DOCSLIB.ORG

CNG/LNG Hybrid Electric

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CNG/LNG Hybrid Electric 10/31/2016 Natural Gas Hybridization NGVTF Gas Technology Institute Ted Barnes GTI Company Overview > Independent, not-for-profit, established in 1941 > Over 300 employees (~100 in CA) > 350 active projects > 1,200 patents; 500 products 2 1 10/31/2016 Reasons for Heavy Duty Hybrids • Heavy Duty Truck Hybridization – Why? • Critical environmentally sensitive areas looking for “zero emission” options; natural gas hybrids allow for near- term, at scale, real-world applications • Increased range, smaller battery pack, ability to keep same duty cycle as diesel • Fuel economy and low-end torque improvements can be substantial • Allows for zero tailpipe emissions in critical areas for limited range or through overhead (or rail) power transfer • NOx emissions already “near-zero” for natural gas but GHG needs constant improvement (diesel-hybrid and biodiesel have significant NOx issues) 3 Current GTI Hybrids Projects • Energy Commission – Hybrid Trucks • US Hybrid and UC Riverside major technology partners • Two projects with natural gas Class 8 trucks • US DOE – SCAQMD – ZECT Program • BAE and Kenworth major technology partners • Drayage truck with natural gas “genset”, BAE Hybrid Drive propulsion, Plug-in, Pantograph for zero-emission operation 4 2 Abas Goodarzi, Ph.D., P.E. & Farzad Ahmadkhanlou, Ph.D., P.E. NGVT Forum 2016 Integrated NaturalElectric, Gas Vehicle Fuel Technology Cell and Forum Hybrid 2016 Meeting Powertrain Components Powering Clean Mobility US Hybrid © 1 US Hybrid Group www.ushybrid.com www.usfuelcell.com www.magmotor.com US Hybrid US FuelCell Magmotor Corporation HQ: Torrance, CA South Windsor, CT Worcester, MA Year Year 1999 2013 Year Established Established 1876 Established (Acquired by US Hybrid in 2008) Electric Powertrain for Core Servo Motors and Drives Electric, Hybrid and Fuel Core Fuel Cell Core Competency Automation, Robotic and Cell Heavy Duty Vehicles Competency Power Plant Competency Semiconductor Mfg. Torrance, CA South Windsor, CT Worcester, MA Torrance, CA Honolulu, HI Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 2 1 Business Focus is Commercial Vehicles Business Focus is Heavy Duty Commercial Vehicles Class 6 7 8 Category Medium Heavy Heavy Weight 19,501- 26,001- Range >33,000 26,000 33,000 (GVWR) Shuttle Bus Delivery Transit Bus Bucket Constructions Drayage Examples Municipality Agriculture Refuse Mining Monorail Sao Palo Brazil KL Malaysia Mumbai, India Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 3 US Hybrid Time Line We have been making and operating Hybrid Heavy Duty Commercial Vehicles for decades 1999 2002 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Utility Van Near Zero Emission Powertrain FC BOP Parallel Hybrid Battery Electric 240kW PM-APU 200kW 320kW Drayage Truck Parallel Hybrid Monorail Traction Series Hybrid PHEV Hybrid FC BOP to UTC PHEV NG Hybrid Self Powered Carts EV & FC Scooter PHEV-Turbine Parallel Hybrid Series Hybrid Series Hybrid PHEV Electric Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 4 2 Transportation Engineering; Decoupling Traffic More than 50% of energy is wasted due to traffic GVWR GVWR GVWR GVWR 36,300 kg 29,545 kg 1,800 kg 20,450 kg 80,000 lbs. 65,000 lbs. Stop/Go (Traffic) 45,000 lbs. Constant 14 8 40 Idling lost Drag 100% Braking Acceleration Hotel load 7 Drag 35 90% 12 Rolling Braking (lost) Acceleration 80% Drag 6 Rolling 30 10 Acceleration 70% 59% 47% 57% 25 Delivery Transit Bus Rolling 5 60% 8 Speed Speed 7 mph 19 mph Speed 20 50% 9 mph 4 6 (kWh) Energy Energy (kWh) Energy 15 40% 3 Energy Energy (kWh) 30% 4 10 2 20% Municipality Agriculture Energy per unit distance (kWh/mile) distanceunitper Energy 5 10% 2 1 Speed Mining 0% Ave. 7 mph 0 0 0 UDDS 10 mph 20 mph 40 mph 60 mph Drive Cycle: UDDS US06 J45 UCR 5 mph 10 mph 15 mph Monorail Regular Drive CycleRamp OCTA Regular Ramp 32 kph 80 kph 23 kph 5 mph Sao Palo Brazil Denver Drive Cycle 15 mph 15 Ave Speed: mph 10 20 mph 50 mph 14 mph Drive Cycle KL Malaysia Mumbai, India West Virginia West Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 5 LNG or CNG? Volumetric Ratio: LNG=1.7 DGE CNG=3.8 