EMFAC2001 WORKSHOP

Presented by:Mobile Source Analysis BranchPlanning and Technical Support

DivisionMay, 2001

Workshop Agenda 10:00-10:15 Introduction 10:15-10:45 Modifications to Activity 10:45-11:15 Modifications to Emission

Rates 11:15-12:15 Miscellaneous Improvements 12:15 - 1:00 Lunch Break 1:00 - 1:30 Introduction of User Interface 1:30 – 2:00 Updates to “OFFROAD” 2:00 – 2:30 EMFAC2002 2:30 - 3:00 Wrap up and Q&A

Modification to Activity

Incorporation of NewVMT and Speed

Updated VMT and Speed Update with latest data from MPOs No obvious trends with respect to VMT Speeds are getting dramatically faster Timeliness and completeness of

submissions critical for annual updates ARB “responsible” for accuracy of

activity (SB2174)

New Speed Distribution Trends

AM-Peak Less VMT at low

speeds More VMT at

intermediate speeds

Significantly more VMT at extreme speeds

PERCENT VMT BY SPEED - SD (CY2000 - 8 AM)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65

MPH

PER

CE

NT

VM

T

EF2000 EF2001

New Speed Distribution Trends

PM-Peak Less VMT at low

speeds More VMT at

intermediate speeds

More VMT at extreme speeds

PERCENT VMT BY SPEED - SD (CY2000 - 5 PM)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65

MPH

PE

RC

EN

T V

MT

EF2000 EF2001

New Speed Distribution Trends

Off-Peak Less VMT at low

speeds More VMT at

intermediate speeds

Significantly more VMT at extreme speeds

PERCENT VMT BY SPEED - SD (CY2000 - 5 AM)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65

MPH

PER

CEN

T VM

T

EF2000 EF2001

Implications of “Faster” Speeds on SCFs

Fewer vehicles experience upturn at low/high speeds.

Significant drop in exhaust emissions.

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65

Speed (mph)

Cor

recti

on F

acto

r

HC CARB HC FI HC TBI

Other Implications Faster speeds imply less “on” time. Should reduce running losses

(grams/hour). Should increase diurnal/resting

losses because of additional “off” time.

Should increase starts due to longer soak times.

SFAB 2000 Exhaust Emissions Effect

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

TPD

HC CO/ 10 NOx

Base SpeedNew Speed

Summary Trends in speed distribution will reduce

emissions, especially HC. ARB will be working to standardize

activity submissions and dates for annual updates.

To address other modeling implications, ARB may ask for clarification on the nature of the changes.

Update Estimates of Chronically Unregistered Vehicles

Project Objective Determine the County Specific

Instantaneous and Chronic Un-registered rate.

Instantaneous – Less than two years Chronic – Two years or more

(no benefit from Smog Check) Travel to each county in California

and capture license plate information.

Samples of Captured Vehicles

Unregistered Vehicles by County

Results of Analysis 98,817 Useable Images Captured Unregistered fraction ranged from

0% Del Norte / Sierra / Siskiyou / Trinity

To 6.45% Alpine

Statewide Average = 3.85%

Un-registered Rate/Vehicles Analyzed for Select Counties Imperial Los Angeles Orange Riverside Sacramento San Diego San Francisco San Joaquin

5.37% 411 5.12% 25,835 3.20% 9,468 5.13% 4,262 3.31% 3,337 4.15% 9,584 4.37% 2,840 1.33% 1,241

Modifications to EMFAC EMFAC2000 assumed a Statewide Un-

Registered Vehicle fraction of: 8.35% Instantaneous and 0.56% Chronic

Based on the latest information, the modified Statewide Un-Registered Vehicle fraction will be : 3.85% Instantaneous and ? % Chronic

Update Out-Of-State Heavy-Duty Diesel Fraction

Out-of State HHDT VMT Based on a study by JFA, out-of-

state heavy heavy-duty diesel truck VMT fraction increased from 25% of CA HHD trucks to 33%

Inventory Changes Due to Changes inOut-of-State HHDT VMT

% Change

HC +7.1%

CO +7.2%

NOx +4.9%

PM +6.3%

Update Estimates of Technology Fractions

Introduction to ARBVin Decoder Radian VIN Decoder

Refined technology fields: AIR, CAT, TWC, OXY, etc.

