CHICAGO – EPA Region 5 has awarded approximately $2.5 million to the National School Tranportation Association (NSTA) to replace older school buses and install emission controls on others.
The funds are provided under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 National Clean Diesel Funding Assistance Program. Under this funding competition, EPA Region 5 received 81 grant applications. The awards were chosen to maximize economic impact – particularly job creation – and emissions reductions.
NSTA will provide for replacement of 98 older school buses in the fleets serving school districts in Milwaukee, Kenosha, Racine and Waukesha counties in Wisconsin, the addition of diesel particulate filters to 62 buses service four school districts in Wright County, Minn.
The school bus contractors involved in the project are Dousman Transport, Riteway Bus Service, Durham School Services and M&M Bus Service. Costsharing contributions from those NSTA members will bring the total cost to more than $7.75 million.
The project is expected to preserve or create 119 jobs and to reduce pollution in the affected areas by 455 tons.
The Recovery Act allotted the National Clean Diesel Campaign a total of $300 million, of which the National Clean Diesel Funding Assistance Program received $156 million to fund competitive grants across the nation.
From School Bus Fleet – September 2009
With Advanced EGR buses, the technology used to meet 2010 standards is an evolution of the same technology used by all manufacturers to meet 2007 EPA standards, thereby reducing need to training technicians. (Part 2)
By David Hillman, from Metro Magazine April 2009 Issue
January 1, 2010, the final phase-in of EPA 2007 Heavy Duty Diesel rule will take effect. This rule requires all diesel engines to be at or below .50 grams per brake horsepower-hour (g/bhp-hr) of oxides of nitrogen (NOx). In the first part of this article (found here) I introduced the two different solutions that bus manufacturers will use to make their engines compliant with 2010 requirements, and described how each technology works: MaxxForce Advanced Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR), which IC Bus will use to meet 2010, and Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR), which all other manufacturers will use. In part 2, I’ll further compare these two solutions and how they will impact you and your business.
Before we get started, let’s recall how these technologies differ in reducing emissions. Advanced EGR takes place within the engine and increases the EGR flow rate, cooling in-cylinder temperatures and decreasing NOx. SCR takes place outside the engine, reducing NOx by adding aftertreatment, which uses urea, to the engine’s current EGR system and eliminating NOx downstream in the exhaust process.
Better for my bottom line?
Especially in this economy, bus operators are concerned about every penny that goes out their door. So let’s first examine the cost of 2010 compliance on your operations.
We all know that when something different is added to our operations, it has the potential to affect our bottom line. Something familiar usually has less of an impact, whereas something very different usually means a greater impact. Advanced EGR engines includes updates to components with which bus operators and service technicians are familiar: interstage cooling (some ratings), twin turbos, EGR coolers, water pump, oil filter housing and oil pan (on V-8’s), and a revised cooling package. Your techs are familiar with these as they are simply an evolution of existing components. You do not need to worry about the costs of new training, additional maintenance intervals, storage for aftertreatment hardware or the on-going cost of urea when it comes to Advanced EGR from IC Bus.
Alternatively, SCR adds unfamiliarity. SCR would be a new technology to your staff requiring new training for drivers and service technicians. Also, the cost of storage for the additional hardware and the ongoing cost of handling and purchasing urea impacts your bottom line.
SCR proponents claim that you will save money with improved fuel economy over 2007 engines. But it is misleading to look solely at fuel economy. Since urea gets consumed as you go down the road, like diesel fuel, it needs to be replenished. That costs money. Information available from operators using SCR in Europe indicates two to five gallons of urea will be consumed for every 100 gallons of diesel burned. I have seen vehicle urea cost around $12 per gallon in Europe and as much as $35 per gallon domestically. Industry experts estimate that the cost of urea could come down at some point, but that remains to be seen. The cost per mile for SCR includes the ongoing cost of urea, and you should calculate that impact on your bottom line.
Looking at both options, we can conclude that even if SCR improves fuel economy and if urea costs come down at some point, then the additional costs of training service techs, storing and purchasing replacement parts for the urea system, and adding a urea infrastructure to your business will add unfamiliarity and costs that are not good for your bottom line.
Which is less of a hassle?
Aside from the costs to your bottom line, let’s weigh the options in terms of hassle for you, your technicians and drivers.
