States to Delay Diesel Lubrication Standards

[jimnance]

This information from an article in Transport Topics dated 12/13/04.



"Many states that now use ASTM International guidelines have decided to delay implementation of a ruling that would require, effective Jan 1, a minimum amount of lubricating qualities in diesel fuel "



" Many fuel terminals have said they need more time to prepare for the deadline since they originally thought refineries would be adding the lubricity compunds. Now, though, it may be that terminal operators would have to install injection equipment at each terminal "



It appears that lubricity issues associated with the reduction in sulfur in our diesel fuel from it's present levels of up to 500 PPM, but due to be reduced to 10-15 PPM by mid-2006, have not been resolved.



Trucking firms are worried about supply shortages caused by terminal operators being unprepared to add the needed lubricity additives for the ULSD being phased into production.



Unfortunately, the refining process to reduce sulfur to the U. S. mandated levels in mid-2006 will significantly reduce the lubricity in our fuels. This can cause premature injection pump failure amongst other things if additives are not added to restore the needed lubricity.



Until this issue is resolved, I'm personally comitted to putting an additive in my fuel that has lubricity components.



I realize that this may be "old news" to some, but this article surprised me as I had also "assumed" that refiners would be adding the needed additives. Apparently not.

 

[rbattelle]

Uh-oh. I've got to start running a fuel additive, but I find it impossible to pick one with the raging debate about emulsifying vs. demulifying.



-Ryan

 

[Marco]

Again that low sulfur, dead injection pump stuff... .



My truck has never seen anything different than 50ppm diesel. No problems at all with the VP. The common rail pump is designed by Bosch for less then

10ppm sulfur fuel.



What do you worry about?



I have a different thought about the sulfur hype that's going on over there in the States.



Fact is you have the most severe emission rules for diesel engines for light duty vehicles. Those rules can be met but only with lower than 50 ppm diesel fuel. Can be met by whom? All the European car makers could sell their diesel engines in the States today IF there was low sulfur fuel availabel.



Can the American car maker industry do that? Do they have the technology ready for their engines? Dare I say NOT?!?



Marco

 

[jimnance]

Marco, I'm not suggesting that removing sulfur from diesel is a bad idea. On the contrary, I think it is a good idea.



What you may not know, is that fuel quality in the US is generally poor and very inconsistant. In tests against European fuel our fuel was found to be defficient in most respects.



As has been pointed out, it's not the lack of sulfur in the fuel that is the problem. It is the refining process that removes the sulfur. It also reduces the fuels ability to lubricate.



While your countries have lubricating standards that allow the use of ULSD, our country doesn't. Some states had adopted the international standard for minimum lubricity, but this article indicates that our fuel, in general, has not been treated to meet those standards. Also, it may be some time before the infrastructure to treat the fuel is in place.



Also, I hope this thread doesn't creap and become a "which additive is better" flamer. At this point any additive with lubricity enhancers is better than no additive, IMHO.