Report to/Rapport au:
Transportation and Transit Committee/
Comité des transports et des
services de transport en commun
and Council/et au Conseil
20 March 2002/le 20 mars 2002
Submitted by/Soumis par: Kent Kirkpatrick, General Manager/Directeur
général
Corporate Services Department / Services généraux
Contact/Personne-ressource: Ken Wetzel, Manager, Fleet Technical
Services
Gestionnaire, Services techniques, parc
automobile
842-3636, ext. 2602, ken.wetzel@city.ottawa.on.ca
|
|
|
Ref N°:
ACS2002-CRS-FLT-0001
|
SUBJECT: FLEET EMISSIONS REDUCTION STRATEGY
OBJET: STRATÉGIE DE RÉDUCTION DES ÉMISSIONS DU PARC AUTOMOBILE
REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
That
the Transportation and Transit Committee recommend Council:
1.
Receive the
attached Logtech report on fleet emissions for information.
2.
Approve a Fleet
Emission Reduction Strategy as follows:
a.
Long-Term (20
years) –
i.
Conversion of the
urban transit bus fleet to near-zero emission fuel-cell technology.
b. Mid-Term (5-10 years) –
c. Short-Term (1-2 years) –
i.
Continued
participation in ethanol-blended diesel (E-diesel) trials,
ii.
Monitoring of
bio-diesel trials as an option to E-diesel,
iii. Retrofitting older technology buses with
catalytic converters subject to availability of external funding. “Green” funds and special programs to be
investigated and applications made as appropriate,
iv. Conversion of all City fuel sites to
ethanol-blended gasoline (E-10) at an approximate cost of $80,000, and
v.
Conduct preparatory
work to implement the mid-term strategy.
RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT
Que le Comité des transports et des services de transport en commun
recommande au Conseil municipal :
1.
prenne connaissance du rapport
Logtech sur les émissions des véhicules du parc automobile ci-joint;
2.
approuve une stratégie de réduction
des émissions des véhicules du parc automobile comme suit :
a. à long terme (20 ans) -
i. Conversion du parc d’autobus
du transport en commun urbain à la
technologie des piles à
combustible à émissions presque nulles.
b. à moyen terme (5 à 10 ans) -
i. Conversion du parc d’autobus du transport en
commun urbain à une
technologie hybride diesel-électrique,
ii. Mise en œuvre du travail
préparatoire en vue de réaliser la stratégie à
long terme.
c. à court terme (1 à 2 ans) -
i.
Participation continue aux essais de
mélange éthanol-diesel,
ii.
Contrôle des essais au biodiesel en
tant qu’option au mélange éthanol-diesel,
iii.
Réhabilitation des autobus utilisant
une ancienne technologie à l’aide de convertisseurs catalytiques sous réserve
de la disponibilité des fonds. Il faut se pencher sur la question des fonds
« verts » et des programmes spéciaux et soumettre des demandes au
besoin,
iv.
Conversion à des mélanges
essence-éthanol (E-10) partout dans la Ville pour un coût approximatif de
80 000 $, et
v.
Mise en oeuvre du travail
préparatoire en vue de réaliser la stratégie à moyen terme.
BACKGROUND
Background on Climate Change
Over
the past several years, countries worldwide have become concerned with global
climate change. Reasons for this
concern include observed warmer average temperatures and an increase in the
occurrence of extreme weather events.
In Canada, Environment Canada has documented the last two decades and
the last two years as the warmest on record with an increased frequency of
extreme weather events such as the ice storm, droughts and flood events.
Climate
change is defined as the warming of the earth’s atmosphere, caused by trapping
of greenhouse gases emitted by human activity.
Greenhouse gases primarily water vapour, carbon dioxide, methane, and
nitrous oxide trap the heat of the sun, preventing its dissipation into
space. This is a naturally occurring phenomenon, referred to as the
"greenhouse effect", which keeps the average temperature of the earth
at 15°C. Without this effect, the average temperature on the earth would be
-18° C. Since the Industrial Revolution, greenhouse gases have been
accumulating in the atmosphere. These
gases have a long life, remaining in the atmosphere for decades to centuries.
Over the past 200 years, concentrations of
carbon dioxide have increased by 30 percent, methane by 145 percent, and
nitrous oxide by 15 percent.
Greenhouse gas increases are
caused by human activities related to our increasingly sophisticated and
mechanized lifestyle, in particular the burning of fossil fuels such as coal,
oil, and natural gas to generate electricity, heat and cool our homes and power
our factories and cars. As well, we
have cleared more land for human use in the past 100 years than in all of prior
human history. This has resulted in the loss of forests and wetlands, which
absorb and store carbon dioxide, a dominant greenhouse gas. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the greenhouse gas
released in the highest quantities by human activities, primarily through the
burning of fossil fuels. It is the main
contributor to climate change, accounting for approximately 70% of the enhanced
greenhouse effect, to date. Although
released in lower quantities, methane and nitrous oxide have greater unit contributions
to the greenhouse effect, 21 and 110 times greater than that of an equal amount
of carbon dioxide, respectively.
Proportionately, methane emissions account for 24% of the greenhouse
effect while nitrous oxide emissions are responsible for about 6%.
Additional Air
Quality Considerations
In
addition to greenhouse gas emissions, air quality can also be impacted by other
components of vehicle exhaust such as unburned hydrocarbons, volatile organic
compounds, sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter and other
potentially toxic substances. Within
urban areas, exhaust from vehicles can become concentrated at ground level,
with the potential to cause human health effects.
Global
Commitments to Climate Change
In December 1997, in Kyoto,
Japan, 160 industrialised countries from around the world, including Canada,
committed to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. This international agreement on climate change was called the
Kyoto Protocol. Once ratified,
this agreement would commit Canada to reduce its greenhouse emissions to six
percent below 1990 levels by the period 2008 to 2012.
Municipal Commitments to Climate Change
In the
meantime, many Canadian communities are taking action on climate change.
Municipalities are key partners in efforts to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, given their unique position as the closest
level of government to individuals. It
has been estimated that municipal actions have the ability to influence up to
fifty percent of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions. To date, more than 70 municipalities across Canada are members of
the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) and the International Council
for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) Partners for Climate Protection
Program (PCP). PCP members commit to
reducing emissions from their own operations to twenty percent below baseline
levels within 10 years of joining the program.
They also commit to reducing emissions on a community wide basis by at
least six percent below baseline levels in the same period. Both the former Region of Ottawa Carleton
and the former City of Ottawa were members of the PCP program.
City of Ottawa Commitment
In 1991, the former City of
Ottawa established a greenhouse gas emissions reduction target of 20 percent
below the 1990 level, by the year 2005.
The former City had implemented both a community and corporate action
plan in 1994 to achieve this 20% reduction and reported on its actions since
1995. At the time of amalgamation,
January of 2001, the City achieved almost all of their corporate target (19%
reduction).