With Advanced EGR buses, the technology used to meet 2010 standards is an evolution of the same technology used by all manufacturers to meet 2007 EPA standards. 2010 emissions are met with advanced fuel injection technology, proprietary combustion bowl design on the pistons, advanced air management, and electronic calibration strategies. It is the next step in the technology path, so service technicians are already well-versed on these engines. Also, the EGR diagnostic requirements and service intervals are unchanged from today’s engines. For drivers, the same driver display on the buses today will be used. In other words, the familiarity of Advanced EGR engines means less hassle for you.
As for SCR, drivers and technicians will need training on the SCR system. For example, because diesel engines with SCR could run with empty urea tanks but would not meet 2010 requirements, EPA rules call for vehicles to be equipped with sophisticated sensors to detect NOx in exhaust. If the sensors detect bad or no urea solution, there will be progressive stages of warning and vehicle response, beginning with warning lights and, a few stages later, ending with vehicle shutdown. Can you afford to have your buses shut down? Operators, drivers and technicians for buses with SCR need to be prepared to be part of the EPA compliance equation, because without urea the vehicle cannot run legally and will eventually lose power if the fluid is unavailable.
Many operators I speak with want to keep driver distractions minimized. A blinking light on the dash can be cause for alarm and an unwanted distraction. Did you know that SCR systems require EPA mandated warning lights, all of which will be new to your drivers and service technicians?
As mentioned earlier, SCR requires additional hardware, including: urea storage tanks, tank heaters and connections, tank level sensors and sensor cables, electric cables, heated lines, urea filter, stainless steel line connectors, inline filters, stop flow valves, screw fittings and electrical connectors, all of which are new to your bus. The additional hardware takes up space. Think about your buses with luggage boxes, wheelchair lifts, air conditioning systems and rear engine configurations where space is at a premium. Where will you put that SCR equipment? As for Advanced EGR, because 2010 adjustments happen in cylinder, these engines take up no added space on your buses.
Do both require Urea?
No, only SCR systems require urea. The addition of this fluid, which currently has limited U.S. availability, is the critical component to making SCR buses 2010 compliant and also a major reason IC Bus chose not to follow the SCR plan. “We wanted our engines to meet 2010 compliance without urea. Urea is too big of a burden to put on our customers,” said John McKinney, president, Global Bus Operations, at IC Bus.
Have you thought about how you would handle and store urea? Urea is not as tame as, say, windshield washer fluid. In fact, the International Organization for Standardization created a nine-page document (ISO 22241-3) prescribing the correct handling and storage procedures and a 43-page document (ISO 22241-2) detailing testing required to confirm quality levels needed for vehicle-grade urea. These documents bring up important guidelines about urea, including:
* Urea freezes at 12 degrees Fahrenheit. SCR-equipped vehicles will require a tank heater and heated lines to prevent the urea from freezing.
* Urea begins to break down at 85 degrees Fahrenheit, decomposes into an ammonia gas beginning at 122 degrees Fahrenheit and should not be stored for prolonged periods above 80 degrees Fahrenheit.
* Urea storage tanks must be insulated and shielded from direct sunlight to avoid algae growth.
So there are clear differences in SCR and MaxxForce Advanced EGR. Only one solution has less financial impact on you, is virtually hassle-free and doesn’t require you to add urea to be compliant. “We believe Advanced EGR is the more customer-friendly solution. It’s better for the bottom line and it’s less hassle,” added McKinney. McKinney advises that you ask your bus dealer the questions on your mind when it comes to this decision and your next bus purchase, such as:
* How will my buses be different in 2010?
* Will there be added space required to fit your system that will impact my bus?
* What additional training and maintenance will be needed with your system?
* What are some leading European bus manufacturers now preferring Advanced EGR to SCR?
* What does your 2010 solution mean for resale value?
When you weigh both options for meeting 2010 standards, it seems that the choice is clear.
There’s been much discussion over the use of credits relative to meeting 2010 requirements. One criticism from the competition is that credits allow IC to run “dirtier” engines. In fact, no bus engine manufacturer could have met the 2007 standard for NOx without the flexibility inherent in the credit system that’s written into EPA rules. And, when manufacturers like Navistar meet standards early, it helps clean up the environment.
FACT: Navistar is building cleaner engines than required today. Navistar has taken a leadership role by purposely building pre-2010 engines that are cleaner than what is required by the EPA. In doing so, Navistar has built up a bank of credits that provides us with additional time to optimize our MaxxForce Advanced EGR system with operational advantages for our customers because we planned for it.
