Biomass Conv. Bioref. DOI 10.

1007/s13399-012-0049-z

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Benchmarking heavy-duty ethanol vehicles against diesel and CNG vehicles

Nils-Olof Nylund & Juhani Laurikko & Petri Laine & Jari Suominen & Mika P. A. Anttonen

Received: 14 February 2012 / Revised: 11 May 2012 / Accepted: 11 May 2012 # Springer-Verlag 2012

Abstract The Finnish energy company St1, producing waste-based ethanol, is working on high-concentration ethanol fuels together with the VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland. One example of the results of this cooperation is the high-concentration flex-fuel vehicle fuel (RE85) optimised for cold conditions, now available nationwide in Finland. The newest initiative is a field test with heavy-duty ethanol vehicles using Scania technology. In the preparatory phase, VTT carried out measurements on one ethanol bus and one ethanol truck. It turns out that Scanias ethanol technology delivers fuel efficiency (in megajoules per kilometre) almost as good as conventional diesel engines, with particulate emission levels lower than the diesel average. For fuel efficiency, the ethanol engine clearly outpoints current natural gas engines. With these promising results, St1 took the decision to go ahead with field testing with three trucks, one delivery truck and two refuse vehicles. A monitoring programme of the field test vehicles has been set
N.-O. Nylund (*) : J. Laurikko : P. Laine VTT Technical Research Centre Finland, P.O. Box 1000, 02044 VTT Espoo, Finland e-mail: nils-olof.nylund@vtt.fi J. Laurikko e-mail: juhani.laurikko@vtt.fi P. Laine e-mail: petri.laine@vtt.fi J. Suominen : M. P. A. Anttonen St1 Biofuels Oy, Finland, P.O. Box 100, 00381 Helsinki, Finland J. Suominen e-mail: jari.suominen@st1.fi M. P. A. Anttonen e-mail: mika.pa.anttonen@st1.fi

up. This paper describes exhaust emission and fuel consumption results of the ethanol vehicles, benchmarking the results against results from corresponding diesel and natural gas vehicles. Keywords Heavy-duty vehicles . Ethanol . Diesel . CNG . Emissions . Energy consumption

1 Background Finland has set a very ambitious target for biofuels in transport, 20 % in 2020. The strategy is to meet the greater part of this target using biofuels eligible for double counting according to Directive 2009/28/EC. However, in any case, there is a clear need to look for sinks for biofuels. As only limited amounts of ethanol can be blended into regular petrol, other ways to utilize ethanol must be evaluated. The Finnish energy company St1, producing waste-based ethanol, is working on high-concentration ethanol fuels together with the VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland. A new fuel-grade, high-concentration ethanol fuel for use in spark-ignited flexible fueled vehicles (FFV) and optimised for cold conditions has already been brought to the market under the trademark of RE85 [1]. The newest initiative is a field test with three heavy-duty (HD) ethanol vehicles, one delivery truck and two refuse vehicles, using Scanias ethanol technology. Buses are also under discussion. Before entering the field testing phase, VTT carried out preliminary measurements of HD ethanol vehicles for St1 in a go/no-go check, meaning that St1 wanted to have solid evidence of the performance of HD ethanol vehicles. The reason for this was that there is only limited information on the real-life performance of HD ethanol vehicles. VTTs comprehensive database of HD vehicle performance forms a solid reference for comparison. VTT has a

Biomass Conv. Bioref.

unique test facility for HD vehicles, with a transient-type chassis dynamometer, making it possible to generate distance-based performance values (e.g., grams per kilometre for emissions, megajoules per kilometre for energy consumption). It turned out that Scanias ethanol technology delivers fuel efficiency (in megajoules per kilometre) almost as good as conventional diesel engines, with particulate emission levels lower than the diesel average. Consequently, a decision to go ahead with field testing was taken. As Europe is already now suffering of a shortage of diesel fuel, substitution of diesel fuel is a crucial issue [2]. Figure 1 shows alternative fuel options for heavy-duty diesel vehicles.

Farm

Food industry

Site Etanolix

Dehydration

Terminal

Fig. 2 Etanolix is a complete concept for producing bioethanol from the food industrys waste and side streams

2 St1s ethanol production technology The Finnish energy company St1 has started to produce bioethanol from waste and industrial side streams by introducing new methods to combine efficient waste management and small-scale local preproduction using their unique Etanolix process. Apart from bioethanol, this process creates a by-product which can be used as animal feed. The 85 %-strength bioethanol produced near the raw material source in a small (typically 25 by 25 m) plant is sent to a large, centralised plant for dehydration to make it suitable as fuel component. There, the bioethanol is blended to petrol to make the final fuel. To date, six plants are on-line, producing annually some 10 million l of bioethanol. Figure 2 depicts this concept. The next step for the company is to make use of household-based biowaste. This is based on a different process called Bionolix, and those plants are slightly bigger in size. The first plant using this technology was started in 2010, and the estimated potential for this type of bioethanol production yields another 10 million l annually. However, in order to reach the levels required for a 10 % energy share of the petrol that the company sells, some 300 million l of ethanol is needed. Biowaste does not hold enough potential, so cellulose-based processes are needed. Development of the first Cellunolix plant using cardboard and other similar packaging material from household as well as from the industry and retail sector is already underway. Emblematic for St1s ethanol is sustainability and low life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions. As mentioned before, St1 also has improved the fuel formulation of highconcentration ethanol fuels, but so far only in the case of fuels for FFV vehicles (RE85). In the HD vehicle experiments which will be explained in this paper, an additive package of Swedish origin was used (see Section 5.1).

3 VTTS measurements of HD vehicles VTT commissioned a test facility for HD vehicles in 2002. Over the years, VTT has measured close to 500 HD vehicles, buses as well as trucks, thus creating one of the most comprehensive databases on the performance of HD vehicles. This database has been referred to in several projects for the evaluation of alternative fuel vehicles. VTTs test facility comprises a heavy-duty transient chassis dynamometer, a transient engine dynamometer and a full-flow constant-volume sampler (CVS) dilution and sampling system, as well as a full set of gas analysers for regulated emissions. The facility also has versatile instrumentation for special emission analysis, including detailed

Fig. 1 Biofuel options for diesel substitution [6]

Biomass Conv. Bioref. Fig. 3 Schematic of VTTs heavy-duty test facility

measurements of particles. Figure 3 shows a schematic of the test facility. The chassis dynamometer, manufactured by Froude Consine, has a roller diameter of 2.5 m and a power absorption capacity of 300 kW (continuous) at the driving wheels. The dynamometer has a very fast control system and electric inertia simulation making dynamic (transient) testing possible. Inertia can be simulated within the range from 2,500 to 60,000 kg. The regulated emissions are measured using the full-flow CVS system (Pierburg CVS-120-WT) and an analyzer set (Pierburg AMA 4000) conforming to requirements of Direc-

tive 1999/96/EC for the measurement of exhaust emissions of heavy-duty on-road engines. As the testing is carried out using transient vehicle driving cycles, the emission measurements are basically performed in the same way as passenger car chassis dynamometer tests for homologation. At VTT, the need for an approved chassis dynamometer measurement procedure for HD vehicles was recognised. VTT developed its own in-house method base covering both emission and fuel consumption measurements. In June 2003, FINAS, the Finnish Accreditation Service, granted accreditation for the method of VTT (T259, in-house method, VTT code MK02E).

Table 1 Emission factors and fuel consumption figures for two-axle city buses Braunschweig Diesel Euro I Diesel Euro II Diesel Euro III Diesel Euro IV Diesel Euro Vc Diesel EEV CNG Euro II CNG Euro III CNG EEV CO (g/km) HC (g/km) CH4 (g/km) NOx (g/km) PM (g/km) CO2 (g/km) CO2 eqvb (g/km) FC (kg/100 km) FC (MJ/km) 1.39 1.48 0.79 2.77 2.77 0.93 4.32 0.15 2.73 0.32 0.19 0.15 0.11 0.11 0.03 7.12 2.14 1.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.33 1.70 0.91 15.59 12.94 8.57 8.32 8.32 6.12 16.92 9.82 3.34 0.436 0.202 0.190 0.116 0.094 0.071 0.009 0.013 0.007 1,219 1,270 1,182 1,197 1,197 1,126 1,128 1,222 1,251 1,219 1,270 1,182 1,197 1,197 1,127 1,283 1,271 1,272 38.6 41.0 38.0 38.6 38.6 36.9 42.1 45.1 45.0 16.4 17.4 16.2 16.4 16.4 15.7 20.7 22.1 21.9

Braunschweig test cycle, half load (3,000 kg) [5]

a b c

For CNG vehicles CH4 0THC0.95, for diesel CH4 00 (estimated) CO2 eqv0CO2 +23CH4 Euro V emission factors are estimated by Euro IV results

Biomass Conv. Bioref. Table 2 Technical data for Scanias ethanol engine [3]
Vehicle Speed [km/h]
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 500 1000 1500

Braunschweig bus cycle

Emission levels Configuration

Euro V and EEV Charge-cooled in-line 5-cylinder 4-valve cylinder heads Unit injectors, EGR 8.9 l 28:1 199 kW (270 hp) at 1,900 rpm 1,200 Nm at 1,1001,400 rpm

Displacement Comp. ratio Power Torque

Time [s]

Fig. 4 The Braunschweig bus cycle [7]

Table 1 presents average emission factors for buses representing Euro I to enhanced environmentally friendly vehicle (EEV) emission certification (VTTs general database). The data have been generated using the Braunschweig bus cycle, which has been found representative of bus operation in Helsinki, as well. VTT uses half load (roughly 3,000 kg) as default load for standard size two-axle city buses. The data are presented relative to driven distance (in grams per kilometre, kilograms per 100 km or megajoules per kilometre).

The current ethanol unit is an adaptation of Scanias latest 9-l diesel engine with air-to-air charge cooling and exhaust gas recirculation, EGR. The ethanol version features, among other things, elevated compression ratio (28:1) to secure ignition, higher fuel delivery and special materials for the fuel system. The engine is available with Euro V and EEV emission certification [3]. The fuel is additive-treated (ignition improver, lubricity) hydrous ethanol. Table 2 presents technical data for the engine.

4 Scanias ethanol engine technology Scania ethanol buses have been in operation in Swedish cities since 1989. More than 600 buses have been supplied. Stockholm Public Transport (SL) as early as the mid-1980s decided to start replacing its diesel buses with buses running on renewable fuels on the inner-city lines. Today, ethanol buses complemented with some biogas buses are used on all inner-city routes. 5 Preliminary testing 5.1 Vehicles and fuels Two ethanol trucks and one ethanol bus were selected for preliminary testing. All three vehicles had the same 8.9l 199-kW (270 hp) ethanol engine. One truck had a conventional automatic transmission, the other one a more fuelefficient robotized mechanical transmission. The trucks were of two-axle configuration, with a total weight of 18 tons. The bus had a conventional automatic transmission like most city buses today. The reference vehicles were vehicles that had been measured for other projects at VTT. As for trucks, three reference vehicles with Euro V emission certification were

Table 3 Reference vehicles Fuel Buses Iveco Scania Volvo MAN Mercedes-Benz Trucks MB Axor 1829 Scania P280 DB Volvo FL D7F Em. control Em. class

Diesel Diesel Diesel CNG CNG Diesel Diesel Diesel

SCR+DPF EGR+FTF SCR 01+TWC Lean-burn+oxycat SCR EGR SCR

EEV EEV EEV EEV EEV Euro V Euro V Euro V

Performance data for the reference vehicles can be found at (the reports are in Finnish): http://www.transeco.fi/files/341/VTT_Kaupunkibussien_ Paastotietokanta_2010.pdf (buses), http://www.transeco.fi/files/510/ VTT-R-04847-11_HDENIQ_vuosiraportti_2010.pdf (trucks) DFF diesel particulate filter, FTF flow-through filter, TWC three-way catalyst

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

District Delivery Cycle

vehicle speed [km/h]

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

time [s]

