Mobile Source Control Division September 25, 2003 Monitoring and Laboratory Division Board HearingCalifornia Air Resources Board
Control Measure to Reduce Emissions from Small Off-Road Engines (SORE)
Outline
• Background• Proposed Exhaust Emission Standards• Proposed Evaporative Emission Standards• Environmental Benefits• Economic Impacts• Conclusion
California Air Resources Board
Small Off-Road Engines and Equipment (SORE)
• Engines < 19 kW• Two and four-stroke engines• Lawn and garden and small industrial
equipment• Preempt: farm and construction equipment
< 175hp
California Air Resources Board
Examples of SORE Equipment
History
1990 1995 2000 2003
1st S
ORE Reg
ulatio
n
Adopte
d
1st S
ORE Sta
ndar
ds
Imple
men
ted
SORE R
egula
tion
Amen
ded
SORE Am
endm
ents
Imple
men
ted
and
U.S. E
PA
Finaliz
es R
egula
tions
Staff
Propo
ses N
ew
Exhau
st an
d Eva
pora
tive
Requir
emen
ts
California Air Resources Board
1998
Need for Regulation
2020
2010
2000
121 tpd
152 tpd
Exhaust and Evaporative Emissions Statewide HC+NOx Baseline - Nonpreempt
111 tpd
New SIP Commitments
• Includes two SORE measures– SMALL OFF-RD-1– SMALL OFF-RD-2
• Staff’s proposal designed to accomplish goals of both measures
California Air Resources Board
Proposed 2005 Handheld Standards
Tier 3
• Align with most stringent U.S. EPA HC+NOx standard for engines < 50 cc– 50 g/kW-hr– 30% reduction from current standard
California Air Resources Board
Handheld - ExhaustTier 3 Levels Already Met By Some
• Currently 25 CA engine families certified to levels below proposed Tier 3
• Includes all types of handheld equipment• Technologies
– Four-stroke– Two-stroke with a catalyst– Stratified scavenging– Two-stroke/four-stroke hybrid– Electric equipment
California Air Resources Board
Proposed 2007/8 Nonhandheld Standards
Tier 3• Staff’s Original Proposal
– >80 - <225cc: 8.0 g/kW-hr, 2007+ MY– 225cc and above: 6.0 g/kW-hr, 2008+ MY
• Alternative Proposal– >80 - <225cc: 10.0 g/kW-hr, 2007+ MY– 225cc and above: 8.0 g/kW-hr, 2008+ MY
• Standards based on the use of a catalytic converter
California Air Resources Board
Catalyst Test Program to Show Technical Feasibility
• Three-way catalyst• Secondary air injection• Some enleanment of A/F
Engine Power (kW) ApplicationB&S #1 4.8 WBMB&S#2 4.8 WBM
Tecumseh 4.8 WBMHonda #1 4.1 WBMKawasaki 14.2 Riding MowerHonda #2 8.2 Generator
California Air Resources Board
Catalyst Pictures
B&S #2
Kawasaki
Honda #2
Original Muffler
Muffler with Cat
Muffler with Cat
Original Muffler
Original Muffler Muffler with Cat
Catalyst Efficiency
0102030405060708090
100
B&S#1 B&S#2 Tec. Hon.#1 Hon.#2 Kawa.
% E
ffici
ency
0 hr 125 hr 250 hr 500 hr
California Air Resources Board
Target Level
Exhaust Levels Achieved
02468
1012141618
B&S#1 B&S#2 Tec. Hon.#1 Hon.#2 Kawa.