DGE Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 6 3 Class-8 Truck Powertrain System Configuration LNG/CNG Hybrid Electric SAE J2601 Standard LNG/CNG Plug-in Hybrid Electric Fuel Cell, 80kW 25 kg, 350 BAR Fuel Cell Electric Fuel Cell Electric Class-8 Truck Powertrain System Configuration Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 7 LNG/CNG Plug-in Hybrid Electric Powertrain Enabling Near Zero Goods Movement Double Power, Torque and Fuel Economy, 80% less NOx Li-Ion Battery 80kWhr On-board High Voltage Distribution 20-kW Charger EVSE-TTSI interface BMS Controller iDrive Telematics Electro-Hydraulic Steering Electro-Air System DC-DC: 200A, 27.6V Peterbuilt LNG Truck • Model 384 with ISL-G engine • Wheelbase was 189” • Suspension, spring front and air rear. Electric Motor Auto Transmission • Stock weight is 13,360lbs. Cummins ISL-G Clutch 300 hp Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 8 4 LNG/CNG Hybrid Electric Powertrains Electric Regen Braking Electric only operation during que and traffic Idle control (Engine off operation) Manages low duty engine operation Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 9 Specs of Electric Motor and Engine 1800 1400 1600 1200 1000 1400 800 1200 600 Torque (N.m) Torque Torque (N.m) Torque 1000 400 800 1700 N.m @ 1500 RPM 1365 N.m @ 1300 RPM 200 600 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 500 1000 1500 2000 Speed (RPM) Speed (RPM) 300 250 250 200 240 kW 200 150 150 260 kW 350 hp 100 Power(kW) Power(kW) 100 50 50 0 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 500 1000 1500 2000 Speed (RPM) Speed (RPM) Electric motor ISL-G 320 Engine (8.9 Liters) Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 10 5 Double Power and Torque Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 11 Modeling and Simulation Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 12 6 Conventional versus EV and HEV Speed 80 60 Conventional-Loaded 40 Conventional-Unloaded EV-Loaded EV-Unloaded Speed(mph) 20 HEV-Loaded HEV-Unloaded 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 Time (s) Acceleration 4 Conventional-Loaded ) 2 3 Conventional-Unloaded EV-Loaded EV-Unloaded 2 HEV-Loaded HEV-Unloaded 1 Acceleration(m/s 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Time (s) Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 13 Speed and Acceleration Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 14 7 Torque and Power Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 15 Drive Cycle 1: Port 710-110 Composite of Drayage and Highway 80 60 40 Speed(mph) 20 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Time (s) Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 16 8 Battery Energy and SOC Battery Energy Available 80 Charge Depleting Charge Sustaining 60 EV Mode HEV Mode 40 Unloaded Loaded Energy (kWh) Energy 20 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Distance (mile) Battery SOC 100 80 60 Unloaded 40 Loaded SOC (%) SOC 20 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Distance (mile) Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 17 Simulation Results PHEV Conventional Parameter Loaded Unloaded Loaded Unloaded Torque Tmax (N.m) 2856 1517 1354 1304 Power Pmax (kW) 478 303 239 239 Power Pave (kW) 140 79 144 96 EV Range (miles) 19.5 39.7 0 0 MPG (Diesel Equivalent) 5.0 9.2 4.1 6.8 Fuel Efficiency Increase +22% +35% - - Considering the idling time, the fuel economy is doubled Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 18 9 Drive Cycle 2: Drayage Port-Ware Houses Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 19 Battery SOC Battery Energy Available 80 60 40 Unloaded Loaded Energy (kWh) Energy 20 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Distance (mile) Charge Sustaining Charge Depleting HEV Mode EV Mode Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 20 10 Simulation Results PHEV Conventional Parameter Loaded Unloaded Loaded Unloaded Torque Tmax (N.m) 3012 3003 1356 1356 Power Pmax (kW) 478 474 239 238 Power Pave (kW) 74 33 78 34 EV Range (miles) 22.7 58.6 0 0 MPG (Diesel Equivalent) 5.8 13.0 4.7 10.3 Fuel Efficiency Increase +23% +26% - - Considering the idling time, the fuel economy is doubled Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 21 Hybrid Electric