Search

Environmental and other public health issues promise to adversely affect what otherwise should be an apparently optimistic outlook for the diesel engine market in 1999. Public perception of the diesel engine has not helped since consumers typically view diesel engines as smoke belchers and very few realize the tremendous strides in improved diesel engine emissions since 1978. The results of ongoing epidemiologic studies on the health effects of diesel engine emissions will also influence diesel emission regulations by different governments., The diesel engine has been a benchmark in efficiency, reliability, durability, and robustness for all other types of internal combustion engines. From the environmental perspective, the high fuel efficiency of [...]

Following an initiative by the German Minister for Environment, Juergen Trittin, the EU Environmental Council requested to its late June session that the European Commission develop a proposal for new [...]

Earlier this year, the European Commission announced its proposed Stage 3 legislation to control emissions from diesel engines that are used in nonroad machinery in the European Union (EU). The [...]

The European Council of Environment Ministers have agreed on the final Euro III standard for heavy-duty truck and bus engines. Starting on the year 2000, the old test cycle ECE R-49 will be superseded by two test cycles: European Stationary Cycle and European Transient Cycle. The emission limit values for the year 2005/2008 are expected to require all new diesel-powered heavy-duty vehicles to be equipped with exhaust gas aftertreatment devices, such as particulate traps and DeNOx catalysts., The European Council of Environment Ministers has reached a political agreement on the final Euro III (year 2000) standard for heavy-duty truck and bus engines, and has adopted new, very [...]

Background:A retrospective evaluation of tolerance and efficacy of two schemes of neoadjuvant treatment in patients (pts) with unresectable rectal cancer: radiochemotherapy (CRT) and radiotherapy (RT), including conventional and accelerated hyperfractionation. Material and Method:A total of 145 consecutive pts with unresectable, locally advanced rectal cancer. The schemes used are RT in 73 (50%) or CRT in 72 (50%). In CRT, 54 Gy in 1.8 Gy fractions was given with chemotherapy, In the RT group, conventional fractionation (CFRT) and hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy (HART). HART was introduced at first as an alternative to CFRT, after radiobiological studies suggesting a therapeutic gain of hyperfractionation in other cancers, and second to administer relatively high dose needed in unresectable cancer, which is not feasible in hypofractionation because of critical organs sensitivity to high fraction doses (fd). HART was an alternative option in pts with medical contraindications to chemotherapy and to shorten overall treatment time with greater radiobiological effectiveness than CFRT. Results:Objective response (OR) in the RT and CRT group was 60% versus 75%. Resection rate (RR) in RT and CRT: 37% versus 65%. Tumor mobility and laparotomy-based unresectability were significant factors for OR. Performance status (PS), tumor mobility, and neoadjuvant treatment method were significant for RR.