Browse
Search
Agenda - 11-21-2000-6c
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2000
>
Agenda - 11-21-2000
>
Agenda - 11-21-2000-6c
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/1/2008 11:41:49 PM
Creation date
8/29/2008 10:16:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
11/21/2000
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6c
Document Relationships
Minutes - 11-21-2000
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
. . . . . . . .~ <br />Emissions and Performance: <br />The alternative fuel options that have been considered by the workgroup are electric, compressed <br />natural gas (CNG), and ethanol (85% ethanol and l5% gas, generally notated as "E85" or simply <br />"ethanol"), or bi-fuel combinations. Liquefied natural gas, and methanol have not been <br />considered, and converted bi-fuel systems (systems that run on either CNG or gasoline) have <br />been discounted in favor of originally equipped bi-fuel vehicles because of safety and <br />maintenance considerations. The primary assessment of these fuel options was based on the <br />degree to which their use will contribute to lower emissions from County fleet vehicles. For <br />example, solar and electric vehicles have outstanding technical issues with battery operation. <br />A brief chart detailing the emissions comparisons of each of the fuels is listed below: <br />Table 1-Emissions <br />No tailpipe emissions (100%), <br />although maybe 30-40% <br />reduction when considering <br />power plant emissions <br />Alternative Fuel Source <br />74% <br />i tail pipe emissions (100%), <br />reduction may depend on <br />power plant emissions <br />No tail pipe emissions, <br />.reduction depends on <br />efficiency of power plant' <br />85% <br />70% <br />Up to 30% <br />No <br />A decrease in carcinogenic <br />hydrocarbons and in C023 <br />1: According to "A$Cs of AFVs", (California Energy Commission, 11 /99) electricity from a grid source of power leads to a <br />30% overall reduction in emissions from gasoline powered engines. If solar power is used, the reduction is 40%. <br />2: NC Division of Air Quality; 3: http://www.grcenfuels.orp/ethaair.html <br />As shown in Table 1 above, the greatest overall reductions in emissions come from electric <br />vehicles, followed by CNG, and then ethanol. A decision based on this assessment alone would <br />tend to favor the purchase of electric vehicles aver gasoline vehicles and over any of the other <br />AFVs. <br />However, factors other than emissions are also important t6 the purchase decision. Travel range <br />per fill-up is very important to consider in the purchase for use by County departments and <br />agencies because of the service area covered. Travel range varies from fuel to fuel. Generally, <br />electric vehicles have the least range, while ethanol vehicles have the greatest. Bi-fuel vehicles <br />can also have extensive ranges if both fuel tanks are used. Table 2 below compares the expected <br />range of several types of vehicles. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.