 |
| Fuel and vehicle propulsion strategy. (Source: ERTRAC) Click to enlarge. |
Alternative fuels have the potential gradually to replace fossil energy sources and make transport sustainable by 2050, according to a report presented to the European Commission last week by the stakeholder expert group on future transport fuels. The EU will need an oil-free and largely CO2-free energy supply for transport by 2050 due to the need to reduce its impact on the environment and concerns about the security of energy supply.
Expected demand from all transport modes could be met through a combination of electricity (batteries or hydrogen/fuel cells) and biofuels as main options, synthetic fuels (increasingly from renewable resources) as a bridging option, methane (natural gas and biomethane) as complementary fuel, and LPG as supplement, the report finds.
The Commission is currently revising existing policies and the report will feed into the initiative on clean transport systems, to be launched later this year. The initiative intends to develop a consistent long-term strategy for fully meeting the energy demands of the transport sector from alternative and sustainable sources by 2050.
If we are to achieve a truly sustainable transport, then we will have to consider alternative fuels. For this we need to take into account the needs of all transport modes.
—Vice-President Siim Kallas, responsible for transport
Different modes of transport require different options of alternative fuels, the panel said. Fuels with higher energy density are more suited to longer-distance operations, such as road freight transport, maritime transport, and aviation. Compatibility of new fuels with current technologies and infrastructure, or the need for disruptive system changes should be taken into account as important factors, determining in particular the economics of the different options.
According to the report, alternative fuels are the ultimate solution to decarbonize transport, by gradually substituting fossil energy sources. Technical and economic viability, efficient use of primary energy sources and market acceptance, however, will be decisive for a competitive acquisition of market share by the different fuels and vehicle technologies.
There is no single candidate for fuel substitution, the report said. Fuel demand and greenhouse gas challenges will most likely require the use of a mix of fuels which can be produced from a large variety of primary energy sources. There is broad agreement that all sustainable fuels will be needed to fully meet the expected demand.
Strategy 2050. Looking ahead to 2050, the expert group said that a long-term view and a stable policy environment are required to provide “clear, consistent and unwavering” signals to industry and investors.
A long-term trajectory should therefore be defined for Europe within a predictable regulatory framework. Within this trajectory, managing the transition from a predominantly fossil fuel to a predominantly alternative fuel transport system will be an ongoing challenge.
Policy and regulation should be technology neutral, founded on a scientific assessment of the well-to-wheels CO2 emissions, energy efficiency, and cost associated with competing technology pathways. The incentives for alternative fuels should be based on their CO2 footprint and their general sustainability. This should include recognition of all alternative fuel pathways and all CO2 abatement measures available, including application of carbon capture and storage (CCS).
Separate regulations on the energy system and on the transport system ensure more efficient implementation and leave flexibility for adopting the most cost-effective solutions. However, these regulations need to be developed in parallel to ensure that they are complementary and that they provide consistent message to industry.
—Future Transport Fuels
The first element of a long-term fuel strategy should be ongoing efforts to increase the energy efficiency of all transport operations as well as vehicles, through implementation of such options as downsizing, direct injection, charging and engine displacement reduction and the utilization of new efficient combustion systems. This stretches the availability of fossil resources, the group noted, and facilitates full substitution of oil by CO2–free energy sources in the long term. The main guidelines for this strategy are:
Energy efficiency policies in the end-use transport sectors allow energy savings and reduction of CO2 emissions. They will not provide for oil substitution, as required in the longer term. But energy savings through efficiency policies are an important prerequisite for replacing oil-based fuels, meeting increasing demand with limited supply from alternative energy sources.
Future transport technologies and measures designed to promote them need to deliver both on efficiency and on replacing oil-based energy with renewable energy.
Allocation of fuels to the different sectors of transport might better be achieved through market competition than through regulatory measures. Some sectors could also afford higher fuel prices, supporting early market development of initially more expensive alternative fuels.
Electric drive technology has the greatest potential for sustainable short to medium distance road transport over the long term, although it is not yet decided, according to the report, whether the electricity used will be stored in a battery or generated in a fuel cell using hydrogen.
