Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > General Efficiency Discussion
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 10-26-2010, 06:15 PM   #1 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,755

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,582
Thanked 3,541 Times in 2,211 Posts
Gummint proposing fuel efficiency standards for medium and heavy duty trucks

WASHINGTON - For the first time, the government is proposing fuel-efficiency standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks.

In a few years those kinds of vehicles school buses, delivery vans, garbage trucks, tractor-trailers and more will have to get more miles to the gallon than they do today.

The fuel-efficiency plan is expected to be announced Monday in Washington.

The Environmental Protection Agency and the Transportation Department are seeking to improve standards for vehicles sold in the 2014 model year and into the 2018 model year.

The White House has been pushing for tougher fuel economy standards for all kinds of vehicles as a way to reduce oil consumption and cut greenhouse gas emissions.

Under new federal proposal, medium- and heavy-duty trucks must get more miles to the gallon | StarTribune.com

__________________


  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 10-26-2010, 06:57 PM   #2 (permalink)
UFO
Master EcoModder
 
UFO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,300

Colorado - '17 Chevrolet Colorado 4x4 LT
90 day: 23.07 mpg (US)
Thanks: 315
Thanked 178 Times in 138 Posts
It's about time.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2010, 07:29 PM   #3 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada
Posts: 531
Thanks: 11
Thanked 12 Times in 11 Posts
It will be interesting in how they think they can do this, given there are a billion possible configurations on these trucks. I know California is mandating LRR tires and aero mods on trailers but I dont see how else this can work other than making fuel expensive.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2010, 05:27 PM   #4 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,755

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,582
Thanked 3,541 Times in 2,211 Posts
I'd imagine they come up with a "typical" useage profile like they've done for cars, at the GVWR or some percentage of it, and dyno it all. But, I don't know.
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2010, 06:04 PM   #5 (permalink)
UFO
Master EcoModder
 
UFO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,300

Colorado - '17 Chevrolet Colorado 4x4 LT
90 day: 23.07 mpg (US)
Thanks: 315
Thanked 178 Times in 138 Posts
I'm not sure how this requirement can be complied with either. There must already be a significant amount of pressure on manufacturers to install efficient engines already, as fuels cost are probably one of the main considerations in commercial truck purchases. There may have to be other methods employed to improve efficiency, such as regenerative braking, aerodynamics, perhaps exemptions for renewable fuels...
__________________
I'm not coasting, I'm shifting slowly.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2010, 08:33 AM   #6 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,755

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,582
Thanked 3,541 Times in 2,211 Posts
Ah, this helps:

Report Recommends Ways to Regulate and Improve Fuel Economy of Tractor-Trailers, Buses, Work Trucks, and Other Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles



WASHINGTON -- A new congressionally mandated report from the National Research Council evaluates various technologies and methods that could improve the fuel economy of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, such as tractor-trailers, transit buses, and work trucks. The report also recommends approaches that federal agencies could use to regulate these vehicles' fuel consumption. Currently there are no fuel consumption standards for such vehicles, which account for about 26 percent of the transportation fuel used in the U.S.



"The choices that will be made over the course of the next few years will establish the regulatory design for medium- and heavy-duty vehicle fuel consumption standards for the next several decades," said Andrew Brown Jr., chair of the committee that wrote the report, and executive director and chief technologist at Delphi Corp., Troy, Mich. In 2007 Congress passed legislation requiring the U.S. Department of Transportation for the first time in history to establish fuel economy standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration asked the National Research Council to recommend the best ways to measure and regulate fuel economy for these vehicles, and assess technologies that could improve it.



The committee estimated the improvements that various technologies could achieve over the next decade in seven vehicle types. For example, using advanced diesel engines in tractor-trailers could lower their fuel consumption by up to 20 percent by 2020, and improved aerodynamics could yield an 11 percent reduction. Hybrid powertrains could lower the fuel consumption of vehicles that stop frequently, such as garbage trucks and transit buses, by as much 35 percent in the same time frame. While the cost of making these improvements would be passed on to vehicle purchasers, the report notes that many of these suites of technologies would pay for themselves even at today’s energy prices, under the committee’s assumptions.



The report also estimates the costs and maximum fuel savings that could be achieved for each type of vehicle by 2020 if a combination of technologies were used. The best cost-benefit ratio was offered by tractor-trailers, whose fuel use could be cut by about 50 percent for about $84,600 per truck; the improvements would be cost-effective over ten years provided gas prices are at least $1.10 per gallon. The fuel use of motor coaches could be lowered by 32 percent for an estimated $36,350 per bus, which would be cost-effective if the price of fuel is $1.70 per gallon or higher. For other vehicle classes, the financial investments in making improvements would be cost-effective at higher prices of fuel.



