EXECUTIVE SUMMARY |
i |
|
Key Conclusions |
i |
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS |
iii |
UNITS OF MEASURE |
iv |
TABLE OF CONTENTS |
v |
LIST OF TABLES |
vi |
INTRODUCTION |
1 |
STATUS OF FISCHER-TROPSCH and HIGH QUALITY DIESEL
FUELS |
1 |
|
GTL and Fischer-Tropsch Fuel Properties |
1 |
Fuel Property Effects on Diesel Exhaust Emissions |
7 |
|
Sulfur Content |
7 |
Cetane Number |
8 |
Aromatic Content |
9 |
Density |
9 |
Distillation Temperature |
10 |
Inclusion of Oxygenates |
10 |
|
Emissions Performance of F-T and F-T Like Diesel
Fuels |
11 |
|
Exhaust Emissions Effects on Current Technology
Engines and Vehicles |
11 |
Emissions Reductions in Future Engines |
15 |
Statistical Significance of Reported Emissions
Reductions |
17 |
Overall Statistical Significance of the Literature
Data |
19 |
|
Durability/Materials Compatibility |
19 |
Emissions Durability/Engine Durability |
19 |
Fuel Economy |
20 |
|
FUEL PROPERTY REQUIREMENTS TO ENSURE ENVIRONMENTAL
BENEFITS |
21 |
|
APPENDIX A - DISCUSSION OF F-T AND F-T/ COD DIESEL
PETITIONS |
23 |
|
Syntroleum Petition |
24 |
Mossgas Petition |
28 |
Rentech Petition |
31 |
Conclusions |
33 |
APPENDIX B - DISCUSSION OF STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
TECHNIQUES |
34 |
|
Two Sample t-test Analysis - Approach |
34 |
Usefulness of the Two Sample t-test |
34 |
Assumptions of the Two Sample t-test |
34 |
Example of two Sample t-test |
34 |
Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test |
34 |
Usefulness of Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test |
35 |
Example of Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test |
35 |
REFERENCES |
37 |
|
LIST OF TABLES |
Table 1 |
ASTM D975 No. 2 Low Sulfur Diesel property
requirements |
2 |
Table 2 |
Properties of Fischer-Tropsch, GTL, and conventional
diesel fuels |
3-6 |
Table 3 |
Heavy-duty engine dynamometer hot start FTP emission
results for F-T diesel fuel compared to conventional diesel fuel |
12 |
Table 4 |
Heavy-duty engine dynamometer FTP emission results
for F-T diesel fuel relative to No. 2 diesel fuel baseline. The
values are percentages of the No. 2 baseline emissions |
12 |
Table 5 |
Heavy-duty engine dynamometer steady state emission
results, composite of all modes |
12 |
Table 6 |
Heavy-duty engine dynamometer steady state emission
results, mode-by-mode emissions |
13 |
Table 7 |
Heavy-duty chassis dynamometer emission test results |
14 |
Table 8 |
Heavy-duty engine dynamometer steady state emission
results, off-highway engine, mode-by-mode emissions |
15 |
Table 9 |
Light-duty steady state emission test results |
15 |
Table 10 |
Light- and heavy-duty emission test results for
as-is and optimized configuration for a Ford Power Stroke 7.3L
diesel engine |
17 |
Table 11 |
Engine out and catalyst out NOx emissions
for a DeNOx catalyst for a Ford 2000 Power Stroke 7.3L
diesel engine |
17 |
Table 12 |
P-value for emissions reductions reported in
literature comparing F-T and GTL diesel fuels to conventional diesel
fuel |
18 |
Table 13 |
Critical Value and Statistical Significance of
Emission Reduction with F-T Diesel Fuel compared to Conventional
Diesel Fuel, All Reported Literature Values |
19 |
Table 14 |
Importatn fuel properties for F-T diesel fuels |
21 |
Table 15 |
Typical "S-2" fuel properties, provided by
Syntroleum in petition to DOE |
24 |
Table 16 |
Results of light- and heavy-duty FTP testing with
S-2 compared to current emissions standards |
25 |
Table 17 |
Results of engine dynamometer FTP testing on 1999
Cummins 5.9L B engine |
25 |
Table 18 |
Light heavy-duty test results for a 2000 Dodge Ram
2500HD with a Cummins B engine |
26 |
Table 19 |
Light-duty test results for a 1999 Volkswagen Golf
GL TDI |
26 |
Table 20 |
Comparison of Syntroleum test fuel with conventional
diesel fuel for toxic and N2O emissions |
27 |
Table 21 |
P-values for Syntroleum supplied diesel fuel
compared to CARB diesel, No. 2 diesel and Swedish City 1 diesel fuel |
28 |
Table 22 |
Composition of Mossgas RFD1, RFD2, and RFD3 fuels |
29 |
Table 23 |
Typical fuel properties for Mossgas RFD1, RFD2, and
RFD3 fuels, provided by Mossgas in petition to DOE |
29 |
Table 24 |
Heavy-duty engine dynamometer FTP emissions using
Mossgas F-T and GTL fuels |
30 |
Table 25 |
Chassis dynamometer emissions on transit buses
fueled with Mossgas fuel |
30 |
Table 26 |
Statistical significance of emissions reductions for
Mossgas fuels (p-value), compared to conventional No. 2 diesel fuel
for engine testing only |
31 |
Table 27 |
Typical Rentech product analysis and recommended
Fischer-Tropsch diesel fuel standards, provided by Rentech in
petition to DOE |
32 |
Table 28 |
Emissions Reductions with Rentech Diesel Fuel |
32 |
Table 29 |
Paired NOx data from Table 3 for
demonstration of Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test |
35 |
Table 30 |
Calculation of the difference of the paired NOx
data and the absolute value of the difference for the Wilcoxon
Signed-Rank Test |
35 |
Table 31 |
Rank and signed rank of the difference of the NOx
data taken from Table 3 |
36 |