Advertisement

Combustion-Based Transportation in a Carbon-Constrained World—A Review

  • Tamour JavedEmail author
  • Ahfaz Ahmed
  • Vallinayagam Raman
  • Awad B. S. Alquaity
  • Bengt Johansson
Chapter
Part of the Energy, Environment, and Sustainability book series (ENENSU)

Abstract

The transportation sector accounts for around a quarter of global CO2 emissions and is powered predominantly by fossil-derived fuels. The regulatory framework is evolving globally to more stringent requirements for fuel efficiency and CO2 emissions, forcing the OEMs to adopt advanced powertrain technologies. Such changes are more evident in the light-duty road transportation sector compared to the heavy-duty road, marine and air transportation sectors. Here, a holistic review of the current and prospective regulations targeted at curbing transportation-based CO2 emissions is presented. For road transport, these include various government- and state-level policy initiatives such as the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) and CO2 emission standards and the zero emission mandates. For marine and aviation sectors, these include the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) regulations and aspirations targeted at reducing the CO2 footprint. The compliance options for these regulations are evaluated using a combination of fuels, engines, and hybridization in each transportation sector. Furthermore, a brief overview of how OEMs are working toward achieving these targets is presented. An overview of several advanced spark and compression ignition engine technologies with the potential to improve the fuel economy and CO2 emissions is presented. Finally, an overview of major disruptions that are changing the road-based transportation is presented and a balanced life cycle based policy approach is advocated.

