United States         Air and Radiation        EPA420-R-01-045
            Environmental Protection                   September 2001
            Agency
&EPA     Large SI Engine
            Technologies and Costs
            Draft Final  Report
                                    ^B Printed on Recycled
                                    Paper

-------
                                                                   EPA420-R-01-045
                                                                      September 2001
                                      SI


                                    Final
                         Assessment and Standards Division
                       Office of Transportation and Air Quality
                        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                Prepared for EPA by
                        Louis Browning and Frank Kamakate
                       Arthur D. Little - Acurex Environmental
                           EPA Contract No. 68-C-98-170
                        Work Assignment No. 1-03 and 2-03
                                     NOTICE

    This technical report does not necessarily represent final EPA decisions or positions.
It is intended to present technical analysis of issues using data thatC are currently available.
         The purpose in the release of such reports is to facilitate the exchange of
      technical information and to inform the public of technical developments which
        may form the basis for a final EPA decision, position, or regulatory action.

-------
                                                    Large  SI  Engine
                                                    Technologies
                                                    and
                                                    Costs


                                                    Draft Final Report

                                                    July 2001
Disclaimer

This report was prepared by Arthur D. Little under
subcontract to ICF Consulting for U.S. EPA. This report
represents Arthur D. Little's best effort in light of the existing
situations made available to us.  Any use the reader makes
of this report or any reliance upon or decisions to be made
based upon this report are the responsibility of the reader.
Report to
U.S. Environmental Protection
  Agency
Assessments and Standards
  Division
2000 Traverwood Drive
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
                                                    Prepared by
                                                    Louis Browning and
                                                      Fanta Kamakate
                                                    Arthur D. Little -
                                                      Acurex Environmental
                                                    10061 BubbRoad
                                                    Cupertino, California 95014
                                                    Tel: 408 517-1550
                                                    Fax:408517-1553
                                                    Work Assignment No. 1-03 and 2-03
                                                    U.S. EPA Contract No. 68-C-98-170
                                                    Subcontract No. 80577-T-001
                                                    Final Report FR-00-105

-------
Table of Contents
1.      Introduction  	Arthur D. Little Case.NoiTp 721

2.      Background  	2-1

3.      Technology Description	3-1
       3.1    Baseline Technologies	3-1
       3.2    Advanced Technologies	3-2
             3.2.1   Fuel System Technologies	3-2
             3.2.2   Oxygen Sensors	3-2
             3.2.3   Electronic Control Modules	3-3
             3.2.4   Catalysts	3-3
             3.2.5   Diagnostic Functions	3-4
       3.3    Fuel Economy Improvements  	3-4
       3.4    Maintenance and Engine Life Improvements  	3-4

4.      Cost Methodology	4-1
       4.1    Hardware Cost to Manufacturer	4-1
       4.2    Fixed Cost to Manufacturer	4-2
       4.3    Fuel Economy  	4-2
       4.4    Maintenance Cost	4-3
       4.5    Results 	4-4
                                                                             MI

-------
1.
Introduction
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is seeking to set new
emission standards for nonroad spark-ignited engines above 19 kW (25 hp). The future
regulation will be similar to the one adopted in October 1998 by the California Air
Resources Board (ARB) which will facilitate harmonization of standards. EPA
standards would also regulate equipment such as farm and construction equipment under
175 hp over which ARB has no jurisdiction.

The ARB standards were adopted in compliance with the 1994 State Implementation
Plan's measure Mil. The standards apply to all non-preempted engines above 19 kW
(25 hp) and are based on three-way catalysts and electronically-controlled closed-loop
fuel systems.  They are programmed to phase-in over three years starting in 2001 with
full-lifetime compliance beginning in 2004. Table 1-1  presents the emission standards
adopted by ARB for engines over one liter in displacement.

Table 1-1.  ARB Nonroad Large Spark-Ignited Engines Emission Standards
Year
Tierl
2001-2003 (phase-in)
Tier 2
2004 and later
Standards (g/bhp-hr)
NMHC+ IMOX
3.0
3.0
CO
37
37
Useful Life
N/A
5000 hours or 7 years
This report's objective is to assess the economic impacts to nonroad large spark-ignited
engine manufacturers of upgrading their production to include features such as
electronically-controlled closed-loop fuel systems, three-way catalysts (and fuel
injection for gasoline units), in order to comply with EPA's future standards.  The EPA
is also considering a requirement for diagnostic monitoring of the air/fuel ratio.  This
requirement will also affect the cost to the manufacturers.
                                                                             1-1

-------
2.     Background
Spark ignited engines above 19 kW referred to as "Large SI engines" are used in a
variety of industrial applications ranging from mobile to portable or stationary
equipment. Table 2-1 summarizes the top ten nonroad Large SI engine applications, as
well as the 1994-96 annual sales from Power Systems Research (PSR).