Model Years 1972 - 1999 ARB EMFAC Algorithms and Classifications ARBVin Decoder

Outputs estimated emissions based on allocated vehicle regime

Outputs EMFAC2000 defined Tech Groups

Tech Group 101Tech Group = Grouping of vehicles

based upon Emission Control Configuration and Emission Control Standards.

EMFAC2000 currently contains almost 300 Tech Groups

Previous version of EMFAC (7G) only contained approximately 18 Tech Groups

EMFAC2000 Tech Group Designations (Partial List Sample)Tech Group Description

1 <75 LDV no AIR 2 <75 LDV with AIR 3 75+ LDV noncatalyst 4 75-76 LDV OxCat with AIR 5 75-79 LDV OxCat no AIR 6 80+ LDV OxCat no AIR 7 77+ LDV OxCat with AIR 8 77-79 LDV TWC TBI/CARB9 81-84 LDV TWC TBI/CARB 0.7 NOx10 85+ LDV TWC TBI/CARB 0.7 NOx

VINARB TG Analyses EMFAC2000 assumed a Statewide

Distribution of Vehicles based upon EEA Report (1990) Use more current data (1999) to perform

comparison

EMFAC2000 assumed vehicles of the same class and technology fall out of the fleet at the same rate. Use one model year (1987) over multiple

calendar years (1995 and 1998)

Statewide Vehicle Distribution Analysis

ExtractVINs

Run ARBVIN

Filter Errors & Diesels

Sum TGs by MY

RunEMFAC with New Dist.

CompareOutput w/ Default

Emission Comparison (ROG)Default vs. DMV99 TG Dist.

Emission Comparison - Default vs. DMV99 TG (ROG)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1965

1967

1969

1971

1973

1975

1977

1979

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

Model Year

RO

G T

ota

l E

xh

EMFAC (Default)

DMV99 (TG Input)

Emission Comparison (CO)Default vs. DMV99 TG Dist.

Emission Comparison - Default vs. DMV99 TG (CO)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

1965

1967

1969

1971

1973

1975

1977

1979

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

SUM

ModelYear

CO

To

tal

Ex

ha

us

t

EMFAC (Default)

DMV99 (TG Input)

Emission Comparison (NOx) Default vs. DMV99 TG Dist.

Emission Comparison - Default vs. DMV99 TG (Nox)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

1965

1967

1969

1971

1973

1975

1977

1979

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

Model Year

NO

x T

ota

l E

xh

au

st

EMFAC (Default)

DMV99 (TG Input)

Multi-Year TG AnalysisMulti-Year TG AnalysisExtract1987 MYVINs (95/98)

Run ARBVIN

Filter Errors & Diesels

Sum TGs by MY

PrintResults in Bar Graph

CompareResults

Tech Group Distribution Comparison (1995 vs. 1998)

1987 MODEL YEAR Only (Percentages)

0.5

%

0.4

%

0.3

%

28

.4%

70

.4%

0.8

%

0.5

%

0.6

%

29

.0%

69

.1%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

3 6 7 10 13

Tech Group

Pe

rce

nta

ge DMV 1995

DMV 1998

Results of Analyses Raises Estimates by

approximately: 5.1% for ROG 1.0% for CO 4.5% for NOx

Assumption that Tech Group Distributions remain the same over time validated

Future Analyses

Annual EMFAC Update using latest registration data

Further Refined analysis of statewide TG distribution MD and HD Trucks Diesel Vehicles

Modifications to Emission Rates

Update LDD Emission Factors

Source: Data from two different diesel

surveillance projects (2S82D1, 2S83D1) Included 139 vehicles Model Years from 1980-1984 Odometer range between 11,000-

125,000 miles FTP test cycle was used

Analysis: Statistical analysis was performed on each

bag to determine if emissions are a function of odometer, model year or vehicle class

