New Fuels and Vehicles: Integration Issues for Air Quality Modelers

1
New Fuels and VehiclesIntegration Issues for
Air Quality Modelers

• K. Shaine Tyson

National Renewable Energy Laboratory


2
Possible DOE Policy Shifts

• DOE Policy Ofc. and Office of Fuels Development
• Models do not show market penetration of E85
• May de-emphasize neat biofuels until petroleum
  prices rise
• Considering more emphasis on Ethanol and
  Biodiesel blends - E17, B20, B2, clean fuels
• Heavy Vehicle Technology Programs
• Focused on Clean Diesel Fuels
• for existing fleets and for future engine
  technology
• Larger emphasis on blends of FT, DMM, DEE, DME,
  and others with diesel

3
Discussion Focus

• AFVs vs. Alternative Fuel Blends (AFBs)
• AFB can expand use of alternative fuels
• Offer air quality benefits
• Enhance air quality strategies
• more options for regulators
• potential for lower cost options
• Site specific options vs. national fuel standards
• More customer choices

4
Diesel Fuel Changes

• Clean Diesel Fuel
• Low Sulfur Low Aromatics High Cetane
• Particulate Toxicity
• Improve catalyst performance
• Assist OEMs with future emission standards
• AFBs may lead to Clean Diesel Fuels
• B20 EPAct Option
• AFV Credit for using blends
• Opens door to blends with other Alt fuels

5
New EPACT Options

• B20 AFV Credit
• Allows regulated fleets to use 450 gallons of
  pure biodiesel each year
• In vehicles gt 8,500 lbs gross weight
• In blends of at least 20 biodiesel
• Up to 50 of the fleet AFV requirements
• No trading or selling or carry overs
• Save Fed. Gov 10 million per year

6
EPACT Compliance Options
7
B20 EPACT Opens the Door

• Diesel mixed with
• Biodiesel
• various blend levels up to pure biodiesel
• Fischer-Tropsch Diesel
• No one standardized type of FT diesel yet
• various blend levels possible
• Ethanol
• Only one blend level tested so far
• DMM, DME, DEE
• various blend levels undetermined yet

8
Market Barrier to AFBs Not Petroleum Industry

• Local air quality regulators are unwilling to
  approve local use of new fuels or fuel blends in
  fleets without reviewing impact on SIPs.
• Most AFV strategies at the state level are driven
  by
• Air quality concerns
• Budget
• Meeting multiple federal program objectives
• AFBs not integrated into state or many Federal
  programs
• missing opportunities

9
Data Needs

• Air Quality regulators and modelers
• Need sufficient databases to include in Mobile
  and Part or modify for older Mobile versions
• Alternative fuel
• AFBs
• Need to know how good the data is
• What are the data development protocols for
  submission to EPA databases?
• How much data is enough? How little?
• Standards?

10
EPA Data Development - Diesel

• Typically based on engine certification data
• modified by aging factors
• terrain and other geographic parameters
• driving cycles
• Chassis dynamometer data limited
• No load on engine
• No good correlation to engine stand emissions
• Needs better protocol for diesel vehicles

11
Emission Data for Diesel Blends

• Need a protocol for building emission databases
  for EPA models for new fuels on in-use vehicles
• How do we really know, legally or statistically,
  if a new fuel blend will do no harm or reduce
  emission by X on average on a wide variety of
  in-use engines
• Engines are not required to be certified on new
  fuels

12
Current Practices

• EPA FTP emission tests on engine stands
• After market engines
• Some fuels extensively tested like biodiesel
• Some fuels have more limited test data
• Data shows significant engine-to-engine
  variability for new fuels
• Repeatability an issue in older or poorly
  maintained engines

13
Generating EPA Emission Data for Diesel Blends

• CARB certification engine - DDC Series 60 at SRI
• Not widely representative of general vehicle
  population
• Minimizes costs of multiple engine tests
• e.g., recertification testing on all engines on
  market
• Provides a statistical protocol for do no harm
  and for estimating benefits
• EPA 211 (b) Health Effects Testing
• trigger point for serious consideration

14
Other AFB Opportunities

• AFBs for off road vehicles
• AFBs for aircraft engines
• ethanol and B20/Jet A
• AFBs should be included in existing programs for
  airports and clean fleets
• AFBs could be used in AFV hybrids
• flexible option to use alt fuels

15
SIP Credits

• Can be important incentives depending on value
• Should be general
• e.g., inclusive of AFV and alternative fuels used
  in blends
• displace more petroleum
• expand options/flexibility for achieving air
  quality goals
• gives consumers more choices

16
Hybrids and Flex Fuel Vehicles

• Mostly dont use alternative fuels
• Models should reflect that
• Should be required to purchase XX amount of
  alternative fuel annually
• or lose credit status
• DOE has no mandate to implement this option
• CAFÉ credits strategies
• A light duty diesel can be a B100 engine with low
  investment by OEM

17
Life Cycle Data

• Biodiesel Life Cycle
• Soy only
• Ethanol Life Cycle
• corn and biomass
• Fischer - Tropsch Fuels
• natural gas and biomass
• DMM, DEE, DME others?
• Some info available

18
Differences in LCA

• Data sources remarkably similar
• Key differences caused by allocation assumptions
• Mass Energy
• Carbon Market Value etc.
• Life Cycle methodology not standardized
• subject to personal interpretation and choice

19
Life Cycle Caveats

• Technologies often too simplified
• conversion
• end use
• Some life cycles are futuristic - unreal
• Feedstocks dont match practice
• A lot of data out of date
• Referenced in 1993 traced back to a 1977 report
• Some data are impossible to find
• Confusion in handling TPM/PM10 THC and other HC

20
LCAs as Regulatory Tools

• NOT as they currently stand
• too generalized
• too generic
• will not withstand legal scrutiny or challenges
• They will not provide accurate, site specific
  data
• With a standardized database and a standardized
  methodology, LCA can be ADAPTED to regulatory use

21
Life Cycle Recommendations

• EPA could update/standardize data sources for LC
  data
• AP42 etc.
• Make data available to users through web
• EPA could standardize methodology and assumptions
  for their own needs
• Users should always use local emission data where
  available

22
Life Cycle Questions

• Given the growing sophistication of local
  emission databases, arent all pertinent sources
  of emissions relevant to a regional air shed
  already represented?
• What is the value of representing emissions that
  occur outside of air shed?
• How does it complicate or benefit an air shed
  analysis or interpretation?