I've been googling for about 2 hours now and have yet to find a summary or statement showing that all this particulate filtering has helped or not.

Does anyone know if things are improving? I mean, has air quality gone up? I'm just curious, I know I'm glad I don't have to clean the sides of my trailers anymore.

 

Speaking from eyeball exp. I say a resounding yes. I can remember in high school, mid 60's, you could walk out to our street and could not see the end of the block from the brown haze. In the summer, forget ever seeing the mts. I hate emission controls as much as anyone but they have definitely made a diff.

 

Don't forget that total vehicle numbers have continued to increase on our roadways as that will offset overall particulate and other smog numbers.

 

Yes, that's why I'm curious. If you figure on average, the exhaust after treatment system in its entirety costs several hundred dollars per vehicle plus a penalty of at least 2 mpg, it's a VERY expensive proposition that is debatable whether it will make any difference at all in the long run. Depletion of resources, financial hardship.

I know the intentions are good and just. I'm curious if there's any progress.

 

There are reports published that a 2015 Super Duty has less than 10% of the emissions as a 2005 6.0

I will try to find it

 

I remember the burning eyes and the air quality warnings every summer. I don't remember the last time my eyes burned during the summer.

 

Did anyone ever get behind a KW or a Pete back in 1975 that had a Cat 1693 engine set at 425 HP?????? When he was pulling a grade????? Or an old Mack B69?????

Me thinks the DPF systems have made great improvements!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Same here, grew up in SoCal, ~ 6 houses down from the base of the Verdugo Mountains. On a "clear" summer day you couldn't see them.

 

I think so. It has forced the makers to come up with new and better designs.


We as the consumer are also demanding that they be efficient and the fuel economy gets better or at least holds the line.

 

I wasn't aware DPF's were in use since sometime in the '60s. IF you truly want to think about it you need to "think" about what the air was like in 2007 compared to now since that is when DPF's were initiated.

I'd say with all the increased fuel usage they are a huge FAIL. But I am also not a anthropogenic global warmist either.

I remember as a kid all the no burn days and the haze from Denver, that all went away WAY before DPF's were even a glimmer in the EPA's eye.

 

I am heavy equipment tech for Caterpillar. In a training class a while back, it was said that in Los Angeles county the air going into the intake of a diesel equipped with Tier 4 final emissions equipment (DPF and DEF) was cleaner than the exhaust coming out as far as chemical and particulate matter. In effect, this means that diesels going down the road can in on sense be thought of as air cleaners.

Now....to me? Yes, there is no doubt whatsoever that what comes out of the tailpipe as far as particulate matter and nox has been substantially reduced from what they were a decade ago, and exponentially better than even 25 years ago. But at what cost? Take a diesel truck of any make and model made in the last 10 years. From the factory, for arguments sake, lets say said diesel gets 11 MPG factory. You straight pipe it, delete the EGR system, put a less restrictive intake on it, tune it and drive conservatively, you could see (again guestimation here but common numbers) 18 MPG.

So, I ask you. Do these systems create cleaner emissions? Yes. Is it worth using 50%, 60%, 70% more fuel to say, "Hey look! The emissions are x.xx amount cleaner!"?

The reality is, the people passing these laws and mandates don't care about the environment, or how many PPM of sulfur is in diesel, or how much soot comes out of our exhaust pipes. Someone, somewhere, is making money for them to pass them. And they sure as heck don't care, or care to know, the dollar amount the manufactures and end users (you, me, Bobs Tow Service, etc) end up paying due to the breakdown, lost work time, decreased longevity, and increased wear these systems often result in. Rant over.

 

Cool. I was searching for something of a report that specifically referenced air quality from 2006-07 to now that aimed to either justify the diesel emissions standard, or, criticized it for being a flat-line. I figured someone somewhere would have made a project out of it?

I get the opinion debate and I see all the sides. Yes, I feel that the smoke bellowing from the big motors being gone is very nice and I appreciate that. I remember all those times being pinned behind an oil burner blinding my vision and making me reach for the recirc button on the hvac. It's nicer out there on the road.

I also have to believe that air quality is better.

I also believe that we as a nation are paying out the yazoo for it too. Higher consumption, higher cost, higher risk, stress. I hope some day we break even on it.

It's also pretty nice the way they have made these engines so quiet, smooth, and powerful. They basically drive like a big v8 gasser with a LOT of guts.

 

MPG has stayed the same or worse. If they were more fuel efficient there would be less need to control emissions.

 

I think fuel consumption went down but is coming back up with time and refinement. that is what makes it liveable.


Look at gas motors. Mid 70's. So much emissions stuff it was a jungle, inefficient. Now we have cars that get 30-40 mpg.

 

Yes and yes. Where would we be without the micro chip? Fuel injection saved our butts.

While fuel mileage went down at first, and has improved greatly in 5 years, if we compared to an open engine we are still down 2-5 mpg, maybe more without any inhibitions.