Copyright 2000 The Houston Chronicle Publishing Company
The Houston Chronicle
May 18, 2000, Thursday 3 STAR EDITION
SECTION: BUSINESS; Pg. 1
LENGTH: 1116 words
HEADLINE:
EPA rules on diesel under fire;
Fuel, truck leaders blast
sulfur reduction proposal
SOURCE:
Staff
BYLINE: DAVID IVANOVICH, NELSON ANTOSH, BILL
DAWSON
BODY:
Refiners, petroleum marketers,
truckers and other industry leaders Wednesday blasted proposed environmental
rules to remove sulfur from diesel fuel, branding the plan
"extreme" and "crushing."
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on
Wednesday unveiled a proposed regulation aimed at slashing the
amount of air pollution generated by heavy-duty trucks and buses.
The
EPA's proposal would reduce the allowable sulfur content of
highway diesel fuel by 97 percent, from the current 500 parts per million to 15.
The proposed rule also would require engines to meet tough new emission
standards. By reducing the sulfur content of the fuel, diesel
trucks and buses could use pollution control devices such as catalytic
converters and soot traps. The new regulations for fuel would
kick in by June 2006, while the engine requirements would be phased in between
2007 and 2010.
Trucking industry officials called the proposed rules
unfair because they won't affect the railroads, construction equipment or
agriculture.
The air pollution from these sources is currently twice
that of heavy-duty diesel trucks, said the American Trucking Associations, a
federation of carriers based in Alexandria, Va.
"To achieve the
cleanest, most cost-effective and equitable protection of our air, EPA must
require all diesel engine users to use the same clean fuel," group President and
Chief Executive Walter B. McCormick Jr. said.
Trucks are already doing
their part, the organization said. The engines in new trucks manufactured in
2000 produce 88 percent less pollution than trucks made 15 years ago, it said,
and those manufactured in 2002 and later will be even cleaner.
Plus, the
EPA rules would drive up the price of diesel fuel by 20 cents a gallon,
McCormick complained.
Motor carriers are already reeling from high fuel
prices, said the trucking executive.
"Any effort in this area must be
pursued within a framework that achieves, in a commonsense way, both clean air
and a strong economy," he said.
The EPA rules, combined with a proposal
from the U.S. Transportation Department to limit driving hours without a rest,
would force many in the trucking industry off the road, according to McCormick.
"The U.S. economy can't afford to pay this high a price," he said.
Agency officials said the new regulation would be
comparable to pulling 13 million trucks off the nation's roads and would allow
communities that are home to 120 million Americans to meet national health
standards for cleaner air.
EPA Administrator Carol Browner said the
pollution caused by heavy duty trucks and buses "is not just dirty and annoying;
it is a threat to our health."
Smog and soot in the air, agency
officials estimate, cause 15,000 premature deaths, 1 million respiratory
problems and 400,000 asthma attacks in the United States each year.
The
proposed regulations, Browner said, could push up the cost of
fuel by about 3 to 4 cents a gallon and add as much as $ 2,000 to the cost of
one of the larger trucks, which now carry a price tag of about $ 150,000.
Industry officials said they could support a reduction in
sulfur of 90 percent, but argued that more stringent
requirements would be too costly.
Urvan Sternfels, president of the
Washington-based National Petrochemical & Refiners Association, said the
exact investment requirements of the EPA's proposed rules have not been
calculated, but he noted: "They are immense, certainly several billion dollars."
Ed Murphy, general manager of downstream for the American Petroleum
Institute in Washington, D.C., estimated the industry would spend $ 5 billion to
$ 6 billion to achieve a 90 percent reduction. Squeezing an additional 7 percent
sulfur content out of the fuel would boost the cost "at least
two or three times that."
When asked why reducing
sulfur levels the additional 7 percentage points was so
critical, Browner said: "If you breathe, they are significant."
Browner
said that to allow the pollution control devices to operate effectively and
reduce emissions to the desired levels, the additional sulfur
reduction is needed.
While refiners are currently enjoying a highly
profitable quarter, the sector, historically, has had a very poor return on
investment.
Industry officials argue the new requirements will prompt
refiners to pull out of diesel production. That, in turn, would reduce refining
capacity and cause possible supply shortages, industry officials insisted.
"This extreme proposal is a blueprint for future supply problems,"
Sternfels said. Many refiners would be unable to bear the heavy costs of
reducing sulfur to the level chosen by EPA. Supplies of home
heating oil and gasoline would also be affected if and when
refineries close or reduce capacity because of the crushing investment burden.
Refiners also complained they already are expected to spend an estimated
$ 8 billion, or 6 to 7 cents a gallon, to reduce sulfur levels
in gasoline in the same time span.
Browner argued the
long lead time should give the industry ample time to implement the necessary
changes.
EPA officials hope to finalize the new rule before President
Clinton leaves office.
Meanwhile, the engine manufacturers strongly
support lower sulfur levels in fuel. An official of Detroit
Diesel said it would prefer sulfur levels to be even lower than
15 parts per million.
Just as catalytic converters couldn't work on cars
until the lead was removed from gasoline, equipment to clean up
the emissions from diesel engines won't work until the sulfur
is removed from diesel fuel, said the Detroit Diesel official, who preferred not
to be identified.
An organization of diesel engine manufacturers was
expected today to release a statement favoring the sulfur
cutback.
The proposed rules would help cut levels of ozone, smog's main
ingredient, in the Houston region. But they wouldn't take effect in time to be
of much assistance in helping Houston meet its most pressing air quality
challenge - compliance with the national ozone standard by 2007.
That's
the federal deadline for Houston's ozone levels to fall below the standard's
health-protection limit. As a result, state environmental officials are
considering including California-style rules to clean up diesel emissions in
their smog-compliance plan for the metropolitan area. That plan must be
submitted for federal approval by the end of the year.
While the EPA
proposal came under quick attack from industry, the agency has the support of
the American Lung Association. John Coruthers Jr., president of the Lung
Association, noted that the diesel truck fleet today is responsible for more
pollution than in 1970, when the Clean Air Act was first passed.
NOTES: Chronicle reporter Bill Dawson
contributed to this story.
LOAD-DATE: May 19, 2000