Fig. 5 VTTs district delivery cycle for trucks

Biomass Conv. Bioref. Fig. 6 Bus NOx emissions

12 10 8

Bus NOx emissions

g/km

6 4 2 0 Iveco EEV Scania EEV Volvo EEV Avg. diesel MAN CNG EEV MB CNG EEV Scania ethanol EEV

chosen. For buses, five reference vehicles were chosen, three diesel vehicles and two compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles. Included in the diesel references were vehicles with EGR as well as with selective catalytic reduction (SCR) technology. One CNG bus was stoichiometric with three-way catalyst; the other one utilized lean-burn combustion. In the case of buses, the reference values are average results for three to seven individual vehicles; in the case of trucks, the reference values are results from one specimen of each individual vehicle type. Table 3 presents the reference vehicles. Ethanol needs to be additized for use in diesel engines. For the testing, an additive package from the Swedish company SEKAB was used. The composition on the completed fuel (Etamax D) is [4]: & & & & Hydrous (95 %) ethanol, 92.2 %m/m Ignition improver, 5.0 %m/m MTBE (denaturant), 2.3 %m/m Isobutanol (denaturant), 0.5 %m/m

vehicles was natural gas with a methane content of more than 98 %. 5.2 Test cycles For buses, the test cycle used for evaluation was the Braunschweig cycle (Fig. 4), as most VTTs bus data have been generated using this cycle. For the trucks, a cycle depicting delivery service was chosen (Fig. 5). Both cycles are transient by nature, corresponding to real-life driving. The top speed in the Braunschweig cycle is approximately 60 km/h; for the delivery cycle, the top speed is just below 90 km/h. The HD ethanol vehicles were evaluated for regulated emissions (carbon monoxide, CO; total hydrocarbons, THC; nitrogen oxides, NOx; particulate matter, PM) and energy consumption. Fuel consumption was measured gravimetrically, and energy consumption calculated from the lower heating value of the fuel. At this stage, no detailed emission analyses were carried out. When running the tests, the vehicles were first warmed up for 1530 min. Then, the test cycle was driven three

The diesel fuel used in the diesel vehicles was commercial EN590 diesel fuel (S<10 ppm). The fuel of the CNG

Fig. 7 Bus PM emissions

0.12 0.10 0.08

Bus PM emissions

g/km

0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 Iveco EEV Scania EEV Volvo EEV Avg. diesel MAN CNG EEV MB CNG EEV Scania ethanol EEV

Biomass Conv. Bioref.

NOx and PM emissions over the Braunschweig city bus -cycle

15 Diesel Euro 2 average Diesel Euro 3 average Diesel Euro 4 Diesel Euro 5 Diesel EEV CNG Euro3 average CNG EEV Light weight Euro 3 calibration Euro limits (by factor 1.8)

Euro 1
12

Euro 2

NOx g/km

Euro 4

Ethanol

Euro 3 ESC ETC

0 0.00 00

E EEV
0.05

Euro 5
0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30

E Euro 6

PM g/km

CNG vehicles
Fig. 8 NOx vs. PM for buses. The results for the ethanol bus market with a red star. This chart includes boxes for the different emission certification classes. (Certification values in grams per kilowatt-hour for the different emission classes are converted into distance-based values by estimating the work of the engine of a typical two-axle city bus at 1.8 kWh/km, e.g. Euro III NOx: limit value, 5 g/kWh, converted to distance-based value 51.809 g/km)

times, and the final results were calculated as an average of the two last cycles.

&

Fuel/energy consumption in megajoules per kilometre

6 Results The results are presented in graphical form. The following results are given: & NOx and PM emission in grams per kilogram

Here, only NOx and PM are reported, as these two components are the most critical ones for urban air quality. The HD ethanol engines are first and foremost meant for urban captive fleets. Figures 6 (NOx), 7 (PM), 8 (NOx/PM chart) and 9 (energy consumption) present results for buses, and Figs. 10 (NOx), 11 (PM), and 12 (energy consumption) present results for trucks. It should be noted that the urea consumed by the SCR vehicles is

Fig. 9 Bus energy consumption

Bus energy consumption

30 25 20 MJ/km 15 10 5 0 Iveco EEV Scania EEV Volvo EEV Avg. diesel MAN CNG EEV MB CNG EEV Scania ethanol EEV

Biomass Conv. Bioref. Fig. 10 Truck NOx emissions

12 10 8
g/km

Truck NOx emissions

6 4 2 0 MB Axor 1829 Euro V Scania P280 DB Euro V Volvo FL D7F Euro V Avg. diesel Scania P270 Ethanol EEV aut. Scania P270 Ethanol EEV rob.

not accounted for in the figures. Urea does not contain energy, and in practice it does not add to the tailpipe carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. However, the urea consumption of a typical SCR vehicle is some 45 % of the fuel consumption, something that from the operators point of view adds a little to the operating costs (the price of urea is roughly half of that of diesel fuel).

