1 / 20

INGAS project – Year 2 Review Meeting

INGAS project – Year 2 Review Meeting. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011. Reply to Technical Review Report for Period 2 issued by Reviewers: Written responses Revised 24 months Periodic Report

randall-rosario
Download Presentation

INGAS project – Year 2 Review Meeting

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. INGAS project – Year 2 Review Meeting

  2. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011

  3. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011 • Reply to Technical Review Report for Period 2 issued by Reviewers: • Written responses • Revised 24 months Periodic Report • New version of rejected deliverables • Release of some delayed deliverables

  4. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011 Common methodology to compare the 3 engine technology approaches

  5. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011 Common methodology to compare the 3 engine technology approaches

  6. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011 Common methodology to compare the 3 engine technology approaches

  7. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011 Common methodology to compare the 3 engine technology approaches

  8. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011 Common methodology to compare the 3 engine technology approaches

  9. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011 Common methodology to compare the 3 engine technology approaches

  10. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011 Common methodology to compare the 3 engine technology approaches This methodology has been approved by PO and reviewers on October 2010

  11. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011 Competitiveness vs benchmark A comparison with a certain vehicle available today in the market is feasible only if vehicle parameters are well known and applied at the same time to all technologies considered inside INGAS project. Moreover current NG engines available into the market show a gap compared to gasoline ones that can be overcome only thanks to technologies developed in INGAS project.

  12. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011 Competitiveness vs benchmark

  13. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011 Emission targets As written in table 3 of original and last amended versions of INGAS DoW, all demonstrators of INGAS Project have to comply with emission limits halved respect to Euro 6

  14. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011 Cost assessment of different technologies INGAS Consortium agrees that the control of costs of NG powered vehicles is a critical issue and we have scheduled in the final assessment / comparison of the 3 engine technology platforms to carry out a cost evaluation of innovative developed technologies, but before to manage this issue it’s mandatory to freeze the technologies to apply on final demonstrators. Therefore the Consortium will provide a cost evaluation according to the list of technologies developed in INGAS project and mentioned above by Reviewers. This activity SP by SP will be carried only in the 3rd year of the project after the completion of definition of integrated technologies to apply on final demonstrators.

  15. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011 Choice of monofuel approach The main scope of INGAS project is to develop technologies to apply on engines running only on NG and therefore the focus it to optimize and to maximize the exploitation of NG features to reduce fuel consumption and CO2 and to increase the performances. This approach is based on the hypothesis of a short term development of refuelling station network suitable for CNG monofuel vehicles. If this event won’t occur due to lack of adequate infrastructure available in the near future, there’s no chance that INGAS project can change this status because out of its scope according to contractual documents (i.e. DoW).

  16. Reviewed INGAS GANTT (1/2)

  17. Reviewed INGAS GANTT (2/2)

  18. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011 SPA2 - Answers to Reviewer Comments

  19. Review meeting Period 2 – Brussels, 8 April 2011 SPB0 - Answers to Reviewer Comments

More Related