’s Car Essay, Research Paper
As time approaches the 21st century, the automobile has become our major source of mass transportation. Everything about our culture and society has developed around this necessary form of travel. However, along with this necessity comes the issue of pollution to the environment. These great gasoline powered vehicles have contributed greatly to the impurity of our environment. The two prominent alternative fueled vehicles yet brought up are the Electric car (EV) and the Hybrid electric car (HEV). The ultimate clean, efficient car is the EV, a vehicle powered by an electrical motor, which is powered by batteries and controlled by an on-board computer. But there are questions about the mid-term viability of EV vehicles. This is due to unresolved technical issues of on-board energy storage capacity, high vehicle cost, and infrastructure limitations (e.g., lack of public charging stations, repair/replacement facilities, and battery recycling centers). HEV vehicles are almost as clean as the EV?s and have vehicle performance comparable to that of today?s standard internal combustion engine vehicles. More important, such performance appears to be available in the mid-term future (e.g., 2002), and therefore represents a practical, technically achievable alternative approach. Some suggest we develop both the EV?s and HEV?s in parallel, because many of the technical advancements can be shared and because either or both will be needed to achieve efficiency and clean air goals.
Unlike EV or the HEV vehicles, motor vehicles generate more air pollution than any other human made machine. This air pollution, or toxic mixture of chemicals released by motor vehicles, is recognized as a major health hazard. According to the American Lung Association, this air pollution kills between 60,000 and 120,000 people in the United States each year and costs $93 billion dollars in medical bills. Some of these air-polluting greenhouse gases that are emitted or attributed to gasoline powered vehicles are chlorofluorocarbon (CFC?s), carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O), methane (CH4), and the precursors to tropospheric ozone – hydrocarbons (HC) and nitrogen oxides (NOx). These gasoline-powered vehicles are also a major source of carbon monoxide (CO). CFC?s are the most potent greenhouse gases on a per-unit mass basis. They now contribute nearly 24 percent of the total global warming effect. While incremental improvements can be made in standard vehicles, regulators and auto makers have defined at least two new vehicle classes that may provide a step-wise improvement in emissions. These are the Electric Vehicle and the Hybrid Electric Vehicle. Unlike an EV, an HEV utilizes the intermittent operation of a small engine to assist a typically battery-powered electric propulsion system. The electric motor propels the front wheels at low speeds. At higher speeds the internal combustion engine takes over. When the engine drives the vehicle, it automatically charges the batteries used for the electric motor, therefore making the battery pack a lot smaller.
EV and HEV vehicles are a lot more beneficial to the environment than internal combustion engines. The EV vehicles have a zero tailpipe emission. Another major problem of motor vehicles is its unsafe nature after its life dies out. Automobile junkyards, which litter the American landscape, contain thousands upon thousands of old broken up cars. From such junkyards are the problem of oil, lead, and battery acids, which enter the ground. However the lead in the batteries of electric vehicles is in a very stable form, unlike the trace amounts of lead in even unleaded gasoline and since electric vehicles do not contain oil or chlorofluorocarbons, they do not risk contaminating the area. Noise is also an advantage of getting an electric vehicle. Because motor vehicles have combustion motors, they tend to be loud and obnoxious. On the other hand, EV vehicles do not have a combustion engine; thus, they are noticeably quieter. Because the electric vehicle motors are also more efficient compared to motor vehicles, they are expected to last over a million miles compared to the motor vehicles? one hundred thousand miles. Initially, HEV vehicles are not expected to compete directly with standard vehicles on performance alone (e.g., acceleration and range), but they are expected to offer benefits that a standard vehicle does not offer. Compared to today’s standard vehicles, HEV vehicle will reduce local/regional pollution, by means of: increased vehicle mileage, (two times per gallon of fuel) , lower emissions per vehicle mile traveled. Propulsion systems that can be cycled off during stop-and-go driving, producing no emissions, fuels or fuel systems with reduced fuel evaporation and refueling losses.
As with any new technology, there are obstructions to its ready acceptance by consumers. Initially there may be resistance to the vehicles’ higher price and slightly reduced performance. Rugged and durable systems will be needed to provide credibility to a claim of long life with low emissions.