Table 2-1. Application Sales Summary
Application
Forklift
Generator Set
Commercial Turf
Pump
Welder
Scrubber/Sweeper
Air Compressor
Chipper/Grinder
Gas Compressor
Aerial Lift
Irrigation Set
1994-1996 Average
Annual Sales
55,198
15,419
7,558
6,584
3,395
3,403
2,691
2,320
1,919
1,812
1,761
Percent of
Total Sales
50%
14%
7%
6%
3%
3%
2%
2%
2%
2%
1 .6%
Large SI engines can be categorized by cooling system and fuel type.  Two types of
cooling systems are available, air and water cooling.  Gasoline, LPG (propane), and
natural gas are the principal fuels used. Natural gas powered equipment is not very
common and the cost of upgrading this equipment would be similar to the cost of
upgrading LPG powered equipment.  All costs calculated for LPG equipment will be
assumed to represent appropriate estimates for the costs of upgrading  natural gas
equipment.

Water-cooled engines dominate the market in most of the application  types presented in
Table 2-1. Air-cooled engines represent approximately 6 percent of the total market and
are more frequently used in applications that generate dust such as concrete saws and
chippers/grinders. Water-cooled engines are often not appropriate for these applications
because the dusty environments they operate in usually cause radiator clogging.
                                                                             2-1

-------
According to industry sources, LPG equipment represents about 65 percent of the Large
SI engine inventory.  LPG engines are available in almost all application types.  LPG is
especially dominant in a few applications with large populations such as forklift and
generator sets. About 95 percent percent of all Large SI engines in forklifts run on LPG.

Gasoline engines also are used in a wide variety of applications and especially prevail
over LPG engines in air cooled applications. The few LPG air-cooled engines are
generally rated under 19 kW (25 hp).

Considering these inventory characteristics, the report will focus on three engine
categories: water-cooled gasoline  engines, air-cooled gasoline engines and water-cooled
LPG engines.
                                                                               2-2

-------
3.
Technology Description
Emission standards do not yet apply to Large SI engines and they therefore use little or
no emission control technology.  The sections to follow describe baseline Large SI
engines and the technology needed to meet the proposed standards. Table 3-1 shows
baseline and projected technologies for gasoline and LPG Large SI engines.

Table 3-1.  Large SI Air and Water Cooled Engine Rule Technology Changes
            Baseline System
      (Gasoline air and water cooled)
                                             Baseline System
                                            (LPG water cooled)
 Fuel System
     Carburetor
     Low-pressure fuel pump
 Cooling System
    94% Water cooled
    6%  Air cooled
                                  Fuel System
                                     Mechanical mixer

                                  Cooling System
                                      100% Water cooled
       Advanced System (Gasoline)
                                         Advanced System (LPG)
 Fuel System
     Water-cooled - PFI
     Air-cooled - TBI
     High-pressure fuel pump
 Three-way Catalyst
 Oxygen Sensor- single pre-cat non-heated
     sensor, two for V engines
 ECM - 16-bit computer
 Diagnostics - Air/Fuel Control
                                  Fuel System
                                     Electronic Mixer
                                  Three-way Catalyst
                                  Oxygen Sensor- single pre-cat non-heated
                                      sensor, two for V engines
                                  ECM - 16-bit computer
                                  Diagnostics - Air/Fuel Control
3.1    Baseline Technologies

Baseline technologies on air and water cooled gasoline Large SI engines include a
carburetor and a low pressure fuel pump. Large SI engines usually have automotive
counterparts, but are governed to lower engine speeds to derate engine power and
modify the horsepower and torque versus engine speed curves.