In setting fuel consumption standards, regulators should use a measure that accounts for the amount of freight or passengers carried by these vehicles, the report says. The miles-per-gallon measure used to regulate the fuel economy of passenger cars (light-duty vehicles) is not appropriate for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, which are designed above all to carry loads efficiently, the report says. For example, a partially loaded tractor-trailer could travel more miles per gallon than a fully loaded one, but this would not be an accurate measure of the fuel efficiency of moving goods.



Instead, any regulation of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles should use a metric that reflects the efficiency with which a vehicle moves goods or passengers, such as gallons per ton-mile, a unit that reflects the amount of fuel a vehicle would use to carry a ton of goods one mile. This is called load-specific fuel consumption (LSFC).



The report does not recommend a specific numerical standard because NHTSA will need to establish standards tied to the task associated with a particular type of vehicle; garbage trucks might be held to a different standard than transit buses, for example. NHTSA should base its regulations on national data on the average payload carried by each type of vehicle. The agency should regulate the final-stage vehicle manufacturers rather than component makers, as the former has the greatest control over the vehicle's design, the report adds. "Our committee also recommends that NHTSA conduct a pilot program to 'test drive' the certification process and validate the regulatory framework," said Brown.



While regulating medium- and heavy-duty vehicles will be more complicated than it is for passenger cars because of the variety of vehicles and their differing tasks and terrains, the barriers are not insurmountable, the report says. Japan regulates the fuel economy of these vehicles, and both the European Union and the state of California are developing standards.



However, one way to avoid the complexity of regulating different types of vehicles would be to impose a fuel tax, which would induce firms to optimize the fuel-efficiency of their operations. The report urges Congress to consider this approach. Another alternative approach -- applying a cap-and-trade system to trucking companies similar to the one that Congress is considering as a way to lower CO2 emissions -- would similarly provide these companies with an incentive to adopt fuel-saving technologies and operational methods.



In addition, the report recommends nontechnical methods NHTSA could use to lower fuel consumption, including providing incentives to train vehicle operators in efficient driving techniques, which can result in fuel savings of anywhere from 2 percent to 17 percent. One approach could be to establish a process to train and certify drivers in these techniques as part of commercial driver license certification.

Improving Fuel Economy of Tractor-Trailers, Buses, Work Trucks
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2010, 10:49 AM   #7 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Ryland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Western Wisconsin
Posts: 3,903

honda cb125 - '74 Honda CB 125 S1
90 day: 79.71 mpg (US)

green wedge - '81 Commuter Vehicles Inc. Commuti-Car

Blue VX - '93 Honda Civic VX
Thanks: 867
Thanked 433 Times in 353 Posts
Even if they don't regulate the fuel use, requiring some sort of labeling seems like a good idea so that the buyers of these types of vehicles can make an informed choice.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2010, 10:54 AM   #8 (permalink)
Hypermiler
 
PaleMelanesian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,316

PaleCivic (retired) - '96 Honda Civic DX Sedan
90 day: 69.2 mpg (US)

PaleFit - '09 Honda Fit Sport
Team Honda
Wagons
90 day: 44.06 mpg (US)
Thanks: 607
Thanked 424 Times in 277 Posts
How about testing and publishing mpg ratings for the F350 class? The usage profile is not so different from cars, and the tests are already in place.
__________________



11-mile commute: 100 mpg - - - Tank: 90.2 mpg / 1191 miles
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2010, 11:07 AM   #9 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: california
Posts: 1,329
Thanks: 24
Thanked 160 Times in 106 Posts
Oh goody. As if owner/operator of heavy duty trucks were totally unaware of how much fuel they're using until today.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2010, 12:09 PM   #10 (permalink)
UFO
Master EcoModder
 
UFO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,300

Colorado - '17 Chevrolet Colorado 4x4 LT
90 day: 23.07 mpg (US)
Thanks: 315
Thanked 178 Times in 138 Posts
That's excellent if the pricing and return on investment figures are accurate.

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fuel Economy related papers tasdrouille General Efficiency Discussion 41 03-19-2021 06:31 PM
mileage computer for a carbureted engine diesel_john Instrumentation 221 05-01-2014 10:38 PM
Announcing a complete solution to mapping engine efficiency kubark42 Instrumentation 80 01-14-2011 09:36 PM
Tips needed for eco-driving my diesel truck! nubbzcummins Hypermiling / EcoDriver's Ed 65 12-07-2010 01:37 PM



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com