DOCSLIB.ORG

Student Exercise 3: Prospective Environmental Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Student Exercise 3: Prospective Environmental Assessment Lecture 102-0348-00 Prospective Environmental Assessments Student exercise 3: Prospective Environmental Assessment Objectives The goal in the first two exercises was to determine scenarios for future e-bike mobility in Europe until 2050 and quantify implications on material demand. More specifically, the first exercise on formative scenario analysis (FSA) provided insights about the market penetration of e-bikes and battery technologies (technology), the implementation and adaptation of e-biking mobility among consumers and in society (consumption pattern) and the way the adoption of e- bikes changes the mobility behavior and the modes of transport that are being replaced (substitution). In the subsequent second exercise on dynamic material flow analysis (MFA), you modelled the implications of a potential transition to e- bike mobility in terms of material stocks and flows. The goal of the third and final exercise is to assess the environmental impacts and benefits (here: greenhouse gas emissions, GHG) induced by the future use of e-bikes. Your objectives for this third exercise are to: • Calculate the environmental impacts (in terms of GHG) of e-bike mobility as a function of time for your scenarios. • Discuss the feasibility and the environmental benefits and impacts (in terms of GHG) of future material recycling of lithium. • Put the resulting environmental impacts into a system-wide perspective and assess the impacts of personal mobility scenarios (from Exercise 1), with a focus on the comparison of GHG emissions caused by e-bike mobility and the modes of transport that are being substituted. • Consider the effect of experience on environmental impacts (upscaling and learning). • Apply discounting to see how it affects your results and how it may influence your conclusions. The exercise is structured into three parts focusing on the environmental assessment of the e-bike market (Part I), the overall impact of mobility and the changes induced by e-bike mobility (Part II), and finally discounting impacts in the dynamic LCA (Part III). Please provide the following three items in your solution: 1. Greenhouse gas emissions (in CO2-equivalents) due to future e-bike mobility. 2. Substituted greenhouse gas emissions (in CO2-equivalents) due to reductions of other means of transport and taking into consideration technology development. 3. Potential reductions in GHG emissions (in CO2-equivalents) due to discounting. 1 Lecture 102-0348-00 Prospective Environmental Assessments Part I – Environmental impacts of future e-bike mobility Use your assumptions on e-bikes sold, kilometres driven, and battery replacements to determine the inventory of your system until 2050. From the kilometres driven you can derive the electricity that is consumed (for “typical” electricity consumption per km see Table 2). GHG emissions for various ways to produce electricity are given in Table 3. For the inventory and GHG emissions of one unit of e-bike, you can use ecoinvent 3.3. To log into ecoinvent, please use the following credentials: • Website: https://ecoquery.ecoinvent.org/Account/LogOn • User: studentethz • Password: go-ecoinvent2017 Please make sure the ecoinvent LCI datasets are consistent with your own assumptions (e.g. weight of the battery) and correct them if necessary. For the assessment of GHG, use the IPCC 2013 GWP100 method. Which life-cycle stages are important for future e-bike mobility and what are sensitive parameters? Optionally, if you assessed various battery technologies in Exercise 2, compare these and the overall influence on GHG impact results. Based on exercise 2, discuss potential gains in terms of future lithium recycling in your scenarios. A new recycling process is becoming available, which is able to save 2.5 kg CO2-eq per 1.0 kg LiMn2O4 (Dunn et al. 2012a). Dunn et al. 2012a and 2012b assume that in the “direct physical” process 95% of LiMn2O4 can be recovered and therefore directly substitute primary material. Since lithium recycling is a new technology, experience effects (learning and upscaling) can be expected. Assume an experience index of b=0.6 and a current cumulative recycling of 5’000 tonnes of lithium batteries in the EU. Will lithium recycling improve the GHG impacts in your scenarios and is this improvement relevant with regard to overall GHG emissions of e-bike mobility? Part II – Environmental impact of overall mobility In exercise 1 you quantified the substitution of other modes of transport (e.g. passenger car or public transport) by e-bike mobility. Assess the GHG impact savings induced by this reduction in other modes of transportation in your scenarios. Make sure that you select coherent system boundaries. If