DOCSLIB.ORG

The Potential to Build Current Natural Gas Infrastructure to Accommodate the Future Conversion to Near-Zero Transportation Technology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Potential to Build Current Natural Gas Infrastructure to Accommodate the Future Conversion to Near-Zero Transportation Technology Research Report – UCD-ITS-RR-17-04 The Potential to Build Current Natural Gas Infrastructure to Accommodate the Future Conversion to Near-Zero Transportation Technology March 2017 Amy Myers Jaffe Rosa Dominguez-Faus Joan Ogden Nathan C. Parker Daniel Scheitrum Zane McDonald, Yueyue Fan Tom Durbin George Karavalakis Justin Wilcock Marshall Miller Christopher Yang Institute of Transportation Studies ◦ University of California, Davis 1605 Tilia Street ◦ Davis, California 95616 PHONE (530) 752-6548 ◦ FAX (530) 752-6572 www.its.ucdavis.edu FINAL REPORT March 24, 2017 The Potential to Build Current Natural Gas Infrastructure to Accommodate the Future Conversion to Near-Zero Transportation Technology Contract No. 14-317 Amy Myers Jaffe, Principal Investigator STEPS Program, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis Disclaimer The statements and conclusions in this Report are those of the contractor and not necessarily those of the California Air Resources Board. The mention of commercial products, their source, or their use in connection with material reported herein is not to be construed as actual or implied endorsement of such products. This Report was submitted in fulfillment of contract 13-307, “The Feasibility of Renewable Natural Gas as a Large-Scale, Low Carbon Substitute” by the STEPS Program, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis under the sponsorship of the California Air Resources Board. Work was completed as of February 29, 2016 and updated as of March 2017. ii Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank our colleagues in research of alternative fuels and vehicles and more sustainable transportation at the California Air Resources Board for funding this contract and the staff with whom we engaged in the Research Division. The authors also thank the contributing team members of the STEPS program for their diligent and comprehensive work on this contract and report, including the following: Team Coordinators/Lead Researchers: Amy Myers Jaffe Rosa Dominguez-Faus Contributing Researchers: Joan Ogden Nathan Parker Daniel Scheitrum Zane McDonald Yueyue Fan Tom Durbin George Karavalakis Justin Wilcock Marshall Miller Christopher Yang iii Table of Contents Abstract .................................................................................................................................................................... viii Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................. x 1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 16 2 Background ........................................................................................................................................................ 19 2.1 Natural Gas in Transportation: Literature Review ...................................................................... 19 2.2 Renewable Natural Gas in Transportation: Literature Review ............................................... 20 2.2.1 RNG Pathways ................................................................................................................................................. 20 2.2.2 RNG Costs .......................................................................................................................................................... 21 2.2.3 RNG Yields ......................................................................................................................................................... 22 2.2.4 Commercial RNG Examples ....................................................................................................................... 22 2.2.5 RNG synergies ................................................................................................................................................. 23 2.3 Hydrogen in Transportation: Literature Review .......................................................................... 24 2.3.1 Hydrogen Production ................................................................................................................................... 24 2.3.2 Hydrogen Storage and Delivery .............................................................................................................. 28 2.3.3 Hydrogen Infrastructure Strategies ...................................................................................................... 28 2.3.4 Current Status of Hydrogen Infrastructure development in California ................................ 29 2.3.5 Studies of Hydrogen and the Natural gas grid .................................................................................. 32 2.3.6 Synergies Between Hydrogen Fuel Cell and Natural Gas Vehicles .......................................... 33 3 Methods ............................................................................................................................................................... 34 3.1 Fossil natural gas infrastructure pathways .................................................................................... 34 3.2 Renewable natural gas supply pathways ........................................................................................ 36 3.3 Hydrogen Pathways ................................................................................................................................. 40 4 Results .................................................................................................................................................................. 44 4.1 RNG Compatibility with the Natural Gas System ........................................................................... 44 4.1.1 RNG Treatment and Purification ............................................................................................................ 47 4.1.2 Monitoring ........................................................................................................................................................ 