Attention: TDR Forum Junkies 
April 19, 2002 5:18 PM
Subject: Re: [DIESEL] FW: California says diesel cleaner than CNG
> For those of you that can't get in to read this story, here it is:
>
> WASHINGTON, April 19 /PRNewswire/ -- New comparative environmental data
> from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) indicates that California's
> massive South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) in Los Angeles
> may have jumped the gun in mandating compressed natural gas (CNG) for
buses
> and other vehicles in its jurisdiction. The new CARB data suggests
> emissions from CNG buses may actually be more toxic than its
alternative --
> modern diesel systems, according to Allen Schaeffer, Executive Director of
> the Washington, D. C. -based Diesel Technology Forum. "This study certainly
> challenges conventional thinking -- it shows us that alternative fuels
like
> CNG are not always as clean as they have been accepted to be, and more
> importantly, that we have not given fair consideration to the tremendous
> progress made in clean diesel technology," said Schaeffer. "It was a naive
> assumption that CNG emitted fewer particulates than diesel," said
> toxicologist Charles Lapin, Ph. D. of Glendale, CA. He said he was
surprised
> that toxic formaldehyde levels in CNG emissions were so much higher than
> diesel, but he acknowledged that only one or two studies have looked at
the
> toxicity of CNG emissions. The announcement by CARB that diesel engines
> with soot filters emit fewer and less-toxic compounds than "clean" CNG
> engines questions the objectivity and wisdom of South Coast District's
> two-year-old CNG-only decision. That policy, based on conjecture rather
> than comparative data, has seen taxpayers subsidize hundreds of millions
of
> dollars for new CNG vehicles and fueling stations -- in the midst of the
> natural gas shortage. "Several months ago, California determined that it
> didn't adequately study the adverse effects of the gasoline additive MTBE
> before mandating its use, and Californians are now paying the price. The
> blind rush by some government agencies away from modern clean diesel to
> CNG-fueled public transit may carry the same harmful effects. Our message
> is that all fuels and technologies should be evaluated fairly and openly,"
> said Schaeffer. Some 13 transit fleets and all school districts in the
> South Coast AQMD region have been required to direct new purchase dollars
> to the more expensive, less reliable, and potentially more toxic CNG
buses,
> said Schaeffer. "It's a prime example of why government agencies should
not
> pick winners and losers in the technology arena," he added. CARB, one of
> the world's leading advocates of "alternative" technologies, discovered in
> its tests with South Coast AQMD that a diesel bus with a soot trap
> outperformed a newer CNG bus in eight out of 11 pollution tests. The
> results also suggest that the CNG exhaust components may be more harmful
> than those from low-sulfur diesel fuel. The CARB data corroborates studies
> done in Sweden in 2000 but were rejected by the South Coast AQMD and many
> policymakers at CARB during the decision-making process in 2000 and 2001.
> The results also parallel a much larger California study of trucks, waste
> haulers and school buses conducted by BP/ARCO along with CARB, South Coast
> AQMD, and the U. S. Department of Energy. "The comparison reaffirms the
> decision made by 21 California transit agencies last year that chose a
> clean diesel future over CNG. And it leaves the South Coast Air Quality
> Management District -- a co-sponsor of the study - - questioning the
wisdom
> of its policies that have advocated 'clean' alternatives with impunity,"
> said Schaeffer. "These findings only further reinforce the value of clean
> diesel technology in meeting air quality goals and what the majority of
> transit districts and school bus fleets already know -- they can get more
> clean air for the buck with clean diesel technology," asserted Schaeffer.
> This technology includes cleaner engines, cleaner fuel and emissions
> systems that collectively reduce soot, nitrogen oxides and other
> pollutants. Experience with CNG by transit districts around the country
> suggests that not only is it far more expensive technology to own and to
> operate, but it is less fuel efficient, less reliable and breaks down more
> often. "All engines produce emissions, and neither diesel nor CNG are
> exempt," said Schaeffer, whose members offer both clean diesel and CNG
> products. "Technology is constantly evolving towards lowering emissions.
> These kinds of studies not only improve our knowledge of the science, but
> we also hope they promote change in the process that compares technologies
> and the perception and understanding about just how far we have come in
> diesel technology," he added. "We encourage more comparison studies, since
> this research was only based on two buses. But the South Coast AQMD stood
> firmly behind it's CNG-only policy with NO data," concluded Schaeffer.
> "Perhaps these new findings will encourage the District to reconsider its
> restrictive mandate. " The Diesel Technology Forum represents manufacturers
> of engines, fuel and emissions control systems. It brings together the
> diesel industry, the broad diesel user community, civic and public
interest
> leaders, government regulators, academics, scientists, the petroleum
> industry and public health researchers to encourage the exchange of
> information, ideas, scientific findings and points-of-view to current and
> future uses of diesel power technology. For more information about the
> Forum, visit the web site at http://www.dieselforum.org .
