Swed Gov’t cost ben 970203 1 Summary (I) The proposed levels of sulphur in EU petrol for 2000 will...

Swed Gov’t cost ben 970203

1

Summary (I)

The proposed levels of sulphur in EU petrol for 2000 will make it difficult to further reduce automobile emissions with currently available technologies

Sulphur has a negative effect on the performance of 3-way catalytic converters and thereby increases the emissions of CO, HC (hydrocarbons) and NOx from petrol driven automobiles - however, the catalytic converter returns to full efficiency if sulphur content is subsequently reduced

The proposed standard of 200 ppm sulphur in petrol will:

inhibit the introduction of currently available gasoline direct injection (GDI) engines with systems for lean NOx reduction

– it has been reported that GDI engines can reduce petrol consumption by up to 35%

– GDI engines have already been introduced in Japan because current market levels of sulphur in petrol are less than 50 ppm

significantly increase the emissions from vehicles which can meet California low and ultra low emission standards (LEV and ULEV) and which are currently available in Europe

11


2

Summary (II)

The proposed standard of 350 ppm sulphur in diesel will inhibit the introduction of technologies to reduce emissions from diesel driven road transport

The retro-fit of trucks/automobiles with currently available oxidation catalysts and filters can reduce CO and HC emissions by around 50-70% and Particle Matter (PM) emissions by over 90% - however, diesel with a sulphur content less than 75 ppm is required

The introduction of DeNOx catalysts under current development, which have the potential of reducing NOx emissions by at least 30%, presently require a diesel with a sulphur content less than 50ppm

11


3

Summary (III)

On the short term, there are environmental and human health benefits which can be gained if there is a further reduction of sulphur levels in road transport fuels

Reducing sulphur limits in petrol from 200 to 50 ppm will further reduce CO, HC and NOx emissions by around 3-5%

Reducing sulphur limits in diesel from 350 to 50 ppm will further reduce PM emissions by 5-8 % from Heavy Duty Vehicles (HDV)

11

According to estimates of unit economic damage(ECU per tonne emitted) derived in other EU studies, the cost benefit in terms of

improved human health and reduced building damage are estimated between 400 -700 million ECUs a year

According to estimates of unit economic damage(ECU per tonne emitted) derived in other EU studies, the cost benefit in terms of

improved human health and reduced building damage are estimated between 400 -700 million ECUs a year


4

Sulphur’s Affect on Emissions - Automobiles (petrol)

The Auto/Oil study concluded that sulphur influences HC, CO and NOx emissions, but has no effect on CO2 emissions or fuel consumption

The effects are linear and can be predicted well

A reduction of sulphur from 382 to 18 ppm in petrol (Auto/Oil test fuels) reduced emissions over the composite test cycle (cold start, city and highway driving)

HC 0.015 g/km or 8.6%

CO 0.113 g/km or 9.0%

NOx 0.019 g/km or 10%

In an extra urban driving test cycle (warm catalyst) reductions were even larger, but there were larger vehicle to vehicle variations and a higher dependence on sulphur fuel content

HC 0.015 g/km or 52%

CO 0.067 g/km or 43%

NOx 0.027 g/km or 20%

22

Source: Auto/Oil Programme: European Programme on Emissions, Fuels and Engine Technologies


5


Sulphur fuel content effects emissions by decreasing catalyst conversion efficiencies

Sulphur competes for active surface area sites on the catalyst

Palladium catalysts, which are more effective in removing HC and less expensive, are more sensitive to sulphur fuel content

Sulphur’s effect on catalytic efficiency is not permanent, the catalyst can return to near optimum levels once it is subjected to low sulphur fuels and higher temperatures (>700°C)

There is contradictory evidence that sulphur increases the light-off temperature (i.e. the temperature at which the catalyst begins operating)

22

Source: Auto/Oil Programme: European Programme on Emissions, Fuels and Engine Technologies;Appendix: Sulphur in Fuels: Benefits of Sulphur Reduction; 3. Sulphur’s affect on catalyst performance


6


The proposed sulphur and other specifications were derived after a lengthy programme which was initiated in 1991

Parameter Unit Marketaveragewithout

proposal

Proposedspecifications*

(year 2000)