Baseline LPG water cooled Large SI engines typically have an open-loop mechanical
mixer. LPG is stored at 130 to 170 psi, remaining in a liquid state at normal ambient
temperatures. The mixer typically consists of a diaphragm, exposed to manifold air
pressure, attached to a needle and orifice assembly. The diaphragm responds to changes
in intake manifold vacuum (which in turn is controlled by the engine load and throttle
setting), raising and lowering the needle within the orifice to finely adjust the amount of
LPG admitted and mixed with engine intake air.
                                                                             3-1

-------
3.2    Advanced Technologies

The following sections describe advanced technologies for gasoline and LPG engines.
All engines will be expected to use closed loop control with oxygen sensors and three-
way catalytic (TWC) converters. Since most Large SI engines are derived from
automotive counterparts, much of the technology developed for cars and trucks can be
utilized for Large SI engines.

3.2.1   Fuel System Technologies

To facilitate better control of the air/fuel ratio when using three-way catalysts, gasoline
fuel systems will probably need to be closed-loop controlled with port fuel injection.  In
some cases, throttle body fuel injection systems might be used, but better air/fuel ratio
control and less cylinder-to-cylinder maldistribution will be gained with port fuel
injection systems.  Since these systems are already in  use in counterpart automotive
engines, a great deal of the technology already exists.  Port fuel injection systems will
include a fuel injector per cylinder, a fuel rail, a pressure regulator, an electronic control
module (ECM), manifold air pressure and temperature sensors, an oxygen sensor, a high
pressure fuel pump, a throttle assembly, a throttle position sensor, and a magnetic
crankshaft pickup for engine speed.  Port fuel injection systems typically operate at
30 psi.  Throttle body systems will only need one fuel injector (although significantly
larger) for the engine and will use a lower pressure fuel pump. Throttle body systems
typically operate at 10 psi. There is also no need for a fuel rail on a throttle body system.

Future LPG fuel systems will most likely consist of an electronically-controlled closed-
loop gas regulator on a throttle body. An LPG converter temperature controller placed
on the coolant return line from the vaporizer/regulator will maintain the temperature in
the regulator at a level to prevent the condensation of heavy hydrocarbons from the fuel.
The condensed hydrocarbons can form deposits that prevent the regulator from working
properly.

While some manufacturers have been investigating the use of gaseous fuel injection
systems, the anticipated standards can likely be met with an electronic closed-loop
regulator on a throttle body.  This system will be typically composed of an electronic
mixer,  an oxygen sensor, a manifold air pressure sensor, an electronic control unit, and a
throttle assembly.  If developed, gaseous injection systems would require substantial
filtering before the injector due to contaminants in LPG.

3.2.2  Oxygen Sensors

Oxygen sensors will need to be added before the catalyst for closed-loop control.
Heated oxygen sensors are not necessary to meet the proposed standards as the emission
certification tests currently do not include cold starting. It is expected that most

                                                                               3-2

-------
manufacturers will use one oxygen sensor in each exhaust manifold of V-6 and V-8
engines to minimize maldistribution between cylinders.  At least one manufacturer of
LPG engine systems uses only one oxygen sensor in V engines, inferring the air fuel
ratio in the other bank from the one that is measured.  However, this manufacturer is
redesigning the intake manifold to insure more even air/fuel ratio between cylinders.

3.2.3  Electronic Control Modules

Manufacturers will need electronic control modules (ECM) to handle fuel injection,
ignition timing, and diagnostic functions.  Since advanced diagnostic functions are not
expected, 16-bit computers should suffice. Large SI engine industry contacts have
confirmed this assumption.

3.2.4  Catalysts

In order to accomplish the level of emission reduction necessary to meet the proposed
standards, three-way catalysts will be essential.  In some equipment models today,
catalysts are offered as an option.  The three-way catalysts expected to help meet
emission standards are derived from gasoline vehicle catalysts. Since the NOx
reductions needed are only around 90 percent, low precious metal loadings can be used.
It is estimated that catalyst volumes will be approximately 60 percent of engine
displacement with ceramic substrates and tri-metal formulations. At least one engine
supplier is using catalysts at 70 percent of engine volume to maintain  durability, but it is
unlikely that this will be necessary to meet the proposed standards. Also, several
manufacturers claim that metal substrates are necessary to minimize deterioration due to
engine vibrations and high exhaust temperatures.  Precious metal loading of 2.8 g/liter
with tri-metal catalysts are assumed here, but some manufacturers are using lower
levels. Detailed catalyst assumptions used in this report are shown in Table 3-2.

Table 3-2.  Three-Way Catalyst Characteristics
Catalyst Size
Substrate
Washcoat
Precious Metals
60% of engine displacement
Ceramic
400 cells per square inch
50% ceria/50% alumina
Loading 160 g/liter
Pt/Pd/Rh 1/14/1
Loading 2.8 g/liter
The cost estimates in Section 4 include the cost of a muffler with the price of the
catalyst. In general the catalyst does not provide adequate muffling and it is therefore
                                                                              3-3

-------
important to integrate a dedicated muffler to the catalyst. Space constraints on many
applications make it necessary to combine the catalyst and muffler in one can.

3.2.5  Diagnostic Functions

Effective diagnostic functions are possible on Large SI engines with a 16-bit electronic
control unit. The most fundamental is air/fuel ratio control, but others might include
oxygen sensor malfunction, or other catalyst performance variables, that the
manufacturer wants to monitor.  Diagnostic functions will illuminate a malfunction
indicator light  (MIL) on the equipment.

The air/fuel ratio control diagnostic will monitor oxygen sensor output and time the
switching function.  If the oxygen sensor does not switch within a specific amount of
time, the engine is either running rich or running lean and is therefore not at the optimal
stoichiometric air/fuel ratio.

3.3    Fuel Economy Improvements

Carbureted Large SI engines can run rich or lean at steady state.  Stoichiometric
operation provides a direct benefit for those engines set to fuel-rich operation but a
penalty for those that are set lean.  However, in-use operation of Large SI engines
usually includes a large amount  of transients, in which carburetors usually over-fuel.
Feedback control during transients significantly reduces fuel use in all engines, whether
set to operate rich or lean.  In fact, engines that operate lean on steady state, compensate
during transients by over enriching the mixture.  Since transients are high fuel use
conditions, keeping the air/fuel ratio  at stoichiometric during these periods will
ultimately reduce fuel consumption in-use.

Manufacturers and engine suppliers have estimated the benefits of gasoline fuel injected
systems and electronic closed loop control LPG mixers over open loop carburetors and
mixers at 10 to 20 percent. We have calculated a 10 percent improvement in fuel
economy; this  percentage can be scaled up or down to meet equipment specific
estimates.

3.4    Maintenance and Engine Life Improvements

By minimizing over rich operation, carbon build-up in cylinders will be less.  This has a
direct effect on oil contamination which allows longer oil change and maintenance
intervals. In addition, engines will last longer between rebuilds. A good indication of
this phenomenon is seen in the automobile industry where fuel injected closed-loop
controlled engines now last significantly longer and have less frequent maintenance
requirements than their carbureted predecessors. We have assumed a  15 percent
                                                                              3-4

-------
increase in engine life between rebuilds and a 15 percent longer maintenance interval,
which is much less than the changes seen in the automotive industry.
                                                                             3-5

-------
4.     Cost Methodology
In order to determine the costs to manufacturers to upgrade their engines to comply with
future emission regulations, this report focuses on the three engine categories described
earlier: gasoline water cooled, LPG water cooled and gasoline air-cooled engines.
Representative models of each category were chosen among several manufacturers'
engine lines and cost information was collected for each. No single model's costs were
used to develop the estimates presented in this report, but rather representative averages
of all costs collected were used for each technology. In addition to hardware and fixed
costs to the manufacturer, we also estimated fuel consumption and maintenance costs.
All costs are reported in year 2001 dollars.

4.1    Hardware Cost to Manufacturer

The fuel system and the catalytic converter/muffler are the two main components of the
hardware cost. The cost estimates for the different parts of the fuel system are averages
of retail prices obtained from Large SI engine manufacturers, fuel systems
manufacturers, and engine dealers. Component costs were  estimated from dealer and
parts supplier prices less various markup, the ARB study on nonroad engines done by
SwRI1, and studies done by Arthur D. Little2'3 and Lindgren4 on gasoline truck engine
technology costs.

Catalyst manufacturers were the main source of information for the cost of
manufacturing a three-way catalytic converter for a nonroad Large SI engine. They
provided generic information on precious metal and washcoat loadings as well as
catalyst volumes.  Precious metal costs were taken from the 2007 heavy-duty vehicle
rule analysis.5. The labor cost assumes a medium scale production of catalysts of a
similar size of a couple thousand units per year and an average labor time of two hours
per unit including the time necessary to weld the catalyst to the muffler. Because of the
diversity of equipment types and configurations especially among forklifts, the catalyst
manufacturers' process will be less automated than in the automotive industry. Labor
 White, Jeff et al.  "Three-Way Catalyst Technologies for Off-Road Equipment Powered by Gasoline and
 LPG Engines," prepared for the California Air Resources Board, November 1998.