51 4.1.3 RNG Potential in California: Upgrading and Injection Costs Assessment ............................. 52 4.1.4 The GHG benefit of blending NG with RNG ........................................................................................ 58 4.2 Hydrogen Compatibility with Natural Gas Infrastructure ........................................................ 61 4.2.1 Which transportation markets are most promising for natural gas and hydrogen? ....... 61 4.2.2 Hydrogen infrastructure supply pathways ........................................................................................ 62 4.2.3 infrastructure requirements and overlap for Hydrogen and NG Supply Pathways ......... 63 4.2.4 Compatibility of CNG refueling station equipment with hydrogen ......................................... 65 4.2.5 Blending hydrogen with natural gas ..................................................................................................... 67 4.2.6 Methanation or “E-gas”: Production of Methane from CO2 and Renewable Hydrogen . 76 4.3 Scenarios for Growth: Implications for Natural Gas as a Bridge to Hydrogen ................... 77 5 Summary and Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 81 6 Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................... 83 7 Glossary of Terms ............................................................................................................................................ 85 8 Appendix A: RNG compatibility with natural gas infrastructure ................................................ 87 9 References ....................................................................................................................................................... 102 iv List of Figures Figure 1. CNG (left) and LNG (right) stations in California. 17 Figure 2. Natural Gas Fueling Stations in California 2009-2014. 20 Figure 3. Pathways to hydrogen 24 Figure 4. Six fuel supply pathways for hydrogen and hydrogen blends derived from natural gas. 26 Figure 5. Delivered cost of hydrogen transportation fuel from various pathways. 27 Figure 6. Locations (top) and status (bottom) of hydrogen refueling stations in California. In 31 stations, compressed hydrogen is delivered by truck; 7 have liquid hydrogen delivered by truck; 7 onsite electrolysis; 2 onsite steam methane reforming; 1 hydrogen pipeline delivery. 30 Figure 7. CARB projections for hydrogen fuel cell vehicle populations (top) and numbers of stations (bottom) in California (CEC/CARB Joint report 2015). 31 Figure 8. Renewable Hydrogen Requirements in California under SB1505. 32 Figure 9. LNG supply pathways 34 Figure 10. CNG supply pathway 35 Figure 11. CNG Time fill station configuration. 35 Figure 12. RNG Sites compared to trucking corridor 37 Figure 13. Public CNG and LNG locations in California. 38 Figure 14. Centralized and onsite hydrogen infrastructure pathways for providing hydrogen transportation fuel. 40 Figure 15. Near Term and Long Term Pathways for Hydrogen Production and Delivery to Vehicles. (It is also possible to deliver hydrogen via compressed gas truck.) 41 Figure 16a. Hydrogen refueling station with onsite steam methane reforming. 42 Figure 17. Schematic of RNG production from feedstock through to end use. 51 Figure 18.
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]
  • Blending Hydrogen Into Natural Gas Pipeline Networks: a Review of Key Issues
    Blending Hydrogen into Natural Gas Pipeline Networks: A Review of Key Issues M. W. Melaina, O. Antonia, and M. Penev NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. Technical Report NREL/TP-5600-51995 March 2013 Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 Blending Hydrogen into Natural Gas Pipeline Networks: A Review of Key Issues M. W. Melaina, O. Antonia, and M. Penev Prepared under Task No. HT12.2010 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Technical Report 15013 Denver West Parkway NREL/TP-5600-51995 Golden, Colorado 80401 March 2013 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of 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 process disclosed, 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. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrogen Storage for Mobility: a Review
    materials Review Hydrogen Storage for Mobility: A Review Etienne Rivard * , Michel Trudeau and Karim Zaghib * Centre of Excellence in Transportation Electrification and Energy Storage, Hydro-Quebec, 1806, boul. Lionel-Boulet, Varennes J3X 1S1, Canada; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] (E.R.); [email protected] (K.Z.) Received: 18 April 2019; Accepted: 11 June 2019; Published: 19 June 2019 Abstract: Numerous reviews on hydrogen storage have previously been published. However, most of these reviews deal either exclusively with storage materials or the global hydrogen economy. This paper presents a review of hydrogen storage systems that are relevant for mobility applications. The ideal storage medium should allow high volumetric and gravimetric energy densities, quick uptake and release of fuel, operation at room temperatures and atmospheric pressure, safe use, and balanced cost-effectiveness. All current hydrogen storage technologies have significant drawbacks, including complex thermal management systems, boil-off, poor efficiency, expensive catalysts, stability issues, slow response rates, high operating pressures, low energy densities, and risks of violent and uncontrolled spontaneous reactions. While not perfect, the current leading industry standard of compressed hydrogen offers a functional solution and demonstrates a storage option for mobility compared to other technologies. Keywords: hydrogen mobility; hydrogen storage; storage systems assessment; Kubas-type hydrogen storage; hydrogen economy 1. Introduction According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), it is almost certain that the unusually fast global warming is a direct result of human activity [1]. The resulting climate change is linked to significant environmental impacts that are connected to the disappearance of animal species [2,3], decreased agricultural yield [4–6], increasingly frequent extreme weather events [7,8], human migration [9–11], and conflicts [12–14].