RVP Summer kPa 68 58

E 100 (min) %v/v 53 46

E 150 (min) %v/v 84 84

Olefins %v/v 11 18

Aromatics %v/v 40 45

Benzene %v/v 2.3 2.0

Oxygen %m/m 0.6 2.3

Sulphur ppm 300 200

Lead g/l 0.005 0.0051 0

*maximum value s , unle ss s tate d othe rwise

22


7


Reductions in CO, HC and NOx emissions can be expected if sulphur is reduced in petrol

Sulphur contentin fuel

(ppm)

% Δ frombase case

CO

% Δ frombase case

HC

% Δ frombase case

NOx

comments:

300 1.61 0.176 0.178 Base emission values (g/km)*

market average without proposal

200 -2.1% -2.4% -2.9% reducing only sulphur(to 200 ppm)

200 -4.1% -4.2% -4.7% proposed specifications

100 -6.0% -6.5% -7.6% proposed specifications;sulphur reduced to 100 ppm



1 0

Calculated emission reductions of CO, HC and NOx from automobiles:Composite cycle

*Base emissions were calculated using the composite emission model derived from the regression analysis in the Auto/Oil program and the proposed EU parameters for petrol.

Changes in emissions were calculated using the sulphur regression equations derived in the composite test cycles.

22


8


The impact is greatest in the extra urban driving cycle since the catalyst is warm

Calculated emission reductions of CO, HC and NOx from automobiles:Extra Urban Driving Sequence (EUDC)

*Base emissions were calculated using the EUDC emission model derived from the regression analysis in the Auto/Oil program and the proposed EU parameters for petrol.

Changes in emissions were calculated using the sulphur regression equations derived in the EUDC test cycles.

22

Sulphur contentin fuel

(ppm)

% Δ frombase case

CO

% Δ frombase case

HC

% Δ frombase case

NOx

comments:

300 0.23 0.028 0.093 Base emission values (g/km)*

market average without proposal

200 -8.0% -15% -7.9% reducing only sulphur(to 200 ppm)

200 7.0% -8.3% -19% proposed specifications

100 -1.0% -24% -27% proposed specifications;sulphur reduced to 100 ppm



1 0


9

Auto/Oil synthesised existing data and the linear relationship between sulphur content in diesel and PM emissions was determined

Light DutyVehicles

(without catalyst)

Heavy DutyVehicles

(without catalyst)

Percent reductionin PM emissionsper 100 ppmsulphur content

-0.16% -0.87%

(with catalyst) (with catalyst)

Percent reductionin PM emissionsper 100 ppmsulphur content

-1.5%not estimated

1 0

Sulphur's Affect on Emissions - Trucks (Diesel) 22

sulphur fuel content ranged between 500 and 2000 ppm

PM emissions ranged between 0.18 - 0.40 g/kWh for HDV

several different type of engines

assumed constant fuel consumption

Source: Auto/Oil Programme: European Programme on Emissions, Fuels and Engine Technologies;Appendix: Sulphur in Fuels: Benefits of Sulphur Reduction; 1. Auto/Oil and ACEA sulphur correction formulas


10

Sulphur’s Affect on Emissions - Trucks (Diesel)

A recent draft report by ACEA* recommends that the Auto/Oil sulphur correction formula for heavy engines should be modified

The Auto/Oil correction formula is only suitable for the ranges in which data was analysed - PM levels between 0.15 and 0.4 g/kWh and sulphur fuel levels between 500 and 2000 ppm

Current and proposed levels in the EU are outside the range studied in the Auto/Oil programme

Since October, 1996, sulphur content in diesel is regulated to 500 ppm

PM emissions from HDV are currently regulated to 0.15 g/kWh (EURO II)

The ACEA report contends that

the Auto/Oil correction formula is not accurate enough to predict the influence of sulphur fuel content of 10 to 500 ppm on particulate levels between 0.05 and 0.15 g/kWh

differences in fuel consumption need to be considered when correcting for nominal sulphur fuel content

*Influence of Diesel Fuel Quality on Heavy Duty Diesel Engine Emissions, Draft Report, European Automobile Manufacturers Association

22


11

PM 2 =PM 1 * (BSFC * 9.17 *10−8 * (S 1 −S 2 )

Sulphur content of fuels (ppm)

Sulphur to sulphate

conversion factor

Cycle weighted brake specific fuel

consumption(g/kWh)

Particulate emissions at

S1 level(g/kWh)


