legality of egr system removal

Ok. Let me back peddle a bit. Sorry for calling you a Liberal...but you're still wrong. I didn't explain it correctly earlier.

So, for years, as we all know, Agencies have had free reign to pass laws and assess penalties without much issue. Things changed after the SEC fined a guy. He wanted a trial and SEC said it's not a criminal case, so therefore no trial needed. SCOTUS said they violated the 7th which says you have the right to trial by jury for any civil case. SEC said this wasn't a civil penalty but rather an "Administrative Penalty." SCOTUS said they are one in the same. So while THIS case pertaining to the 7th, the underlying issue was overreaching power, which Justices addressed in their decision.

Part of that dialog indicated SCOTUS was going to also address the sleeping giant which is the practice of Agencies assessing penalties without a trial or appeal process (aka, Administrative Penalty). That, in turn, brought up the question of why are Agencies ALLOWED to assess ANYTHING? SCOTUS, in previous years, have created CASE LAW that stated Punitive Assessments are Punishment and therefore become part of the Executive Branch. Only Justice Department has the Constitutional authority to conduct investigations if the outcome could be punitive. And IF that's the case, that would also mean either a civil trail or criminal trial ONLY. Anything besides these two outcomes goes against articles in the Bill of Rights, (namely the 4th and 7th). SCOTUS said outside of these two possibilities, the case becomes a State matter and should stay at the state level.

So, in that example, CARB in California can make it a felony if California says that they can, but the EPA cannot. EPA can recommend, advise, and counsel the Government but they can't pass these laws as criminal. EPA is not a law enforcement agency and as such, falls outside ofcthe Executive Branch. What they CAN do, however, is conduct an investigation and submit their findings to either State Attorney General or to a Federal District Attorney who can then assign it to the FBI for investigation or follow through. So, I think the days of EPA tossing around fines are gone. I don't think they will target end user deletes, but I know some states are.

I truly believe the EPA absolutely has a place in the US and certainly emission control ought play a role. Look at how clean diesel has become as a result. But the aftertreatment stuff is, I think, the benefactor of the Law of Unintended consequences. For example- UC-Berkley did a research on the uptick in wild fires. Climate Change folks were quick to point out higher temps and thus dead foliage. In a study of the dead plants roadside, they found high concentration of ammonia. Ammonia is the main chemical released in DEF Exhaust these days.

Here's the study. I THINK. It gets rather dull, so be warned:

Reviewing the Impact of Vehicular Pollution on Road-Side Plants—Future Perspectives

I honestly think the way MAN/SCANIA handle the exhaust and after treatment is the way to go. I'm not 100% on how it works, but those trucks don't REGEN. The DEF is inserted right after the turbo and that air get filtered and put back in. The filter is then "cleaned" by turbo heat...or something .

 

Not trying to be argumentive about the issue, but there is a lot you said and most of it is overlooking a few important points.

1 - congress made the law that created the means for the standards to be set.
2 - they mandated the standards to be set without regard to cost or technology.
3 - the EPA set the standards far enough in advance to allow the manufacturers to produce the products to sell and meet those standards.
4 - congress has oversight on the EPA and they meet with the EPA in committee meetings to discuss the standards and to see if there was any legislative need to strengthen or change the standards or means of enforcement.
5 - the system worked well until the 1990s when Congress gave more agencies latitude to create regulations. which brings me up to ...
6 - the entire Obama care package removed congressional oversight to the point that Congress was powerless to do much if anything to change regulations.
7 - agencies do not pass laws,
8 - this has little to do with the fact that Congress passed the CAA in 1970, charging the EPA to enforce it and other laws and standards while allowing the EPA to work with the DOJ in order to bring 'justice' to a violation.
9 - when you remove any emission control devices, you have broken federal law, state law notwithstanding.
10 - just for giggles, using your CARB example as a springboard, under the constitution and the Interstate Commerce clause, the state of California can not stop a foreign (out of state) truck from entering the state to access work from that state or the markets of said state.

 

As an engineer, but not directly in the field of vehicular emissions, let me give you my $.02 on this system: It looks better, and it works more 'seamlessly' than current Regen systems do, BUT it will require knowledgeable maintenance from time to time. Also, the space required for these exhaust scrubber on Scania trucks alone looks to be fairly large, so finding places to hide it will be challenging. It also looks to be more expensive, so there is that as well. Still, with a system like this Scania can still fit it under a cabover, with room there still for a 770hp V-8 diesel and 1000l of diesel and DEF.

As far as EGR's in general are concerned, I believe California is not the only state which can fine you for entering with emissions devices disconnected. I'm pretty certain that most states in the Northeast will also do the same; it's just that they usually are not looking primarily for that. Get a full DOT check in NY, though, and you may be up "feces estuary" without a paddle.

And, as far as the validity of vehicular emissions controls in general goes; I'm 63. I can remember a time before all that stuff was required. As a kid, every time we drove down the turnpike from Boulder to Denver we had to go through a layer of dense, brown smog. When visiting the LA area in 1966, the air was so awful you couldn't even see the sun; it was just a faint glow through a heavy brown layer of smog. California doesn't want to go back to that, and neither do most people.

 

EGR's sole purpose is to lower NOx emissions by lowering combustion temperatures below the threshold that NOx emissions are produced. However when you have EGR gases mixed into the cylinder, the lack of oxygen causes a dirty burn with more soot.

Fuel systems and electronic engine controls are so advanced now that the engines can burn so clean that a DPF is not needed. However, NOx emissions are now far above acceptable levels. This is what the SCR system is for.

IMO any engine manufacturer still using EGR in 2025 is behind the 8 ball. Its obsolete tech now.

 

My last Scania didn't have EGR. They probably still don't. They don't sell them here though. They burn clean by design, they have DEF though. I don't know how they do that. I take my EGR and VGT apart periodically and clean the soot and gunk out thoroughly. There is always a lot. It really needs it and this helps prevent issues and codes. Best idea is not to modify emissions.The government is not very nice to you once you catch their attention

 

Expensive..... that calls for a definition.

In my opinion, the PRINCIPAL costs of the current and recent crops of after treatment systems haven not been the system costs (let's pick a number, call it $20K).

The principal costs have been in increased downtime, increased maintenance, and reduced longevity. Very few motors make it to the 1 million mile mark without a major overhaul. Virtually all motors have significant maintenance costs related to the after treatment systems before 700K miles.

Quantifying the reduction in longevity of a $200K truck by 300K miles? $50K? Added maintenance of $20K? Cost of additional down time another $10K? Cost of DEF? $25K?

I'm not against clean are anymore than anyone else, but now we are talking about spending 50% of the capital cost of trucking on cleaning the air.

What is reasonable?

 

Reason left the chat when emissions rules killed the Judge. (The car)

 

The PCV system in the 60s was brilliant. $10 system and it made the whole engine much better. Very few success stories like that though

 

EGR delete if you can pull it off. Do it. Yes, its illegal. However, chances of getting caught are slim. DPF delete is a whole different story. They can find that during an inspection real easy.

 

EGR delete? Sure...get the new S-13 engine (International). It doesn't have an EGR.