Search Results

The objective of this project, which is supported by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) through the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), is to provide a comprehensive comparison of heavy-duty trucks operating on alternative fuels and diesel fuel. Data collection from up to eight sites is planned. This paper summarizes the design of the project and early results from the first two sites. Data collection is planned for operations, maintenance, truck system descriptions, emissions, duty cycle, safety incidents, and capital costs and operating costs associated with the use of alternative fuels in trucking.

A recently completed program was developed to evaluate ultra-low sulfur diesel fuels and passive diesel particle filters (DPF) in several different truck and bus fleets operating in Southern California. The primary test fuels, ECD and ECD-1, are produced by ARCO, a BP company, and have less than 15 ppm sulfur content. A test fleet comprised of heavy-duty trucks and buses were retrofitted with one of two types of catalyzed diesel particle filters, and operated for one year. As part of this program, a chemical characterization study was performed in the spring of 2001 to compare the exhaust emissions using the test fuels with and without aftertreatment. A detailed speciation of volatile organic hydrocarbons (VOC), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), nitro-PAH, carbonyls, polychlorodibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDD) and polychlorodibenzo-p-furans (PCDF), inorganic ions, elements, PM10, and PM2.5 in diesel exhaust was performed for a select set of vehicles.

A program has been completed to evaluate ultra-low sulfur diesel fuels and passive diesel particulate filters (DPFs) in truck and bus fleets operating in southern California. The fuels, ECD and ECD-1, are produced by ARCO (a BP Company) and have less than 15 ppm sulfur content. Vehicles were retrofitted with two types of catalyzed DPFs, and operated on ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel for over one year. Exhaust emissions, fuel economy and operating cost data were collected for the test vehicles, and compared with baseline control vehicles. Regulated emissions are presented from two rounds of tests. The first round emissions tests were conducted shortly after the vehicles were retrofitted with the DPFs. The second round emissions tests were conducted following approximately one year of operation. Several of the vehicles retrofitted with DPFs accumulated well over 100,000 miles of operation between test rounds.

A study was performed in the spring of 2001 to chemically characterize exhaust emissions from trucks and buses fueled by various test fuels and operated with and without diesel particle filters. This study was part of a multi-year technology validation program designed to evaluate the emissions impact of ultra-low sulfur diesel fuels and passive diesel particle filters (DPF) in several different heavy-duty vehicle fleets operating in Southern California. The overall study of exhaust chemical composition included organic compounds, inorganic ions, individual elements, and particulate matter in various size-cuts. Detailed descriptions of the overall technology validation program and chemical speciation methodology have been provided in previous SAE publications (2002-01-0432 and 2002-01-0433).

Both field research and certification data show that the lean burn natural gas powered spark ignition engines offer particulate matter (PM) reduction with respect to equivalent diesel power plants. Concerns over PM inventory make these engines attractive despite the loss of fuel economy associated with throttled operation. Early versions of the Cummins L-10 natural gas engines employed a mixer to establish air/fuel ratio. Emissions measurements by the West Virginia University Transportable Heavy Duty Emissions Testing Laboratories on Cummins L-10 powered transit buses revealed the potential to offer low emissions of PM and oxides of nitrogen, (NOx) but variations in the mixture could cause emissions of NOx, carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons to rise. This was readily corrected through mixer repair or readjustment. Newer versions of the L-10 engine employ a more sophisticated fueling scheme with feedback control from a wide range oxygen sensor.