LNG/CNG Class 8 truck Commercially viable Near Zero Goods Movement Hybrid Electric ISL-G at the same cost as ISX-15G with double the range/fuel economy Li-Ion Battery 28kWhr iDrive Controller Telematics Electro-Hydraulic Steering Electro-Air System DC-DC: 200A, 27.6V Peterbuilt LNG Truck • Model 384 with ISL-G engine • Wheelbase was 189” • Suspension, spring front and air rear. • Stock weight is 12,000 lbs. Electric Motor Automated Cummins ISL-G 200 hp Transmission Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 22 11 LNG/CNG Hybrid Electric Powertrains Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 23 LNG/CNG Hybrid Electric Vehicle Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 24 12 LNG/CNG Hybrid Electric Specification Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 25 Fuel Cell Electric Heavy duty Powertrain Zero & Near Zero Emission Road map SAE J2601 Standard Fuel Cell, 80kW 25 kg, 350 BAR Plug-in Hybrid Battery Electric Hybrid Electric Fuel Cell Electric Fuel Cell Electric Class-8 Truck Powertrain System Configuration Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Forum 2016 Meeting US Hybrid © 26 13 Charge
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Natural Gas Vehicles Myth Vs. Reality
    INNOVATION | NGV NATURAL GAS VEHICLES MYTH VS. REALITY Transitioning your fleet to alternative fuels is a major decision, and there are several factors to consider. Unfortunately, not all of the information in the market related to heavy-duty natural gas vehicles (NGVs) is 100 percent accurate. The information below aims to dispel some of these myths while providing valuable insights about NGVs. MYTH REALITY When specifying a vehicle, it’s important to select engine power that matches the given load and duty cycle. Earlier 8.9 liter natural gas engines were limited to 320 horsepower. They were not always used in their ideal applications and often pulled loads that were heavier than intended. As a result, there were some early reliability challenges. NGVs don’t have Fortunately, reliability has improved and the Cummins Westport near-zero 11.9 liter engine enough power, offers up to 400 horsepower and 1,450 lb-ft torque to pull full 80,000 pound GVWR aren’t reliable. loads.1 In a study conducted by the American Gas Association (AGA) NGVs were found to be as safe or safer than vehicles powered by liquid fuels. NGVs require Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) fuel tanks, or “cylinders.” They need to be inspected every three years or 36,000 miles. The AGA study goes on to state that the NGV fleet vehicle injury rate was 37 CNG is not safe. percent lower than the gasoline fleet vehicle rate and there were no fuel related fatalities compared with 1.28 deaths per 100 million miles for gasoline fleet vehicles.2 Improvements in CNG cylinder storage design have led to fuel systems that provide E F range that matches the range of a typical diesel-powered truck.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Gas Vehicle Technology
    Natural Gas Vehicle Technology Basic Information about Light -Duty Vehicles History Natural Gas Vehicles 1910’s : Low-pressu re bag carried on a trailer (USA) 1930’s Wood-Gas (Germany) © ENGVA, 2003 1 Gaseous Vehicle Fuels LPG (Liquefied Petroleum Gas) Propane, butane, mixture 3 – 15 bar (45 – 625 psi) at ambient temperature CNG (Compressed Natural Gas) Methane CH 4 200 bar (3000 psi) at ambient temperature LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) Methane CH 4 Cryogenic : Liquefied at -162°C (typical for vehicle use -140°C @ 3 to 5 bar) H2 (Hydrogen) CH 2 (350 bar (5150 psi) compressed) or LH 2 (liquefied, -253°C) © ENGVA, 2003 CNG system overview Light-Duty Typical CNG Components in a Natural Gas Vehicle Fill receptacle Storage tank(s) Piping and fittings High Pressure Regulator Fuel-rail CNG injectors ECU Source : Volvo © ENGVA, 2003 2 CNG storage Storage in gaseous phase Storage under high pressure : 200 bar / 3000 psi Storage in one or more cylinders LPG storage Source : Barbotti, Argentina Storage in liquid phase Storage under low pressure : 3 - 15 bar Storage (mostly) in one cylinder Source : Opel © ENGVA, 2003 CNG fuel systems Light-Duty Mono-Fuel CNG only (dedicated) Bi-Fuel Source : Fiat Auto Spa CNG & Petrol © ENGVA, 2003 3 Mono-Fuel system Light-Duty Advantages Optimised engine possible Higher power output Lower fuel consumption Better exhaust gas emissions More available space for CNG tanks Better access to incentive programs Disadvantages Higher system price Restricted (total) range Dependency on filling station availability Source :
