web.mit.edu/environment
MIT’s Experience with Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)
Vehicles in Fleet Operations
Steven M. LanouProgram Manager for Sustainability Initiatives
MIT Environmental Programs Office617-452-2907 [email protected]
web.mit.edu/environment
Two CNG Vehicles in Use
2000 GMC Box Truck 2002 Chevrolet Express Cargo Van
web.mit.edu/environment
Why Do We Have Them?
• To Act on the Institute’s Commitment to Reduce the Environmental Impact of its Operations
• Road Test the Technology• Demonstrate Leadership in and Feasibility of
Campus Applications of Alternative-Fuel Vehicles
web.mit.edu/environment
How Did We Choose CNG?
• Best Available Technology• No Gasoline-Electric Hybrids• No Biodiesel• No Appropriate Electric Options• Required a Duel-Fuel Technology to Reduce Risk
web.mit.edu/environment
How Has CNG Worked for Us?• Excellent performance – No Compromises• No Additional Maintenance or Maintenance Costs• Less Expensive Fuel - $80-$100 vs. $160/week• Fast Filling Rate – Same as Gas• Only Weekly Fill Required (Recycling Truck)• No Dead-Heading for Recycling Truck Fuel Trips• Builds Awareness of and Recognition for
Environmentally Responsible Action
web.mit.edu/environment
What Are the Drawbacks?• Increased Cost for CNG Retrofits • No Local Fueling Locations – Everett, MA• High Cost and Political Barriers to Local Filling
Station Siting• Limited Scalability with No Local Filling• May Not be Competitive with Newer Technologies:
• Environmental Performance (GHG/methane)• Ease of Use / Convenience (vs. hybrid, etc.)
web.mit.edu/environment
What Does the Future Hold?• Should Periodically Assess Options• CNG May Not be the Choice in the Future• Other Technologies Now Viable
• Clean Diesel / ULSD• Biodiesel• Gas-Electric Hybrid, Other?
• Have to Consider Local Situation & Opportunities, e.g. Cambridge DPW
• Need for Campus-Wide Alt. Vehicle Guidance
web.mit.edu/environment
University Innovations May Lead to New Solutions for Greening Our Transportation Infrastructure …
