Clean Fuels for Road Public Transport Ulrich Weber, UITP-EuroTeam - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Clean Fuels for Road Public Transport

Ulrich Weber, UITP-EuroTeam

DG Environment Workshop on Clean Buses and other Captive Fleets 14 January 2005

UITP Report on Clean Fuels for Road Public Transport (2004)

Clean fuels for road public transport

A study report from the UITP Bus Committee – Expertise from 35 bus operating companies from 20 countries (Berlin, Paris, New York, Milan, Barcelona, Amsterdam, Vienna,..) – Rich experience in operating city buses ( … purchasing, servicing, maintaining and repairing the vehicles … ) Objective of the report – Give a review of all current available fuels – Present available experiences from operators using clean fuels in terms of reliability, maintainability, costs (purchase and operating), safety and service improvement

Content:

• Recommendations for measurement tests not on engine but
• n vehicle basis:

SORT (Standardised On Road Test Cycles) method

• Review of the propellants/technologies available for PT:

(a) carbon-based fuels/fossils (diesel, CNG, LPG, etc.) (b) renewable options (biofuels like vegetable oil, biomass and hydrogen) (c) applications of electrical energy (trolley buses, batteries, hybrids, fuel cells)

Clean fuels for road public transport

Current Changes and Developments

Clean diesel technologies (e.g. particle filter…) have been developed along with the entry into strict standards Synthetic fuels such as water-diesel emulsions are available Biofuels such as biodiesel and diester are available Alternative fossil fuels (e.g. CNG) have managed a significant market breakthrough Electric driven vehicles have been put into commercial service Fuel cell technology has been/is tested intensively

Compliance with EEV Standard

Project “challenging environmental standards in PT competition”

(German Ministry of Environment, 2004):

EEV can be reached with CNG and Diesel technologies!

22 CNG buses in Frankfurt/Oder 25 Diesel buses in Berlin

The Way to reach Euro V/EEV with Diesel Buses

• 2 Strategies -

NOx emissions PM emissions NOx/PM

SCR

M

• t
• r

( P M

• p

t )

EGR DPF (CRT)

EURO V

DPF (z.B. CRT) + AGR (oder SCR) Motor (PM-opt.) + SCR

SCR

Influence of CRT Systems on Particle Size

20 40 60 80 100 10-30 nm 30-100 nm 100-300 nm

P a r t i c l e e m i s s i

• n

%

without CRT with CRT

Particle size

Initial extra capital costs

(compared to a 12m diesel bus at 200.000 €)

CNG LPG Diesel + CRT Diesel + SCRT

Vehicle

40.000 € 30.000 € 5.000 – 6.000 € 10.000 €

Filling station

0,3 to 0,6 Mio € 0,22 Mio €

• Safety

devices

0,03 to 1 Mio € 1 Mio €

• Cleaning

installations

• 25.000 € 25.000 €

The Price of Change

Conclusion 1: Clean Vehicles and Alternative Fuels have extra Costs

Diesel technology is still the most economic solution and

• ffers with EGR/SCR and particle filters compliance with

highest emission standards (EEV) Technology/fuel independent incentives for clean vehicles Local authorities and transport undertakings should be free to choose their best strategy on how resources are allocated to obtain a clean fleet Extra costs for changing to clean vehicles and alternative fuels have to be taken into account and should not lead to a counterproductive cut in the PT service offer

Experiences from New Member States

Relatively old bus fleets

Example Bratislava: 504 buses – 42 % after lifetime, 131 trolley buses – 80 % after lifetime Example Lithuania: 80 % of all buses are more than 10 years old

Serious problem: only very limited financial resources for purchase of new vehicles/modernising old vehicles and maintenance of PT infrastructure More European structural funds dedicated to local PT would be a solution

8 6 9 7,7 5

20 40 60 80 100

CO HC NOx PM CO2 Total Transport Public Transport

Relative Responsibilities for Emissions in Urban Areas

(Source: UITP Focus Paper 2000)

Fuel Consumption of selected Transport Modes (per Person)

7,4 1,7 1,2 5,2 1 0,7 2 4 6 8 10

Liters/100 km Car * PT ** PT *** Metro ** PT Public Transport * 1,2 Persons per Car ** Average Consumption per Day *** Consumption in Rush Hours Metro *** 1998 2020 today today

(Source: Shell Study)

Porsche Cayenne Turbo: 23 liters/100 kilometers Articulated MB Citaro: 60 liters/100 kilometers

CO2 Emissions of selected Transport Modes in Relation to Cars

100 70,4 74,1 25,9 14,8 18,5 9,9 38,3 7,4

Pkw 1998 Pkw 2020 Flugzeug ÖPNV im Durchschnitt ÖPNV in Verkehrsspitze Stadtbahn im Durchschnitt Stadtbahn in Verkehrsspitze Lininebus im Durchschnitt Linienbus in Verkehrsspitze in Prozent 20 40 60 80 100

Per Cent Cars 1998 Cars 2020 Airplanes PT in Average PT during Rush Hours Metro in Average Metro during Rush Hours PT Bus in Average PT Bus dg. Rush Hours

(Source: Shell Study)

Conclusion 2: Comprehensive Strategy to solve

transport related problems in urban areas is necessary!

3 km/h increase in average commercial speed of London bus lines resulted in reduction of ~ 50 % of all major pollutants + GHG emissions!

Modal shift from individual motorized transport to more environmentally friendly modes of transport such as public transport, cycling and walking will be the key solution in urban areas for: Reducing pollutants Reducing GHG emissions Reducing accidents and improving road safety Reducing space consumption Reducing congestion