TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT: TRANSPORT REFRIGERATORS August 2015 State of California AIR RESOURCES BOARD This report has been prepared by the staff of the Air Resources Board. Publication does not signify that the contents 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. TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents Page Executive Summary ….. ............................................................................................ ES-1 I. Introduction and Purpose of Assessment ........................................................... I-1 II. Overview of Transport Refrigeration Unit Applications ..................................... II-1 A. Fleet Characterization ............................................................................ II-2 B. Operational Characterization ................................................................ II-4 C. Manufacturers ....................................................................................... II-4 D. Key Performance Parameters ................................................................. II-5 E. Population and Emissions Summary ..................................................... II-8 F. Typical Purchase Patterns and Average Age ........................................ II-9 G. Regulatory Setting ................................................................................. II-9 III. Assessment of Potential Transport Refrigeration Technologies ....................... III-1 A. All-Electric Plug-in/Generator/Battery TRs ............................................. III-1 B. All-Electric Plug-In/Cold Plate TRs ...................................................... III-10 C. Hydrogen Fuel Cell-Powered TRs ...................................................... III-15 D. All-Electric Plug-In/Battery/Solar-Assist TRs ....................................... III-29 E. Cryogenic TRs .................................................................................... III-39 F. Alternative Fueled Engines .................................................................. III-52 G. Advanced Power Plant – HCCI ........................................................... III-68 H. Well-to-Wheels GHG Emission Rate Comparison .............................. III-72 I. Tank-to-Wheels Criteria Pollutant Emission Rate Comparison ........... III-75 J. Energy Efficiency ................................................................................ III-78 IV. Conclusions ...................................................................................................... IV-1 A. Summary of Most Promising Technologies ........................................... IV-1 B. Staff Recommendations and Next Steps .............................................. IV-4 V. References ....................................................................................................... V-1 VI. Acronyms and Abbreviations Used in this Report ............................................ VI-1 APPENDICES Appendix III.A-1: WTW Assumptions and Calculations – All-Electric Plug- In/Battery/Vehicle Generator TR (Auragen) Appendix III.A-2: WTW Assumptions and Calculations – Conventional (Diesel) TRUs Appendix III.B-1: WTW Assumptions and Calculations – All-Electric/Cold Plate TRs Appendix III.C-1: WTW Assumptions and Calculations – Hydrogen Fuel Cell TRs i TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) Contents Page Appendix III.D-1: WTW Assumptions and Calculations – All-Electric/Solar Assist TRs Appendix III.E-1: WTW Assumptions and Calculations - Cryogenic TRs Appendix III.E-2: Detailed California Modified GREET Pathway for Liquid Nitrogen from California Marginal Electricity Appendix III.F-1: WTW Assumptions and Calculations – Alternative Fuel (CNG/LNG) TRs LIST OF TABLES Table ES-1: WTW GHG Emission Rate Comparisons, 2015 Fuel (Baseline) .......... ES-4 Table ES-2: WTW GHG Emission Rate Comparisons, 2020+ Fuel ........................ ES-6 Table ES-3: TTW Criteria Pollutant Emission Rate Comparisons ........................... ES-7 Table ES-4: Most Promising TR Technologies ........................................................ ES-8 Table ES-5: Estimated Cost of TR Technologies Compared to Conventional TRU Costs ........................................................................................ ES-10 Table II-1: 2015 TRU Population and Emissions ..................................................... II-9 Table II-2: Off-Road Compression-Ignition (Diesel) Engine Standards ................. II-11 Table III.A-1: Auragen System - TTW Criteria Pollutant Emission Rate Comparisons III-8 Table III.B-1: All-Electric Plug-in Cold Plate TR - TTW Criteria Pollutant Emission Rate Comparisons ............................................................. III-13 Table III.C-1: Net Present Value Cases without ITC ............................................... III-25 Table III.C-2: Net Present Value Cases with ITC .................................................... III-25 Table III.C-3: All-Electric H2 Fuel Cell TR - TTW Criteria Pollutant Emission Rate Comparisons ..................................................................................... III-27 Table III.D-1: All-Electric Plug-in/Battery/Solar-Assist - TTW Criteria Pollutant Emission Rate Comparisons ............................................................. III-37 Table III.E-1: Annual Operating Cost Comparison for Trailer Cryogenic TR and Trailer Conventional TRU .................................................................. III-47 Table III.E-2: Cryogenic Trailer TR - TTW Criteria Pollutant Emission Rate Comparisons ..................................................................................... III-48 Table III.F-1: Advantages and Disadvantages of Each Alternative Fuel Type ......... III-60 Table III.F-2: Planned Demonstration Projects and Infrastructure Expansion ......... III-61 Table III.F-3: Class 8 HD Vehicle Accessible CNG and LNG Refueling Stations ... III-62 Table III.F-4: GHG Emission Rates for CNG and LNG TRs ..................................... III-64 Table III.F-5: GHG Emission Rates for Conventional TRs Fueled with 2015 and 2020+ Fuels ................................................................................ III-65 Table III.F-6: GHG WTW Emission Rates Reductions - CNG and LNG TRs Fueled with 2020+Fuels Compared to Conventional TRs Fueled with 20015 and 2020+Fuels ..................................................... III-65 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) Contents Page Table III.F-7: CNG/LNG Fueled TRs – TTW Criteria Pollutant Emission Rate Comparisons ....................................................................................... III-66 Table III.H-1: WTW GHG Emission Rate Comparisons of TR Technologies (2020+ Fuel) to Baseline Conventional 2015 TRU (2015 Fuel) .......... III-72 Table III.H-2: WTW GHG Emission Rate Comparisons, 2020+ Fuel ...................... III-74 Table III.I-1: TTW Criteria Pollutant Emission Rate Comparisons .......................... III-76 LIST OF FIGURES Figure ES-1: Truck TRU .......................................................................................... ES-1 Figure ES-2: Trailer TRU ......................................................................................... ES-1 Figure ES-3: Railcar TRU ........................................................................................ ES-2 Figure ES-4: Pin-On TRU Genset ........................................................................... ES-2 Figure ES-5: Under-slung TRU Genset ................................................................... ES-2 Figure ES-6: Powerpack ......................................................................................... ES-3 Figure ES-7: WTW GHG Emission Rate Comparisons for 2015 Fuel (Baseline) and TR Alternatives ............................................................................ ES-5 Figure ES-8: WTW GHG Emission Rate Comparisons for 2020+ Fuels ................. ES-6 Figure ES-9: TTW Criteria Pollutant Emission Rate Comparisons .......................... ES-8 Figure II-1: Typical Single-Stage Vapor Compression Refrigeration System ........... II-1 Figure II.A-1: Refrigerated Fleet Market Segments .................................................... II-2 Figure II.A-2: For Hire Fleets ...................................................................................... II-2 Figure II.A-3: Private Fleets ........................................................................................ II-3 Figure III.A-1: Converted All-Electric TR ................................................................... III-1 Figure III.A-2: Auragen System Architecture ............................................................. III-2 Figure III.A-3: Loading Dock Power Plugs .................................................................. III-3 Figure III.A-4: Parking Area Power Plug Pedestal ..................................................... III-3 Figure III.A-5: Power Plug Connectors ...................................................................... III-3 Figure III.A-6: AGM Deep Cycle Battery .................................................................... III-4 Figure III.A-7: Lithium-Ion Battery .............................................................................. III-4 Figure III.A-8: Flow Battery ........................................................................................ III-5 Figure III.B-1: Eutectic Cold Plate ..........................................................................