you have not quantified substitution in exercise 1, make the according assumptions here and document them shortly. You find inventory data for various personal car technologies in Tables 2 and 3, for the current situation and 2030. As you can see, the technologies are projected to improve in terms of mass and energy efficiency (experience effect). Extrapolate the trajectories to 2050 by assuming that the two data points for the current situation and 2030 lie on the experience curve. All gliders scale with cumulative production of car gliders (independent of car technology). This is different for the battery and the generator/motors for BEV, which scale with cumulative production of BEV. If you do not have any other estimates from Exercise 1, assume that until 2 Lecture 102-0348-00 Prospective Environmental Assessments 2030, 200 million new vehicles will be produced in Europe, of which 6% are BEV, 10% ICEV- c, 44% ICEV-p and 40% ICEV-g. Would you expect that experience (learning and upscaling) also influences the environmental impact of e-bike mobility? Discuss qualitatively why or why not. Determine the greenhouse gas emissions of the future transport system and the substitution effect of future e-bike use. Discuss the environmental impacts caused by the rebound effect (based on exercise 1). Discuss qualitatively whether you expect a change in the results, if you would use the Global Temperature Change Potentials 100 years (GTP100) instead of GWP100 as characterization factors. Part III –Discounting Quantify the difference in greenhouse gas emissions if discounting is applied to your prospective scenario(s). Do a sensitivity analysis for the discount rate and provide a brief discussion of the arguments for and against temporal discounting of environmental impacts. For all three parts, please discuss the implications of your findings and discuss what policy recommendations could be derived. For the executive summary In addition to the above tasks, please discuss which factors and assumptions you expect to have the largest contribution to the uncertainty of your results. Propose possible strategies for decreasing the uncertainty. Organisational issues • The exercise should be submitted to [email protected] before the May 16th. • If you are interested in receiving feedback, please submit an executive summary of less than 5 pages and your calculation (preferably in Excel format). The executive summary shall be a standalone document, containing all necessary figures to understand the results and interpretation. • The files should be named with the surnames of the group members and the exercise number (e.g. “PEA 2016_Ex3_Müller_Meyer”). • You may also refer to the above email address should you have questions regarding the exercise • All documents, the lecture slides, and further reading on the prospective assessment of mobility are available on the course website 3 Lecture 102-0348-00 Prospective Environmental Assessments Table 1 – Mass of the main components for different vehicle technologies in two different reference years (2012 and 2030), based on information provided in Bauer et al. (2015). Abbreviations: ICEV: internal combustion engine vehicle; BEV: battery electric vehicle, FCEV: fuel-cell electric vehicle, -g: gasoline, -d: diesel, and –c: compressed natural gas (CNG). Mass, in [kg] Glider (body & Powertrain Technology/year chassis) Tank (motor/generator/engine/transmission) Battery ICEV-g currently 1195 86 261 0 2030 1080 69 206 0 ICEV-d currently 1195 76 285 0 2030 1080 63 224 0 ICEV-c currently 1195 117 175 0 2030 1080 112 218 0 BEV currently 1195 0 233 448 2030 1080 0 171 327 Table 2 – Energy (fuel) consumption of different vehicle technologies for two reference years (2012 and 2030. Abbreviations: ICEV: internal combustion engine vehicle; BEV: battery electric vehicle, FCEV: fuel-cell electric vehicle, -g: gasoline, -d: diesel, and –c: compressed natural gas (CNG).The energy future consumption of the e-bike depends on the development of the weight. Energy (fuel) consumption Technology Year [MJ/km] ICEV-g currently 2.80 2030 2.17 ICEV-d currently 2.43 2030 1.93 ICEV-c currently 2.75 2030 2.14 BEV currently 0.91 2030 0.75 e-bike currently 0.036* 2030 ? *refers to an e-bike of 24 kg weight. 4 Lecture 102-0348-00 Prospective Environmental Assessments Table 3 – Aggregated life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) scores of vehicle components (production+ end-of-life, EoL), energy (fuel) supply, and exhaust emissions in terms of climate change impacts (using global warming potential GWP100 as characterization factors; in [kg-CO2-eq.]) adapted from information provided in Bauer et al. (2015). Grey fields indicate no change over time, i.e. parameter assumed constant. Powertrain: motor/generator/engine + transmission. Currently 2050 Vehicle type Inventory Unit [kg-CO2-eq.] [kg-CO2-eq.]
