4.8 Article

Evaluating the Effects of Aromatics Content in Gasoline on Gaseous and Particulate Matter Emissions from SI-PFI and SIDI Vehicles

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 49, Issue 11, Pages 7021-7031

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/es5061726

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. University of California Transportation Center (UCTC)
  2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) STAR Fellowship Assistance [FP-91751101]
  3. EPA [83504001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We assessed the emissions response of a fleet of seven light-duty gasoline vehicles for gasoline fuel aromatic content while operating over the LA92 driving cycle. The test fleet consisted of model year 2012 vehicles equipped with spark-ignition (SI) and either port fuel injection (PFI) or direct injection (DI) technology. Three gasoline fuels were blended to meet a range of total aromatics targets (15%, 25%, and 35% by volume) while holding other fuel properties relatively constant within specified ranges, and a fourth fuel was formulated to meet a 35% by volume total aromatics target but with a higher octane number. Our results showed statistically significant increases in carbon monoxide, nonmethane hydrocarbon, particulate matter (PM) mass, particle number, and black carbon emissions with increasing aromatics content for all seven vehicles tested. Only one vehicle showed a statistically significant increase in total hydrocarbon emissions. The monoaromatic hydrocarbon species that were evaluated showed increases with increasing aromatic content in the fuel. Changes in fuel composition had no statistically significant effect on the emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx), formaldehyde, or acetaldehyde. A good correlation was also found between the PM index and PM mass and number emissions for all vehicle/fuel combinations with the total aromatics group being a significant contributor to the total PM index followed by naphthalenes and indenes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available