1. Tools for Addressing Community Concerns
Tim Eaton
General Manager Safety and Environment

2. Resident Concerns about Freight
Safety
Noise
Air Quality
Health
Amenity

3. ALGA Draft Strategy safer, quieter, cleaner freight vehicles
alleviating freight impacts on local amenity
minimising community impacts
good safety and environmental outcomes

4. NTC programs Safety Environment fatigue (inc rest areas) speed
heavy Vehicle Safety Strategy
Environment
noise
emissions

5. Air Quality New Vehicle Emission Standards Fuel Quality Standards
In-service Emission Standards
Maintenance is the key

6. Light Vehicles Euro 4 for petrol, LPG, NG in 2008/10
95 and 98 RON petrol at 50ppm sulfur 2008
10ppm sulfur levels under review (2010?)

7. Heavy Vehicles Euro 4 for diesel engines in 2007/8
(noise standards at same time)
10ppm sulfur diesel in 2009
Euro 5 for diesel engines in 2010/11
(US and Japanese as alternatives)
On-board diagnostics mandatory

8. Emission Reduction Already Achieved
In 8 years we’ve come a long way!!!
Vehicles deliver 75% lower NOx emissions.
Particulates reduced by over 90%.

9. USA On-Highway Regulations 1988 to 2010
EPA ‘88
EPA ‘91
EPA
07/10
EPA
‘04
EPA ‘94
EPA
‘98

10. Emission std close-up

11. Homogenous Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI)
Caterpillar HCCI Results (2003)
Emissions are IN cylinder

12. Path taken
Euro5
Euro4

13. Evolution of On-Highway Standards EPA & Euro
0.01
0.10
0.2
1.2
2.5
4.0
5.0
EPA 1994
EPA 1999
EPA 2004
PARTICULATE [g/HP-hr]
NOx [g/HP-hr]
Euro
Euro
EPA 2010
EPA 2007 (avg)
Euro
Euro
0.075
0.11
0.015
ULSD
15 PPM
(6/06)
500 PPM
(6/93)
SULFUR
EPA
10 PPM
(1/09)
(10/96)
Euro

14. Recirculated and cooled exhaust gas
Technical solutions
Engine control unit
Urea
Air
Catalytic converter
Engine
Exhaust
gas
NH3 + NOx → N2 + H2O
Recirculated and cooled exhaust gas
I will now shortly describe how we look upon the two solutions to the NOx emission challenge … cooled EGR … and SCR.
We are working with both technologies … so what are the benefits and the drawbacks from a customer’s point of view?
Intake air
Exhaust gas
Cooled EGR
SCR * **
* Exhaust gas recirculation
** Selective catalytic reduction

15. Urea supply and price still unclear
Operating economy
Scania SCR
Scania EGR
Fuel saving 3-4% (V8)
Urea solution
5-6%
Euro 5
Urea solution
Fuel saving 3-4% (V8)
Euro 4
3-4%
Fuel
Euro 3
Fuel
Euro 4
Fuel
Euro 5
Scania has managed to maintain about the same fuel economy from Euro 1 to Euro 2 … to Euro 3 … and now, with Scania EGR for Euro 4.
With our full range of Euro 5 engines with Scania EGR … we will be able to do it again. Lower emissions without any fuel penalty.
We know that an SCR vehicle consumes slightly less fuel ... but you need to add the cost of the urea solution.
To reach Euro 5 with SCR, you need to add up to 6% of urea solution. These are examples for our V8 engines with SCR.
Then you need to add the cost for the urea solution.
The pump price of the urea solution in Germany … where it is available at a few service stations … is around 60 cents.
In a 10-litre canister it may cost up to 70 cents per litre.
(So far, there is no tax on it.)
All-in-all, our conclusion is that the balance is very even.
The price of the urea solution can tip the balance either way. SCR involves some extra handling and there is an important difference in environmental performance.
But there are other factors to consider as well.
Proven technology
Urea supply and price still unclear

16. Integrating Critical Subsystems

17. Fuel consumed per tonne-km (= CO2 emissions)
More efficient road transport
Engine improvement
Rolling resistance
Aerodynamic drag
Increased payload capacity
50%
Driver influence 10 percent
A lot has happened in transport efficiency since 1970.
The amount of fuel needed to transport one tonne has been halved … thanks to various technical gains and legislation changes.
Powertrain improvements account for 10 percent … which may seem low ... but that’s quite an achievement … since during this period we have passed several steps in emission control.
Other technical steps have been taken in rolling resistance and aerodynamics.
The increase in load-carrying capacity has been achieved partly through vehicle re-design ... for less weight and more space for the cargo ... but the authorities have also contributed by changing the regulations ... for example by raising the permitted gross weights.
But more can be done.
Scania's driver training programme shows clearly that the difference in fuel efficiency between a bad driver and a good one … can be as much as 20 percent … and driver training has a lasting effect of around 10 percent in fuel saving.
Let’s now look deeper into the potential of powertrain technology.
1970
2000
Fuel consumed per tonne-km (= CO2 emissions)

18. Environmental Performance
No of trucks 2 3 7 11
Fuel Syd-Bris
1.105 L
1.300 L
2.191 L
2.860 L
NOx kg 22 26 44 57
PM g
390
460
770
1000
CO2 ton
3,0
3,5
5,9
7,7
(Minus 2 Pallets)
Source: Volvo Trucks