 Browning, Louis and Kassandra Genovesi. "Cost Estimates for Heavy-Duty Gasoline Vehicles,"
 prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, September 1998.

 Browning, Louis and Fanta Kamakate. "Sterndrive and Inboard Marine SI Engine Technologies and
 Costs, " prepared for the U.S.. Environmental Protection Agency, September 1999.

 Lindgren, Leroy H. "Cost Estimations for Emission Control Related Components/ Systems and Cost
 Methodology Description", Rath & Strong, Inc., Report No. EPA 460/3-78-002, December 1977.

 EPA, "Regulatory Impact Analysis: Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel
 Fuel Sulfur Control Requirements," EPA420-R-00-026, December 2000.

                                                                                4-1

-------
rates used in this study are $17.50 per hour plus a 60 percent fringe rate for a total labor
cost of $28 per hour.

All hardware costs are subject to a 29 percent mark up which represents an average
manufacturer mark up of technologies on new engine sales6. The 5 percent warranty
markup was added to the incremental hardware cost to represent an overhead charge
covering warranty claims associated with new parts.

4.2    Fixed Cost to Manufacturer

The fixed costs to the  manufacturer consist of the cost of researching, developing and
testing a new technology.  They also include the cost of retooling the assembly line for
the production of new parts.  The estimate of research and development costs used in
our cost calculations reflects the fact that a great part of the technology needed for
compliance with future emissions standards has already been developed by the
automotive industry. The research and development efforts will concentrate on adapting
the existing technology to nonroad applications and ensuring that engines control
emissions over a wide range of operation. Many of these efforts have begun and an
electronic fuel injected nonroad gasoline engine is already commercially available. The
$500,000 of R&D represents 9 months of engine test time utilizing 2 engineers and 3
technicians.

The number of units per manufacturer and the number of years to recover are used to
determine the fixed cost per unit in year  1999 dollars. The number of units per year is
derived from Power Systems Research data adjusted using confidential sales data from
major manufacturers.  Five years is a typical length of time used in the industry to
recover an investment in a new technology.

4.3    Fuel Economy

As discussed in Section  3.3,  switching from carbureted to  fuel injected or electronically-
controlled engine powered equipment can lead to fuel cost savings for the operator. We
developed an estimate of these savings by using engine characteristics such as annual
use (hrs/year) and lifetime provided by the EPA nonroad inventory data and load factors
developed by Southwest Research Institute7.  Each engine's usage characteristics are
population-weighed averages of annual use, lifetime, and load factors of all the
applications in the particular fuel type. As LPG engines mostly operate in forklift
 Jack Faucett Associates.  "Update of EPA's Motor Vehicle Emission Control Equipment Retail Price
 Equivalent (RPE) Calculation Formula,", Report No. JACKFAU-85-322-3, September 1985.

 White, Jeff et al. "Three-Way Catalyst Technologies for Off-Road Equipment Powered by G;
 LPG Engines," prepared for the California Air Resources Board, November 1998.
                                                                               4-2

-------
 applications, their average load factor (0.31), annual use (1,729 hrs/year) and lifetime
 (8.4 years) are very close to the median forklift engine characteristics.  Gasoline engines
 are used in a wider variety of applications with higher average load factor (0.57), lower
 annual use (694 hrs/year), and longer lifetime (13 years). These three factors multiplied
 together give an indication of the total  work done by an engine over its lifetime. Even
 though the individual figures vary considerably, the calculated total lifetime work is
 comparable for gasoline and LPG engines.

 The brake specific fuel consumption (bsfc) for each engine type was based upon engine
 test data8. The price of gasoline and propane are based on year 2000 averages from the
 Energy Information Administration without highway taxes9.  The taxes were estimated
 from national average data provided by the American Petroleum Institute10 and U. S.
 DOE Transportation Energy Data Book11.

 Using the following formulas we determined an estimate of the yearly fuel consumption
 and yearly fuel cost for both baseline and compliant equipment.

                                 Hp * Load Factor * Annual Operation (hrs / yr) *  bsfc (Ib / blip - hr)
 Yearly Fuel Consumption (gal / year) =	
                                                 Fuel Density (Ibs / gal)
 Yearly Fuel Cost ($ / yr) = Yearly Fuel Consumption (gal / year) *  Fuel Cost ($ / gal)

 The difference between the yearly fuel cost for carbureted and fuel injected equipment is
 the savings in fuel consumption due to the increased fuel economy of the fuel injected
 gasoline equipment or the electronically controlled LPG equipment.