Keywords

Transport Climate change Fuel economy CO2 Regulations ZEV Aviation Marine LCA 

References

  1. Abdul-Manan AF (2018) On the appropriate use of life-cycle thinking for evidence-based sustainable transport policy. Environ Sci Policy Sustain Dev 60:18–25Google Scholar
  2. AEA-Ricardo (2011) Reduction and testing of greenhouse gas emissions from heavy duty vehicles-LOT 2. Development and testing of a certification procedure for CO2 emissions and fuel consumption of HDV, report by AEA and RIcardoGoogle Scholar
  3. Alabbad M, Issayev G, Badra J, Voice AK, Giri BR, Djebbi K, Ahmed A, Sarathy SM, Farooq A (2018) Autoignition of straight-run naphtha: a promising fuel for advanced compression ignition engines. Combust Flame 189:337–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alvarez CEC, Couto GE, Roso VR, Thiriet AB, Valle RM (2017) A review of prechamber ignition systems as lean combustion technology for SI engines. Appl Therm EngGoogle Scholar
  5. Attard WP, Toulson E, Huisjen A, Chen X, Zhu G (2012a) Spark Ignition and pre-chamber turbulent jet ignition combustion visualization. SAE Technical PapersGoogle Scholar
  6. Attard WP, Blaxill H, Anderson EK, Litke P (2012b) Knock limit extension with a gasoline fueled pre-chamber jet igniter in a modern vehicle powertrain. SAE Int J Engines 5(3):1201–1215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Avola C, Copeland T, Duda R, Burke S, Akehurst CB (2015) Review of turbocharger mapping and 1D modeling inaccuracies with specific focus on two-stag systems. SAE Technical Paper Report No 0148–7191Google Scholar
  8. Ayala FA, Heywood JB (2007) Lean SI engines: the role of combustion variability in defining lean limits. SAE Technical PapersGoogle Scholar
  9. Bunce M, Blaxill H (2016) Sub-200 g/kWh BSFC on a light duty gasoline engine. SAE Technical PaperGoogle Scholar
  10. CARB (2016) Zero-emission vehicle standards for 2018 and subsequent model year passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty vehicles, California Air Resource BoardGoogle Scholar
  11. Chang J, Kalghatgi G, Amer A, Adomeit P, Rohs H (2013) vehicle demonstration of naphtha fuel achieving both high efficiency and drivability with EURO6 engine-out NOx emission. SAE Int J Engines 6(1):101–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. COM//0767 final//0382 (COD) (2016) Proposal for a directive of the European parliament and of the council on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (recast), COM//0767 final//0382 (COD)Google Scholar
  13. COM//284 (EU) (2015) Proposal for a regulation setting CO2 emission performance standards for new heavy-duty vehiclesGoogle Scholar
  14. Cui H (2018) Chinaʻs new energy vehicle mandate policy (Final Rule). Policy update. ICCT reportGoogle Scholar
  15. Daimler (2017) Diamler Sustainability focus report, Diamler 2017Google Scholar
  16. De Groot GJ (1996) Blighty: British society in the era of the great war. Addison-Wesley LongmanGoogle Scholar
  17. Delft (2016) Assessment of fuel oil availability, Final report, CE Delft, July 2016Google Scholar
  18. Delgado O, Lutsey N (2014) The U.S. SuperTruck program: expediting development of advanced HDV efficiency technologiesGoogle Scholar
  19. Elgowainy A, Han J, Ward J, Joseck F, Gohlke D, Lindauer A, Ramsden T, Biddy M, Alexander M, Barnhart S, Sutherland I, Verduzco L, Wallington TJ (2018) Current and future united states light-duty vehicle pathways: cradle-to-grave lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions and economic assessment. Environ Sci Technol 52(4):2392–2399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. EnSys and Navigistics (2016) Supplemental marine fuel availability study to the IMO, EnSys and Navigistics, July 2016Google Scholar
  21. EPA (2017) Carbon dioxide emissions and fuel economy trends report, US EPA 2017Google Scholar
  22. EU (2018) Monitoring of CO2 emissions from passenger cars—Regulation (EC) No 443/2009Google Scholar
  23. Faria P, Marques P, Moura F, Freire J, Delgado AT, de Almeida R (2013) Impact of the electricity mix and use profile in the life-cycle assessment of electric vehicles. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 24:271–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Garg M, Sharpe B (2017) Fuel consumption standards for heavy-duty vehicles in India, ICCT reportGoogle Scholar
  25. Gibble K (2013) Scattering of cold-atom coherences by hot atoms: frequency shifts from background-gas collisions. Phys Rev Lett 110(18):180802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gilroy RW (2016) SuperTruck II aims to more than double freight efficiency of Class 8sGoogle Scholar
  27. Hanemann M (2008) California’s new greenhouse gas laws. Rev Environ Econ Policy 2(1):114–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hawkins TR, Singh B, Majeau Bettez G, Strømman AH (2013) Comparative environmental life cycle assessment of conventional and electric vehicles. J Ind Ecol 17(1):53–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hebert A (2017) Developing future light-duty vehicle regulations in California, CARB 2017Google Scholar
