Possibilities of Alternative Vehicle Fuels –
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
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. -
Vehicle Conversions, Retrofits, and Repowers ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLE CONVERSIONS, RETROFITS, and REPOWERS
What Fleets Need to Know About Alternative Fuel Vehicle Conversions, Retrofits, and Repowers ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLE CONVERSIONS, RETROFITS, AND REPOWERS Acknowledgments This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 with Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, the Manager and Operator of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. This work was made possible through funding provided by National Clean Cities Program Director and DOE Vehicle Technologies Office Deployment Manager Dennis Smith. This publication is part of a series. For other lessons learned from the Clean Cities American Recovery and Reinvestment (ARRA) projects, please refer to the following publications: • American Recovery and Reinvestment Act – Clean Cities Project Awards (DOE/GO-102016-4855 - August 2016) • Designing a Successful Transportation Project – Lessons Learned from the Clean Cities American Recovery and Reinvestment Projects (DOE/GO-102017-4955 - September 2017) Authors Kay Kelly and John Gonzales, National Renewable Energy Laboratory Disclaimer This document is not intended for use as a “how to” guide for individuals or organizations performing a conversion, repower, or retrofit. Instead, it is intended to be used as a guide and resource document for informational purposes only. VEHICLE TECHNOLOGIES OFFICE | cleancities.energy.gov 2 ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLE CONVERSIONS, RETROFITS, AND REPOWERS Table of Contents Introduction ...............................................................................................................................................................5 -
Alternative Fuels, Vehicles & Technologies Feasibility
ALTERNATIVE FUELS, VEHICLES & TECHNOLOGIES FEASIBILITY REPORT Prepared by Eastern Pennsylvania Alliance for Clean Transportation (EP-ACT)With Technical Support provided by: Clean Fuels Ohio (CFO); & Pittsburgh Region Clean Cities (PRCC) Table of Contents Analysis Background: .................................................................................................................................... 3 1.0: Introduction – Fleet Feasibility Analysis: ............................................................................................... 3 2.0: Fleet Management Goals – Scope of Work & Criteria for Analysis: ...................................................... 4 Priority Review Criteria for Analysis: ........................................................................................................ 4 3.0: Key Performance Indicators – Existing Fleet Analysis ............................................................................ 5 4.0: Alternative Fuel Options – Summary Comparisons & Conclusions: ...................................................... 6 4.1: Detailed Propane Autogas Options Analysis: ......................................................................................... 7 Propane Station Estimate ......................................................................................................................... 8 (Station Capacity: 20,000 GGE/Year) ........................................................................................................ 8 5.0: Key Recommended Actions – Conclusion -
Fuel Cells on Bio-Gas
Fuel Cells on Bio-Gas 2009 Michigan Water Environment Association's (MWEA) Biosolids and Energy Conference Robert J. Remick, PhD March 4, 2009 NREL/PR-560-45292 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. Wastewater Treatment Plants • WWTP operators are looking for opportunities to utilize biogas as a renewable energy source. • Majority use biogas through boilers for reheating • Interest is growing in distributed generation, especially where both electricity and fuel costs are high. • Drivers for the decision to purchase fuel cells – Reliability – Capital and O&M costs – Availability of Government Incentives National Renewable Energy Laboratory Innovation for Our Energy Future Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas • Anaerobic digestion is a process used to stabilize Range of Biogas Compositions wastewater sludge before final disposal. Methane 50% – 75% Carbon Dioxide 25% – 50% • The process uses Nitrogen 0% – 10% microorganisms in the Hydrogen 0% – 1% absence of oxygen to Sulfur Species 0% – 3% convert organic Oxygen 0% – 2% materials to biogas. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Innovation for Our Energy Future WWTP Co-Gen Market • There are over 16,800 WWTP in the U.S. • 615 facilities with flows > 3 mgd that use anaerobic digestion • 215 do not use their biogas but flare it instead. • California has the highest number of municipal facilities using anaerobic digestion, about 102, of which 25 do not use their biogas. -
ACEA – E10 Petrol Fuel: Vehicle Compatibility List