ACEA has developed a more accurate HDV sulphur correction formula to be used at sulphur levels below 500 ppm and PM emissions below 0.15 g/kWh

22


12

0,080

0,085

0,090

0,095

0,100

-100200300400500


Estimates of PM reductions from HDV can vary significantly between the two models

PM2 - ACEA sulphur correction formula

PM2 - Auto/Oil sulphur correction formula

S1 - S2 (ppm)

Correction of PM emissions to sulphur content in diesel (BSFC = 270 g/kWh; PM = 0.10 g/kWh)

9% reduction in

PM emissions S2 = 10 ppm

9% reduction in

PM emissions S2 = 10 ppm

PM2 (g/kWh)

25% reduction in PM emissions

S2 = 10 ppm

25% reduction in PM emissions

S2 = 10 ppm

22


13


Using the ACEA sulphur correction formula indicates that a 2-3 times larger reduction in particle emissions can be expected by reducing sulphur levels

Sulphurcontent in

fuel(ppm)

Reduction of PMemissions

(Auto/Oil sulphurcorrection)

Reduction of PMemissions

(ACEA sulphurcorrection)

comments:

500 (S1) Current EU standard

350 1.3% 2.8-3.7% Proposed EU standard

200 2.6% 5.5-7.4%

100 3.5% 7.3-9.9%

50 3.9% 8.3-11%

10 4.3% 9.0-12%1 0

Estimations of particle emission reductions using the Auto/Oil and ACEA sulphur correction equations

(BSFC = 200 - 270 g/kWh; PM = 0.10 g/kWh)

22


14


The application of the ACEA sulphur correction formula suggests a greater degree of freedom for certain engines in the NOx “Trade off”curves

22

I L L U S T R A T I V EI L L U S T R A T I V E

Fuel Consumption, CO2 , PM(g/kWh)

NOx(g/kWh)

Fuel2 - Auto/OilFuel1

Fuel2 - ACEA


15

It is the automotive and catalyst producers’ opinion that sulphur content greater than 50 ppm in both petrol and diesel inhibits the implementation of new technologies

New Technologies in Engine Design and Pollution Abatement Devices 33

Technologies Reportedly Inhibited by Sulphur in Fuels

Gasoline Direct Injection (GDI) engine technology

Lean NOx or (DeNOx) catalysts for GDI and diesel engines

Continuous Regenerating Trap (CRT) for HDV engines

Filters and/or oxidation catalyst for diesel engines


16

New Technologies in Engine Design and Pollution Abatement Devices

Commercially available GDI technology* represents a major breakthrough for greatly reducing fuel consumption in automobiles

The fuel is directly injected into the cylinder, this allows for quicker and more precise control of air to fuel ratios

In GDI engines pumping losses are reduced under light loads, boosting fuel economy

Since the fuel supply is more precisely controlled combustion can occur at much higher air to fuel ratios (> 40:1)

Since GDI engines are less susceptible to knocking, they run at higher compression ratios, this provides more torque at low- to mid - rpm ranges, this also aids fuel economy

*Not considered in the technology package for determining cost effective strategies for reducing emissions from road vehicles for the year 2010. Final Report: A Cost Effective Study of the Various Measures likely to Reduce Pollutant Emissions from Road Transport for the Year 2010, Touch Ross & Co., November 1995, European Commission.

33


17


However, new catalytic converter technology is needed since GDI engines produces significantly higher NOx emissions than conventional automobiles

CO +O 2Δ? ♦ ? CO2

HC +O2Δ? ♦ ? H2O + CO2

NO + CO Δ? ♦ ? N2 +CO2

Current catalytic converter technology requires an exact air to fuel stoichiometry in order to guarantee a 99% percent reduction in HC, CO and NOx emissions. GDI and Diesel engines run at much higher air to fuel ratios

Any increase in the air to fuel stoichiometry, as in diesel or GDI engine technology, inhibits the catalytic converter from reducing NOx since the higher oxygen levels will decrease CO levels

While the combustion process at high air to fuel ratios produces significantly less NOx, it is the ineffectiveness of the 3-way catalytic converter to remove NOx which results in higher emissions

33

Catalytic Converter Chemistry

(illustrative)


18


The major challenge for automotive and catalyst manufacturers is to reduce NOx under conditions of excess oxygen

Lean NOx or (DeNOx) catalysts are being developed which create a fuel rich micro-climate where hydrocarbons in the exhausts reduce NOx to nitrogen

