Puppeteer

Author Topic: Has the EPA doomed the future of our engines?  (Read 37540 times)

oldnslow

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 150
    • View Profile
Has the EPA doomed the future of our engines?
« on: March 08, 2006, 10:40:39 PM »
Gentlemen. Is our supply of listeroids really cut off? Utterpower is not bringing in any more engines and I thought if anyone could figure out a way around the regulations, they could. I tried to read through the EPA regs and got lost.
Fortunately I have a couple of Listeroids purchased before the ban. Just a quick look at Montieth's website says he is out of stock too.
We can all stick together and share information but eventually no one will be able to get one of these. Any of you guys have a solution in mind?
Mistakes are the cost of tuition.

JohnF13

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 289
    • View Profile
    • woodnstuff
Re: Has the EPA doomed the future of our engines?
« Reply #1 on: March 08, 2006, 11:01:40 PM »
Several people have suggested that bringing in engines in "parts" might bypass the EPA regs.  It looks possible to me, BUT, don't give up on Utterpower yet........I'm sure George will think of something novel....
John F
2 x 6/1 JKSON.  1 x 10/1 JKSON, 1 x 27hp Changfa, 1 x 28hp AG295, 1 genuine 1939 SOM, a couple of others in test mode and a Hercules Multu-fuel still in the box.

rpg52

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 387
    • View Profile
Re: Has the EPA doomed the future of our engines?
« Reply #2 on: March 08, 2006, 11:07:24 PM »
List,
I thought George's thoughts on the subject, (while only his opinion of course) were worth considering.
http://www.utterpower.com/lister_future.htm
Some of the rest of you have the engineering background to assess them better than I however.
Ray   :-\
PS Listeroid 6/1, 5 kW ST, Detroit Diesel 3-71, Belsaw sawmill, 12 kW ST head, '71 GMC 3/4 T, '79 GMC 1T, '59 IH T-340

Halfnuts

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 259
    • View Profile
Re: Has the EPA doomed the future of our engines?
« Reply #3 on: March 09, 2006, 01:12:43 AM »
So just what is it that constitutes and EPA "certified" engine, anyway?  What kind of emissioins limits are they talking about and where are the Listeroids currently vs. those limits?  I haven't heard about anyone who has had a sniffer sample the exhaust. 

Certified diesels seem all to be 4 valve/cylinder, common-rail electronically furel injected direct-injection engines, with sensors feeding a computer that controls the fuel rack and modulates the injection sequence during each injection event for each cylinder.  Not trivial.  All of the foregoing your garden-variety Lister(oid) is most emphatically not.  Once you've dolled up the pig with all those nips and tucks and implants and liposuction, this pig won't be a pig anymore, and it won't be a Listeroid, either.   

Halfnuts
« Last Edit: March 09, 2006, 01:20:52 AM by Halfnuts »

kpgv

  • Guest
Re: Has the EPA doomed the future of our engines?
« Reply #4 on: March 09, 2006, 01:44:21 AM »
Hi All,
For some background on this, see:

http://listerengine.com/smf/index.php?topic=321.0

There are some theories about how to get around this...
Maybe that works for a while...Maybe...
I think there are lots of people in the US who STILL want these.
It will really SUCK if importing them comes down to "smuggling".
These are FUN, challenging, useful, educational, FUN, FUN, FUN.
The more of them around, the stronger the businesses who support them (Parts, etc) will be.
Maybe there IS a way to "legalize" the importation of these?
There are lots of us with a "dog in this hunt".
Operators want parts in stock in North America.
Businesses need demand to justify keeping "inventory".
IMPO: GROWTH in the count of these running in North America should be of interest to Importers, those who already have one, and to those who want one (or another one!!!), if for no better reason than "Enlightened Self Interest"!

Halfnuts, You hit the Nail on the Head.
Although I've looked, I can't find a report of a "test" on these.
I've called around Denver, and as of yet, can't find a "Mobile" tester for a "stationery" engine. ??? ???

Kevin



 

sawmiller

  • Guest
Re: Has the EPA doomed the future of our engines?
« Reply #5 on: March 09, 2006, 02:03:05 AM »
Hi All

Ancient Engine - importing an engine first manufactored at least 21 years earlier that is in its original configuration. Probaly would work if you wanted to import your own. But not a container load.



Regards  Tim

SCOTT

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 209
    • View Profile
Re: Has the EPA doomed the future of our engines?
« Reply #6 on: March 09, 2006, 02:45:12 AM »
To all:  I do not make many posts, unless I am sure what I post can be read as irrefutable,  I do my homework. While researching the specifics of grid interconnection in Ct. I have spoken to CL&P, CT DEP and the EPA.  To all those who are concerned about the EPA restrictions; I have 1 question, who of you have actually read the text?  I have read the text in full several times and to me the answer is clear.  It seems clear that some who would benefit (dealers) are making it seem that all of the sudden the EPA is gunning for “lister types”  are you kidding me?  Take a step back and think about what the role of the EPA is.  Do you really think that they are going to expend resources to stop an 800lb 6 hp diesel engine from clearing a US port?  If there is anyone here who is concerned about importing an engine, let me know I will buy it for you.  I will charge you my cost plus $200.00 Get me a quote from any manufacturer and I will do the leg work.  You do not need a dealer to deal with EPA, you need a dealer to act as a buffer between you and some Indian exporter who will never sell you anything again.  You need their clout.  I have spoken to a few manufacturers in India, and guess what???   You get what you pay for.

The following is the response fromthe EPA to my e-mail, at bottom/

Scott,
 Here are the regulations for stationary engines.

Stationary engine.
                            The engine must be used for a stationary
         purpose and remain at a single
                            site at a building, structure, facility or
         installation for more than 12
                            consecutive months throughout its lifetime,
         or at a seasonal source
                            during its full annual operating period (see
         the definition of  “nonroad
                            engine” in 40 CFR 1068.30, 89.2 or 90.3 ).
         Starting January 1, 2004
                            for spark-ignition engines above 19 kW and
         January 1, 2006 for all
                            compression-ignition engines, the engine
         must be labeled (see 40 CFR
                            1039.20 or 1048.20 ). Penalties: Any person
         who circumvents or
                            attempts to circumvent residence-time
         requirements for stationary
                            engines may be fined up to $32,500 per day
         of violation ( 40 CFR
                            1068.101(b)(3), 89.1106(a)(5), 90.1006(a)(5)
         ). NOTE: Stationary
                            engines may be subject to state or local
regulations.



1068.30

iii) The engine otherwise included in paragraph (1)(iii) of this
definition remains or will remain at a location for more than 12…  consecutive months or a shorter period of time for an engine located at
a seasonal source. A location is any single site at a building,
structure, facility, or installation. Any engine (or engines) that
replaces an engine at a location and that is intended to perform the
same or similar function as the engine replaced will be included in
calculating the consecutive time period. An engine located at a seasonal
source is an engine that remains at a seasonal source during the full
annual operating period of the seasonal source. A seasonal source is a
stationary source that remains in a single location on a permanent basis
(i.e., at least two years) and that operates at that single location…. My guess is that 95 % of the people who read this post will never bother to read this far into the text.  Please prove me wrong…

approximately three months (or more) each year. This paragraph (2)(iii)
does not apply to an engine after the engine is removed from the
location.




§ 1039.20   What requirements from this part apply to excluded
stationary engines?


The provisions of this section apply for engines built on or after
January 1, 2006.


(a) You must add a permanent label or tag to each new engine you produce
or import that is excluded under §1039.1(c) as a stationary engine. To
meet labeling requirements, you must do the following things:


(1) Attach the label or tag in one piece so no one can remove it without
destroying or defacing it.


(2) Secure it to a part of the engine needed for normal operation and
not normally requiring replacement.


(3) Make sure it is durable and readable for the engine's entire life.


(4) Write it in English.


(5) Follow the requirements in §1039.135(g) regarding duplicate labels
if the engine label is obscured in the final installation.