List of ACEA member company petrol vehicles compatible with using ‘E10’ petrol 1. Important notes applicable for the complete list hereunder The European Union Fuel Quality Directive (1) introduced a new market petrol specification from 1st January 2011 that may contain up to 10% ethanol by volume (10 %vol). Such petrol is commonly known as ‘E10’. It is up to the individual country of the European Union and fuel marketers to decide if and when to introduce E10 petrol to the market and so far E10 petrol has only been introduced in Finland, France, Germany and Belgium. For vehicles equipped with a spark-ignition (petrol) engine introduced into the EU market, this list indicates their compatibility (or otherwise) with the use of E10 petrol. 2. Note In countries that offer E10 petrol, before you fill your vehicle with petrol please check that your vehicle is compatible with the use of E10 petrol. If, by mistake, you put E10 petrol into a vehicle that is not declared compatible with the use of E10 petrol, it is recommended that you contact your local vehicle dealer, the vehicle manufacturer or roadside assistance provider who may advise that the fuel tank be drained. If it is necessary to drain the fuel from the tank then you should ensure it is done by a competent organisation and the tank is refilled with the correct grade of petrol for your vehicle. Owners experiencing any issues when using E10 petrol are advised to contact their local vehicle dealer or vehicle manufacturer and to use instead 95RON (or 98RON) petrol that might be identified by ‘E5’ (or have no specific additional marking) in those countries that offer E10 petrol. -
Internal and External Combustion Engine Classifications: Gasoline
Internal and External Combustion Engine Classifications: Gasoline and diesel engine classifications: A gasoline (Petrol) engine or spark ignition (SI) burns gasoline, and the fuel is metered into the intake manifold. Spark plug ignites the fuel. A diesel engine or (compression ignition Cl) bums diesel oil, and the fuel is injected right into the engine combustion chamber. When fuel is injected into the cylinder, it self ignites and bums. Preparation of fuel air mixture (gasoline engine): * High calorific value: (Benzene (Gasoline) 40000 kJ/kg, Diesel 45000 kJ/kg). * Air-fuel ratio: A chemically correct air-fuel ratio is called stoichiometric mixture. It is an ideal ratio of around 14.7:1 (14.7 parts of air to 1 part fuel by weight). Under steady-state engine condition, this ratio of air to fuel would assure that all of the fuel will blend with all of the air and be burned completely. A lean fuel mixture containing a lot of air compared to fuel, will give better fuel economy and fewer exhaust emissions (i.e. 17:1). A rich fuel mixture: with a larger percentage of fuel, improves engine power and cold engine starting (i.e. 8:1). However, it will increase emissions and fuel consumption. * Gasoline density = 737.22 kg/m3, air density (at 20o) = 1.2 kg/m3 The ratio 14.7 : 1 by weight equal to 14.7/1.2 : 1/737.22 = 12.25 : 0.0013564 The ratio is 9,030 : 1 by volume (one liter of gasoline needs 9.03 m3 of air to have complete burning). -
Morgan Ellis Climate Policy Analyst and Clean Cities Coordinator DNREC [email protected] 302.739.9053
CLEAN TRANSPORTATION IN DELAWARE WILMAPCO’S OUR TOWN CONFERENCE THE PRESENTATION 1) What are alterative fuels? 2) The Fuels 3) What’s Delaware Doing? WHAT ARE ALTERNATIVE FUELED VEHICLES? • “Vehicles that run on a fuel other than traditional petroleum fuels (i.e. gas and diesel)” • Propane • Natural Gas • Electricity • Biodiesel • Ethanol • Hydrogen THERE’S A FUEL FOR EVERY FLEET! DELAWARE’S ALTERNATIVE FUELS • “Vehicles that run on a fuel other than traditional petroleum fuels (i.e. gas and diesel)” • Propane • Natural Gas • Electricity • Biodiesel • Ethanol • Hydrogen THE FUELS PROPANE • By-Product of Natural Gas • Compressed at high pressure to liquefy • Domestic Fuel Source • Great for: • School Busses • Step Vans • Larger Vans • Mid-Sized Vehicles COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS (CNG) • Predominately Methane • Uses existing pipeline distribution system to deliver gas • Good for: • Heavy-Duty Trucks • Passenger cars • School Buses • Waste Management Trucks • DNREC trucks PROPANE AND CNG INFRASTRUCTURE • 8 Propane Autogas Stations • 1 CNG Station • Fleet and Public Access with accounts ELECTRIC VEHICLES • Electricity is considered an alternative fuel • Uses electricity from a power source and stores it in batteries • Two types: • Battery Electric • Plug-in Hybrid • Great for: • Passenger Vehicles EV INFRASTRUCTURE • 61 charging stations in Delaware • At 26 locations • 37,000 Charging Stations in the United States • Three types: • Level 1 • Level 2 • D.C. Fast Charging TYPES OF CHARGING STATIONS Charger Current Type Voltage (V) Charging Primary Use Time Level 1 Alternating 120 V 2 to 5 miles Current (AC) per hour of Residential charge Level 2 AC 240 V 10 to 20 miles Residential per hour of and charge Commercial DC Fast Direct Current 480 V 60 to 80 miles (DC) per 20 min. -
Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles in Tunnels
