Elsevier

Applied Energy

Volume 86, Issue 5, May 2009, Pages 610-615
Applied Energy

Comparison of GHG emissions from diesel, biodiesel and natural gas refuse trucks of the City of Madrid

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2008.08.018Get rights and content

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to carry out a comparative study with regard to energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, in respect of two types of engines with three different fuels. The fuels analysed are diesel, biodiesel 30% (B30) and compressed natural gas (CNG). The engines tested were a spark ignition engine (Otto cycle) and two compression ignition engines (Diesel cycle), the first fed with CNG and the last two with B30 and diesel. What is new about this study is its scope of application concerning refuse collection services in the city of Madrid. The tests were carried out on refuse trucks of the FCC Company along actual urban routes in the city of Madrid. Also taken into account were the energy input and the greenhouse gases emitted for each of the paths taken by the fuels analysed, from resource recovery to delivery to the vehicle tank.

Introduction

The technological improvements that have been implemented in vehicles during the last decades have greatly reduced the emissions of some pollutants as CO, NOx and NMVOC. However, energy consumption and CO2 emissions have experienced a sustained growth. Available forecasts show that, under a business-as-usual scenario, this growth will continue in the near future [1], [2].

A diversification of automotive fuels and powertrain technologies will be needed if national and international targets on greenhouse gas emissions are to be met. Following this diversification, advanced technology vehicles such as hybrid electric vehicles with gasoline and diesel, and various fuel cell based vehicles, are currently under extensive research and development [3]. Recently, life cycle assessment (LCA) has been garnering increased interest from policy analyst and decision-makers. LAC can be used effectively to analyze transportation fuel pathways. Many quality and comprehensive studies have been conducted for transportation fuels, both in North America [4] and non-North America [5], [6] contexts. Against this background, in order to evaluate the greenhouse gas emissions reduction potentials, we focus on estimating well-to-tank (considerating fuel from resource recovery to delivery to the vehicle tank) greenhouse gas emissions of automotive fuels to be used in these refuse trucks for the present and near future. Further, by adding these to well-to-tank results, we show well-to-wheel (integration of the well-to-tank and tank-to-wheel components) greenhouse gas emissions under specific condition of driving a refuse truck.

A number of studies with comparisons of diesel, natural gas and diesel/biodiesel blends bus emissions have been published previously [7], [8], [9]. The basis for these comparisons, the choice of vehicles and even the outcome vary significantly. Other researches have been conducted to develop a methodology for the generation of driving and duty cycles for refuse vehicles matching the statistical metrics and distributions of the generated cycles to the collected database [10], [11]. These cycles will be utilized in the development and computer simulation of future refuse vehicle designs, specifically energy-saving hybrid-electric vehicles. Other comparisons include a chassis-based testing program to document emission reduction (NOx, HC, CO and PM) performance from a fleet of vehicles accumulating mileage or applying standard driving cycles [12], [13].

In this study, we have aimed to show the results of the tests made on three refuse collection vehicles with regard to their energy consumption. Each of the three vehicles was designated to run on a different fuel: diesel, biodiesel and natural gas.

The compaction process has a strong influence on the consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in this kind of vehicle. Compaction process and transfer to dump causes a relatively high consumption and CO2 emission, comparing with other types of urban fleet such as buses. Collections segment is a combination of kinematic and hydraulic operation and also includes a significant number of stops per kilometre. The vehicle spends a large portion of this driving cycle idling (over 50%), mostly while the refuse is being collected. Due to frequent compactations, body hydraulics are engaged (power-take-off operation) for more than 19% of the whole cycle.

The fact that three fuels were analysed is due, on the one hand, to the current state of activity in fleets of refuse trucks, and on the other hand, to the recommendations from the European Commission regarding biofuels for this decade and the next.

NG is considered to be one of the alternative fuels with the greatest potential for application to urban services [14]. The use of NG in transport is growing rapidly in Spain in public services, and in other countries even for general use in automobiles. In Europe, the European Commission, in its Green Paper, has made replacing 23% of conventional fuel with alternative fuel a goal for 2020. With regard to NG, it was thought it should have a penetration of 10% [15]. Recently, the EC has ratified this value [16].

The EU White Paper on transport warns of the need to reduce dependency on oil-based fuels in order to have clean efficient transport [17]. In many countries NG has been introduced for urban service fleets, in urban bus services, for instance.

