DERA funding from $300 million to $6 million

Congress has developed two programs specifically intended to replace or retrofit existing diesel engines, but federal funding has been slashed for one program and has never gotten off the ground for the second.

Dwindling federal dollars to support the programs have raised questions about whether the government is doing enough to reduce emissions of black carbon (soot), a pollutant from the combustion of diesel fuel, which endangers human health and, as a greenhouse gas (GHG), is about 2,000 times more potent than carbon dioxide (CO2). 

One program brought about by the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) provides funding to eligible entities to retrofit or replace their engines early.  DERA was authorized at $200 million per year for 5 years, or $1 billion, but since enactment, only half that amount has been appropriated.  DERA continues to receive congressional support and was reauthorized and signed by President Obama in 2010 to cover the years 2012 to 2016 at $100 million per year.  But actual funding has steadily declined—$60 million in 2010, $50 million in 2011, $30 million in 2012, and $20 million in 2013.  The EPA has requested only $6 million to keep DERA running in 2014.

The second program was contained in the 2011 Clean Construction Act, a bill that was written to address highway construction equipment that did not realize some of the benefits provided by DERA.  Under the Clean Construction Act, 1 percent of federal funding for highway projects in fine particulate matter (PM-2.5) nonattainment and maintenance areas must be used to install diesel emissions control technologies for covered equipment.  The legislation was included in the 2011 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), but virtually all its language was removed in the final MAP-21 approved by the Senate-House conference committee.

The declining funding for DERA persists despite the generally recognized success of the program.  According to the Diesel Technology Forum (DTF), an industry group, DERA was supported in 2005 by a diverse array of 32 groups.  “At last count, almost 1,000 groups have signed on in support of this program,” says the DTF.   

The Clean Construction Act was also endorsed by the industry-based Associated General Contractors of America (AGC) and the Clean Air Task Force (CATF), an environmental organization.  “While diverse in membership and priorities, AGC and CATF share a common interest in improving air quality and ensuring that the next generation of infrastructure projects is built utilizing clean emission control technology,” said the two groups in a joint statement of “strong support” for the bill.  More recently, Senator Tom Carper (D-DE), the main sponsor of the Senate version of the bill, announced that he would “continue my efforts on this front.”

Representatives of the CATF and the DTF provided testimony on the problems posed by black carbon, the federal response, and the available control technologies at a Senate subcommittee hearing chaired by Carper. 

Economic Workhorse

According to the DTF, diesel technology powers over 90 percent of commercial trucks, more than three-fourths of all transit buses, 100 percent of freight locomotives and marine work boats, and two-thirds of all farm and construction equipment.  Diesel engines are also relied upon for backup emergency electrical generators, stationary pumps, and other industrial equipment, testified Allen Schaeffer, DTF’s executive director.  Other statistics noted by Schaeffer include the following:

• Diesel contributes $480 billion annually to the U.S. economy in the form of engines, equipment, and fuels and has a significant influence on 16 sectors of the economy from agriculture to wholesale trade.
• Diesel accounts for about 1.25 million total jobs in engineering, manufacturing, and servicing nationwide.
• Diesel is a productivity multiplier—$1 earned by diesel enables another $4.50 of added value elsewhere in the economy.
• Diesel engines, fuel, and equipment are high-value U.S. exports (five times the average).

Pollution

In a 2005 report, the CATF stated that fine particle pollution, the majority of which comprises black carbon, causes 21,000 deaths a year.  That rate has undoubtedly fallen, says the CAFT, largely because of EPA’s emissions standards for new diesel engines.  But diesel engines are very durable, and turnover has been slowed by the recession.  Carper noted that EPA’s zero-emissions standards for new engines do nothing to address the pollution coming from an estimated 11 million old diesel engines lacking the latest control technology.  According to the CAFT, the United States has the highest per-capita emissions in the world for black carbon.  About 57 percent of U.S. black carbon comes from diesels—41 percent from on-road engines and 16 percent from off-road engines. 

The CATF notes that the EPA has found over 40 hazardous air pollutants in diesel exhaust.  For diesel engines without particulate filters, black carbon comprises 50 percent to 80 percent of all particles emitted. 

“Nationally, diesel exhaust poses a cancer risk that is 3 times higher than the risk from all other toxics tracked by EPA combined,” says the CATF.  The risk is highest for commuters and people living or working near truck traffic, construction equipment, and other heavy equipment.  In his testimony, Conrad G. Schneider, CATF’s advocacy director, refers to “estimates” showing that for every dollar spent on reducing black carbon in diesel-engine emissions, $13 would be avoided in health damages.

