IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/itsdav/qt4qg1s2jq.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Fuel and Emissions Calculator (FEC) Version 2.0

Author

Listed:
  • Xu, Xiaodan
  • Xu, Yanzhi Ann
  • Zhao, Yingping
  • Liu, Haobing
  • Cheng, Honghan
  • Rodgers, Michael O
  • Guensler, Randall

Abstract

The Fuel and Emissions Calculator (FEC) is an operating-mode-based, life-cycle emissions modeling tool developed by the Georgia Institute of Technology researchers. The primary purpose of the FEC is to assist fleet owners and managers, regulatory agencies, and policy analysts in assessing the energy and emissions impacts of fleet alternatives. The FEC’s modeling approach estimates emissions as a function of engine load, which in turn is a function of vehicle service parameters, allowing modelers to account for local on-road operating mode conditions as model inputs. The functional modules are embedded in an Excel spreadsheet platform for all current model versions. The open platform allows users to see all input data and every calculation, which makes the model transparent and accessible for most users. With Version 2.0 of the model, an online Python version of the model has also been developed. The Python version enhances model performance, and provides functionality for advanced users who may wish to link the FEC with other modeling tools, such as travel demand or simulation models. The first Fuel and Emissions Calculator (Version 1.0), known as ‘FEC for transit fleets,’ was originally developed by Georgia Tech researchers in 2013-2014 for transit bus, shuttle bus and rail systems (ORNL and Georgia Tech, 2014). This report first summarizes the FEC Version 2.0 model’s main features. The generic methodology that is applied to all transportation modes is introduced in Chapter 2, which includes modules for scenario setting, energy consumption, onroad emission rates, life-cycle assessment, and cost-effectiveness. The model specifications for individual transportation modes are introduced in Chapter 3, and case study examples are provided to help users prepare customized analysis for their own fleets. The key considerations for establishing the online FEC are discussed in Chapter 4. Current research achievements and ongoing work to update and improve the FEC are provided in the final Chapter. View the NCST Project Webpage

