[PPT] - California Air Resources Board March 6, 2013 Environmental PowerPoint Presentation

SLIDE 1

Environmental Protection Agency

0 Air Resources Board

Emissions Inventory for Recreational Vehicles

California Air Resources Board March 6, 2013

SLIDE 2

Outline

Overview and Emissions
Inputs
Base Population and Age Distribution
Forecasted Population and Age Distribution
Activity
Base Emission Factors
Regional Allocation and Corrections
Rule Scenario
Results

2

SLIDE 3

Recreational Vehicles

Off-Highway Motorcycle All Terrain Vehicles (ATV) Snowmobile (OHMC) Mini Bike Specialty Vehicle and Golf Cart

3

SLIDE 4

Overview

What is an inventory?
An emissions inventory estimates the amount of

pollutants released into the atmosphere for a specific area and time span from a source

An emissions inventory helps policymakers to develop

control strategies and policies

How is it calculated?
Emissions = Population x Activity x Emission Factor

4

SLIDE 5

Overview – Emissions Results

Statewide Summer Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) (tons per day)

Exhaust ROG Evap ROG Total ROG Exhaust ROG Evap ROG Total ROG 2020 5.1 18.4 23.5 5.1 17.4 22.6 0.9 2025 4.6 19.9 24.5 4.6 14.1 18.7 5.8 2030 4.5 20.9 25.4 4.5 10.8 15.3 10.1 2035 4.6 22.5 27.1 4.6 8.6 13.2 13.9 Baseline Baseline with Proposed Controls Proposed Net Benefit CY

5

SLIDE 6

>,

ro

..._

(/)

C

I-

(9

0::

L..

Q)

E E

:::J

(fJ

Q)

"O

·3

Q) +-'

ro

+-'

en

35 ~ -------------------~

'

15 -+--------------------

' ~·

---------<

' •

10 -+---------------------------;

- Basel

liine 5 -+----I

With Proposed Cant ral

l s

0 ----~---~--~---~--~----------i 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040

Calendar Year

Statewide Summer ROG (tons per day)

6

SLIDE 7

Inputs: Population and Age Distribution

DMV Registration Data (CY 2000 to 2010)
Vehicle population by age for each calendar year
Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) number
Registration code

─ Codes N, P, R are unregistered vehicles ─ We assume all N, P, R code vehicles are stored at the location of prior registration ─ These “inactive” vehicles have diurnal and resting emissions only

DMV code Definition Status C Currently registered Active E Evidence of use Active S Pending Active N Not currently registered Inactive P Planned non-operational Inactive R Prior history Inactive

7

SLIDE 8

ca

::::,

c..

a..

>

I-

<(

90000 ~ ---------------- 80000

-Total Pop
Inactive Pop

70000 _j____'::::======~-----~r-.-------l 60000 -+----------------- 50000 -+------------------- 40000 -+----------------- 30000 -+---------------

------<

20000 -+-------------------------<- --

10000 -+------------------------
·- ·
.-----------<
0 --+----_....,..--~n...!_- ~~~

· _:__,

__

_______!_.,,

i-----------l

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Model Year

Age Distribution of ATV (2010 DMV)

8

SLIDE 9

....

ro

::::s

a.

0..

()

~

I

70000 ~ ----------------~ 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000

-Total Pop
••••Inactive Pop

1960 1970 1980

••
1990

Model Year

2000 2010 2020

C

Age Distribution of OHMC (2010 DMV)

9

SLIDE 10

Inputs: Population and Age Distribution

Vehicle technology
Two vs. Four Stroke Engines

─ Two-stroke engines have much higher emissions ─ Identifiable in DMV data using VIN decoder

10

SLIDE 11

1,800,000

+-'

1,600,000

ro

• • • • 2-Stroke

::J

a. 1,400,000

0...

-4-Stroke

Q)

1,200,000

(.)

..c

Q)

1,000,000

>

ro

800,000

C +-'

600,000

ro

Q)

L..