FACT: The banking and trading of credits provide environmental benefits. Some ask if there is truly a benefit to generating credits if the credits will be used in the future. Well, the truth is that 20 percent of the credits created by building cleaner engines cannot be used, and they represent a net contribution to the environment. This rule was put in place, says the EPA, “as an added assurance that the incentives created by the program will not only have no adverse environmental impact but also provide an environmental benefit.” (55 Federal Register 20584)
FACT: Navistar will be 2010 EPA compliant. So how does this work? In 2010, Navistar will be fully compliant at .50 g/bhp/hr (the amount allowed when credits are used). In the future, Navistar will meet the standard .20 g/bhp/hr without credits or additional aftertreatment hardware. Our solution will also be fully compliant with the California Air Resource Board (per California Air Resource Board – Title 13, California Code of Regulations, section 2025 paragraph {49}, and Appendix A {Dec. 11, 2008}) for 2010.
Navistar’s Long History of Environmental Leadership
* 1989 - First truck company to offer smokeless diesel engine.
* 1998 – First truck company to receive U.S. EPA approval for 1999 model year engines.
* 2007 – First line production of commercial hybrid vehicles.
* 2007 – First hybrid school bus.
* 2008 – First OEM named by the U.S. EPA as SmartWay transport partner and SmartWay Manufacturer.
IC has received some common questions which we would like to use as an opportunity to reinforce some points about the grant:
The DERA Grant is Competitive
· The EPA will receive many times more requests for funding than is available. Applications such as marine diesel projects, DPF retrofit projects, new school bus purchases, off highway retrofits, municipal trucks, offset to the cost of alternative fuels, locomotives, etc are all eligible for funding. We are hearing from across the country of organizations pursuing DERA funds. As such, this is a competitive grant and it is possible that not everyone will receive funding. We need to ensure our customers understand this.
Focus Your Efforts on 25% Funding Level
· Due to the competitive nature of the grant, the key for you to educate your customer on is presenting a winning application. Focusing on the 25% level will help with a winning bid. Why? A major factor in determining the grant award is Cost per Emissions Reduced. Here’s an example of what this means:
Customer A. Submitting for 25% funding level to replace a 1994 school bus with a 2009 school bus w/
MaxxForce DT
Emission reduction
EPA 1994 level 2009 level Total Reduction
NOx 5.0 1.2 3.8
PM 0.10 0.01 0.09
Customer B . Submitting for 50% funding level to replace same 1994 school bus with a 2009.5 CE school bus w/ high HP MXF DT produced after August 1, 2009.
Emission Reduction
EPA 1994 level 2009.5 level Total Reduction
NOx 5.0 <0.5 4.5+
PM 0.10 0.01 0.09
Probable Result:
EPA may likely choose to fund customer A over customer B. The incremental NOx reduction is not double, yet it would cost the EPA twice the funding. The EPA.s goal is to have the greatest impact in reducing diesel emissions. They would likely prefer to fund (2) 25% proposals instead of (1) 50% proposal.
Another note, please keep in mind, the new bus must have a similar horsepower rating to the old bus. The EPA may not allow you to replace a 210 hp engine with a 245 hp engine.
Minimum Grant Requests
· For customers interested in only purchasing a few buses, we have aligned with a national, non for profit organization that will collate similar customers from their EPA regions and submit a combined grant request meeting the minimum award levels on their behalf. Please contact Jason Anderson at salesmanager@hoglundbus.com for more information.
· To complete the grant through the national organization, each dealership must fill out one excel document, collating all customer information onto the excel spreadsheet. In addition, on a Microsoft Word document, each district should provide the following information (One MS Word document per customer):
o Short description of applicant organization
o High level description of the vehicles involved (Number and Type
of Vehicles)
o Project start date if awarded money (Order date and date vehicle
would be put into service)
o Positive impact the project could have on the environment in the
customers area
o If applicable, how this grant can help overcome financial hardship by
a school district
o Any past experience the customer has with diesel emission reduction
projects
o Any potential economic impact of this proposal, including number of jobs retained or created (IC Bus will provide impact from factory manufacturer view)
To view information on the DERA Grant, please visit this website. You can download the presentation or email it to someone. Applications for the DERA grant are due by April 28, 2009. If you are interested in this grant, you need to move quickly. You can also get more information on our previous post about this topic, found here. If you have any questions, please contact Jason Anderson at salesmanager@hoglundbus.com or Nicole Crum at busadmin@hoglundbus.com.
