Refine Your Search

Search Results

Viewing 1 to 2 of 2
Technical Paper

The Texas Diesel Fuels Project, Part 1: Development of TxDOT-Specific Test Cycles with Emphasis on a “Route” Technique for Comparing Fuel/Water Emulsions and Conventional Diesel Fuels

2004-03-08
2004-01-0090
The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) began using an emulsified diesel fuel in July 2002. They initiated a simultaneous study of the effectiveness of this fuel in comparison to 2D on-road diesel fuel, which they use in both their on-road and off-road equipment. The study also incorporated analyses for the fleet operated by the Associated General Contractors (AGC) in the Houston area. Some members of AGC use 2D off-road diesel fuel in their equipment. The study included comparisons of fuel economy and emissions for the emulsified fuel relative to the conventional diesel fuels. Cycles that are known to be representative of the typical operations for TxDOT and AGC equipment were required for use in this study. Four test cycles were developed from data logged on equipment during normal service: 1) the TxDOT Telescoping Boom Excavator Cycle, 2) the AGC Wheeled Loader Cycle, 3) the TxDOT Single-Axle Dump Truck Cycle, and 4) the TxDOT Tandem-Axle Dump Truck Cycle.
Technical Paper

The Texas Diesel Fuels Project, Part 3: Cost-Effectiveness Analyses for an Emulsified Diesel Fuel for Highway Construction Equipment Fleets

2004-03-08
2004-01-0086
The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) began using an emulsified diesel fuel as an emissions control measure in July 2002. They initiated a study of the effectiveness of this fuel in comparison to conventional diesel fuel for TxDOT's Houston District operations and included the fleet operated by the Associated General Contractors (AGC) in the Houston area. Cost-effectiveness analyses, including the incremental cost per ton of NOx removed, were performed. NOx removal was the focus of this study because Houston is an ozone nonattainment area, and NOx is believed to be the limiting factor in ozone formation in the Houston area. The cost factors accounted for in the cost-effectiveness analyses included the incremental cost of the fuel (including an available rebate from the State of Texas), the cost of refueling more often, implementation costs, productivity costs, maintenance costs, and various costs associated with the tendency of the emulsion to separate.
X