NOx and general emissions levels pre vs post delete

[UglyViking]

So, I've tried to pull up some info but so far have struck out. I'm trying to figure out if anyone has data on emissions levels with emissions equipment on vs deleted. I don't want to get into the should you delete or not argument, that's not my goal here. My goal is to find hard data on what emissions levels are from a factory vehicle vs one that has been deleted.

My understanding is that obviously the newer emissions equipped vehicles are releasing a lot less pollutant into the atmosphere, however I've seen a lot of guys doing tunes on deleted trucks that look "clean". By clean I mean no or super low levels of soot. Since visual isn't the only killer out there I'm curious if anyone knows of testing that has been done on any deleted vehicles to compare apples to apples.

 

[Too Tall]

Just an old man's observation who likes to watch gauges, not an expert analysis. I'm not deleted so I can't answer the question directly but from what I see, when the truck is in regen, the NOX PPM averages 30 PPM over the 20 minutes or so that it is in regen. (The EGR valve is closed during regen). That's still very low IMO, but more DEF is being pumped to compensate so IMO, it would be much higher without the additional DEF, I assume). When the truck goes back to normal EGR operation, (at 65 mph towing), I'm seeing 0 to 3 PPM. Mostly 0.

As to the Soot output, (carbon), which is probably what you really want to know and I can't help other than, visually with the DPF, the exhaust pipe shows no soot so I suspect the soot level is probably close to 0 but don't have any hard evidence.

 

[josephc1]

Subscribed

 

[UglyViking]

Without getting too much into it since I don't want to open a can of worms, I'm actually interested mostly in NOx emissions.

While I don't like the look of soot, nor do I have interest in cleaning it off my truck or "rolling coal" on hybrids I don't think the soot is all that bad. I think the soot is mostly an issue where people look at it and view it as a problem, but in reality it's the invisible killers that are the real issue.

My desire is to try and pull data to see the real harm in deleting a truck, especially around NOx. I am trying to get an apples to apples comparison on total emissions not just vehicle emissions. I think about the boxes of plastic and cardboard def fluid I'm filling, plus the additional burning of diesel, the slightly lower MPG (since these newer trucks have vastly better emissions equipment), downside to the engine, etc. Outside of the legality of the thing I'm interested in the overall lifecycle of the emissions.

For example, I've seen multiple studies discussing conventional combustion engine sedans vs electric vehicles like the nissan leaf and tesla model 3. They seem to point to the electric vehicle being far better for the environment over the long term but they always seem to leave out where the energy to charge said batteries and the lifecycle of batteries in different climates (we don't all live in sunny California after all).

From my initial research it looks like modern diesels have something like 10x less the NOx emissions than older diesels. That said, a lot has changed in that time and I'd be curious to know what a modern diesel with a clean tune spit out vs a fully emissions in tact vehicle. I'm sure it's not enough to pass the strict emissions required by law as if that were a possibility I'd imagine that everyone would have dumped the DPF and such by now. That said, I'm interested in seeing data. As an example this article (https://www.dw.com/en/nitrogen-oxide-is-it-really-that-dangerous-lung-doctors-ask/a-47202076) brings up the differences of epidemiological studies and the much discussed causality argument, or more often references as "correlation does not equal causation".

I'm not one to ignore science, however I also know that people often have a blind faith in things being told to them by anyone in the scientific or political community. I would rather look at the data and make up my own mind on the situation and if the juice is worth the squeeze if you will.

 

[lpennock]

Cummins does sell engines that all emission control is in the exhaust. I heard rumor that EPA wouldn't allow in light duty truck because it didn't have egr.

https://www.cummins.com/engines/b67-stage-v

 

[Andy_dirt]

I read an article once about the new emissions on diesel motors breaking the particles up, possibly causing more lung damage than the black soot falling to the ground and getting washed into the ocean.

 

[Ozymandias]

Oh well, Yeah, thats why all Diesel Vehicles have a DPF - exactly for that reason.

 

[Ozymandias]

Cummins does sell engines that all emission control is in the exhaust. I heard rumor that EPA wouldn't allow in light duty truck because it didn't have egr.

https://www.cummins.com/engines/b67-stage-v

These are EURO5 rated, that's an outdated Norm since 2015. Still possibly to sell in many Countrys, but not in the first world.
Back then it was possible to go non-EGR.

 

[Andy_dirt]

Oh well, Yeah, thats why all Diesel Vehicles have a DPF - exactly for that reason.

What comes out of the exhaust tip? Fresh air? Kind of like what comes out of a septic spray nozzle? Fresh drinking water?