Filed under: 2010 Emissions, Commercial Buses, EPA, Grant, Hybrid, IC, Iowa, Minnesota
Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) Grant Environmental Protection Agency
Overview:
The EPA DERA grant provides funding to reduce emissions from existing diesel engines through a variety of strategies including funding the purchase of new vehicles. Grants will focus on promoting economic recovery, preserving and/or creating jobs, and reducing diesel emissions. Approximately $156 million of funding will be offered for competitive funding. More information can be found at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/diesel/prgnational.htm.
Available funding:
• The EPA grant will fund 25% of the entire cost of each vehicle (body and chassis).
• School buses that meet 2010 emissions in 2009 may qualify for 50% funding
Eligibility:
• Both hybrid and non-hybrid vehicles are eligible. Commercial\school buses and medium\ heavy trucks qualify.
• A vehicle that is currently operating must be taken out of service. The purchase of the new vehicle(s) must be accompanied by the fully-documented scrapping of the vehicle(s) being replaced.
o The replacement vehicle must perform the same function as the new vehicle.
o The replacement vehicle must be of the same type and similar gross vehicle weight rating or horsepower as the vehicle being replaced.
Who can apply:
o A regional, state, local or tribal agency or port authority with jurisdiction over transportation or air quality.
o A nonprofit organization or institution that represents or provides pollution reduction or educational services to persons or organizations that own or operate diesel fleets.
• Private companies and municipal entities should plan to apply for the grant in partnership with an organization that is described above.
Application Process
• Applications must be submitted by eligible organizations listed above. Private companies and municipal entities may apply in partnership with these organizations.
• Navistar will help interested customers partner with organizations that are eligible to apply for the grant.
• Customers interested in applying for the grant should complete a Letter of Intent and Customer Information Worksheet.
Timing:
• The request for proposal from the EPA is expected to be announced on March 17
• The due date for submissions is yet to be announced. It is expected that submissions will be due Late-April 2009.
For submission support (including Navistar emissions and funding eligibility information) please contact:
Mark Schumacher
Construct Marketing and Business Solutions
TEL: 773-857-3346
MSchumacher@ConstructMBS.com
There have been some issues with finding information on how to apply for the grant money we talked about in this post. Hopefully this will help clear up any confusion.
The funding programs that will be receiving grant money are located here – http://www.epa.gov/otaq/eparecovery/index.htm
The following grant application forms are required as part of the application package.
- Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424)
- Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs (SF-424A)
- Assurances, Non-Construction Programs (SF-424B)
- Pre-Award Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL)
- Pre-Award Compliance Review Report for All Applicants Requesting Federal Financial Assistance (EPA Form 4700-4)
- Key Contacts Form (EPA Form 5700-54)
Hoglund wants to ensure you are aware that with the recently passed economic stimulus program, the government is funding $350 million in the Diesel Exhaust Reduction Act. The available grant money has increased from the $50 million offered in 2008. One of the anti-idling items approved under this grant money is a fuel fired heater for school buses. The time frame for applying is very short, only 30 days, so apply NOW! More information can be found on the EPA Website.
Grant Information Resources for Idle Reduction Equipment
Fuel-Operated Heaters for School Buses
On February 17, 2009, the ARRA recovery act stimulus package was signed into law. This includes $300 million to fund Clean Diesel grants in addition to the approximately $50 in fiscal year 2009 National Diesel Emissions Reduction Program Appropriations. Please note that these two sources of grant money will have separate grant announcements. Money from these two sources will fund equipment such as fuel-operated heaters for school buses.
Seventy percent of the EPA funds will be awarded through the regional offices. Thirty percent of the EPA funds will be awarded by state affiliated EPA organizations such as NYSERDA in New York or Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Please watch for state informational announcements and grant assistance meetings that are being organized in some states to assist people to understand and apply for the state and national funds.
Fuel-operated heaters are funded because they reduce fuel consumption and reduce diesel particulate matter and other contaminates from entering the air in and around school buses, near school buildings and in our communities. The heaters allow a warm and defrosted bus while following idle reduction laws and the spirit of state idle reduction campaigns.
School districts and other non-profit entities are eligible to apply for the grants. In addition, school bus contractors may receive heaters for the buses but a school district or other non-profit organization must submit the grant application for the heaters.