Urban buses operate on fixed routes and refuel in the bus depots. This same situation is now successfully applied to refuse collection vehicles in Madrid, Barcelona, Oviedo, Tarragona, Valencia, Reus, Vigo and other cities, with Spain alone reaching 800 industrial vehicles in urban applications with a daily service.

A detailed study of this kind of vehicles working in such specific conditions had never been performed, so it can be an important contribution to the state of art of these kind of studies.

Section snippets

Calculation methodologies

Energy Logistic Modelling (ELM) is a method developed at the Department for Transportation and Logistics at Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden, for the transportation sector [18]. ELM is based on traditional logistics and on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA).

The ELM for motor fuel describes a method for analyzing energy and exergy utilization and emissions for a fuel that is made from defined raw materials, with defined production processes, located at specific places and used by specific

Well-to-tank emissions analysis

The well-to-tank assessment accounts for the energy consumption and GHG emissions associated with the production of the fuel, including the production of its feedstock, processing the feedstock and transportation of the fuel to the dispenser at the fuelling station. The following fuels will be analysed:

  • Diesel.

  • Natural Gas.

  • B30 (biodiesel 30%, diesel 70%).

Much information can be found from technical literature sources about well-to-tank analysis [19], [20], [21]. For this study, the well-to-tank

Tank-to-wheel analysis

For the tank-to-wheel analysis three routes were evaluated by monitoring: average speeds, distances, times, and the fuel consumption. In consultation with FCC staff, it was determined that the most severe usage of a refuse vehicle in terms of physical harm to the vehicle is in residential settings. The vehicles specifications are described below:

  • IVECO 240 E 26 GNC Sel 25 m3 CE Double Polyvalent. IVECO 8469.41.10 engine. Rear-loading. Turbo intercooling. Displacement: 9500 cm3. Multipoint

Well-to-wheel analysis

The total WTW energy use is calculated by multiplying the WTT energy requirements by the fuel consumption of the vehicle. The WTW emissions are calculated multiplying the WTT GHG emissions in gram per MJ by the energy consumption of the vehicle in MJ per km, to which the TTW GHG emissions were added (in gram per km, see Fig. 3, Fig. 4).

From the well-to-wheel analysis, it may be deduced that the vehicle fed with CNG is the one that emits the lowest amount of greenhouse gases into the air, both

Conclusions

The following basic conclusions can be extracted from this comparative study:

  • Well-to-tank analysis shows that B30 pathway fuel presents the best conditions from the GHG point of view.

  • The Tank to Wheel GHG emissions for CNG vehicle were the lowest.

  • CNG refuse collection vehicles are those that emit the lowest emissions of CO2 during well-to-wheel, which means that their global environmental impact (greenhouse effect) is lower.

In the t VTT study, the best available European diesel bus technology

Acknowledgements

Special thanks should be given to FCC for their collaboration with this study, not only for making the vehicles available to run the chosen routes but also for the drivers’ enthusiastic willingness to follow the instructions for carrying out the driving cycles with the seriousness required by the replicate of these tests.

References (23)

  • J.M. Burón et al.

    Estimation of road transportation emissions in Spain from 1988 to 1999 using COPERT III program

    Atmos Environ

    (2004)
  • J.M. Burón et al.

    Estimation of the input data for the prediction of road transportation emissions in Spain from 2000 to 2010 considering several scenarios

    Atmos Environ

    (2005)
  • M. Jefferson

    Long-term energy scenarios: the approach of the World Energy Council

    Global Energy Issues

    (2000)
  • Wung M. GREET. Greenhouse gas regulated emission and energy use in transportation model version 1.7 (beta); 2006....
  • EUCAR. Well-to wheel analysis of future automotive fuels and powertrain in the european context. European Council for...
  • Europe GM. GM well-to-wheel analysis of energy use and greenhouse gas emissions of advanced fuel/vehicle systems –...
  • Air Resources Board, California Environmental Protection Agency. Study of CNG and diesel transit bus emissions. Air...
  • Ayala A, Kado NY, Okamoto A, Holmén BA, Kuzmicky PA, Kobayashi R, Stiglizt KE. Diesel and CNG heavy-duty transit bus...
  • Tzirakis E, Karavalakis G, Zannikos F, Stournas S. Impact of Diesel/biodiesel blends on emissions from a diesel vehicle...
  • Dembski N, Rizzoni G, Soliman A, Fravert J, Kelly K. Development of refuse vehicle driving and duty cycles. SAE...
  • Ivani Z. Data collection and development of new york city refuse truck duty cycle. SAE Technical Paper,...
  • Cited by (111)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text