    [Show full text]
  • Storing Syngas Lowers the Carbon Price for Profitable Coal Gasification
    Carnegie Mellon Electricity Industry Center Working Paper CEIC-07-10 www.cmu.edu/electricity Storing syngas lowers the carbon price for profitable coal gasification ADAM NEWCOMER AND JAY APT Carnegie Mellon Electricity Industry Center, Tepper School of Business, and Department of Engineering and Public Policy, 254 Posner Hall, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213 Integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) electric power generation systems with carbon capture and sequestration have desirable environmental qualities, but are not profitable when the carbon dioxide price is less than approximately $50 per metric ton. We examine whether an IGCC facility that operates its gasifier continuously but stores the syngas and produces electricity only when daily prices are high may be profitable at significantly lower CO2 prices. Using a probabilistic analysis, we have calculated the plant-level return on investment (ROI) and the value of syngas storage for IGCC facilities located in the US Midwest using a range of storage configurations. Adding a second turbine to use the stored syngas to generate electricity at peak hours and implementing 12 hours of above ground high pressure syngas storage significantly increases the ROI and net present value. Storage lowers the carbon price at which IGCC enters the US generation mix by approximately 25%. 1 Carnegie Mellon Electricity Industry Center Working Paper CEIC-07-10 www.cmu.edu/electricity Introduction Producing electricity from coal-derived synthesis gas (syngas) in an integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) facility can improve criteria pollutant performance over other coal-fueled technologies such as pulverized coal (PC) facilities [1-5] and can be implemented with carbon capture and sequestration.
    [Show full text]
  • Substitute Natural Gas from Biomass Gasification
    Rapport SGC 187 Substitute natural gas from biomass gasification ©Svenskt Gastekniskt Center – mars 2008 Haldor Topsoe's methanation process TREMP Per Tunå, Lund Institute of Technology Rapport SGC 187 •1102-7371 • ISRN SGC-R-187-SE SGC:s FÖRORD FUD-projekt inom Svenskt Gastekniskt Center AB avrapporteras normalt i rapporter som är fritt tillgängliga för envar intresserad. SGC svarar för utgivningen av rapporterna medan uppdragstagarna för respek- tive projekt eller rapportförfattarna svarar för rapporternas innehåll. Den som utnyttjar eventuella beskrivningar, resultat eller dylikt i rapporterna gör detta helt på eget ansvar. Delar av rapport får återges med angivande av källan. En förteckning över hittills utgivna SGC-rapporter finns på SGC:s hemsida www.sgc.se. Svenskt Gastekniskt Center AB (SGC) är ett samarbetsorgan för företag verk- samma inom energigasområdet. Dess främsta uppgift är att samordna och effektivisera intressenternas insatser inom områdena forskning, utveckling och demonstration (FUD). SGC har följande delägare: Svenska Gasföreningen, E.ON Gas Sverige AB, E.ON Sverige AB, Göteborg Energi AB, Lunds Energikoncernen AB (publ) och Öresundskraft AB. Följande parter har gjort det möjligt att genomföra detta utvecklingsprojekt: E.ON Gas Sverige AB Göteborg Energi AB SVENSKT GASTEKNISKT CENTER AB Jörgen Held Acknowledgements I would like to thank the following people for their support throughout this thesis work. Professor Hans T. Karlsson at the Department of Chemical Engineering for his dedication to find an interesting thesis work for me. Christian Hulteberg at the Department of Chemical Engineering as he always has a good answer for everything and always had time to help me. Owe Jönsson at E.ON Gas Sverige AB and Lars A Andersson at Göteborg Energi AB for taking their time and to give valuable suggestions and ideas.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Innovative and Automated Freight Strategies and Technologies—Phase I Final Report
    Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA/TX-17/0-6837-1 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date ASSESSMENT OF INNOVATIVE AND AUTOMATED FREIGHT February 2017 STRATEGIES AND TECHNOLOGIES—PHASE I FINAL REPORT 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Curtis Morgan, Jeffery Warner, Allan Rutter, Dahye Lee, C. James Report 0-6837-1 Kruse, Dong Hun Kang, Mario Monsreal, Jolanda Prozzi, Juan Carlos Villa, Jeffrey Borowiec, Leslie Olson, David Bierling, and Edwin Varela 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Texas A&M Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System 11. Contract or Grant No. College Station, Texas 77843-3135 Project 0-6837 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Technical Report: Research and Technology Implementation Office March 2016 125 E. 11th Street 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Austin, Texas 78701-2483 15. Supplementary Notes Project performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. Project Title: Assessment of Innovative and Automated Freight Systems and Development of Evaluation Tools URL: http://tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-6837-1.pdf 16. Abstract Many innovative freight delivery strategies and technologies have been proposed to address the future freight needs of Texas’s growing population. Changes in both buying habits and a shift toward direct home package delivery threaten to dramatically change distribution patterns and increase the number of intercity and local delivery trucks on Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) roadways.
    [Show full text]
  • Maximising the Value of Surplus Ethane and Cost-Effective Design to Handle Rich Lng
    Poster PO-25 MAXIMISING THE VALUE OF SURPLUS ETHANE AND COST-EFFECTIVE DESIGN TO HANDLE RICH LNG CC Yang Process and Technology Director, LNG Foster Wheeler USA, 2020 Dairy Ashford, Houston, TX 77077, USA [email protected] Geoffrey Bothamley Business Development Manager Oil and Gas Foster Wheeler Energy Limited, Shinfield Park, Reading, Berkshire, RG2 9FW, UK [email protected] ABSTRACT Gas companies have strict requirements for the composition of the natural gas sent out from their LNG receiving terminals in order to satisfy customer requirements in terms of calorific value and quality of the composition. For LNG receiving terminals serving the North American market particularly, the C2+ content and heating value specifications are lower than most natural gases and most existing LNG baseload plants. Cost-effective management of these components enhances the LNG value chain, increasing flexibility in sourcing LNG cargoes. Several alternatives for managing C2+ components in the LNG value chain exist. Generally, extraction can occur at either the receiving terminal or upstream of the liquefaction plant. In many cases it is not cost-effective to reduce the C2 at the baseload plant, as it will reduce the LNG production rate and there may be no local market. Some LNG production plant locations, however, have grown to a size that would meet minimum economic scale for a steam cracker taking C2 and C3 as feedstock for ethylene and propylene production. To accept cargoes of rich LNG, the LNG receiving terminal has to be able to manage the C2+ components in an economically efficient manner. This paper presents a cost- effective C2+ management process design for send-out gas at the LNG receiving terminal.
