T he major burden of creating cleaner diesels clearly rests with
Page 37
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
the truck manufacturers. But are the fuel companies pulling their weight?
Bernd Gottschalk, who heads up Mercedes-Benz's truck division, reckons they aren't. At the launch of M-B's Euro-2 engine range in Mannheim last month he told CM: "The automotive industry is calling for better quality fuel with a lower sulphur content. Sulphur isn't necessary for the reliable functioning of diesel engines. From October 1996 the limit will be reduced to 0.05% by weight—a figure already in force in the USA. in Sweden low-sulphur diesel is on the market; only when such a fuel becomes available will the full environmental benefits of Euro-2 technology be felt. Improved diesel quality would immediately reduce the emissions from vehicles in use."
This view is echoed by lveco's engine development chief Giovanni Biaggini: "There's a wide potential to improve today's fuel and so boost the performance of the engine. If you consider that Euro-1 is a reduction of 15% in emissions as compared with the late eighties engines, and Euro-2 is a reduction of almost 70%, then the truck manufacturers have already done a lot. But the fuel companies have hardly done anything at all up till now. They believe they've made an important contribution only because they've reduced sulphur, or are going to reduce sulphur, but sulphur is not the only thing.
"Sulphur doesn't affect engine performance or the economy of the truck; aromatics and cetane levels do. If we have to reduce emissions by 10-20% only through engine improvements that means higher costs, less fuel economy or higher fuel consumption. We could limit the deterioration in performance Caused by lower emission levels with a better fuel."