Similarly, in 1997, the former
Region of Ottawa Carleton (RMOC) joined the PCP program and committed to reduce
corporate and community greenhouse gas emissions by 20% below the baseline year
of 1990, by the year 2007. Regional
Council took this action in recognition of the potentially serious
environmental, economic and health impacts of climate change. In June 2000, RMOC Council endorsed the
“Region of Ottawa-Carleton Corporate Climate Change Action Plan: Technical
Report”. This report presented the
RMOC’s corporate greenhouse gas emissions inventory and recommended measures
for corporate emissions reductions. At
the time of amalgamation, the Region had achieved approximately three-quarters
of their commitment, or a 16% reduction, relative to 1990 levels.
Also in June 2000, Regional
Council committed to conducting an emissions inventory and reduction measures
strategy on a community-wide basis. A
draft of this work was prepared in 2001 with a subsequent draft in February
2002 to incorporate adjusted population projections for the City, as adopted by
Council on October 10, 2001. At
present, the corporate emissions inventory, previous monitoring efforts and
commitments to action are being consolidated for the amalgamated City of
Ottawa. This information will form the
basis for obtaining Council confirmation of our reduction targets and plan for
the City of Ottawa.
Corporate emissions for the City
are expected to be reasonably close to the combined data compiled within the
former Region and City of Ottawa. For the purpose of this report, data
collected within the former Region are presented to illustrate past, existing
and potential future emissions and initiatives of Fleet Services.
In the base year of 1990, the
Region’s Fleet Services contributed 15% to the corporate inventory of
greenhouse gas emissions. By 1997, this
proportion had risen slightly, to 19%, largely due to increases in fleet size. Within the Action Plan endorsed by Council
in 2000, existing fleet management initiatives identified as contributing to
emission reductions included: use of
Q-Tool software to help assess vehicle compatibility with alternative fuels,
conversion of municipal vehicles to alternative fuels, matching of payload and
operating cycle when purchasing to ensure optimally sized vehicles, and
evaluation of fuel and life cycle costs when purchasing new vehicles. Potential future initiatives to further
reduce emissions such as the following were identified in this Plan:
·
Increase levels of efficiency in new fleet vehicles and
increase the number of alternatively fuelled new vehicle purchases;
·
Increase efficiency of existing fleet/optimize vehicle
use;
·
Reduce personal vehicle use for corporate business;
·
Maintain fleet vehicles in good condition.
The initiatives proposed in the
current emissions strategy are in line with the initiatives identified above.
DISCUSSION
In the spring of 2001, the City
was approached by the Canadian Renewable Fuels Association (CRFA) to participate
in a trial of ethanol-blended diesel as a bus fuel. Similar approaches were made by Sunoco and the Canadian Farm
Business Management Council regarding “environmentally friendly” fuels.
The Fleet Services Branch
commissioned a study to review current technologies and to make recommendations
regarding a cost effective emission reduction strategy for the City fleet. The study is attached to this report.
Approximately 95% of the
automotive fuel consumed by the City is diesel. Over 80% of City fuel is used in transit buses, hence the study
has focused on transit applications.
The study recommendations are
shown below in italics. Each
recommendation is followed by a staff assessment, which has led to the report
recommendations.
Recommendation 10.9 Long-Term
(20 years)
This strategy is supported. Fuel-cell technology is the only viable
long-term zero-emission option. This
technology should be monitored by the City and appropriate preparatory work
undertaken. Preparatory work would include such items as research and trials
and ultimately infrastructure changes to accommodate fuel-cell technology. Such work would be included in future budget
submissions as applicable.
Recommendation 10.10 Mid-Term
(5 to 10 years)
The study reviews various
mid-term options to hybrid buses. The
recommended strategy to start purchasing diesel-electric hybrids within 5-10
years is supported. This technology is
rapidly being commercialized as demonstrated by the City of New York’s
operation of over 200 hybrid buses. The
leading competitor to hybrid diesel-electric buses is compressed natural gas
(CNG). The required investment in
infrastructure ($22M-$100M per site) makes the CNG an unviable mid-term
solution.
Some work will be required to
implement the mid-term strategy largely in the area of electric propulsion
systems infrastructure and training.
These requirements would be included in future budget submissions.
Short-Term (24 months)
Recommendation 10.11.1E-Diesel
The City has previously committed
$25,000 to this trial, which is currently in Phase 1. Phase 1 focuses on laboratory testing of the fuel blends. The CRFA is leading the project. City support in Phase 2 and 3 involves using
the fuel in City buses first on a small scale (20 buses) and then on a larger
scale (over 100 buses).
Continued support of this project
is recommended and, if successful, could provide an attractive option for
reduced emissions with potentially minimal infrastructure costs. There is no 2002 budgetary support for this
project nor are there any planned expenditures other than staff
participation. CRFA is responsible for
capital and trial costs.
Recommendation 10.11.2
Bio-Diesel
The City of Montreal is testing
bio-diesel as an urban transit fuel.
Monitoring of this project, as an option to E-diesel, is
recommended.
Recommendation 10.11.3
Particulate Traps and Catalytic Converters
Further investigation with
catalytic converter and particulate trap vendors has confirmed retrofit costs
are significant.
Particulate traps, while more
effective than catalytic converters, are not suitable for older technology
engines; therefore the 500 oldest and “dirtiest” vehicles cannot be retrofitted
with particulate traps. Of the 398
buses that could be retrofitted with particulate traps, 317 already have
catalytic converters. A retrofit
program for these would likely only produce marginal emissions quality gains on
vehicles that are currently the cleanest in the fleet. The cost of a particulate trap retrofit
program is estimated to be $3.2 M for which there is no budget authority. Retrofitting buses with current generation
particulate traps is not recommended.
Catalytic converters can be
installed on any bus generating significant reductions in vehicle
emissions. About 1/3 of the bus fleet
is currently equipped with catalytic converters and all new buses are delivered
with catalytic converters. Due to
planned retirements only about 400 of the older buses are considered viable
candidates for catalytic converter retrofits.
The cost of this retrofit is estimated at $1.2M.
The advantage of a catalytic
converter retrofit is that older buses emit more pollutants than newer buses
and therefore a greater effect is realized for each installation. The cost of a converter retrofit has not been
identified in City budget submissions; therefore, it is recommended that City
staff investigate alternate sources of “green” funds. Should non-City funding be available this project would be
submitted for consideration.
Recommendation 10.11.4 E-10
Gasoline
The City currently uses
ethanol-blended gasoline at one site.
The study recommends the use of E-10 gasoline be extended to all other
City refueling sites at an annual recurring cost of $80,000 based on a
$0.0251/L premium for E-10 gasoline.
