Search Results

Heavy-duty diesel engines (HDDE), because of their widespread use and reputation of expelling excessive soot, have frequently been held responsible for excessive amounts of overall environmental particulate matter (PM). PM is a considerable contributor to air pollution, and a subject of primary concern to health and regulatory agencies worldwide. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has provided PM emissions regulations and standards of measurement techniques since the 1980's. PM standards set forth by the EPA for HDDEs are based only on total mass, instead of size and/or concentration. The European Union adopted a particle number emission limit, and it may influence the U.S. EPA to adopt particle number or size limits in the future. The purpose of this research was to study the effects biodiesel blended fuel and cetane improvers have on particle size and number.

Biodiesel fuels benefit both from being a renewable energy source and from decreasing in carbon monoxide (CO), total hydrocarbons (THC), and particulate matter (PM) emissions relative to petroleum diesel. The oxides of nitrogen (NOx) emissions from biodiesel blended fuels reported in the literature vary relative to baseline diesel NOx, with no NOx change or a NOx decrease found by some to an increase in NOx found by others. To explore differences in NOx, two Cummins ISM engines (1999 and 2004) were operated on 20% biodiesel blends during the heavy-duty transient FTP cycle and the steady state Supplemental Emissions Test. For the 2004 Cummins ISM engine, in-cylinder pressure data were collected during the steady state and transient tests. Three types of biodiesel fuels were used in the blends: soy, tallow (animal fat), and cottonseed. The FTP integrated emissions of the B20 blends produced a 20-35% reduction in PM and no change or up to a 4.3% increase in NOx over the neat diesel.

The objective of this program, which is supported by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) through the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), is to provide an unbiased and comprehensive comparison of transit buses operating on alternative fuels and diesel fuel. The information for this comparison was collected from eight transit bus sites. The fuels studied are natural gas (CNG and LNG), alcohol (methanol and ethanol), biodiesel (20 percent blend), propane (only projected capital costs; no sites with heavy-duty propane engines were available for studying operating experience), and diesel. Data was collected on operations, maintenance, bus equipment configurations, emissions, bus duty cycle, and safety incidents. Representative and actual capital costs were collected for alternative fuels and were used as estimates for conversion costs. This paper presents preliminary results.