1 / 43

COMPRESSED GAS IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN SOUTHERN AFRICA Lovell Emslie and Andrew Taylor

COMPRESSED GAS IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN SOUTHERN AFRICA Lovell Emslie and Andrew Taylor Cape Advanced Engineering (CAE) and Raoul Goosen Green Industries SBU Industrial Development Corporation (IDC). Southern African Transport Conference 7 July 2014. Project Summary.

lavey
Download Presentation

COMPRESSED GAS IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN SOUTHERN AFRICA Lovell Emslie and Andrew Taylor

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. COMPRESSED GAS IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN SOUTHERN AFRICA Lovell Emslie and Andrew Taylor Cape Advanced Engineering (CAE) and Raoul Goosen Green Industries SBU Industrial Development Corporation (IDC) Southern African Transport Conference 7 July 2014

  2. Project Summary • The IDC contracted CAE to evaluate Methane (natural gas and bio-gas) as an alternative fuel in vehicles • Evaluation took the form of a gas vehicle fleet trial • The objectives of the gas vehicle fleet trial: • evaluate operation and performance of vehicles running on CNG and CBG under SA operating conditions; • evaluate range of different types of engine / gas combustion systems in different vehicles under different driving / duty cycles • Operated 8 bi-fuel petrol vehicles (taxis)and 1 diesel dual fuel ( commuter bus evaluatedover 10 months (August 2012 - May 2013) • Project Outcomes • Determined cost of vehicle operation, • Impact of CNG combustion on engine durability • Parameters analysed: • fuel consumption and • engine wear and tear from oil analysis

  3. Gas conversion technology • Petrol engines with spark-ignition • Bi-fuel conversions are installed • Engine operates on petrol or gas (LPG/CNG/CBG) • Can achieve 100% petrol substitution • Simple low cost conversion benefitting from OEM ECU control systems • Dedicated spark-ignition commercial engines • Gas operation only, with spark-plugs • Commercial diesel engines • Dual fuel conversions are installed • Engine operates on petrol and gas (LPG/CNG/CBG) • Can achieve 90% diesel substitution • Complex conversion required to achieve high diesel substitutions and to retain engine reliability and durability.

  4. Bi-fuel petrol vehicles (minibus taxis) Background • 8 vehicles first evaluated on petrol to establish a baseline for 20,000 km, which included two oil drain intervals of 10,000 km, • then converted to bi-fuel operation evaluated for 20,000 km, which included two additional oil drain intervals of 10 000 km. • Under bi-fuel phase the taxis were able to drive on either petrol or CNG, but were expected to run mainly on CNG • the proportion of CNG actually used was reported as percentage petrol displaced • Fuel consumption and cost savings were quantified • Engine durability / wear rates and oil degradation were quantified • Economic returns were quantified to asses viability

  5. Bi-fuel commuter taxi vehicles • Taxi fleet 1 • 2 x Toyota 2.7 litre Quantum • 1 x CAM 2.4 litre Indlovo • 1 x CMC 2.4 litre Ses’buyile • 45,000 to 60,000 km tested per vehicle • Vehicle age/mileage at start was 30,000 to 130,000 km • Taxi Fleet 2 • 4 x Toyota 2.7 litre Quantum • 44,000 to 57,000 km tested per vehicle • Vehicle age/mileage at start was 72,000 to 513,000 km

  6. Bi-fuel commuter taxi vehicles Fuel data ‘fleet 2’ Total fuel consumption: T#5

  7. Bi-fuel commuter taxi vehicles Fuel data ‘fleet 2’ Fuel operating cost: T#5

  8. Bi-fuel commuter taxi vehicles Fuel data ‘fleet 2’ CNG substitution of petrol: T#5

  9. Bi-fuel commuter taxi vehicles Fuel data analysis summary: ‘fleet 2’

  10. Bi-fuel commuter taxi vehicles Oil data ‘fleet 1’ – wear metals Iron spectographic analysis results: T#1 to T#4

  11. Bi-fuel commuter taxi vehicles Oil data ‘fleet 1’ – wear metals Aluminium spectographic results: T#1 to T#4

  12. Bi-fuel commuter taxi vehicles Oil data ‘fleet 1’ – wear metals Copper and tin spectographic results: T#1 to T#4

  13. Bi-fuel commuter taxi vehicles Oil data ‘fleet 1’ – oil additive component concentration Calcium, zinc and phosphorous analysis results: T#1 to T#4

  14. Bi-fuel commuter taxi vehicles Oil data ‘fleet 1’ – oil viscosity Viscosity at 100º C and 40ºC: T#1 to T#4

  15. Bi-fuel commuter taxi vehicles Oil data ‘fleet 1’ – ability to neutralise acid: TBN T#1 to T#4

  16. Diesel dual fuel commuter bus Background • a diesel dual fuel (DDF) commuter bus was compared to a standard (diesel-only) commuter bus • these 2 commuter buses operated on similar routes between Lenasia and JHB CBD

  17. Diesel dual fuel commuter bus Fuel data analysis summary

  18. Diesel dual fuel commuter bus Fuel data Fuel (diesel-only) consumption: DDF commuter bus

  19. Diesel dual fuel commuter bus Fuel data Fuel (CNG-only) consumption: DDF commuter bus

  20. Diesel dual fuel commuter bus Fuel data Standard fuel (diesel) consumption: standard diesel commuter bus

  21. Diesel dual fuel commuter bus Fuel data Diesel substitution by CNG in DDF commuter bus

  22. Diesel dual fuel commuter bus Fuel data Total fuel consumption: DDF commuter bus versus standard diesel bus

  23. Diesel dual fuel commuter bus Fuel data Fuel operating cost: DDF commuter bus versus standard diesel bus

  24. Diesel dual fuel commuter bus Oil data – wear metals Iron spectographic analysis results: DDF versus diesel-only commuter bus

  25. Diesel dual fuel commuter bus Oil data – wear metals Aluminium spectographic results: DDF versus diesel-only commuter bus

  26. Diesel dual fuel commuter bus Oil data – oil additive component concentration Calcium, zinc and phosphorous analysis results: DDF versus diesel-only commuter bus

  27. Diesel dual fuel commuter bus Oil data – oil viscosity Viscosity at 100º C and 40ºC: DDF versus diesel-only commuter bus

  28. Diesel dual fuel commuter bus Oil data – ability to neutralise acid: TBN DDF versus diesel-only commuter bus

  29. Diesel dual fuel commuter bus Financial viability of dual fuel conversion Scenarios tested during the cash flow analysis exercise

  30. Diesel dual fuel commuter bus Financial viability of dual fuel conversion

  31. Bi-fuel commuter taxi vehicles Financial viability of bi-fuel conversion

  32. Bi-fuel fuel commuter taxi Vehicle trial summary and concluding findings • Fuel operating cost saving : 49c to 55c per km / 33% to 36% cost reduction • 33% to 36% cost saving is based on 95% diesel substitution • Bi-fuel operation has no negative effect on engine durability and cost of maintaining vehicle compared to standard (petrol) operation • Results indicate that the taxi industry requires higher quality lubricants due to demanding engine duty cycles

  33. Diesel dual fuel commuter bus Vehicle trial summary and concluding findings • Fuel operating cost saving : 76c per km / 19.2% cost reduction • 76c per km / 19.2% saving is based on 71% diesel substitution • Diesel dual fuel operation has no negative effect on engine durability or the cost of maintaining vehicles compared to standard (diesel-only) operation • further testing will confirm that extended service intervals can be achieved with DDF operation to offer further reductions in operating costs

  34. Diesel dual fuel commuter bus Vehicle trial summary and concluding findings Conclusions based on oil analysis results – • Oil drain interval could be extended by as much as 100% depending on substitution of diesel by CNG • more extensive fleet trials should be conducted • Fuel operating cost saving is only portion of life cycle cost saving achievable from diesel dual fuel operation that has been confirmed and quantified through this fleet trial • Actual life cycle cost saving may therefore be significantly greater than 76c per km, which will result in substantially higher internal rates of return

  35. Objective: 50% of all vehicles operated in the City fuelled by alternative energy by 2016 • Four new Rea Vaya depots, supplied with compressed natural gas (CNG) and compressed bio-gas (bio-methane - CBG) • Large number of new diesel dual fuel Rea Vaya buses - inner city route, stop/start driving cycle, one can achieve 65% gas-for-diesel substitution • Metrobus is ordering 150 new DDF buses; more in the next financial year. Market needs – City of Johannesburg “Johannesburg is a City at work conducting a Green Revolution”

  36. Natural gas / Bio-methane Fueled vehiclesGoods transport, public transport, mining , power generation Renewable energy innovation centre

  37. NGV trend worldwide

  38. Bi-fuel technology for petrol cars • Technology is readily available • Conversions do not require a high level of engineering – numerous job opportunities • Improved lubricants are required for taxis (petrol and gas) • IDC / City of Johannesburg etc. supporting conversion of >20 000 taxis

  39. Appropriate Diesel Dual Fuel technology • Highly engineered solutions are required – non intrusive: Not deterring the operation of the OEM engine management system • Diesel substitution, fuel efficiency and emissions performance must be optimised • Engine durability must be maintained • Driving behaviour must be managed • Greater benefits for freight vehicles

  40. DDF substitution and operating cost • Typical driving cycle for Urban bus operator • Diesel substitution by CNG, depending on driving cycle • Inner city route, stop/start driving cycle, one can achieve 65% • Average driving cycle : 70 to 75% • More free moving driving cycle : 85% substitution • Cost saving, at • Diesel price: R 13 per litre (R 360/ gigajoule) • CNG price: R 6.90 per diesel litre ( R 190 / gigajoule) • Cost saving, at • 65% substitution: 30% fuel cost saving, • 70% substitution: 33% fuel cost saving, • 75% substitution: 35% fuel cost saving, • 85% substitution: 40% fuel cost saving, • With Diesel dual fuel • A slight decrease in maintenance cost • A slight decrease in engine efficiency

  41. Greenhouse gas emissions reduction: CNG compared to diesel • CNG as a vehicle fuel generates less CO2 emissions per energy unit of fuel burned, as a result of the lower carbon-hydrogen ratio of methane compared to diesel and petrol. • CNG produces 27% less CO2 compared to diesel (acc. to US EPA) (if at same vehicle efficiency). • In a DDF application with average diesel substitution of 70% by CNG, the CO2 reduction (due to methane) is 19% (because DDF achieves same efficiency as original diesel).

  42. DDF compared to diesel emissions • Typical DDF reduction in emissions (compared to diesel): • Assuming a 80% substitution of diesel by CNG: • The reduction of CO2is between 20 – 22% • PM reduction is up to 80% • Higher engine-out total HCs and CO, effectively eliminated by a simple simple and inexpensive oxidation catalyst

  43. DDF technology is available now • Diesel common rail engines including • MAN – D08, D20 • Unit pump injection systems including • OM 906, OM926, OM501/2

More Related