11.01.2013 Views

Transportation's Role in Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...

Transportation's Role in Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...

Transportation's Role in Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Transportation’s <strong>Role</strong> <strong>in</strong> Reduc<strong>in</strong>g U.S. <strong>Greenhouse</strong> <strong>Gas</strong> <strong>Emissions</strong>: Volume 2<br />

technology. Truck-stop electrification is only one component of idle reduction because<br />

many truckers idle at decentralized locations (rest areas, roadsides, other park<strong>in</strong>g areas)<br />

which cannot be efficiently electrified.<br />

Idle reduction technologies and laws have been implemented to vary<strong>in</strong>g degrees<br />

throughout the country. Of the nation’s 5,000 truck stops, 136 stops <strong>in</strong> 34 States were<br />

electrified as of October 2008 (U.S. DOE, 2008); all or part of 25 States have implemented<br />

anti-idl<strong>in</strong>g laws (ATRI, 2009); and 36 percent of trucks with sleeper cabs currently have<br />

on-board idle reduction technologies (ATRI, 2006).<br />

Most idle-reduc<strong>in</strong>g technologies require equipment on-board the vehicle. So-called<br />

“s<strong>in</strong>gle system” electrified park<strong>in</strong>g spaces at truck stops require an attachment for the<br />

truck w<strong>in</strong>dow through which all services are delivered, and/or components for the truck<br />

to connect to the electrical grid. On-board technologies have an upfront cost for vehicle<br />

owners associated with purchase and <strong>in</strong>stallation, but f<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g and tax relief programs<br />

are available to help users afford idle reduction technology.<br />

While the carbon benefits of this strategy to the transportation sector as a whole are<br />

relatively small (0.3%), truck idle reduction provides net cost sav<strong>in</strong>gs to truck<strong>in</strong>g<br />

companies, with a short payback period of two to three years. Although the fuel sav<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

are small compared to the transportation sector as a whole, they are significant to<br />

<strong>in</strong>dividual truck<strong>in</strong>g companies.<br />

This truck idl<strong>in</strong>g section addresses two particular anti-idl<strong>in</strong>g strategies: <strong>in</strong>stallation of<br />

heat<strong>in</strong>g and cool<strong>in</strong>g systems on sleeper cabs and truck stop electrification. These<br />

strategies are non-additive, s<strong>in</strong>ce trucks would typically use only one system or the other<br />

when parked. Of the two measures, the on-board systems have a much larger impact<br />

s<strong>in</strong>ce they have the potential to be used regardless of where a truck is parked, while truck<br />

stop electrification applies only to the use of electrified park<strong>in</strong>g spaces at the nation’s 5000<br />

truck stops. As a result, the high-end GHG estimate for idle reduction strategies (6.1 mmt<br />

<strong>in</strong> 2030) reflects the maximum deployment assumption for on-board systems. The lowend<br />

estimate (1.3 mmt) corresponds with a 100 percent deployment assumption for truck<br />

stop electrification. 25<br />

Magnitude and Tim<strong>in</strong>g of <strong>Greenhouse</strong> <strong>Gas</strong> Reductions<br />

There are about 666,000 comb<strong>in</strong>ation tractor trailer trucks with sleeper cabs registered <strong>in</strong> the<br />

United States, accord<strong>in</strong>g to the 2002 Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey (VIUS). Sleeper cab<br />

trucks idle, on average, for about five hours a day while consum<strong>in</strong>g about 1 gallon per hour<br />

while idl<strong>in</strong>g (Perrot et al., 2003). In comparison, an APU consumes about 0.3 gallons per<br />

hour and a battery the equivalent of 0.05 gallons per hour (Bus<strong>in</strong>essWire, 2008a and 2008b).<br />

25 While one would not expect to achieve 100 percent deployment, the calculation provides a useful<br />

bar. Chang<strong>in</strong>g the deployment assumption to less than 100 percent would make a difference of<br />

less than a tenth of a percent <strong>in</strong> the transportation sector-wide GHG reduction estimate, s<strong>in</strong>ce the<br />

current estimate is 0.1%.<br />

4-42

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!