SAND2020-4507 R Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles in Tunnels Austin M. Glover, Austin R. Baird, Chris B. LaFleur April 2020 Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory managed and operated by National Technology and Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Honeywell International Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-NA0003525. 2 ABSTRACT There are numerous vehicles which utilize alternative fuels, or fuels that differ from typical hydrocarbons such as gasoline and diesel, throughout the world. Alternative vehicles include those running on the combustion of natural gas and propane as well as electrical drive vehicles utilizing batteries or hydrogen as energy storage. Because the number of alternative fuels vehicles is expected to increase significantly, it is important to analyze the hazards and risks involved with these new technologies with respect to the regulations related to specific transport infrastructure, such as bridges and tunnels. This report focuses on hazards presented by hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles that are different from traditional fuels. There are numerous scientific research and analysis publications on hydrogen hazards in tunnel scenarios; however, compiling the data to make conclusions can be a difficult process for tunnel owners and authorities having jurisdiction over tunnels. This report provides a summary of the available literature characterizing hazards presented by hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles, including light-duty, medium and heavy-duty, as well as buses. Research characterizing both worst-case and credible scenarios, as well as risk-based analysis, is summarized. Gaps in the research are identified to guide future research efforts to provide a complete analysis of the hazards and recommendations for the safe use of hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles in tunnels. -
Technical Report: Engine and Emission System Technology
Technical Report: Engine and Emission System Technology Spark Ignition Petrol: Euro 5 & Beyond - Light Duty V ehicles © Copyright 2016 ABMARC Disclaimer By accepting this report from ABMARC you acknowledge and agree to the terms as set out below. This Disclaimer and denial of Liability will continue and shall apply to all dealings of whatsoever nature conducted between ABMARC and yourselves relevant to this report unless specifically varied in writing. ABMARC has no means of knowing how the report’s recommendations and or information provide d to you will be applied and or used and therefore denies any liability for any losses, damages or otherwise as may be suffered by you as a result of your use of same. Reports, recommendations made or information provided to you by ABMARC are based on ext ensive and careful research of information some of which may be provided by yourselves and or third parties to ABMARC. Information is constantly changing and therefore ABMARC accepts no responsibility to you for its continuing accuracy and or reliability. Our Reports are based on the best available information obtainable at the time but due to circumstances and factors out of our control could change significantly very quickly. Care should be taken by you in ensuring that the report is appropriate for your needs and purposes and ABMARC makes no warranty that it is. You acknowledge and agree that this Disclaimer and Denial of Liability extends to all Employees and or Contractors working for ABMARC. You agree that any rights or remedies available to you pursuant to relevant Legislation shall be limited to the Laws of the State of Victoria and to the extent permitted by law shall be limited to such monies as paid by you for the re levant report, recommendations and or information. -
Comparison of Hydrogen Powertrains with the Battery Powered Electric Vehicle and Investigation of Small-Scale Local Hydrogen Production Using Renewable Energy
Review Comparison of Hydrogen Powertrains with the Battery Powered Electric Vehicle and Investigation of Small-Scale Local Hydrogen Production Using Renewable Energy Michael Handwerker 1,2,*, Jörg Wellnitz 1,2 and Hormoz Marzbani 2 1 Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Applied Sciences Ingolstadt, Esplanade 10, 85049 Ingolstadt, Germany; [email protected] 2 Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, School of Engineering, Plenty Road, Bundoora, VIC 3083, Australia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: Climate change is one of the major problems that people face in this century, with fossil fuel combustion engines being huge contributors. Currently, the battery powered electric vehicle is considered the predecessor, while hydrogen vehicles only have an insignificant market share. To evaluate if this is justified, different hydrogen power train technologies are analyzed and compared to the battery powered electric vehicle. Even though most research focuses on the hydrogen fuel cells, it is shown that, despite the lower efficiency, the often-neglected hydrogen combustion engine could be the right solution for transitioning away from fossil fuels. This is mainly due to the lower costs and possibility of the use of existing manufacturing infrastructure. To achieve a similar level of refueling comfort as with the battery powered electric vehicle, the economic and technological aspects of the local small-scale hydrogen production are being investigated. Due to the low efficiency Citation: Handwerker, M.; Wellnitz, and high prices for the required components, this domestically produced hydrogen cannot compete J.; Marzbani, H. Comparison of with hydrogen produced from fossil fuels on a larger scale. -
How Practical Are Alternative Fuel Vehicles?