Analysis indicated emissions were not a function of odometer. Emissions showed a significant difference between the following model year groups: 1980-1982 1983 1984

Results: Based on emission standards, the final EMFAC

2001 model year specific emission rates for PC, LDV and MDV < 8,500 lbs are:

ZM DR ZM DR ZM DR ZM DR

Gm/Mile Gr/Mile² Gm/Mile Gm/Mile² Gm/Mile Gr/Mile² Gm/Mile Gm/Mile²Pre 1982

Bag 1 0.450 0 0.391 0.0299 1.591 0 1.226 0.0647Bag 2 0.382 0 0.280 0.0410 1.268 0 1.060 0.0276Bag 3 0.326 0 0.230 0.0299 1.153 0 0.958 0.0371

1983Bag 1 0.292 0 0.391 0.0299 1.66 0 1.660 0.0647Bag 2 0.225 0 0.280 0.0401 1.236 0 1.236 0.0276Bag 3 0.175 0 0.230 0.0299 1.103 0 1.103 0.0371

1984-1995Bag 1 0.418 0 0.520 0.0398 1.742 0 1.226 0.0647Bag 2 0.321 0 0.374 0.0534 1.402 0 1.060 0.0276Bag 3 0.265 0 0.307 0.0398 1.341 0 0.958 0.0371

CO COProposed EMFAC 2000

HC HCProposed EMFAC 2000

Results: (continued…)

ZM DR ZM DRGm/Mile Gr/Mile² Gm/Mile Gm/Mile²

Pre 1982Bag 1 442.40 0 381.60 0Bag 2 385.93 0 437.55 0Bag 3 368.40 0 364.87 0

1983Bag 1 441.11 0 381.60 0Bag 2 380.71 0 437.55 0Bag 3 365.42 0 364.87 0

1984-1995Bag 1 397.84 0 345.72 0Bag 2 345.72 0 397.84 0Bag 3 329.88 0 329.88 0

C02 CO2Proposed EMFAC 2000

ZM DR ZM DRGm/Mile Gr/Mile² Gm/Mile Gm/Mile²

1.465 0 1.279 0.04091.545 0 1.402 0.06201.358 0 1.196 0.0409

1.386 0 1.279 0.04091.342 0 1.402 0.06201.304 0 1.196 0.0409

1.280 0 0.853 0.02731.481 0 0.935 0.04141.081 0 0.797 0.0273

NOX NOXProposed EMFAC 2000

Results: (continued…)

ZM DR ZM DRGm/Mile Gr/Mile² Gm/Mile Gm/Mile²

Pre 1982Bag 1 0.745 0 0 0Bag 2 0.413 0 0.2567 0Bag 3 0.487 0 0 0

1983Bag 1 0.626 0 0 0Bag 2 0.378 0 0.2567 0Bag 3 0.401 0 0 0

1984-1995Bag 1 0.797 0 0 0Bag 2 0.346 0 0.2567 0Bag 3 0.41 0 0 0

PMProposed

PMEMFAC 2000

Conclusions: HC emissions will decrease. CO and PM emissions will increase. NOx emissions will decrease (slightly). CO2 emissions will be used to calculate fuel

consumption.

Inclusion of Methane Inventory

Greenhouse Gases Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Methane

(CH4) and Nitrous Oxide (N2O)Global Warming Potential (GWP)

Gases GWPCO2 1CH4 21N2O 310

* www.epa.gov/globalwarming/emissions /national/gwp.html

(100 Year Time Horizon)GWP is the ratio of global warming from one unit mass of greenhouse gas to one unitmass of CO2 over a period of time

• Methane molecule traps 21 times more heat than a CO2 molecule

Methane Factors Developed from an analysis of exhaust gas

speciation profiles Vary by fuel type, cat, non-cat & diesel groups,

and by running and starting emissionsMethane Conversions Factors - Catalyst equipped gasoline and diesel Vehicles (*)Cleaner Burning Gasoline Catalyst running'" '' Catalyst starts CH4 = 0.0649 * TOG = 0.06916 * THCPre-Cleaner Burning Gasoline Catalyst running'" '' Catalyst starts CH4 = 0.0624 * TOG = 0.06442 * THCDiesel All running CH4 = 0.0408 * TOG = 0.058821 * THC(*) Section 4.13 HC Conversions @ www.arb.ca.gov/msei/doctabletest /doctable_test.htm

