Lawsuit Over Ship Emissions

Environmentalists are suing the US Environmental Protection Agency
over pollution from ocean-going vessels. Tracy Samilton reports:

Transcript

Environmentalists are suing the US Environmental Protection Agency
over pollution from ocean-going vessels. Tracy Samilton reports:


Friends of the Earth says big ships are among the largest mobile
sources of air pollution in the world. And large ships don’t have to
meet US environmental regulations.


Attorney Sarah Burt says emissions from cruise ships, cargo ships and
ocean tankers cause asthma and thousands of premature deaths:


“These tanker ships burn a fuel called bunker fuel, which is the lowest
grade of fuel available it’s completely unrefined.”


She says the US EPA already agreed to regulate large ship emissions,
but missed its April deadline. The EPA says the US is currently
negotiating tougher ship emissions standards with the International
Maritime Organization.


For the Environment Report, I’m Tracy Samilton.

Related Links

Revving Up Sales of Cleaner Diesel Cars

When you think of diesel engines, you might think of big, noisy, stinky trucks. But that’s changing. And a domestic automaker has plans to bring a cleaner, higher performing diesel engine to passenger cars. The company insists: it’s not your father’s diesel. The GLRC’s Julie Halpert has the story:

Transcript

When you think diesel engines, you might think of big, noisy, stinky
trucks, but that’s changing and a domestic automaker has plans to bring a
cleaner, higher performing diesel engine to passenger cars. The
company insists: it’s not your father’s diesel. The GLRC’s Julie Halpert
has the story:


In Europe… people have been hearing this catchy little tune on a
television commercial…


(Sound of commercial)


If you hate something, improve it. That’s the message of this Honda UK
commercial that highlights the historically loud, smelly diesel engines.
It’s intended to promote Honda’s new, cleaner diesel, something it’s
launching in Europe.


Diesels have always been more popular in Europe than the U.S. That’s
because there diesel fuel is roughly 20 to 30 percent cheaper than
gasoline there, and diesels get great fuel economy… 30 percent better
than in gasoline engines.


Here in the U.S., diesels haven’t sold well. In the 1970s, when diesel
fuel was cheaper than gas, diesels gained in popularity briefly, but people
didn’t like the stench of the smoky fumes and the clunky sounds of diesel
engines. Those lingering attitudes have scared Honda off from bringing
its new diesels here.


But Daimler/Chrysler is trying to change all that. The company is
drawing on its European expertise to bring advanced technology diesels
to more U.S. passenger cars, and now, they think Americans will buy
them.


Jim Widenbak is a manager of small diesel systems for Daimler/Chrysler.


“We think that there’s a niche for diesels in the North American market,
and We’re not sure exactly how big, but I would characterize us as kind
of bullish on diesels. We really think there’s a place for them and
that customers will ultimately be very happy with diesel products.”


Daimler/Chrysler currently offers a diesel engine on its newer models of
the Jeep Liberty and the Mercedes E-320. Sales of these vehicles were
more than double what the company expected – 10,000 for the diesel
Jeep Liberty and 5,000 for the E-320.


Widenback says that electronic controls have improved over the past 30
years, making diesels better performing, more fuel efficient and cleaner
burning.


The company is in negotiations with the Environmental Protection
Agency to use a new technology, currently in use in Europe, that cuts
pollution further – just in time for tough new federal emission controls
that take effect by 2008. The process uses a material called urea that’s
injected into the exhaust before the exhaust hits the pollution control
device. This ultimately removes troublesome emissions of nitrogen
oxides.


There is one problem with the pollution control system, though.
Anthony Pratt directs power train forecasting for J.D. Power Automotive
Systems. He says the car periodically will run out of its supply of urea.


“So, in other words, you’re not getting the injection of urea in the
exhaust, the vehicles will continue to perform normally as if the urea
tanks were full but they will not meet the more strict emission
standards.”


If the company finds a way to ensure the tanks stay full, Pratt thinks it
will work. Pratt projects diesel engine sales will grow from 3 percent of
the market in 2005 to seven and a half percent in 2012, overtaking sales
of hybrid vehicles, which are only projected to be 4% of the market.


“I think the vehicle manufacturers will be successful in ultimately
educating the consumer in that the new diesel technology is not the dirty,
clanky, loud and sluggish technology they may be familiar with from the
late 70s and early 80s.”


(Sound of car dealership)


That message – that diesels are worth buying – is falling on deaf ears for
the customers of Schultz Motors. Tyler Shultz, the general manager, doesn’t
think it will fly, based on what he’s seen.


“As diesel prices went up in the last six months to a year, we virtually
have lost interest. Again, it’s not that the consumer doesn’t want it, but
when they see fuel prices go above gasoline prices, it was almost like
somebody flipped a switch.”