Please use the following information and links to help you understand and prepare the grants:
· United States map with EPA regional coalitions and contact information
· EPA website www.epa.gov/otaq/diesel/grantfund.htm to begin preparation NOW
-
- Sign up on this EPA page to receive e-mail notification regarding grant funding and issues related to reducing diesel emissions
- See sample grant application materials required for these EPA grants http://www.epa.gov/otaq/diesel/dera2008/2008-sample-proposal.pdf
- Determine which fleet vehicles are eligible for funding
- Establish partnerships
- Prepare fleet descriptions
- Evaluate public health benefits—includes link to tutorial for Diesel Emission Quantifier to create a summary which quantifies benefits of equipment on air quality and related health benefits that result http://www.epa.gov/otaq/diesel/webinar.htm
- View archived funding information from 2008 http://www.epa.gov/otaq/diesel/grantfundarchive.htm
EPA moved to a central contact point for the stimulus grants on March 4, 2009 http://www.epa.gov/otaq/eparecovery/index.htm
• If you need to contact the EPA for questions, cleandiesel@epa.gov
Link to EPA where Espar heaters are listed as an accepted idle reduction technology – http://www.epa.gov/smartway/transport/what-smartway/idling-reduction-fet.htm
The grant applications should be posted on the EPA website about March 5 and the completed applications are due back by April 13, 2009.
It is important to find the website for the EPA region in your area and read about the priorities set for that region. There will be information on the regional website for the grant applications and specific instructions for how to complete and return the application to that office.
Public fleets, such as school buses, have a priority in the stimulus funding. Now is the time to start preparing partners to submit a grant during the short window of opportunity for the stimulus funds.
Region 5 (IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, WI) Funding Sources – information on grant funding available in Region 5.
The best ‘green’ essay will win a yellow hybrid bus
Warrenville, Ill.-based IC Bus, which describes itself on its website as the only manufacturer of hybrid school buses, says its bus reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 40% and improves fuel economy compared with a regular diesel school bus. The company created an essay contest to encourage students from kindergarten through 12th grades to start environmentally friendly programs in their schools.
“We feel strongly about the fact that every school bus takes 36 cars off the road, about the billions of gallons of gas that it saves per year for every school bus we have on the road,” says IC Bus president John McKinney.
Students who enter the contest, which is open until April 30, should write 500-word essays on the ways their school seeks to become green.
Christian Laskaros, a junior at Half Hollow Hills High School East in Dix Hills, N.Y., entered a few weeks ago. He described how small eco-friendly programs at his school, including a paper recycling program, fliers with energy-saving tips in classrooms and ceiling lights with timers, add up to make a big difference.
“I really hope (the judges) grasp the entire gist of the essay, how you can see nothing being eco-friendly one day, and the next day you’re looking at the bus you’re riding on in the city and how eco-friendly it actually is,” Laskaros says. “And you look at your water bottle, something so small, and realize how much damage it can do.”
For contest judges McKinney and Terra Wellington, author of the upcoming book The Mom’s Guide to Growing Your Family Green: Saving the Earth Begins at Home, the contest is all about who is the most excited about going green.
“I’m looking for that passion and emotion in the essay,” Wellington says. “I would love to see children who write these essays show how maybe they got their school involved. Children have a capacity to influence.”
Students can enter their essay at AmericasGreenestSchool.com, where they can read about hybrid buses and learn ways to create a more eco-friendly school, such as shutting off unnecessary classroom lights and packing “litterless lunches” in reusable containers.
Ten finalists will be posted on the website May 11-17, and the public will vote on who should win. In addition to the hybrid bus prize, the winning student will get a $5,000 scholarship, and a faculty sponsor can win $3,000 for educational materials.
From USAToday.com
PRINCETON, N.J. – Heavy- and medium-duty commercial truckers knowledgeable on the upcoming 2010 EPA diesel emissions changes would mostly rather have exhaust gas recirculation technology in new diesel engines than selective catalytic reduction technology, according to an online survey conducted by Braun Research. Quantitatively, 51 percent of respondents chose EGR technology over SCR technology, while 24 percent chose SCR over EGR. The remaining 25 percent presumably had no strong siding for either position.
The survey also gauged the level of concern regarding upcoming emissions changes. When queried, more than half of survey respondents cited being “very” to “extremely” concerned. Particular areas of concern regarding the changes included: the higher prices of engines, engine reliability, additional maintenance costs, time needed to convert engines to updated standards, changes in maintenance requirements, and increased engine weight.
The survey was conducted by Braun Research in conjunction with Navistar, and included 302 respondents who have purchasing authority or influence the purchasing of heavy- and medium-duty commercial trucks.