HC+
NO
x (
g/kW
-hr)
0 hr 125 hr 250 hr 500 hr
Current Standard
Alternative Proposal
Developed Engine Emissions
California Air Resources Board
Original Proposal
>80 cc - <225cc >225cc
Muffler Surface Temperatures
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
B&S#2 Tec.* Honda#1 Kawa** Honda#2Surf
ace
Tem
pera
ture
(deg. F)
No Cat w/ Cat Cat w/ shield
California Air Resources Board
(@Mode 1)
** At 125 hours
* At 250 hours
Summary of Proposed Tier 3 Standards
Size (cc) MY
HC+NOx Standard (g/kW-hr)
< 50 2005+ 50>50 - <80 2005+ 72>80 - <225 2007+ 8/10*
> 225 2008+ 6/8*
California Air Resources Board
* Alternative Standards
“Blue Sky” Engine Standards
• Voluntary
• HC+NOx levels 50% of Tier 3 standard
• Provides opportunity for clean label and
incentives
• Includes zero-emission engine eligibility
California Air Resources Board
Additional Changes to Exhaust Regulations
• Alignment with U.S. EPA– < 25 hp vs. <19 kW– 1000 hour durability option– Test procedures
• Handheld limit raised to 80cc
California Air Resources Board
Additional Changes to Exhaust Regulations
• Warranty Defects Reporting– Voluntary/Ordered Recall– Included in Exhaust and Evaporative Program
• Additional text to clarify use of cooling fans during testing
California Air Resources Board
Sources ofSORE Evaporative Emissions
Fuel Tank Permeation
Fuel Line Permeation
Vented Emissions(Tank & Carburetor)
Fuel ConnectorsHC
HC
HC HC HCHC HC HC
HC
HC HC
HC
HC
Fuel Tank Permeation
Fuel Line Permeation
Vented Emissions(Tank & Carburetor)
Fuel ConnectorsHC
HC
HC HC HC
Overview
• Evaporative Emission Control Elements• Control Technology and Test Data• Industry Issues• Nonhandheld Alternatives• Comparison of Alternatives• Overall Cost Effectiveness• Conclusions
California Air Resources Board
Evaporative Emission Control Elements
• Handheld standards• Nonhandheld standards• Certification
California Air Resources Board
Handheld Standard
SORE Equipment Category
Effective Date
Model Year
Permeation Standard Grams ROG/m2/day
Diurnal Standard Grams HC/day
< 80 cc 2007 2.0 None
California Air Resources Board
Nonhandheld Standards
SORE Equipment Category
Effective Date
Model Year
Permeation Standard Grams ROG/m2/day
Diurnal Standard Grams HC/day
Walk-Behind Mowers
> 80 cc - < 225 cc 2007 None 1.0
> 80 cc - < 225 cc Excluding Walk-Behind Mowers
2007 None 0.21 * Tank
Volume (gal.) + 0.95
> 225 cc 2008 None 2.0
California Air Resources Board
Certification
• Requires certification of evaporative families• Handheld tanks
– Tested per TP-901– Certified per CP-901
• Nonhandheld equipment– Tested per TP-902 – Certified per CP-902
California Air Resources Board
Permeation Control Technologies
• Tanks– Metal and coextruded tanks, nylon tanks, and barrier
treatments
• Connectors, Gaskets, and Hoses– Thermoplastic materials, Viton®, and Teflon®
California Air Resources Board
Untreated HDPE Tanks vs. Optimized Fluorinated Tanks
22.4
0.34
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
gram
s/m
2/d
ay
Untreated Avg. Fluorinated Avg.
ARB Permeation Test Data
California Air Resources Board
Diurnal Emission Control Technologies
• Sealed systems• Carbon canister systems• Hybrid sealed systems
California Air Resources Board
Diurnal Emission Control TechnologiesARB Feasibility Testing
• ARB tested prototype equipment• Six mowers configured with:
– sealed systems, – fluorinated HDPE tanks– low permeation fuel lines
• A generator and commercial mower configured with:– carbon canisters– metal tanks– low permeation fuel lines
California Air Resources Board
ARB Test Results for Sealed Systems
Lawn Mower Evaporative Emission Reduction Data(24-Hour Diurnal Fuel Comparison)
2.8
2.6
3.3
3.5
2.5 2.5
3.0
3.4 3.4
3.0
3.8
0.6
1.0 0.9
1.31.4
3.1
0.80.9
0.80.9
0.80.8 0.8
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
B&S #1 B&S #2 Tecumseh #1 Tecumseh #2 Honda #1 Honda #2
Gra
ms
HC
UncontrolledMTBE UncontrolledEthanolControlled MTBE Controlled Ethanol
ProposedStandard
California Air Resources Board
ARB Test Results for Canister Systems
Commercia l Equipment Evaporative Emission Reduction Data(24-Hour Diurnal Comparison)
26.8
1.2
14.7
1.9
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
20.0
22.0
24.0
26.0
28.0
30.0
Avg. Uncontrolle d M TBE Avg. Controlle d M TBE
Gra
ms
HC
Commercial GeneratorCommercial Mower
Propos e dStandard
California Air Resources Board
Additional Changes to the Evaporative Proposal
• Adjust canister working capacity in TP-902• Require small volume manufacturers to submit
a letter of conformance
California Air Resources Board
Industry Issues
• Standards too stringent– Exhaust– Evap.
