How to understand emissions regulations
With so many different standards worldwide, can harmonization be achieved?
One of the many questions that have emerged in the wake of the Volkswagen emissions scandal is, “Why are there so many different regulations?” And the corollary, “Why shouldn’t there be a common set of standards worldwide.”
The answers are rooted in both science and politics. But there now seems to be a glimmer of hope that some level of harmonization might be achievable.
The U.S., and particularly the State of California, has been the pioneers in vehicle emissions regulation — driven largely by the photochemical smog problem that reached “perfect storm” conditions in the Los Angeles basin in the 1960s and ’70s.
Those jurisdictions have been at the forefront of emissions regulations ever since, enacting the toughest standards in the world in most respects.
Not all countries and regions experience the same types and levels of smog and air pollution, so they don’t feel the same need. But there are huge potential benefits from the adoption of harmonized global test standards
California’s standards are even stricter than those of the federal government (although, the two now are on a path of convergence).
So, why hasn’t the rest of the world adopted the same standards, like Canada has? For one, they haven’t felt they had to. Not all countries and regions experience the same types and levels of smog and air pollution, so they didn’t feel the same need.
For another, the testing regimen adopted for the U.S. regulations was based on a typical Los Angeles-area driving cycle of almost 50 years ago. And while they have been modified since then, it is still at the core of current regulations.
Those conditions don’t necessarily relate to traffic patterns in other places, such as China, Europe or Japan. So they may not be appropriate for those regions.
Even if they were appropriate, based on local air quality and political considerations, the need for such stringent regulations was not universally recognized and accepted, particularly considering the significant costs inherent in doing so.
In addition, there are differences in things such as fuels available in different regions that can dramatically alter emissions outputs, making realistic standardization almost impossible.
Nevertheless, there are huge potential benefits from the adoption of harmonized global test standards — even if it’s just the test procedure that’s standardized, not the allowable emissions levels.
To that end, a “Worldwide Light Vehicle Emissions Test Procedure” (WLTP) is being developed, under the auspices of the United Nations Working Party on Pollution and Energy.
It will define a harmonized driving cycle representative of world average driving conditions and a similarly harmonized test procedure that sets the conditions, requirements, tolerances, and other conditions for the emissions test.
There is said to be a high probability of adoption by the European Union, Japan, and some other countries. But the United States, which initially supported the project, has dropped out (and by extension, based on our parallel standards, so has Canada).
Recently, however, General Motors global powertrain chief Dan Nicholson expressed his intent to “knock heads together” between regulatory environments in Europe and the U.S. on the subject, according to Automotive News. As the incoming president of the International Federation of Automotive Engineering Societies, he just may be in a position to do so.
Stay tuned.