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]
  • Electric Vehicles Electric Vehicle Expansion Liquefied Natural Gas
    The Road to 1 Billion Miles in UPS’s Alternative Fuel and Advanced Technology Vehicles UPS is committed to better fuel alternatives, now and for the future. That’s why we recently announced a new goal –– to drive 1 billion miles in our alternative fuel and advanced technology vehicles by 2017. With nearly 3,000 vehicles currently in our “rolling laboratory,” we’re creating sustainable connections and delivering innovative, new technologies on the road and around the globe. 1 000 000 00 0 miles by 2017 1 Billion Miles Our goal is to drive 1 billion miles in alternative fuel and advanced technology vehicles by the end of 2017 — more than double our previous goal to drive 400 million miles. 295 Million Miles 212 Million Miles Base Year 100 Million Miles 2000 2005 2010 2012 2017 Electric Vehicle Liquefied Natural Gas Expansion Announcement x20 100x 2013 2013 Earlier this year we deployed 100 fully electric UPS announced the purchase of 700 LNG tractors in commercial vehicles throughout California. These 2013 and plan to ultimately have more than 1,000 in additions to our electric vehicle fleet will help our fleet. These tractors will operate from LNG fueling offset the consumption of conventional motor fuel stations in Las Vegas, Nev.; Phoenix, Ariz., and Beaver by an estimated 126,000 gallons per year. and Salt Lake City, Utah among other locations. Electric Vehicles Diesel Hybrid Hydraulic 2001 First tested in New York City in the 1930s, we 2006 took a second look in Santiago, Chile, in 2001. Harnessing hydraulic power sharply increases fuel Today, we have more than 100 worldwide.
    [Show full text]
  • CASE Studies
    THE STATE OF ASIAN CITIES 2010/11 CASE STUDIES TRANSPORTATION POSITIVE CHANGE IS WITHIN REACH Transportation generates at least one third of greenhouse gas emissions in urban areas, but positive change is within reach, and much more easily than some policymakers might think. Cycle rickshaws remain a policy blind spot The cycle rickshaw remains widely popular in Asian cities and is a sustainable urban transport for short- distance trips (1-5 km). It can also complement and integrate very effectively as a low-cost feeder service to public transport systems, providing point-to-point service (i.e., from home to a bus stop). According to estimates, over seven million passenger/goods cycle rickshaws are in operation in various Indian cities (including some 600,000 in India’s National Capital Region) where they are used by substantial numbers of low- and middle-income commuters as well as tourists, and even goods or materials. Still, for all its popularity and benefits, this non-polluting type of transport is largely ignored by policymakers and transport planners. Recently in Delhi, a ban on cycle rickshaws resulted in additional traffic problems as people turned to ‘auto’ (i.e., motorized) rickshaws instead. The ban met with public outcry and opposition from many civil society groups. In a landmark decision in February 2010, the Delhi High Court ruled that the Municipal Corporation’s ban on cycle rickshaws was unconstitutional. State of Asian Cities Report 2010/11, Ch. 4, Box 4.17 Delhi’s conversion to natural gas and solar power In 1998 and at the request of India’s non-governmental Centre for Science and Environment, the country’s Supreme Court directed the Delhi Government to convert all public transport and para-transit vehicles from diesel or petrol engines to compressed natural gas (CNG).
