Hi Lee, What was the cost of retrofitting a bus using the JM particle filters, or for the older buses DOCs, from your experience in Mexico? Are there experiences in retrofitting buses in areas where sulfur in diesel is 500ppm? Diesel in the Philippines has 500ppm sulfur. In Metro Manila, the most pollutive are buses, jeepneys, and 2-stroke 3 wheelers. There are some on-going efforts to address the pollution from 2-stroke 3 wheelers. Increasing car ownership and usage has also contributed substantially to the air pollution problem. It is clear that several parallel efforts/ measures are needed in order to fully address this problem. Bert Herbert G. Fabian Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities Asian Development Bank, Manila tel: + 63 2 632 4444 loc. 7666 fax: + 63 2 636 2381 e-mail: hfabian@adb.org http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia <table width=100%> <tr valign=top> <td> <td>"Lee Schipper" <schipper@wri.org> Sent by: sustran-discuss-bounces+hfabian=adb.org@list.jca.apc.org 02/02/2006 06:55 AM Please respond to Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport <td>                To:        <sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org>         cc:                 Subject:        [sustran] Re: More on Will maintenance keep 15-year old        public        transportbuses clean?</table> The joker in the deck is contained in what Eric said. If you only put in a new engine, but not a completely new power train, you risk a total mismatch of power, power train, and load. For example, repowering an old bus with just a new engine will lead to far less than optimal performance We in EMBARQ retrofitted buses in Mexico City -- the 2001 buses had a huge decline -90% n an already low PM emissions, as measured by Chris Weaver's RAVEM. WE got something like 0.02 gm/km using ultra low sulfer diesel (15 PPM) and JM particle filters. Older 1991 buses got a 20-30% reduction in PM from a much higher level -- the numbers are on EMBARQs web site. These older buses only had diesel oxidation catalysts, because the partile filters would not work right on them.  Original fuel, btw, was 350 PPM, clean by Manila standards. Our take away from this -- retrofit (with some repowering), or replace! >>> Eric Bruun <ericbruun@earthlink.net> 2/1/2006 5:40:47 PM >>> To add to what Walter said: I think that it is not the bus chassis so much that is at issue, but the drive train. A bus that is not corroded and well-maintained can have a new or rebuilt engine installed at mide-life and it will function largely like a new one up to 15 years old. After that, they start to have lots of other maintenance issues, as well, as the engine and transmission. If it is not a purpose-built bus, but a truck chassis with a bus body added, its life will be much shorter than 15 years, no matter what. Anything without air suspension, and that frequently operates overloaded will destroy both the chassis and the drive train. Also, retrofitting a particulate trap onto the exhaust is one of the single most important things to do! Particulates are where diesels are inferior to petrol and CNG engines. This is the type of foriegn aid that should be given immediately. One more thing. It is unrealistic to expect a service that operates without subsidies and where the owner/operator is living at a subistence level to maintain buses well. If I were them, I would choose feeding my family over cleaning the fuel injectors and air filters. So, pollution can not be separated from the operating economics that prevail. In my opinion, anyone who supports laizzez faire for public transport doesn't care about the environment very much. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- From: Walter Hook Sent: Feb 1, 2006 10:06 AM To: 'Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport' Subject: [sustran] Re: Fw: [cai-asia] Will maintenance keep 15-year oldpublictransport buses clean? v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}       Clean  Clean  DocumentEmail         MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) } /* Style Definitions */  table.MsoNormalTable                 {mso-style-name:"Table Normal";                 mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;                 mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;                 mso-style-noshow:yes;                 mso-style-parent:"";                 mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;                 mso-para-margin:0in;                 mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;                 mso-pagination:widow-orphan;                 font-size:10.0pt;                 font-family:"Times New Roman";}     I am not an expert in this, but i do know that in most US cities transit authorities receiving money from the US Federal Transit Admin must use buses 10 years old or younger, after which they are sold to a company in LA that parks them on a huge lot and sells them to smaller towns and foreign countries.  