 4.4    Maintenance Cost

 The changes in maintenance intervals described in Section 3.4 can also result in cost
 savings for the operator. To determine these potential cost savings we estimated the
 intervals between  scheduled maintenance tasks such as oil change, tune up and engine
 rebuild using several engines' operation and maintenance guides. The advanced
  White, Jeff et al, "Three-Way Catalys Technology for Off-Road Equpment Powered by Gasoline and
  LPG Engines," Final report from Southwest Research Institute (SwRI 8778), April 1999.
Q
  US Energy Information Administration, "Monthly Energy Review, April 2001,"
  www.eia.doe.gov\emeu\mer.

10 Barnes, Tina. "Nationwide and State-by-State Motor Fuel Taxes", American Petroleum Institute, May
  1999.

11 Davis, Stacy. "Transportation Energy Data Book," U.S. DOE, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Edition
  19, 1999.

                                                                                  4-3

-------
technology engines were estimated to have 15 percent longer maintenance intervals than
the baseline engines. This estimate is borne out by trends seen in the automotive
industry when passenger car engines were upgraded from carburetion to fuel injection.
The cost of each one of these activities was estimated from quotes provided by forklift
servicing businesses and forklift manufacturers. The total maintenance cost obtained is
an estimate of the lifetime spending on maintenance in year 2001 dollars.

As observed with automotive engines, the new Large SI engines will likely last longer.
The analysis, however, does not attempt to quantify the economic impacts of extended
engine life.

4.5    Results

Preliminary results were submitted for review to the industry contacts who provided cost
information.  Their comments were incorporated in the final version of the cost
estimates which are presented in Tables 4-1 to 4-4.

Table 4-1 shows incremental consumer costs for baseline and projected water-cooled
gasoline engines using either throttle body injection systems or port fuel injection
systems.  It should be noted that incremental costs for both the throttle body and the port
fuel injection cases are referenced to the baseline case.  Throttle body systems cost an
additional $771, while port fuel injected systems cost an additional $869 over the
baseline carbureted version. The improved fuel economy and reduced maintenance
requirements more than compensate for the increased cost of the new technologies.

Table 4-2 shows the incremental consumer costs for baseline and advanced air-cooled
gasoline engines using either throttle body injection systems or port fuel injection
systems.  Incremental costs for both the throttle body and the port fuel injection cases
are referenced to the baseline case.  Throttle body systems cost an additional $842, while
port fuel injected systems cost an additional $940 over the baseline carbureted version.
As in the previous case, improved fuel economy and reduced maintenance requirements
more than compensate for the increased cost of the new technologies.

Table 4-3 shows the incremental consumer costs for baseline and closed-loop controlled
water-cooled LPG engines. The advanced LPG engine costs an additional $616 over the
baseline version. Once again, improved fuel economy  and reduced maintenance
requirements more than compensate for the increased cost of the new technologies.

Table 4-4 shows catalyst costs to the engine manufacturer.  These costs assume that the
same catalyst will be used for gasoline air and water cooled and LPG water-cooled
applications and also that the same catalyst will be used by manufacturers producing
similar-sized engines.  Catalyst costs to the engine manufacturer are estimated to be
$229 per engine, which included the cost of integrating the muffler.

                                                                             4-4

-------
Table 4-1. Water-cooled Gasoline Engine
Hardware Cost to Manufacturer
Carburetor
Injectors (each)
Number Required
Pressure Regulator
Fuel filter
Intake Manifold
Fuel Rail
Throttle Body/Position Sensor
Fuel Pump
Oxygen Sensor (each)
Number Required
ECM
Governor
Air Intake Temperature Sensor
Manifold Air Pressure Sensor
Engine Speed Sensor
Wiring/Related Hardware
Fuel System
Catalyst/Muffler
Muffler
Total Hardware Cost
Markup @ 29%
Warranty Markup @5% (incremental hardware cost)
Total Component Costs
Baseline
$51