(.)

400,000

Q)

et::

••••••••••••••••••••• •••

200,000 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Callendar Year

C

Statewide Population: Vehicle Technology

11

SLIDE 12

Inputs: Forecasted Population and Age Distribution

Pop = Base Pop + Annual Sales – Vehicle Attrition
Population forecast elements
Annual sales

─ New vehicles added to the population ─ Reflects forecast of engine characteristics (two vs. four-stroke)

Vehicle attrition

─ Scrapped vehicles deleted from the population

12

SLIDE 13

Inputs: Forecasted New Vehicle Sales

Annual sales growth
Modeled recreational vehicle sales in California as a

function of forecasted nationwide housing starts

Housing starts

─ General indicator of economy, discretionary spending ─ Correlate well with historical annual vehicle sales

Short Term Forecast

─ 2011 to 2017, based on forecasted nationwide new housing starts (2012 UCLA Economic Forecast)

Long Term Forecast

─ 2018+, based on CA human population growth (1.2%)

13

SLIDE 14

Q)

«s

50000

(J)

«s

::::J

40000

C: C:

<C

30000

2

:I:

20000

Q)

'C

~ Q)

11 0000

+"'

«s

+"'

(J)

0 -------------------------< .

.5

11 11 .5 2

2 .

.5

Natiionwide Single Fam1 iily Housing Starts (Millllion)

Correlation Between OHMC Annual Sales and Nationwide New Housing Starts

14

SLIDE 15

(/) Q)

60000 ~ -------------------------~

1 UCLA 1

50000 --1--------- ------L.......O!O E = c=

~

no =m

_,__,_,_,.

i '"-----------------1

1 Forecast 1

1 New

1 Housing 1

40000 -t-------~-------.--,....-r-=-,:::r::----t------------1

CA Human Population Growth

85 30000 L

______

/L__~i\_--~-------.,~ k ~:::::::=----_J

co

:::J

C C

! 20000 -+------------------ -----------------1

(.)

:.c

Q)

> 10000 +-------,~

,~ ------¼-----1--1----1--------l

~~---'

,,

-ARB
--- MIC
~--~-~--~--~~-~----~--~--~-~

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Calendar year

Annual OHMC Sales Estimates ARB and MIC

MIC - Motorcycle Industry Council

15

SLIDE 16

Inputs: Vehicle Attrition

Estimate of population survival by age
Expressed as a survival curve
Derived from year to year analysis of DMV

registration data

Results: much longer vehicle lifetime than

previously estimated using industry reports

16

SLIDE 17

,.,,

a,

120

(0 Cl)

a,

100

.c:

a,

>

~

80

- •Previous Estimate

a,

z

\

II-

\ Current Estimate

+"'

60

C

\

a,

\

L..

\

a,

a..

40

(0

\

>

'

·-

'

>

20

L..

::J

\

Cl)

2

:I:

10 20 30 40

OHMCAge

Comparison of Survival Rate for OHMC

17

SLIDE 18

Inputs: Vehicle Technology

Two vs. Four Stroke
CY 2000 and earlier, use the same split from CY 2000
CY 2010 and later, use the same split from CY 2010

18

SLIDE 19

1,800,000

+-'

1,'600,000 ro

::::l

c..

1,400,000

(l_

Q)

1,200,000

(.)

..c

Q)

1,000,000

>

ro 800,000

C +-'

'600,000 ro

Q)

I...

(.)

400,000

Q)

er:

200,000 1990

• • • • 2-Stroke
-4-Stroke

2000 ! Forecast ==> 2010

Callendar Year

..

, .

, ..... , ..

2020

2030

C

Forecast: Statewide Population by Vehicle Technology

19

SLIDE 20

·-

+,I

ta

:::s

Q.

