Memorandum submitted by The Lord Clanmorris
THE RELATIVE CONTRIBUTION OF OLDER VERSUS
NEWER VEHICLES TO CARBON MONOXIDE (`CO') AND HYDROCARBON (`HC')
EMISSIONS
AND
THE USE OF LOW COST TECHNOLOGY TO REDUCE
CO, HC AND OTHER EMISSIONS
Very great strides have been taken to reduce
emissions from new vehicles. According to the DfT study "The
Environmental Impact of Road Vehicles in Use" CO emissions
from Euro 4 cars are 25 times less than CO emissions from Pre
Euro 1 cars and HC emissions from Euro 4 cars are 50 times less
than HC emissions from pre Euro 1 cars. In fact by the time Euro
5 standards are applied there will be very little scope for additional
reduction.
It is clear that for the short and medium term
much more attention should be paid to reducing carbon emissions
from older vehicles. As the following figures from the UK show,
older petrol fuelled cars, defined as Pre Euro and Euro 1, represent
28.1% of the numbers but produce 67.6% of the CO and 82.2% of
the Hydrocarbons. Cars of Euro 2 & 3 standards (or higher)
represent 71.9% of the numbers but only produce 32.4% of the CO
and 17.8% of the Hydrocarbons.
Similar results have been shown in studies in
France and Milan
The following data from Milan and from France
shows that although cars older than 15 years represent between
30% and 35% of the numbers they are responsible for between 60%
and 70% of the pollution. Similar results would be obtained from
most other European Countries.
Until now the only proven methods of reducing
carbon emissions from older cars have been either to scrap such
vehicles or to use high cost retro-fit technology operating in
the post combustion area of the vehicle (gas recirculation, particulate
filters, ammonia injections etc). The cost of such retro fit systems
is usually in excess of £1,500 plus several hours of labour
cost.
Several countries in Europe have conducted successful
experiments with a much lower cost technology which operates in
the pre combustion area of the vehicle. The cost of such a device
is currently £250 (but this cost would be reducible to £100
or less in large scale production). The fitting time is 30 minutes.
The device has in over 500 governmental test agency and end user
tests has been proven to reduce emissions from both diesel and
petrol fuelled vehicles typically between 40% and 80%. This technology
also has fuel saving benefits and is applicable to motor cycles
and two stroke engines (which are very polluting).
A large scale test with the above mentioned
low cost retro fit device was carried in the north of Italy. The
charts set out below give the results of the tests and show the
ability of low cost devices to upgrade older vehicles to much
higher Euro standards. The sample was composed of 237 petrol fuelled
vehicles. 32% of the 132 pre-Euro vehicles were upgraded to Euro
4 emission class and 89% of the 63 Euro 1 vehicles were upgraded
to the Euro 4 emission class. More than 90% of all other vehicles
(Euro 2 and 3) were upgraded to the Euro 4 emission class. Similar
improvements were seen in 170 diesel fuelled vehicles.
Although the committee's terms of reference
are limited to HC, CO & CO2 the results of a long
term test in Hungary on diesel buses owned by Volan, (the former
state owned bus company) could be of interest because the tests
were conducted over a very long period and the same technology
can be applied to reduce CO and HC in petrol fuelled vehicles.
The above tests were end user tests. However
the results have been reproduced and replicated in strictly controlled
laboratory conditions by a test centre operated by KTI (the Hungarian
Ministry of Transport) and two centres in Italy (i) Stazione Sperimentale
per i Combustibili (`SSC'—the official test centre authorised
by the Italian Ministry of Industry) and (ii) Elasis (an independent
test centre owned by Fiat). In the SSC test CO was reduced by
57.9% in the urban driving cycle and 61.5% in the extra urban
driving cycle. In the Elasis test in the urban driving cycle HC
was reduced by 41.4% and CO reduced by 72.9%. There was also a
very significant reduction in fuel comsumption (25% in the urban
driving cycle).
Of course the availability of low cost technology
will not in itself do anything to reduce pollution. Although local
and central government can lead by example (as do some major distribution
companies) the vast majority of owners will not do anything unless
there is an incentive. The main incentive would be the introduction
of many more low emission zones throughout the country and (in
London) a reduced congestion charge for lower emitting vehicles.
It is significant that London black cabs are only now starting
to fit emission reduction devices (includind the above mentioned
low cost device) because of the regulations of the Public Carriage
Office department of Transport for London. This incentive will
soon also soon apply to lorries over 7.5 tonnes. The Mayor of
London decided not to apply the regulations to private cars because
of the perceived cost implications. This was at a time when when
low cost technology was not available. The situation has now changed.
A regulation stating than only light goods vehicles (and, if the
political implications were not perceived to be too great, cars
too) with emissions equal or better than Euro 3 can enter the
Low Emission Zone would now be feasible. The administrative procedures
to accompany such a change and identify vehicles with improved
emission standard have been proven in Italy.
CONCLUSION
The DEFRA Air Quality Strategy published in
April 2006 did not address the issue of the relative contribution
of older and newer vehicles to emissions and in examining the
various alternative strategies did not take account of low cost
pre-combustion retrofit technology. This needs to change.
Much wider introduction of low emission zones
with exemptions for vehicles with retro fit technology raising
a vehicle's standard to Euro 3 would make a major impact and the
cost to commercial and private vehicle owners would be minimal.
| 