CH4 = TOG{0.0356821 + 0.106396/(THC) - 0.0125986/(THC2) – 0.000613197/(THC3)}

CH4 = TOG{0.0627696 + 0.0584035/(THC) - 0.00476385/(THC2) – 0.000860145/(THC3)}

Draft Estimates Methane - Approximately 100 tons

per day Statewide in 2001 12 percent of TOG (starts+running) Model - User can output either THC,

TOG, ROG or CH4

Future - Greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4 and N2O) will be reported separately

Non-Fuel RelatedEvaporative Emissions

Non-Fuel Related Evaporative Emissions

ZEVs do have a finite amount of “evaporative” emissions from upholstery, tires, etc.

Update necessary to be consistent with PZEVs. BERs set to background level (0.35 grams/test). Hot Soak and Diurnal adjusted, Running losses

kept at zero. Emissions effect small, but significant for true

ZEVs. Other technology types - assume the

background emissions are implicit.

Fuel/Non-Fuel Contribution to Evaporative Emissions

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Enhanced PZEV ZEV

FuelNon-Fuel

Update Mexican Vehicle Emission Rates

EMFAC2000 In the current model, Mexican

vehicle emission rates are based on the Juarez study conducted in 1995.

Revised Mexican vehicle emission rates are based on the San Diego/Imperial study conducted in 1999.

JUAREZ STUDY Data was collected in Juarez/El Paso

area IM240, BAR90, and tampering tests

performed on vehicles HC and CO emission levels were higher

for the Juarez vehicles than comparable U.S. vehicles

Data was used to develop a MOBILE-Mexico model

San Diego/Imperial Study Drivers were solicited at the Calexico,

Otay Mesa, and San Ysidro POEs Questionnaires administered Incentives offered: idle tailpipe test -

$20; RG240 dyno test - $50; GPS installation - $50

Tests completed: 671 underhood inspections/idle tests; 240 RG240s; 62 datalogger installations

FTP EMISSIONS COMPARISON

HC gpm CO gpm NOx gpm

CARBURETED/NO CATALYST 6.31 82.66 2.83CARBURETED/OX CATALYST 4.52 64.72 2.02CARBURETED/THREE-WAY CATALYST 3.73 50.01 2.22FUEL INJECTED/THREE-WAY CATALYST 2.10 25.13 1.82

SAN DIEGO/IMPERIAL FLEET EMISSIONS AVERAGES

HC gpm CO gpm NOx gpm

CARBURETED/NO CATALYST 9.23 98.22 2.08CARBURETED/OX CATALYST 7.32 88.28 1.53CARBURETED/THREE-WAY CATALYST 6.24 104.81 1.31FUEL INJECTED/THREE-WAY CATALYST 3.69 37.27 1.82

JUAREZ FLEET EMISSION AVERAGES

CONCLUSION San Diego/Imperial fleet has lower

HC and CO emissions than the Juarez fleet; NOx emissions are similar in both fleets

Heavy-Duty Idle Emission Rates

HDT Idle Emissions Idle emission rates only apply to

idle trips

An idle trip is a key-on to key-off event with distance traveled

Idle emission rates revised based on Colorado School of Mines data

Idle Emission Test DataTHC CO NOx PM

CSM Data (g/min) 0.128 1.12 1.40 0.024

# of Trucks Tested 11 11 11 11

Altitude CorrectedRate (g/hr) 3.75 27.2 82.4 0.979

High AltitudeCorrection Factor*

2.05 2.46 1.02 1.47

HDT Idle EmissionsIdle Emission Rate (g/hr)

