Capital requirements and fuel-cycle energy and emissions impacts of potential PNGV fuels.

PDF Version Also Available for Download.

Description

Our study reveals that supplying gasoline-equivalent demand for the low-market-share scenario requires a capital investment of less than $40 billion for all fuels except H{sub 2}, which will require a total cumulative investment of $150 billion. By contrast, cumulative capital investments under the high-market-share scenario are $50 billion for LNG, $90 billion for ethanol, $100 billion for methanol, $160 billion for CNG and DME, and $560 billion for H{sub 2}. Although these substantial capital requirements are spread over many years, their magnitude could pose a challenge to the widespread introduction of 3X vehicles. Fossil fuel use by US light-duty vehicles ... continued below

Physical Description

Medium: P; Size: vp.

Creation Information

Johnson, L.; Mintz, M.; Singh, M.; Stork, K.; Vyas, A. & Wang, M. March 11, 1999.

Context

This article is part of the collection entitled: Office of Scientific & Technical Information Technical Reports and was provided by UNT Libraries Government Documents Department to Digital Library, a digital repository hosted by the UNT Libraries. More information about this article can be viewed below.

Who

People and organizations associated with either the creation of this article or its content.

Sponsor

Publisher

Provided By

UNT Libraries Government Documents Department

Serving as both a federal and a state depository library, the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department maintains millions of items in a variety of formats. The department is a member of the FDLP Content Partnerships Program and an Affiliated Archive of the National Archives.

Contact Us

What

Descriptive information to help identify this article. Follow the links below to find similar items on the Digital Library.

Description

Our study reveals that supplying gasoline-equivalent demand for the low-market-share scenario requires a capital investment of less than $40 billion for all fuels except H{sub 2}, which will require a total cumulative investment of $150 billion. By contrast, cumulative capital investments under the high-market-share scenario are $50 billion for LNG, $90 billion for ethanol, $100 billion for methanol, $160 billion for CNG and DME, and $560 billion for H{sub 2}. Although these substantial capital requirements are spread over many years, their magnitude could pose a challenge to the widespread introduction of 3X vehicles. Fossil fuel use by US light-duty vehicles declines significantly with introduction of 3X vehicles because of fuel-efficiency improvements for 3X vehicles and because of fuel substitution (which applies to the nonpetroleum-fueled alternatives). Petroleum use for light-duty vehicles in 2030 is reduced by as much as 45% relative to the reference scenario. GHG emissions follow a similar pattern. Total GHG emissions decline by 25-30% with most of the propulsion system/fuel alternatives. For those using renewable fuels (i.e., ethanol and H{sub 2} from solar energy), GHG emissions drop by 33% (H{sub 2}) and 45% (ethanol). Among urban air pollutants, urban NOX emissions decline slightly for 3X vehicles using CIDI and SIDI engines and drop substantially for fuel-cell vehicles. Urban CO emissions decline for CIDI and FCV alternatives, while VOC emissions drop significantly for all alternatives except RFG-, methanol-, and ethanol-fueled SIDI engines. With the exception of CIDI engines fueled by RFD, FT50, or B20 (which increase urban PM{sub 10} emissions by over 30%), all propulsion system/fuel alternatives reduce urban PM{sub 10} emissions. Reductions are approximately 15-20% for fuel cells and for methanol-, ethanol-, CNG-, or LPG-fueled SIDI engines. Table 3 qualitatively summarizes impacts of the 13 alternatives on capital requirements and on energy use and emissions relative to the reference scenario. The table clearly shows the trade-off between costs and benefits. For example, while H{sub 2} FCVs have the greatest incremental capital needs, they offer the largest energy and emissions benefits. On the basis of the cost and benefit changes shown, methanol and gasoline FCVs appear to have particularly promising benefits-to-costs ratios.

Physical Description

Medium: P; Size: vp.

Notes

OSTI as DE00012414

Source

  • 32nd International Symposium on Automobile Technology and Automation, Vienna (AT), 06/14/1999--06/18/1999

Language

Item Type

Identifier

Unique identifying numbers for this article in the Digital Library or other systems.

  • Report No.: ANL/ES/CP-98571
  • Grant Number: W-31109-ENG-38
  • Office of Scientific & Technical Information Report Number: 12414
  • Archival Resource Key: ark:/67531/metadc623953

Collections

This article is part of the following collection of related materials.

Office of Scientific & Technical Information Technical Reports

Reports, articles and other documents harvested from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information.

Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI) is the Department of Energy (DOE) office that collects, preserves, and disseminates DOE-sponsored research and development (R&D) results that are the outcomes of R&D projects or other funded activities at DOE labs and facilities nationwide and grantees at universities and other institutions.

What responsibilities do I have when using this article?

When

Dates and time periods associated with this article.

Creation Date

  • March 11, 1999

Added to The UNT Digital Library

  • June 16, 2015, 7:43 a.m.

Description Last Updated

  • March 24, 2016, 5:54 p.m.

Usage Statistics

When was this article last used?

Yesterday: 0
Past 30 days: 0
Total Uses: 3

Interact With This Article

Here are some suggestions for what to do next.

Start Reading

PDF Version Also Available for Download.

Citations, Rights, Re-Use

Johnson, L.; Mintz, M.; Singh, M.; Stork, K.; Vyas, A. & Wang, M. Capital requirements and fuel-cycle energy and emissions impacts of potential PNGV fuels., article, March 11, 1999; Illinois. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc623953/: accessed January 18, 2018), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.