The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04/16/1991, C-8 - DIRECTION FOR TROLLEY VEHICLE ACQUISITION. r "'��b�►►�VIIIIII��I► �;�;i� city of san tins osIspo MEETING DATE: IT M NUMBE MWAIMUMMM Ado COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Z7- FROM: Ken Hampian, Assistant City Administra i e Officer Prepared by: Harry Watson, Transit Manager SUBJECT: Direction for trolley vehicle acquisition. CAO RECOMMENDATION: 1. Receive follow-up information comparing emissions of heavy duty versus light duty trolleys. 2. Direct staff to prepare specifications for the acquisition of a heavy-duty vehicle to use as the City's primary trolley. DISCUSSION: Background At the March 19, 1991 City Council meeting this item was brought to the Council along with the trolley evaluation component of the Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) . At that time, Council received and filed the trolley evaluation, but asked staff to bring back additional information comparing the emissions produced by the light duty and heavy duty trolley vehicles. For several reasons, the SRTP consultant recommended that the City purchase a heavy vehicle trolley vehicle. As outlined in the March 19, 1991 report, staff concurs with the consultant that the purchase of a heavy duty vehicle would be preferable to a light duty vehicle. A summary of the advantages and disadvantages of the two vehicle types is provided as Attachment 1. The remainder of this report focuses on the comparison of emissions between the gasoline powered (light duty) and the diesel powered (heavy duty) vehicles. Emission Standards Comparison Below is a comparison of both gasoline powered and diesel powered trolleys. For comparison purposes the emission control standards allowable on our existing fleet of buses is also listed. The emissions standards for the light duty gasoline vehicle came from the Department of Motor Vehicles, State of California. The heavy duty diesel standards came from the Federal Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) . crZv of san lu,.� o p oBis COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Page Two Council Agenda Report Liaht Dutv Heaw Dutv Present Bus Fleet j Gasoline Powered New Diesel Existing Diesel Emissions Standards Emissions Standards Fleet Emission (1991-94) Standards Hydrocarbons .25 parts per million (ppm) .20 ppm 1.3 ppm I I Carbon Monoxide 2.5 ppm 1.5 ppm 15.5 ppm i Noxious Oxide (NOX) 4.3 ppm 4.5 ppm 6.0 ppm Particulate .25 ppm .30 ppm .60 ppm I Evaluation of Emissions Data/Particulate Traps Diesel engines rank lower in hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide emissions, and higher in noxious oxide and particulate emissions. An appraisal of diesel versus gasoline powered trolleys from the County Air Pollution Control District favoring diesel is attached as Attachment 2 . i Despite the superiority of diesels in carbon monoxide emissions, and its aproximate equality with gasoline engines in other areas, the "perception" is that diesels are dirty in that you can see the particulates coming out of the tailpipe. The newer diesel engines i have a 50% reduction in visible particulates being emitted into the air compared to prior standards. However, particulates will still be visible, but at about one-half that of our existing buses. The March 19, 1991 Council meeting contained a discussion on diesel particulate traps which are currently in use on a test basis in Orange County. At this time the traps are not being manufactured by diesel manufacturers. The traps that are currently in use on a test basis are handcrafted units produced by the engine manufacturers as part of their research and development effort and are not available on any current production vehicles. However, as the Federal law now stands, traps will be standard on the 1994-95 production year models to achieve the Federal target of . 10 ppm for particulates. Cz8-� �nii�dhllllilll11°"1►1'''� c1ty of san lues oBIspo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Page Three Council Agenda Report In addition, you can both smell a diesel vehicle and a diesel engine is louder in operation. Unless a gasoline engine is in need of a tune-up, you generally can see no emissions and they can be more effectively muffled. I CONCLUSION: From an environmental standpoint, the heavy duty diesel trolley is roughly equal to the light duty gasoline vehicle, though superior in carbon monoxide emissions. Either is far superior to our existing buses on a vehicle by vehicle comparison. From a durability standpoint, the heavy duty trolley will outlast the light duty trolley two and one-half to one, will transport 37% more people and will require 50% less fuel. These factors lead staff to recommend the heavy duty diesel trolley. NEXT STEP: If Council approves the Staff recommendation, specifications will be developed for Council approval, and the bid process will be initiated immediately thereafter. The timing of the actual expenditure of funds will occur depending on the successful vendor's ability to produce the trolley. i ATTACHMENT: Trolley Comparison i NOTE: Consultant report and previous agenda report are available in the City Clerk's Office, City Council reading file. I HW\hvydty-2 C'8-3 ATTACHMENT 1 Cateao Heavy Dutv Liaht Duty Advantages: Capacity 55 adults 40 adults Primary life 10 years 5 years Miles per gallon 12 6 Engine Life 250,000-300,000 miles 100,000-125,000 miles Transmission Life 250,000-300,000 miles 100,000-125,000 miles Suspension Air Spring Wheel/Chair Lift Stepwell 6derior platform Disadvantages: Cost $150,000-170,000 $92,000-100,000 Size Larger than current Same as current trolley trolley Fuel Diesel Gasoline Fuel Cost $1.40/gal $1.10/gal SLO CO R6 TEI, No . 8055461035 AP, 4 ,91 17 : 26 No .021 P .01 ATTACHMENT 2 AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT Couunr OF SAN Luis OBISPO 2156 S>ERRA WAY.SurrE B-SAN LULS OBISPO,CALIFORNIA 93401 -(805) 549.5912 T0: Harry Watson, Transit Manager City of S.L.O. �f FROM: Dave Borrow, Air Quality Specialist, APCD DATE: 4 April, 1991 SUBJECT: Impact of bus emissions With diesel or gasoline engine. We understand that the City is considering purchase of a new trolly-type transit vehicle. The City has a choice of diesel or heavy-duty gasoline engine. You requested evaluation of potential air quality impacts from the trolly, which will be powered by a new engine. As you know, federal standards for new diesel transit engines in 1991 are substantially more strict than ever before. Emissions from 1991 diesel engines are on par with gasoline engines for most pollutants, except for carbon monoxide, where the diesel engine emissions are significantly lower. Further emission reductions from diesels should be forthcoming as cleaner fuels required by the state become available within the next 2 years. While the two engine types have generally similar emission characteristics, the diesel powered vehicle can carry about 1/3 more passengers. Therefore, when operating . near capacity, the diesel engine vehicle would have substantially lower emissions per/passenger mile than the gasoline powered vehicle. I hope this dissipates some of the smoke surrounding the question of transit vehicle emissions. If you have any further questions, please contact the District at 549-5912. dai9i/Dare®p/watson-1 ��^S00"