Bob Falco, PhDPete Sheehey, PhD

Institute for Energy Resourcefulness

Presented to the LAC Transportation Committee 12 July 2012

The EPA has researched the use of high The EPA has researched the use of high percentages of alcohol in enginespercentages of alcohol in engines

Scientifically prescribed path to easy Scientifically prescribed path to easy introduction of methanol introduction of methanol MIT Engine Lab and Lotus EngineeringMIT Engine Lab and Lotus Engineering

The path utilizes the availability of current The path utilizes the availability of current Flex Fueled Vehicles (FFV)Flex Fueled Vehicles (FFV)

There are over 11,000,000 FFV in the USThere are over 11,000,000 FFV in the USAll new vehicles purchased by Los Alamos All new vehicles purchased by Los Alamos

County are Flex Fuel CapableCounty are Flex Fuel Capable

7/12/12 Institute for Energy Resourcefulness 2

High cost of vehicle conversionHigh cost of pumping stationsHigh cost of maintenance Lower efficiency/power of vehiclesNo easy transition pathLocked into a single technology and fuel at a time of rapidly developing fuels technology

40%G 10%E 50%M

Institute for Energy Resourcefulness 7/12/124

Lotus Engineering Research

G = $3.73

G = $ 3.11 %

methanol

Lotus Engineering

7/12/12

Institute for Energy Resourcefulness 6

• Can be made from natural gas (100-120 yrs)• No competition with food• No water use issues• Cheaper to make than gasoline

Additional advantages• Engines can be optimized to run with

higher efficiency than diesels• Lower CO2,• CO2 neutral if bio methanol• CO2 negative if solar energy is used

• Methanol can be made renewably

7/12/12Institute for Energy Resourcefulness 9

Reduce engine system costs (engine plus exhaust treatment) by $10,000 - $15,000. The engines cost less (diesels are more

expensive)No need for either the Diesel Particulate

Filter or the Urea Filter (NOx) Reduced maintenanceFuel costs less Better mileage – up to 5% better fuel

economy

EIA Nov 08 100 -120 years supply

Institute for Energy Resourcefulness

5/30/12Institute for Energy

Resourcefulness 11

Landfill

COWS------ > BIOGAS----- > GASIFIER -- > METHANOL---- > VEHICLES

NET EFFICIENCY = .70*.85 = 59.5%

5/30/12Institute for Energy Resourcefulness

Maximum theoretical efficiency = 1.3*.85 = 1.10%

12

Landfill

COWS---- > BIOGAS--- > SOLAR FURNACE -- > METHANOL--- > VEHICLES

7/12/12Institute for Energy Resourcefulness 13

A Way Forward for Economical Environmentally Responsible

Transportation Policy in Los Alamos County• Do a test on an older E-85 vehicle. Buy methanol on open market

and establish the use of GEM mixtures. • If successful run a small test fleet

• Mix locally at airport pumping station?• Expand fleet using GEM mixture

• Contract for a long term methanol price (see supplemental slides)

• Buy all new vehicles with capability of 100% methanol usage• Passage of the “Open Fuels Act” will mandate this

• Renewable methanol from LA landfill gas emissions• Use classical gasifiers to make methanol from landfill gas• In the future, add solar gasifiers to make additional methanol

• Gain 30% in available energy• Utilize all of the CO2 emitted

• Apply for Federal Production Tax Credit

The above can be done with existing vehicles

CNG $2.54*200,000/5 = $101,600 LNG $1.70 * 200,000/5 = $68,000 Diesel $3.91 *200000/5 = $156,400 Methanol $2.64*200000/5 = $105,600 $75,000 cost increment to convert a full sized bus to CNG --------------------------------- Over 200,000 miles --

Converting to Methanol Saves: Diesel – Methanol = $156,400 - $105,600 = $50,800

Converting to LNG Saves: Diesel – (LNG + $75,000) = $156,400 – ($68,000 + $75,000) =

$156,400 – 143,000 = $13,400 ----------------------------

Additional cost of CNG fuel pumps $300,000-$500,000 Additional cost of methanol dispenser/tank from $25,000 to

$50,000

7/12/12Institute for Energy Resourcefulness 14

CNG $2.54*200,000/5 = $101,600 LNG $1.70 * 200,000/5 = $68,000 Diesel $3.91 *200000/5 = $156,400 Methanol $2.64*200000/5 = $105,600 $75,000 cost increment to convert a full sized bus to CNG --------------------------------- Over 200,000 miles --

Converting to Methanol Saves: Diesel – Methanol = $156,400 - $105,600 = $50,800

Converting to LNG Saves: Diesel – (LNG + $75,000) = $156,400 – ($68,000 + $75,000) =

$156,400 – 143,000 = $13,400 ----------------------------

Additional cost of CNG fuel pumps $300,000-$500,000 Additional cost of methanol dispenser/tank from $25,000 to

$50,000

7/12/12Institute for Energy Resourcefulness 15

Transportation costs can be reduced using existing vehicles – hundreds of dollars vs. tens of thousands per vehicle.

Future vehicles can be less expensive to purchase and operate if run on GEM mixtures.

Methanol can be contracted from NM farms or purchased cheaply on long term contract.

Maintenance is traditional, not the complication of CNGFlexibility in fueling

Cellulosic ethanol production breakthrough can immediately be accommodated

Butanol production breakthrough can be accommodated Flex Fueled hybrids are a natural extension for increased mileage

7/12/12Institute for Energy Resourcefulness 16

5/30/12Institute for Energy Resourcefulness 18

Experience with Methanol

In California

5/30/12Institute for Energy Resourcefulness 19

Methanol is much cheaper

The contract pricing is substantially less than market prices

as the California experience shows

from

Let’s look at the Carbon Dioxide Emissions from methanol fuel production

5/30/12Institute for Energy Resourcefulness 20

renewables

Gasoline refining

METHANOL

GASOLINE

Safety

• In the California test (15 years), with over 200 million miles of methanoldriving, there was not a single case of accidental methanol poisoning.

• For M100 a 90% reduction in fuel related automotive fires is projected.

P. A. Machiele, Summary Of The Fire Safety Impacts of Methanol

as a Transportation Fuel, SAE International paper 901113

5/30/12Institute for Energy Resourcefulness

Solar Methanol will use no water

22

5/30/12Institute for Energy Resourcefulness 23

Volumetric vs. gravimetric energy density

24

Supports national policy/renewable fuel initiatives

Vehicle demonstration program High efficiency hybrid (hydraulic) Heavy-duty Class 6 delivery truck Captive fleet

High efficiency engine program (neat alcohol fuels and blends with gasoline) Ethanol or Methanol engines

with high efficiency (>40% peak) Lends itself to exhaust thermal energy

recovery in the form of chemical and mechanical energy

Combined system yields fuel cell efficiency (>55% peak) at a significantly lower cost

5/30/12Institute for Energy Resourcefulness 25

Bromberg, L. and Cohn, D., "Alcohol Fueled Heavy Duty VehiclesUsing Clean, High Efficiency Engines,”

SAE Technical Paper 2010-01-2199, 2010, doi:10.4271/2010-01-2199.Author(s): Leslie Bromberg - Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyDaniel Cohn - Massachusetts Institute of Technology

5/30/12Institute for Energy Resourcefulness 26

EPA Brake Thermal Efficiency Comparison

engine fueled on 100% methanolin spark ignition

mode

same engine run in its native diesel mode

(1.9L VW TDI diesel)

Typical 1.9L gasoline engine has 22-25% BTE

42%39%

Ethanol/Methanol can give diesel engine efficiencies without the need for high pressure injection systems and either DPF or Urea NOx reducing exhaust treatment.

Test in a VW TDI 1.9 L diesel engine which was converted to spark ignition for the ethanol tests. The compression ratio was 19.5 to 1.

“Combined with an optimized conventional drivetrain, the efficiency gain shown in the previous slide for E30 should yield an estimated 10% - 12% gain in fuel economy. Thus it more than compensates for the approximately 8% loss in fuel energy density of E30 vs. straight gasoline.” EPA

Even Ethanol/Gasoline mixtures as low as E30 can give engine efficiencies that approach those of a diesel.

These SI engine efficiencies are 25% greaterthan attainable in current gasoline only fueled engines