Posted on 06/13/2012 5:34:04 AM PDT by thackney
New low-sulfur fuel standards for marine ocean carriers go into effect Aug. 1, and the near-term result is likely to be a 20 percent to 25 percent hike in fuel costs for a special blended diesel carriers will have to use.
ping
Not only should we abolish the EPA, everybody in the EPA should spend a minimum of twenty years in prison.
Wouldn’t it make more sense to just require these ship operators to convert to wind and solar? The EPA wants us landlubbers to go back to the horse and buggy days anyway.
Cost of food and other products will INCREASE even more! Use to be you could shop at the Military Commissary and save a few $, not any more, some times they are higher than the private grocery store...and you still pay a 5% restocking fee vs a sales tax. And private grocery stores like Kroger’s in TN DOUBLE you coupons up to 60 cents, where as the Commissary only does face value.
Maybe we should raid mooch’s veggie garden...I have no room to put one in. We live on the top of a hill, hill in back, hill in front, no room for planting a small garden..lucky to get a few flowers in.
Reduce sulfur, reduce lubricity.
Decrease energy content, increase consumption
Burn more fuel, emit more C02
And this change does what to improve the environment.
I know there is a difference in ULS vs. Red Diesel. Red Diesel (off road) burns hotter, the engine is smoother and more powerful and more efficient. I burn both ULS and Red Diesel at the farm.
Oh, and now WHO have declared diesel exhaust a “probable” carcinogen.
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1076921_raw-diesel-fumes-worse-than-second-hand-smoke-says-w-h-o
No worries, it won’t show up in the inflation rate.
Food and fuel costs are too volitle:)
EPA can have their way with us.
The Consumer Price Index includes Food and Fuel.
What goods and services does the CPI cover?
http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpifaq.htm#Question_7
FOOD AND BEVERAGES (breakfast cereal, milk, coffee, chicken, wine, full service meals, snacks)
HOUSING (rent of primary residence, owners’ equivalent rent, fuel oil, bedroom furniture)
APPAREL (men’s shirts and sweaters, women’s dresses, jewelry)
TRANSPORTATION (new vehicles, airline fares, gasoline, motor vehicle insurance)
MEDICAL CARE (prescription drugs and medical supplies, physicians’ services, eyeglasses and eye care, hospital services)
RECREATION (televisions, toys, pets and pet products, sports equipment, admissions);
EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION (college tuition, postage, telephone services, computer software and accessories);
OTHER GOODS AND SERVICES (tobacco and smoking products, haircuts and other personal services, funeral expenses).
Go Nuke... It works for the navy.
Great Lakes carriers got an exemption from blended diesel, according to a guy who now sells the stuff out of Duluth-Superior.
Works for the Navy because they don't care about the cost, licensing, and large number of specialized personnel needed. It was tried in 1962 - ship was decommissioned in 1972
Refiners have resolved the lubricity issue.
It turned up in 1993 during the first round of low sulfur mandates.
Really? How?
If that happens, it WILL be a death sentence to Alaska. Too many people will not survive here. I even had to order a reduced amount of home heating oil last spring instead of a full up, and I have a good job.
I didn’t think I dreamed this.
From Bosch Fuel Injection:
“It is expected that the useful operating lifetime of any mechanical component will be adversely affected by fuel with a lubricity exceeding 460 microns.”
Lots of diesel enthusiasts are still concerned about lubricity of ULSD. Guess they are all on the wrong track and wasting their money on lubricity additives. It is really good to know that the refineries solved the problem in 1993.
http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/showthread.php?t=177728
Not quite a blanket exemption for Great Lakes carriers.
Second, a fuel availability relief provision has been added for use only by vessels with diesel engines operating on the Great Lakes and Saint Lawrence Seaway. This provision allows operators to buy the lowest sulfur marine residual fuel available if fuel that meets the near-term 1.0 percent (10,000 ppm) fuel sulfur standard is not available. This provision preserves the greatest benefits of this rulemaking, while avoiding undue consequences for a narrow segment of the regulated industry.
Furthermore, we are finalizing an economic hardship relief provision for vessels with diesel engines operating on the Great Lakes and Saint Lawrence Seaway. This option provides temporary relief from the 2015 ECA-level fuel sulfur standards upon demonstration that the burden of compliance costs would cause serious economic hardship.
Finally, reflecting technical challenges to the use of lower sulfur fuels in steamships, a corresponding potential for reduced safety and a clear directive from the Congress, we are excluding from this final action the application of the ECA-level fuel sulfur standards in MARPOL Annex VI to existing steamships operating on the Great Lakes and Saint Lawrence Seaway.
http://www.epa.gov/nonroad/marine/ci/420f09068.htm
Not if, when.
And the when is this summer. It has been in the works for quite a while.
“The EPA rules are part of the U.S. compliance with International Marine Organization rules on emission standards, but are also stricter than the IMO requires...”
Our EPA is so wrong on this. First, the USA should never just follow rules of an international organization-we are a sovereign nation and should set our own policies on our own national interests. Second, our crazy EPA made the rules even tougher than those of IMO. Third, these rules will make all of our numerous imported and what we export more costly.
Transport ships have used the nasty sludge left over after all the better oils are refined off, bunker fuel, to run profitably. The new rules make them buy more expensive diesel like oil, so even our trucks will have a cost increase due to less supply available.
US shippers are at another disadvantage than foreign carriers so will go broke. There are not many US shippers now as most of ours already use foreign flags of convenience due to tax and labor advantages.
And the very same perps who force this requirement on carriers will demonize them for the price increases.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.