There would be minor one-time site improvement costs for tank cleaning
and filter installations that could be incorporated in the first year budget
increment, assuming mid-year implementation.
The advantage of this approach is that, for a nominal amount of funding,
the City can show leadership in improving the environment while reducing
overall fleet emission.
ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPLICATIONS
Implementation of the recommended
initiatives within this strategy will contribute to reduced air and greenhouse
gas emissions for the City of Ottawa.
In particular, these measures will contribute to our commitments as a
member of the Partners for Climate Change program to reduce corporate
greenhouse gas emissions by 20%.
This report outlines a long-term
strategy for reducing emissions from the City’s fleet. For immediate action, two initiatives are
proposed, relevant to the City’s bus and gasoline fleet:
·
Further analysis of the feasibility to retrofit
approximately 400 buses with catalytic converters with a potential to reduce
emissions of hydrocarbons (-20 to –50%), carbon monoxide (-40%) and particulate
matter (-50%); and
·
Use of E10 gasoline by the City’s gasoline vehicle
fleet, which will result in a slight reduction (~3.9%) in greenhouse gas
emissions and reduced emissions of hydrocarbons (-7%), carbon monoxide (-20 to
-30%) and nitrogen oxides (-7%).
The ultimate goal of the
strategy, within a 20-year horizon, is a zero emission bus fleet. In addition to the initiatives outlined
here, Fleet Services will continue to implement reduction initiatives for green
house gases, as identified within the Corporate Climate Change Action Plans of
the former Region and City of Ottawa, soon to be consolidated for the City of
Ottawa. Initiatives to further improve
fleet air quality emissions are likely to be identified as the City develops an
environmental management strategy over the next few years.
CONSULTATION
There has been no public consultation for this
report. Environment Canada and industry
were consulted in developing the consultant’s report.
FINANCIAL
IMPLICATIONS
Of the recommendations submitted,
only the implementation of E-10 gasoline has an immediate financial
impact. An additional $80,000 would be
required within the City Fleet fuel budget to implement this recommendation.
Staff recommends that should this recommendation be approved that the cost be
managed within the provision for fuel costs currently included in the 2002
draft operating estimates. Other
recommendations have implementation timelines that permit financial impacts to
be addressed in future budget submissions.
Fuel cell buses have an as yet undetermined
premium for a production vehicle. When
costs are known they will need to be incorporated into long-term budgets. Future budgets will require funding for
continued research and ultimate infrastructure changes leading up to
implementation.
Recommendation 10.10 Mid-Term
Hybrid buses currently cost about
$350,000 more per bus than a conventional diesel bus. Capital budget projections for replacement buses will need to
reflect appropriate premiums starting in the 2006 timeframe. Future budgets will require additional
funding for continued research and ultimate infrastructure changes leading up
to implementation.
Recommendation 10.11
Short-Term
10.11.1 E-Diesel Trial
Participation in the E-diesel
trials should have no direct impact on operating budgets; however, should the
trial be successful, a premium may be required for the new fuel. Current estimates are that the fuel premium
could be up to $0.02 per litre, which would require fuel budget increases of
$845,000 annually.
10.11.2 Bio-diesel Trial
There is no anticipated financial
impact of monitoring this project.
10.11.3 Bus Retrofits
The recommendation is to seek
alternative sources of funding if retrofitting of catalytic converters is to
proceed; therefore, there are no anticipated City funding requirements for this
project.
10.11.4 E-10 Gasoline
An annual recurring incremental
cost of $80,000 is required to implement this project. Site capital improvements are estimated to
be negligible and can be incorporated into the first year’s incremental
funding.
ATTACHMENTS (Issued separately)
Document I – An Implementation Strategy to Enable the City of Ottawa to Cost
Effectively
Reduce
Emissions from its Vehicle Fleet.
DISPOSITION
The City previously did not have a long-term
strategy for fleet emissions; however, it has a history of participation in
projects that have assisted in reducing fleet emissions including experience
with and operation of a wide variety of alternative fuel vehicles plus participation
in many studies and trials. The City
has previously committed to participate in the Canadian Renewable Fuels
Association E-diesel trial that is scheduled to continue into 2003. The City provides ethanol-blended gasoline
at one City refueling site. City staff
monitor developments that can improve the overall efficiency and emissions of
the fleet but without any strategic direction.
Most buses have had engine upgrades to 1993 emissions standards and new
technology has been incorporated in new acquisitions resulting in lower
emissions.
If the recommendations of this report are approved, Fleet Services will
arrange for the conversion of City fuel sites to E-10 as permitted within
existing fuel contracts. Staff will
investigate funding options for catalytic converter bus retrofits and commence
development of mid and long-term implementation plans based on the overall
strategy. Support to the E-diesel
project will continue and be expanded to monitor the Montreal bio-diesel trial.
Document 1
AN IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY TO ENABLE THE CITY OF OTTAWA TO COST
EFFECTIVELY REDUCE EMISSIONS FROM ITS VEHICLE FLEET
27 January 2002
Developed For The
City Of Ottawa By LOGTECH
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
These emissions are primarily a function of the
technology utilized in a specific engine and the properties of the fuel
used. Relative to their gasoline and
diesel counterparts, hybrid, CNG and propane fuelled vehicles reduce
emissions. Blends of biodiesel and
ethanol-diesel reduce emissions in proportion to the percentage of biodiesel
and ethanol in the base diesel fuel.
The aim of this paper is to develop the most
cost-effective fleet emissions reduction strategy for the City of Ottawa.
Fuel cell vehicles using hydrogen as their fuel are
the acknowledged “way ahead”. They will
be virtually zero emission vehicles, depending on the source of hydrogen. No infrastructure exists to deliver the
hydrogen to useful locations.
Hybrid diesel electric buses are in limited use in
the United States. Initial trials have
shown positive results and follow-on buys are being made. Hybrid diesel electric buses have the great
advantage of requiring no modifications to existing infrastructure and no new
infrastructure. When compared to conventional diesel, hybrid diesel electric
vehicles have the potential to lower GHG emissions by approximately 25%. This translates into a reduction of 23,000
tons relative to 2002 projected City of Ottawa fleet operations.
CNG as a fuel for urban buses and a good cross
section of other vehicles has been the subject of many evaluations. In the United States it is the alternative
transportation fuel of choice for buses and light vehicles. In Ontario, the natural gas distribution
system is widespread, but only as a source of heating fuel, not vehicle fuel. Refuelling infrastructure is costly and
requires a long-term commitment. GHG
reduction is similar to that of hybrid diesel electric vehicles.
Only ethanol-diesel and biodiesel blends can be used
without costly modifications or additions to existing infrastructure or modifications to
engines. Emission reductions are only
in proportion to the blend level and cannot be compared to those resulting from
a total fuel replacement. The commercial
availability of biodiesel is limited.