    [Show full text]
  • Report to Congress
    REPORT TO CONGRESS Effects of the Alternative Motor Fuels Act CAFE Incentives Policy PREPARED BY: U.S. Department of Transportation U.S. Department of Energy U.S. Environmental Protection Agency March 2002 Table of Contents Highlights.............................................................................................................................iii Executive Summary.............................................................................................................vi I. Introduction.....................................................................................................................1 II. Background.....................................................................................................................3 III. Availability of Alternative Fuel Vehicles.....................................................................13 IV. Availability and Use of Alternative Fuels....................................................................27 V. Analysis of the Effects on Energy Conservation and the Environment...................................................................................................37 VI. Summary of Findings and Recommendations............................................................49 Appendices.........................................................................................................................52 Appendix A: Summary of Federal Register Comments Appendix B: Listing of CAFE Fines Paid by Vehicle Manufacturers Appendix C: U.S. Refueling Site Counts by State
    [Show full text]
  • 2002-00201-01-E.Pdf (Pdf)
    report no. 2/95 alternative fuels in the automotive market Prepared for the CONCAWE Automotive Emissions Management Group by its Technical Coordinator, R.C. Hutcheson Reproduction permitted with due acknowledgement Ó CONCAWE Brussels October 1995 I report no. 2/95 ABSTRACT A review of the advantages and disadvantages of alternative fuels for road transport has been conducted. Based on numerous literature sources and in-house data, CONCAWE concludes that: · Alternatives to conventional automotive transport fuels are unlikely to make a significant impact in the foreseeable future for either economic or environmental reasons. · Gaseous fuels have some advantages and some growth can be expected. More specifically, compressed natural gas (CNG) and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) may be employed as an alternative to diesel fuel in urban fleet applications. · Bio-fuels remain marginal products and their use can only be justified if societal and/or agricultural policy outweigh market forces. · Methanol has a number of disadvantages in terms of its acute toxicity and the emissions of “air toxics”, notably formaldehyde. In addition, recent estimates suggest that methanol will remain uneconomic when compared with conventional fuels. KEYWORDS Gasoline, diesel fuel, natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, CNG, LNG, Methanol, LPG, bio-fuels, ethanol, rape seed methyl ester, RSME, carbon dioxide, CO2, emissions. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This literature review is fully referenced (see Section 12). However, CONCAWE is grateful to the following for their permission to quote in detail from their publications: · SAE Paper No. 932778 ã1993 - reprinted with permission from the Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. (15) · “Road vehicles - Efficiency and emissions” - Dr. Walter Ospelt, AVL LIST GmbH.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantifying the Potential of Renewable Natural Gas to Support a Reformed Energy Landscape: Estimates for New York State