A DeNOx catalyst will require changes in the structural properties of the catalyst surface

Three basic systems are being developed

Passive - where no reductant is added

Active - where 2 - 3% additional fuel is added upstream of the catalyst

Adsorption - NOx is selectively adsorbed and stored until the catalyst is ready to convert it

Studies have shown that high sulphur fuel content will greatly reduce the effectiveness of the catalyst

DeNOx systems currently under development require fuels with sulphur content less than 50 ppm

Studies have shown that high sulphur fuel content will greatly reduce the effectiveness of the catalyst

DeNOx systems currently under development require fuels with sulphur content less than 50 ppm

33


19

Mitsubishi and Toyota have successfully introduced GDI automobiles in Japan because sulphur content in petrol is approximately 30 ppm


A“Gentleman’s agreement” has resulted in market levels of sulphur in petrol of approximately 30 ppm

33

30 - 35% better fuel consumption

95 - 97% reduction of NOx emissions

NOx reduction is accomplished through a high Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR)techniques and newly developed DeNOx catalysts

The EGR and DeNOx catalyst requires low sulphur fuels

EGR - to prevent sulphur corrosion in the engine

DeNOx catalyst - sulphur forms an impenetrable barrier on the active surface area


20

Toyota’s GDI engine employs a NOx storage reduction catalytic converter combined with EGR technology


Lean burn range

Stoichiometricrange

NOx engine emissions

NOx storage NOx reduction

exhaust from catalytic converter

At high air to fuel ratios NO is converted to NO2 by platinum catalysts and temporarily stored

When the engine runs at stoichiometry the NO2 is released to mix with HC and CO to be catalytically converted to N2

At 1,200 rpm with 40% EGR,a 95% decrease in NOx emissions is obtained


21

California has recently introduced a new reformulated gasoline with a 30 ppm sulphur content to ensure the proper functioning of LEV technology


The extremely low sulphur level is to ensure that LEV and ULEV pollution abatement devices work correctly

According to Ford higher sulphur levels in fuels disrupts the proper functioning of onboard diagnostic equipment

Ford reports that sulphur effects are larger for LEV and ULEV vehicles than with traditional pollution abatement equipment

California has been the most pro-active state in the US in reducing emissions from road transport


22


Oxidation catalysts alone or combined with particulate filters can be retro-fitted on to diesel vehicles but require sulphur diesel content under 75 ppm

Over 1,000 buses and trucks have been fitted in Scandinavia with oxidation catalysts, filters or CRT (Continuous Regenerating Trap) packages

Both technique reduces CO and HC emissions, CRT also greatly reduces particulate emissions

While the catalyst does not remove particles it removes the organic material which contributes to particle mass

Ceramic wall flow filters have been developed which can remove up to 90% of the particulates contained in diesel exhausts

Filter regeneration techniques include

fuel additives

catalytic coatings to initiate particulate combustion

combining filters with oxidising catalyst upstream (CRT) - NO2 levels are increased in the exhaust which in turn “burns-off” the particles on the filters

33


23


There are over 1800 CRT units in operation in Europe

33

Reductions of CO, HC and PM by over 90% is achieved

Long-term engine tests in Scandinavia have shown that there are no apparent negative effects on engine wear

No external muffler is needed

Sulphur content in diesel must be lower than 75 ppm

No HDV manufacturer sanctions the retro-fitting of CRT technology on existing vehicles or offers it as extra equipment on new units


24

External Environmental Cost Benefits

The external costs of air pollution has been estimated in other EU projects*

The purpose of the ExternE project was to develop a unified methodology for quantifying the environmental impact and social costs associated with the production and combustion of energy

External costs are defined as costs associated with an activity of a group on a second group which are not fully accounted for by the first group (e.g.):

health effect costs for senior citizens from truck transport in cities

– corrosion effects on buildings from power generation

– crop damage from road transport

In the cost benefit study, Coopers & Lybrand summarised the data from the ExternE project into units of economic value damage (ECU per tonne pollutant; net present costs) for airborne NOx and PM from transport for each country in EU-12

* European Commission, DGXII - ExternE, 1995.