• Proposal lacks flexibility• Costs too high
California Air Resources Board
Alternatives Suggested by Industry
• Alternatives presented by Briggs & Stratton, EMA/OPEI, and Honda
• Staff evaluated alternatives• Alternatives 1 and 2 developed from industry
proposals
California Air Resources Board
Nonhandheld Alternatives
Alternative 1 and 2 would:• Provide nearly same emission reductions
– Greater evaporative emission reductions– Less exhaust emission reductions
• Provide flexibility for compliance• Reduce costs• Meet SIP commitments
California Air Resources Board
Overall Emission Reductions
Statewide Comparison of the Alternatives(Annual Average Tons Per Day for Nonpreempt Equipment)
21.7 21.0 19.8
49.5 48.7 49.4
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
TPD
2010 2020
Staff's Proposal Alternative #1 Alternative #2
California Air Resources Board
1st Alternative - Major Elements
• Achieves additional evaporative emission reductions (running loss)
• Requires testing of complete engines
• Implements low permeation hoses one year early
• Allows fleet averaging
California Air Resources Board
1st Alternative - Nonhandheld Standards
Effective Date
Model Year
Engine Displacement Fuel Hose Permeation Standard Grams ROG/m2/day
Diurnal Standard Grams HC/day
2006 > 80 cc 15 None 2007 and
2008 > 80 cc - < 225 cc
15 1.2 + 0.21*tank vol.
(gal) 2009 WBMs > 80 cc - < 225 cc 15 1.0 2009 Non-
WBMs > 80 cc - < 225 cc
15 0.95 + 0.21* tank vol.
(gal)
2008 > 225 cc
15 1.2 + 0.21* tank vol.
(gal)
California Air Resources Board
2nd Alternative - Major Elements
• Achieves additional evaporative emission reductions (running loss)
• Requires testing of Class I walk-behind mowers (WBMs)
• Implements low permeation fuel hoses two years early• Reduces compliance testing
(design standards)
California Air Resources Board
2nd Alternative - Nonhandheld Standards
Class I Engines, > 80 cc - < 225 cc
EffectiveDate
Model Year
Fuel HosePermeation StandardGrams ROG/m2/day
Diurnal StandardGrams HC/day
2005 15 None2007 thru
201115 1.3
2012 15 1.0
California Air Resources Board
EffectiveDate
Model Year
Fuel HosePermeation StandardGrams ROG/m2/day
Fuel Tank PermeationStandard
Grams ROG/m2/day
Carbon Canister orEquivalent
Butane Working CapacityGrams HC/Liter Tank Vol.
2005 15 None None2007 thru
201115 2.5 Per TP-902
2012 15 1.0 Per TP-902
Walk-Behind Mowers
Non Walk-Behind Mowers
2nd Alternative - Nonhandheld Standards Class II Engines, > 225 cc
Effective DateModel Year
Fuel HosePermeation
StandardGrams ROG/m2/day
Fuel TankPermeation
StandardGrams ROG/m2/day
Carbon Canister or EquivalentButane Working CapacityGrams HC/Liter Tank Vol.
2005 15 None None20081 15 3.0 Per TP-90220102 15 None Per TP-90220131 15 1.0 Per TP-902
1 First year of implementation 90% of production volume must be compliant increasing to 100% thefollowing year.2 Applies to small volume manufacturers.
California Air Resources Board
Overall Cost Effectiveness
• Handheld Equipment - $1.71 to $6.21 per pound of HC reduced
• Nonhandheld Equipment – $0.20 - $4.30 per pound of HC+NOx
California Air Resources Board
Estimated Retail Price Increase
• Handheld Equipment - $2.16 to $4.84
• Nonhandheld Equipment - $37 to $179
California Air Resources Board
Cost Effectiveness of Major Regulations
Hand Cleaner
OBD1
0.25HC LDV
4-Stroke Law nLEV2-Stroke Law n
Off-Road Diesel Medium TruckOff-Road Motorcycle 2.4 HDDE
Off-cycle LDT0.4 Nox LDV
5g HDD
RFG2
PWC/Outboard
On-Road Motorcycles
Aerosol Adhesives
Inboard Sterndrive
SORE Handheld
SORE Nonhandheld
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005
Board Hearing Year
Do
llar
s p
er P
ou
nd
EVR
Ind. Maint. Coatings
Carpet Cleaner
California Air Resources Board
Comparison of Controlled Emissions
(Annual Average Tons Per Day for Nonpreempt Equipment)
111.0 121.089.3 71.5
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
2010 2020Uncontrolled ISOR Control Alt. Control.
California Air Resources Board
Max Alt. Shortfall
0.8 TPD
Max Alt. Shortfall
0.9 TPD
Conclusions
• Proposal and alternatives provide significant emission reductions
• Proposed controls are cost effective• Standards are attainable with existing technologies• Staff recommends Board adoption including alternatives
California Air Resources Board