This paper presents thermodynamic analyses of ten different scenarios for using natural gas to power motor vehicles. Specifically, it presents a comparison between different types of automotive vehicles using fuels made from natural gas feedstock. In comparing the various fuel-vehicle options, a complete well-to-wheel fuel cycle is considered. This approach starts with the well at which the feedstock is first extracted from the ground and ends with the power finally delivered to the wheels of the vehicle. This all-inclusive comparison is essential in order to accurately and fairly compare the transportation options. This study indicates that at the present time hybrid-electric vehicles, particularly those using diesel components, can achieve the highest efficiency among available technologies using natural gas as the primary energy source. Hydrogen spark ignition, all-electric battery-powered, and methanol fuel cell vehicles rank lowest in well-to-wheel efficiency because of their poor fuel production efficiencies.

Issue Section:
Technical Papers
Keywords:
natural gas technology, transportation, road vehicles, thermodynamics, hydrogen, ignition, energy resources
Topics:
Fuels, Hydrogen, Natural gas, Transportation systems, Vehicles, Wheels, Diesel, Batteries, Methanol, Ignition, Fuel cells, Feedstock, Energy resources
1.
Wang, M. Q., and Huang, H.-S., 1999, “A Full Fuel-Cycle Analysis of Energy and Emissions Impacts of Transportation Fuels Produced from Natural Gas,” ANL/ESD-40, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL.
2.
Kreith, F., ed., 1998, The CRC Handbook of Mechanical Engineering, CRC Publishing, Boca Raton, FL.
3.
Howe-Grant, M., ed., 1994, Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, 4th Edition, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
4.
Block, D. L., 1997, “Comparative Costs of Hydrogen Produced from Photovoltaic Electrolysis and from Photoelectrochemical Processes,” Florida Solar Energy Center, Cocoa, FL.
5.
Kalhammer, F. R., Prokopius, P. R., Roan, V. P, and Voecks, G. E., 1998, “Status and Prospects of Fuel Cells as Automobile Engines,” report of the Fuel Cell Technical Advisory Panel prepared for State of California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA.
6.
Ogden
,
J. M.
,
Steinbugler
,
M. M.
, and
Kreutz
,
T. C.
,
1999
, “
A Comparison of Hydrogen, Methanol and Gasoline as Fuels for Fuel Cell Vehicles: Implications for Vehicle Design and Infrastructure Development
,”
J. Power Sources
,
25
, pp.
143
–
168
.
7.
Thomas
,
C. E.
,
James
,
B. D.
,
Lomax
, Jr.,
F. D.
, and
Kuhn
, Jr.,
I. F.
,
2000
, “
Fuel options for the fuel cell vehicle: hydrogen, methanol or gasoline?
”
Int. J. Hydrogen Energy
,
25
, pp.
551
–
567
.
8.
Kreith, F., West, R. E., and Isler, B. E., 2002, “Legislative and Technical Perspectives for Advanced Ground Transportation Systems,” Transportation Quarterly, Eno Transportation Foundation, Washington, DC, 56.
9.
Lovins, A. B., and Williams, B. D., 1999, “A Strategy for the Hydrogen Transition,” 10th Annual US Hydrogen Meeting, National Hydrogen Association, Vienna, VA.
10.
Billings, R. E., DiVacky, R. J., and Hatch, S. M., 1997, “Conversion and Testing of a Hydrogen-Powered Post Office Vehicle,” International Academy of Science; (online document cited 2000 Nov. 15, available: http://www.science.edu/science/tech/h81001.htm).
11.
Caterpillar Inc., 2000, C-12 Electronic Dual-Fuel Truck Engine Data Sheet.
12.
Wang, M., 1999, “The Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET) Model: Version 1.5,” Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL.
13.
Personal correspondence with Dr. Mark Bohn, Vice President, Rentech, Denver, CO.
14.
Unnasch, S., and Browning, L., 2000, “Fuel Cycle Energy Conversion Efficiency Analysis,” California Energy Commission and Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA.
15.
Allard, M., 1999, “CO2 Emissions from Methanol Production,” American Methanol Institute, Washington, DC.
16.
Stodolsky, F., Gaines, L., Marshall, C. L., An, F., and Eberhardt, J. J., 1999, “Total Fuel Cycle Impacts of Advanced Vehicles,” Paper No. 1999-01-0322, 1999 SAE International Congress and Exposition, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL.
17.
Kolke, R., 1999, “Technical Options for Abating Road Traffic Impacts: Comparative Study of Fuel Cell Vehicles and Vehicles With Internal Combustion Engines,” Smith, S., Trans., Umwelt Bundes Amt (Federal Environmental Agency), Berlin, Germany.
18.
Chalk, S., Milliken, J., Davis, P., and Ho, D., 1998, “Fuel Cells for Transportation: Contractor’s Annual Progress Report FY 1998,” 1, US DOE, Washington, DC.
19.
Thomas
,
C. E.
,
Kuhn
, Jr.,
I. F.
,
James
,
B. D.
,
Lomax
, Jr.,
F. D.
, and
Baum
,
G. N.
,
1998
, “
Affordable Hydrogen Supply Pathways for Fuel Cell Vehicles
,”
Int. J. Hydrogen Energy
,
23
, No.
6
, pp.
507
–
516
.
20.
Volvo Bus Corporation, 2000, “Natural Gas and Biogas,” Goteborg, Sweden.
21.
Mack Trucks, Inc., 2000, E7-427 ECONODYNE Diesel Engine Data Sheet, Allentown, PA.
22.
McCoy, G. A., and Lyons, J. K., 1993, Electric Vehicles: An Alternative Fuels Vehicle, Emissions, and Refueling Infrastructure Technology Assessment, Washington State Energy Office.
23.
Bauer, H., Ed., 1996, Automotive Handbook, 4th Edition, Robert Bosch GmbH, Stuttgart, Germany.
24.
Gary, J. H., and Handwerk, G. E., 1975, Petroleum Refining Technology and Economics, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, NY.
25.
Mintz, M., 2001, “Infrastructure Requirements of Advanced Technology Vehicles,” NCSL/TRB Transportation Technology and Policy Symposium, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL.
26.
General Motors Corporation, 2001, “Well-to-Wheel Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Advanced Fuel/Vehicle Systems” (available: http://www.transportation.anl.gov).
27.
Stedman, D. H., 1995, Playing with Fire: Science and Politics of Air Pollution from Cars, Denver University, Denver, CO.
Copyright © 2002
 by ASME
You do not currently have access to this content.