AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Scania sees red on green fuel

27th June 1996, Page 16
27th June 1996
Page 16
Page 16, 27th June 1996 — Scania sees red on green fuel
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

by Bryan Jarvis • Scania wants the major fuel producers to invest in new refineries to make green dery as readily available throughout Europe as Sweden's City diesel—Scania engine develop ment specialist Govan Hammarberg thinks there would be inure environmental gains if legislators were to raise gross vehicle weights.

During the early development of Scania's 4-Series Hammarberg broached the subject of cleaner fuel with the European Oil Industry Association (ELTROPIA), only to be rebuffed.

The European Vehicle Manufacturers Association (ACEA)—of which Scania is a member—and EUROPIA recently ran tests with a number of recommended fuels. None of these, he says, were as green as the standard Swedish fuel (City Diesel) which is used by 90% of its goods vehicles.

He challenged them on this, only to he told that such fuel couldn't be produced economically because every one of Europe's 55 refineries would need a 1133m investment. Hannnarberg isn't convinced.

He points to the .1:20m paid by Shell for improving its refinery in Sweden. "If cleaner. greener dery is commercially viable here then it should be available elsewhere too, in the EL; and beyond," he says.

From October every new truck sold in the EU will have to meet the Euro-2 emission requirements, and they'll have to be quieter too.

As a result, new chassis prices are believed to have risen by up to £2,000: operators who haven't seen a rate increase in several years are not likely to relish the thought of such a hefty green supplement but Hammarberg justifies the price by pointing to the major engine design changes necessary to reduce nitrogen oxides (N0x) and particulates below the present Euro-1 levels while maintaining or improving fuel economy. "The extra cost isn't simply a price premium," he says. "Such development involves thousands of engineering and test bed hours, new production equipment and new, more expensive engine components, and this costs money."

New pistons were needed to withstand the higher cylinder pressures and reduced clearances, along with higher pressure injection equipment and turbochargers.

Scania's older 9.0, 11 and 14-litre engines still have two valves per cylinder but the latest 12-litre unit is a four-valve/central injection design. By opting for unit injectors and compound mrbocharging Scania could enhance the performance still further.

Scania, says Hammarberg, invests up to 70% of its resources on environmental development work which is more than many other manufacturers; he believes that both the customer and environment are getting good value.

The 4-Series has better aerodynamics and more power so even though the specific fuel consumption curve is steeper, habitual driving in the green is expected to cut fuel bills compared with the older models.

Like other engine manufacturers Scania can't tackle impending Euro-3 legislation until the test cycle is agreed, but Hammarberg believes it will be a new "steady state" method with some transient component representing acceleration.

The latest engines certainly burn fuel more efficiently, with lower emissions, than ever before but the fuel they burn doesn't have to be diesel. Alternatives include rape seed oil, ethanol, methane and its derivative DME and compressed natural gas, Like diesel, CN(; is a fossil fuel with a finite supply; it also needs to be pressurised and stored, both on site and on a converted vehicle, All these fuels have potential, but Hammarberg warns: "From a well-to-wheel viewpoint diesel still remains the most cost-effective option and economics are an important ingredient."

There are even more environmental benefits to be had, he says, simply by bringing gross vehicle weights into line. Adding another six tonnes to a truck will hardly affect its fuel consumption but in overall terms, he reasons, it will be a little more cost-effective.

More importantly, he stresses that emissions will be reduced in relation to the amount of goods carried (he would also like the industry to work in grammes per tonne weight carried rather than grammes of fuel used per kilowatt hour).

Few engine manufacturers would dispute that clean breathing diesel engines are a key element in the drive to protect the environment.

However, the biggest bee in Hammarberg's bonnet is that, while engine manufacturers are having to invest heavily on making their engines cleaner, with operators and customers sharing in the cost, the fuel refiners are just sitting back and enjoying the harvest.


comments powered by Disqus