Brian Choe, Air Quality Specialist

Technology Advancement Office

Alternative Fuels Studies

February 2, 2011

Background

Increased interest to promote the use of alternative fuels to reduce dependence on foreign oil, greenhouse gases, and air pollution

CA initiatives - AB32, AB1007 and Low Carbon Fuel Standards

Comprehensive studies to understand impact on tailpipe emissions and investigate mitigation measures on NOx

AQMD Funded Alternative

Fuel Testing Projects

AQMD Board approved grants to CE-CERT in December 2007 to study

Biodiesel and renewable diesel blends

Ethanol blends

Natural gas blends (Hot Gas)

CE-CERT Three Project Costs

Biodiesel Ethanol Nat. Gas

Blends Blends Blends

CARB $1,380k - -

CEC - - 350k

Nat Biodiesel Brd 50k - -

AQMD LOE 50k 39k -

AQMD 150k 250k 50k

Total $1,630k $289k $400k

Project 1 – Biodiesel/Renewable

Testing Matrix

1. FTP, Light UDDS, HHDDT Cruise 40 & 50 mph

2. Biodiesel Blends (B5, 20, 50, 100)

3. Renewable Blends (R20, 50, 100)

Units

Tested

Test

Cycles1

Biodiesel

Blends2

(Soy/Animal)

Renewable

Diesel

Blends3

Engine Dyno 2 4 4 3

Chassis Dyno 3 2 4 3

Off-Road Dyno 2 4 3

Project 1 – Biodiesel/Renewable

- cont.

CE-CERT investigated NOx mitigation measures

for biodiesels (e.g., blends, additives, composition,

etc.)

UC Davis to analyze samples for toxics &

potential biological impacts (under separate CARB

contract)

2006 Cummins Dyno Test

NOx - Biodiesel

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

UDDS FTP 40 mph Cruise 50 mph Cruise

NOxEm

ission

s (g/b

hp-hr

)NOx Emissions - Soy Biodiesel

ULSD

B20 - Soy

B50 - Soy

B100 - Soy

B5 - Soy

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

UDDS FTP 50 mph Cruise

NOxEm

ission

s (g/b

hp-hr

)

NOx Emissions - Animal Biodiesel

ULSD

B20 - Animal

B50 - Animal

B100 -Animal

B5 - Animal

2007 MBE 4000 Dyno Test

NOx - Biodiesel

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

UDDS FTP 50 mph Cruise

NOxEm

ission

s (g/b

hp-h

r)

NOx Emissions - Animal Biodiesel

ULSD

B20 - Animal

B50 - Animal

B100 - Animal

B5 - Animal

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

UDDS FTP 50 mph Cruise

NOxEm

ission

s (g/bh

p-hr)

NOx Emissions - Soy Biodiesel

ULSD

B20 - Soy

B50 - Soy

B100 - Soy

B5 - Soy

9

2006 Cummins Dyno Test

PM - Biodiesel

PM Emissions - Soy Biodiesel

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.10

UDDS FTP 40 mph Cruise 50 mph Cruise

PM Em

ission

s (g/b

hp-hr

)

ULSD

B20 - Soy

B50 - Soy

B100 - Soy

B5 - Soy

PM Emissions - Animal Biodiesel

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

UDDS FTP 50 mph Cruise

PM Em

ission

s (g/b

hp-hr

)

ULSD

B20 - Animal

B50 - Animal

B100 - Animal

B5 - Animal

2006 Cummins Dyno Test

NOx – Renewable Diesel

Project 1 - Biodiesel/Renewable

Engine Dyno Tests Summary

Increasing NOx for the higher biodiesel blends

Decreasing THC, PM and CO with increasing

biodiesel blends

Limited trends for MBE 4000 due to DPF

CO2 increase insignificant (1-5%)

Increasing fuel consumption (1-10%)

NOx and PM reductions with higher blends of

renewable diesel

Biodiesel

NOx Mitigation Strategies

Additives

2-ethyl-hexyl-nitrate (EHN)

1% level in B5, B10, and B20

Di-tert-butyl-peroxide (DTBP)

1% level in B10 and B20

Both studied by NREL and SwRI

Renewable/biodiesel blends

GTL/biodiesel blends

All testing on FTP

NOx Mitigation Dyno Test

2006 Cummins

1.9

2.0

2.0

2.1

2.1

2.2

2.2

2.3

2.3

NO

xE

mis

sion

s (g

/bhp

-hr)

NOx Mitigation Dyno Test

Summary

DTBP is more effective than EHN

B20-S 1% DTBP (0.0%)

B10-S 1% DTBP (-1.1%)

Renewable/GTL diesels are also effective

to mitigate NOx impact

CARB80/R13/B3-S/B4-A (-0.3%)

CARB80/GTL15/B5-S (-0.7%)

CARB80/R10/B10-S 0.25% DTBP (-1.3%)

Project 2 -

Ethanol Blends Testing

7 light-duty test vehicles (1 FFV)

2 Tech 3 (1981-1985)

2 Tech 4 (1986-1995)

3 Tech 5 (1996-2010)

5 different ethanol-gasoline blends and/or mixtures

(E5.7, E10, E20, E50, E85)

Chassis dynamometer at CE-CERT (FTP)

Criteria pollutants & certain

toxic species measured – BTEX and carbonyl

groups

Ethanol Tests

NOx Emissions

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1984 Toyota

Pickup

1985 Nissan

Truck

1991 Ford

Explorer

1993 Ford

Festiva

1996 Honda

Accord

2000 Toyota

Camry

2007

Chevrolet

Silverado

NO

x E

mis

sion

s (g

/mi)

CARB 2 CARB 3 E10 E20 E50 E85

Ethanol Tests

NMHC Emissions

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

1984 Toyota

Pickup

1985 Nissan

Truck

1991 Ford

Explorer

1993 Ford

Festiva

1996 Honda

Accord

2000 Toyota

Camry

2007

Chevrolet

Silverado

NM

HC

Em

issi

on

s (g

/m

i) CARB 2 CARB 3 E10 E20 E50 E85

Ethanol Tests

CO2 Emissions

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

1984 Toyota

Pickup

1985 Nissan

Truck

1991 Ford

Explorer

1993 Ford

Festiva

1996 Honda

Accord

2000 Toyota

Camry

2007

Chevrolet

Silverado

CO

2 E

mis

sio

ns

(g/m

i) CARB 2 CARB 3 E10 E20 E50 E85

Ethanol Tests

BTEX Emissions

0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

0.035

0.04

0.045

1,3-Butadiene Benzene Toluene m&p-Xylene o-Xylene

g/m

i

CARB 2 CARB 3 E10 E20

Ethanol Tests

Fuel Economy

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1984 Toyota

Pickup

1985 Nissan

Truck

1991 Ford

Explorer

1993 Ford

Festiva

1996 Honda

Accord

2000 Toyota

Camry

2007

Chevrolet

Silverado

Fu

el

Eco

no

my

(m

pg

) CARB 2 CARB 3 E10 E20 E50 E85

Project 2 -

Ethanol Blends Tests Summary

NOx increased with higher ethanol levels

(older models)

NMHC and CO decreased with increasing

ethanol levels (older models)

No significant trends for CO2

Lower toxic aromatics with ethanol blends but

no direct correlations

Decreasing fuel economy with higher ethanol

blends