Search Results

Hybrid-electric transit buses offer benefits over conventional transit buses of comparable capacity. These benefits include reduced fuel consumption, reduced emissions and the utilization of smaller engines. Factors allowing for these benefits are the use of regenerative braking and reductions in engine transient operation through sophisticated power management systems. However, characterization of emissions from these buses represents new territory: the whole vehicle must be tested to estimate real world tailpipe emissions levels and fuel economy. The West Virginia University Transportable Heavy Duty Emissions Testing Laboratories were used to characterize emissions from diesel hybrid-electric powered as well as diesel and natural gas powered transit buses in Boston, MA and New York City.

Yard hostlers are tractors (switchers) used to move containers at ports and storage facilities. While many speed-time driving cycles for assessing emissions and performance from heavy-duty vehicles exist, a driving cycle representative of yard hostler activity at Port of Long Beach, CA was not available. Activity data were collected from in-use yard hostlers as they performed ship loading/unloading, rail loading/unloading and other yard routines, primarily moving containers on trailers or carts. The activity data were then used to develop four speed-time driving cycles with durations of 1200 seconds, representing light and heavy ship activities and light and heavy load rail activities. These cycles were constructed using actual speed-time data collected during activity logging and the cycles created were statistically comparable to each subset of activity data.

Fuel economy and regulated emissions were measured from eight forty-foot transit buses operated on petroleum diesel and a “B20” blend of 80% diesel fuel and 20% biodiesel by volume. Use of biodiesel is attractive to displace petroleum fuel and reduce an operation's carbon footprint. Usually it is assumed that biodiesel will also reduce particulate matter (PM) emissions relative to those of petroleum diesel. Model years of the vehicles evaluated were newer 2007-08 Gillig low-floor buses, 2005 Gillig Phantom buses, and a 2002 Gillig Phantom bus. Engine technology represented three different emissions standards, and included buses with OEM diesel particulate filters. Each bus was evaluated using two transient speed-time schedules, the Orange County Transit Authority (OCTA) driving schedule which represents moderate speed urban/suburban operation and the Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule (UDDS) which represents a mix of suburban and higher speed on-highway operation.

West Virginia University characterized the emissions and fuel economy performance of a 30-foot 2010 transit bus equipped with urea selective catalytic reduction (u-SCR) exhaust aftertreatment. The bus was exercised over speed-time driving schedules representative of both urban and on-highway activity using a chassis dynamometer while the exhaust was routed to a full-scale dilution tunnel with research grade emissions analyzers. The Paris speed-time driving schedule was used to represent slow urban transit bus activity while the Cruise driving schedule was used to represent on-highway activity. Vehicle weights representative of both one-half and empty passenger loading were evaluated. Fuel economy observed during testing with the urban driving schedule was significantly lower (55%) than testing performed with the on-highway driving schedule.

Relationships between diesel particulate matter (PM) mass and gaseous emissions mass produced by engines have been explored to determine whether any gaseous species may be used as surrogates to infer PM quantitatively. It was recognized that sulfur content of fuel might independently influence PM mass, since PM historically is composed of elemental carbon, organic carbon, sulfuric acid, ash and wear particles. Previous research has suggested that PM may be correlated with carbon monoxide (CO) for an engine that is exercised through a variety of speed and load cycles, but that the correlation does not extend to a group of engines. Large databases from the E-55/59 and Gasoline/Diesel PM Split programs were employed, along with the IBIS bus emissions database and several additional data sets for on- and off-road engines to examine possible relationships.

It is difficult to project the emissions performance of a vehicle on a route unless the test cycle used to gain the emissions data reasonably represents that route. A chassis dynamometer emissions measurement test schedule consisting of three modes (congested, non-congested and bus rapid transit (BRT) operation) was developed for use in a program to evaluate transit bus technologies in Mexico City. Existing buses were fitted with global positioning system (GPS) data loggers and, between September 2nd and 8th of 2004, 54 hours of speed-time data were collected while the buses were operated over several bus routes in Mexico City. The data set was then broken down into individual micro-trips, each consisting of an idle period followed by the bus traveling some distance, followed by a final deceleration to idle.

Although diesel engines still power most of the heavy-duty transit buses in the United States, many major cities are also operating fleets where a significant percentage of buses is powered by lean-burn natural gas engines. Emissions from these buses are often expressed in distance-specific units of grams per mile (g/mile) or grams per kilometer (g/km), but the driving cycle or route employed during emissions measurement has a strong influence on the reported results. A driving cycle that demands less energy per unit distance than others results in higher fuel economy and lower distance-specific oxides of nitrogen emissions. In addition to energy per unit distance, the degree to which the driving cycle is transient in nature can also affect emissions.

Transit agencies across the United States operate bus fleets primarily powered by diesel, natural gas, and hybrid drive systems. Passenger loading affects the power demanded from the engine, which in turn affects distance-specific emissions and fuel consumption. Analysis shows that the nature of bus activity, taking into account the idle time, tire rolling resistance, wind drag, and acceleration energy, influences the way in which passenger load impacts emissions. Emissions performance and fuel consumption from diesel and natural gas powered buses were characterized by the West Virginia University (WVU) Transportable Emissions Testing Laboratory. A comparison matrix for all three bus technologies included three common driving cycles (the Braunschweig Cycle, the OCTA Cycle, and the ADEME-RATP Paris Cycle). Each bus was tested at three different passenger loading conditions (empty weight, half weight, and full weight).

Typically ethanol is present in gasoline as a 10% blend by volume (E10), although E15, E85 (51 to 83%), and E0 are also available at selected stations. Numerous studies of tailpipe regulated emissions have been conducted to compare emissions from E10 and E0, and there is a growing body of literature addressing blends of E15 and higher. Isolating the effect of ethanol in a study is philosophically difficult, because the ethanol naturally displaces some hydrocarbons, because the ethanol interacts with the remaining gasoline, and because properties of mixing are often nonlinear. Some studies have used splash blending, simply mixing the ethanol with a reference gasoline to produce a blend for comparison to the reference. Others have used match blending, where the objective is to match selected properties of the blend to properties of a reference gasoline.