How Practical Are Alternative Fuel Vehicles? Many of us have likely considered an alternative fuel vehicle at some point in our lives. Balancing the positives and negatives is a tricky process and varies greatly based on our personal situations. However, many of the negatives that previously created hesitancy have changed in recent years. Below, we have outlined a few of the most commonly mentioned negatives regarding the two leading alternative fuel vehicle types: Flex Fuel vehicles and Electric/Hybrid vehicles. Then, you can decide for yourself whether one of these vehicle types are practical for you! Cost – How much does the vehicle cost to purchase and operate? Flex Fuel: Flex Fuel vehicles typically cost about the same as a gasoline vehicle.1 For fuel cost, E85 typically costs slightly less than gasoline, however, due to decreased efficiency has a slightly higher cost per mile than gasoline.2 Overall, a Flex Fuel vehicle is likely to be slightly more expensive than a gasoline counterpart. Electric/Hybrid: This situation varies quite a bit depending on where you live. Electric vehicles and hybrid vehicles often cost considerably more than a conventional gasoline vehicle. For example, a plug-in hybrid will cost around $4000-$8000 more than a conventional model.3 However, there are federal rebates and local rebates that can refund thousands of dollars from the purchase price. Electric/Hybrid vehicles also tend to save money on fuel, with the possibility of saving thousands of dollars over the lifetime of the vehicle.4 Whether these rebates and fuel cost savings will eventually account for the higher purchase price can be estimated with comparison tools. -
EPRI Journal--Driving the Solution: the Plug-In Hybrid Vehicle
DRIVING THE SOLUTION THE PLUG-IN HYBRID VEHICLE by Lucy Sanna The Story in Brief As automakers gear up to satisfy a growing market for fuel-efficient hybrid electric vehicles, the next- generation hybrid is already cruis- ing city streets, and it can literally run on empty. The plug-in hybrid charges directly from the electricity grid, but unlike its electric vehicle brethren, it sports a liquid fuel tank for unlimited driving range. The technology is here, the electricity infrastructure is in place, and the plug-in hybrid offers a key to replacing foreign oil with domestic resources for energy indepen- dence, reduced CO2 emissions, and lower fuel costs. DRIVING THE SOLUTION THE PLUG-IN HYBRID VEHICLE by Lucy Sanna n November 2005, the first few proto vide a variety of battery options tailored 2004, more than half of which came from Itype plugin hybrid electric vehicles to specific applications—vehicles that can imports. (PHEVs) will roll onto the streets of New run 20, 30, or even more electric miles.” With growing global demand, particu York City, Kansas City, and Los Angeles Until recently, however, even those larly from China and India, the price of a to demonstrate plugin hybrid technology automakers engaged in conventional barrel of oil is climbing at an unprece in varied environments. Like hybrid vehi hybrid technology have been reluctant to dented rate. The added cost and vulnera cles on the market today, the plugin embrace the PHEV, despite growing rec bility of relying on a strategic energy hybrid uses battery power to supplement ognition of the vehicle’s potential.