Shultz says it’s too expensive to buy and maintain a diesel and customers
won’t recoup the cost savings from better fuel economy unless they own
their car for several years. He, and some other dealers in the area don’t
think diesels will ever become popular.


Daimler/Chrysler’s Widenbak disagrees. He expects those fuel prices to come
down, and as they do, he says people will start buying diesel vehicles.


“We’re confident that our vehicles, diesel vehicles in general and our vehicles
specifically, can appeal to people.”


Daimler/Chrysler is so confident, it expects to roll out diesel engines in
more of its passenger cars over the next few years.


For the GLRC, I’m Julie Halpert.

Related Links

Budget Calls for Cleaner School Buses

The Bush administration has proposed a funding increase for a nationwide program to reduce pollution from diesel school buses. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Erika Johnson reports:

Transcript

The Bush administration has proposed a funding increase for a nationwide
program to reduce pollution from diesel school buses. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Erika Johnson reports:


The Environmental Protection Agency launched a program last year to cut
emissions from diesel school buses. Five million dollars was divided among
a handful of school districts nationwide. The money was used to replace or
retrofit diesel school buses with pollution control devices and to provide
cleaner burning diesel fuels. Now, the Bush administration has proposed
that an additional 65-million dollars be added to the program next year.


Tom Skinner is EPA’s Region 5 Administrator.


“The reason for the big jump is that we’ve seen the kind of success, the
kind of results that can be created by the program, and what we’ve found is
it’s tremendously effective. We started with a relatively small pilot
program with limited funding, and now is really when we’re going to kick it off, and
expand it dramatically and really reach across the country.”


Skinner says EPA hopes to replace or retrofit all diesel school bus engines
by 2010.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Erika Johnson.

Related Links

‘Greener’ Cars Won’t Save Us From Sprawl

Many feel that cars powered by fuel cells will save us from a future of pollution and rising oil prices. But Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator James Howard Kunstler says there’s more to think about… he says it’s time to reconsider not just WHAT we drive but HOW we live:

Transcript

Many feel that cars powered by fuel cells will save us from a future of pollution and rising oil
prices. But Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator James Howard Kunstler says there’s
more to think about and that it’s time to reconsider not just what we drive but how we live:


For quite a while now it’s been fashionable among the environmentally-minded to decry the
ownership of SUVs. This says a lot about what’s wrong with the conventional thinking of the
progressive / green crowd.


Would the everyday environment in America be any better if it were full of compact cars instead
of giant gas-guzzling Chevy Denalis and Ford Expeditions? I don’t think it would make a bit of
difference, really. We’d still be a car-dependent society stuck in a national automobile slum. The
problem with America is not big cars, it’s the fact that cars of all sizes have such an
overwhelming presence in our lives, and that driving is virtually mandatory for the ordinary
business of daily life.


Many in the anti-SUV crowd assume that we will solve our car problem with new technology,
like hydrogen fuel cells. Or that low-emission, environmentally-friendly hybrid cars will help to
usher in a sustainable way of life in America.


In fact, cleaner-running, higher mileage cars would do nothing to mitigate the degraded public
realm of a nation that has become a strip mall from sea to shining sea. They would not lessen
commuting distances or times. They would not reduce the number of car trips per day per
household. If anything, they would only promote the idea that we should continue living this way
– that suburban sprawl is normal and desirable, instead of what it is: the most destructive
development pattern the world has ever seen, and a living arrangement with poor prospects for
the future.


Why do we believe that better-running cars will save us? Because environmentalists are stuck in
a culture of quantification, just like their corporate bean-counter adversaries. It’s easy to count up
the number of carbon dioxide molecules in a cubic foot of air, and reduce the whole car issue to
good air or bad air. But air pollution or miles-per-gallon are hardly the only problems with car
dependency. The degradation of the everyday environment in general and of public space in
particular is at least as important, and is not subject to statistical analysis. It’s a question of
quality, not numbers.


In the age of austerity and global strife that is coming down the pike at us, we are going to need
walkable neighborhoods, towns and villages and public transit systems that are a pleasure to use.
Many of us pay premium prices to vacation in European cities precisely because they offer this
way of living, with great railroad and streetcar systems. Europeans still have cars, but they’re not
sentenced to own one per family member or spend two or three hours every day in them. It
would be nice to have these options here in the USA.


In the meantime, I really don’t care whether Americans drive Humvees or Toyota Priuses. Both
big and small cars are cluttering up our everyday world and wasting our lives.


James Howard Kunstler is the author of ‘The City in Mind: Notes on the Urban Condition’ and
other books. He comes to us by way of the Great Lakes Radio Consortium.