Why China Needs Low Sulfur Fuels. Michael P. Walsh

Transcription

1 Why China Needs Low Sulfur Fuels Michael P. Walsh

2 Overview Why Low Sulfur Fuels Worldwide Trends and Tendencies International Experience Regarding The Benefits and Costs of Reducing Sulfur Comments on ExxonMobil Presentation

3 Why Low Sulfur Fuel? Lowers Emissions From Existing Vehicles SO 2 From All Vehicles PM From Diesel Vehicles CO, HC, NOx, Toxics From All Catalyst Vehicles Enables Advanced Technologies & Tight Standards For New Vehicles Enables Retrofit Technologies To Clean Up Existing Vehicles

4 Tons of Directly Emitted PM From Diesel Fuels Sulfur Tons Per Million Gallons Sulfur in Fuel (PPM) Derived From US EPA Data

5 Linkage Between Fuel Sulfur and PM Emissions PM Filter PM Emissions grams/kilometer Oxidation Catalyst Other PM Sulfur Fuel Sulfur PPM

6 Linkage Between Fuel Sulfur and PM Emissions PM Emissions grams/kilometer PM Filter Oxidation Catalyst Other PM Sulfur 500 PPM Sulfur Ox Cat Retrofit Viable Fuel Sulfur PPM 50 PPM Sulfur Reasonable PM Filter Feasible ~85% PM Reduction 10/15 PPM Sulfur Strong PM Filter Feasible ~95-99% PM Reduction

7 Fuel Sulfur Negatively Affects All Catalyst- Based Emission Control Technology Impacts of Sulfur SO 2 Sticks to Catalyst Sites (Chemisorption) Inhibits Gaseous Catalytic Reactions Catalytic Oxidation of SO 2 to SO 3 SO 3 Adds to Tailpipe PM Emissions Up to 40 to 50% of SO 2 Can Be Oxidized to SO 3 SO 3 Reacts with Catalyst Base Metal Oxides to Form Metal Sulfate which reduces catalytic activity For Catalyst-Based Diesel Particulate Filters, Sulfur Adversely Effects the Regeneration of the Filter For NOx Adsorbers, Sulfate Clogs Up and Shuts Down the NOx Storage Mechanism

8 Sulfur Effects SO 2 SO 3 H 2 SO 4 Sulfate make O 2 Sulfate Poisoning Sulfur inhibition SO 4 Zeolite or refractory oxide support

9 Summary of Influence of Fuel Sulfur on Diesel Exhaust Emission Control Devices Control Technology Oxidation Catalyst Lean NOx Catalyst SCR with Urea Catalytic Filters NOx Adsorbers All Catalyst Technologies Adversely Affected Sulfur Effects Inhibition, form SO 3 PM Inhibition, form SO 3 PM Inhibition, form SO 3 PM Inhibition, form SO 3 and Affects Regeneration Clogging, form SO 3 and store as sulfate requires periodic removal

10 Close Linkage Between Vehicle Emissions Standards and Fuel Sulfur Levels EPA g/bhp-hr 15 months Caterpillar, EPA 98 NOx = 4.0 P = 0.10 Consent Decree 10/02 Cummins, Detroit Diesel, Volvo, Mack Trucks/Renault Navistar EPA 04 NOx = 2.5 P = 0.10 Diesel 15 ppm EPA 07 NOx = 0.25 P = 0.01 EURO g/kw-hr EURO III NOx = 5.0 P = 0.10 Combined EURO IV EURO V EURO III-IV NOx = 3.5 P = 0.02 NOx=2.0 P=0.02 Diesel 50/10 ppm 10/05 10/08

11 CONCAWE Study On Advanced Diesels Fuel effects on PM and NOx emissions were also observed. However, DPFs were used the impact of changing fuel properties OTHER THAN SULFUR became negligible. In the heavy duty engines, the 300 ppm sulfur fuels were not considered relevant to test in the Euro 4 or Euro 5 engines. In the [light duty] Euro 3 engine, lower sulfur content reduced PM emissions.

