standards are.

I will however present the information that was made available to me if it helps answer this question.

Neither SCR or AEGR currently meet the standard at the tailpipe.

At this time, "at the tailpipe", SCR is closer in meeting the standard than AEGR. How is this possible and meet the standard? The Federal standards are meet by both camps by technology and credits.

SCR still needs credits to meet the 2010 emission control standards. AEGR meets the 2010 emission control standards however they need to use more credits to achieve the standard.

SCR is bleeding fewer credits than AEGR at the moment but those credits will run out at some point where the standard MUST be met at the tailpipe or the penalties per engine would drive the manufacturer out of business. To the best of my recollection, the fine could be as much as $10,000 per engine.

The next hurdle in percentages comes I believe in 2013 at which point credits are going to bleed out like someone opened up a 48" storm drain. I have been offered a bit of insight about what Maxxforce expects to achieve by that time. MaxxForce engines expects to meet the standard using their in cylinder solution at the tailpipe due to engineering alone and not be dependent on credits. Going from 1.2 NOx to 0.2 NOx in cylinder by just turning the key, I believe is going to be the 600 pound gorilla in the room. I expect that many in the trucking and RV industry will welcome that technology and it will assume a more dominant role in their considerations when they look toward buying fleets of vehicles.

I have not spoken with anyone at Cummins about 2013 but I will bet you that they will come up to task as well however I expect that Blue-Def (urea) will continue to be a component of their strategy. It would seem that it would have to. Cummins and others would not want to string along the UREA consortium just to turn around in a couple of years and tell them that they are no longer needed. Emissions aside, Cummins makes great engines and I don't expect that they will ever go out of business so they will definitely meet the new standard without I expect using credits.

As with any type of technology, you never know. Hamilton made some of the best propellers on the planet but with the advent of jet engines turbines have taken over that role. When an in-cylinder standard is achieved by one why not all is going to be the question of the day that is going to be on the table in the board rooms.

[mythplaced]

So let's see if I understand.......

(Precursor, this is NOT a shot at any manufacturer, I just want to understand the standards)

1. NONE of these diesel technologies meets the output standards...
   
2. The reason they pass is because of "loopholes" in the standard that allow them to use "carbon credit" to INCREASE the emissions output allowable?

I call SHENANIGANS on the government (EPA)or the standards body that created this "stuff" (and stuff is spelled B***S**T)

[DriVer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mythplaced I call SHENANIGANSon the government (EPA)or the standards body that created this "stuff" ...

I surely don't want to put in a position where I should advocate for the Fed but those laws were on the books for quite some time now and it's not only us. Look around at advanced countries in the world. They all have laws on the their books regulating emissions. Even China one of the worst polluters in the world is finally coming around slowly but they are making a move it that direction.

Once the credits run out here on EPA emission mandates it's either play the game or go home. Personally I think that getting rid of leaded gasoline was a good thing and that was a Fed emission requirement. Just have to take it one day at a time. Whether the standard is achieved with loopholes or other means it's a much better option than not to try at all.

[moisheh]

Actually Driver I am not up to date on the latest standards. I stopped following it as there was just too much misinformation from the 2 camps. Almost like the Senate!! I really think that the Feds made the standards a little too severe. It must be difficult too get these engines that clean. I also am pleased that the regulators must realize that fact and are giving them some leeway. I am all in favor of clean air but we all must realize there is a huge cost to achieve the required results. We all end up paying those costs not only when we buy an RV or Truck but when we buy anything that has a built in transportation cost ( almost all consumer goods including food!). Inflation added to a fragile economy can have drastic results. Thanks for a good explanation.