E-diesel is not yet commercially available.
The long-term implementation strategy for the City of
Ottawa should be the utilization of fuel cell vehicles. The mid-term
implementation strategy should be the utilization of hybrid diesel electric
buses.
1.0 BACKGROUND
Figure 1 –
Canadian Energy Use –1999
1.2 Concomitantly,
transportation was and is the single largest producer of manmade greenhouse
gases (GHG) in Canada. The largest
component (about two thirds of the manmade component) of GHG is carbon dioxide
(CO2) (Transport Canada 2000 Ch 5, p. 1). In 1998 the GHGs from transportation use were in the order of the
equivalent of 157 megatons of CO2.
Figure 2 – Contribution Of Various
Sources to Anthropogenic GHG Emissions – 1998
1.3 Vehicle engines produce nitrogen oxides (NOx), volatile
organic compounds, sulphur oxides, carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO2),
fine particulate matter (PM) and other toxic or potentially toxic
substances. These emissions reduce air
quality, particularly in urban areas, as pollution from vehicles is
concentrated at ground level and in densely populated areas. A
large percent of the population is forced to breath vehicle exhaust directly
before it has a chance to mix with cleaner air or degrade into less hazardous
by-products. Many have health problems
directly attributable to the effects of pollution on their cardio-vascular and
respiratory systems. In addition to the
human suffering, there is a monitory cost to every Canadian due to the added
burden on the health system from increased emergency room visits, to hospital
care to the costs of prolonged care.
These emissions are major contributors to greenhouse gases (GHGs). The GHGs accumulate in the troposphere (the
lowest layer of the atmosphere) where they trap the heat reflected from the
surface of the Earth. This process
elevates global temperatures, which in turn changes the Earth’s climate.
1.4 These
emissions are primarily a function of the technology utilized in a specific
engine and the properties of the fuel used.
Particulate emissions from diesel engines are formed due to the
incomplete combustion of the fuel. The
formation of NOx is a result of the air-fuel ratio and the temperature of
combustion. High
temperatures in diesel engines that result from igniting the fuel through
compression (as opposed to the Otto cycle) increase NOx formation. Lowering
engine temperature decreases NOx levels but tends to increase the amount of
fuel which is not combusted and is emitted in the form of PM and HCs. Basically, newer vehicles emit fewer
emissions than older ones. Similarly,
relative to their gasoline and diesel counterparts, CNG and propane fuelled
vehicles tend to reduce emissions and biodiesel and E-diesel fuelled vehicles
tend to reduce emissions.
1.5 OC Transpo operates 898 active diesel buses, ranging up to 28
years of age. A great proportion of
these will be in service for years to come.
There are approximately another 2000 vehicles in the city inventory that
run on diesel and gasoline (see Annex A for distribution). During the years since their production,
technology has changed, as has the emission standards for gasoline and on-road
diesel engines (see table 1). By the
year 2004, the new US Environmental Protection Act (EPA) Tier 2 Motor Vehicle
Emissions Standards and Gasoline Sulfur Control Requirements will be in effect.
Canada has agreed to harmonize US – Canada emission standards, hence
these standards will apply to the production of any
new vehicles for the Canadian market (Canadian Gazette, 2001, p 453). However, the older buses and other vehicles
remaining in service will continue to pollute at much higher rates. This situation is uncomfortable to “good
corporate citizens’. The EPA urban bus
diesel emission standards are summarized in the following table:
|
Year
|
HC
|
CO
|
NOx
|
PM
|
|
1991
|
1.3
|
15.5
|
5.0
|
0.25
|
|
1993
|
1.3
|
15.5
|
5.0
|
0.10
|
|
1994
|
1.3
|
15.5
|
5.0
|
0.07
|
|
1996
|
1.3
|
15.5
|
5.0
|
0.05
|
|
1998
|
1.3
|
15.5
|
4.0
|
0.05
|
|
2004
Option 1
Option 2
|
NMHC + NOX
|
15.5
|
NMHC
|
0.05
|
|
|
2.4
2.5
|
|
N/A
0.5
|
|
Table 1- Emission Standards for Urban Bus Diesel Engines, g/bhp-hr
1.6 GHG Emission Calculations. To calculate CO2 emissions from the combustion of
various fuels, the Natural Resources Canada Champagne Vehicle GHG Accounting
Model was used. The amount of CO2
released is found by multiplying the estimated annual fuel consumption
for each by an emissions factor based on fuel type. Specific fuel type emission factors are provided in the following
table:
|
Fuel
Type
|
Kg of CO2 per liter
|
|
Fuel
Type
|
Kg of CO2 per liter
|
|
Gasoline
|
2.34
|
|
M85
|
2.30
|
|
Diesel
|
2.69
|
|
M65/E65
|
2.31
|
|
CNG
|
2.01
|
|
E10
|
2.33
|
|
Propane
|
2.13
|
|
E7
|
2.33
|
|
M100/E100
|
2.29
|
|
E5
|
2.34
|
Table 2 – Kilograms Of CO2
Per Liter Of Fuel
The production
of greenhouse gases is strictly a function of the quantity of fuel burned. For example, if a gasoline vehicle burned
2,000 liters of gasoline annually, the amount of CO2 produced will
be 4,680 kilograms. This table shows
that one liter of diesel produces 18 percent more CO2 than one liter
of gasoline, but it must be remembered that a vehicle
will travel 30 percent further on a liter of diesel than a liter of
gasoline. Hence from the
fuel-efficiency point of view, a diesel engine will produce less CO2 than
a gasoline engine. According to the
Transportation and Climate Change: Options for Action paper (p. 12), the 1997
transportation GHG emissions per capita in Ontario was 4.32 tons. Based on the City of Ottawa’s population of
approximately 700,000, this results in the production of 3,042,000 tons of GHG
1.7 Next year
the City of Ottawa has budgeted for 42,250,000 liters of diesel and 2,750,000
liters of gasoline for fleet use. This
will result in the production of over 120,000 tons of CO2. The diesel fleet will produce the vast
majority of this, some 114,000 tons or 95%.
The bus fleet will produce 92,000 tons of CO2.
Figure 3 –
City Of Ottawa Projected CO2 Fleet Production For 2002
2.0 AIM
2.1 The
aim of this paper is to develop for the City of Ottawa the most cost-effective
emissions reduction strategy for its vehicle fleet. Additionally, recommendations are to be made regarding the
pursuit of technology and fuels for future vehicle procurement.
3.0 APPROACH
4.0 CURRENT
UNDERTAKINGS
General
4.1 The
City of Ottawa has a long history of involvement in projects and action aimed
at reducing emissions from the vehicle fleet.
The former municipalities made various in-roads to make the fleet more
fuel-efficient and to make use of less polluting fuels.
