The Experts below are selected from a list of 171 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Michael Wang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • development and use of greet 1 6 fuel cycle model for Transportation Fuels and vehicle technologies
    Other Information: PBD: 23 Aug 2001, 2001
    Co-Authors: Michael Wang
    Abstract:

    Since 1995, with funds from the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Office of Transportation Technologies (OTT), Argonne National Laboratory has been developing the Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy use in Transportation (GREET) model. The model is intended to serve as an analytical tool for use by researchers and practitioners in estimating fuel-cycle energy use and emissions associated with Alternative Transportation Fuels and advanced vehicle technologies. Argonne released the first version of the GREET mode--GREET 1.0--in June 1996. Since then, it has released a series of GREET versions with revisions, updates, and upgrades. In February 2000, the latest public version of the model--GREET 1.5a--was posted on Argonne's Transportation Technology Research and Development Center (TTRDC) Web site (www.Transportation.anl.gov/ttrdc/greet).

  • greet 1 5 Transportation fuel cycle model vol 1 methodology development use and results
    Other Information: PBD: 6 Oct 1999, 1999
    Co-Authors: Michael Wang
    Abstract:

    This report documents the development and use of the most recent version (Version 1.5) of the Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET) model. The model, developed in a spreadsheet format, estimates the full fuel-cycle emissions and energy associated with various Transportation Fuels and advanced vehicle technologies for light-duty vehicles. The model calculates fuel-cycle emissions of five criteria pollutants (volatile organic compounds, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter with diameters of 10 micrometers or less, and sulfur oxides) and three greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide). The model also calculates total energy consumption, fossil fuel consumption, and petroleum consumption when various Transportation Fuels are used. The GREET model includes the following cycles: petroleum to conventional gasoline, reformulated gasoline, conventional diesel, reformulated diesel, liquefied petroleum gas, and electricity via residual oil; natural gas to compressed natural gas, liquefied natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, methanol, Fischer-Tropsch diesel, dimethyl ether, hydrogen, and electricity; coal to electricity; uranium to electricity; renewable energy (hydropower, solar energy, and wind) to electricity; corn, woody biomass, and herbaceous biomass to ethanol; soybeans to biodiesel; flared gas to methanol, dimethyl ether, and Fischer-Tropsch diesel; and landfill gases to methanol. This report also presents themore » results of the analysis of fuel-cycle energy use and emissions associated with Alternative Transportation Fuels and advanced vehicle technologies to be applied to passenger cars and light-duty trucks.« less

  • greet 1 5 Transportation fuel cycle model vol 1 methodology development use and results
    Other Information: PBD: 6 Oct 1999, 1999
    Co-Authors: Michael Wang
    Abstract:

    This report documents the development and use of the most recent version (Version 1.5) of the Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET) model. The model, developed in a spreadsheet format, estimates the full fuel-cycle emissions and energy associated with various Transportation Fuels and advanced vehicle technologies for light-duty vehicles. The model calculates fuel-cycle emissions of five criteria pollutants (volatile organic compounds, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter with diameters of 10 micrometers or less, and sulfur oxides) and three greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide). The model also calculates total energy consumption, fossil fuel consumption, and petroleum consumption when various Transportation Fuels are used. The GREET model includes the following cycles: petroleum to conventional gasoline, reformulated gasoline, conventional diesel, reformulated diesel, liquefied petroleum gas, and electricity via residual oil; natural gas to compressed natural gas, liquefied natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, methanol, Fischer-Tropsch diesel, dimethyl ether, hydrogen, and electricity; coal to electricity; uranium to electricity; renewable energy (hydropower, solar energy, and wind) to electricity; corn, woody biomass, and herbaceous biomass to ethanol; soybeans to biodiesel; flared gas to methanol, dimethyl ether, and Fischer-Tropsch diesel; and landfill gases to methanol. This report also presents themore » results of the analysis of fuel-cycle energy use and emissions associated with Alternative Transportation Fuels and advanced vehicle technologies to be applied to passenger cars and light-duty trucks.« less

  • fuel cycle greenhouse gas emissions impacts of Alternative Transportation Fuels and advanced vehicle technologies
    Transportation Research Record, 1999
    Co-Authors: Michael Wang
    Abstract:

    The greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction potentials of various near- and long-term Transportation technologies were estimated. The estimated per-travel-distance GHG emissions results indicate that Alternative Transportation Fuels and advanced vehicle technologies can help to significantly reduce Transportation-related GHG emissions. Of the near-term technologies evaluated, electric vehicles, hybrid electric vehicles, compression-ignition, direct-injection vehicles, and E85 (85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline) flexible-fuel vehicles can reduce fuelcycle GHG emissions by more than 25 percent on a fuel-cycle basis. Electric vehicles powered by electricity generated primarily from nuclear and renewable sources can reduce GHG emissions by 80 percent. Other Alternative Fuels (such as compressed natural gas and liquefied petroleum gas) offer limited, but positive, GHG emissions reduction benefits. Among the long-term technologies evaluated, conventional sparkignition and compression-ignition engines ...