Liquid and gaseous biofuels are other priority candidates for oil substitution in the long term strategy, within the time horizon of 2050. They are primarily needed in those sectors where no alternatives exist, such as aviation, parts of maritime transport, and long-distance freight transport. Fungibility of biofuels would be of advantage for their long-term market expansion.
The option of alternative biofuels blending standards should be compared with fungible biofuels, both for liquid and gaseous pathways, with fully flexible blending ratios between fossil and biomass based products in order to allow a smooth transition in the fuel mix and to keep and valorize the achievements of internal combustion engine technology.
Any decision to expand the use of biofuels should take into account the impact on life-cycle GHG emissions and biodiversity. The sustainability safeguards for biofuels should be reviewed to prevent i.a. unwanted effects on indirect land use change.
Bioethanol expansion would need additional standards for higher blending ratios, going from E5 to E10 in 2011 and then possibly to E20. Before introducing higher blends into the market, their compatibility with vehicle and infrastructure technologies needs to be ensured. The 2020 RED target could be supported by a wider deployment of flex-fuel vehicles using E85 blends. Blending potential and associated costs should be analysed.
Expansion of diesel alternatives can be supported by blending paraffinic fuels (HVO, GTL, BTL) that are fully fungible with existing vehicle technology and distribution infrastructures in any blending ratios.
The technical and economic complications of several different biofuel blending standards for fuel supply infrastructure and vehicle technology need to be assessed against the option of fully fungible (synthetic) biofuels complying with one single standard.
There should be clear and stable guidelines on the injection of bio-methane into the grid, including possible favorable tax treatment supporting market build-up. This can balance regional differences in biogas production and natural gas consumption by vehicles, and avoid double investment into a parallel bio-methane distribution network.
The approach with tailored fuels versus a multi-segment approach should be analysed in depth. R&D activities and a possible pilot project could be proposed for adequate testing of these technologies.
All these principal alternative fuel candidates can be produced from low-carbon technologies. Substitution of oil in transport by them leads inherently to a decarbonization of transport if the energy system is decarbonized. Life-cycle aspects have to be included in this assessment.
Decarbonisation of transport and decarbonization of the energy system can therefore be considered as two complementary strategic lines. They are closely related, but can be decoupled and require different technical approaches. Decarbonisation of the energy carriers used in transport should progress at least with the rate of their introduction into the transport fuel mix. However, the decarbonization of the two systems needs to be undertaken in a complementary manner in order to ensure that approaches are consistent.
—Future Transport Fuels
Specific to on-road transport, the expert group said that he following issues should be considered:
Urban transport can be powered by several alternative fuel options, namely electricity (battery electric small vehicles or electric trolleys) and hydrogen; also by biofuel blends, neat synthetic fuels or paraffinic, methane or LPG. Possible risks of market fragmentation and resulting limitations in economies of scale in case of competition between the two fuels need to be clarified.
Medium-distance transport could be covered by synthetic or paraffinic fuels, hydrogen, biofuel blends and methane. For methane, a gas grid already exists. Possible competition also needs to be clarified, as hydrogen and methane require the build-up of new dedicated infrastructure. Methane gas vehicles are mature technology where as hydrogen driven engines have to be further developed.
Long distance transport can be supplied by biofuels or synthetic or paraffinic fuels, for freight possibly also by liquefied methane gas (LNG, LBG or LPG).
In all cases (urban, medium and long-distance), there will continue to be a significant role to play for the internal combustion engine and advancements in ICE technology can be expected and certainly not disregarded in future scenarios.
Railways and urban rail systems can further contribute to decarbonizing transport, since power generation is on a path of decarbonization through the EU ETS and renewable energy targets. Additional electrification should be undertaken. For those few lines where electrification is not feasible or economically viable, engine technology from heavy duty road vehicles could be adapted for rail. Possible standards for diesel engines and potential use of biofuels, and possibly LNG should be explored.
Source:
Green Car Congress
Posts
