Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  66 / 88 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 66 / 88 Next Page
Page Background

66 |

Central Eastern Europe GRIP 2017

5.4 Emissions Evaluation

5.4.1 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

The two main approaches to greenhouse gas (GHG) evaluation of vehicles present-

ed in this chapter are:

\\

JEC (Joint Research Centre) Methodology Versions 2.c (March 2007) and 4.a

(January 2014) (Figure 5.6), which use the 5-seat C segment passenger car as

a reference vehicle

\\

DLR (Deutsches Zentrum für Luft und Raumfahrt) & Partners (July 2013)

(Figure 5.7), which use mid-size passenger car and city bus as reference vehi-

cles

Both methods work with an overall balance of “well to wheels” (WTW), which

accounts for production and transmission (well to tank – WTT) and consumption

(tank to wheel – TTW) of the fuel, closely described in Figure 5.5. It should be

mentioned that these studies comprise all emissions causing the greenhouse effect

including, but not limited to, CO ² , N ² O, and CH

4

. Methane (CH

4

) is an especially

potent greenhouse gas. Thus, any loss of unburned NG during exploitation,

transmission, and distribution must be strenuously avoided.

Figure 5.5:

Well to wheels lifecycle diagram

Well to tank

Natural Gas

Well to wheels

Tank to wheel

Feedstock

production

Transmission

Refining

Distribution

Consumption

As shown in Figures 5.6 and 5.7, GHG emissions per kilometre were in 2010 (JEC)

and 2012 (DLR) about the same for CNG and diesel vehicles, as resulted from both

evaluation methodologies. However, both evaluation methodologies predict a trend

that the GHG emissions of CNG vehicles in the future will undercut the GHG emis-

sions of diesel. While the JEC predicts a gap of 3.8% in favour of CNG vehicles in

the year 2020, the DLR predicts a gap of 9.8% in favour of CNG passenger vehicles

and even a gap of 14.3% in favour of CNG buses by the year 2030.

The specific CO ² emission per kWh given in Table 1 suggests a gap of 26%. This

theoretical value, however, is reduced, because the energy efficiency of a diesel-

fuelled compression ignition engine is actually higher than the efficiency of a NG- or

petrol-fuelled spark ignition engine, which is indicated in previous paragraph. For

the same reason, compared to petrol-fuelled engines, NGVs by contrast actually

demonstrate a positive advantage of 20% regarding GHG emissions.

The DLR result for CNG buses is especially encouraging, and it confirms ongoing

projects in Bulgaria and Germany for NG-fuelled buses and garbage collection

trucks in urban areas.