New Fuels and Vehicles:Integration Issues for Air

Quality Modelers

K. Shaine Tyson

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

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

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

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

New EPACT Options

• B20 AFV Credit– Allows regulated fleets to use 450 gallons of

pure biodiesel each year– In vehicles > 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

EPACT Compliance Options

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

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

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?

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hybrids and Flex Fuel Vehicles

• Mostly don’t 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

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

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

Life Cycle Caveats• Technologies often too simplified

– conversion

– end use

• Some life cycles are futuristic - “unreal”• Feedstocks don’t 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

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

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

Life Cycle Questions

• Given the growing sophistication of local emission databases, aren’t 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?