EMFAC2000 CSM

HC CO NOx HC CO NOx

LHD 44 247 396 3.75 27.2 82.4

MHD 44 247 396 3.75 27.2 82.4

HHD 44 247 396 3.75 27.2 82.4

LHG 27 155 2 -- -- --

MHG 27 155 2 -- -- --

HDDT Idle Emissions

PM Idle Emission Rate (g/hr)

EMFAC2000* CSM

Pre-1988 5.370 --

1988-90 3.174 0.735**

1991-93 1.860 1.159

1994+ 1.004 0.808

* From US EPA Part 5

** Result of one test vehicle

Miscellaneous Improvements

Incorporation of Latest Standards

Update to Technology Fractions for 2003+ Model Years

Background Technology Groups Affected

LEVII, ULEVII, SULEV, ZEV Vehicle Classes

LDA, LDT, MDT less than 8500 lbs EMFAC2000 based on LEVII program Programs Adopted since

Changes to CA ZEV Mandate CA Requires Cleaner Federal Tier2

Vehicles

LEVII Adopted November 1998 Lower Exhaust & Evaporative

Standards NMOG Fleet Average Standard LDA/LDT/MDT up to 8500 lbs LEV/ULEV/SULEV/PZEV/ZEV

Changes to ZEV Program Adopted January 2001 Reduced Number of ZEVs Near

Term PZEV Phase-in Schedule Increased ZEV% through 2018+ All Vehicles up to 8500 lbs will be

included to Calculate Total Number ZEVs – beginning in 2007

Require Cleaner Federal Tier 2 Vehicles Adopted December 2000 Intermediate Truck Standard 2004-

2006 Lower Standards for Some LDAs

beyond 2007 Ensures Any Cleaner Federal

Vehicles be Made Available in California

New Technology Groups from Federal Tier2 Program

HC CO NOX

LEV 0.09 4.2 0.07

ULEV 0.055 2.1 0.07

TIER2-4 0.07 2.1 0.04

TIER2-3 0.055 2.1 0.03

SULEV 0.01 1.0 0.02

PZEV (150k)

0.01 1.0 0.02

ZEV 0 0 0

Useful Life Emission Standards (120k)

New Technology Groups from Federal Tier2 Program (cont)

HC CO NOX

TIER2-10 0.23 6.4 0.6

TIER2-9 0.09 4.2 0.3

TIER2-8 0.156 4.2 0.2

Groups 8 and 10 Applicable to MDTs

MDT Bins use higher optional Tier2 NMOG standards

Group 9 Applicable to LDT2

Modifications to EMFAC EMFAC2001 Technology Fraction

changes ZEV Program Inclusion of Clean Tier2 Vehicles

Addition of PZEV Technology Group Addition of Tier2 Emission Groups

Newly Adopted Heavy Truck Standards

Incorporation of Newly Adopted HDGT Standard California’s 1.0 g/bhp-hr HC+NOx

standard for medium and heavy heavy-duty gasoline trucks to take effect beginning 2005 model year

Decrease in HC and NOx inventories

Incorporation of Recently Adopted Federal Standards US EPA’s recently adopted NMHC,

NOx, and PM standards will be phased-in between 2007 and 2010 for heavy-duty diesel trucks and between 2008 and 2009 for heavy-duty gasoline engines

2007 HDDE Standards Recently Adopted by US EPA

FTP Exhaust Emission Standards

Standard Phase-in by Model Year

(g/bhp-hr) 2007 2008 2009 2010

NOx 0.20 50% 50% 50% 100%

NMHC 0.14 50% 50% 50% 100%

PM 0.01 100% 100% 100% 100%

Emission Reduction from EPA 2007 HDDE Standards

LHDT MHDT HHDT

2010

HC -9% -6% -5%

NOx -15% -11% -12%

PM -31% -22% -26%

2020

HC -45% -40% -45%

NOx -65% -59% -65%

PM -90% -70% -75%

Changes of HDD Truck Inventories under EPA 2007 Standards

2008 HDGE Standards Recently Adopted by US EPA

FTP Exhaust Emission Standards

Standard Phase-in by Model Year

(g/bhp-hr) 2008 2009

NOx 0.20 50% 100%

NMHC 0.14 50% 100%

PM 0.01 50% 100%

Emission Reduction from EPA 2008 HDGE & ARB 1.0 g/bhp-hr Standards

LHDT MHDT HHDT

2010

HC -4% -2% -2%

NOx -30% -15% -16%

2020

HC -12% -7% -10%

NOx -54% -37% -42%

Changes of HDG Truck Inventories under EPA 2007 & ARB 1.0 g/bhp-hr HC+NOx Standards