Regarding climate change, Schneider notes the findings from a January 2013 paper by a team of “31 world-renowned experts” (Bounding the Role of Black Carbon in the Climate System:  a Scientific Assessment).  In a news release discussing the paper, the American Geophysical Union (AGU) said, “The report’s best estimate of direct climate influence by black carbon is about a factor of two higher than most previous work.” 

In one sense, the AGU found this news encouraging because reductions in atmospheric emissions of black carbon can have a stronger impact in mitigating climate change than once believed.  But the AGU noted that the role of black carbon in the atmosphere is complex.

“The dark particles absorb incoming and scattered heat from the sun (called solar radiation), they can promote the formation of clouds that can have either cooling or warming impact, and they can fall on the surface of snow and ice, promoting warming and increasing melting,” said the AGU.  “In addition, many sources of black carbon also emit other particles that provide a cooling effect, counteracting black carbon.” 

New engines and retrofits

Schaeffer notes that progress in reducing emissions from diesel engines has resulted from industry action prompted by federal regulations.  In 1988, a newly manufactured engine emitted 0.6 grams of particulate matter/brake-horsepower-hour (g/bhp-hr).  In 2000, the EPA established a regulatory pathway for highway diesel engines to reach near zero emissions in a 10-year period.   In 2004, additional regulations were established for the many categories of off-road diesel engines and equipment.  EPA’s new clean diesel standards in place for engine model year 2007 required 0.1 g/bhp-hr, and 2010 emissions standards required 0.01 g/bhp-hr.  Thanks to the adoption and widespread availability of ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD) fuel beginning in 2006, engine manufacturers have been able to deploy innovative emissions control solutions that make compliance with these standards possible for new engines.  Overall, new clean diesel engines emit 98 percent less particulate matter (PM) compared to an engine manufactured in 1988. 

But, as pointed out by Carper, the major challenge comes from engines that predate EPA’s standards.  The CATF describes diesel particulate filters (DPFs) as the “only emissions control technology that can virtually eliminate black carbon particles with 90+ percent effectiveness.  Installing a DPF on a Class 8 truck (e.g., tractor-trailer truck) provides the climate benefits equivalent to eliminating the CO2 emissions of six-passenger cars.”

DPFs typically use a porous ceramic or cordierite substrate or metallic filter to physically trap PM and remove it from the exhaust stream.  DPFs can be installed on existing vehicles and must be used in conjunction with diesel fuel that has a sulfur content of less than 15 parts per million (ppm).   DPFs work best on engines built after 1995.

Schaeffer expanded on this emissions-control theme for existing engines.  Schaeffer referred to diesel retrofit, which he calls a “term of art,” reflecting a number of strategies and choices for modernizing and upgrading existing diesel engines.  “The term has come to encompass efforts to retrofit existing engines with modern emissions control devices, repower older equipment or vehicles by purchasing a new engine or rebuilding a new engine to meet newer standards or refueling the equipment to operate on clean fuels,” said Schaeffer.  “In some instances, the term also incorporates scrapping the vehicle or equipment and purchasing new.”

DERA

Both the DTF and the CATF have high praise for DERA.  Schaeffer cited EPA’s second report to Congress on diesel reduction, in which the Agency said that DERA funding appropriated between 2008 and 2010 retrofitted, repowered, or replaced over 52,000 older engines found in a wide variety of vehicles, including school buses, long-haul trucks, construction equipment, and even ferryboats.  CATF’s Schneider adds that DERA has created over 10,000 jobs. 

“Retrofit funding provided between 2008 and 2010 resulted in over 12,000 tons of particulate matter emissions reduced and over 200,000 tons of NOx—an impressive achievement that provides real air quality benefits to almost every community,” said Schaeffer.  “Additionally, DERA has provided federal funds in a competitive process that encourages the private sector and states and localities to also provide funding matches.  By doing so, DERA has been able to leverage roughly three dollars in non-federal funding for every federal dollar to generate air quality benefits.”

“We are missing an enormous opportunity for improving public health and the environment by failing to fully fund DERA,” said Schneider, who added that the funding should not come at the expense of other priorities within EPA’s budget, “which is already strained to the limit.” 

Testimony in the Senate on black carbon

William C. Schillaci
BSchillaci@blr.com