Preliminary Investigation of Nonroad Mobile Source Issues

1. Preliminary InvestigationofNonroad Mobile Source Issues Rhode Island GHG Process - Phase IV Transportation and Land Use Working Group - Meeting 3 March 17, 2005 410-569-0599 www.meszler.com

2. Background • During January TLU meeting, was asked to investigate two nonroad mobile source issues. • Contribution of nonroad sources to RI GHG. • Potential benefits of rail electrification. • Initial analysis was undertaken, but due to constraints imposed by available budget, results should be considered preliminary and subject to further refinement. Page 2

3. Nonroad Sources Agricultural Equipment Aircraft Airport Ground Support Equipment Commercial Equipment Construction and Mining Equipment Industrial Equipment Commercial Lawn and Garden Equipment Residential Lawn and Garden Equipment Recreational Marine Commercial Marine Locomotives Railway Maintenance Equipment Land-Based Recreational Equipment Page 3

4. Preliminary Emission Estimates TPY = tons per yearMTPY = metric tons per year AP = GHG Action Plan Page 4

5. Significance of Emission Estimates • Based on overall estimates from the RI GHG Action Plan, nonroad sources contribute about 6% of total carbon and about 15% of transportation carbon. • Estimates should be revisited before targeting for control. • Especially those for rail and commercial marine, which are based on very sparse data. Page 5

6. Rail Electrification • As indicated in previous slides, preliminary estimates show rail to be a small contributor to RI GHG. • Rail propulsion is almost exclusively electric in nature, but locomotives can derive electrical power from onboard diesel generators or from stationary power producers (via overtrack distribution wires or electrified rail). • Although only limited effort has been expended in this area, it appears that the GHG benefits of switching from onboard to offboard power generation are limited and depend entirely on local power generation characteristics. Page 6

7. Rail Electrification (continued) • Onboard diesel generation efficiency is limited by internal combustion engine efficiency. • While electric motor efficiency is much greater, the overall efficiency of offboard power generation must also consider boiler/turbine efficiencies at the production site and transmission losses. • When all factors are considered, overall efficiency can actually favor onboard generation and GHG performance becomes a function of the fuel used to generate offboard power (as compared to onboard diesel). Page 7

8. Rail Electrification (continued) • Thus, a detailed analysis of local power generation characteristics must be conducted to fully evaluate potential benefits. • Other issues that can “swing” GHG performance toward offboard power include lack of idling emissions for offboard electrics and improved efficiency under part load operations. • Detailed analysis of local idling time and operating characteristics required to fully evaluate. Page 8

9. Rail Electrification (continued) • Offboard power may have non-GHG emission benefits depending on local power producer characteristics. • Offboard power certainly has geographic emissions implications. • Emissions occur at power generation site, while onboard power emissions occur coincident with locomotive location. Page 9