    energies Review Quantifying the Potential of Renewable Natural Gas to Support a Reformed Energy Landscape: Estimates for New York State Stephanie Taboada 1,2, Lori Clark 2,3, Jake Lindberg 1,2, David J. Tonjes 2,3,4 and Devinder Mahajan 1,2,* 1 Department of Materials Science and Chemical Engineering, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA; [email protected] (S.T.); [email protected] (J.L.) 2 Institute of Gas Innovation and Technology, Advanced Energy Research and Technology, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA; [email protected] (L.C.); [email protected] (D.J.T.) 3 Department of Technology and Society, Stony Brook University, 100 Nicolls Rd, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA 4 Waste Data and Analysis Center, Stony Brook University, 100 Nicolls Rd, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: Public attention to climate change challenges our locked-in fossil fuel-dependent energy sector. Natural gas is replacing other fossil fuels in our energy mix. One way to reduce the greenhouse gas (GHG) impact of fossil natural gas is to replace it with renewable natural gas (RNG). The benefits of utilizing RNG are that it has no climate change impact when combusted and utilized in the same applications as fossil natural gas. RNG can be injected into the gas grid, used as a transportation fuel, or used for heating and electricity generation. Less common applications include utilizing RNG to produce chemicals, such as methanol, dimethyl ether, and ammonia. The GHG impact should be quantified before committing to RNG. This study quantifies the potential production of biogas (i.e., Citation: Taboada, S.; Clark, L.; the precursor to RNG) and RNG from agricultural and waste sources in New York State (NYS).
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Gas Fleet Toolkit
    Alternative Fuel Toolkit for Fleets Why is it important to learn about alternative fuels? Not only are local governments thinking about alternative fuels, but there are several state‐level Alternative fuel vehicles can become an integral part of policies and strategies that promote the increased use a fleet. These vehicles offer long‐time cost savings and of alternative fuels. have the same performance quality of internal combustion engine vehicles, but without the air How do I use this tool kit? pollution that comes with it. This toolkit provides resources that fleets have identified Policies for the acquisition of alternative fuel vehicles as being very desirable for further training and may already be in your organization’s larger long‐term assistance in the transition into alternative fuel vehicles. energy plan or Climate Action Plan. A majority of The toolkit involves the following resources: municipalities and public agencies throughout the San Diego region have already referenced the increased Guidance on availability of funding for procurement of alternative fuel vehicles as a way to alternative fuel vehicles and infrastructure reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that cause installation projects climate change. Fact sheets or reference guides on general information about alternative fuels Estimated Total Cost of Ownership Comparison for Mid‐Size Light‐Duty Vehicle Options with 120,000 Lifetime Miles, United States: 2012 Case studies of jurisdictions or private fleets that use alternative fuels Source: Pike Research, Forbes.com NATURAL GAS Natural Gas FACTS ABOUT NATURAL GAS On a well‐to‐wheels basis, natural gas vehicles (NGVs) What is natural gas? produce 22% less greenhouse gas than comparable diesel vehicles and 29% less than Natural gas used as a transportation gasoline vehicles.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Evaluation and Assessment of CNG/LPG Bi-Fuel and Flex-Fuel Vehicle Viability C-ACC-4-14042-01