Fuels
4.2 Propane. The City has operated a number of vehicles
on propane or liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) since the 1980’s. The City has one
LPG refueling site at 951 Clyde Avenue that is integrated into the City
fuelling system. The number of vehicles
using propane has remained fairly constant in the past 15 years; currently
there are 58 in the fleet (see Annex A).
4.3 Natural Gas. CNG has been trialled in a variety of City
vehicles ranging from light duty trucks to transit buses. Today it is used
mainly in vehicles that operate in enclosed spaces such as ice resurfacers,
forklifts and building maintenance machines.
4.4 Electricity. The City’s fleet of electric vehicles
consists of warehouse operations-type vehicles such as forklifts, sweepers and
utility carts. There is a fairly long
history of City involvement in electric vehicles including the development of
an electric police motorcycle in the 1970’s that is on display at the Swansea
Municipal garage.
4.5 Ethanol blend gasoline. For the past several years the City has used
ethanol blended gasoline at one of its City refueling sites. The cost of the fuel is about $0.02/L
greater than regular unleaded and is available for use to all City gasoline
powered vehicles. The fuel is dispensed
at the Swansea location. In 2001,
100,000 litres were used.
4.6 Diesel. The bulk of the City fleet operates on diesel fuel. The City currently purchases a low-sulphur
diesel fuel with a maximum of 500 ppm sulphur content. Most engines being purchased today are
compliant with 2004 emissions standards.
Diesel Engine Retrofits
4.7 Particulate
Traps. The city bus fleet
has an extensive history of involvement in projects related to the treatment of
diesel exhaust gases to improve the quality of the emission. Particulate traps designed to prevent
unburned hydrocarbons from entering the atmosphere were first trialled in
1991. Early particulate traps were
prone to soot build up and deemed unacceptable. A new second-generation trap is being installed for further
trials.
4.8 Catalytic Converters. The first trials of catalytic converters
started in 1994. They have been
included on City diesel engines since 1997.
Currently 334 buses are equipped with catalytic converters.
Previous CNG Bus And Truck
Trials
4.9 The City has conducted trials on various
truck and bus configurations using CNG as a fuel. To date the City has not acquired any significant number of CNG
vehicles due mainly to the reduced range and payload of CNG vehicles and a limited
refueling infrastructure. There has
also been limited support for this type of vehicle by the local dealer network.
Drive Clean
4.10 Since 1999 all City heavy-duty diesel
vehicles have been required to undergo annual emissions testing as part of the
Ontario Drive Clean program. Starting
in July 2002, this program will be extended to all City licensed vehicles. This program ensures that vehicles meet
minimum emission standards throughout the life of the vehicle. The City
operates a number of Provincially Accredited test sites for this program.
5.0 FUELS
Fuel
Consumption Factors
5.1 To
accurately compare the consumption of different fuels a common frame of
reference must be used. The basis for this comparison is the selected energy
content (higher heating value) of the fuel, often described as gasoline liter
equivalents (GLE). The factors
used in this paper are summarized in the following:
|
1.36 liter of propane
|
=
|
1 liter of gasoline
|
|
1.39 liter of E85
|
=
|
1 liter of gasoline
|
|
1.76 liter of M85
|
=
|
1 liter of gasoline
|
|
0.8 liter of diesel
|
=
|
1 liter of gasoline
|
|
0.66 kg of CNG
|
=
|
1 liter of gasoline
|
Table 3 –Fuel Energy Content
5.2 Two other methods of comparing fuels are
the distance a vehicle can travel on a given volume of fuel, or the volume of
fuel required to give the same energy content as a
given quantity of gasoline. These
concepts are illustrated in the following tables;
Figure 4 – Vehicle
Range On different Fuels (Constant Volume)
Figure 5 – Relative Fuel Volume
(50 Litres Gasoline Equivalent)
Full Fuel Cycle
5.3 This
is a concept that embraces the “cradle to grave” approach in accounting for the
CO2 emissions generated in the production and consumption of
fuel. As an example, for gasoline and
diesel fuel it accounts for the energy used and the emissions that result from
the drilling, transportation, refining and finally consumption in a
vehicle. In the case of ethanol, it
accounts for the fertilizer used in the growing of the feedstock and the
“credits” resulting from usable byproducts.
Another example of this concept is the production of electrical energy
in Quebec versus that produced in Ontario.
Most electricity produced in Quebec originates in James Bay. Hydro generating plants are extremely clean
operations therefore there are almost zero emissions as a result of the
production of electricity. Many Ontario
electric generating plants are fired with natural gas or coal. These are definitely not zero emission
operations.
Propane
5.4 General. LPG is a mixture of petroleum and natural gases whose primary
constituent is propane. It is produced
as a by-product of natural gas processing and petroleum refining. It is normally a gas, but when used in
vehicles (and B-B-Qs) it is slightly pressurized and condenses to a
liquid. In a gaseous state it is
heavier than air and tends to collect in low-lying areas.
5.5 Current
Status. LPG has been used in vehicular applications for many years. It is contained in pressurized tanks or
cylinders (at about 300 psi) in liquid form.
They must be inspected every 10 years, more frequently if exposed to the
elements. Propane has experienced
operational problems during cold temperatures.
This is however directly related to the level of technology used in the
fuel system. Vehicles with modern,
closed-loop, feed back-systems work as well as conventional gasoline systems
when treated the same way as gasoline vehicles. Mechanics require special licensing and there are storage and
maintenance precautions required to ensure the heavier-than-air fumes do not
collect in building low points.
Although a popular ATF in automobiles and
light trucks, fuel price increases and the additional cost of the propane fuel
system have resulted in a steady decline in the number of propane vehicles in
Canada from a high of approximately 250,000 to 120,000. The propane infrastructure is widespread in
Canada; hence availability is not a real problem.
Hydrogen
5.14 General. Biodiesel can be made by chemically
combining any natural oil or fat with an alcohol such as methanol or
ethanol. It is therefore classified as
a renewable fuel. It can be used in its
pure form or as a blend with normal diesel fuel. Pure biodiesel is non-toxic, essentially free of sulfur and
aromatics and degrades about four times faster than normal diesel. Biodiesel is most often commercialized as a
blend of 20 percent biodiesel with 80 percent petroleum-based diesel. Biodiesel has similar physical and chemical
properties to diesel but has high levels of oxygen, a higher cetane number and
a viscosity approximately twice that of petro-diesel. A 20 percent blend of biodiesel with
petro-diesel raises the cold weather properties at least 3° F (cloud point,
cold filter plugging point). Solutions to biodiesel winter operability problems
are the same solutions that are used with conventional #2 petro-diesel (use a
pour point depressant, blend with #1diesel, use engine block or fuel filter
heaters on the engine, store the vehicles near or in a building, etc) (National
Biodiesel Board 2001, p1). B20 has
almost 98% of the energy content of petro-diesel.