*European Commission, DGXI - Cost Benefit Analysis of the Different Municipal Solid Waste Management Systems: Objectives and Instruments for the Year 2000, Final Report, Coopers & Lybrand, March 1996

44


25


There are large uncertainties in determining the true costs of air pollution

44

EmissionsEmissionsDispersion

(concentration)Dispersion

(concentration)Impact on receptors

Impact on receptors CostsCosts

• uncertainties in calculating emissions from road transport

• uncertainties in appointing the source of pollutants

- inherent uncertainties associated with air pollution dispersion models

• uncertainties in the dose response functions

•receptors (e.g.):- population- crops- buildings- forests and rivers

• uncertainties associated with the actual costs associated with the response- health care costs

• uncertainties in the current value of receptors-the value of human life-costs associated with “nonproductive” individuals


26


There are three important valuation techniques for estimating the costs of pollution from road transport

44

Valuation Technique

Dose-Response damage response cost ofresponse

human health medicaltreatment

medicalexpenses

crop damage reduced output(tonne)

market value ofthe crop

Averting Behaviour potentialchange

response toavoid change

cost ofavoidance

acidification oflakes or soils

liming to avoidacidification

costs of liming

Replacement Cost(clean -up)

damage activity torestore to

originalcondition

cost ofreplacement

buildingdamage

restoration costs ofrestoration

1 0


27


Effects on human health represent the largest proportion of unit damage costs estimates

% ofdamage

costestimate

SO2

% ofdamage

costestimate

NOX

% ofdamage

costestimate

PM Transport

comments:

Health 87% 90% 97% Based on the value of statistical humanlife (VOS L), medical expenses, value ofwork days lost and Willingness to Pay(WTP) to avoid respiratory symptoms.

Buildings 10% 10% 3% Based on the cost of repair andmaintenance of damaged buildings andmaterial. Historical and culturalbuildings have higher costs.

Crops 3% <0.1% Based on the damage cost due toacidifying pollutants (crop yield loss atinternational market prices).

Forest <0.1% <0.1% Based on the market value of timbergrowth at UK prices.

Water <0.1% <0.1% Based on the costs of liming of S wedishlakes.

1 0

44


28


Unit economic values for damage in Europe per pollutant emitted in each country (ECU per tonne emitted) was estimated as follows

Country SO2 NOx PMtransport

Belgium 6 369 4 317 7 925

Denmark 4 532 3 466 7 913

France 6 175 4 241 7 821

Germany 6 279 4 329 7 458

Greece 3 191 2 400 5 892

Ireland 3 366 2 541 6 843

Italy 4 268 3 642 7 627

Luxembourg 7 252 4 771 7 949

The Netherlands 5 329 3 888 7 539

Portugul 5 107 3 946 6 278

Spain 4 662 3 704 6 848

UK 4 338 3 077 7 522

CO = 9 ECU/tonne HC = 1.9*CO = 17 ECU/tonne CO2 = 4 ECU/tonne

44


29


The estimated benefit in terms of externalised costs of a reduction in sulphur fuel content is between 400 - 700 million ECUs per year*

Emission

Scenario

PMTransport

(million ECU)

Nox

(3% reduction)

(million ECU)

Nox

(5% reduction)

(million ECU)

Diesel

300 ppm reduction insulphur

(PM = 0.10 g/kWh;BSFC = 235 g/kWh)

66

Petrol

75 ppm reduction insulphur

360 600

1 0

44

*Calculated for the current vehicle park. If sulphur levels are reduced, new emission reduction technologies can be introduced and subsequent costs benefits will be different.


30

Sulphur in Fuels - Benefits of Sulphur Reduction

Table of contents

11 SummarySummary

22 Sulphur’s Effect on EmissionsSulphur’s Effect on Emissions

33 New Technologies in Engine Design and Pollution Abatement DevicesNew Technologies in Engine Design and Pollution Abatement Devices

44 External Environmental Cost BenefitsExternal Environmental Cost Benefits


31


Table of contents

11 SummarySummary





32


Table of contents

11 SummarySummary





33


Table of contents

11 SummarySummary





34


Final Report February 12, 1997

Swedish and FinnishGovernments

Arthur D. Little ABBox 70434107 25 StockholmTelephone +46 8 698 30 00Telefax +46 8 698 30 02

Swed Gov’t cost ben 970203 1 Summary (I) The proposed levels of sulphur in EU petrol for 2000 will...

Documents

Transcript of Swed Gov’t cost ben 970203 1 Summary (I) The proposed levels of sulphur in EU petrol for 2000 will...