    [Show full text]
  • Fuel Properties Comparison
    Alternative Fuels Data Center Fuel Properties Comparison Compressed Liquefied Low Sulfur Gasoline/E10 Biodiesel Propane (LPG) Natural Gas Natural Gas Ethanol/E100 Methanol Hydrogen Electricity Diesel (CNG) (LNG) Chemical C4 to C12 and C8 to C25 Methyl esters of C3H8 (majority) CH4 (majority), CH4 same as CNG CH3CH2OH CH3OH H2 N/A Structure [1] Ethanol ≤ to C12 to C22 fatty acids and C4H10 C2H6 and inert with inert gasses 10% (minority) gases <0.5% (a) Fuel Material Crude Oil Crude Oil Fats and oils from A by-product of Underground Underground Corn, grains, or Natural gas, coal, Natural gas, Natural gas, coal, (feedstocks) sources such as petroleum reserves and reserves and agricultural waste or woody biomass methanol, and nuclear, wind, soybeans, waste refining or renewable renewable (cellulose) electrolysis of hydro, solar, and cooking oil, animal natural gas biogas biogas water small percentages fats, and rapeseed processing of geothermal and biomass Gasoline or 1 gal = 1.00 1 gal = 1.12 B100 1 gal = 0.74 GGE 1 lb. = 0.18 GGE 1 lb. = 0.19 GGE 1 gal = 0.67 GGE 1 gal = 0.50 GGE 1 lb. = 0.45 1 kWh = 0.030 Diesel Gallon GGE GGE 1 gal = 1.05 GGE 1 gal = 0.66 DGE 1 lb. = 0.16 DGE 1 lb. = 0.17 DGE 1 gal = 0.59 DGE 1 gal = 0.45 DGE GGE GGE Equivalent 1 gal = 0.88 1 gal = 1.00 1 gal = 0.93 DGE 1 lb. = 0.40 1 kWh = 0.027 (GGE or DGE) DGE DGE B20 DGE DGE 1 gal = 1.11 GGE 1 kg = 1 GGE 1 gal = 0.99 DGE 1 kg = 0.9 DGE Energy 1 gallon of 1 gallon of 1 gallon of B100 1 gallon of 5.66 lb., or 5.37 lb.
    [Show full text]
  • China at the Crossroads
    SPECIAL REPORT China at the Crossroads Energy, Transportation, and the 21st Century James S. Cannon June 1998 INFORM, Inc. 120 Wall Street New York, NY 10005-4001 Tel (212) 361-2400 Fax (212) 361-2412 Site www.informinc.org Gina Goldstein, Editor Emily Robbins, Production Editor © 1998 by INFORM, Inc. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America ISSN# 1050-8953 Volume 5, Number 2 Acknowledgments INFORM is grateful to all those who contributed their time, knowledge, and perspectives to the preparation of this report. We also wish to thank ARIA Foundation, The Compton Foundation, The Overbrook Foundation, and The Helen Sperry Lea Foundation, without whose generous support this work would not have been possible. Table of Contents Preface Introduction: A Moment of Choice for China. ........................................................................1 Motor Vehicles in China: Oil and Other Options...................................................................3 Motor Vehicle Manufacturing........................................................................................................3 Oil: Supply and Demand...............................................................................................................5 Alternative Vehicles and Fuels........................................................................................................8 Natural Gas Vehicles.....................................................................................................8 Liquefied Petroleum Gas ..............................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Leak Detection in Natural Gas and Propane Commercial Motor Vehicles Course
    Leak Detection in Natural Gas and Propane Commercial Motor Vehicles Course July 2015 Table of Contents 1. Leak Detection in Natural Gas and Propane Commercial Motor Vehicles Course ............................................... 1 1.1 Introduction and Overview ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Welcome ........................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.3 Course Goal .................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.4 Training Outcomes ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.5 Training Outcomes (Continued) ..................................................................................................................... 2 1.6 Course Objectives .......................................................................................................................................... 2 1.7 Course Topic Areas ........................................................................................................................................ 2 1.8 Course Overview ............................................................................................................................................ 2 1.9 Module One: Overview of CNG, LNG,
    [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]
  • General Tax Information Bulletin #300 Page 2