    [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]
  • The Future Role of Gas in Transport
    The Future Role of Gas in Transport Green Gas Transport Pathway 2 Green Gas Transport Pathways Acknowledgements A Network Innovation Allowance project report for Cadent, Gas Networks Ireland, National Grid, Northern Gas Networks, SGN, Wales and West Utilities Green Gas Transport Pathways 3 Executive Summary Project Background, Aims and Objectives This is a Network Innovation Allowance funded project Green gases overseen by a steering group comprising the UK and Ireland gas network operators (Cadent, Gas Networks Ireland, This report discusses the future role of ‘green gases’ which National Grid, Northern Gas Networks, SGN, Wales and West). are biomethane and hydrogen produced from low- and The project follows on from previous studies1 that modelled zero-carbon sources, each produced via two main methods: the role of green gases in decarbonising the GB economy. The Biomethane from Anaerobic Digestion (AD): A role of this study is to understand the transition from the GB mature technology for turning biological material into economy today to a decarbonised economy in 2050, focusing a non-fossil form of natural gas (methane). AD plants on how the transition is achieved and the competing and produce biogas which must then be upgraded to biomethane. complementary nature of different low and zero emission fuels and technologies over time. Biomethane from Bio-Substitute Natural Gas (Bio-SNG): This technology is at an earlier stage of While the project covers the whole economy it focuses on development than AD, but has the potential to unlock transport, especially trucks, as an early adopter of green other feedstocks for biomethane production such as waste gases and as a key enabler of the transition.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrogen-Enriched Compressed Natural Gas (HCNG)
    Year 2005 UCD—ITS—RR—05—29 Hydrogen Bus Technology Validation Program Andy Burke Zach McCaffrey Marshall Miller Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis Kirk Collier Neal Mulligan Collier Technologies, Inc. Institute of Transportation Studies ◊ University of California, Davis One Shields Avenue ◊ Davis, California 95616 PHONE: (530) 752-6548 ◊ FAX: (530) 752-6572 WEB: http://its.ucdavis.edu/ Hydrogen Bus Technology Validation Program Andy Burke, Zach McCaffrey, Marshall Miller Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis Kirk Collier, Neal Mulligan Collier Technologies, Inc. Technology Provider: Collier Technologies, Inc. Grant number: ICAT 01-7 Grantee: University of California, Davis Date: May 12, 2005 Conducted under a grant by the California Air Resources Board of the California Environmental Protection Agency The statements and conclusions in this Report are those of the grantee and not necessarily those of the California Air Resources Board. The mention of commercial products, their source, or their use in connection with material reported herein is not to be construed as actual or implied endorsement of such products 2 Acknowledgments Work on this program was funded by the Federal Transit Administration, the California Air Resources Board, and the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District. This Report was submitted under Innovative Clean Air Technologies grant number 01-7 from the California Air Resources Board. 3 Table of Contents Abstract………………………………………………………………………………...................6 Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………...................7
    [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]
  • Improving Performance of Compressed Natural Gas Fueled Passenger Car Engine by Addition of Hydrogen
    Journal of Scientific & Industrial Research Vol. 77, January 2018, pp. 61-65 Improving Performance of Compressed Natural Gas Fueled Passenger Car Engine by Addition of Hydrogen A K Sehgal1*, M Saxena2, S Pandey3 and R K Malhotra4 *1Indian Oil Corporation Ltd, Faridabad, India 2Univeristy of Technology and Management, Shillong, India 3University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, Dehradun, India 4Petroleum Federation of India, New Delhi, India Received 06 October 2016; revised 05 June 2017; accepted 07 October 2017 Hydrogen is a clean fuel that can be used as sole fuel or blends with compressed natural gas (CNG) in the spark ignition engines. Blending of hydrogen in CNG improves the burning velocity and calorific value of CNG. Engine tests were carried out using CNG and optimized fuel blend of 18%HCNG for comparing the engine performance and emissions behavior. Marginal improvement in engine performance (up to 2%) and significant reduction in emissions with18%HCNG compared to neat CNG. The brake specific fuel consumption was 5% lesser compared to CNG. Replacement of methane by hydrogen in the 18%HCNG blend reduced the HC emissions by ~20% and NOx emissions was increased by ~ 10-20% compared to CNG. 18% HCNG decreased the methane emissions up to 25% compared to CNG. The investigation showed that 18% HCNG has given better performance and emissions compared to CNG. Keywords: Hydrogen, Compressed Natural Gas, Emissions, Methane Emissions Introduction produce any major pollutants such as CO, HC, SOx, Natural gas is a naturally occurring form of fossil smoke and other toxic metals except NOx. Hydrogen energy. Utilization of natural gas as fuel for internal can be produced from renewable sources such as combustion engines was almost restricted to biomass and water as well as from non-renewable stationary applications prior to World War II.
    [Show full text]