12 New York City Retrofit Experience NYC Bus ID# 6019 NYC Bus ID# 6065 Percen tage Ch ange in g/ m 20% 0% -20% -40% -60% -80% -100% CO2 NOx THC CO PM CO2 N Ox THC CO PM OEM Catalyst / ULSD (50 ppm S) fuel CRT Catalyst / ULSD (50 ppm S) fuel

13 Durability & Reliability Ralphs Grocery Trucks Average Grocery Truck Emissions, CSHVR(1&2) Emissions, g/mile ULSD with Johnson Matthey CRT TM CO/10 NOx/100 HC PM Below Detection Limit Below Detection Limit CARB Fuel w/o DPF

14 Em issions, g/mile Durability & Reliability Ralphs Grocery Trucks Average Grocery Truck Emissions, CSHVR(1&2) ULSD with Engelhard DPX TM CO/10 NOx/100 HC PM Below Detection Limit CARB Fuel w/o DPF *

15 The Costs and Benefits of Shifting To Lower Sulfur Fuels International Experience

16 Results of Three Major US Rules Billions $90 $80 $70 $60 $50 $40 $30 $20 $10 $0 Tier 2 Standards & Low Sulfur Gasoline HD Diesel Standards & ULSD Off Road Diesel Standards & ULSD Benefits Costs Net Benefits

17 Canada Health Effects Consensus Findings (Independent Expert Panel) Reducing sulphur to 30 ppm improves the health of Canadians Health Effects of Pollution Mixture May Be Much Greater than Particles Alone Mortality Hospital Admissions Emergency Room Visits New cases of chronic bronchitis New cases of bronchitis in children Restricted activity days Asthma symptom days Acute respiratory symptoms e.g.: new cases of croup, pneumonia Number of Cases Extrapolated for All of Canada 2001 to ,100 2,400 6,800 7,600 93, million 3.3 million 11 million Canadian Study of Health Impacts of Low Sulfur Gasoline 6/3/

18 costs or benefits (in billions of $CDN) Costs and benefits of reduced-sulphur gasoline 1 (in terms of net present value ; 1994$) 30 ppm sulphur level 1 costs and benefits calculated for the years Costs calculated country wide; benefits for seven cities including TORONTO, MONTREAL, VANCOUVER, HALIFAX, WINNIPEG, ST. JOHN, AND EDMONTON Costs Benefits Net benefits

19 EU Estimate of Costs to Reduce Sulfur From 50 ppm to 10 ppm Cents per Liter $0.70 $0.60 $0.50 Low Estimate High Estimate $0.61 Benefits Exceeded Costs By Factor of 2 to 3 Times $0.40 $0.29 $0.29 $0.30 $0.20 $0.11 $0.10 $0.00 Gasoline Diesel

20 Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel Is Spreading PPM US US 2006 EU 2000 EU 2005 EU Denmark Sweden Class 1 Germany 2003 Japan Japan 2004 Japan Hong Kong South Korea 2006 Taipei, China 2007 Australia 2006 Thailand 2010 Santiago, Chile 2004 Singapore 2006

21 European Tax Incentives Schemes To Encourage Low Sulfur Fuels National Tax incentives For 50ppm sulphur fuels National Tax incentives For 50ppm & 10 ppm sulphur fuels (and or availability) 4.5Ec/l 50ppm Petrol (2000), Diesel (2001) 10ppm Diesel Available (2000) 0.3Ec/l 50ppm Petrol (2001) 5.7Ec/l 10ppm Diesel (2001) 3.9Ec/l Diesel (2000) 10ppm Petrol (2002) 10ppm Diesel (2002) 2.5Ec/l 50ppm Diesel (1993).076Ec/l 50ppm Petrol (2000), Diesel (2001) 1.5EC/l 10ppm Petrol/Diesel (2003) 1.5Ec/l 50ppm Petrol/Diesel (2001) 2.4 Ec/l Diesel (1999) 3.1Ec/l 50ppm Diesel (1993) 4 Ec/l Petrol/Diesel (2001) 2 Ec/l Petrol/Diesel (2001) 50ppm Diesel Available (2000) 10ppm Petrol/Diesel incentive (2004)

22 Conclusion Fuel Quality Is an Integral Part of a Complete Emission Control System for Both Gasoline- and Diesel-Powered Vehicles Fuel Sulfur Adversely Effects All Catalyst-Based Emission Control Technology and Needs to Be Reduced Using a Systems Approach with Ultra-Low Sulfur Fuel Combined with Advanced Engine Designs and Advanced Emission Control Technology, Cars, Trucks, and Buses Will Emit 99% Less Pollution As Compared to Vehicles in the 1960s Fuel Sulfur Content: The Lower, the Better

23 Conclusion (continued) Introducing Low Sulfur Gasoline Fuel Will Immediately Improve the Emission Control Performance of Existing Catalyst-Equipped Vehicles Introducing Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel Will Enable Existing Engines to be Retrofitted with Advanced Control Technology

24 Comments on ExxonMobil Presentation On Fuels Developments and Specifications

25 Analyze Vehicles and Fuels as a Single System Evap. HC HC, CO NOx, Particulates Vehicle technology can bring large emission reductions. Fuels must be suitable for the vehicles to perform well. I Agree!