    INFORMATION BULLETIN #300 GENERAL TAX JUNE 2021 (Replaces Bulletin #300 dated June 2020) Effective Date: July 1, 2021 SUBJECT: Sales of Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) and Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) REFERENCES: IC 6-2.5-5-51; IC 6-6-2.5-1; IC 6-6-2.5-16.5; IC 6-6-2.5-22; IC 6-6-2.5- 22.5; IC 6-6-2.5-28; IC 6-6-4.1-1; IC 6-6-4.1-4; IC 6-6-4.1-4.5. DISCLAIMER: Commissioner’s directives are intended to provide nontechnical assistance to the general public. Every attempt is made to provide information that is consistent with the appropriate statutes, rules, and court decisions. Any information that is not consistent with the law, regulations, or court decisions is not binding on either the department or the taxpayer. Therefore, the information provided herein should serve only as a foundation for further investigation and study of the current law and procedures related to the subject matter covered herein. SUMMARY OF CHANGES The bulletin was updated to provide the new special fuel tax rate effective July 1, 2021. I. DEFINITIONS “Natural gas” means compressed or liquid natural gas. “Natural gas product” means: (1) A liquid natural gas (LNG) or compressed natural gas (CNG) product; or (2) A combination of liquefied petroleum gas and a compressed natural gas product; used in an internal combustion engine or a motor to propel any form of vehicle, machine, or mechanical contrivance. “Alternative fuel” means a liquefied petroleum gas, not including a biodiesel fuel or biodiesel blend, used in an internal combustion engine or a motor to propel any form of vehicle, machine, or mechanical contrivance.
    [Show full text]
  • THE HYDROGEN ECONOMY. a Non-Technical Review
    Hydrogen holds out the promise of a truly sustainable global energy future. As a clean energy carrier that can be produced from any primary energy source, hydrogen used in highly efficient fuel cells could prove to be the answer to our growing concerns about energy security, urban pollution and climate change. This prize surely warrants For more information, contact: THE HYDROGEN ECONOMY the attention and resources currently being UNEP DTIE directed at hydrogen – even if the Energy Branch prospects for widespread 39-43 Quai André Citroën commercialisation of hydrogen in the A non-technical review 75739 Paris Cedex 15, France foreseeable future are uncertain. Tel. : +33 1 44 37 14 50 Fax.: +33 1 44 37 14 74 E-mail: [email protected] www.unep.fr/energy/ ROGRAMME P NVIRONMENT E ATIONS N NITED DTI-0762-PA U Copyright © United Nations Environment Programme, 2006 This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. UNEP would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from the United Nations Environment Programme. Disclaimer The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations Environment Programme concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
    [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]
  • CNG + Electric) Motorcycle
    Singh Samarendra et.al; International Journal of Advance Research, Ideas and Innovations in Technology ISSN: 2454-132X Impact factor: 4.295 (Volume 4, Issue 3) Available online at: www.ijariit.com Fabrication of dual fuel (CNG + Electric) motorcycle Samarendra Singh Sarthak Singh [email protected] [email protected] J. S. S. Academy of Technical Education, J. S. S. Academy of Technical Education, Noida, Uttar Pradesh Noida, Uttar Pradesh Sharaj Kant Saurav Khari [email protected] [email protected] J. S. S. Academy of Technical Education, J. S. S. Academy of Technical Education, Noida, Uttar Pradesh Noida, Uttar Pradesh Madan Prasad [email protected] J. S. S. Academy of Technical Education, Noida, Uttar Pradesh ABSTRACT The aim of this examination is an investigation of the achievability and preferences of utilizing the natural gas as a contrasting option to gasoline as a fuel for hybrid electric vehicles. Using CNG vehicles are extremely valuable in India considering the way that gasoline fuel is offered at a vigorously sponsored cost and consequently, by converting a significant portion of the automobiles to run on CNG, the gasoline fuel utilization could be lessened. This will bring about more oil being accessible for trade which will be valuable to the economy of the nation. This process assessed a test examination on Compressed Natural Gas as an elective fuel for four-stroke start motor and furthermore Battery worked. The essential target of the investigation was to determine the performance and the fumes emanations of the motor utilizing distinctive fuel. The motor utilized as a part of the examination was initially a single cylinder, four-stroke start motor and minor alterations were done to allow the trials to keep running on CNG fuel.
    [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]