Laserfiche WebLink
Cemex Vernalis Quarry Mining and Reclamation Project <br /> • the Draft EIR's claim that additional retrofits would be cost prohibitive is unsupported <br /> by cost-benefit analysis. <br /> • the commenter also states that the use ofPuriNOx and the use ofselective catalytic <br /> reduction ("SCR') (urea injection)systems are feasible and have been successfully <br /> demonstrated on off-road equipment. <br /> The SJVAPCD measures listed by the commenter would be incorporated into the project to the <br /> maximum extent feasible per Regulation VIII,which is included in Mitigation Measure 4.6.1. See <br /> also Responses to Comments B-47 and B48 regarding additional retrofits. _ <br /> Response to Comment B-47 <br /> Commenter argues that PuriNOx is a viable control strategy to improve air quality in California <br /> for use in heavy-duty diesel engines including offroad engines. <br /> Use of PuriNOx is not a widely accepted control measure at this time. In addition to the additional _ <br /> fuel cost,use of PuriNOx reduces horsepower by 15"1 which could require larger equipment to <br /> accomplish certain operations. Finally,PuriNox may increase engine maintenance problems. <br /> Response to Comment B-48 <br /> Commenter argues that "selective catalytic reduction, using urea as a reducing agent, can reduce <br /> NOx emissions by 75 to 90 percent while simultaneously reducing VOC emissions by up to 80 <br /> percent and PM emissions by 20 to 30 percent." <br /> Selective catalytic reduction (SCR) is not considered feasible as it is not readily available in U.S. <br /> diesel engines.New diesel engine standards (2010)will require SCR. These future reductions <br /> have been taken into account in the future NOx emissions. <br /> Response to Comment B-49 <br /> Commenter argues that lean NOx catalyst("LNC') technology can achieve a 10 to 40 percent <br /> reduction in NOx emissions and has been demonstrated and commercialized for a variety of off- <br /> road retrofit applications, including heavy-duty earthmoving equipment. <br /> LNC is an experimental alternative to SCR,discussed above. LNC is not recommended because it <br /> is cost prohibitive and not readily available. CARB has not recommended LNC as a feasible — <br /> mitigation measure. <br /> Response to Comment B-50 — <br /> Commenter argues that exhaust gas recirculation ("EGR') reduces NOx by reducing the <br /> temperature at which fuel burns in the combustion chamber, and that "engine retrofits with low _ <br /> pressure EGR in conjunction with a DPF can achieve NOx reductions ofover 40 percent and PM <br /> reductions of more than 90 percent and have been successfully demonstrated on off-road equipment." <br /> Comex Vemlis(quarry Mining andl Reclamation Project 3-18 ESA 1303015 <br /> Final Environmental Impact Report June 2008 <br />