(b) Engine labels or tags required under this section must have the
following information:


(1) Include the heading “EMISSION CONTROL INFORMATION”.


(2) Include your full corporate name and trademark. You may instead
include the full corporate name and trademark of another company you
choose to designate.


(3) State the engine displacement (in liters) and maximum engine power.


(4) State: “THIS ENGINE IS EXCLUDED FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF 40 CFR PART
1039 AS A “STATIONARY ENGINE.” INSTALLING OR USING THIS ENGINE IN ANY
OTHER APPLICATION MAY BE A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW SUBJECT TO CIVIL
PENALTY.”.

1039.1(c)

(c) The definition of nonroad engine in 40 CFR 1068.30 excludes certain
engines used in stationary applications. These engines are not required
to comply with this part, except for the requirements in §1039.20. In
addition, the prohibitions in 40 CFR 1068.101 restrict the use of
stationary engines for nonstationary purposes.


§ 1048.20   What requirements from this part apply to my excluded
engines?


(a) Engine manufacturers producing an engine excluded under §1048.5(d)
must add a permanent label or tag identifying each engine. This applies
equally to importers. To meet labeling requirements, you must do the
following things:


(1) Attach the label or tag in one piece so no one can remove it without
destroying or defacing it.


(2) Make sure it is durable and readable for the engine's entire life.


(3) Secure it to a part of the engine needed for normal operation and
not normally requiring replacement.


(4) Write it in block letters in English.


(5) Instruct equipment manufacturers that they must place a duplicate
label as described in 40 CFR 1068.105 if they obscure the engine's
label.


(b) Engine labels or tags required under this section must have the
following information:


(1) Include the heading “Emission Control Information”.


(2) Include your full corporate name and trademark.


(3) State the engine displacement (in liters) and maximum brake power.


(4) State: “THIS ENGINE IS EXCLUDED FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF 40 CFR PART
1048 AS A “STATIONARY ENGINE.” INSTALLING OR USING THIS ENGINE IN ANY
OTHER APPLICATION MAY BE A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW SUBJECT TO CIVIL
PENALTY.”.


1048.5(d)


(d) As defined in §1048.801, stationary engines are not required to
comply with this part (because they are not nonroad engines), except
that you must meet the requirements in §1048.20. In addition, the
prohibitions in 40 CFR 1068.101 restrict the use of stationary engines
for non-stationary purposes.




Penalties:


1068.101(b)(3)

(b) The following prohibitions apply to everyone with respect to the
engines to which this part applies:


(3) Stationary engines. For an engine that is excluded from any
requirements of this chapter because it is a stationary engine, you may
not move it or install it in any mobile equipment, except as allowed by
the provisions of this chapter. You may not circumvent or attempt to
circumvent the residence-time requirements of paragraph (2)(iii) of the
nonroad engine definition in §1068.30. We may assess a civil penalty up
to $31,500 for each day you are in violation.




89.1006(a)(5)

(a) Violations. A violation of the requirements of this subpart is a
violation of the applicable provisions of the Act, including sections
213(d) and 203, and is subject to the penalty provisions thereunder.

 (5) A person who violates §89.1003(a)(2) or (a)(5) is subject to a
civil penalty of not more than $25,000 per day of violation.
.1006(a)(5)
(a) Violations. A violation of the requirements of this subpart is a
violation of the applicable provisions of the Act and is subject to the
penalty provisions thereunder.


(5) A person who violates §90.1003(a)(2) or (a)(6) is subject to a civil
penalty of not more than $25,000 per day of violation.


(See attached file: Regulations for Stationary and Mobile Engines.pdf)

David C. Hurlin ________________________
EPA Imports Line
Compliance & Innovative Strategies Division
Light Duty Vehicle Programs
Imports Group
Managed by EG&G Technical Services
Phone: (734) 214-4100
Fax: (734) 214-4676

2000 Traverwood Drive
Ann Arbor, MI 48105                                                     
                                                                     

Hello

I would like to get the opinion of the EPA regarding the legality of
importing the following diesel engine.  The engine in question is a
"lister type" slow speed diesel consisting of either 1 or 2 cylinders
ranging from 6 -25 hp.
 Link:
http://www.poweranand.com/diesel_engine.htm

These engines weigh anywhere from 750-1500 lbs, they are intended for
stationary use only.  The main use is for electricity production.