What FTA says is that some 10 year old buses that are well maintained are no more polluting than much newer buses, and that the 10 year cut off is arbitrary and that simply testing the tailpipe emissions and having road worthiness testing would be more efficient, but enforcement of such measures seems to be beyond the capacity of many countries and I would assume this includes the Philippines, hence the need for a sub-optimal age restriction.  They can probably resell the vehicles outside Manila where there are lower concentrations of ambient air pollution.  -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of Brendan Finn Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 4:00 AM To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport Subject: [sustran] Re: Fw: [cai-asia] Will maintenance keep 15-year oldpublictransport buses clean? Dear Aurora, In my opinion, the simple answer is that a good preventive maintenance regime will keep the buses a lot cleaner than they would be in the absence of such a regime. I don't know what you define as "clean", I would take the benchmark as the performance you should expect in the first five years if the vehicle is maintained in line with the manufacturer's recommendations. I presume the scenario refers either to an existing stock of buses or to a proposal to buy in second-hand vehicles which are being replaced in another country (perhaps currently 10-15 years old), and that there is concern locally about the future emissions based on past experience with the operators. At the risk of interfering where I don't know the context, I would suggest that there are five factors which could assure good performance from older vehicles : a) Clearly defined emission standards which are practical, realistic, and measurable b) An enforcement regime that can detect violating vehicles and impose escalating penalties on their owners c) A regime of preventive maintenance within the operating companies that supports a vehicle throughout its working life (provide some technical assistance if needed) d) Sufficiently strong incentives for companies to include emissions-related work and testing within such a regime e) Incentives for operating companies to replace their vehicles when good maintenance can no longer possible keep them within specifications (and, of course, ensure that these vehicles are scrapped rather than sold on somewhere else) On one issue I would be cautious. In some places I have seen the arguments about old or clean buses used as a pretext for other actions. For example, I have seen it used to drive small operating companies and owner-drivers off the road to the advantage of the state-owned enterprises, and in other cases as criteria on routes tenders to quite effectively eliminate the competition in the pre-qualification stages. I think it is important to keep the agenda 'clean' as well as the buses! If you assemble the various inputs into a briefing note, I would be interested to receive it. With best wishes, Brendan Finn. _____________________________________________________________________________________ >From Brendan Finn, ETTS Ltd.   e-mail : etts@indigo.ie   tel : +353.87.2530286 ----- Original Message ----- From: aables@adb.org To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 3:40 AM Subject: [sustran] Fw: [cai-asia] Will maintenance keep 15-year old publictransport buses clean? Dear SUSTRAN friends, We thought you might have something to say on this topic. Please see below. Best regards, Au Aurora Fe Ables Transport Researcher Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities (CAI-Asia) Asian Development Bank Tel (632) 632-4444 ext. 70820 Fax (632) 636-2381 Email aables@adb.org http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia www.adb.org ----- Forwarded by Aurora Ables/Consultants/ADB on 01-02-2006 11:27 AM ----- gbathan@adb.org 01-02-2006 10:40 AM Please respond to cai-asia@lists.worldbank.org To"Clean Air Initiative -- Asia" <cai-asia@lists.worldbank.org> cchfabian@adb.org, "Bebet Gozun" <bggozun@hotmail.com>, chuizenga@adb.org, majero@adb.org, mrco@adb.org, aables@adb.org Subject[cai-asia] Will maintenance keep 15-year old public transport buses clean?   Dear friends, In a stakeholder meeting held in the Philippines last week, CAI-Asia was asked to request inputs through the listserv to the question -- "Will vehicle maintenance ensure that 15-year old public transport buses remain non-polluting?" 15 years here means 15 years from the date of engine manufacture. Your inputs would be greatly appreciated. Glynda Glynda Bathan Coordinator Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities (CAI-Asia) Asian Development Bank Tel (632) 632-5151 Fax (632) 636-2381 http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia www.adb.org Aurora Fe Ables Transport Researcher Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities (CAI-Asia) Asian Development Bank Tel (632) 632-4444 ext. 70820 Fax (632) 636-2381 Email aables@adb.org http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia www.adb.org ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia.