1 / 51

Insights from two recent transport emission inventories made at DCE

This presentation reports on two recent transport emission studies conducted at DCE, focusing on train emissions in urban areas and airport emissions in Copenhagen. The studies provide insights into particle numbers, particle mass, and NOx emissions.

marchambault
Download Presentation

Insights from two recent transport emission inventories made at DCE

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. Insights from two recent transport emission inventories made at DCE

  2. Introduction • The aims of todays presentation is to report on two recent transport emission studies: • Study on train emissions made in the DCE project “Air pollution from train activities in urban areas”. • Airport emission calculations made in the DCE project “Inventory of emissions including particulate numbers at the inner apron area in Copenhagen Airport”, with a focus on particle numbers (PN), particle mass (PM) and NOx.

  3. Emissions from rail transport activities in the urban area of Copenhagen

  4. Introduction • In 2012 a project was made by DCE - on behalf of the Danish EPA - in order to examine the influence on urban air quality from railway activities in Copenhagen and the city of Aarhus (Olesen et al., 2013). • The project was initiated due to worried citizens, living close to the railway lines in Copenhagen, approaching the Minister of the Environment with their concerns over air quality deterioration, due to the emissions from near by trains. Luftforurening fra togdrift i byområder. Olesen, H. R., Ellermann, T., Winther, M., Plejdrup, M. S., & Brandt, J. 2013. Miljøstyrelsen. (Miljøprojekt; Nr. 1484).

  5. Introduction

  6. Introduction • The project as such comprises a detailed baseline emission inventory for rail transport activities, as well as dispersion modeling of the air quality in Copenhagen and the city of Aarhus. • For Copenhagen, a circular (5 km range) area around the central train station was selected as investigation area. Emissions from rail transport activities in the urban area of Copenhagen. Winther, M., Olesen, H. R., Ellermann, T., Plejdrup, M. S., & Brandt, J. 2014. Paper presented at 20th International Transport and Air Pollution Conference 2014, Graz, Austria.

  7. Introduction • This presentation explains the baseline emission inventory for trains during running, at stop and during service preparation around Copenhagen Central Station. • Total results of fuel, NOx, PM, CO and HC will be shown, as well as some diurnal distributions. • Spatial results will also be shown for the inventory circle (100m grid) suited for the further dispersion modelling work.

  8. Disposition • Description of inventory area • Activity data • No. of trains per railway line • No. of stops and stoppage time • No. of trains undergoing service preparation • Emission factors • Results • Conclusions

  9. Map of inventory area • Lines: Airport (green), Østerport (blue) and Valby (yellow) • Stations: Copenhagen Central Station (København H), Ørestad (Airport line), Østerport (Østerport line), Valby (Valby line) • Nørreport: Underground station; not treated as a station in the calculations • ”Sydhavn” and ”Dybbølsbro” limit the service preparation areas

  10. Train service preparation centers • Service preparation center Copenhagen (“KGC København”) is located between “København H” and “Dybbølsbro”. • The train service preparation center “Belvedere” is located between “Dybbølsbro” and “Sydhavn”.

  11. Activity data • Data from Danish Railways for a typical workday • Train type: IC3 or ME • Line • Departure times • Stoppage station and stoppage time (minutes) • No. of interconnected train sets (IC3) • No. of trains undergoing service preparation (time and duration) IC3 train: Separate train set units coupled up to meet various capacity demands ME: ME locomotive hauls four coaches

  12. Activity data – no. of trains during the day • IC3 is the only train type on the Kbh H-Airport line (66 trains) • Kbh H-Valby line: 169 IC3 trains, 124 ME trains; in total 293 trains • Kbh H-Østerport line: 66 IC3 trains, 90 ME trains; in total 156 trains

  13. Activity data – stoppage times at station • Copenhagen Central station: • Express (IC3, 5 minutes) • Intercity (IC3, 8 minutes) • Regional (IC3/ME, 3 minutes) • Valby, Ørestad, Østerport: 1 minute

  14. Activity data – train service preparation during the day • KGC København: Service of IC3 trains • 17 train set arrivals (5 minutes), 17 train set departures (20 minutes); in total 425 minutes • Belvedere: Service of ME trains • 41 arrivals (45 minutes), 41 departures (45 minutes); in total 1845 minutes

  15. Emission factors – during driving • Emissions are measured by Danish Railways and EF’s are further modelled to represent the average driving pattern for regional trains. • These EF’s are used as an approximation, due to lack of EF’s simulated for the specific driving in the inventory circle. • IC3 EF’s are much smaller than ME EF’s (per seat km).

  16. Emission factors – during idle • Time specific EF’s per train set are derived from km based factors and the fuel rate, due to lack of real idle emission data. • IC3 EF’s are much smaller than ME EF’s (per train set).

  17. Results • Highest contributions from trains during running • Fuel, NOx, PM, CO and HC shares are 74 %, 67 %, 65 %, 67 % and 69 %, respectively. • For trains during service preparation • Fuel[NOx, PM, CO, HC] percentage shares are 22 %[28 %, 31 %, 29 %, 26 %] • For trains at station: 4 % in all cases

  18. Results during running • Per train type: Many IC3 trains, but small emissions. ME is the dominant source mostly due to high EF’s • Line specificshares: Valby line: More thanhalf of totals Østerport line: Around 40 % of totals Airport line: Small shares

  19. Results for train service preparation • For ME trains, fuel share is 97 % of total during service; emission shares are 99 - 100 % • Due to high time related ME emission factors and long service time in total at Belvedere.

  20. Results for trains at station • As a hub, Kbh H account for around 80 % of the fuel and emissions. • Me trains account for 50 % of the fuel. NOx, PM, CO and HC shares are 78 %, 93 %, 81 % and 68 %, respectively.

  21. Total results • The pie chart again reveal running, service and stop shares. • ME dominates the emissions. Fuel, NOx, PM, CO and HC shares are 65 %, 87 %, 96 %, 89 % and 80 %, respectively.

  22. Results – Spatial distribution (100m x 100m) • The highest emissions (ME trains) are located on the railway lines leading through the service preparation areas. • ME trains are also the predominant source of emissions on the Valby and Østerport lines. • A dim (yellow) emission trail from IC3 trains is visible on the Airport line between Sydhavn and Ørestad.

  23. Results – Retrofit of NOx and PM emission abatement kit on ME locomotives • In 2011 DSB began to install emission abatement kits on ME locomotives in order to cut down NOx and PM emissions. The retrofit program was completed in autumn 2013. • The emission abatement kit consist of more emission effective fuel injection nozzles and fuel pump, and exhaust gas after cooler, which on average reduce NOx and PM by appr. 30 %.

  24. Results – Retrofit of NOx and PM emission abatement kit on ME locomotives • Expected total NOx and PM reductions are 26 % and 29 %, respectively. • For trains during running, train stops and service the NOx[PM] emission reductions become 25 %[28 %], 30 %[30 %] and 23 %[28 %], respectively

  25. Results – other sources inside the inventory circle • Rail transport emissions - depending on wind direction and other ambient conditions - can be a big environmental nuisance to humans close to the railway lines • Railways is, however, a small source for NOx (3%) and PM2.5 (0.5%)

  26. Conclusions • Inside the 5 km inventory circle around Copenhagen Central Station: • For trains during running, NOx, PM, CO and HC shares are 67 %, 65 %, 67 % and 69 %, respectively • For trains during service preparation, NOx, PM, CO and HC shares are 28 %, 31 %, 29 % and 26 %, respectively. • For trains at station, emission shares are 4 % in all cases.

  27. Conclusions • Due to the relatively large emission factors, ME trains dominate the emissions for all three source categories. • An emission kit installed on all ME locomotives after end of this project is expected to reduce total NOx and PM emissions by 26 % and 29 %, respectively.

  28. Conclusions • The use of more accurate emission factors simulated for the specific train driving patterns, and during engine idle combustion, would improve the precision of the railway inventory: • Trains during running is the largest emission source found in this work • Emissions during engine idle will most likely differ substantially from emissions during direct driving

  29. Emission inventory of NOx, particulate mass and particulate numbers at the inner apron area in Copenhagen Airport

  30. Introduction • In 2013 DCE made calculations of particulate numbers (PN) emitted from aircraft main engines, APU’s (auxiliary power units) and handling equipment in Copenhagen Airport. • The work builds upon a previous DCE study, aiming to quantify the atmospheric pollutants at the apron of Copenhagen Airport based on emission inventories, measurements and model calculations (Ellerman et al. 2011). Undersøgelse af luftforureningen på forpladsen i Københavns lufthavn Kastrup i relation til arbejdsmiljø, Ellermann, T., Massling, A., Løfstrøm, P., Winther, M., Nøjgaard, J. Klenø, Ketzel, M. , Teknisk rapport fra DCE - Nationalt Center for Miljø og Energi nr. 5. Opgørelse af emissioner og antal partikler på forpladsen i Københavns Lufthavn, Winther, M., Ellermann, T., Massling, A., Løfstrøm, P, Nøjgaard, J. K., Ketzel. M. & Kousgaard, U. 2014. DCE - Nationalt Center for Miljø og Energi, Aarhus Universitet. 84 s. - Teknisk rapport fra DCE – Nationalt Center for Miljø og Energi nr. 21. Winther, M., Kousgaard, U., Ellermann, T., Massling, A., Nøjgaard, J. K., & Ketzel, M. 2014. Emissions of NOx, particle mass and particle numbers from aircraft main engines, APU's and handling equipment at Copenhagen Airport. Atmospheric Environment , volume100, January 2015, pages 218-229.

  31. Introduction • The previous project comprised an emission inventory for PM2.5, but contained no estimates for PN. • Measurements, however, showed high PN conc. at the apron compared with PN conc. for HC Andersens Boulevard. • Thus, In order to gain more knowledge of the PN sources at the apron, a PN inventory was needed.

  32. Disposition • Activity data • Aircraft main engines (ME) • APU (Auxiliary power units) • Handling equipment • Emission factors • Results • Totals and PM and PN sensitivity calculations • Conclusions

  33. Terminal gates (black dots marked with letters A-F and a number) • Main engine start-up marks (brown dots) • Aircraft taxiways (red lines or green lines near the gates) • Runway parts (blue lines)

  34. Map of inner apron area (pink frame) situated between the terminal fingers

  35. Activity data • Aircraft operational data from CPH • Aircraft ID, gate on/off block time, start/landing runway and time • Handling activity data from handling companies • Equipment working time and engine power loads, per aircraft size • APU usage (ICAO guideline values) • Aircraft size categories, times-in-modes ICAO: InternationalCivilAviation Organization

  36. Emission factors – NOx and PM • Main engines: g/kg fuel and fuel/s from ICAO database per engine ID • Handling: EMEP/EEA guidebook, EF’s in g/kWh per engine age/size • APU: EF’s in g/s per aircraft size/age (ICAO manual)

  37. Emission factors • Big EF variation between studies; averages for idle (3.91E+16/kg fuel) and take off power modes (4.62E+16/kg fuel) were selected • Somewhat similar factors for APU based on one study (Lobo, 2012) • For non road engines (handling), fine evidence for low PN (3.1E+15/kg fuel)

  38. Results • Handling equipment: Large emission shares of NOx (63%) and PM (75%), due to the high fuel related emission factors for the diesel fueled handling equipment. • APU: Fuel consumption is the main reason for the relatively high NOx (25%) and PM (19%) emissions. • Main engines: Small NOx (11%) and PM (6%) emission shares, due to the very small emission factors during taxiing of the aircraft. • PN: Handling equipment is a small source (2.4%), due to the generally very low emission factors (#/kg fuel) for handling engines compared to aircraft engines. APU and main engine shares become 54% and 43%.

  39. Visible emissions for the handling area on the right side of the aircraft. • Push-back tractor trails from gate to engine start up mark. • APU emissions are visible at the gate, during push-back and by engine start up mark. • Main engine trails during arrival and departure (start up marks)

  40. Low particulate number emissions for handling compared to particulate mass (previous slide) • Due to low PN factors for handling

  41. Sensitivity analysis: PM impact of using zero sulphur jet fuel • The PM factor mainly consist of a soot and a sulphur part (ICAO FOA3.0 method) • Switching from 1000 ppm sulphur to zero sulphur jet fuel: the average PM reductions for main engines become 64% and 47% for idle and take off power, respectively. • The total PM emission reductions for main engines at CPH is expected to be 58%.

  42. Sensitivity analysis: PN impact of using low/high EF’s • The PN emissions are expected to be sensitive to the sulfur content as well as distance of the measurement equipment to the passing aircraft, exhaust plume evolution and meteorological conditions (wind direction and speed, ambient air temperature and humidity) (e.g. Wong et al., 2008; Timko et al., 2013; Hsu et al., 2012). • By switching from “low” to “high” EF’s (#/kg fuel), the estimated PN emissions increase with approximately a factor of 14.

  43. Conclusions • For the inner apron area: • Handling equipment share of NOx, PM and PN are 63 %, 75 % and 2 %, respectively • For APU the NOx[PM, PN] shares are 25 %[19 %, 54 %]. • For main engines the NOx[PM, PN] shares are 11 %[6 %, 43 %].

  44. Conclusions • Number based EF’s for aircraft ME and APU are still uncertain, as literature values (and sensitivity calculations) suggest. More airport experimental studies, or even direct measurements for CPH would be useful. • Due to good evidence for handling number based EF’s, it is still expected, that this source only plays a minor role for PN emissions in the airport.

  45. Conclusions • The sensitivity analysis for PM suggests that more than half of the PM emissions from aircraft ME originates from fuel sulfur. • It is important to use local fuel sulfur data, and precise aircraft/engine information, for PM precision. • Due to a similar sulfur dependency, jet fuel sulfur reduction is also expected to reduce PM emissions from APU’s, as well as particle numbers from aircraft main engines and APU’s.

  46. Thank you for your attention!

  47. Results – Air quality impacts • Highest additional NOx contribution from trains at Copenhagen Central Station, and service areas: Around 30μg/m3. • At HC A. Boulevard, 300 m from Copenhagen Central station, the additional NOx contribution is less than2 μg/m3; small compared to measured annual levels of 136 μg/m3 at this site. • PM2.5: Locally, around service areas, train stations and close to railway lines, the contribution from train exhaust amounts to 5-10% of the total level of 10-20 μg/m3. • Particles emitted from diesel combustion have a larger negative health impact, and wear related PM is excluded.

  48. Calculation method For eachtrainduringrunning the emissions arecalculated as: E = emissions, N = number of train sets per train (= 1 for ME trains), L = length of railway line (km), EF = emission factor per train set (g/km) For eachtrain at station or during service preparation the calculation is: Δt = time duration (minutes), EF = emission factor per train set (g/min)

More Related