Update to A/C Algorithms

A/C Adjustment Issue: The predicted A/Con

emissions are not sensitive to very low emitting NOx vehicles. This occurs because of the y-intercept in the regression equation.

Solution: Force the regression through zero (no intercept).

Intercept vs. No-Intercept COMPARISON OF NOx EMISSIONS WITH 10% RLHP TO AC ON FOR UC CYCLE

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

NOx EMISSIONS WITH 10% RLHP (G/MI)

NO

x E

MIS

SIO

NS

WIT

H A

C O

N (

G/M

I)

R2 = 0.852

y = 1.040x + 0.100

y = 1.198x

R2 = 0.820

Effect on Tier I/LEVs(Air Improvement Resources)

Figure 1. Increase in NOx Emissions With Declining FTP NOx Levels

0%

200%

400%

600%

800%

1000%

1200%

0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.07 0.05 0.02 0.01

NOx Level Without A/C On

Pe

rce

nt

Inc

rea

se

in

NO

x W

ith

A/C

On

Tier 1 50 K Std

LEV1, ULEV1 50K Std

LEV2, ULEV2 120K Std

LEV2, ULEV2 50 K Std

SULEV 120K Standard

Low-Mileage SULEV

A/C Effect - Statewide

0200400600800

100012001400160018002000

PC-2000

Total-2000

PC-2010

Total-2010

PC-2020

Total-2020

BaselineAdj. A/ C

Update I&M Assumptions

Current Assumptions Enhanced Areas - ASM testing began in

January 2001. ASM Cutpoints - SIP cutpoints designed

to get max benefits from IM program BAR - Implemented cutpoints that have

not yet achieved reductions agreed to in SIP

Update - reflect IM benefits for current ASM cutpoints

Methodology SIP Cutpoints (ASMSIP) - Effective

01/2010 Failure Rates for 2001-2009 - Ratio of

current BAR cutpoints to SIP cutpoints applied to existing identification rates

Ratio - Based on 1,642 vehicle dataset containing both ASM and FTP data

Conclusion Current BAR cutpoints achieve

37% of HC, 50% of CO and 50% of NOx emission reductions relative to SIP cutpoints.

Emissions increase between 2001 and 2010 calendar years.

Introduction to User Interface

Inventory & Planning Models EMFAC2000 - Inventories (tons per day or g/mi)

for 1970-2040 CYs & 69 areas. Uses default activity data that user cannot edit.

MOBILE 5/6 - Planning model with g/mi estimates. Requires user to input local population/trip/speed and other estimates.

EMFAC2001 - Inventory & Planning model - Standard model, default inventories - WIS is planning model. User can change temperature, relative humidity, fuel RVP, speed, population, trips and VMT

Burden Outputs Planning(*.bur) - tons per day by aggregated

vehicle classes. Traditional 7G format Heavy-Duty Truck Detail(*.bur) - Similar with

expanded truck information. Text File (CSV)(*.csv) - tpd by vehicle class and

cat, non-cat and diesel groups. Spreadsheet MVEI7G (CSV)(*.bcd) - columnar format(*.XXX) filename extensions

EMFAC Outputs ASCII Impacts(*.ERP) - Used in DTIM. Running,

diurnal and resting loss rates in g/hr. Hot soak (g/trip). Starts (g/start/soak time)

Binary (*.BIN) same info in binary format Impact Rate Detail(*.RTL) - Detailed info. Used

in Urbemis. Running (g/mi), Hot Soak & Starts (g/trip), Diurnal/Resting (g/hr.)