As I understand current regulations this type engine should be allowed
under the following circumstance: Stationary use   box # 20 on the
following form:
Link:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/imports/forms/3520-21.pdf

I have been told that any engine produced after April 1 2006 will not be
allowed to use the above exception.  Is that correct?

Please let me know

Scott
net metering with a 6/1 in Connecticut
12/1
6/1

Mr Lister

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
Re: Has the EPA doomed the future of our engines?
« Reply #7 on: March 09, 2006, 01:37:35 PM »
Guys,

Does this mean that original Lister CS engines, built before 1987, and clearly labelled and stamped on both flywheels with a serial number that can trace their date of manufacture, are going to be exempt all this latest EPA nonsense?

What if the aforementioned engines were kept running using modern spare parts manufactired in India?

Any ideas ;-)



Ken


cujet

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 957
  • Lister power rules!
    • View Profile
    • www.cujet.com
Re: Has the EPA doomed the future of our engines?
« Reply #8 on: March 09, 2006, 02:39:46 PM »
There is some new regulation coming about this year and next. (AS I UNDERSTAND IT, I could be wrong) Tier 4 requirements will apply to stationary CI engines of all sorts and displacements. With the exception of certain very specific emergency use engines only. This may be the loophole we need, as Lister types are generally used for standby power generation.

While some of this information is contained in a NPRM, these often are written into law without opposition.

Chris
People who count on their fingers should maintain a discreet silence

tnorvold

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
    • View Profile
    • Brookville Trading Company, LLC
Re: Has the EPA doomed the future of our engines?
« Reply #9 on: March 09, 2006, 06:31:34 PM »
Good afternoon,

I have several PM diesels that are clearing customs in Minneapolis, Minnesota that I should have at my shop middle of next week.  I have a few 6/1 (spoked flywheel) 12/2 engines.  I have been cleared by the EPA if you check the regualtions they are tightening but not impossible to get.
Give me a call if you are interested.  I have photos I can send via email.
Trygve Norvold
Spring Valley, Wisconsin
651-271-1689(cell)
tnorvold@hotmail.com

Andre Blanchard

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 373
    • View Profile
Re: Has the EPA doomed the future of our engines?
« Reply #10 on: March 09, 2006, 07:07:32 PM »
Good afternoon,

I have several PM diesels that are clearing customs in Minneapolis, Minnesota that I should have at my shop middle of next week.  I have a few 6/1 (spoked flywheel) 12/2 engines.  I have been cleared by the EPA if you check the regualtions they are tightening but not impossible to get.
Give me a call if you are interested.  I have photos I can send via email.
Trygve Norvold
Spring Valley, Wisconsin
651-271-1689(cell)
tnorvold@hotmail.com

Spring Valley, Pierce or Manitowoc?

If it is Pierce county you are 35 miles directly south of me.
____________
Andre' B.  Clear Lake, Wis.
______________
Andre' B

