Technical Options to Achieve Additional Emissions and Risk Reductions from California Locomotives and Railyards
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Technical Options to Achieve Additional Emissions and Risk Reductions from California Locomotives and Railyards August 2009 This Page Iintentionally Left Blank State of California California Environmental Protection Agency AIR RESOURCES BOARD Stationary Source Division Technical Options to Achieve Additional Emissions and Risk Reductions from California Locomotives and Railyards August 2009 This document has been reviewed by the staff of the Air Resources Board and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Air Resources Board, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. August 2009 i This Page Intentionally Left Blank August 2009 ii Acknowledgments This report was prepared with assistance and support from the other divisions and offices of the Air Resources Board. In addition, we would like to acknowledge the assistance and cooperation that we have received from many individuals and organizations. Principal Author Harold Holmes, Manager, Engineering Evaluation Section Mike Jaczola Contributors Eugene Yang, Ph.D. Hector Castaneda Ambreen Afshan Alexander Mitchell Stephen Cutts Reviewed by: Bob Fletcher, Chief, Stationary Source Division Dean C. Simeroth, Chief, Criteria Pollutants Branch August 2009 iii This Page Intentionally Left Blank August 2009 iv Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 1 A. Background....................................................................................................................... 1 B. Summary of Technical Options Evaluated ........................................................................ 2 C. Staff Preliminary Recommendations On Options.............................................................. 8 I. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 11 A. Emissions from Locomotives and Railyards ................................................................... 11 B. Efforts to Reduce Locomotive Emissions........................................................................ 15 C. Summary of Efforts to Reduce Non-Locomotive Railyard Emissions ............................. 20 D. Railyard Mitigation Plans................................................................................................. 22 E. Key Terms....................................................................................................................... 25 II. LOCOMOTIVE OPTIONS........................................................................................ 35 A. Switch Locomotives ........................................................................................................ 35 B. Medium Horsepower Locomotives.................................................................................. 57 C. Interstate Locomotives .................................................................................................... 70 III. RAILYARD OPTIONS ............................................................................................. 75 A. Cargo Handling Equipment ............................................................................................. 75 B. Transportation Refrigeration Unit (TRU) – Plug-In Electrification.................................... 90 C. Port and Intermodal Railyard Drayage Trucks ................................................................ 92 IV. ADVANCED SYSTEMS OPTIONS FOR LOCOMOTIVES AND RAILYARDS..... 105 A. Advanced Locomotive Emission Control System (ALECS)........................................... 105 B. Use of Remote Sensing Devices to Measure Locomotive Emissions........................... 109 C. Retrofit Interstate Locomotives with Idle Reduction Devices ........................................ 110 D. Alternate Power Sources and Innovative Technologies for Locomotives ..................... 114 E. Use CARB Diesel for All Interstate Line Haul Locomotives .......................................... 119 F. Locomotive Emissions In-Use Testing .......................................................................... 125 G. Electrify Major Freight Rail Lines in the South Coast Air Basin..................................... 127 H. Maglev Electrificiation from the Ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach to BNSF SCIG (Proposed) and UP ICTF .............................................................................................. 131 I. Retrofit Existing Major Rail Infrastructure with Linear Induction Motors........................ 133 V. RAILYARD OPERATIONAL AND PHYSICAL CHANGES................................... 135 A. Install Railyard Perimeter Walls .................................................................................... 135 B. Plant Trees Around the Perimeter of Railyards............................................................. 137 C. Install Indoor Air Filters in Schools and Homes Near Railyards.................................... 141 D. Install Ambient Diesel PM Monitoring Stations ............................................................. 144 E. Implement an Enhanced Truck and Locomotive Inspection Program........................... 146 F. Move Railyard Sources Further Away from Nearby Residents..................................... 147 August 2009 v APPENDICES Page APPENDIX A: Diesel PM Emissions from Eighteen Major California Railyards ......... 151 APPENDIX B: U.S EPA Locomotive Emission Standards.......................................... 157 APPENDIX C: Current Status of Aftertreatment for Existing Locomotives ................. 163 APPENDIX D: AAR publication on “Railroad Service” and “Freight Railroads Operating” in California ...................................................................... 171 APPENDIX E: Options 1 thru 4 - Calculations for Switch Locomotives ...................... 175 APPENDIX F: Options 5 thru 8 - Calculations for Medium Horsepower Locomotives 187 APPENDIX G: Option 9 - Calculations for Interstate Line Haul Locomotives.............. 199 APPENDIX H: Options 10 thru 15 - Calculations for Cargo Handling Equipment (CHE) .................................................................................................. 205 APPENDIX I: Option 16 - Calculations for Transport Refrigeration Unit (TRU) Plug In Electrification........................................................................... 219 APPENDIX J: Options 17 thru 20 - Calculations for Port and Intermodal Railyard Drayage Trucks................................................................................... 223 APPENDIX K: Option 21 - Calculations for Advanced Locomotive Emission Control System (ALECS) ................................................................................. 229 APPENDIX L: Option 23 - Calculations for Interstate Line Haul Locomotives Operating with Idle Reduction Devices ............................................... 253 APPENDIX M: Option 29 - Calculations to Electrify Major Freight Lines in the SCAB to Barstow and Niland .............................................................. 257 APPENDIX N: Option 30 - Calculations for Maglev Electrification From the Port of LA/LB to ICTF/SCIG ................................................................ 263 APPENDIX O: Option 31 - Calculations to Retrofit Existing Rail Infrastructure with LIMs in the SCAB................................................................................ 269 APPENDIX P: Cost-Effectiveness Calculation Methodology ...................................... 273 OPTIONS INDEX………………………………………………………………………….…279 August 2009 vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In this report, the Air Resources Board (ARB/Board) staff provides a technical evaluation for public comment of 37 options that may accelerate further statewide locomotive and localized locomotive and non-locomotive railyard emission reductions. This technical evaluation of each option addresses the technical feasibility, potential emission reductions, costs, and relative cost-effectiveness. The purpose of this document is to provide a sound technical basis for the ongoing dialogue on how best to achieve further emissions reductions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and diesel particulate matter (PM or diesel PM). This report is intended to provide an initial technical assessment of various options that are available or may be available in the near future to accelerate and provide additional emissions reductions from locomotives and major railyards in California. It is not intended to serve as an implementation blueprint, as it does not evaluate which agency or agencies may have authority to implement such options. The document also does not evaluate what role, if any, the availability of public funding might play in assuring earlier or further reductions. Following receipt and evaluation of the public comments on the preliminary draft, ARB staff has developed this revised report on the technical evaluation of the options. ARB staff is now developing a second report that provides recommendations to implement further emission reduction options for locomotives and railyards. This second report also provides possible implementation mechanisms. The range of possible mechanisms includes direct regulation, incentive funds, voluntary actions by the railroads, and enforceable agreements with the railroads.1 This second report will draw on the results of this technical evaluation. ARB staff will again seek public