Transcript Slide 1

The Automotive Fuel Sustainability Model
Mathematical Representation of the Model
ABSTRACT
Systems Methodology
In order to use linear programming to determine an optimal fuel mix, the
lifecycle of each alternative fuel must first be evaluated. The main costs
associated with each fuel can be grouped into three primary cost areas:
gross consumer cost (P), environmental cost (E), and indirect costs (I). The
following diagram details the most prominent factors that contribute to
each cost field. Many of these variables are interdependent, but when
analyzed together, they yield a mix that accounts for the subsystems
embedded in each stage of the lifecycle of each fuel:
While gasoline and diesel are the most
commonly used automotive fuels, they
contribute significantly to global warming
through greenhouse gas emissions. As a result,
scientists and engineers around the world are
working to develop alternative fuels that have
significantly fewer emissions.
Gross Consumer Price (P)
In order to make an appropriate comparison
between the cost of using traditional fuels and
alternative fuels, the entire lifecycle of each fuel
must be considered, including production,
transportation, and usage. For example, even
though electric cars produce no emissions while
running, the generation of that electric power
may originate from highly polluting sources such
as coal.
This project team has designed a model that
minimizes the total cost of automobile
operations per year in a given country, using a
linear programming optimization technique. The
total cost is a weighted sum of the three primary
cost areas of each fuel: gross consumer cost (P),
environmental cost (E), and indirect costs (I). The
weights are comprised of “country priorities,”
which is a numerical interpretation of the
importance of P, E, and I to that country.
The model’s output is the optimal fuel mix a
country should have given its unique costs,
priorities, and constraints. The model can
perform a large number of different scenario
analyses, which renders the model ideal for use
as a policy analysis tool. The most relevant
model finding is that gasoline is not in the
portfolio of optimal fuel mixes unless the user
places a high weight on minimizing indirect costs.
AUTHORS: TEAM 8
Can Ediboglu ([email protected])
Hande Erfus ([email protected])
Brandon Hedvat ([email protected])
Guli Zhu ([email protected])
ADVISORS
Dr. Peter Scott
Mr. Walter Sobkiw
• Price per GGE
• Subsidies
• Annual Demand
• Number of Vehicles
• Miles Driven
Environmental Cost (E)
Infrastructure Costs (I)
• CO2-Equivalent Emissions of
Greenhouse Gases (Well-toWheel)
• Cost per Metric Ton of Carbon
• Miles Driven
• Cost of Adding or Upgrading
Fuel Dispensers
• Incentives (Tax Credits)
• Number of Fueling Stations
• Compounded Growth Rate of
Each Fuel
Comparison of Fuel Types
The scenarios below provide the optimal fuel mix for T = 10 years in the
future given the Y2007 mix of fuels and level of infrastructure in the
United States. It is assumed that 250 million vehicles will traverse 3.5
trillion miles in at time T.
 Scenario 2 (base case) yields the lowest gross consumer cost
 Scenario 3 (no fuel cap) yields the lowest overall financial cost
 Scenario 4 (only alternative fuels) yields the lowest CO2 emissions
 Scenario 5 (improved I.C.E.) yields the lowest indirect costs
In each scenario, changes in assumptions and constraints significantly
alter the optimal fuel mix. It is interesting to note that unless the user
places a high weight on minimizing indirect costs, gasoline is not part of
any optimal fuel portfolio. This result implies that diesel is a better
traditional fuel in terms of overall price and environmental emissions. In
general, given some user input of assumptions and constraints, usually
one or two fuels dominate the optimal fuel mix.