$3
$35


$15



$40




$144

$45
$189
$55

$244
TBI
N/A
$19
1
$11
$4
$37

$76
$26
$19
1
$140
$60
$5
$11
$12
$45
$465
$229

$694
$201
$25
$920
PFI
N/A
$17
4
$11
$4
$50
$13
$60
$30
$19
1
$150
$60
$5
$11
$12
$45
$538
$229

$767
$222
$29
$1,018
Fixed Cost to Manufacturer
R&D Costs
Tooling Costs
Units/yr.
Years to recover
Fixed cost/unit
Total Costs ($)
Incremental Total Cost ($)
Baseline
$0
$0
1,750
5
$0
$244

TBI
$500,000
$100,000
1,750
5
$95
$1,015
$771
PFI
$500,000
$100,000
1,750
5
$95
$1,113
$869
Fuel Economv
Horsepower
Load Factor
Annual Operating Hours, hr/yr
Lifetime, yr
BSFC, Ib/bhp-hr
BSFC improvement
Fuel Density (Ibs/gal)
Fuel Cost ($/gal)
Yearly Fuel Consumption (gal/yr)
Yearly Fuel Cost ($/yr)
Lifetime Fuel Cost (NPV at 7%, $)
Incremental Lifetime Fuel Cost (NPV at 7%, $)
Baseline
76
0.57
694
13
0.605

6.1
1.103
2982
$3,289
$27,487

TBI
76
0.57
694
13
0.545
10%
6.1
1.103
2684
$2,960
$24,739
-$2,748
PFI
76
0.57
694
13
0.545
10%
6.1
1.103
2684
$2,960
$24,739
-$2,748
Maintenance
Oil Change Interval (hrs)
Oil Change Cost ($)
Tune-up Interval (hrs)
Tune-up cost ($)
Rebuild Interval (hrs)
Rebuild Cost ($)
Lifetime Maintenance Cost (NPV at 7%, $)
Incremental Lifetime Maintenance Costs
(NPV at 7%, $)
Baseline
150
$30
400
$75
5,000
$800
$2,573


TBI
172.5
$30
460
$75
5,750
$800
$2,354
-$219

PFI
172.5
$30
460
$75
5,750
$800
$2,354
-$219

                                                                        4-5

-------
Table 4-2. Air Cooled Gasoline Engine
Hardware Cost to Manufacturer
Carburetor
Injectors (each)
Number Required
Pressure Regulator
Fuel filter
Intake Manifold
Fuel Rail
Throttle Body/Position Sensor
Fuel Pump
Oxygen Sensor (each)
Number Required
ECM
Governor
Air Intake Temperature Sensor
Manifold Air Pressure Sensor
Engine Speed Sensor
Wiring/Related Hardware
Fuel System
Catalyst/Muffler
Muffler
Total Hardware Cost
Markup @ 29%
Warranty Markup @5% (incremental hardware cost)
Total Component Costs
Baseline
$51



$3
$35


$15



$40




$144

$45
$189
$55

$244
TBI
N/A
$19
1
$11
$4
$37

$76
$26
$19
1
$140
$60
$5
$11
$12
$45
$465
$229

$694
$201
$25
$920
PFI
N/A
$17
4
$11
$4
$50
$13
$60
$30
$19
1
$150
$60
$5
$11
$12
$45
$538
$229

$767
$222
$29
$1,018
Fixed Cost to Manufacturer
R&D Costs
Tooling Costs
Units/yr.
Years to recover
Fixed cost/unit
Total Costs ($)
Incremental Total Cost ($)
Baseline
$0
$0
1,000
5
$0
$244

TBI
$500,000
$100,000
1,000
5
$166
$1,086
$842
PFI
$500,000
$100,000
1,000
5
$166
$1,184
$940
Fuel Economv
Horsepower
Load Factor
Annual Operating Hours, hr/yr
Lifetime, yr
BSFC, Ib/bhp-hr
BSFC improvement
Fuel Density (Ibs/gal)
Fuel Cost ($/gal)
Yearly Fuel Consumption (gal/yr)
Yearly Fuel Cost ($/yr)
Lifetime Fuel Cost (NPV at 7%, $)
Incremental Lifetime Fuel Cost (NPV at 7%, $)
Baseline
60
0.57
694
13
1.10

6.1
1.103
2639
$2,911
$24,331

TBI
60
0.57
694
13
0.99
10%
6.1
1.103
2375
$2,620
$21,898
-$2,433
PFI
60
0.57
694
13
0.99
10%
6.1
1.103
2375
$2,620
$21,898
-$2,433
Maintenance
Oil Change Interval (hrs)
Oil Change Cost ($)
Tune-up Interval (hrs)
Tune-up cost ($)
Rebuild Interval (hrs)
Rebuild Cost ($)
Lifetime Maintenance Cost (NPV at 7%, $)
Incremental Lifetime Maintenance Costs
(NPV at 7%, $)
Baseline
70
$30
250
$75
4,000
$800
$3,024