CL. QJ

u

·-

~

QJ

>

u

~

:::c:

QJ

""C

·;:

QJ

+,I

ta

+,I

V')

70000 ~------------------------~ 60000

(¥1990------
CV1995

50000

•••• CV2000

40000 30000

,,

20000

~

I \

:•

__ .._ __________ ----------

------------------• -·- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

: I \ : ·.

.

. .

10000

. . .

.

\ . .

.

·.

.

. .

- --..... -·~ --, __ ..,

____ --------.. , ____________ •.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

.,,_

"" .

.

. . ..

'-

·.

.

. .

.

. ·. . . .

....

' - ..

-- .... ·.:.:.· ······ ...

0 ----1----~--~-~--~~-.....a-...;.~:.&.-----.....-~-~----I

5

10 15 20 25

Age

30 35 40 45

so

C

Age Distribution of OHMC (1990 to 2000)

20

SLIDE 21

·-

...,

C'U

::::s

C. 0..

a,

u

·-

.c:

a,

>

u

~

:::c:

a,

"'C

·;:

a,

...,

C'U

...,

V,

70000 ---r----------------------------, 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000

CV2005
✓
' 1
CV2010

I

' -----------1 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------HU ·CV2015------------

'

.....

.

. .

..

I •

.

.

- --------- --------------' :

____________ : ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

i :

. .

I

:,

:

. .

- . -------- -----
.
,
♦
·.

I :

·.

. . \ .

.

.
• I

: \

·•

~

.

-------,----------
--- --- --------
------------- • -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

.

\

.

. . .

l

r.
\
.

.

~

______ ,

·•.------------.--

---' .... -------·-----

/

.

·.

. . .

I

:
•
0 i_:_

_

____L_:___L__

_

__L_

_

____L

__

_J__---=::::t:~~~

. ~
~:..:.al!..,.

_

_J

5

10 15 20 Age 25 30 35 40 45

Age Distribution of OHMC (2005 to 2015)

21

SLIDE 22

--.--------------------------------,

C

60000

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------____;(Y2020

_______ _

a,

u

·-

.c

a,

>

u

~

::c

a, "'C

·3:

a,

...,

ta

...,

V,

50000 40000 30000 20000 10000

• -CY2025
--CY2030
·••· CY2035
- --- -- -....
.
-- -- --- -- -- --- -- --- -- --- -
- --- -- -- --- -- --- -- --- -- --- -- -- --- -- --- -- --- -- --- -- -- --- -- --- -- --- -- --- -- -- --- -- --- -- --

.

... ~-, ·

.

..

..

~ ---------
:...·:...·. .

\

......

'··.

,
------- \ ___ ..
-'-------~-\-------------------------------------------------------

\

' I ' :· ..... .

\

~

: .. ,

.
----.----, ------------•

. --------

.

\

.

5

10 15 I '

:a.

, __ ,

20

Age

25 30 35 40 45

Age Distribution of OHMC (2020 to 2035)

24

SLIDE 23

Inputs: Activity

Activity (hours of operation or miles travelled/yr)
Based on Broad 2009 Survey (n=1127)
Provides use frequency and area of operation
Supplemented with
Information from internet user’s forums
Used vehicle sales websites
Activity Estimates
Decline with vehicle age
Are not assumed to change with economic trends

23

SLIDE 24

9000 8000

7000

...

(tS

~ 6000

u,

♦ ♦

Q)

2

♦

5000

♦

(.) ♦ ♦

♦

2

:::c

4000

♦

3000

i

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

2000

♦ ♦

1000 5 10 15 20 25 30

Age

OHMC Survey Activity Data

24

SLIDE 25

700

ARB
MIC Average

600

ARB Average

a..

ca

Q)

500 >-

U)

Q)

400

~ -

300

~

:::c

200 100 10 20 30 40 50

Age

800

OHMC Activity: ARB and MIC

Note: Average is defined as lifetime average (not weighted by VMT or population) 25

SLIDE 26

Inputs: Base Emission Factor (EF)

Exhaust
Evaporative
Vehicle in operation

─ Hot Soak (emissions after an engine is shut off) ─ Running (emissions while the engine is operating)

Vehicle in storage

─ Diurnal (emissions driven by the rising ambient temperature) ─ Resting Loss (emissions driven by the declining ambient temperature)

26

SLIDE 27

Inputs: Base Exhaust Emission Factors

Based on OFFROAD2007
Updated specialty vehicles and golf carts for

consistency with ATV emissions

CO2 adjustment to reflect real-world emissions

– Adjustment not applied to criteria pollutants

27

SLIDE 28

Exhaust EF (zero hour)

Vehicle Type Tech Group HP Model Year HC CO NOX PM CO2 G2 All All 34.2 54.1 0.01 0.42 79.58 1997 and before 3.59 39.1 0.49 0.06 79.58 1998 and later 0.68 19.8 0.64 0.06 79.58 G2 All All 34.2 54.1 0.01 0.42 109.63 1997 and before 3.59 39.1 0.49 0.06 109.63 1998 and later 0.68 19.8 0.64 0.06 109.63 G2 All All 34.2 54.1 0.01 0.42 79.58 1994 and before 24.25 488.10 2.03 0.71 79.58 1995-1998 8.68 300 2.8 0.75 79.58 1999 and later 0.47 100 2.7 0.25 79.58 2005 and before 140.7 385.1 0.54 2.3 615 2006 89.75 246.1 0.54 2.3 615 2007-2009 74.5 205 0.54 2.23 615 2010 and later 55.9 205 0.54 1.57 615 G4 All All 3.5 59.3 6.57 0.2 615 0 - 5 All 92 145.5 0.03 1.13 446.2 >5 All 63.27 100.09 0.02 0.78 446.2 1997 and before 14.6 159.1 2.6 0.24 446.2 1998 and later 2.77 80.59 1.99 0.24 446.2 1997 and before 6.64 72.33 1.18 0.11 446.2 1998 and later 1.26 36.63 0.91 0.11 446.2 Note that CARB and FI are included in both G2 and G4 ATV (g/mile) G4 All OHMC (g/mile) G4 All Mini Bike (g/mile) Snowmobile (g/bhp-hr) G2 All Golf Cart & Specialty Vehicle (g/bhp-hr) G2 G4 0 - 5 >5 G4 All

28

SLIDE 29

Inputs: Base Evaporative Emission Factors

Updated with new test data including hot soak,

running loss, diurnal and resting loss

2003 ATL study

─ ATV (n=4) and OHMC (n=4) ─ 65 to 105 F ─ Phase-II Reformulated Gasoline

2009 limited ARB in-house test data

─ ATV (n=5) and OHMC (n=9) ─ 72 to 96 F and 65 to 105 F ─ Phase-III Reformulated Gasoline

No deterioration assumed

29

SLIDE 30

Evaporative Emission Factors

2007 and before

3.12 12.23 6.59 1.07

2008 and after 2.37 9.29 5.01 0.81 2007 and before 1.28 6.93 3.73 1.08 2008 and after 0.97 5.26 2.83 0.82 2007 and before 3.12 12.23 6.59 1.07 2008 and after 2.37 9.29 5.01 0.81 2007 and before 1.46 8.74 4.71 1.25 2008 and after 1.11 6.64 3.58 0.95 Running Loss (g/mile) All Vehicle Type Model Year Group (all Tech Group) Hot Start (g/event) Diurnal (g/day) Resting (g/day) OHMC ATV Mini Bike Snowmobile* Golf Cart & Specialty Vehicle* 1.23 1.26 0.71 0.34

*running loss in g/bhp-hr

30

SLIDE 31

Inputs: Regional Allocation and Corrections

Spatial Allocation
Area of operation (exhaust, hot soak, running loss)
Area of storage (diurnal and resting loss)
Emission factor corrections based on regional

climate conditions

Exhaust temperature and RH
Evaporative Temp and RVP
Garage Correction
Weathering correction for inactive vehicles
Red/Green Sticker program benefits

31

SLIDE 32

Statewide Allocation

~

0.0000 - 0.0046 0.0047 - 0.0109

1111 0.0110 - 0.0228 1111 0.0229 - 0.0519 1111 0.0520 - 0.1220

S,sluy01.1

Statewide Allocation

.-J

0.0000 - 0.0075 0.0076 - 0.0175

1111 0.0176 - 0.0370 1111 0.0371 - 0.0639 1111 0.0640 - 0.1093

Lusen

Spatial Allocation (OHMC)

Area of Storage Area of Operation

32

SLIDE 33

Inputs: Emission Factor Corrections

Region-Specific Exhaust Emissions
Correction for ambient temperature and relative

humidity

Region-Specific Evaporative Emissions
RVP correction for hot soak and running loss
Temperature/RVP correction for diurnal and resting

33

SLIDE 34

Inputs: Garage Correction

Most recreational vehicles are stored in garages

which experience less temperature gradients than ambient temperature

Diurnal and resting loss emissions are adjusted

to estimated garage temperatures

For example
A 65-82 F ambient temperature equates to a 71-80 F

garage temperature

34

SLIDE 35

Inputs: Weathering Correction on Inactive Vehicles

Inactive recreational vehicles are assumed to

generate diurnal and resting emissions only

Over the year, tank fuel vapor pressure will decrease as

higher ends volatilize first

Staff estimated weathering effect by modeling of

the mass balance and vapor-liquid equilibrium

Annual diurnal and resting loss from inactive

vehicles are assumed to be about half (53%) as much as active vehicles

35

SLIDE 36

Inputs: Rule Scenario

Proposed lower evaporative emissions standard

Evaporative Process New Standards Proposed Emission Factor (THC) Unit

Diurnal and Resting Loss 1.0 g TOG 0.89 g/day Hot Soak 0.6 g TOG 0.35 g/event Running Loss 0.6 g TOG 0.07 g/mi Note that THC=TOG/1.1248

Phase in schedule: 2018 (33%), 2019 (67%) and

2020 (100%)

36

SLIDE 37

~ ro

CJ)

C

I-

(9

0:::

L..

(1)

E E

::::J

(f)

(1)

"'O

·3

(1)

....

ro

....

(f)

35 -,-------------------------,

'

15 ------------------

' -'"----l

'

10 -----------------------

- Baseline

5

With Proposed Controls

0 ----..-----------,----------.-------,---------.----------1 1980 1990

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 Calendar Year

ROG Benefit with Proposed Rule (Statewide, Summer)

37

SLIDE 38

Summary of Benefits from Proposed Rule (tons/day)

ROG NOx ROG NOx ROG NOx Statewide 23.5 1.0 22.6 1.0 1.0 SJV Unified APCD 2.9 0.1 2.8 0.1 0.1 South Coast AQMD 6.2 0.8 6.0 0.8 0.3 ROG NOx ROG NOx ROG NOx Statewide 24.5 1.1 18.7 1.1 5.8 SJV Unified APCD 3.1 0.1 2.3 0.1 0.8 South Coast AQMD 6.6 0.9 4.8 0.9 1.8 ROG NOx ROG NOx ROG NOx Statewide 25.4 1.2 15.3 1.2 10.2 SJV Unified APCD 3.2 0.1 1.8 0.1 1.3 South Coast AQMD 6.9 0.1 3.8 0.1 3.1 2030 Baseline Proposed Rule Proposed Benefit 2020 Baseline Proposed Rule Proposed Benefit 2025 Baseline Proposed Rule Proposed Benefit

38

SLIDE 39

Next Steps

Please provide comments:
David Chou (cchou@arb.ca.gov)
Staff Report Release (6/5/13)
Inventory release (documentation and model)
Board Hearing (7/25/13 to 7/26/13)

39