Scenario Analysis
Hybrid LPG, 0.06%
Electric, 1.7%
Electric,
0.02%
E85, 0.15%
CNG, 0.05%
B20, 0.16%
B20, 4.1%
Diesel, 28.8%
GASOLINE
DIESEL
ELECTRIC
HYBRID ELECTRIC
• Current Price:
$2.64/GGE
• Emissions: 474
grams CO2/mile
• Y2007 Vehicles:
69.7%
• Current Price:
$2.54/GGE
• Emissions: 401
grams CO2/mile
• Y2007 Vehicles:
28.8%
• Current Price:
$1.82/GGE
• Emissions: 352
grams CO2/mile
• Y2007 Vehicles:
0.02%
• Current Price:
$2.64/GGE
• Emissions: 343
grams CO2/mile
• Y2007 Vehicles:
1.7%
LPG
E85
CNG
B20
• Current Price:
$3.72/GGE
• Emissions: 397
grams CO2/mile
• Y2007 Vehicles:
0.06%
• Current Price:
$3.21/GGE
• Emissions: 381
grams CO2/mile
• Y2007 Vehicles:
0.15%
• Current Price:
$1.86/GGE
• Emissions: 405
grams CO2/mile
• Y2007 Vehicles:
0.05%
• Current Price:
$2.63/GGE
• Emissions: 345
grams CO2/mile
• Y2007 Vehicles:
0.16%
Gasoline,
69.1%
Hybrid
Electric,
48.9%
Electric,
0.02%
Diesel,
46.9%
SCENARIO 1: CURRENT MIX
SCENARIO 2: BASE CASE
SCENARIO 3: NO FUEL CAP
 CO2 Emissions: 2.039 billion metric tons
 Financial Cost: $492.4 billion
• Gross Consumer Cost: $489.2 billion
• Indirect Costs: $3.2 billion
– Infrastructure: $0.7 billion
– Conversion: $2.5 billion
 Weights: P = 33%, E = 33%, I = 33%
 CO2 Emissions: 1.666 billion metric tons
 Financial Cost: $437.3 billion
• Gross Consumer Cost: $393.8 billion
• Indirect Costs: $43.5 billion
– Infrastructure: $4.6 billion
– Conversion: $38.9 billion
 Weights: P = 33%, E = 33%, I = 33%
 No constraint on rate of fuel adoption
 CO2 Emissions: 1.801 billion metric tons
 Financial Cost: $432.7 billion
• Gross Consumer Cost: $390.6 billion
• Indirect Costs: $42.0 billion
– Infrastructure: $8.4 billion
– Conversion: $33.7 billion
Electric,
0.02%
B20, 0.1%
E85,
0.07%
B20, 8.2%
LPG, 3.7%
Electric,
0.02%
Electric,
10.4%
B20,
43.5%
Diesel,
19.5%
Hybrid
Electric,
99.9%
E85,
39.7%
Gasoline,
72.3%
CNG,
2.7%
DEMO TIMES
Thursday, April 22, 2010
9.00 | 9.30 | 10.00 | 15.00
Special Thanks To
Mr. Philip D. Farnum
Dr. Ken Laker
Dr. Raymond Watrous
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
SCHOOL AND ENGINEERING AND APPLIED SCIENCE
Department of Electrical and Systems Engineering
Key Findings
Source: Argonne National Laboratory GREET Model
SCENARIO 4: ONLY ALT. FUELS
SCENARIO 5: IMPROVED I.C.E
SCENARIO 6: PRO-ENVIRONMENT
 Weights: P = 33%, E = 33%, I = 33%
 No constraint on rate of fuel adoption
 No pure gasoline/diesel vehicles
 CO2 Emissions: 1.544 billion metric tons
 Financial Cost: $453.2 billion
• Gross Consumer Cost: $394.1 billion
• Indirect Costs: $59.1 billion
– Infrastructure: $0.0 billion
– Conversion: $59.1 billion
 Weights: P = 10%, E = 10%, I = 80%
 Gasoline/Diesel Emissions: -25%
 Gasoline/Diesel MPGGE: +25%
 CO2 Emissions: 1.558 billion metric tons
 Financial Cost: $500.9 billion
• Gross Consumer Cost: $495.9 billion
• Indirect Costs: $5.1 billion
– Infrastructure: $5.1 billion
– Conversion: $0.0 billion
 Weights: P = 10%, E = 80%, I = 10%
 Gasoline/Diesel Price: $10/gallon
 Carbon Cost: $50/metric ton
 Electric Emissions: -50%
 CO2 Emissions: 1.636 billion metric tons
 Financial Cost: $749.3 billion
• Gross Consumer Cost: $524.7 billion
• Indirect Costs: $224.6 billion
– Infrastructure: $73.8 billion
– Conversion: $150.8 billion
Key:
MPGGE – Miles Per Gasoline Gallon Equivalent | WTW – Well-to-Wheel (from production to consumption) | I.C.E. – Internal Combustion Engine
Red – scenario-specific assumption | Green – Lowest cost in category