1 uta & alternative fuel vehicles governor’s energy development summit june 2014
Post on 12-Jan-2016
219 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
1
UTA & Alternative Fuel VehiclesGOVERNOR’S ENERGY DEVELOPMENT SUMMITJUNE 2014
2
Strategic and Board Goal Alignment
2020 Strategic Plan‘Operate a balanced fleet of alternative fuel vehicles’
2014 Board Goal‘Complete construction of an on-site CNG fueling facility’
3
Why Alternative Fuels?
• Vehicle fuel consumption is the second largest operating expenditure at UTA (Labor is #1)
• Spread risk associated with future fuel volatility
• Participation in new funding resources:• Utah Clean Cities Coalition – nearly $2
million in alternative fuel vehicles
• Better air quality
• Leveraging evolving efficiency technologies
• Since 1995, use of diesel fuel at transit agencies across the country has decreased more than 20% while the combined used of alternative fuel types* has increased more than 800%
67%
15%
12%
6%
Labor
Fuel
Other
Parts
*
* Includes electricity for rail propulsion
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Diesel Other
1995 2009
*
* GNC, LNG, gasoline, and Bio-diesel
4
UTA’s Fleet Mix
Today 2023*
45%42%
6%7%
Diesel (Pre-2006)
Clean Diesel
Hybrid
CNG77%
6%
17%
Clean Diesel
Hybrid
CNG
* Based on 2014 Bus Replacement Schedule
5
Fuel Volatility
20102011
20122013
20142015
20162017
20182019
20202021
20222023
20242025
20262027
20282029
20302031
20322033
20342035
20362037
20382039
2040 $-
$0.20
$0.40
$0.60
$0.80
$1.00
$1.20
Projected Fuel Cost ComparisonsPer Mile*, in 2013 Dollars
Diesel Diesel ProjectedNatural Gas Natural Gas ProjectedElectric Electric Projected
*Assumptions
2010 Diesel (MPG): 4.3
CNG (MPGe): 3.5
Electric (@ 2.3 kWh/Mile)*: 17
Source: ANNUAL ENERGY OUTLOOK 2014, US Energy Information Administration
6
Diesel Buses
• Currently four hundred fifty five (455) in the UTA Fleet• Pre-2006 Diesel Vehicles – 239• “Clean Diesel” Vehicles – 216
• Most common, reliable, highest horsepower technology available
• Existing infrastructure for fueling and maintenance
7
CNG Buses
• Currently twenty four (24) in the UTA Fleet
• Technology is being used by more than 40 transit agencies in North America
• Fuel can be locally sourced
• Lower emissions of criteria air pollutants• Compared to a model year 2000 diesel bus, a model year 2012 CNG
bus emits:• 80% less NOx• 99% less PM• 100% less Hydrocarbons
8
Hybrid Buses
• Currently thirty two (32) in the UTA Fleet
• Technology is being used by more than 60 transit agencies in North America
• Diesel-electric technology combines two energy converters:• An internal combustion engine• Electric battery powered drive
9
Electric Buses
Current Top Manufacturers• Proterra• BYD• Compete Coachworks
Charging Technologies• Conduction
• Overhead• Embedded (WAVE)
• Overnight (Plug in)
Current US Agencies Using the Technology
Proterra
BYD
Complete Coach Works
10
Capital Cost Comparisons
Diesel B
us
CNG Bus
Hybrid
Bus
Electric
Bus (CCW
- WAVE)
Electric
Bus (BYD - C
onductive
)
Electric
Bus (BYD - O
vernight)
Electric
Bus (Proterra
- Conduct.
..$0
$200,000
$400,000
$600,000
$800,000
$1,000,000
$1,200,000
$1,400,000
$1,600,000
Bus Capital Costs (Including Charging Infrastructure & Battery)
Base Bus Cost Charging Infrastructure & Battery
11
Electric Buses – Capital Costs
Proterra
BYD
Complete Coach Works
Electric Bus (CCW - WAVE)
Electric Bus (BYD - Conductive)
Electric Bus (BYD - Overnight)
Electric Bus (Proterra - Conductive)
$0
$200,000
$400,000
$600,000
$800,000
$1,000,000
$1,200,000
$1,400,000
$1,600,000
Electric Bus Capital Costs Breakdown*
Base Bus Cost Charging Infrastructure Battery Cost
* Costs are for one (1) bus and (1) set of Infrastructure, economies of scale can be realized with larger fleet sizes
12
Projected Lifecycle Operations and Maintenance Cost Comparisons
*Assumptions:- Twelve (12) year vehicle life- 34,000 annual miles (UTA average)- 7% annual fuel price increase- 3% annual electricity cost increase- At least one (1) battery replacement for electric vehicles- Bus systems and infrastructure estimated to last 8 years; 8 year amortization for all systems & infrastructure- Numbers shown are in Net Present Value (NPV)
Electric
Bus (CCW
- WAVE)
Electric
Bus (BYD - O
vernight)
CNG Bus
Diesel B
us
Electric
Bus (BYD - C
onductive
)
Hybrid
Bus
Electric
Bus (Proterra
- Conducti
ve)
$0
$200,000
$400,000
$600,000
$800,000
$1,000,000
$1,200,000
Vehicle Lifecycle Costs (12 Years)
Base Bus Cost Fuel/Energy Costs O&M
13
Depot District Service Center
Sustain operations• Support maintenance and fueling
of existing fleet in a safe, efficient, well-designed facility
Increase options• Allow expansion of Central Garage
fleet• Facilitate exploration of other fuel
types• Conduit for charging future electric
vehicles• Flexibility to accommodate other
vehicle types
14
Key Issues
• Initial capital costs
• Operations & Maintenance• Training• Facilities
• Additional public infrastructure required
• Unproven Technology
15
Thank you!
G.J. LaBontyManager, Long Range & Strategic Planning
Utah Transit Authority
top related