Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Ethanol-powered vehicles generate more ozone than gas-powered ones

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-14-09 11:37 AM
Original message
Ethanol-powered vehicles generate more ozone than gas-powered ones
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-12/su-evg121409.php
Public release date: 14-Dec-2009

Contact: Louis Bergeron
louisb3@stanford.edu
650-725-1944
http://news.stanford.edu/">Stanford University

Ethanol-powered vehicles generate more ozone than gas-powered ones

Ethanol, often promoted as a clean-burning, renewable fuel that could help wean the nation from oil, would likely worsen health problems caused by ozone, compared with gasoline, especially in winter, according to a new study led by Stanford researchers.

Ozone production from both gasoline and E85, a blend of gasoline and ethanol that is 85 percent ethanol, is greater in warm sunny weather than during the cold weather and short days of winter, because heat and sunlight contribute to ozone formation. But E85 produces different byproducts of combustion than gasoline and generates substantially more aldehydes, which are precursors to ozone.

"What we found is that at the warmer temperatures, with E85, there is a slight increase in ozone compared to what gasoline would produce," said Diana Ginnebaugh, a doctoral candidate in civil and environmental engineering, who worked on the study. She will present the results of the study on Tuesday, Dec. 15, at the American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco. "But even a slight increase is a concern, especially in a place like Los Angeles, because you already have episodes of high ozone that you have to be concerned about, so you don't want any increase."

But it was at colder temperatures, below freezing, that it appeared the health impacts of E85 would be felt most strongly.

"We found a pretty substantial increase in ozone production from E85 at cold temperatures, relative to gasoline when emissions and atmospheric chemistry alone were considered," Ginnebaugh said. Although ozone is generally lower under cold-temperature winter conditions, "If you switched to E85, suddenly you could have a place like Denver exceeding ozone health-effects limits and then they would have a health concern that they don't have now."

The problem with cold weather emissions arises because the catalytic converters used on vehicles have to warm up before they reach full efficiency. So until they get warm, a larger proportion of pollutants escapes from the tailpipe into the air.

There are other pollutants that would increase in the atmosphere from burning E85 instead of gasoline, some of which are irritants to eyes, throats and lungs, and can also damage crops, but the aldehydes are the biggest contributors to ozone production, as well as being carcinogenic.

Ginnebaugh worked with Mark Z. Jacobson, professor of civil and environmental engineering, using vehicle emissions data from some earlier studies and applying it to the Los Angeles area to model the likely output of pollutants from vehicles.

Because E85 is only now beginning to be used in mass-produced vehicles, the researchers projected for the year 2020, when more "flex fuel" vehicles, which can run on E85, will likely be in use. They estimated that vehicle emissions would be about 60 percent less than today, because automotive technology will likely continue to become cleaner over time. They investigated two scenarios, one that had all the vehicles running on E85 and another in which the vehicles all ran on gasoline.

Running a widely used, complex model involving over 13,000 chemical reactions, they did repeated simulations at different ambient temperatures for the two scenarios, each time simulating a 48-hour period. They used the average ozone concentrations during each of those periods for comparison.

They found that at warm temperatures, from freezing up to 41 degrees Celsius (give F conversion), in bright sunlight, E85 raised the concentration of ozone in the air by up to 7 parts per billion more than produced by gasoline. At cold temperatures, from freezing down to minus 37 degrees Celsius, they found E85 raised ozone concentrations by up to 39 parts per billion more than gasoline.

"What we are saying with these results is that you see an increase," Ginnebaugh said. "We are not saying that this is the exact magnitude you are going to get in a given urban area, because it is really going to vary from city to city depending on a lot of other factors such as the amount of natural vegetation, traffic levels, and local weather patterns."

Ginnebaugh said the results of the study represent a preliminary analysis of the impact of E85. More data from studies of the emissions of flex fuel vehicles at various temperatures would help refine the estimates, she said.

###

Paul Livingstone contributed to the study while he was a postdoctoral researcher in civil and environmental engineering. He now works for the California Air Resources Board.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
JohnWxy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 06:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. Another 'redoubtable' "study" from Exxon-Mobil's favorite Petro-University - Stanford.


some interesting quotes from article:


"Ginnebaugh worked with Mark Z. Jacobson, professor of civil and environmental engineering, using vehicle emissions data from some earlier studies and applying it to the Los Angeles area to model the likely output of pollutants from vehicles.

Jacobson is the author of an earlier study, that has been criticized for questionable methodology and unrealistic assumptions. Any guesses where the "vehicle emissions data from some earlier studies" came from?????

Ginnebaugh said that they found that E85 had greater emissions under cold weather conditions.

and then elaborated:

"The problem with cold weather emissions arises because the catalytic converters used on vehicles have to warm up before they reach full efficiency. So until they get warm, a larger proportion of pollutants escapes from the tailpipe into the air."


......."until they warm"... now by "warm" what temps are you talkng about? and uh, how long does it take to warm to that temperature? 10 minutes? 15 minutes?... 5 minutes???


oh, and regarding the.... "vehicle emissions data from some earlier studies"... here's a couple comments from a well known critique of Jacobson's 2007 "study"


http://www.ethanolrfa.org/objects/documents/1071/reapresponse_jacobsone85.pdf


"Conflicts with U.S. EPA Analysis and Other Agencies

E85 and other high blend ethanol/gasoline fuels warrant further analysis. However, Jacobson’s study already stands in stark contrast to work done by U.S. EPA, the California Air Resources Board (ARB), the National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL) and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)."
~~
~~

"relies on 1991 vehicle data for establishing inputs to the model (there were virtually no cars certified for E85 use in 1991). The report also seems to ignore that formaldehyde emission rates from recent FFV certification results indicate that formaldehyde emissions from both gasoline and E-85 are well controlled by latest catalyst technology, and both fuel / technology combinations provide a substantial margin of compliance with ARB’s strict 15 milligram per mile HCHO (formaldehyde) standard, as shown below:"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Stanford University is the recipient of a $100 million grant from EXXON-Mobil


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 02:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC