-------
Ricardo HRCC Engine
Ricardo modified a VW engine with
Ugh Compression Ratio, Compact Combustion Chamber design
Lean combustion, sequential fuel injection, M100, EGR
Engine installed in an Audi 5000 Diesel provided
5 percent higher fuel economy and
20 percent better performance
Work now underway to optimize for emissions,
especially to meet 1.0 gpm NOx
Direct injection work planned
-------
Toyota Lean Combustion System
dlrea Hฎฎ4 to <&Mffi wOUti JteiiuDd^ฎ 9S/&K stand* ffd
D Swrbl ฉsuratr^O
CI S^ix
At ER&*@ o
-------
Toyota Lean Burn Methanol Results
Vehicle performed well on both M85 and M100
Meets current HC and CO standards, and
less than 1.0 gram/mile NOx
Very low aldehyde emissions : less than 10 mg/mile
Evap emissions less than 1 gram/test,
M100 lower than M85
Fuel economy as good or better than
comparable gasoline vehicles
-------
Future Plans for Toyota Lean Burn System
New leaner M100 calibrations to be evaluated
on current vehicle
Engine out emissions and air/fuel ratio mapping
over FTP on current vehicle
EGR evaluation on current vehicle
Development of new methanol lean burn engine
optimized for emissions and fuel economy
Delivery of vehicle with new engine in mid-1988
-------
Joint Nissan /EPA Program
Baseline Sentra delivered in July 1987
Part-throttle lean combustion,
sequential fuel injection, turbocharger
Meets current emission standards
106 hp vs 70 hp for gas Sentra
42 mpg vs 36 to 41 mpg for gas Sentra
Three engines will be delivered in fall 1987
Upgraded Sentra scheduled for delivery in summer 1988
Maintain high performance of baseline vehicle
Low ozone potential - 5 mgpm formaldehyde emissions
Gasoline equivalent fuel economy of 45 to 50 mpg
-------
In-House Concepts
Cold Start
Atomizer Nozzle
Ignition System Design
Resistance Heating/ Partial Oxidation
Dissociation
Southwest Research Institute Contract
Industry Interaction
Catalyst
Washcoat Formulations
Preheater
-------
EPA Reassessment of Transit Bus Emissions
More Sophisticated Analysis
* Larger and more accurate emission data base
* Very high public exposure
Greater Concern About Diesel Particulate and NOx pollution
Equity
* Relative to treatment of other vehicle classes
* Credibility for future air quality strategies
-------
Ratio of Transit Bus to Gasoline Car Emissions
(1980 vehicles in use)
500
-------
Environmental Impacts of Diesel Participate
Total Suspended Particulate is an EPA Criteria Pollutant
* Very high levels correlated with mortality rates
* Lower levels aggravate respiratory diseases
Diesel Particulate is a Special Health Concern
* Very small size
* Known to contain mutagenic and carcinogenic compounds
Diesel Particulate is Also a Welfare Concern
* Very detrimental to visibility
* Soiling and/or corrosion
* Odor
-------
Bus and Truck Emission Standards
( g/ hp-hr over EPA test procedure )
NOx PM
Current Engines 5 to 9 0.4 to 0.8
1988 - 1989 10.7 0.60
1990 6.0 0.60
1991 - 1993 5.0 0.25 / 0.10
1994 and later 5.0 0.10
-------
Diesel vs Methanol Bus Emissions (GPM)
& Diesel GM Methanol MAN Methanol
o J
-------
Diesel vs Methanol Bus HCHO
Diesel
GM Methanol MAN Methanol
3.0
Bus Cycles (g/mile)
2.5
2.0 -
1.5 -
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.6
Idle (g/minute)
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
-------
New York City Demonstration
Settlement of EPA enforcement action
EPA, GM, NRDC, CAS, Celanese, New York City and UMTA
Total GM commitment of $6.7 million
Goal to show commercial viability by 1991
Phase 1 -- engine R and D
Phase 2 -- 6 buses in December 1987 at no cost
Phase 3 -- sale of 26 buses in 1989-90 at diesel price
-------
Oxygenated Blends Approved by EPA
Name
Gasohol
Additive
10% Ethanol
Oxygen Content
3.7%
Oxinol
4.75% Methanol
4.75% TBA
3.5%
DuPont
5% Methanol
2.5% Ethanol
3.7%
MTBE
11% MTBE
2.0%
-------
Effect of Blends on CO
Technology 3.7% Oxygen 2.0% Oxygen
Non-Catalyst -18% -10%
Open Loop -30% -17%
Closed Loop -10% -5%
-------
Factors Affecting HC Emissions Analysis
Evaporative and Exhaust
Vehicle Technology
Low Reactivity of Methanol
Change in Fuel Volatility
Evaporative Only
Change in Distillation Curve
Change in Molecular Weight
Commingling
-------
Effect of Blends on Exhaust HC
Technology 3.7% Oxygen 2.0% Oxygen
= RVP +1 RVP
Non-Catalyst -9% -5% -5%
Open Loop -9% -5% -5%
Closed Loop -4% -1% -2%
-------
Effect of Blends on Evap HC
(percent, range from no commingling to maximum commingling)
Carbureted Fuel Injected
Ethanol
= RVP + 7 to + 12 -6 to + 2
+1 RVP +61 to +69 +71 to + 84
Methanol
= RVP -7 to +5 -17 to +5
+1 RVP +35 to +66 +50 to +77
MTBE +15 +1
-------
Projected Fleetwide Impacts of Blends in 1990
(percent)
Blend Hydrocarbons CO
= RVP +1 RVP
Gasohol -2 to +5 +15 to +35 -22
Oxinol/DuPont -5 to +5 +9 to +30 -22
MTBE -1 NA -12
-------
Options for Blends in Volatility Rulemaking
Control to same RVP as gasoline
Temporary 1 PSI RVP allowance
(tax exemption)
Permanent 1 PSI RVP allowance
-------