The other half is all about fuel efficiency and CO2 and trying
to make sure our customers can get as much value as possible while still meeting the regs. We want to be able to provide
Fortunately they are a little bit better lined up. Criteria emissions didn’t have that and CO2 will have fuel economy with it. But
still the regs are likely to be ahead of a straight economic calculation, so the better we can do that, the more customers feel like it’s
a good deal for them and not just another add-on cost.
Fuel economy/CO2 is kind of the next big one. But you can’t
lose sight of what’s happening with emissions technologies over
the next 20 years as they apply to developing countries.
II. We’ve heard some whispered references to a “Tier 5.”
What might that be and what might it entail?
It’s not clear, but there are a couple of things going on. I’d
say that regulators are wondering could they do more with particulates? They want to get particulate levels to lowest possible. Whatever the lowest level is, they want that everywhere
because particulate levels are not good.
I think the second thing is they’ll want to say NOx levels in
some of these applications aren’t as low as they are in other
power ranges, so they’ll want to get there.
The other thing I’ve heard is as they’ve looked at overall
emissions levels, and in Europe they just came out with a
study that said that overall emissions levels, despite improvements in regs, have actually creeped up, which I think is a
matter of people usage and people being at different parts of
the emissions cycle. So they’re going to step back and say are
there things we can tweak to make it better?
I still think we’re talking about marginal steps as compared
to the 1998 to 2010 steps, which were very large. We’re getting
at the edge of measurement accuracy now in terms of criteria
emissions, so even if they do something, I think it will be kind
of in the realm of existing technology.
EPA seems to be talking about trying to link emissions standards, criteria emissions with CO2, which I think is a good idea.
Because one of the challenges as you move toward CO2
emissions and optimized drive cycles, you could lose ground on
criteria emissions. Or you could have one regulator like maybe
the ARB (California Air Resources Board) that goes further on
a criteria and gets separated again.
One of the things I think the EPA did on the first greenhouse
gas rule that was exceptionally good, is they got one rule and one
regulator. That was really well done. I think we’d like to see a continuation of that and I think EPA has an interest in doing that.
One other thing I should mention is the other technology
challenge that I see happening in commercial vehicles and
commercial equipment is integration of subsystems and controls. If I look at what Cummins is doing on R&D in terms of
frontier work, what we’re trying to do is better integrate all of
these complex subsystems to give a more robust solution and
a more capable solution from a feature point of view.
This is what the cars went through too. Cars have a lot of controls now and a lot of what you buy a car for now are controls and
features. I think that’s all coming into commercial vehicles and
commercial equipment. People want to, depending on the market, choose what they want, they want the package integrated
well, so all those integration subsystems become very important.
For Cummins one of the things we like about our position is
because we have these subsystems in-house and we’ve been
working with them for a long time, I think our ability to integrate
them gives us potentially an advantage there. A potential advantage, actually having an advantage is a matter of execution. I like our position better, but that’s definitely a technical
challenge to make sure we do a good job.
I think our kids are going to buy cars because they do Facebook better and they do better electronics in an interface way.
They don’t really care about driving they just want to be able to
look up Facebook images. When we bought cars it was all about
the freedom of driving. Things have definitely shifted there.
Commercial vehicles have a work aspect to them but I do
think when you start thinking about how you can integrate subsystems and controls, you can make work more productive. So
there will be more of a question of how I can create advantage
for the customers in their productive environment as opposed
to how is it more pleasurable per se. But there are opportunities there and that will be up another big thrust technically.
10 QUESTIONS WITH TOM LINEBARGER OF CUMMINS dpX
“You’ll see Cummins continuing to pursue applications where
we think customers can get value. We’re primarily a commer-
cial-focused company. So what we’re trying to do with our pow-
ertrains is try to demonstrate and give people value for work
- Tom Linebarger, chairman CEO, Cummins Inc.
38 DIESEL PROGRESS NORTH AMERICAN EDITION February 2014