EPA Streamlines Regulations for Car and Truck Fuel Conversion Systems
New options encourage innovation, maintain air quality protections
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has updated rules making it easier for manufacturers to sell fuel conversion systems. The conversion systems allow vehicles to run on alternative fuels, which may appeal to consumers concerned about energy security, fuel costs, or emissions.
These changes reflect the EPA’s interest in encouraging innovation and spurring conversions that optimize clean air and clean energy technologies. It is also in keeping with the president’s January 18, 2011, executive order, which directs agencies to identify and consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public.
The revised procedures will vary based on the age of the vehicle or engine being converted. EPA has found that the procedures for older vehicles and engines can be streamlined, while maintaining environmental safeguards. As opposed to a one-size fits all approach, EPA’s process is now based on whether a vehicle or engine is new, intermediate age, or outside its expected useful life.
Conversion systems alter an existing vehicle or engine to enable it to run on a different type of fuel. An example of this type of conversion includes switching a car designed for gasoline to run on compressed natural gas. While properly engineered conversion systems can reduce or at least not increase emissions, poorly designed systems can lead to much more pollution.
PDF Pages: 1 2
About Christopher DeMorro
This is good news. Anytime the government steps out of the way of progress, it’s a good thing. CNG is the most sensible Gas 2.0 right now for so many reasons:
1) low price
2) easy conversion
3) cleaner–CNG burns with 60-90% fewer smog-producing pollutants, 30-40% percent fewer greenhouse-gas emissions and ~70% less carbon monoxide
4) domestic (American jobs; no need to import from unstable countries)
5) octane rating of 130 (engines with 15:1 compression ratios could be the new norm…which will improve engine efficiency)
6) non corrosive (unlike ethanol)
It has a few disadvantages all of them having to do with the fact that it’s a gas and not a liquid at normal pressures, but overall, it would be a good thing if we could get a significant percentage of vehicles converted to CNG.
Good for the USA. I live in Europe and drive a propane-converted car. If the car is properly tuned, there is no difference in performance. Less polution also. With a nice conversion kit the car burns almosr the same quantity as gas. And in my country it is almost two times cheaper to drive on lpg. The benefits are obvious – for the environment and for your pocket.
I ran a v-6 S10 pickup on propane for a decade. The conversion to the carbeurated engine was accomplished with salvaged parts and used tank for less than 200 dollars. It was a propane only conversion, so running out of gas was somewhat inconvenient, but all in all, was very satisfactory. Especially when I was able to wear that smug kiss-my-rear-bumper-Jihadist smile every time I switched the ignition on. There are things you can’t put a price on. The only maintenance I did on the engine in ten years was two oil changes and a few air filters. When I was done using the truck, I pulled the engine, had a two stage shaft made to bolt to the back for a pulley to run a generator. After that I sold it to someone who ran a high capacity pressure washer with it. As far as I know it’s still running. My first ride in a propane conversion truck was in 1965. The propane company manager who inspired the S-10 conversion was still driving a 60′s vintage car he had converted. (around 1993 then) The propane delivery trucks ran on….you guessed it….propane. Isn’t this really a no-brainer?
My car is with fuel injectors, so it is no technical problem to convert almost any car to propane. And I can choose between propane and gas.