Austin, T.C.; J.M. Lyons; P.L. Heirigs; L.S. Caretto; R.W. Joy; G. Fauth (1994).
The Cost-Effectiveness of Further Regulating Mobile Source Emissions. Sierra Research, Inc. and Charles River Associates for American Automobile Manufacturers Association.
Automotive Engineering (March 1994).
“Advanced-Technology Vehicle Emissions with California Phase 2 Gasoline.” Automotive Engineering: 59-61.
Benson, D.K., and Potter, T.F., 1994
U.S. Patent #5,318,108, “Gas-Controlled Dynamic Vacuum Insulation with Gas Gate,” (June 7, 1994).
Benson, D.K., Potter, T.F., and Tracy, C.E., 1994
“Design of a Variable-Conductance Vacuum Insulation,” SAE Technical Paper #940315.
Bentley, Jeffrey M.; Teagan, Peter; Walls, David; Balles, Eric; Parish, Thomas (1992).
The Impact of Electric Vehicles on CO2 Emissions. Prepared for INEL. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Arthur D. Little, EGG-EP-10296.
Blumel, H. (1992).
“Inner city driving with battery powered or hybrid cars only A comparison from the viewpoint of air pollution control.” Presented at Aspects of Alternative Energies for Vehicle Drive, Wolfsburg, Germany, November 24 – 26, 1992. Dusseldorf, Germany: Verlag des Verein Deutscher Ingenieure GmbH. Also published in: VDI Report No. 1020.
Born, G.L.; S.V. Lucas; R.D. Scott; T.H. DeFries; S. Kishan (1994).
Effect of use of low oxygenate gasoline blends upon emissions from California Vehicles. Prepared for the California Air Resources Board and the South Coast Air Quality Management District. East Liberty, Ohio: Automotive Testing Labs.
Burch, S., Potter, T., Keyser, M., Brady, M., and Michaels, K., 1995
“Reducing Cold-Start Emissions by Catalytic Converter Thermal Management,” SAE Technical Paper #950409.
Burch, S., Keyser, M., Potter, T., and Benson, D., 1994
“Thermal Analysis and Testing of a Vacuum Insulated Catalytic Converter,” SAE Technical Paper #941998.
Cadle, S.H.,Gorse, R.A., Lawson, D.R., 1993
Real World Vehicle Emissions: A Summary of the Third Annual CRC APRAC On Road Vehicle Emissions Workshop, Air & Waste, v.43 p.l084 1090
California Air Resources Board (CARB) (1993).
Methodology for Estimating Emissions from On-Road Motor Vehicles: Volume I: EMFAC7F. Mobile Source Division, California Air Resources Board.
California Air Resources Board (CARB) (1993).
Methodology for Estimating Emissions from On-Road Motor Vehicles: Volume II: Weight (E7FWT). Mobile Source Division, California Air Resources Board.
California Air Resources Board (CARB) (1993).
Methodology for Estimating Emissions from On-Road Motor Vehicles: Volume III: BURDEN7F. Mobile Source Division, California Air Resources Board.
Calvert, J.G., J.B.Heywood, R.F.Sawyer, J.H.Seinfeld (1993)
Achieving Acceptable Air Quality: Some Reflections on Controlling Vehicle Emissions, Science, v261 p37 45.
Chock, D.P.; S.L. Winkler (1992).
Exhaust emissions of reformulated gasolines and methanol fuels based on the working datasets of the Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program. Presented at the International Specialty Conference: PM10 standards and nontraditional particulate source controls, January 12-15, 1992, Scottsdale Arizona, Volume 2. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania : Air and Waste Management Association.
Clossey, T.J.; J.M. DeJovine; K.J. McHugh, D.A. Paulsen, L.A. Rapp; J.S. Segal; B.K. Sullivan; D.J. Townsend (1992). The EC-X Test Program – Reformulated Gasoline for Lower Vehicle Emissions. Warrendale, Pennsylvania: Society of Automotive Engineers. SAE 920798. Also published in SP-900.
Colucci, J.M.; J.D. Benson (1991).
Impact of reformulated gasoline on emissions from current and future vehicles. Symposium on the impact of U.S. environmental regulations on fuel quality, Austin, Texas, December 11, 1991. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: American Society for Testing and Materials.
Darrow, K.G. (1994).
Light Duty Vehicle Full Fuel Cycle Emission Analysis. Prepared for the Gas Research Institute, Contract 5193-294-2573. Bellevue, Washington: Energy International, Inc. Report No. 9333R440.
Dowlatabadi, H.; A.J. Krupnick; A. Russell (1990).
Electric Vehicles and the Environment: Consequences for Emissions and Air Quality in Los Angeles and U.S. Regions. Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future, Discussion Paper QE91-01.
Dunn, Donald A.; Reuyl, John S.; McCormick, David L.
Hybrid Electric Vehicles – Their Possible Roles in Emissions Reduction and Fuel Saving
Finlayson Pitts, B., and J. Pitts, Jr., 1993a
Atmospheric Chemistry of Tropospheric Ozone Formation: Scientific and Regulatory Implications, Air & Waste, v.43 p.1091 1100.
Finlayson Pitts, B., and J. Pitts Jr., 1993b
Volatile Organic Compounds: Ozone Formation, Alternative Fuels and Toxics, Chemistry and Industry (UK), 18 October 1993. p.796 800.
Goodger, E., 1980
Alternative Fuels, MacMillan, ISBN 0-333-25813-4
Gorse, R.A.; Benson, J.D.; Burns, V.R.; Hochhauser, A.M.; Painter, L.J.; Reuter, R.M.; Rippon, B.H.; Rutherford, J.A. (1992). “Toxic Air Pollutant Vehicle Exhaust Emissions with Reformulated Gasolines.” Proceedings of the International Specialty Conference on Toxic Air Pollutants from Mobile Sources: Emissions and Health Effects, Detroit, Michigan, October 16-18, 1991. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Air And Waste Management Association.
Hartsock, D., Stiles, E., Bable, W., and Kranig, J., 1994
“Analytical and Experimental Evaluation of a Thermally Insulated Automotive Exhaust System,” SAE Technical Paper #940312.
Hempel, L.C.; D.Press; D. Gregory; J.M., Hough; M.E. Moore (1989).
Curbing Air Pollution in Southern California: The Role of Electric Vehicles. Claremont, California: Claremont Graduate School.
Hochhauser, A.M.; J.D. Benson; V. Burns; R.A. Gorse; W.J. Koehl; L.J. Painter; B.H. Rippon; R.M. Reuter; J.A. Rutherford (1991). The Effect of Aromatics, MTBE, Olefins and T90 on Mass Exhaust Emissions from Current and Older Vehicles – The Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program. Warrendale, Pennsylvania: Society of Automotive Engineers. SAE 912322.
Hoekman, S., 1992
Speciated Measurements and Calculated Reactivities of Vehicle Exhaust Emissions from Conventional and Reformulated Gasolines, Environ. Sci. Technol., v.26 p.1206 1216.
Energy related Carbon Dixode Emissions per Capita for OECD Collntries during 1990, International Energy Agency. (1993)
Koehl, W.J.; J.D. Benson;; V. Burns; R.A. Gorse; A.M. Hochhauser; R.M. Reuter; (1991).
Effects of Gasoline Composition and Properties on Vehicle Emissions: A Review of Prior Studies – Auto/Oil Air Quality Improvement Research Program. Warrendale, Pennsylvania: Society of Automotive Engineers. SAE 912321.
Korotney, D.J.; V. Rao; C.E. Lindhjem; M.S. Sklar (1995).
Reformulated Gasoline Effects on Exhaust Emissions: Phase III; Investigation on Effects of Sulfur, Olefins, Volatility, and Aromatics and the Interactions Between Olefins and Volatility or Sulfur. Warrendale, Pennsylvania: Society of Automotive Engineers. SAE 950782. Also published in SP-1095.
Kubsh, J.E. (1993).
Emission Performance Relationships to Gasoline Composition for Vehicles Equipped with Electrically Heated Catalytic Converters. Washington, D.C.: National Petroleum Refiners Association.
Laing, P.M., 1994