California emission standards

California emission standards, 10 32, 57 California giant kelp, common and scientific names, 3 188t California hazardous materials... 

Federal and California Emission Standards for Light-Duty Motor Vehicles (Passenger Cars) in the United States... 

The benefits of alcohol fuels include increased energy diversification in the transportation sector, accompanied by some energy security and balance of payments benefits, and potential air quaUty improvements as a result of the reduced emissions of photochemically reactive products (see Air POLLUTION). The Clean Air Act of 1990 and emission standards set out by the State of California may serve to encourage the substantial use of alcohol fuels, unless gasoline and diesel technologies can be developed that offer comparable advantages. 

In the late 1980s attempts were made in California to shift fuel use to methanol in order to capture the air quaHty benefits of the reduced photochemical reactivity of the emissions from methanol-fueled vehicles. Proposed legislation would mandate that some fraction of the sales of each vehicle manufacturer be capable of using methanol, and that fuel suppHers ensure that methanol was used in these vehicles. The legislation became a study of the California Advisory Board on Air QuaHty and Fuels. The report of the study recommended a broader approach to fuel quaHty and fuel choice that would define environmental objectives and allow the marketplace to determine which vehicle and fuel technologies were adequate to meet environmental objectives at lowest cost and maximum value to consumers. The report directed the California ARB to develop a regulatory approach that would preserve environmental objectives by using emissions standards that reflected the best potential of the cleanest fuels. 

Table 8. California Light-Duty Vehicle Exhaust Emission Standards...

The future use of lead may be decided by the resolution of an environmental paradox. Some markets for lead are being phased out because of environmental concerns, eg, the use of tetraethyllead as a gasoline additive. However, a 1990 State of California law and similar laws in nine eastern U.S. states require that 2% of new cars meet 2ero-emission standards in 1998. By 2003 this requirement rises to 10% of new vehicles. Zero emission vehicles are generally accepted to mean electric, ie, battery powered cars, and there is considerable research effort to bring suitable electric vehicles to market by 1998. 

The main converter, which is located downstream of the EHC, heats to functional temperature much more quickly because of catalytic combustion of exhaust gases that would otherwise pass unconverted through the catalyst during the cold start period. The EHC theoretical power required for a reference case (161) was 1600 watts to heat an EHC to 400°C in 15 s in order to initiate the catalytic reactions and obtain the resultant exotherm of the chemical energy contained in the exhaust. Demonstrations have been made of energy requirements of 15—20 Wh and 2 to 3 kW of power (160,161). Such systems have achieved nonmethane HC emissions below the California ULEV standard of 0.025 g/km. The principal issues of the EHC are system durabihty, battery life, system complexity, and cost (137,162—168). 

State of California Air Resource Board, California Fuel Evaporative Emissions Standard and Test Procedure for 1970 Model Light Duty Vehicles, April 16, 1968. 

Serious research in catalytic reduction of automotive exhaust was begun in 1949 by Eugene Houdry, who developed mufflers for fork lift trucks used in confined spaces such as mines and warehouses (18). One of the supports used was the monolith—porcelain rods covered with films of alumina, on which platinum was deposited. California enacted laws in 1959 and 1960 on air quality and motor vehicle emission standards, which would be operative when at least two devices were developed that could meet the requirements. This gave the impetus for a greater effort in automotive catalysis research (19). Catalyst developments and fleet tests involved the partnership of catalyst manufacturers and muffler manufacturers. Three of these teams were certified by the California Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board in 1964-65 American Cyanamid and Walker, W. R. Grace and Norris-Thermador, and Universal Oil Products and Arvin. At the same time, Detroit announced that engine modifications by lean carburation and secondary air injection enabled them to meet the California standard without the use of catalysts. This then delayed the use of catalysts in automobiles. 

The Clean Air Act of 1970 set new standards that went beyond the capabilities of the then existing technology, and spurred a very intensive research effort. The Clean Air Act also called for a study by the National Academy of Sciences of the technological feasibility of meeting the emission standards. On April 11, 1973 William D. Ruckelshaus, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, announced a delay in enforcing the 1975 standard by one year, to be replaced by an interim standard for California and a more relaxed interim standard for the rest of the forty-nine states. 

C05-0080. California s automobile emission standards require that exhaust gases contain less than 220 parts per million hydrocarbons and less than 1.2% CO (both of these values are in moles per mole of air). At standard atmospheric pressure, what are the partial pressures, in torr and in atmospheres, that correspond to these values ... 

The purpose of the converter is to reduce unbumed hydrocarbon emissions to 4 g/mile, CO to 40 g/mile, and NO to 0.4 g/mile. (The mixed units are those in several Federal Clean Air Acts, which mandate these maximum emissions.) In California these standards are even more stringent, and lower levels are mandated to be required in several years throughout... 

TABLE 16.3 Light-Duty Motor Vehicle Emission Standards in the United States and California"... 

RAFs are adopted in Section 13 of the California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 1988 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and Medium-Duty Vehicles, and the process for establishing RAFs is in Appendix VIII of that document. The document is incorporated by reference in Title 13, California Code of Regulations, Section 1960.l(k) see also California Air Resources Board (1992a, 1993). The last amended date is March 19, 1998. 

It is interesting that over the same period in many other regions of the United States and in Europe and Japan, ozone levels did not appear to change as dramatically (National Research Council, 1991 Lindsay et al., 1989 Rao et al., 1992, 1994, 1995, 1996 Zurbenko et al., 1995 Fiore et al., 1998 Oltmans et al., 1998). The major difference in control strategies in California compared to the U.S. federal approach has been an emphasis on both NO, and VOC control, rather than primarily on VOC as has been the case at the federal level. For example, Table 16.3 shows the more stringent control of both NO, and VOC from motor vehicles in California beginning in the mid-1970s. Since 1980, however, VOC emission standards in California have been comparable to the federal standards while the allowed NO, emissions have been smaller by a factor of two or more. 

The solvent should not contain substances that contribute significantly to the production of photochemical smog and troposphere ozone. The volatile organic content of the product, as used, should not exceed 50 g/L. None of the components of the product will have a maximum incremental reactivity (MIR) exceeding 1.9 g Ofg of compound (the MIR for toluene). MIR values can be obtained from the maximum incremental reactivity list found in Appendix VII of the California Air Resources Board s California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 1988 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks and Medium-Duty Vehicles as amended on September 22, 1993. 

In the USA, for Tier 2 emission limits different bins have been defined. Passenger cars are certified in any of the available bins by choice of the vehicle manufacturer. With full implementation in 2009, the average NOx emission of the entire light-duty fleet sold by each manufacturer must meet 0.07 g/mile. For the individual bins, the full useful life emission limits are displayed in Table I. The very strict California low emission vehicle (LEV) II emission standards are covered in the lower number bins to make certification easier for vehicle manufacturers. 

As a result of atmospheric pollution levels that exceed the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in many parts of the United States, both the federal government and the State of California have implemented standards for exhaust and evaporative emissions from new vehicles (see Exhaust control, AUTOMOTIVE). The first of these standards went into effect in 1968 and mandated that the vapors from the vehicle crankcase be routed back through the engine and burned. Since then, the standards have continued to grow stricter. Table 7 shows the federal exhaust emission standards and Table 8 shows the more stringent California standards. California has mandated that starting in 1998 a certain percentage of new vehicles sales must be zero emissions vehicles (ZEV). 

---