Subject: Re: [DIESEL] FW: California says diesel cleaner than CNG
> For those of you that can't get in to read this story, here it is:
>
> WASHINGTON, April 19 /PRNewswire/ -- New comparative environmental data
> from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) indicates that California's
> massive South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) in Los Angeles
> may have jumped the gun in mandating compressed natural gas (CNG) for
buses
> and other vehicles in its jurisdiction. The new CARB data suggests
> emissions from CNG buses may actually be more toxic than its
alternative --
> modern diesel systems, according to Allen Schaeffer, Executive Director of
> the Washington, D. C. -based Diesel Technology Forum. "This study certainly
> challenges conventional thinking -- it shows us that alternative fuels
like
> CNG are not always as clean as they have been accepted to be, and more
> importantly, that we have not given fair consideration to the tremendous
> progress made in clean diesel technology," said Schaeffer. "It was a naive
> assumption that CNG emitted fewer particulates than diesel," said
> toxicologist Charles Lapin, Ph. D. of Glendale, CA. He said he was
surprised
> that toxic formaldehyde levels in CNG emissions were so much higher than
> diesel, but he acknowledged that only one or two studies have looked at
the
> toxicity of CNG emissions. The announcement by CARB that diesel engines
> with soot filters emit fewer and less-toxic compounds than "clean" CNG
> engines questions the objectivity and wisdom of South Coast District's
> two-year-old CNG-only decision. That policy, based on conjecture rather
> than comparative data, has seen taxpayers subsidize hundreds of millions
of
> dollars for new CNG vehicles and fueling stations -- in the midst of the
> natural gas shortage. "Several months ago, California determined that it
> didn't adequately study the adverse effects of the gasoline additive MTBE
> before mandating its use, and Californians are now paying the price. The
> blind rush by some government agencies away from modern clean diesel to
> CNG-fueled public transit may carry the same harmful effects. Our message
> is that all fuels and technologies should be evaluated fairly and openly,"
> said Schaeffer. Some 13 transit fleets and all school districts in the
> South Coast AQMD region have been required to direct new purchase dollars
> to the more expensive, less reliable, and potentially more toxic CNG
buses,
> said Schaeffer. "It's a prime example of why government agencies should
not
> pick winners and losers in the technology arena," he added. CARB, one of
> the world's leading advocates of "alternative" technologies, discovered in
> its tests with South Coast AQMD that a diesel bus with a soot trap
> outperformed a newer CNG bus in eight out of 11 pollution tests. The
> results also suggest that the CNG exhaust components may be more harmful
> than those from low-sulfur diesel fuel. The CARB data corroborates studies
> done in Sweden in 2000 but were rejected by the South Coast AQMD and many
> policymakers at CARB during the decision-making process in 2000 and 2001.
> The results also parallel a much larger California study of trucks, waste
> haulers and school buses conducted by BP/ARCO along with CARB, South Coast
> AQMD, and the U. S. Department of Energy. "The comparison reaffirms the
> decision made by 21 California transit agencies last year that chose a
> clean diesel future over CNG. And it leaves the South Coast Air Quality
> Management District -- a co-sponsor of the study - - questioning the
wisdom
> of its policies that have advocated 'clean' alternatives with impunity,"
> said Schaeffer. "These findings only further reinforce the value of clean
> diesel technology in meeting air quality goals and what the majority of
> transit districts and school bus fleets already know -- they can get more
> clean air for the buck with clean diesel technology," asserted Schaeffer.
> This technology includes cleaner engines, cleaner fuel and emissions
> systems that collectively reduce soot, nitrogen oxides and other
> pollutants. Experience with CNG by transit districts around the country
> suggests that not only is it far more expensive technology to own and to
> operate, but it is less fuel efficient, less reliable and breaks down more
> often. "All engines produce emissions, and neither diesel nor CNG are
> exempt," said Schaeffer, whose members offer both clean diesel and CNG
> products. "Technology is constantly evolving towards lowering emissions.
> These kinds of studies not only improve our knowledge of the science, but
> we also hope they promote change in the process that compares technologies
> and the perception and understanding about just how far we have come in
> diesel technology," he added. "We encourage more comparison studies, since
> this research was only based on two buses. But the South Coast AQMD stood
> firmly behind it's CNG-only policy with NO data," concluded Schaeffer.
> "Perhaps these new findings will encourage the District to reconsider its
> restrictive mandate. " The Diesel Technology Forum represents manufacturers
> of engines, fuel and emissions control systems. It brings together the
> diesel industry, the broad diesel user community, civic and public
interest
> leaders, government regulators, academics, scientists, the petroleum
> industry and public health researchers to encourage the exchange of
> information, ideas, scientific findings and points-of-view to current and
> future uses of diesel power technology. For more information about the
> Forum, visit the web site at http://www.dieselforum.org .