  • fuel cycle greenhouse gas emissions impacts of Alternative Transportation Fuels and advanced vehicle technologies
    1999 Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board Washington DC (US) 01 10 1999--01 14 1999, 1998
    Co-Authors: Michael Wang
    Abstract:

    At an international conference on global warming, held in Kyoto, Japan, in December 1997, the United States committed to reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 7% over its 1990 level by the year 2012. To help achieve that goal, Transportation GHG emissions need to be reduced. Using Argonne's fuel-cycle model, I estimated GHG emissions reduction potentials of various near- and long-term Transportation technologies. The estimated per-mile GHG emissions results show that Alternative Transportation Fuels and advanced vehicle technologies can help significantly reduce Transportation GHG emissions. Of the near-term technologies evaluated in this study, electric vehicles; hybrid electric vehicles; compression-ignition, direct-injection vehicles; and E85 flexible fuel vehicles can reduce fuel-cycle GHG emissions by more than 25%, on the fuel-cycle basis. Electric vehicles powered by electricity generated primarily from nuclear and renewable sources can reduce GHG emissions by 80%. Other Alternative Fuels, such as compressed natural gas and liquefied petroleum gas, offer limited, but positive, GHG emission reduction benefits. Among the long-term technologies evaluated in this study, conventional spark ignition and compression ignition engines powered by Alternative Fuels and gasoline- and diesel-powered advanced vehicles can reduce GHG emissions by 10% to 30%. Ethanol dedicated vehicles, electric vehicles, hybrid electric vehicles, and fuel-cell vehicles can reduce GHG emissions by over 40%. Spark ignition engines and fuel-cell vehicles powered by cellulosic ethanol and solar hydrogen (for fuel-cell vehicles only) can reduce GHG emissions by over 80%. In conclusion, both near- and long-term Alternative Fuels and advanced Transportation technologies can play a role in reducing the United States GHG emissions.

G Nagarajan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • performance and emission study in manifold hydrogen injection with diesel as an ignition source for different start of injection
    Renewable Energy, 2009
    Co-Authors: N Saravanan, G Nagarajan
    Abstract:

    Abstract Over the past two decades there has been a considerable effort to develop and introduce Alternative Transportation Fuels to replace conventional Fuels, gasoline and diesel. Environmental issues are the principal driving forces behind this effort. To date the bulk of research has focused on the carbon-based Fuels such as reformulated gasoline, methanol and natural gas. One Alternative fuel to carbon-based Fuels is hydrogen which is considered to be low polluting fuel. In the present experimental investigation hydrogen was injected into the intake manifold by using an injector. Using an electronic control unit (ECU) the injection timing and the duration were controlled. From the results it is observed that the optimum injection timing is at gas exchange top dead center (GTDC). The efficiency improved by about 15% with an increase in NOX emission by 3% compared to diesel. The smoke emission decreased by almost 100%. A net reduction in carbon emissions was also noticed due to the use of hydrogen. By adopting manifold injection technique the hydrogen–diesel dual fuel engine operates smoothly with a significant improvement in performance and reduction in emissions.

Harvey W Blanch - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • addressing the need for Alternative Transportation Fuels the joint bioenergy institute
    Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2010
    Co-Authors: Harvey W Blanch
    Abstract:

    Addressing the Need for Alternative Transportation Fuels: The Joint BioEnergy Institute Harvey W. Blanch †,‡,§ , Paul D. Adams †,§,¶ , Katherine M. Andrews-Cramer †,? , Wolf B. Frommer †,§, **, Blake A. Simmons †,†† , and Jay D. Keasling †,‡,§,¶, * † Joint BioEnergy Institute, ‡ Department of Chemical Engineering, University of California, Berkeley California 94720, § Physical Biosciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720, ¶ Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720, ? Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185, **Department of Plant Biology, Carnegie Institute for Science, Stanford, California 94305, and †† Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, California 94551 Today, carbon-rich fossil Fuels, primarily oil, coal, and natural gas, provide 85% of the energy consumed in the U.S. As world demand increases, oil reserves may become rapidly depleted (1). Fossil fuel use increases CO 2 emissions and raises the risk of global warming. The high energy content of liquid hydrocarbon Fuels makes them the preferred energy source for all modes of Transportation. In the U.S. alone, Transportation consumes ›13.8 million barrels of oil per day and generates 0.5 gigatons of carbon per year (2). This release of greenhouse gases has spurred research into Alternative, nonfossil energy sources. Among the options (nuclear, concentrated solar thermal, geothermal, hydroelectric, wind, solar, and biomass), only biomass has the potential to provide a high-energy-content Transportation fuel. Biomass is a renewable resource that can be converted into carbon-neutral transporation Fuels. Currently, bioFuels such as ethanol are produced largely from grains, but there is a large, untapped resource (estimated at more than a billion tons per year) of plant biomass that could be utilized as a renewable, domestic source of liquid Fuels. Well-established processes convert the starch content of the grain into sugars that can be fermented to ethanol. The energy efficiency of starch-based bioFuels is however not optimal, while plant cell walls (lignocellulose) represent a huge untapped source of energy (3). Plant- derived biomass contains cellulose, which is more difficult to convert to sugars; hemicellulose, which contains a diversity of carbohydrates that have to be efficiently degraded by microorganisms to Fuels; and lignin, which is recalcitrant to degradation and prevents cost-effective fermentation. The development of cost-effective and energy-efficient processes to transform lignocellulosic biomass into Fuels is hampered by significant roadblocks, including the lack of specifically developed energy crops, the difficulty in separating bio- mass components, low activity of enzymes used to deconstruct biomass, and the inhibitory effect of Fuels and processing byproducts on organisms responsible for producing Fuels from biomass monomers. The Joint BioEnergy Institute (JBEI) is a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Bioenergy Research Center that will address these roadblocks in bioFuels production. JBEI draws on the expertise and capabilities of three national laboratories (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Sandia National Laboratories (SNL), and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL)), two leading U.S. universities (University of California campuses at Berkeley (UCB) and Davis (UCD)), and a foundation (Carnegie Institute for Science, Stanford) to develop the scientific and technological base needed to convert the energy stored in lignocellulose into Transportation Fuels and commodity chemicals. Established scientists from the participating organizations are leading teams of researchers to solve the key scientific problems and develop the tools and infrastructure that will enable other researchers and companies to rapidly develop new bioFuels and scale production to meet U.S. Transportation needs and to develop and rapidly transition new technologies to the commercial sector. JBEI’s biomass-to-bioFuels research approach is based in three interrelated scientific divisions and a technologies division. The Feedstocks Division will develop improved plant energy crops to serve as the raw materials for bioFuels. The Deconstruction Division will investigate the conversion of this lignocellulosic plant material to sugar and aromatics. The Fuels Synthesis Division will create microbes that can efficiently convert sugar and aromatics into ethanol and other bioFuels. JBEI’s cross-cutting Technologies Division will develop and optimize a set of enabling technologies including high-throughput, chipbased, and ’omics platforms; tools for synthetic biology; multi-scale imaging facilities; and integrated data analysis to support and integrate JBEI’s scientific program.

  • addressing the need for Alternative Transportation Fuels the joint bioenergy institute
    ACS Chemical Biology, 2008
    Co-Authors: Harvey W Blanch, Paul D Adams, Katherine M Andrewscramer, Wolf B Frommer, Blake A Simmons, Jay D Keasling
    Abstract:

    Harvey W. Blanch, Paul D. Adams, Katherine M. Andrews-Cramer†,!, Wolf B. Frommer**, Blake A. Simmons, and Jay D. Keasling* Joint BioEnergy Institute, Department of Chemical Engineering, University of California, Berkeley California 94720, Physical Biosciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720, Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720, !Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185, **Department of Plant Biology, Carnegie Institute for Science, Stanford, California 94305, and Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, California 94551

Jay D Keasling - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • addressing the need for Alternative Transportation Fuels the joint bioenergy institute
    ACS Chemical Biology, 2008
    Co-Authors: Harvey W Blanch, Paul D Adams, Katherine M Andrewscramer, Wolf B Frommer, Blake A Simmons, Jay D Keasling
    Abstract:

    Harvey W. Blanch, Paul D. Adams, Katherine M. Andrews-Cramer†,!, Wolf B. Frommer**, Blake A. Simmons, and Jay D. Keasling* Joint BioEnergy Institute, Department of Chemical Engineering, University of California, Berkeley California 94720, Physical Biosciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720, Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720, !Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185, **Department of Plant Biology, Carnegie Institute for Science, Stanford, California 94305, and Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, California 94551

S R Bull - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.