7 Discussionpreliminary testing 7.1 NOx emissions For both buses and trucks, the ethanol vehicles delivered average NOx emissions. In the case of buses, CNG vehicles showed lowest (stoichiometric combustion with three-way catalyst) as well as highest (lean-burn) NOx values. Within trucks, the Scania ethanol trucks delivered some 50 % lower NOx compared to Scanias diesel EGR truck. 7.2 PM emissions There were significant differences in PM emissions between buses and trucks. For buses (all with EEV certification), the
Fig. 11 Truck PM emissions
0.12 0.1 0.08

reference vehicles included a diesel vehicle with an actual wall-flow particulate filter and two CNG vehicles, technologies delivering very low PM emissions. Overall, the ethanol bus delivers PM emissions slightly lower than the diesel average, but higher than the CNG average. The Scania EGR diesel bus has quite high PM emissions, and compared to this vehicle, the ethanol bus has some 70 % lower PM emissions. None of the tested trucks had PM reducing aftertreatment devices. The reference group did not contain CNG vehicles (VTT has only measured CNG trucks in the 26-ton three-axle class). In this case, ethanol delivers a significant reduction in PM, some 75 % compared to the diesel average. 7.3 NOx/PM (buses) Figure 8 clearly shows the huge variation in emission results for buses. Only stoichiometric CNG buses deliver real EEV performance (lower left-side corner). Independent of age and technology, CNG buses deliver very low particulates. The figure confirms that ethanol delivers average NOx emissions, but lower PM emissions than most EEV-certified diesel buses.
Truck PM emissions

g/km

0.06 0.04 0.02 0 MB Axor 1829 Scania P280 Euro V DB Euro V Volvo FL D7F Euro V Avg. diesel Scania P270 Ethanol EEV aut. Scania P270 Ethanol EEV rob.

Biomass Conv. Bioref. Fig. 12 Truck energy consumption

Truck energy consumption
12 10 8
MJ/km

Effect of transmission

6 4 2 0 MB Axor 1829 Euro V Scania P280 DB Euro V Volvo FL D7F Euro V Avg. diesel Scania P270 Ethanol EEV aut. Scania P270 Ethanol EEV rob.

7.4 Energy consumption The Braunschweig bus cycle is more challenging than VTTs district distribution truck cycle. This goes for emissions as well as energy consumption. In the bus cycle, the ethanol engine consumes some 8 % more energy compared to the average diesel (16.5 vs. 15.2 MJ/km). However, it should be noted that the CNG buses on an average consume close to 40 % more energy than the diesel average due to the fact that the current HD gas engines operate with spark ignition and not compression ignition as diesel engines. Thus, when introducing renewable fuels for buses and trucks, ethanol used in diesel-type combustion is a much more energy efficient alternative compared to biogas used in spark-ignited gas engines. In the case of trucks, the results are interesting as the ethanol vehicle with robotized mechanical gearbox has marginally lower energy consumption than the average diesel

vehicle with manual transmission (9.9 MJ/km for ethanol and 10.2 MJ/km for diesel).

8 Field test with ethanol trucks Encouraged by the findings, St1 decided to go on with field testing. In the first phase, three companies, one dairy company (delivery truck, Fig. 13) and two environmental management companies (refuse truck in Fig. 14), have acquired one truck each for testing. Testing of buses is still under discussion. For the field testing, a 3-year monitoring programme has been established, including, among other things, regular emission and performance measurements on VTTs chassis dynamometer. As can be seen in Fig. 13, the climatic conditions in Finland can be quite severe, as winter temperatures drop below 25C even in Southern Finland. The first truck (at

Fig. 13 An ethanol truck for delivering dairy products for the Valio company

Fig. 14 One of the refuse trucks on VTTs chassis dynamometer

Biomass Conv. Bioref. Fig. 15 Energy consumption results for the first round of field test vehicle measurements. Delivery cycle with unladen vehicles, half load and full load
MJ/km