Hybrid Vehicles
6.1 General. A Hybrid-Electric Vehicle (HEV) uses an internal combustion
engine or fuel cell in conjunction with an electric motor(s) and a battery
pack. In a “series” configuration, the
engine is used to drive a generator that in turn charges the storage device to
power the motor. In a “parallel”
configuration, the engine only operates when the batteries required charging or
when extra power is required for climbing hills or traveling at highway
speed. A regenerative braking system
recharges the batteries during the breaking operation. The engine operates at a relatively constant
speed; hence operating conditions can be optimized to minimize emissions and
fuel consumption. Hybrid engines are
typically smaller than their conventional counter part. The battery pack is
also smaller than a traditional all-electric vehicle. Total weights for a hybrid diesel electric vehicle is between
that of a conventional diesel vehicle and an all-electric vehicle. As a transitional vehicle, HEVs can easily
co-exist with today’s vehicles, using the current infrastructure. As in all alternative fuel vehicles, fuel
savings pay for the added costs of the new system. Urban transit buses are usually kept for a long time (see
paragraph 1.4); hence break-even or payback situations are possible.
6.2 Emissions. Hybrids have been also tested in Boston,
where the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority has logged about 35,000
miles on a pair of Orion VI buses. The engine is fitted with a particulate filter. This
configuration dramatically reduces emissions while improving fuel economy by
25% to 50% and improving performance.
According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, “emissions of soot and
the pollutants that cause smog are 40 percent below those of the diesel buses
they replace”. When compared to
conventional diesel, HEVs have the potential to lower GHG emissions by
approximately 25%. When compared to conventional diesel buses, NOx is reduced
by 31 to 46 % (Inform, p.6).
Fuel Cells
6.4 General. The hydrogen fuel-cell is one of the most promising technologies
with respect to reduction of GHG and other emissions. It produces DC electricity in an electrochemical process to power
a variable speed electric propulsion motor(s). The technology is applicable to
both light and heavy vehicles. When pure hydrogen is used in fuel cells, a
zero-emission vehicle can result. If
“clean” processes for production of hydrogen can be developed to the necessary
state, full fuel cycle emissions would be negligible.
6.5 Description. A fuel-cell electric vehicle uses fuel cells
instead of batteries to supply power to the electric vehicle motor. Like
batteries, fuel cells use a chemical reaction to produce electrical power, but
in fuel cells the reactants (i.e., fuel) are introduced from an external
source. As long as fuel is supplied, fuel cells can operate continuously. Instead of needing to be recharged (as with
a battery) a fuel cell need only be refueled. The “reactants” of most fuel
cells are hydrogen and atmospheric oxygen. These two elements combine with a
catalyst to produce electricity and water.
One of the key advantages of fuel-cell technology is its ability to
utilize a wide range of energy resources in a clean and efficient way. From a
performance perspective, a fuel-cell vehicle offers the following:
·
excellent range
·
the ability to refuel rapidly
·
simple, quiet operation (few moving parts)
·
high energy density (power to weight ratio)
·
near zero emission from the vehicle
·
low total fuel cycle emissions (depending on the fuel
source).
6.6 Current Status. Most fuel-cell vehicles currently in use are
experimental buses that carry tanks of compressed hydrogen gas as their fuel.
Several companies have successfully demonstrated on-board fuel reforming
systems that allow for the use of conventional liquid fuels. Most major
automobile manufacturers are researching and developing fuel-cell technology.
Daimler-Benz has produced a fuel-cell vehicle that reforms methanol on-board,
thereby eliminating the need for hydrogen tanks. Chrysler has also eliminated
the need for hydrogen gas tanks with its new on-board reformed gasoline-powered
fuel cell. Toyota is show casing a fuel cell that can power a 45 kW motor, and
has developed a new hydrogen adsorbing titanium alloy storage system that can
store 5 times more hydrogen than cylinder storage of the same volume. Xcellsis is a joint venture set up by Ford, Daimler
Chrysler and the fuel cell company Ballard Power Systems to produce fuel cell
engines. The organization is set to
deliver 30 Mercedes fuel cell buses for commercial use as early as the end of
next year. In May 2001, Singapore’s
Economic Development Board (EDB) announced that Daimler Chrysler had agreed to
co-operate on the launch and implementation of a fuel cell vehicle
demonstration and development project. The NECAR – no emissions car – is being
tested on Singapore’s roads, and is expected to be available for sale to the
public in 2004. In this latest
development, BP will develop and supply the required hydrogen-refueling
infrastructure for clean fuel cell cars equipped with hydrogen-fuelled fuel
cell power trains. There are
still a number of problems that stand in the way of commercial production of
fuel cell vehicles. The current cost of
a fuel cell engine is in the region of $1,070 per kW, compared to around $31
per kW for an internal combustion engine. There are many “missing links” in
development of a hydrogen infrastructure. Major barriers and uncertainties
include:
· hydrogen safety - codes and standards are
at an early stage
· cost and
performance of fuel cells is unclear - mass production is being studied by
General Motors, Ford and others
· transmission and distribution of hydrogen
is expensive, compared to natural gas
· plastic pipe and metal
fittings etc. in natural gas pipelines are not compatible with hydrogen
· economic incentives for
shifting to hydrogen are not present; there is no transmission and distribution
system, since hydrogen is not in widespread use.
6.7 Time Line To Market. A hydrogen distribution infrastructure to
support hydrogen fill-up does not exist at this time. Steam reforming and
hydrogen extraction from industrial process byproducts are mature technologies.
Reformers for use on vehicle-scale already exist, but further development will
continue in parallel with development of fuel cell vehicles. The preferred energy scenario is direct use
of hydrogen for vehicle fuel cells and other applications. The criteria for
“on-board” storage of hydrogen include cost, weight and size. Compressed
gaseous hydrogen or liquid hydrogen do not meet these criteria, but advanced
technologies for solid storage of hydrogen are under development which appear
capable of meeting these goals by the mid 21 st century or sooner. Given the large amount of resources devoted
to fuel-cell research and development, there is reason to believe that this
technology could provide a tremendous contribution to GHG mitigation by 2030 by
being applied to light vehicles, mass transit and heavy vehicles.
Propane
6.8 Description. Initially LPG engine were modified gasoline
and diesel engines. The level of
technology applied to the conversion was not great. Conversion was done solely for economics. This resulted in vehicles that were not much
cleaner than the original gasoline or diesel engine. Since approximately 1995, high-level technology kits have been
available and their use has resulted in vehicles that operate much cleaner than
gasoline or diesel engines. For the
past several years Original Equipment Manufacturers have produced vehicles that
are much cleaner than their gasoline counterparts. This was initially seen in passenger cars, vans and pick-up
trucks.
