Shell Global Solutions Shell Gas to Liquids in the context of a Future Fuel Strategy – Technical Marketing Aspects Ralph A. Cherrillo, Richard.H. Clark, Ian G. Virrels Shell Global Solutions (US) Inc. Roger Davies Shell Gas & Power 9th Diesel Engine Emissions Reduction Workshop, 24-28 Aug 2003, Newport RI Talk Synopsis • REQUIREMENTS OF A FUTURE FUEL STRATEGY • Sustainability challenges • Technology Drivers • Fuel Options • GAS TO LIQUIDS • Advantages • Background studies • Pre-Marketing Activities - Stakeholders • Fleet trials • CONCLUSIONS Shell Global Solutions 2 Sustainability challenges • Required to be met by any changes in transport fuels • Need to balance the requirements of affordable mobility while reducing local and global environmental impacts • Cleaner Hydrocarbon Fuels enable more fuel efficient/low emission engine technology • Renewable Biofuels - e.g. ethanol and vegetable oil esters • Radical new technologies - e.g. Fuel cells & Hydrogen • Alternatives need to meet economic and social sustainability criteria as well as contributing to environmental objectives • Need to understand the challenge of consumer acceptance Shell Global Solutions 3 Well-to-Wheel Greenhouse Gases - US Study g CO Better 2 /mile 800 700 600 Petroleum Natural Gas 500 400 300 200 100 0 Gasoline ICE Diesel ICE Gasoline Fuel Cell HEV Diesel ICE HEV Naphtha Fuel Cell HEV Renewable/ FT Diesel ICE Electricity CNG ICE FT Naphtha FC HEV Liquid H2 FC HEV Methanol Fuel Cell HEV Gaseous H2 FC HEV E-85 ICE Elecrolysis GH2 FC HEV Shell Global Solutions Ethanol Fuel Cell HEV Technology Drivers • First step is to extend availability of improved fuels which enable more efficient and lower emission engine technology • Diesel direct injection • Gasoline direct injection • Diesel particulate traps • 3 way catalysts (NOx, CO, HC) • NOx traps • EGR (exhaust gas recirculation) • SCR NOx reduction (selective • De-NOx storage & reduction catalytic reduction) catalysts • DPNR (diesel particulate & NOx • Hybrid engines reduction) • EGR • Hybrid engines Fuels for the future Fuels for the future • Low S diesel • Low S gasoline • Provision of Urea/Ammonia? • HCCI (homogeneous charge compression ignition) …new fuel types? Shell Global Solutions 5 One view of the Future • The next 20 years will see a wider range of technologies and fuel types, especially in the developed world……one possible scenario is: % of New cars 100 LPG/CNG 90 80 Diesel (inc Bio-diesel/GTL) Compression 70 ignition engines 60 50 Hybrid HCCI 40 Gasoline (inc Ethanol) Spark 30 ignition 20 Naphtha/Methanol 10 Hydrogen 0 Fuel cell 2000 2010 2020 Shell Global Solutions 6 Fuel Options – Bio-fuels, CNG, LPG & GTL Bio-fuels • Ethanol, ETBE (gasoline), Esters (Diesel) • Can substitute oil imports & use agricultural surpluses, but practical limits on availability • Use existing infrastructure • Significant GHG reduction potential on WTW basis, but depends on production • Cost 2-4 x conventional fuels, although still cheaper than some alternatives CNG LPG • Lower Sulphur, low PM, NOx & • Lower sulphur, PM, NOx and SOx SOx • Overall emissions similar to CNG • Can substitute oil imports • Infrastructure costs lower than • Expensive infrastructure CNG • Bulky on-board storage • Less bulky storage • Shell companies assess locally • Supplied by Shell in many whether to supply (eg. Argentina) markets for both fleet and private motorist, Shell Global Solutions 7 Fuel Options – Bio-fuels, CNG, LPG & GTL • Alternatives such as CNG, LPG and GTL have a role in the future fuel mix, but unlike bio-fuels do not provide significant GHG benefits • CNG, LPG and GTL have potential as niche fuels, especially where urban air quality is problematic • GTL combined with appropriate engine technology would offer CNG type emissions benefits at lower overall cost 5 Shell GTL (100%) Emissions benefits vs CNG CNG "Typical" Heavy-Duty Euro-III (2000) Vehicle- 4.5 SMDS SMDS with "Cat" # Buses 4 Standard Diesel 3.5 3 75-95% # SMDS with PM Traps 2.5 (CRT) & De-NOx Selective BAT 90-95% 2 Catalytic Reduction (SCR) Emissions (g/km) 90-95% 1.5 90% 1 BAT 0.5 BAT 0 PM*10 NOx/10 NMHC*10 CO Shell Global Solutions 8 Shell Gas to Liquids –Process and Products CO + 2H –(CH) – 600 MMscf/d 2 2 n 75,000 bbl/day SyngasSyngas Synthesis Hydrocracking Natural Manufacture naphtha, LPG, Gas gasoil, Power speciality O Generation + products O22 Water Water Commercially proven technology, at Bintulu, Malaysia since 1993 ….. Gasoil product • Odourless, low-toxicity, biodegradable, water-white • Paraffinic • Cetane 75-80 • Sulphur 0 ppm • Density 780 Kg/m3 • Pour Point -18C* *future Shell GTL plants Shell Global Solutions 9 Advantages of GTL Automotive Gasoil • Strategic diversification of energy supply - Gas-derived fuel • Significant emissions benefits as a blend or 100% • Compatible with existing diesel infrastructure • Life cycle analysis (PWC), GTL vs. Refinery system (DEER2002 paper) • GTL, less impact on on air acidification and smog formation • No greater impact on global warming. • “Future-Proof”. Compatible with most conceivable directions of the fuels market • More cost effective in reducing emissions than any competing fuel Shell Global Solutions 10 Bridging the gap to Renewable Transportation Fuels GTL offers a ‘seamless transition’ Future to future transport fuels/systems H2 Fuel Cells Biomass to Liquids (BTL) GTL Transport Fuel HC fuel Fuel Cells n io Diesel / Electric Hybrids sit an Tr Dedicated Vehicles with Improved efficiency Now GTL can be Improved conventional fuels used in all of these systems Shell Global Solutions 11 Copy right is vested with Shell International Gas. May not be reproduced or transmitted without prior written consent of Shell International Gas. Emissions Performance -Current “on the road” technologies We have a good idea of emissions benefits in current engine technology Summarised %benefits for 100% Shell GTL Benefit Light-Duty Heavy-Duty (%) Euro I Euro II Euro III Euro I Euro II Euro III PM 42 39 41 18 18 34↔10 NOx 10 5 5 16 15 5↔19 HC 45 63 62 13 23 <9 But…. CO 40 53 75 22 5 16 Shell Global Solutions 12 Emissions Performance -Future Challenges • Developed world is rapidly moving towards “sulfur free” diesel • E.g. <15ppm or <10ppm S • Is there a benefit of GTL over other sulfur free systems ? • Modern engine technologies with or without advanced aftertreatment are liable to make all fuels look similar • Does GTL still have an edge on emissions performance ? • Research effort and collaborations to address these issues • Collaborations with VW and Bosch on light- and heavy duty engines • Shell commission work with AVL (Austria) in Euro-4 (2000) and Euro-5 (2005) prototype heavy duty engines Shell Global Solutions 13 Emissions Performance – Collaborations with Bosch & VW 1Cyl. HD Diesel Engine, Vd approx 2l , BOSCH-SHELL Comparison of Fuels • n = 1710 rpm, load = 100%, EGR- Rate 18%, Bosch HD research engine Soot Emission inj. pressure 1800 bar configured to Euro-4 or 0,05 0,1 NOx = 3,5 g/kWh NOx = 2,0 g/kWh Euro-5 NOx limits 0,04 0,08 (Euro 4 Limit) (Euro 5 Limit) 0,03 0,06 • ESC - PM Limit Euro 4/5 100% GTL showed PM [g/kWh] 0,02 [g/kWh] 0,04 ESC - PM Limit Euro 4/5 benefits against other sulfur 0,01 0,02 0 0 free fuels Current EU Sulphur Free Sulphur Free SMDS Current EU Sulphur Free Sulphur Free SMDS 1 2 1 2 spec. Fuel Consumption VW-SHELL 210 210 205 205 [g/kWh] • Studies with prototype Euro- [g/kWh] 4 engines and cars with 200 200 Current EU Sulphur Free 1 Sulphur Free 2 SMDS Current EU Sulphur Free 1 Sulphur Free 2 SMDS 100% GTL & EU standard . diesel DS/EMF C 2967shell 23.12.2002 • PM benefits of ~50% © Alle Rechte bei Robert Bosch GmbH, auch für den Fall von Schutzrechtsanmeldungen. Jede Verfügungsbefugnis, wie Kopier- und Weitergaberecht, bei uns. • i.e. better than in earlier technologies Shell Global Solutions 14 Emissions Performance -Shell study at AVL NOx emissions comparison from prototype Euro-5 • Engines Heavy PrototypeDuty Eurodiesel 5 Heavy engine Duty Diesel Engine with with Urea Urea SCR SCR De NOx CatalystDe-NOx 2.5 catalyst • Prototype Euro-4 (2005) engine Euro 5 limit with PM trap 2 • Prototype Euro-5 (2005) engine 1.5 with SCR deNOx • Fuels NOx (g/kW.h) 1 • Blends of GTL in ULSD (50ppm S) 0.5 • 2 sulfur free fuels (<10ppm S) 0 Extrapolated NOx benefits of 100% GTL from blends Sulphur Free "A" Sulphur Free "B" ULSD ULSD + 30% Shell GTL ULSD + 70% Shell GTL yp p yp 3.5 studies in ULSD • Significant NOx benefits of GTL 3 still seen in both advanced Euro 4 ~16% benefit engine systems (Euro-4 and 2.5 Euro-5) 2 1.5 NOx (g/kW.h) Euro 5 ~26% benefit • NOx benefits of GTL blends (30 1 & 70%) when compared to 0.5 either ULSD of sulfur free fuels 0 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100 Fraction of Shell GTL Shell Global Solutions 15 Cost-effectiveness Study USA Recent independent WTW study performed by TIAX: For 2002: • GTL fuels offer significant reductions in criteria pollutants • Other gas-based fuels can achieve greater reductions (per vehicle), but the cost impact of using GTL fuels is significantly less • GTL fuels are (several times) more cost-effective for reductions in criteria pollutants For 2010: • GTL fuels will continue to be the most cost-effective option for reductions in criteria pollutants from existing engines • Emissions will be strictly controlled and all new engines will have similar emission levels, eliminating the environmental drivers for CNG / LPG • But, after-treatment technologies are in the early stages of development and new emission limits may not be achievable (without