26 All Parties Can Contribute to an Effective Regulatory Development Process Government Fuel Regulations Fuel Suppliers I Agree! Vehicle Producers

27 Vehicle Emission Standards Give Significant Reductions Diesel Cars European experience: g/km I Agree! Gasoline Cars CO HC+NOx Euro g/km uncontrolled Diesel Trucks Euro 2 CO PM g/kwh HC+NOx Euro 2 NOx g/kwh Diesel Cars and Trucks

28 China s s Future Fuel Specifications Fuels must be appropriate for the vehicle technology Utilize Experiences From Other Regions But Incorporate Local Situation Chinese Situation Fuel sulfur levels higher than regional average. China processing more imported crudes with higher sulfur content Considerations 1. Continue to look at all sources, including power plants, to identify the most cost-effective emission reduction steps 2. Reduce fuel sulfur levels consistent with vehicle equipment, air quality goals and costeffectiveness of other available steps 3. THIS IS WHAT YOU ARE DOING!

29 GASOLINE: DEFINING THE FUEL SPECIFICATIONS

30 Lead and Sulphur are Most Important Fuel Parameters I AGREE! Exhaust catalysts are much more sensitive to the fuel than the engine itself (I AGREE!) Most important fuel change is lead-free gasoline Allows use of Three-Way Catalyst (I AGREE!) Fuel Sulphur affects catalyst performance But very low levels not needed for Euro 2/3 emission limits European Auto-Oil data, gasoline cars NOx g/km Sulphur Effects, Euro 2 Cars Bangkok Real World Experience Indicates Euro 2 & Euro 3 Cars Are Cleaner with Low Sulfur Gasoline

31 NOx (g/km) Sulphur Effects Small for Modern Vehicles Fuel Sulphur (mg/kg) NOx No significant effect of sulphur on four advanced European gasoline cars Car A Car B Car C Car D Euro 3 limit Euro 4 limit HC CO HC (g/km) CO (g/km) Fuel Sulphur (mg/kg) Fuel Sulphur (mg/kg) Source: SAE

32 NOx g/km Sulphur Effects US Study Comparison Strong sulphur effects seen in early Calif LEVs not repeated in other studies } 99 CALEV Study (100 mg/kg sulphur) Fuel Sulphur (mg/kg) CONCAWE study No evidence of non-linear response to sulphur at levels up to 150 mg/kg 89 US Tier0 94 US Tier1 96 Euro2 97 CALEV 99 CALEV Car A Car B Car C Car D

33 Concawe Test Programme Fuels effects studied in more detail by CONCAWE Tested four modern European gasoline vehicles on European driving cycle Car A Euro litre Stoich. DI TWC Car B Euro litre VVA MPI TWC Car C Euro litre Lean DI TWC + NOx trap Car D Euro litre Lean DI TWC + NOx trap

34 Methodology Test Design Fuels tested in blocks 1 test per fuel per block Different randomised test orders for each block in each vehicle Phase 1 (sulphur) minimum 4 tests / fuel Extra tests if variability thresholds exceeded Additional Conditioning Vehicle Specific Phase 1: Sulphur purge within conditioning for each test Phase 2: Sulphur purge for NOx trap vehicles before each block OF COURSE YOU WOULD NOT EXPECT TO SEE ANY SULFUR EFFECT: Sulfur was purged before every test The durability of the catalyst exposed to the different sulfur levels was not monitored

35 Sulfur Purging Procedure Three Way Catalysts km/hr for 5 minutes km/hr for 1 minute 3. Wide Open Throttle Acceleration for at least 5 seconds to at least 115 km/hr; hold speed for 15 seconds; decelerate to 50 km/hr 4. Maintain 50 km/hr for 1 minute 5. Repeat steps 3 & 4 for 4 additional cycles NOx Storage Catalysts 1. Followed manufacturer guidelines

36 Limit Value of Gasoline-powered Vehicles (2009) (Draft) Passenger car PM NOx NMHC CO Achivement periods Light-weight (GVW1.7t or less) N.C Middle-weight (GVW over 1.7t ~ 3.5t or less) Heavy-weight 0.01 ( GVW over 3.5t) 1 Unit: Heavy-weight :g/kwh Except Heavy-weight :g/km 2 GVW: Gross weight Vehicle NMHC: Non-methane hydrocarbons t r u c k s note) Target values of particulate matter are applied only to lean-burn, direct-injection vehicles mounted with storing-type NOx reduction catalyst.