19. Understanding Road Use
Future Directions
Brisbane Urban Corridor Trial
Five monitoring stations supporting night-time truck trial on Logan Motorway.
Development of real-time data analysis tools
Integration with vehicle classifiers and Weigh in Motion Site
Installation into Other Major Road Corridors
Gateway Upgrade Project

20. The Problem: Vehicle Noise
ADR 83/00 gazetted in March
new generation of standards for all vehicles (motorbikes to trucks).
Lowers engine noise levels
Won’t do anything about engine brakes
Engine brakes major source of community complaint
ATC asked NTC to address the matter

21. What are Engine Brakes? Secondary retarders
Assists heavy vehicles to slow down without use of service brakes (no cost!)
exhaust brakes
hydraulic retarders
electromagnetic retarders
regenerative brakes (future)
engine brakes
Jacobs or “Jake Brake”

22. Hydraulic retarders: Quiet!
“the thing that impressed us most was Scania’s brilliant, and utterly silent, hydraulic retarder. If the Scania was hauling 42tonnes and slowing down outside your bedroom window, you wouldn’t know about it. Urban dwellers can thank Scania for that. Truck operators can thank them for making possible real reductions in wheel brake maintenance costs.
This is the most comfortable Truck I’ve ever driven”
Barry Ashenhurst “Welcome to first class” in Truck Australia, May 2002

23. Other engine brakes: Quiet!
VGT gives quieter maximum braking capacity
fuel savings of 5%
20% less weight
noise levels one quarter of predecessor
reduced operating costs 15% to 20%
source

24. Jacobs Engine Brake

25. Normal compression stroke
With Jake-brake engaged
Courtesy

26. Some Facts: Secondary retarders are a cost saving device
They save wear on the service brakes
They are not mandated anywhere in the world, but almost every heavy truck has one
Most forms of secondary retarders remain quiet throughout their lifetime
All engine brakes are reasonably quiet when new because the oem mufflers are well designed in in good condition
Jacobs brake will become noisy when mufflers deteriorate or are replaced with inferior produce
The vehicle will still meets the in-service noise standard because it’s a stationary test (engine brake won’t work)

27. Solutions We just need them to fit decent mufflers!
Many ways of achieving this:
do a stationary test X
reverse-drive by under controlled conditions X
pull-over noisy vehicles and check muffler integrity X
roadside measurement using agreed descriptor ?
Providing incentives etc is not a performance based outcome and might cause perverse outcomes - ie noisy hydraulic retarders
Restricting the use creates a safety issue - a battle we can’t win
Yes we want to ensure good maintenance but how? There are already maintenance systems in place and we still have noisy engine brakes

28. 2002/3 Test Program 600 trucks tested on the road
6 locations in NSW & SA
Release “Engine Brake Noise: Development of a Roadside Test Procedure” on 1 September 2003
Proposes modulation characteristic to identify trucks with noisy engine brakes
Decibels poor method of capturing annoying noise such as engine brakes

29. Modulation characteristic

30. Picking a ‘threshold’ level of annoyance using modulation
RTA engage experts to design methodology to determine a reasonable level
January 2006
Run a series of panels using community participants
Pick a reasonable threshold level during public consultation

31. Unacceptable Modulation
No modulation

32. Practical application of the modulation characteristic
Need to be able to identify noisy engine brakes quickly and efficiently (at the roadside)
Need standard measurement equipment with ‘modulation’ feature
Put it in a camera and run a trial

37. Key issue: Can all trucks meet the new standard at a reasonable cost?
We know it’s just about mufflers
RTA test program
Use available mufflers (varying quality)
Give industry information about the choice of the muffler

38. Proposed regulation
Set in-service noise limit for engine brakes based on a community derived ‘annoyance’ level
Application Australia-wide
Level of enforcement up to jurisdictions
Engine brake ‘bans’ in certain areas
Address the safety issue
Not mandated
Only plausible safety argument is for long, steep descents
Flat low-speed highly populated environments may demand no engine brake noise at all

39. Key Costs and Benefits Cost to truck operators with poor mufflers:
Either upgrade muffler(s) or
Rely more on the service brakes (wear and tear)
Enforcement Costs
Benefit to community of reduction in engine brake noise (‘internalise externality’)
Engaged ARRB to assist with analysis
Positive outcome over longer term

40. Process Public consultation phase is critical
Opportunity to review methodology
Need to set a reasonable level
Reasonable for both operators and the community
Need to consult on perceived safety issues
Fine tune costs and benefits
Confirm the relative importance of this issue to the community

41. Process (cont)
Consider submissions, hold meetings, release public response document
Propose final policy supported by RIS
Formal submission to ATC
Jurisdictions build into road transport or environment legislation

43. Crash-zone concept
Energy absorption enough to transform a km/h car to truck frontal collision into an equal 60 km/h crash

44. 300 mm length and 150 - 250 kg weight added. Extra weight and length
Crash-zone concept
300 mm length and kg weight added.
Extra weight and length
should be permitted
300 mm

45. Crash-zone concept
Trailer-back
Cars