    May 1994 • NRELffP-425-6544 Technical Eval ·on and Assessment of C !LPG Bi-Fuel and Flex-Fuel V cle Viability J .E. Sinor Consultants, Inc. Niwot, CO •.. •... ···� �=- ·-· ·��-· National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617• Cole Boulevard Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 A national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Operated by Midwest Research Institute for the U.S. Department of Energy Under Contract No. DE-AC02-83CH)0093_____ _ _ NRELffP-425-6544 • UC Category: 335 • DE94006925 Technical Evaltil*ion··:·:·:·:·:·:·:·: and ·, Assessment of C , /LPG Bi-Fuel and Flex-Fuel Vell�le Viability J J.E. Sinor Consultants, Inc. Niwot, CO technical monitor: C. Colucci NREL �·� .,!!!!!�-· ·� �--­ .. •.·-· ···� National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617 Cole Boulevard Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 A national laboratory operated for the U.S. Department of Energy under contract No. DE-AC02-83CH10093 Prepared under Subcontract No. ACC-4-14042-01 May 1994 Thispub lication was reproducedfrom thebest available camera-readycopy submitted by the subcontractor and received no editorial review at NREL. NOTICE NOTICE: This reportwas prepared as an accountof work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or processdisclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]
  • MC Report V2
    Managing Motorcycles: Opportunities to Reduce Pollution and Fuel Use from Two- and Three-Wheeled Vehicles ! ii Managing Motorcycles: Opportunities to Reduce Pollution and Fuel Use from Two- and Three-Wheeled Vehicles The goal of the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) is to dramatically improve the environmental performance and efficiency of personal, public and goods transportation in order to protect and improve public health, the environment, and quality of life. The Council is made up of leading regulators and experts from around the world that participate as individuals based on their experience with air quality and transportation issues. The ICCT promotes best practices and comprehensive solutions to improve vehicle emissions and efficiency, increase fuel quality and sustainability of alternative fuels, reduce pollution from the in-use fleet, and curtail emissions from international goods movement. www.theicct.org ! October 2009 The International Council on Clean Transportation Design layout and format by Yulee Kim Printed on 100% recycled paper with soy-based ink iii Managing Motorcycles: Opportunities to Reduce Pollution and Fuel Use from Two- and Three-Wheeled Vehicles Authors: Fatumata Kamakaté Program Director, the International Council on Clean Transportation Deborah Gordon! Transport Policy Consultant Primary research was conducted during 2007 and 2008. Advances in policy development in 2009 may not be reflected in this report. The authors would like to thank our many colleagues around the world that have generously contributed their time and insight in reviewing and commenting on the draft version of this report. We are especially grateful for Mr. Narayan Iyer’s thorough review of the report’s initial draft.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Concerns of Natural Gas Vehicles: Do We Know Enough?
    8 Transportation Research Record 1049 Environmental Concerns of Natural Gas Vehicles: Do We Know Enough? MARGARET K. SINGH ABSTRACT Vehicles powered by natural gas are currently used in the United States and other parts of the world. Although the number of such vehicles in the United States is small, there is a potential for substantial growth. An overview of natural gas vehicle technology, markets, and environmental concerns is provided, The environ­ mentC:1l (.;OnC~LuS discussed aLe u.atu~al gao supply, ::~icci~~=, .e.~d safet~,". !t is concluded that more research is required in the areas of exhaust emissions and safety; no comprehensive data base exists in either area. The availability of natural gas does not presently appear to be a crucial issue. Vehicles powered by compressed or liquefied natural The CNG cylinders are the dominant i terns in the gas (NG) are currently in use in the United States natural gas vehicle system, accounting for much of and other parts of the world. The number of vehicles the added weight, volume, cost, and operational con­ in the United States is small; estimates range from straints (!.). Current CNG cylinders typically weigh 20,000 to 30,000, all in fleets (1,2). However, the 100 lb or more and have a capacity of 325 standard Gas Research Institute (GRI) has projected that by ft' (scf) , or the equivalent of approximately 2. 6 the year 2000 from l to 4 million natural gas fleet gal of gasoline. A two-cylinder system, which adds vehicles might be operating in the United States (2_).
    [Show full text]
  • Costs Associated with Compressed Natural Gas Vehicle Fueling Infrastructure
    Costs Associated With Compressed Natural Gas Vehicle Fueling Infrastructure Factors to consider in the implementation of fueling stations and equipment Margaret Smith, New West Technologies (DOE HQ Technical Support) John Gonzales, National Renewable Energy Laboratory This document has been peer reviewed by the natural gas industry. September 2014 Introduction This document is designed to help fleets understand the cost factors associated with fueling infrastructure for compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles. It provides estimated cost ranges for various sizes and types of CNG fueling stations and an overview of factors that contribute to the total cost of an installed station. The information presented is based on input from professionals in the natural gas industry who design, sell equipment for, and/or own and operate CNG stations. The total cost of developing a CNG fueling station depends on a number of factors, including the fuel demand from the fleet and other users, the fleet's applications and duty cycles, site conditions, the complexity of equipment installation, and permitting processes. Consequently, costs can vary widely from one project to another. This document outlines the primary cost factors for fleets' consideration but is not intended to serve as a tool for estimating the cost of an individual project. To obtain an estimate for a specific project, contact a CNG equipment supplier or CNG vehicles using time-fill posts in Oyster Bay, New York. Photo engineer who specializes in CNG from Greater Long Island Clean Cities, NREL 23853 station design. CNG Station Overview CNG stations receive fuel via a local utility line at a pressure lower than that used for vehicle fueling.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative Fuels and Alternative Fuel Vehicles
    ALTERNATIVE FUELS AND ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLES Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) CNG consists of mostly methane and is a clean burning alternative fuel. Natural gas can be formulated into CNG or liquefied natural gas (LNG) to fuel vehicles. Natural Gas Vehicle (NGV) NGVs are bi-fuel vehicles with multi-fuel engines capable of running on two fuels. On internal combustion engines (ICEs), one fuel is gasoline or diesel and the other is an alternate fuel such as CNG, Liquefied Propane Gasoline (LPG), or hydrogen. The two fuels are stored in separate tanks and the engine runs on one fuel at a time. Advantages Disadvantages • Approximately 87% of natural gas used in • Limited availability America is produced domestically • Natural gas is less readily available than gasoline • Less smog-producing pollutants & diesel • Less greenhouse gas emissions • Limited driving range as compared to gasoline • Less expensive than gasoline vehicles Ethanol Ethanol is an alcohol-based fuel made by fermenting and distilling starch crops, such as corn. It can also be made from "cellulosic biomass" such as trees and grasses. The use of ethanol can reduce U.S. dependence upon foreign oil and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Ethanol 85 Flex Fuel Vehicle (E85) An E85 flexible-fuel vehicle (FFV) or dual-fuel vehicle (colloquially called a flex-fuel vehicle) is an alternative fuel vehicle with a internal combustion engine designed to run on more than one fuel, usually gasoline blended with either ethanol or methanol; both fuels are stored in the same common tank. Advantages Disadvantages • Reduces the use of imported petroleum • Only compatible with flex-fuel vehicles because it is domestically produced • Lower mileage per gallon compared to gasoline • Lowers air pollutant emissions vehicles • Increases resistance to engine knock • Similar to slightly-higher costs compared to gasoline vehicles • Same cost as gasoline Propane or Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) LPG is a clean-burning fossil fuel that can be used to power internal combustion engines.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring the Intersection of Hydrogen Fuel Cell and Natural Gas Vehicles
    TRANSITIONING THE TRANSPORTATION SECTOR: Exploring the Intersection of Hydrogen Fuel Cell and Natural Gas Vehicles September 9, 2014 American Gas Association 400 N. Capitol St., NW, Washington, DC 20001 Organized in partnership by: Sandia National Laboratories, AGA and Toyota, in support of the U.S. Department of Energy i Organizing Committee Reuben Sarkar, Department of Energy Dawn Manley, Sandia National Laboratories Sunita Satyapal, Department of Energy Kathryn Clay, American Gas Association Mark Smith, Department of Energy Fred Joseck, Department of Energy Fuel Cell Technologies Office Ned Stetson, Department of Energy Craig Scott, Toyota Motor Sales Benn Tannenbaum, Sandia National Laboratories Jacob Ward, Department of Energy Vehicle Technologies Office Mike Veenstra, Ford Todd West, Sandia National Laboratories Todd Wetzel, GE Bob Wimmer, Toyota Participants Frank Wolak, Fuel Cell Energy Glen Andersen, National Conference of State Legislatures Don Anton, Savannah River National Laboratory Workshop Assistance Jim Bruce, UPS Cover Design and Publication – Daniel Strong Gerry Conway, Plug Power Administrative – Melissa Tallion and Sue Swann Bill Craven, Mercedes-Benz Greg Dierkers, National Governors Association Prepared by Catherine Dunwoody, California Air Resources Board Dawn Manley Matt Forman, Chrysler Sandia National Laboratories Joseph Guzzo, GM 7011 East Avenue Will James, Department of Energy Mail Stop 9054 Siddiq Khan, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy Livermore, CA 94550 Jim Kliesch, Honda (925) 294-4589
    [Show full text]