37 Comparison of PM exhaust emission PM(mg/km) 10.15/11 CD34 P.C. MPI 2005 G P.C. GDI/L 2000 G P.C. GDI/S 2005 G P.C. MPI/L 2005 G LoQ 2.7~ 4.5mg/km LDT MPI 2000 G P.C. MPI 2005 G P.C. GDI/L 2000 G P.C. GDI/L 2000 G P.C. GDI/L 2000 G P.C. GDI/L 2000 G P.C. GDI/L 2000 G P.C. GDI/L 2005 G P.C. GDI/L 2005 G LPC MPI 2000 G MDT DPF 2003 D LoD 0.9~1.5mg/km (JAMA DATA)

38 National Workshop on Clean Fuels and Vehicles in Vietnam Sulfur in Gasoline Highly efficient catalysts are much more sensitive to sulfur (if a catalyst is 99% efficient, a 1% decrease in efficiency will double emission) Advanced technologies such as lean NOx traps and NOx reduction catalysts require < 5 ppm sulfur to operate Real World Experience From Bangkok- Dr. Supat Wangwongwatana

39 National Workshop on Clean Fuels and Vehicles in Vietnam Impact of Sulfur On Exhaust Emissions from Gasoline Vehicles -5.9% -6.2% -10.8% -10.8% -22.1% -23.5% EURO 2 CO/10 HC NOx 800 ppm 500 ppm 150 ppm EURO 3 Real World Experience From Bangkok - Dr. Supat Wangwongwatana -18% -34.9% -11.6% -17.7% -16.1% -28% CO/10 HC NOx

40 National Workshop on Clean Fuels and Vehicles in Vietnam Impact of Sulfur On Diesel Vehicles 0.08 g/km % -51.9% -22.7% -38.3% -1.8% -4.5% -15.6% -27.9% EURO CO/10 HC NOx PM 500 ppm 350 ppm 50 ppm EURO 3 g/km % -47.3% -25.3% -48.4% -4.2% -12.7% -4.6% -24.6% 0.02 Real World Experience From Bangkok - Dr. Supat Wangwongwatana CO/10 HC NOx PM

41 National Workshop on Clean Fuels and Vehicles in Vietnam Napa Statement International Council on Clean Transportation 4-66 May 2003, Napa, CA, USA Sulfur is the Lead of the new century Reducing fuel sulfur content in gasoline and diesel is crucial tot o any serious effort to reduce air pollution from existing and new vehicles. Reducing sulfur in all transportation fuels (including non-road machines) provides immediate air quality and public health benefits. Benefits include reduced PM emissions from all vehicles es as well as reduced acidification. For vehicles equipped with any type of catalyst technology, sulfur reductions also reduce emissions of CO, HC, NOx, and secondary PM. Near-zero sulfur fuels (10 ppm or less) are required for advanced vehicle technologies.

42 Conceptual Cost Analysis Cents Per Gallon (relative) As gasoline sulphur is reduced Costs rise rapidly Benefits decrease As technology improves Costs decrease, but shape of curve stays the same Euro 2/3 gasoline vehicles need sulphur in range ppm Further reductions increase cost without benefit Sulfur maximum, ppm Costs Rise As Levels Go Down But The Benefits Far Outweigh Costs

43 Technology Solutions - New Catalyst Development Nebula-20 for Diesel Activity Early Commercial Catalysts New Generation Catalysts SCANfining for Gasoline Cumulative On-Line Capacity KBD '02 '03 '04 '05+ And Refinery Catalysts Are Improving! Increasing ultra-low sulfur diesel producability Proprietary catalyst technology Activity level tripled Rapid development / deployment Meeting gasoline sulfur specifications with minimal octane loss Proprietary catalyst technology Clear octane advantage Lower operating cost Retrofit capability Over 1 Mbd committed capacity

44 Summary Addressing vehicles and fuels as a single system can significantly improve the cost-effectiveness of future regulations -- benefiting consumers and society Government and industry should work together to develop effective regulations to improve air quality China can benefit from experience in other regions -- but should develop regulations appropriate for the Chinese situation For Euro I,II,III vehicles and engines, sulphur is the most important fuel parameter (emphasis added!) I AGREE WITH THESE CONCLUSIONS BUT WOULD ADD THAT EURO FUEL SULFUR LEVELS SHOULD BE MATCHED WITH VEHICLE STANDARDS