TBI
80.5
$30
290
$75
4600
$800
$2,789
-$235

PFI
80.5
$30
290
$75
4600
$800
$2,789
-$235

                                                                        4-6

-------
Table 4-3. Water Cooled LPG System
Hardware Cost to Manufacturer
Regulator/Throttle body
Intake Manifold
Fuel Filter w/ lock-off system
LPG vaporizer
Governor
Converter Temperature Control Valve
Closed Loop System
Oxygen Sensor (each)
Number Required
ECM
Wiring/Related Hardware
Fuel System
Catalyst/Muffler
Muffler
Total Hardware Cost
Markup @ 29%
Warranty Markup @5% (incremental hardware cost)
Total Component Costs
Baseline
$50
$37
$15
$75
$40






$217

$45
$262
$76

$338
Conttrolled Carburetor
$65
$37
$15
$75
$60
$15

$19
1
$100
$45
$431
$229

$660
$191
$20
$871

Fixed Cost to Manufacturer
R&D Costs
Tooling Costs
Units/yr.
Years to recover
Fixed cost/unit
Total Costs ($)
Incremental Total Cost ($)
Baseline
$0
$0
2,000
5
$0
$338

Controlled Carburetor
$500,000
$100,000
2,000
5
$83
$954
$616
Fuel Economv
Horsepower
Load Factor
Annual Operating Hours, hr/yr
Lifetime, yr
BSFC, Ib/bhp-hr
BSFC improvement
Fuel Density (Ibs/gal)
Fuel Cost ($/gal)
Yearly Fuel Consumption (gal/yr)
Yearly Fuel Cost ($/yr)
Lifetime Fuel Cost (NPV at 7%, $)
Incremental Lifetime Fuel Cost (NPV at 7%, $)
Baseline
57
0.31
1729
8.4
0.507

4.2
0.602
3688
$2,220
$13,750

Controlled Carburetor
57
0.31
1729
8.4
0.456
10%
4.2
0.602
3319
$1 ,998
$12,375
-$1,375
Maintenance
Oil Change Interval (hrs)
Oil Change Cost ($)
Tune-up Interval (hrs)
Tune-up cost ($)
Rebuild Interval (hrs)
Rebuild Cost ($)
Lifetime Maintenance Cost (NPV at 7%, $)
Incremental Lifetime Maintenance Costs
(NPV at 7%, $)
Baseline
200
$30
400
$75
7,000
$800
$2,902


Controlled Carburetor
230
$30
460
$75
8,050
$800
$2,681
-$221

                                                                     4-7

-------
Table 4-4. Three-way Catalysts Cost Estimates
                           Gasoline/LPG
Washcoat Loading
% Ceria
% Alumina
Precious Metal Loading
% Platinum
% Palladium
% Rhodium
Labor Cost
9/L
by wt.
bywt.
g/L
bywt.
bywt.
bywt.
$/hr
160
50
50
2.8
6.3
87.5
6.3
$28.00
Material
Alumina
Ceria
Platinum
Palladium
Rhodium
Stainless Steel
$/troy oz


$412
$390
$868

$/lb
$5.00
$5.28



$1.12
$/g
$0.011
$0.012
$13.25
$12.54
$27.91
$0.002
Density
3.9
7.132



7.817
Engine Size
Catalyst Volume (L)
Substrate Diameter(cm)
Substrate
Ceria/Alumina
R/Pd/Rd
Can (18 gauge 304 SS)
Substrate Diameter (cm)
Substrate Length (cm)
Working Length (cm)
Thick, of Steel (cm)
Shell Volume (cm3)
Steel End Cap Volume (cm3)
Vol. of Steel (cm*3) w/20% scrap
Wt. of Steel (g)
TOTAL MAT, COST
LABOR
Labor Overhead @ 40%
Supplier Markup @ 29%
Manufacturer Price
Manufacturer Price with Muffler
2.50
1.50
12.70
$12.00
$2.27
$47.41
$2.17
12.70
9.9
12.7
0.121
48
33
98
762
$63.85
$56.00
$22.40
$41.25
$183.50
$228.50
                                                                         4-8

-------