Rate Summary(*.RTS) - aggregated vehicle classes

CALIMFAC Output Option - Output either corrected

and uncorrected rates CALIMFAC(*.OUT) - Model year

specific zero mile (g/mi) & deterioration (g/mi per 10k) rates. Output by mode and FTP composite

Additional WIS Edits/Features Change I&M benefits for ASM program by CY Implement WEIGHT output Report Methane GUI Update - Windows look with tab strip

controls. Program flow for managing sequence of edits Implement double precision Read/write and save WIS Scenario edits

Future Enhancements Independent trip growth factor Multiple Scenario Model Output multiple calendar years and model

years in one scenario Evaluate benefits from proposed control

strategies without adding new tech. Groups CEIDARs and/or CEFS output formats Inventory estimates by vehicle speed

System Requirements EMFAC2001-WIS is optimized Minimum system specifications

Pentium 200 MHz or better

64 MB ram, more preferred

350 MB hard disk space for swap space

Monitor resolution of 1024 x 768

Current size 31 MB, will increase with DP

Updates to California’s OFFROAD Model

Overview: Inventory = Emission Rate *

Population * Activity *

Horse Power * Load Factor

Overview 12 Categories - many subdivided

by weight or HP Estimates by 69 geographic areas Same processes as the on-road

model Tracks HC/CO/NOx/PM and CO2

estimates

OFFROAD Categories Lawn and Garden

Equipment Light Commercial

Equipment (0-50HP) Recreational

Equipment Industrial Equipment Construction and

Mining Equipment Agricultural Equipment Logging Equipment

Airport Ground Service

Pleasure Craft Transport

Refrigeration Units Tactical support

equipment Portable equipment

Statewide TOG Inventory By Category in 2010

OFFROAD Emissions Inventory (TOG) Statewide, 2010

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

To

ns

pe

r D

ay

D

G2

G4

C4

Statewide NOx Inventory by Category in 2010

OFFROAD Emissions Inventory (NOx) Statewide, 2010

0

50

100

150

200

250

To

ns

pe

r D

ay

D

G2

G4

C4

Update#1: Incorporation of New Emission Standards

Incorporated USEPA’s adopted phase 2 emissions standards for spark ignited small off-road (<25 hp) engines

Only preempted handheld equipment affected

No change to preempted non-handheld due to California’s rule

USEPA’s Phase 2 HC+NOx Standards in g/hp-hr for <=25 hp Handheld SI Engines

EngineClass

HPGroup

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007+

ClassIII

0-2 176 130 84 37 37 37

ClassIV

2-15 145 110 73 37 37 37

ClassV

15-25 106 88 71 53

USEPA’s Phase 2 HC+NOx Standards in g/hp-hr for <=25 hp Non-Handheld SI Engines

Engine Class HP Group HC+NOx Implementation

Class I 0-5 12 Phase-in2003-2007

Class II 5 + 9 Phase-in2001-2005

Update#1: Incorporation of New Emission Standards (cont.)

Preempt spark ignited large off-road (>=25 hp) engines emissions revised to reflect the fact that USEPA has not adopted any rule

Baseline inventory increased

Update#2: Changes to Recreational Marine Inventory

Affected Equipment: Inboard Engines Vessels -

G4 Sterndrive Engine Vessels - G4 Jet Engine Vessels - G4

Update#2: Changes to Recreational Marine Inventory (cont.)

Age distribution revised based on DMV’s data

Vessel turnover rate is flat Engine to boat ratio revised

Increase in Inboard and Jet population; Decrease in

Sterndrive population

Update#2: Changes to Recreational Marine Inventory (cont.)

Average hp values are revised upward

Load factor has decreased from 0.38 to 0.21

Based on more recent test data, emission factors are revised

All of these changes have reduced the baseline inventory

Update#3: Gas Can Inventory

Gas cans have been incorporated in the OFFROAD model

Update#4: Inclusion of Stationary Equipment which have Mobile Counterpart in the OFFROAD Model

Compressors Generator sets Irrigation pumps Other industrial/commercial pumps Pressure Washers Welders

Future Updates Inclusion of evaporative emissions Update to recreational vehicle

emissions

EMFAC2002