MI: Social Cost Comparison Among Fuel Cell Vehicle Alternatives

Social Cost Comparison Among Fuel Cell Vehicle Alternatives (cont.)

<< Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next >>

table 4: Vehicular Emissions

Vehicle		Gasoline				Methanol		Hydrogen
Emissions (g/mile)		ICV	Tech-1^a	Hybr.^b	FCV	Ind. FCV	Dir. FCV	FCV
NOx	DTI	0.704	-	-	0.001	0.001	-	0
	ETSU	0.243	-	-	-	0.001	-	-
	Greet 1.5a	0.275	0.036	0.036	0.007	0.007	-	0
	Greet 1.41	0.513	0.257	0.206	0.005	0.003	-	0
	SULEV ^c	0.02	0.02	0.02	0.02	0.02	0.02	0.02
	Assumed	0.350	0.100	0.050	0.004	0.002	0	0
NMOG^d	DTI	0.755	-	-	0.371	0.023	-	0
	ETSU	0.322	-	-	-	0.026	-	-
	Greet 1.5a	0.207	0.119	0.106	0.057	0.038	-	0
	Greet 1.41	0.674	0.337	0.270	0.037	0.020	-	0
	SULEV	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.01
	Assumed	0.350	0.150	0.100	0.020	0.025	0	0
CO	DTI	7.553	-	-	0.005	0.004	-	0
	ETSU	3.664	-	-	-	0.003	-	-
	Greet 1.5a	5.517	2.759	2.759	0.552	0.552	-	0
	Greet 1.41	8.138	4.069	3.255	0.041	0.041	-	0
	SULEV	1.0	1.0	1.0	1.0	1.0	1.0	1.0
	Assumed	5.000	3.000	2.000	0.050	0.020	0	0
PM₁₀	ETSU	0.016	-	-	-	0	-	-
	Greet 1.5a	0.033	0.035	0.033	0.021	0.021	-	0.021
	Greet 1.41	0.033	0.032	0.030	0.021	0.021	-	0.021
	Assumed	0.030	0.030	0.025	0.020	0.020	0.020	0.020
SO_x	ETSU	0.013	-	-	-	0	-	-
	Greet 1.5a	0.050	0.006	0.004	0	0	-	0
	Greet 1.41	0.040	0.012	0.009	0.009	0	0	0
	Assumed	0.035	0.009	0.005	0	0	0	0

Improved technology for conventional gasoline engines. For Greet it is assumed SIDI (Spark ignition with direct injection and reformulated gasoline)
Grid independent and reformulated gasoline (SIDI for Greet 1.5a and ICE for Greet 1.41)
Super Ultra-Low Emission Vehicle Standard in California.
Assuming zero evaporative emission control for all FCV technology.

The second effect is associated with upstream fuel production and distribution activities that can generate emissions in the analyzed air shed basin. These activities can begin with emissions from feedstock extraction (NG, oil, etc.), emissions from the fuel production plant, fuel transportation and storage, and finally emissions from retail service station refueling. Table-5 presents some predictions for these emissions. Since the assumptions on each study analyzed are related to different conditions, the direct comparison is not a good approach. Table-5 should be used only as reference to get a feeling for what one should expect as a result if hydrogen is produced in-basin, methanol is imported and so on. The assumptions used in this study appear on Table-5 as well.

Table-6 shows the results of existing models that attempt to calculate vehicle life cycle emissions of CO₂. Again, this table should be used as an indicator since the pathways and geographic parameters of each model are close but not necessarily the same.

<< Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next >>

Top | Home | Fuel Cells | Search | E-Mail