6.9 Current Status. Until about 1990,
LPG vehicles were the most common alternative fuel vehicles in North
America. Since that time the number of
vehicles in Canada alone has decreased by 50 percent. This is due to the fact
that the US considers it a “foreign source” fuel. The cost of LPG is tied directly to the cost of petroleum
products (see paragraph 4.4). Over the
past few years the greater demand for oil (heating and diesel) has reduced the
amount of LPG available and this has driven up its cost. LPG is now almost exclusively used in
Canada, but there are exceptions. Ford
produces some LPG light trucks. In1998
San Antonio, Texas, purchased 66 new 30-foot propane-powered buses and 5 new
propane-powered streetcars. The bus
fleet was powered by propane in the 1950s and 1960s and started using propane
again 4 years ago in its service and Para transit fleets. The new buses are
equipped with the Cummins B5.9 LPG low emissions vehicle (LEV) engines. The LPG
buses will compliment the 209 LPG powered vehicles already in the VIA
fleet. The transit authority has had a
very favorable experience with propane vehicles and has learned how to maintain
and refuel its propane fleet. They were pumping about 4,500 gallons of propane
a night before the new buses, which increased to more than 9,000 gallons a
night with the new propane buses (Alternative Fuel News Vol 4, p 2).
Natural Gas
6.10 Description. The use of CNG has been growing in
popularity since the early 1990s.
Initially CNG engine were also modified gasoline and diesel
engines. The level of technology
applied to the conversion was not great.
Conversion was done solely for economics. This resulted in vehicles that were not much cleaner than the
original gasoline or diesel engine.
Since approximately 1995 high-level technology kits have been available
and their use has resulted in vehicles that operate much cleaner than gasoline
or diesel engines. For the past several
years Original Equipment Manufacturers have produced vehicles that are much
cleaner than their gasoline counterparts, particularly where CNG is the only
fuel (vice bi-fuel operations). This
was initially seen in passenger cars, vans and pickup trucks.
6.11 Emissions. A summary of work completed by the Union Of Concerned Scientists
in a 1998 report detailed the following: “new conventional diesel bus
technology represents an improvement over older buses for both PM and NOx
emissions. Further, the hybrid diesel
bus achieved reductions in NOX. The
conventional CNG bus registered the least amount of pollution for both PM and NOx. PM emissions were 67 percent lower in the
CNG bus compared to the diesel hybrid.
NOx emissions dropped 25 percent in the CNG bus” (Inform, p. 67). Hydrocarbons are reduced by 30 to 60 percent
(Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium).
6.12 Current status. Ford, Daimler Chrysler and General Motors
produce a range of CNG powered automobiles, vans and pickup trucks. Four out of
five of the top US bus manufacturers build significant numbers of CNG buses
(Inform p. 5). Sixty-five transit
agencies in United States currently operate CNG buses. The Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit
authority has an inventory of 569 CNG buses and plans to add more than 2000
buses, mostly CNG, by 2004. Many heavy
truck manufacturers offer CNG optional engines (Alternative Fuel News,
May 2001 p 4).
7.0 INFRASTRUCTURE
AND VEHICLES
Infrastructure
7.1 Cost of ATF Infrastructure. In the context of this review,
infrastructure can be defined as: refueling facilities and repair/maintenance
facilities. The relevant costs
associated with infrastructure are: the cost to install a commercial refueling
facility and the cost to equip a facility and train the mechanics to service
ATF vehicles. In the case of LPG and
CNG, training costs for mechanics are typically $2500 each. Shop tools are in the order of $2500. Depending on the type of alternative fuel selected
and geographical location, some fuel companies will install a refueling
station(s) with no capital outlay by the customer. Based on projected fuel
usage, the fuel price is adjusted so that the capital costs are recovered over
a predetermined period of time. The
contract usually also requires a minimum fuel purchase per month or per year.
CNG
7.2 Over Night Refueling. CNG refueling facilities can range from a
Vehicle Refueling Apparatus (VRA) to a full-scale station. The VRA is classified as a slow fill
solution that can re-fuel two vehicles (cars, vans or pick-up trucks) over
night. Their use is limited to vehicles
that have a significant downtime.
Typical costs include $4000 for installation and $4000 for equipment purchase or a monthly
rental of $60.
7.3 Cascade Fill. This involves a compressor, storage tanks
and fuel dispensers. A low-cost cascade
system utilizes a small compressor to fill a series of tanks. This reduces the fill time for an individual
vehicle but the system is limited to the number of vehicles that can be filled
due to tank capacity. Typical station
costs are in the order of $200,000.
7.4 Fast Fill. This represents a full-blown filling
station. Large compressor(s) pressurize
the gas to approximately 3600 psi.
Refueling time is approximately the same as for gasoline or diesel. Typical costs are $7.5 million to $40
million per site for a 30 bus per hour capacity (Northeast Advanced). Garage
upgrades, mostly safety features are $15 to $65 million. Indoor refueling is possible at an
additional cost of $1 million to $2 million.
LPG
7.5 There is a range of filling stations
options available. The costs are
directly proportional to the number of dispensing units required. A multi-vehicle filling station costs in the
order of $1 million. Refueling time is
approximately the same as for a gasoline or diesel vehicle. Garage updates are typically $500,000. Indoor refueling is not possible.
E-Diesel
7.6 Low-Level Blend. A typical installation for a 10% ethanol, 90
% diesel blend only requires the addition of an ethanol tank or the conversion
of an existing tank to hold the ethanol.
A pump splash blends the fuel when it is being dispensed. Typical costs are in the order $10,000 for
tank cleaning to $125,000 for a new tank (above ground installation). Safety precautions must be revisited as the
addition of ethanol reduces the flashpoint.
7.7 General. The fuel cost price
differential, assuming it is in favour of the alternative fuel, is what pays
for the extra cost of the alternative fuel vehicle. The more kilometers a vehicle accumulates during its lifetime,
the more likely savings in fuel will pay for the extra cost of the vehicle.
7.8 Light Vehicles. CNG and LPG automobiles, vans and pick-up
trucks are available from OEMs and cost of between $3,500 and $10,000 more than
their gasoline counterpart.
High-technology conversion kits are available for both CNG and LPG at a
cost of between $3,500 and $6,000. One
factor not presently evaluated is the effect the on-board alternative fuel
equipment will have on the selling price of a remarketed vehicle. Some funding offsets are available to reduce
the extra costs of the alternative transportation fuel vehicle and depend on
method of vehicle procurement; the alternative fuel selected and deployed
geographic location. For example on
some pick-up truck models, fleet discount of $2000 are available; some utility
companies provide a $1,000 or $500
rebate depending on whether it is in OEM alternative fuel vehicle or an
aftermarket conversion. Provinces
provided a rebate on PST. In 1999, in
Toronto, a combination of all of these rebates reduced the additional cost of a
mono- fuel CNG Crown Victoria taxi from approximately $6,500 to a mere $88.