14 12 10 8 6 4

Energy consumption, delivery cycle

Scania Ethanol Refuse 1

2 0

Scania Ethanol Refuse 2 Scania Ethanol Delivery Scania Diesel Delivery ref.2

Load: Empty

Half

Full

the dairy company) started operation in February 2011, the two refuse trucks in late 2011. So far, no problems have been reported from the field. All three vehicles have now been measured once on VTTs chassis dynamometer. Figure 15 shows energy consumption data for the three vehicles and one reference diesel vehicle tested over the delivery cycle. One of the ethanol refuse trucks has a conventional automatic gearbox with torque converter, while all other vehicles are equipped with robotized or manual mechanical transmissions. The conventional automatic gearbox has higher losses than a robotized gearbox, and this can be seen in the results. The measurements confirm the finding of the preliminary measurements; for a typical truck cycle, the ethanol technology delivers energy efficiency equivalent to diesel (when using equivalent transmissions). This was true independent of load. Figure 16 shows a comparison on NOx and PM results for the delivery cycle. In comparison with the reference diesel
Fig. 16 NOx and PM emission results for the three ethanol field test vehicles in comparison with the reference diesel truck. Delivery cycle
NOx [g/km]

vehicle, all three ethanol vehicles deliver excellent performance. Average NOx reduction is 54 % and average PM reduction 70 %.

9 Conclusions In summary, it can be said that the HD ethanol vehicles delivered expected performance, especially regarding energy consumption. VTTs comprehensive database for HD vehicle performance forms a solid reference for comparisons. In the preliminary measurements, NOx emissions were average, and PM emissions lower (buses) or significantly lower (trucks) compared to diesel vehicles without particulate filters. The first set of measurements of the three field test vehicles show equivalent energy consumption and significant reductions in NOx and PM emissions in comparison with a reference diesel vehicle from the same manufacturer.
Emissions delivery cycle

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0.00

NOx:-54 %

PM:-70 %
Scania Ethanol Refuse 1 Scania Ethanol Refuse 2 Scania Ethanol Delivery Scania Diesel Delivery ref. 2

0.01 PM [g/km]

0.02

0.03

Biomass Conv. Bioref.

So far, no vehicle- or fuel-related problems have been reported from the field.
Acknowledgments The projects on heavy-duty ethanol vehicles receive financial support from the Finnish Ministry of Employment and the Economy and from Tekes, the Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation.

References
1. Laurikko J, Nylund N-O (2011) Optimizing high-volume ethanol fuel composition for cold driving conditions. Proceedings of XIX ISAF. 1014 October 2011. Verona, Italy. Paper T6.5C 2. Hdell O, Nilsson L (2011) How to design appropriate incentives. Proceedings of XIX ISAF. 1014 October 2011. Verona, Italy. Paper T0.2H

3. Nordstrm P-E (2007) Scania continues renewable fuel drive. New highly efficient diesel-ethanol engineready to cut fossil CO2 emissions by 90 %. Press Info 21.5.2007. At: http://www.scania.com/ Images/P07503EN%20New%20ethanol%20engine_tcm10163550_81325.pdf. Accessed 23 May 2012 4. SEKAB Biofuels & Chemicals (n.d.) Etamax D. Specification sheet for bioethanol fuel for converted diesel engines. SEKAB Biofuels & Chemicals 5. VTT (2010) Update of VTTs bus data base. 27 Dec 2010 6. Hdell O (2012) Alternative energy and new technology for heavyduty vehicles. TransEco seminar on advanced bus technologies and alternative fuels. Helsinki 6 Feb 2012. At: http://www.transeco.fi/ files/534/Alternative_Energy_and_New_Technology_for_Heavyduty_Vehicles_Olle_Hadell.pdf. Accessed 23 May 2012 7. Nylund N-O, Erkkil K, Clark N, Rideout G (2007) Evaluation of duty cycles for heavy-duty urban vehicles. Final report of IEA AMF Annex XXIX. At: http://www.vtt.fi/inf/pdf/tiedotteet/2007/ T2396.pdf. Accessed 23 May 2012