binnie

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 219
    • View Profile
Re: Has the EPA doomed the future of our engines?
« Reply #11 on: March 09, 2006, 08:53:13 PM »
(Sorry if this is a repeat. I hit the "Tab" button automatically and something magical happened...everything went off into cyberspace.) I hope it went off to the EPA, but I doubt it !
I have an afterburner on my wood stove to reduce emissions & cut down the creosote build up. I have catalytic converters on my cars to meet emissions standards. What do diesel trucks have in place to meet highway emission standards?
With all the inovative talent on this forum perhaps someone, two or three members can come up with some type of converter, afterburner, scrubber, ?, that could be incorporated into the muffler system to reduce emissions on these machines, and then we could apply for an exemption.(another pepper pot).
I have read through the regulations & like most simple people, get lost in the verbal language & end up not knowing if they are banning it outright or alowing some exemptions? Thank you Scott, for your letter sent. Do let us know if you get a reply & what it determines for the future of  these machines.
I see Eric Lyons is designing a prototype of a heat exchanger for the muffler system, perhaps some sort of converter could be incorporated to control emmissions?
I wonder if anyone has tested the emissions on these machines to see where they stand now & howmuch has to be done to improve on them to meet the standard. What is the standard?
Some members have mentioned the possibility of a single personal life time exemption on importing 1,2 or3, engines directly from India. Where is that mentioned, and how do we find out about it?
There must be forms available to apply for exemptions? What do they involve, and how can we meet the exemptions? Till we know the paramaters we are dealing with & the standards we have to meet, we are only guessing?
I am a concerned Cdn. but know it is only a matter of time before we follow the trend and adopt the same standards up here. The life of these machines is threatened, the livelyhood of importers & dealers, the affordable independence and peace of mind they offer us in time of natural catastrophy. Perhaps our Florida friends can band together & make a plea for exemption on the basis of emergency back up. It was a god send durring Katrina. It proved itself in several power outages. I think a good case could be made by way of an exemption for emergency back up use.
How do we approach this issue, through political influence? Lobby, or bombarding the office of the initiator of the legislation with e-mails?
Is there anyone willing to take this on, keep us informed, and solicit our support where & when needed?
binnie, Mtl, cda.   
Listeroid 12/2 Jkson with 10kw head, for backup now on diesel. Future interests: WVO, bio,  Cogen - Heat exchangers - solar.

tnorvold

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
    • View Profile
    • Brookville Trading Company, LLC
Re: Has the EPA doomed the future of our engines?
« Reply #12 on: March 09, 2006, 09:30:38 PM »
I am located in St. Croix County.  Just south of I-94 off of Hwy 128.  About 29 miles east of Hudson, WI.
Thanks,
-Trygve Norvold
651-271-1689

GuyFawkes

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1184
    • View Profile
    • stuff
Re: Has the EPA doomed the future of our engines?
« Reply #13 on: March 09, 2006, 09:44:00 PM »
Now, if the "funk you" factory in india decided to change its brand name to say, LISTER, because they don't care about copyright after all, then you would be importing 50 year old antiques, and it would take a lister buff to spot the difference.
--
Original Lister CS 6/1 Start-o-matic 2.5 Kw (radiator conversion)
3Kw 130 VDC Dynamo to be added. (compressor + hyd pump)
Original Lister D, megasquirt multifuel project, compressor and truck alternator.
Current status - project / standby, Fuel, good old pump diesel.

oldnslow

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 150
    • View Profile
Re: Has the EPA doomed the future of our engines?
« Reply #14 on: March 09, 2006, 09:57:11 PM »
Thanks for all the great responses. IMPO the EPA makes it worse by not answering questions directly. For instance:

Quote
I would like to get the opinion of the EPA regarding the legality of
importing the following diesel engine.

AND

Quote
I have been told that any engine produced after April 1 2006 will not be
allowed to use the above exception.  Is that correct?

Scott's simple questions were not answered very directly. What he was looking for (i think) is for the EPA representative to say: "Yes you can because.....etc...etc" And Scott is also right (about me anyway) that some of us will not read or understand all of these EPA documents completely.

One thing is the regulations might be tied to manufacture date (?) and not importation date. IF this is true I bet the Indians wouldn't care what manufacture date (or brand) they stamp on the engine label as long as they can sell it. Perhaps for a time there will be a bunch of pre-2006 engines available.

Did you import "pre-ban" engines into Wisconsin TNORVOLD? I mean nothing negative by that, bravo if you did. Any dealer who wades through the paperwork and figures out a legal system for reselling has earned his profits even though some think profits are a "killing".

IMPO as long as the requirements stay focused on a small group little will change. IF the scope widens, many other entities will cry out in "pain" and we might see the belt loosen....

Mistakes are the cost of tuition.