7.9 Buses and Heavy Trucks. CNG and LPG buses and trucks are available
at an additional cost of between $35,000 to $50,000. Hybrid diesel buses are presently $350,000 more than their diesel
counterparts. These vehicles usually
accumulate many more kilometers than light vehicles. Hence fuel cost savings play more of a part in the cost
effectiveness equation. Capital cost
offsets are limited and may only include fuel company and PST rebates.
8.0 EMERGING
DIESEL POLLUTION REDUCTION TECHNOLOGIES
8.1 General. Diesel emission control
technologies are designed to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides and
particulate matter from buses and heavy trucks. These technologies can be used to retrofit an existing bus or can
be incorporated into future buses. The
two most common retrofit technologies are diesel particulate traps and diesel
oxidation catalysts. These and other certified technologies have shown during
dynamometer testing, to have the potential to reduce particulate emissions by
as much as 80% (Environmental Fact Sheet p.18). Testing on actual buses has shown significant PM, CO and HC
reductions (Urban Driving Cycle Results p21).
Some of these technologies/specific models require the fuel to be of the
ultra low sulphur type, 30 to 50 ppm.
8.2 Particulate Traps. Diesel particulate traps reduce emissions of
particular matter by filtering them out of the exhaust stream and cleaning the
filter by using oxidation catalysts or burning the trapped particulates. This regeneration of the filter avoids the
problem of clogging that plagued the first generation of particulate traps.
8.4 Retrofit Program. The United
States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has introduced a Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program. A Verification Process
is used to introduce certified technologies to the market as cost effectively
as possible, while providing customers confidence that verified technologies
will provide emission reductions as advertised. This verification process
evaluates the emission reduction performance of retrofit technologies, including
their durability, and identify engine operating criteria and conditions that
must exist for these technologies to achieve those reductions. The information from this program is of
benefit to Canadian vehicle owners wishing to retrofit diesel vehicles.
|
|
Technology
|
PM%
|
CO%
|
NOx%
|
HC%
|
|
Johnson Matthey
|
Continuously Regenerating Technology (CRT)
|
60
|
60
|
N/A
|
60
|
|
Engelhard
|
DPX Catalyzed
Diesel Particulate Filter
|
60
|
60
|
N/A
|
60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Detroit Diesel
|
6V92TA MUI w/AZ
Purimuffler
|
50
|
40
|
N/A
|
50
|
|
ECS
|
AZ Purimuffler
|
20
|
40
|
N/A
|
50
|
Table 4 – Retrofit
Manufacturer, Technology and Percentage Reduction of Pollutants
8.6 Costs. The EPA commissioned an independent cost
survey for these technologies. The
report, dated 5 December 2000 gives the following “mean” cost estimates for
production quantities of 1,000 (US dollar conversion $1.50):
a.
Replacement Oxidation Catalysts - $2400
b.
Diesel Particulate Filters - $7500
9.0 RECENT APPROACHES TO THE CITY OF OTTAWA
Canadian Renewable Fuels Association
Sunoco
Canadian Farm
Business Management Council
10.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
REFERENCES
1. Alternative Fuel News (Vol 2, No 6), Clean
Cities Roundup: Alternative Fuels Data Centre.
2. Alternative Fuel News (Vol 5, No 1, May
2001), Clean Cities Roundup: Alternative Fuels Data Centre.
3. ASEA (July 30, 2001), Ethanol-Diesel
Blends: A Step Towards A Bio-Based Fuel For Diesel Engines: ASEA.
4. EPA
(March 1997), Environmental Fact Sheet: Office Of Mobile Sources
5. Equipment Manufacturers Institute
(November 2001), New Diesel Fuels: They Are In Your Future For Nonroad
Equipment: Equipment Manufacturers
Institute.
6. Government of Canada (February 17,
2001), Canadian Gazette Part 1
Department of the Environment, Federal Agenda on Cleaner Vehicles, Engines and
Fuels, Ottawa: Ministry of Supply and Services.
7. INFORM Inc (2000), Bus Futures New
Technologies for Cleaner Cities, New York: Inform
8. National
Biodiesel Board (2001), Biodiesel Usage Checklist, National Biodiesel
Board website.
15.
National
Biodiesel Board 2 (2001), Biodiesel Emissions, National Biodiesel Board
website
10. National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (2001), Studies Highlight Biodiesel Benefits,
NREL website.
11. Natural
Resources Canada (1994), Federal Fleet Forum, Ottawa: Ministry of Supply
and Services.
12. Natural
Resources Canada (1995), Canada’s Energy Outlook 1996-2020, Ottawa:
Ministry of Supply and Services.
13. Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium
(February 2000), Hybrid Electric Drive – Heavy Duty Vehicle Testing Project,
University of West Virginia.
14. Office of Air and Radiation, EPA
(November 2001), Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program – Summary, EPA website.
15.
Transport
Canada (October 2000), Transportation In Canada – 2000 Annual Report,
Ottawa, Transport Canada.
16.
Transport
Canada (November 1999), Transportation and Climate Change: Options for
Action, Ottawa, Transport Canada.
17.
Transportation Issue Table National Climate
Change Process (December 24, 1999), Alternative And Future Fuels and Energy
Sources For Road Vehicles, Ottawa, Ministry of Supply and Services.
18. SAE 970186 (February 1997), Urban
Driving Cycle Results Of Retrofitted Diesel Oxidation Catalysts On Heavy-Duty
Vehicles: One Year Later, SAE Warrendale.
19. Union Of Concerned Scientists (November
2001), Cleaner Transit – New Buses, UCS website.
Annex A
Emission Reduction Paper
CITY OF
OTTAWA VEHICLE DISTRIBUTION
|
Type
|
Diesel
|
Unleaded
(Including Ethanol Blend)
|
Propane
|
Electric
|
Natural Gas
|
|
Light
|
198
|
892
|
53
|
9
|
1
|
|
Medium
|
315
|
27
|
4
|
7
|
0
|
|
Heavy
|
1405
|
13
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
|
Total
|
1918
|
932
|
58
|
16
|
1
|
Notes:
Light – Automobiles, Pick-up trucks, cargo vans,
3-ton trucks, Police cars, motorcycles and ice-resurfacers.
Medium – Backhoes, crew cab dump trucks, step-vans,
paint trucks, spreader trucks, dump trucks and solid frame tractors.
Heavy – Tandem dump trucks, tandem snow plows,
graders, transit buses, front end loaders, fire trucks, aerial lift trucks and
refuse packers.
Propane – Vans, ½ ton pick-ups, forklifts
and ice resurfacers.
Natural Gas – ½ ton pick-up truck.
Electric – Sweepers, forklift and utility carts.