 

[Ozymandias]

Clean air, in most places cleaner then the
outside air

 

[UglyViking]

I'd rather not get into any sort of political arguments here. My point being that I think a lot of the emissions related research I've seen have been done with epidemiological studies, while I'm not going to claim NOx is good for you to inhale it's also not good to inhale exhaust gases from a gasoline vehicle either. In the 1970s there was a push to remove lead from gasoline, and I think overall we are all better for it. I also lived in southern cali and used to deal with the smog on an almost daily basis and having visited early this year you can see the difference between the 1990s and today. That said, everything has a trade off and I'm trying to better understand that trade off. I live in an area with a huge % of the state being covered by forest, so there is a bit less concern for certain chemicals than if I lived in a huge city center as the trees can feed off some of these chemicals. What works for downtown LA isn't necessarily the same thing that could work for Portland ME if you catch my drift.

If I find that without emissions equipment I'm emitting 10x the harmful NOx and other emissions then that clearly is a signal to keep it on, if it's only 2x then it's less so considering the additional fuel burnt as part of regen, the creation, packaging and distribution of def, not to mention the hit to the longevity of the vehicle. I'm not going to sit here and pretend to be some climate crusader nor is my goal to ignore science, I am just looking for the hard data so I can make that decision and weigh all the risks and downsides myself.

 

[kthaxton]

One thing to keep in mind in your endeavor is that solid wastes....cardboard, plastic etc and liquid wastes, can be captured and controlled or recycled. Emissions released to the atmosphere cannot. That's why controlling air emissions carries more weight than other forms.

 

[UglyViking]

Oh yeah, the end item itself is one thing in that it's easier to control, but there is also emissions from the manufacture, and delivery of those goods as well.

I don't think I'll get down too far into the rabbit hole, as end of the day it's just not worth stressing over that small amount, but it's something to note if it's even close.

To be frank, I expect that even a "clean tune" modern deleted diesel will still be greater than 4x the pollutants of one with emissions controls on, but I'm curious to know if that is accurate.

 

[tlevan03]

I think to get the results youre looking for you would need to conduct an experiment with three trucks, one with no emissions controls (or deleted), another with a EGR and DPF, and one with the full plate. Preferably the same engine. Have each one go through an emissions test.

 

[kthaxton]

I don't think I'll get down too far into the rabbit hole, as end of the day it's just not worth stressing over that small amount, but it's something to note if it's even close.

Agreed. I'm sure you're not the first one to analyze these variables.

 

[sag2]

I don't have any direct data, but I will guess that as far as NOx goes it is a lot more without EGR and SCR Catalyst. The new trucks are tuned so they create more NOx in the engine because they can clean it up in the exhaust. The best info might be to search the VW emissions debacle, as I seem to recall they quoted the increase in emissions, and it was in the hundreds of % increase.

 

[UglyViking]

I hadn't thought about looking into the VM emissions info, thats a good call, I'll have to dig into that. Seems so obvious I'm surprised I didn't think of that.

 

[Wiredawg]

I had a 2009 Ram 4500 4x4 that I ran full emissions the first six months I owned it, then complete delete of DPF/EGR, ran for 8 years, then put all the emissions back on the last six months I owned it. Full emissions on, there was a light gray powder residue inside the tailpipe, completely deleted there was a nasty black sooty tar. I consider the tunes I ran with MADs tuner, mostly level 5, were relatively clean in that it didn't roll smoke, but very doubtful it would pass any emissions test. The smoke rollers are the extreme example of bad emissions, but the "clean tunes" deleted are not good, IMHO. There is no way I would delete any more as I think the Feds and the States are gonna figure out another HUGE source of revenue with enforcing emissions with a whopping $25K fine.

Just my experience, observations and opinion.

Cheers, Ron

 

[UglyViking]

I'm with ya Ron. That said, it's also up to the states to enforce, so while I don't know what life will look like in 20 years it seems in the next 10 you should be able to tell where your state is trending. I agree with you on the "clean" likely not being as clean, but that's what I'm curious about. I don't know of any DIY ways to test so that may be something I have to go without.

 

[Wiredawg]

I'm with ya Ron. That said, it's also up to the states to enforce, so while I don't know what life will look like in 20 years it seems in the next 10 you should be able to tell where your state is trending. I agree with you on the "clean" likely not being as clean, but that's what I'm curious about. I don't know of any DIY ways to test so that may be something I have to go without.

Another note on my choice to restore emissions on my 09 and keeping it on my 17 is that with the emissions, the performance and work capability is so good. I always purchased Ram Cummins trucks for their increased towing and hauling capability.

I also agree with you about keeping the politics out of the discussion and keeping it to the technical side of it. Unfortunately, some folks just can't keep from it.

Good thread and good techincal discussion.

Cheers, Ron