Suggested Citation

  • Xu, Xiaodan & Xu, Yanzhi Ann & Zhao, Yingping & Liu, Haobing & Cheng, Honghan & Rodgers, Michael O & Guensler, Randall, 2016. "Fuel and Emissions Calculator (FEC) Version 2.0," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt4qg1s2jq, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdl:itsdav:qt4qg1s2jq
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/4qg1s2jq.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xu, Yanzhi & Gbologah, Franklin E. & Lee, Dong-Yeon & Liu, Haobing & Rodgers, Michael O. & Guensler, Randall L., 2015. "Assessment of alternative fuel and powertrain transit bus options using real-world operations data: Life-cycle fuel and emissions modeling," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 143-159.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Paul Baustert & Tomás Navarrete Gutiérrez & Thomas Gibon & Laurent Chion & Tai-Yu Ma & Gabriel Leite Mariante & Sylvain Klein & Philippe Gerber & Enrico Benetto, 2019. "Coupling Activity-Based Modeling and Life Cycle Assessment—A Proof-of-Concept Study on Cross-Border Commuting in Luxembourg," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-24, July.
    2. Song, Hongqing & Ou, Xunmin & Yuan, Jiehui & Yu, Mingxu & Wang, Cheng, 2017. "Energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions of diesel/LNG heavy-duty vehicle fleets in China based on a bottom-up model analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 140(P1), pages 966-978.
    3. Rupp, Matthias & Handschuh, Nils & Rieke, Christian & Kuperjans, Isabel, 2019. "Contribution of country-specific electricity mix and charging time to environmental impact of battery electric vehicles: A case study of electric buses in Germany," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 237(C), pages 618-634.
    4. Khan, Muhammad Imran & Shahrestani, Mehdi & Hayat, Tasawar & Shakoor, Abdul & Vahdati, Maria, 2019. "Life cycle (well-to-wheel) energy and environmental assessment of natural gas as transportation fuel in Pakistan," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 242(C), pages 1738-1752.
    5. Sehatpour, Mohammad-Hadi & Kazemi, Aliyeh & Sehatpour, Hesam-eddin, 2017. "Evaluation of alternative fuels for light-duty vehicles in Iran using a multi-criteria approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 295-310.
    6. Alberto Romero-Ania & Lourdes Rivero Gutiérrez & María Auxiliadora De Vicente Oliva, 2021. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis of Sustainable Urban Public Transport Systems," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(16), pages 1-30, August.
    7. Anna Brdulak & Grażyna Chaberek & Jacek Jagodziński, 2020. "Development Forecasts for the Zero-Emission Bus Fleet in Servicing Public Transport in Chosen EU Member Countries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-20, August.
    8. Basma, Hussein & Mansour, Charbel & Haddad, Marc & Nemer, Maroun & Stabat, Pascal, 2022. "Energy consumption and battery sizing for different types of electric bus service," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(PE).
    9. Xu, Yanzhi & Li, Hanyan & Liu, Haobing & Rodgers, Michael O. & Guensler, Randall L., 2017. "Eco-driving for transit: An effective strategy to conserve fuel and emissions," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 784-797.
    10. Dennis Dreier & Semida Silveira & Dilip Khatiwada & Keiko V. O. Fonseca & Rafael Nieweglowski & Renan Schepanski, 2019. "The influence of passenger load, driving cycle, fuel price and different types of buses on the cost of transport service in the BRT system in Curitiba, Brazil," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 2195-2242, December.
    11. Awad, Omar I. & Mamat, Rizalman & Ibrahim, Thamir K. & Kettner, Maurice & Kadirgama, K. & Leman, A.M. & Saiful, A.I.M., 2018. "Effects of fusel oil water content reduction on fuel properties, performance and emissions of SI engine fueled with gasoline -fusel oil blends," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 858-869.
    12. Dennis Dreier & Björn Rudin & Mark Howells, 2020. "Comparison of management strategies for the charging schedule and all-electric operation of a plug-in hybrid-electric bi-articulated bus fleet," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 363-404, June.
    13. García, Antonio & Monsalve-Serrano, Javier & Lago Sari, Rafael & Tripathi, Shashwat, 2022. "Life cycle CO₂ footprint reduction comparison of hybrid and electric buses for bus transit networks," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 308(C).
    14. Narayanamoorthy, Samayan & Ramya, L. & Kalaiselvan, Samayan & Kureethara, Joseph Varghese & Kang, Daekook, 2021. "Use of DEMATEL and COPRAS method to select best alternative fuel for control of impact of greenhouse gas emissions," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    15. Borghetti, Fabio & Carra, Martina & Besson, Carlotta & Matarrese, Elisabetta & Maja, Roberto & Barabino, Benedetto, 2024. "Evaluating alternative fuels for a bus fleet: An Italian case," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 1-15.
    16. Rogge, Matthias & van der Hurk, Evelien & Larsen, Allan & Sauer, Dirk Uwe, 2018. "Electric bus fleet size and mix problem with optimization of charging infrastructure," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 282-295.
    17. Harris, Andrew & Soban, Danielle & Smyth, Beatrice M. & Best, Robert, 2018. "Assessing life cycle impacts and the risk and uncertainty of alternative bus technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 569-579.
    18. Harris, Andrew & Soban, Danielle & Smyth, Beatrice M. & Best, Robert, 2020. "A probabilistic fleet analysis for energy consumption, life cycle cost and greenhouse gas emissions modelling of bus technologies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(C).
    19. Naihui Wang & Yulong Pei & Yi-Jia Wang, 2022. "Antecedents in Determining Users’ Acceptance of Electric Shuttle Bus Services," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(16), pages 1-19, August.
    20. Xinkuo Xu & Liyan Han, 2020. "Operational Lifecycle Carbon Value of Bus Electrification in Macau," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-18, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdl:itsdav:qt4qg1s2jq. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/itucdus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.