  30. Hesterberg TW, Lapin CA, Bunn WB (2008) A comparison of emissions from vehicles fueled with diesel or compressed natural gas. Environ Sci Technol 42(17):6437–6445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Huo H, Cai H, Zhang Q, Liu F, He K (2015) Life-cycle assessment of greenhouse gas and air emissions of electric vehicles: a comparison between China and the U.S. Atmos Environ 108:107–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. ICAO Resolution A39-2 (2016) Consolidated statement of continuing ICAO policies and practices related to environmental protection—climate change and global market-based measure (MBM) scheme, 39th ICAO AssemblyGoogle Scholar
  33. IEA (2017) Energy technology perspectives. http://www.iea.org/etp/explore/
  34. Ikeya K, Takazawa M, Yamada T, Park S, Tagishi R (2015) Thermal efficiency enhancement of a gasoline engine. SAE Int J Engines 8Google Scholar
  35. ITF (2018) Decarbonizing maritime transport: pathways to zero-carbon shipping by 2035. OECDs International Transport Forum (ITF)Google Scholar
  36. Johnson TV (2010) Review of diesel emissions and control. SAE Int J Fuels Lubr 3:16–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kalghatgi G (2018) Is it really the end of internal combustion engines and petroleum in transport? Appl Energy 225:965–974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kalghatgi GT, Risberg P, Ångström HE (2006) Advantages of fuels with high resistance to auto-ignition in late-injection, low-temperature, compression ignition combustion. SAE Technical PaperGoogle Scholar
  39. Kimura K, Tsukahara K, Usui T, Okuda J, Kitamura Y, Kosuge M, Sano T, Tohyama S, Yamanaka O, Yoshii Y, Umemura S (2001) Low-dose tissue plasminogen activator followed by planned rescue angioplasty reduces time to reperfusion for acute myocardial infarction treated at community hospitals. Jpn Circ J 65(10):901–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kline SJ, Rosenberg N (2009) An overview of innovation, Studies on Science and the Innovation Process, pp. 173–203 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Koeberlein D (2014) Technology and system level demonstration of highly efficient and Class 8 trucks, Cummins Super Truck ProgramGoogle Scholar
  42. Lam N, Tuner M, Tunestal P, Andersson A, Lundgren S (2015) Double compression expansion engine concepts: a path to high efficiency. SAE Int J Engines 8Google Scholar
  43. Leermakers CAJ, Bakker PC, Somers LMT, Goey L, Johansson BH (2013) Butanol-diesel blends for partially premixed combustion. SAE Int J Fuels Lubr 6(1):217–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lutsey N (2018) The ever-improving efficiency of the diesel engine, ICCT reportGoogle Scholar
  45. Manente V, Johansson B, Tunestal P, Cannella W (2009) Effects of different type of gasoline fuels on heavy duty partially premixed combustion. SAE Int J Engines 2(2):71–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Manofsky L, Vavra J, Assanis DN, Babajimopoulos A (2011) Bridging the gap between HCCI and SI: spark-assisted compression ignition. SAE Technical PaperGoogle Scholar
  47. Manzetti S, van der Spoel D (2015) Impact of sludge deposition on biodiversity. Ecotoxicology 24(9):1799–1814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. MAZDA (2018) Next-generation Skyactive-X gasoline engine. MAZDAGoogle Scholar
  49. McGill WR, Winther K (2013) Alternative fuels for marine applications, from the motor fuels implementing agreement. A report from the IEA advanced motor fuelsGoogle Scholar
  50. McNeil I (2002) An encyclopedia of the history of technology, Routledge Companion EncyclopediasGoogle Scholar
  51. Melton N, Axsen J, Sperling D (2016) Moving beyond alternative fuel hype to decarbonize transportation. Nat Energy 1(3)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Mitchell J Jr, Dzerdzeevskii B, Flohn H, Hofmeyr W, Lamb H, Rao K, Wallen C, Mitchell Wallen J (1966) Climate change. World Meteorological Organisation Technical noteGoogle Scholar
  53. Morris I (2015) The unexpected origin of human values. New Sci 226(3017):28–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mulero E (2016) DOE debuts 2nd phase of SuperTruck; pledges $80 million to efficiency effort. American Trucking Associations. ISSN: 0041–1558Google Scholar
  55. Najafabadi MI (2017) Optical study of stratification for partially premixed combustion, PhD thesis, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven 2017Google Scholar
  56. Noehre C, Andersson M, Johansson B, Hultqvist A (2006) Characterization of partially premixed combustion. SAE Technical PaperGoogle Scholar
  57. OIES (2018a) A review of demand prospects for LNG as a marine transport fuel, The Oxford Institue for Energy StudiesGoogle Scholar
  58. OIES (2018b) Disruptive change in transport sector. The Oxford Institute for Energy StudiesGoogle Scholar
  59. Regulation (EU) No 253 (2014) European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 510/ to define the modalities for reaching the target to reduce CO2 emissions from new light commercial vehicles (2014)Google Scholar
  60. Regulation (EU) No 333 (2014) European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 amending Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 to define the modalities for reaching the 2020 target to reduce CO2 emissions from new passenger carsGoogle Scholar
  61. Sarangi A (2012) Diesel low temperature combustion: an experimental study. Loughboro UniversityGoogle Scholar
  62. Scania (2017) Scania sustainability report, Scania 2017Google Scholar
  63. Sellnau M, Foster M, Hoyer K, Moore W, Sinnamon J (2014) Development of a gasoline direct injection compression ignition (GDCI) Engine. SAE Int J Engines 7(2):835–851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sellnau M, Foster W, Moore J, Sinnamon K, Hoyer W, Klemm M (2016) Second generation GDCI multi-cylinder engine for high fuel efficiency and US tier 3 emissions. SAE Int J Engines 9:1002–1020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Seyferth D (2003) The rise and fall of tetraethyllead. 1. Discovery and slow development in european universities, 1853–1920. Organometallics 23(5):2346–2357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Shah A, Tunestal P, Johansson B (2012) Investigation of performance and emission characteristics of a heavy duty natural gas engine operated with pre-chamber spark plug and dilution with excess air and EGR. SAE Int J Engines 5(4):1790–1801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Shankar VSB, Lam N, Andersson A, Johansson B (2017) Optimum heat release rates for a double compression expansion (DCEE) engine. SAE Technical PaperGoogle Scholar
  68. Shankar B, Shankar V, Johansson B, Andersson A (2018) Double compression expansion engine: a parametric study on a high-efficiency engine concept. SAE Technical Paper SeriesGoogle Scholar
  69. Solaka SA, Boshamer SE, Parworth CL, Heard GL, Setser DW, Holmes BE (2012) Isomerisation of CF2ClCH2Cl and CFCl2CH2F by interchange of Cl and F atoms with analysis of the unimolecular reactions of both molecules. Chemphyschem Eur J Chem Phys Phys Chem 13(3):869–878CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Splitter DA, Pawlowski A, Wagner R (2016) A historical analysis of the co-evolution of gasoline octane number and spark-ignition engines. Front Mech Eng 1Google Scholar
  71. Sripad S, Viswanathan V (2017) Performance metrics required of next-generation batteries to make a practical electric semi truck. ACS Lett 2:1669–1673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Stanton D (2010) High efficient clean combustion for SuperTruck. DEER 2010Google Scholar
  73. Tang H (2016) Application of variable geometry turbine on gasoline engines and the optimisation of transient behavioursGoogle Scholar
  74. Thiel C, Schmidt J, Zyl AV, Schmid E (2014) Cost and well-to-wheel implications of the vehicle fleet CO2 emission regulation in the European Union. Transp Res Part A 63(4):25–42Google Scholar
  75. TIAX (2011) European union greenhouse gas reduction potential for heavy-duty vehicles, prepared by TIAX for ICCTGoogle Scholar
  76. Toulson E, Schock HJ, Attard WP (2010) A review of pre-chamber initiated jet ignition combustion systems. SAE Technical PaperGoogle Scholar
  77. Toyota (2018) New vehicle zero CO2 emissions challenge, Toyota Environmental report 2018Google Scholar
  78. Transport Dept (2012) 2017–2025 model year light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas emissions and corporate average fuel economy standards, US Department of TransportGoogle Scholar
  79. Transport Dept (2016) Greenhouse gas emissions and fuel efficiency standards for medium- and heavy-duty engines and vehicles—phase 2, US Department of TransportGoogle Scholar
  80. Tully L (2002) A universal view of data. Interview by Anne Zender. J AHIMA 73(10):92Google Scholar
  81. Turner JWG, Popplewell A, Richardson S, Lewis AGJ, Akehurst S (2014) Ultra boost for economy: realizing a 60% downsized engine concept. SAE Int J Engines 7:387–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Tushman ML (1997) Winning through innovation. Strat Leadship 25(4):14–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. UNFCC (1992) United Nations framework convention on climate change. United Nations New YorkGoogle Scholar
  84. UNFCC (2015) United nations framework convention on climate change, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  85. U.S. DOE (2016) Co-optimization of fuels & engines, US Department of Energy 2016Google Scholar
  86. Vallinayagam R, Vedharaj S, An Y, Dawood A, Najafabadi MI, Somers B, Johansson B (2017) Combustion stratification for naphtha from CI combustion to PPC. SAE Technical PaperGoogle Scholar
  87. Wei H, Zhu T, Shu G, Tan L, Wang Y (2012) Gasoline engine exhaust gas recirculation—a review. Appl Energy 99(2):534–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. WoodMackenzie (2018) IMO 2020 updated analysis of the marine fuel sulphur changes. https://www.woodmac.com/reports/refining-and-oil-products-imo-2020-updated-analysis-of-the-marine-fuel-sulphur-changes-18902
  89. Yang Z, Bandivadekar A (2017) Light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas and fuel economy standards. ICCT reportGoogle Scholar
  90. Yao Z, Zheng HML (2009) Progress and recent trends in homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI) engines. Prog Energy Combust Sci 35:398–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Zhao F, Lai MC, Harrington DL (1999) Automotive spark-ignited direct-injection gasoline engines. Prog Energy Combust Sci 25:437–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tamour Javed
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ahfaz Ahmed
    • 2
  • Vallinayagam Raman
    • 2
  • Awad B. S. Alquaity
    • 3
  • Bengt Johansson
    • 2
  1. 1.Fuel Technology DivisionResearch and Development Center, Saudi AramcoDhahranSaudi Arabia
  2. 2.Clean Combustion Research Center, King Abdullah University of Science and TechnologyThuwalSaudi Arabia
  3. 3.Institute for Combustion Technology, RWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations