Mark A. DeLuchi

Emission impacts of electric vehicles

Alternative vehicular fuels are proposed as a strategy to reduce urban air pollution. In this paper, we analyze the emission impacts of electric vehicles in California for two target years, 1995 and 2010. We consider a range of assumptions regarding electricity consumption of electric vehicles, emission control technologies for power plants, and the mix of primary energy sources for electricity generation. We find that, relative to continued use of gasoline-powered vehicles, the use of electric vehicles would dramatically and unequivocally reduce carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons. Under most conditions, nitrogen oxide emissions would decrease moderately. Sulfur oxide and particulate emissions would increase or slightly decrease. Because other areas of the United States tend to use more coal in electricity generation and have less stringent emission controls on power plants, electric vehicles may have less emission reduction benefits outside California.

Impacts of electric vehicles on primary energy consumption and petroleum displacement

We analyze the impact of the use of electric vehicles (EVs) on energy consumption in general and petroleum consumption in particular. The analysis is conducted for sub-compact cars, small vans, and large vans for the years 1995 and 2010. We compare per-mile primary energy consumption of EVs and gasoline internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs), for each of four primary energy sources: petroleum, coal, natural gas, and biomass. When petroleum, natural gas, or biomass is the primary energy source, EVs with current technology will consume more energy per mile than ICEVs, but EVs with advanced technology will consume less. If coal is the primary energy source, both current-and advanced-technology EVs will consume less energy per mile than ICEVs. We find that the magnitude of petroleum displacement by EVs depends mainly on the amount of petroleum used for electricity generation. In many areas of the U.S., EVs will reduce per-mile petroleum use by over 90%, because the vast majority of electricity is generated from non-petroleum fuels. In areas where a relatively large portion of electricity is generated from petroleum (such as New York), EVs will reduce per-mile petroleum use by 65%.

Politics and technical uncertainty in transportation investment analysis

Cities often opt for rail transit even when agency evaluations conclude that other alternatives are superior in performance and efficiency. The choice of light rail transit (LRT) in Sacramento, California serves as a case study. When adjustments are made for overstated assumptions and irregular manipulations of data in the Sacramento evaluation, the LRT project is somewhat inferior on all technical grounds to other proposed alternatives. This article asks why a local decision was made to pursue the light rail option. The LRT choice is examined in the broader context of government structure and decision-making, earmarked state and federal funding, and local planning. It is shown that local decision makers have broad economic and social concerns that are not incorporated into standard technical evaluations, and that they are provided with highly uncertain projections, especially for ridership. Not surprisingly, local politicians were skeptical of the technical evaluations and weighed local values and strategic funding factors heavily in their decision. While we do not advocate porkbarreling, we believe that the choice of LRT, to the extent that it reflected legitimate local concerns, was valid. We suggest improvements in transit evaluation methods and observe that the 1984 changes in UMTA evaluation procedures appear to consider uncertainty correctly and to include local political support in a meaningful way.

Greenhouse-gas emissions from the use of new fuels for transportation and electricity

Concern about global warming, poor urban air quality and dependence on insecure sources of oil are leading many nations to examine alternative energy sources and technologies for transportation and electricity generation. This analysis shows that most of the near-term fossil fuel-based alternatives would not dramatically reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. However, in the long run, several ultra- low-emission fuels and technologies are available. The major uncertainties in the analysis are the efficiency of energy use, the warming potential of greenhouse gases other than CO2 and the economic and political context in which energy is used.

Emissions from the Production, Storage, and Transport of Crude Oil and Gasoline

The production, storage, and transport of crude oil and gasoline produces emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides (NO[sub x]), sulfur oxides (SO[sub x]), particulate matter (PM), carbon monoxide (CO) and toxic air pollutants. This paper estimates upstream VOC and petroleum refinery emissions from the use of gasoline in the United States in the year 2000. The analysis encompasses the entire gasoline production and marketing cycle, from drilling for oil to refuelling vehicles, and accounts for all emissions regulations likely to be in place by the year 2000. The results are that upstream VOC emissions are likely to be between 6 and 10 grams per gallon of gasoline consumed in the year 2000, and between 3 and 10 grams/gallon in the long run, and that SO[sub x] and NO[sub x] emissions from refineries will be about 3 grams each per gallon of gasoline consumed. If these estimates are accurate, then upstream VOC emissions and refinery SO[sub x] emissions, expressed in grams/mile, likely will exceed tailpipe gram/mile emissions from new cars in the year 2000, and refinery NO[sub x] emissions will be a significant fraction of tailpipe NO[sub x] emissions. 19 refs., 8 tabs.

Evaluation methods for rail transit projects

The demand for rail transit funds greatly exceeds available monies. Worse, there is wide-spread disagreement over the wisdom of building rail systems in American cities. The Urban Mass Transportation Administration’s (UMTA’s) transit analysis methods have relied on cost-effectiveness measures with little attention devoted to the analysis of economic efficiency. We survey the literature on transportation evaluation and propose a model method based on economic theory and on practice in other federal agencies. We review UMTA’s past methods and recommend changes.

IS METHANOL THE TRANSPORTATION FUEL OF THE FUTURE

A solution to growing petroleum imports and continuing urban air-pollution problems is the use of clean-burning nonpetroleum fuels in motor vehicles. Methanol is widely viewed as the most attractive candidate for transportation fuel of the future. We examine how methanol gained this preeminent position by analyzing the historical interplay of economic interests, technical judgments, and ideology and then show that the preference for methanol is not the only conclusion to be drawn from the available evidence. An equally good choice may be natural gas.

SOLAR-HYDROGEN FUEL-CELL VEHICLES

Hydrogen is an especially attractive transportation fuel. It is the least polluting fuel available, and can be produced anywhere there is water and a clean source of electricity. A fuel cycle in which hydrogen is produced by solar-electrolysis of water, or by gasification of renewably grown biomass, and then used in a fuel-cell powered electric-motor vehicle (FCEV), would produce little or no local, regional or global pollution. Hydrogen FCEVs would combine the best features of battery-powered electric vehicles (BPEVS) -- zero emissions, high efficiency, quiet operation and long life -- with the long range and fast refueling time of internal-combustion-engine vehicles (ICEVs). If fuel-cell technology develops as hoped, then hydrogen FCEVs will be a significant advance over both hydrogen ICEVs and solar BPEVs: they will be cleaner and more efficient than hydrogen ICEVs, have a much shorter refueling time than BPEVs and have a lower life-cycle cost than both. Solar-hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles would be general-purpose zero-emission vehicles, and could be an important component of a strategy for reducing dependence on imported oil, mitigating global warming and improving urban air quality, at an acceptable cost.

Alternative Transportation Energy

Transportation energy issues are moving to the forefront of the public consciousness in the U.S. and particularly California, and gaining increasing attention from legislators and regulators. The three principal concerns motivating interest in transportation energy are urban air quality, oil dependence, and the threat of global warming. Transportation fuels are a principal contributor to each of these. The transportation sector, mostly motor vehicles, contributes roughly half the urban air pollutants, almost one-third of the carbon dioxide, and consumes over 60% of all petroleum.